UnGovr Transcript
iHow this transcript is madeUnGovr transcribes the official recording with automated speech-to-text, separates speakers by voice, and matches voices to the seated roster. Names and attributions are AI estimates and may contain errors.Verify any quote yourself: click anywhere in the transcript and the official video jumps to that exact moment, so you can check any quote against the recording.0:00 – 0:026 turns
You please call the roll.
Roll call — called by Unidentified speaker 2
Show transcript
Our first order of business here this morning is the adoption of the minutes from the March 10, 2026 regular meeting. May I get a motion? So moved.
Second.
Motion from Kaps, second from Hartman. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Next item of business is our CEO report. CEO Miyasato you have a report for us this
morning? I do good morning Chair Nelson and board members. I have two announcements of recognition one is for our County Health Department. Our health department's certified unified program agency known as CUPA has been awarded the 2026 Secretary's Award for Environmental Achievement from the California EPA This recognition highlights the department's significant progress in strengthening its hazardous materials and environmental compliance programs. The award also reflects the team's strong performance in inspections, enforcement outreach and collaboration with regulatory partners in the community so congratulations to our Health Department staff for their continued commitment to protecting the public's health safety and environment The second is just from the Child Support Services Department, and they wanted to announce that they have achieved 100% compliance rate in all their cases.
And they are recently reviewed by the state as part of their annual federal assessment. This is a large achievement for any child support office. And so this compliance rating is due to the casework by their dedicated child support officers. So again, congratulations to the Child Support Services team. And that concludes my report.
Thank you Ms. Miyasato, Madam Clerk do we have any changes or announcements for today's meeting?
0:02 – 0:032 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the board, I just have one quick announcement this morning regarding public participation. For information on the Board of Supervisors methods to 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 two of the agenda. Individuals that would like to provide verbal public comment may do so via Zoom by registering in advance via the link available on page 2. If you have any questions please contact the Clerk of the Board's Office at area code 805 568-2240. Again, that number is 805-568-2240 and that concludes my announcements for today.
All right thank you Madam Clerk. The next item of business is our Administrative Agenda.
Agenda Discussionitems moved / continued / pulled — click to expand
Would any Board members like to pull items from the Administrative Agenda? CC Resolute, you had 824. Is that still great? Any other items? I'm going to pull 827. Again Madam Clerk there was no additions to the Administrative Agenda. Is that right?
Chair Nelson and members of the board, we have one or two requests to speak from the public on A23. A23? So
it would be appropriate to get a motion on the balance of agenda with the exception of A23, 24 and 27 is that what we're looking for at this point Madam Clerk?
Chair Nelson, members of the board that is correct.
Okay can I get a motion from my colleagues?
I move approval of the balance of the agenda
Thank you Supervisor Hartman.
I second.
Second by Supervisor Kaps. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Okay at this time we're going to go ahead and begin with our resolutions to be presented and we'll begin with item, administrative item number one. Madam Clerk will you please read administrative item number one into the record.
Chair Nelson and members of the board, administrative item number one is sponsored by Supervisor Lee and Supervisor Hartman. It is to adopt a resolution honoring the work and legacy of Reverend J.B. Ficklin Jr., longest standing clergy in Santa Barbara County. And joining us in person today we have Reverend Ficklin and Connie Alexander Bodie, president of Santa Barbara NAACP Unit 1070-B. And I will go ahead and read the resolution.
Whereas Rev. J.B. Ficklin, Jr., a native of Clarksdale, Mississippi journeyed to Santa Barbara, California in 1958 bringing with him the humility, perseverance and deep faith forged through his early years as a sharecropper in Mississippi. And whereas on the third Sunday evening February 20th 1966, Rev. Ficklin accepted the divine call to pastor Greater Hope Missionary Baptist Church And whereas under his visionary and steadfast leadership, the congregation embarked upon a historic and faith-filled journey. And on the third Sunday of March 1971 marched triumphantly from 735 East Haley Street to their new church home at 430 East Figueroa Street.
Ficklin has faithfully served beyond the local church as a member of the National Baptist Convention, USA Inc., as past vice moderator of the Central District Association and as both president and vice president of the Interdenominational Federation of Churches. And whereas Reverend Ficklin has been a tireless advocate and spiritual leader for the black community in Santa Barbara and throughout Santa Barbara County, offering guidance courage and hope in times of challenge and change with leadership extending beyond the pulpit into the broader civic life of our community. Now therefore be it hereby ordered to resolve that the Board of Supervisors of the county of Santa Barbara does hereby honor Reverend J.B. Ficklin Jr. for his extraordinary ministry historic leadership and unwavering commitment to faith and justice And celebrate his more than six decades of transformative service to Greater Hope Missionary Baptist Church and to the broader Santa Barbara community.
His life and legacy shall remain a beacon of hope, ever steadfast, ever faithful guiding future generations in the pursuit of unity justice love and enduring faith passed and adopted today
Chair Nelson and Board, we just want to thank you for this opportunity to recognize really one of the pillars of our community. One that if I can give a little bit of symbolism there's the symbol of holding a banner yes? That communities need people who can come and will be steadfast in holding that banner and certainly that is Reverend Ficklin And how, as you can see this morning some of the members of our community here to honor that and to honor what he will pass on and continues to pass on within our community. So the NAACP is happy and thank you for your support in doing this this morning and honoring him That person that is holding the banner of our communities. We also to the NAACP this morning is awarding him with our legacy award, which is very special and not given so easily to all.
So thank you. And Reverend Ficklin do you want to have a couple words?
Thank you to all supervisors and to all the people who have come to share with me on this great morning. Look I know how the astronauts I feel now, I feel just amen. Amen. Could I tell just a little story as to how perhaps I got here? In the early days of my ministry, I had a privilege to serve on this senior citizen. I bought my badge to prove it. I had worked on the Santa Barbara Senior Citizens Advisory Commission and that was early in my ministry. And so, I was the youngest person who served on that board at the time and I often wondered Why am I sitting here with these seniors? And that I'm so young.
And now, I understand why I was sitting with those seniors all because I received my award this morning and I thank you so very very much. And all the people who have supported me through the years, I want to thank all of my members and friends who are here today. God bless you and thank you so very very much.
Beautiful. Okay, Madam Clerk will you please read Administrative Item Number 2 into the record?
Chair Nelson and members of the Board, Administrative Item Number 2 is sponsored by Supervisor Hartman. It is to adopt a Resolution of Accommodation honoring Carrie McKinnon for serving as Branch Supervisor at the Solvang, San Ynez and Los Olivos Libraries for 25 years. And joining us in person today if you can please make your way to the podium is Carrie McKinnon.
I'll go ahead and read the resolution. Whereas Carrie McKinnon served as branch supervisor of the Solving, San Inez and Los Olivos libraries for 25 years and whereas during her time as branch supervisor for these three libraries Carrie guided them through a period of significant growth which included the expansion of the internet and digital exchange of books and other library materials as well as expanded public engagement. And whereas Carrie was instrumental in partnering with community groups to create learning programs such as storytime and family-focused activities, lectures on natural history and other topics in an online children's book club during the COVID pandemic, community reads, and read aloud events.
And whereas under Carrie's leadership, the Solvang Library served as much more than a place to simply find books. It also served as a community hub providing access to online resources for those who otherwise would not have such access offering a safe space for children and families to explore and learn serving as a cooling location for those vulnerable to extreme heat and supporting the community during the COVID pandemic by acting as a test kit and mass distribution site and providing children's learning activities that could be done at home during distancing And whereas in her retirement, Carrie remains an active leader in the community volunteering and organizing at the San Inez Valley Grange where she helps to achieve its mission of fostering fellowship and goodwill.
And I in our diverse communities through cultural educational and social activities supporting sustainable agriculture and preserving the character and historical significance of the Grange building. And now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara does hereby acknowledge Carrie McGinnon For her many years of service to the Santa Ynez Valley community as a head librarian, Grange leader and community volunteer passed and adopted today.
Supervisor Hartman?
Yes, libraries are only as alive as the people who run them. And Carrie McKinnon has been at the center of community life at the library in Solvang for 25 years. She understood that a library isn't just a room full of books, but it's a place where people can change lives. I had this experience firsthand. I was tutoring a boy, first gen. He was struggling with English. He was struggling with reading. He was struggling...
he wouldn't write But Carrie had a range of programs. She always knew how to, when I was first in the Valley she recruited me to help generate ideas for programs. She had a nose for seeking people out to contribute to the activities at the library. So she had someone who was teaching writing and I took this boy to that class. He was very shy, very introverted And this teacher just sparked something in him. And so he stayed late and he'd never done that before, talking to her excited about what he was going to write.
He's gone on to earn well, he went to Dunn on a scholarship then he got his EMT and he's now studying for to be a physician's assistant. And it all started at the library. It started with that I can do it. I can read, I can write, I can express myself
0:13 – 0:163 turns
and I can't begin to count how many lives the programs that she's instituted have influenced. That's just one case but the ripple effect is tremendous She brought county hazardous waste people there to teach composting. She pioneered things with the Valley Natural History Society, she would set that up so learning is lifelong it doesn't stop when you're a child and then her husband was just featured in the Indy This week, he was a drama teacher at the high school. And so she actually has directed plays on The Enemy of the People which was really rave reviews in the valley.
So and as you can hear she continues to work in the Grange on various programs but through budget cuts through a pandemic through everything She was there and my office is right on the corner. And so I can't tell you, I really miss her presence but she created an institution that will outlive even her and these ripple effects are a legacy to be really proud of.
And her mother's here. Her mother's back here today we're so glad to have her as well.
Thank you so much. For your kind words and your recognition today, and especially thanks to Supervisor Hartman and Solvang staffer Megan Dietenhofer for making sure I got here because I did in fact retire a year ago. And they pursued me and I appreciate it. I was embarrassed to come but I'm thankful. Looking back it seems that 25 years went by in a flash. I even spent one year in the Bilton Library, I'll tell you that.
But public service has always been about finding out what people in the community need and finding a way to make it happen. Creating partnerships, access in programs instead of policies, keeping doors open is what makes a library a really hallowed place to its many, many different users. I had a lot of help along the way from dedicated part-time staff to colleagues in other county branch libraries, the friends of the Library of Santa Ynez Valley, City of Solvang and from you yourselves, the supervisors who made sure that the county libraries get funded.
So I'm especially appreciative today not just for the personal nod but for the recognition of the importance of library service And that's not just the virtual services which our modern libraries have, which make content available to patrons remotely. But the all-important role of the library as a brick and mortar gathering place where the community can meet, learn and grow.
And of the many public services that our county and cities provide, libraries give the most return to the most people for a very small amount of funding. I know you have a difficult bunch of budget decisions to make this year but please keep that in mind. Thank you so much.
Again, thank you Ms. McKinnon. All right Madam Clerk we now please read Administrative Item Number 3 into the record.
0:16 – 0:203 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the board, Administrative Item Number 3 is sponsored by Supervisor Lee it is to adopt a resolution honoring the centennial anniversary 1926 through 2026 of the Santa Barbara Botanic Garden and joining us in person today as they make their way to the podium is Steve Winager Executive Director and Helene Schneider Board of Trustees chair Whereas founded in 1926, the Santa Barbara Botanic Garden was the first botanic garden in the United States devoted exclusively to California native plants. Establishing a pioneering mission to demonstrate their beauty ecological value and importance to the state's natural heritage. And whereas for 100 years the garden has served as a leading science-based institution advancing research conservation and land stewardship through nationally significant collections including a conservation seed bank Safeguarding rare, threatened and climate vulnerable species.
And the Clifton Smith Herbarium and Archives supporting botanical research and education. And whereas the garden has played a critical role in protecting biodiversity and strengthening climate resilience by restoring native habitats advancing wildfire preparedness strategies and training professionals and community members in native plant horticulture and sustainable land management. Whereas as a public-serving educational institution and living museum the Santa Barbara Botanic Gardens 78 acre landscape extensive trail network and robust public programs have connected generations of residents and visitors to California's native plants inspiring environmental stewardship and community engagement. And whereas through partnerships leadership and advocacy the garden continues to shape regional and statewide The board of Supervisors is committed to the preservation and conservation efforts and guide future action to ensure healthy ecosystems resilient communities and a thriving natural environment for generations to come.
Now therefore be it here by order to resolve that this Board of Supervisors at the county of Santa Barbara does hereby acknowledge in honor, the Santa Barbara Botanic Gardens centennial anniversary celebrating 100 years of leadership in conservation science have sustained the garden's mission for a century and will continue to guide its work into the next hundred years passed and adopted today.
Chair Nelson, members of the board. Thank you so much for this very eloquent resolution and you only turn 100 once right? So you got to celebrate when you can. I also want to acknowledge Supervisor Lee thank you for coming up to the garden during the ribbon cutting for the new Torrey Pines. I was actually on Santa Rosa Island that day and visited the Ancestors of those Torrey Pines on Santa Rosa Island, one of only two places in the world where they grow naturally. The other place is in La Jolla and I bring that up to think about the legacy and what it takes in long term planning. And I know you do a lot of long term planning on a variety of issues We think about the redwoods down at the garden. That was planted 90 years ago and the people who planted them could never even be able to see the beauty that it is today, but they had the foresight to put that together.
And that's really what I think brings the garden together. I want to acknowledge Dr. Steve Winhanger, our Executive Director and the incredible staff at the Botanical Garden do come up there it's a beautiful wonderful place in a place of beauty, a place of hope, a place where biodiversity can thrive in a place where we can each and every one of us make a difference each and every day where true leadership can show that the acorn you plant today can create a whole oak forest into the future thanks so much for your support today thank you.
Thank you Alright, we'll go ahead and move on to administrative item number 4.
0:20 – 0:255 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the Board of Administrators, item number four is from Supervisor Lee and Supervisor Hartman. It is to adopt a resolution recognizing the week of April 13th, 2026 through April 20th, 2026 as International Dark Sky Week in Santa Barbara County. And joining us in person today to receive this resolution is Mike Wondoloski, and if he can please make his way to the podium. And anyone else who is with you that would like to join with you?
I'll go ahead and read the resolution. Whereas the natural beauty of Santa Barbara County, including a star-filled night sky is valued by residents and visitors alike, and standing beneath a starry night sky inspires feelings of wonder and awe fostering a growing interest in science and nature especially among the county's children and youth And whereas light pollution makes it hard to see stars and has scientifically established negative economic impacts and environmental consequences for plant, animal and human health throughout the world including Santa Barbara County's precious natural places. Beaches, coastal wetlands, oak wetlands, rural valleys, mountains and areas in between.
And whereas light pollution results in roughly 3 billion per year of wasted energy in the United States, it contributes to diminished energy security. And whereas Santa Barbara County's comprehensive outdoor lighting regulations demonstrate a commitment to minimize light pollution, conserve energy and protect the nighttime environment of the county by directing outdoor lighting down where it is useful instead of up into the sky and using outdoor lighting only when and where necessary.
And whereas Dark Sky International is the globally recognized authority on light pollution and coordinates International Dark Sky Week worldwide to celebrate the many ways responsible outdoor lighting can eliminate light pollution, benefiting all life on Earth. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara Does hereby declare the week of April 13th through 20th, 2026 as International Dark Sky Week in Santa Barbara County and urges residents to learn about night sky friendly lighting to implement improvements that reduce light pollution and to look up and experience the wonder of the star-filled night passed and adopted today.
Chair and members of the board, I'm Mike Wondoloski. And on behalf of all the groups involved in our coalition countywide to pursue this resolution and proclamations throughout the county, thank you so much. These groups have diverse purposes but where we overlap is our care about the protection of dark skies and actions to protect them. Thanks to the advocacy of these groups, this year in addition to this resolution seven of the eight cities in the county issued or are issuing proclamations recognizing this year's International Dark Sky Week.
One more impact of light pollution that was not specifically mentioned in the wording of the resolution that's particularly important in this county is that it can have significant impacts on agriculture It can reduce crop yields and quality in open field agriculture due to disrupting pollination by confusing nocturnal insects, altering plant flowering and growth cycles, and attracting pests.
But light pollution is unique in that it is completely reversible immediately. The moment the light is turned off or pointed down all the pollution has gone with no residual effects. It's completely feasible to expect that when we step outside anywhere in the county, even near developed areas on a moonless night at night we should be able to see the Milky Way spilling across the sky.
So on behalf of all these organizations across the county that worked on this thank you.
Supervisor Hartman?
Yeah, I just want to thank you all for your work. It's a subtle matter how light pollution affects our lives but we evolved in a certain environment and when we change that I think it really affects things that we don't even appreciate But your work has had a tremendous influence in our county and our lighting ordinance is a reflection of that. So I just wanted to thank you.
It's not just honorary, you're actually changing the light educating us and helping us change our ordinances and protecting our night sky so thank you so much.
Thank You Supervisor Hartman All right, Madam Clerk we'll go ahead and move on to administrative item number five. Will you please read that in the record?
0:25 – 0:2912 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the board, Administrative Item Number Five is sponsored by Supervisor Capps. It is to adopt a resolution proclaiming the month of April 2026 as Month of the Young Child in Santa Barbara County. And joining us in person today we have Christian Patterson, Jackie Banta, and Michelle Graham. If you can please make your way to the podium and I'll go ahead and read the resolution.
Participation in stable, high-quality early care and education and school age care makes working families more economically secure and prepares children to succeed in school and live healthier lives. And whereas early care and education professionals are invited in being responsive to the childcare needs of families As evidenced by their collaborations and professional development. And whereas children's cognitive, physical, social and emotional development as well as language and literacy skills are built on a foundation of children's positive interactions with adults, peers and their environment. And whereas collaborations amongst various agencies across Santa Barbara County intend to support early education professionals who are essential to providing quality care and education to the youngest children of our county.
And whereas we celebrate and commemorate the month of the young child so that we may continue to shine a light of recognition upon the essential nature of the early childcare and education professionals. With the Santa Barbara County Child Care Planning Council, First 5 Santa Barbara County Children's Resource and Referral, Santa Barbara County Child Abuse Prevention Council, The Santa Barbara County Network of Family Resource Centers and others Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara does hereby recognize April 2026 as month of the young child in Santa Barbara County and celebrates the complex valuable Essential and demanding work of early care and education and school aged care professionals passed and adopted today
Thank you, this recognition is more than symbolic It's a call to remember that our youngest children, their families and educators who support them are the foundation of a thriving community. When we invest in early childhood, we invest in our shared future.
The early years are a window of rapid brain development and lifelong impact. During this time children build skills, confidence and sense of belonging that shape who they become. Access to high quality care, nurturing relationships and meaningful learning experiences not just optional it's essential.
Today we honor the educators and community partners who carry this work forward every day. With compassion and resilience, they create environments where children feel safe, valued, and inspired to learn. They are without question the quiet force behind strong communities.
As we recognize the month of the young child, we reaffirm our commitment to ensuring every child has a strong start.
We commit to lifting the voices of those who care for and educate our youngest learners.
And we commit to building systems that sustain them.
Thank you again for your partnership and your continued commitment to children and families in our community.
Thank
you Supervisor Kaps.
Yeah I just you can tell how in sync the Child Care Council is with all these different entities coming together on support of our young children so thank you so much.
All right we'll go ahead and read item number six into the record.
0:29 – 0:335 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the Board. Administrative item number six is sponsored by Supervisor Capps, it is to adopt a resolution proclaiming the month of April 2026 as Donate Life Month in Santa Barbara County and joining us in person today is Scott Burns who is a Donate Life Ambassador and Victoria Brown from One Legacy. And I'll go ahead and read the resolution. Whereas organ, eye, tissue, marrow and blood donation are life-giving acts recognized worldwide as expressions of compassion to those in need and more than 103,000 individuals nationwide and more than 23,000 in California are currently on the National Organ Transplant Waiting List and on average 17 people die each day while waiting. And whereas the need for donated organs is especially urgent in Hispanic, Latino and African American communities.
In a single individual's donation of a heart, lungs, liver, kidneys, pancreas and small intestine can save up to eight lives. A donation of tissue can save and heal the lives of more than 75 others. And whereas organ donors saved more than 46,000 lives last year and any person can register to be an organ eye and tissue donor regardless of age or medical conditions.
Also being a registered donor does not impact the quality of life-saving medical care a person receives in an emergency. And whereas California residents can sign up with the Donate Life California donor registry online at any time by visiting www.donatelifecalifornia.org or for Spanish speakers, www.donvidecaliforniapunto.org and whereas residents can sign up to be an organ eye and tissue donor when applying for a renewing their driver's license or ID cards at the California Department of Motor Vehicles California residents interested in saving a life through living kidney donation may visit www.livingdonationcalifornia.org Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara does hereby recognize April 2026 as Donate Life Month in Santa Barbara County, and doing so we encourage all Californians to check yes online or when applying for or renewing their driver's license or ID card at the DMV passed and adopted today
Mr. Burns. Thank you very much. Having the some people ask why am I here? Well, I'm alive because I have a kidney transplant 10 years ago, almost 11 years ago. So I want to let people know that you need to have a pink dot on your driver's license if at all possible. Right now in Santa Barbara County there's 188 people as of a week ago that are on the waiting list. 188 people in this room, you've got 120 chairs. You've got a group of people in this county that are looking for organ donations and having I'm just thanking you guys for doing this, letting the people know that it's going on. And I'd like to introduce my friend Victoria so she can talk about a little other things.
Thank you, thank you very much for having us. We're excited to talk about organ donation and thank you so much for supporting it. It's very important in the community and we are very grateful to have Scott here always spreading the knowledge and spreading the information. And you can join us as well this month. We have our annual 23rd Annual Run-Walk in Azusa but we cover all seven counties And we also invite you to come to Scott's Walk, which will be September 19th. We have an awesome time at Leadbetter Beach. Thank you very much for supporting Organ Eye and Tissue Donation.
This proclamation will end up at the Run-Walk. Basically it'll go and there'll be people, about 20,000 people that will be looking at it and then afterwards they'll go to either the Santa Barbara City or the Goleta City DMV so people can see how the County of Santa Barbara supports organ donation. Thank you very much.
And I have my pink dot, so make sure you guys get yours too. All right, so I'm going to take a brief chair's prerogative to make an announcement where we're now gonna be doing the resolution from the special meeting for Ms. Boulay. So at this time Madam Clerk will you please read the resolution for Ms. Boulay?
0:33 – 0:394 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the board, administrative item number five from our special meeting this morning is sponsored by Supervisor Nelson. It is to adopt a resolution of commendation honoring Mindy Boulay upon her retirement from the Public Defender's Office after over 24 years of faithful and dedicated service to the citizens of Santa Barbara County. And joining us in person today we have Mindy Boulay and our public defender Tracy Makuga.
Whereas Mindy Boulay has served as a deputy public defender for more than 27 years and began her tenure with the County of Santa Barbara in 2002. And whereas throughout her career, she has tirelessly advocated for hundreds of clients securing access to rehabilitation programs conducting more than 40 jury trials Obtaining dismissals and negotiating reduced charges, and stands as the only attorney in the Public Defender's Office to have twice received the Robert Benzendefer Memorial Award for Most Valuable Lawyer. And whereas she litigated a suppression motion challenging the warrantless search of her client's home, and although denied by the trial court she created a record that enabled appointed appellate Council to prevail unanimously in the California Supreme Court, closing a loophole relied upon by the law enforcement to justify warrantless home searches and reinforcing the principle that safeguarding the constitutional rights of the accused protects the liberty of all Californians.
And whereas she played a leadership role in organizing deputy public defenders into SEIU Local 620 advocating for better wages and working conditions for her colleagues while serving as the South County and at the age of 54, she tried a case on behalf of an incarcerated client falsely charged with violent felonies and facing a mandatory life sentence securing a full acquittal and ensuring that her client walked out of the courtroom a free man. And whereas she looks forward to not working six days a week but continuing to advocate for her community while spending more time with her wonderful husband of 31 years and their families in both California and Quebec Now, therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara hereby adopts this resolution of commendation honoring Mindy Boulay upon her exemplary service and extends its best wishes for a well-deserved retirement passed and adopted today.
Well, as you can see that this has been a really hard day for the Public Defender's Office. A total of 75 years of institutional knowledge, talent, character, grit and no one exemplifies that more than Mindy. I'm not going to correct one thing is Mindy usually works seven days a week, not six and I'm sure her family is grateful that that's no longer gonna be the case but I do want to talk about Mindy specifically, but it applies to Brian and Mark who are also still here which is that they absolutely refuse to treat any of our clients no matter what the charges have been with anything less than pure exceptionalism and providing them dignity and respect.
If you want to say someone is a zealous advocate that's who Mindy Boulay is I will say there's, you know at least from my perspective. I would say Mindy Belay outworks everybody in the room There's very few people that meet beat me to the office but Mindy does every morning Very often
not
today Not today and I also count myself as one of the individuals that have learned from Mindy I've been doing this 35 years and and I don't know everything And I'm not sure that any of us know everything, but I know I can always go into Mindy's office like many of my lawyers and ask the tough questions. Have the tough conversations. Get information from her. She's encyclopedic in every way.
For me what Mindy represents is the best of the best of public service which is she...and I say this with apologies to the family because all of you have sacrificed so much to support Mindy and Mark and Brian. I know those hard nights, those long nights, those holiday dinners that were missed, those weekends where I know you are at the jail and not with your husband or your family.
I can't thank you enough. And I know there's thousands and thousands and thousands of clients that these individuals represented that are grateful for your sacrifices. This honor today is not just about Mindy, Mark and Brian it's about each of you And so I want to thank you for that. But for you, Mindy, thank you for being who you are. Thank you for making me a better leader. Thank you for having the tough honest conversations with me at times and thank you for going every single day to the mat for this client and our clients in the community we serve, you're gonna be missed. But I will tell you it's what I said about Mark and Brian and Mindy.
There's lawyers walking into our courtrooms right now that have learned from them so they have passed their knowledge forward, their passion forward, and I already know that Mindy sent out an email with her personal cell phone to all my lawyers saying please call me if you have questions. So thank you Mindy, thank you.
0:39 – 0:454 turns
Thank you Supervisor Lee, Supervisor Kapp, Supervisor Nelson, Supervisor Hartman, Chief Public Defender McKuga, Chief Trial Deputy Adrian Galvan. Thank you so much. Thank you for your leadership and thank you I have so much gratitude that I had the opportunity to become a public defender for the County of Santa Barbara over 23 years ago that I was given this opportunity that I've had the opportunity to work with so many wonderful colleagues So many wonderful clients with prosecutors who were willing to hear me out and hear the defense side of things, and help me work towards equitable resolutions.
And courts that gave us the time to work towards equitable resolutions when we could, and to allow me to fight hard for my clients at jury trial when we couldn't. And I am just so filled with gratitude, and I'm sorry for my late arrival. But I know I leave our office in good hands. We have some wonderful up-and-coming attorneys that I couldn't be more proud of. And so thank you all so much.
Thank you Ms. Bolle and Mr. Galvan, I think you might be the only one left in the office here pretty soon if you're not careful so... All right, and just for the record that was a special announcement that we made. The adoption of the resolution from Mindy was done in our special meeting this morning and that was item administrative number five. And so we're going to get back to the presentation of the resolutions for our regular scheduled meeting and we'll continue with administrative item number seven. Madam Clerk will you please read that into record?
Chair Nelson and members of the Board, Administrative Item Number 7 is sponsored by Supervisor Hartman and Supervisor Lavinino. It is to adopt a resolution proclaiming April 2026 as Healthy People Healthy Trails Month in Santa Barbara County. And joining us in person today we have Mark Wilkinson, Trina Long, and Susan Lyles. If you can please make your way to the podium.
Whereas Santa Barbara County is home to a wealth of natural landscapes including scenic trails, parks and open spaces that provide opportunities for outdoor recreation and promote overall well-being. And whereas spending time in nature has been shown to reduce stress enhance mood and foster social connections contributing to a healthier and more engaged community. And whereas the Healthy People, Healthy Trails initiative supports active living by encouraging residents and visitors to explore local trails, parks and open spaces as part of their regular wellness routine. And whereas community partnerships among health organizations, local governments and outdoor recreation groups play a crucial role In promoting accessible and inclusive outdoor activities for people of all ages and abilities.
And whereas the designation of April 2026 as Healthy People, Healthy Trails Month highlights the county's commitment to fostering an active and health-conscious community while celebrating the natural beauty of Santa Barbara County. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the Santa Barbara County hereby proclaims April 2026 as Healthy People, Healthy Trails Month in Santa Barbara County and encourages all residents to participate in outdoor activities that promote health and well-being passed and adopted today.
Good morning, Chair Nelson and fellow supervisors. I'm here today with Trina Long and Susan Lyles from the County Health Department. I am with Santa Barbara County Trails Council. We're part of the steering committee for the Healthy People Healthy Trails program in Santa Barbara County. We want to thank you for this incredible honor and for your steadfast support for a healthier and more active Santa Barbara County. Over a decade ago, the Healthy People Healthy Trails began a simple but profound premise That the health of our community is inextricably linked to the land we live on.
Building on a national movement with a grant from the National Park Service, we created a critical collaboration focused on the idea that our parks trails and open spaces are places for wellness. This resolution isn't just for one organization it belongs to unique countywide collaboration It belongs to the healthcare providers who are now writing park prescriptions as a standard of care. It belongs to our land managers and our non-profits, who maintain thousands of acres to serve as outdoor gyms and natural sanctuaries. And most importantly it belongs to the community members from Carbondalia to Guadalupe, who have newfound enjoyment for being active in nature.
In the last 10 years, we've seen how equitable access to the outdoors can transform lives. We've seen stress levels drop, physical activity rise and a deeper sense of environmental stewardship take root in our community. By celebrating Healthy People Healthy Trails Month in April, we aren't just about celebrating a program We're celebrating a movement that makes a healthy, active lifestyle the easy choice for everyone.
On behalf of all our partners we want to thank the County Supervisors for recognizing this work. We look forward to another decade of bridging the gap between the clinic and the trailhead Ensuring that the beauty of Santa Barbara County continues to be a source of health, fitness and joy for all. And lastly we encourage everyone to visit our events calendar at healthypeoplehealthytrails.org to learn more about the dozens of outdoor activities that are posted there that take place in the month of April. Thank you
0:45 – 0:484 turns
Thank you. I am proud to be the coordinator of our county health CalFresh Healthy Living Program. It's a program that shares this collective vision of a healthier Santa Barbara County. Our work focuses on promoting healthy eating and active living, and as we all know that lasting change happens when we work together. Across sectors, disciplines and communities.
That is why being part of the Healthy People Healthy Trails Steering Committee was such a natural fit. This initiative reflects the power of partnerships bringing together public health, healthcare providers, community organizations, land managers all working toward the shared goal of making healthy choices easier and more accessible for all. Through this collaboration, we're not only encouraging physical activity but also helping to build a culture of wellness that is rooted in the strengths of our communities.
From improving access to nutritious foods to promoting safe and welcoming outdoor spaces, our collective efforts are creating meaningful and lasting impact. This proclamation represents more than just recognition. It highlights what we can achieve when we align our efforts and invest in prevention and well-being together. So on behalf of the CalFresh Healthy Living Program and all of our partners, thank you very much for your continued support of initiatives that help all residents lead healthier and more active lives.
Supervisor Hartman?
Yeah, you can't pick up a magazine or newspaper without seeing some article that's telling us get moving. Whether it be for our physical health, our mental health or our spiritual health to connect us to something bigger and if you don't have trails it's not very inspiring to go because you have to worry about your safety, worry about air pollution So I really commend everybody who works on trails.
It's not the easiest thing because they go across jurisdictions and it takes a lot of effort, and I just want to call out Mark Wilkinson. He's been working on the Trails Council working with other smaller trails organizations but His work on the Barone Ranch Trail deserves special call out. He's worked with our Public Works Department, our Parks Department and put great signs and it was all fixed. One of the greatest days I've ever had was riding my horse on that trail.
And then came the Alisal Fire and a lot of it got washed out. And so he went back and fixed it all up. And then came the two atmospheric river years, and a lot of it got washed out again. But he's back fixing it. And it's that kind of tenacity that is needed to create a trail network throughout our county. And so thank you Mark for leading the charge.
Right, thank you Supervisor Hartman. Let's go ahead and move on. Madam Clerk will you please read Administrative Item Number 8 into the record?
0:48 – 0:535 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the board, Administrative Item Number 8 is sponsored by Supervisor Nelson. It is to adopt a resolution proclaiming the week of April 12th 2026 through April 18th 2026 as National Public Safety Telecommunications Week in Santa Barbara County. And joining us in person today we have Susan Farley, Dispatch Manager Sheriff Bill Brown and a few other members.
And I'll go ahead and read the resolution, whereas the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office Public Safety Telecommunicators play a critical role in emergency responses who serve as a lifeline that people depend on in emergencies and perform work that goes far beyond simply relying information between the public and first responders. And whereas public safety telecommunicators are responsible for engaging with callers who are often under duress and in danger, and in order to obtain necessary information and determine the severity of the emergency, and are also responsible for dispatching field response personnel and managing the ongoing incident. And whereas when responding to reports of missing, abducted or exploited children the information obtained and actions taken by public safety telecommunicator professionals form the foundation for an effective response.
Or when a hostage taker or suicidal individual calls 9-1-1 the first contact that individual has is with the public safety telecommunications professional who negotiation skills can prevent the situation from worsening. And whereas during crises Public safety telecommunication professionals while collecting vital information to provide situational awareness for responding sheriff's deputies and other emergency personnel can have an extreme emotional and physical toll on those individuals critical to the safety of field responders.
And whereas the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office public safety telecommunicators logged over 163,000 calls for service while exhibiting compassion understanding and professionalism during the past year Highlighting the important and critical work in protecting the public and emergency responders. Now therefore, be it hereby ordered and resolved that this Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara does hereby proclaim the week of April 12th 2026 through April 18th 2026 as National Public Safety Telecommunications Week and acknowledge the important and life-saving contributions of the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office Emergency Call Center's Public Safety Telecommunicator Professionals passed and adopted today.
Thank
you Chair Nelson, members of the board. During National Telecommunications Safety Week we proudly recognize the dedication, the skill and the professionalism of our law enforcement dispatchers. These unsung heroines and heroes are oftentimes the vital link to people in need and those who call them are reassured and are helped not just by the responding sheriff's deputies but by the advice and the comfort that is provided to them from our dispatchers. Their ability to think clearly under pressure, to provide unwavering support to both the public and to our first responders is nothing short of extraordinary. And every call they answer is a testament of that commitment Compassion and courage that they display, qualities that make them an indispensable part of our public safety team.
And I just would like to say how very proud of each and every one of them I am in the tremendous job that they continue to do 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. They are to be commended but especially so during this special week. Congratulations.
Chair Nelson, members of the board, Sheriff Brown. I would like to thank on behalf of all the dispatchers at Santa Barbara County there's about 120 of us, the sheriff's department and all other agencies. We like to be behind the scenes we are not good with microphones but here we are. We're here 24-7, we're here on your worst day, we're not used to praise and we really appreciate the proclamation this year. Thank you.
All right, thank you. Madam Clerk will you now please read administrative item number nine into the record?
0:53 – 0:584 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the board administrative item number nine is sponsored by Supervisor Lavinino. It is to adopt a resolution proclaiming the month of April 2026 as Child Abuse Prevention and Awareness Month in Santa Barbara County and joining us in person today we have Barbara Finch and since Supervisor Lavinino is absent today it will be presented by Chair Nelson Whereas children under the age of 18 represent 22% of residents in Santa Barbara County, and the physical and emotional well-being of all children and youth is a collective responsibility and fundamental priority that ensures thriving and prosperous communities now and in the future. And whereas Santa Barbara County Child Welfare Services investigated 3,170 reports of suspected child abuse In response to concerns about underlying conditions and risk factors that contribute to suspected abuse such as mental illness, substance abuse, domestic violence and high levels of familial stress due to household challenges.
And whereas the effects of child abuse and neglect are felt by whole communities And solutions must also be community-based, addressing root causes of adversity such as economic disparity, community disruption and discrimination. And strengthening partnerships with families and care providers to reduce risks Strengthen protective factors and increase access to positive experiences for children and youth.
And whereas the Santa Barbara County Child Abuse Prevention Council and Kids Network are committed to sustaining collaborative approaches that include social service agencies, schools, youth organizations, religious organizations, civic organizations, law enforcement agencies, the business community, and residents to improve the conditions for raising children while ensuring The board of Supervisors is committed to building an integrated and family centered system of community support. And whereas every child matters in a safer world begins with engaged community members who share responsibility for children, family and community well-being now therefore be it here by order to resolve that this Board of Supervisors of the county Santa Barbara does hereby acknowledge April 2026 as child abuse prevention month
Good morning Chair Nelson and board members. Amy Krueger, Assistant Director of Social Services on behalf of Director Daniel Nielsen thank you so much for your support for our child abuse awareness activities and with me this morning Barb Finch our Kids Network director is going to share a little bit about Child Abuse Prevention Awareness Month
Thanks Amy. Chair Nelson, members of the board thank you so much for recognizing April as Child Abuse Prevention Month in Santa Barbara County this month we join with communities across the nation to raise awareness about the impacts of child abuse and neglect and to offer hopeful strategies for prevention Child abuse happens within all cultures and races, across all incomes and education levels.
Last year there were 434 verified child survivors of abuse and neglect in Santa Barbara County. Estimates from state partners at Safe & Sound show that the cumulative financial impact of this abuse is $178 million accrued over the lifetime of the child survivors. The costs extend beyond child welfare services. Research has shown that the experience of abuse and neglect is often associated with additional healthcare needs, special education, criminal justice involvement and limited lifetime productivity.
To put the numbers in perspective $178 million could send nearly 9000 children to preschool. It could pay for over 1000 students to attend a four year college And perhaps more significant, this amount represents over 10% of the total budget of the County of Santa Barbara in fiscal year 24-25. Preventing child abuse has financial benefits that touch every system.
Awareness is the first step but action is what drives change. Community-based solutions begin with improving the conditions that create stress for families, strengthening protective factors through supportive relationships and increasing access to positive experiences and nurturing environments. Change is possible when a community cares. We're fortunate to have many partner organizations throughout the county who ensure that families receive the respect, resources and material support they need to create safe stable environments for their children to thrive.
This resolution honors the incredible individuals who show up for children, youth and families every day. It is also an invitation to be a part of the solution. A safer world starts with us and our willingness to act. Thank you again for standing with us in our commitment to preventing child abuse and neglect.
Thank You Barbara. And that's very topical with our upcoming budget challenges and state funding around child welfare services. So thank you for highlighting that today. All right, so we're going to move along on our administrative agenda. We have three items that have been pulled one by the public and two by the board. We'll go ahead and take these in order. The first one being A23 which was pulled by public and I believe there's two speakers on that item?
0:58 – 1:0212 turns
Yes, excuse me chair Nelson and members of the board. We have two requests to speak on administrative item number 23 Item number 23 is from the Community Services Department It is to consider recommendations regarding the approval of community project funds CPF grant agreement and loan to sanctuary centers for Hollister to permanent supportive housing development And this is in the first district and we will now go to Frank Thompson to be followed by Stephanie Drake here in Santa Barbara
And I'm going to close public comment on this item at this time.
Thank you. Good morning, Frank Thompson. Great to be here really opened your eyes and ears to experience all of the things going on in this county and the broad responsibilities that you all have so thank you very much. And I'm really down here to say thank you today. I'm representing Barry Schor. I am sure you are very familiar with him as CEO of Sanctuary Centers who is retiring and in a moment you will hear from Stephanie Drake who is the new CEO for Sanctuary Centers. But we did come to say thanks today, it's a relatively complicated subject and we wanted to recognize Supervisor Lee's office and his staff for helping us bring this to the board today. And also most importantly for the staff in the Community Services and Housing Department We had a relatively difficult negotiation, but everybody stayed positive and really put their best forward I think.
And so we're very grateful for that. Lucille Boss, Joe Devornick and Jesus Armas all of them pitched in and really made a difference here. So wanted to be sure and recognize them. I'll be here for any questions that you have technically about this. Thank you. All right,
thank you Mr Thompson.
And we will now go to our final speaker, Stephanie Drake.
Thank you. Good morning, Chair and members of the board. My name is Stephanie Drake and I serve as the Chief Executive Officer of Sanctuary Centers of Santa Barbara. I'd like to just take a brief moment to express our sincere gratitude to Supervisor Lee and the county staff for their leadership and diligence through what has been a highly complex and nuanced process. We recognize the level of care coordination and commitment it takes to move projects like this forward, and we deeply appreciate your partnership.
The county's investment of $1 million in our 34-unit integrated care campus is transformative. The project is not simply housing, it is a comprehensive model of care that brings together behavioral health services, primary care and supportive housing under one roof for some of the community's most vulnerable residents. Your support is helping us close critical gaps in mental health care, reliance on emergency services and create a pathway to stability and recovery for individuals who have too often been left without options.
We are proud to be your partner in this work and we look forward to continuing our collaboration and serving the Santa Barbara County community. Thank you.
Thank You Ms. Drake.
And that concludes
public comment on this item.
All right any further discussion on 823? Okay, not seeing any. Can I get a motion to adopt staff recommendation A through C? Or actually make sure I got that right. Madam Clerk, can you help me? I guess it's A. Chair
Nelson and members of the board yes that is correct we would approve staff recommended actions A through D. A through D looking for that motion.
I move to approve staff recommendation A through D. Okay Supervisor.
Roll-call vote Passed Moved by Roy Lee · Seconded by Joan Hartmann
Show transcript
1:02 – 1:0812 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the Board Administrative Item number 24 sponsored by the County Executive Office it is to consider recommendations regarding an update on cannabis taxation permitting and licensing in the second quarter this is for fiscal year 2025 through 2026
Supervisor Lee, do you have a question?
No, the staff will go first if they want to make any comments.
I believe the supervisor may have pulled it just to get public information out about the process and where we are. And so, Carmela Beck is here. Thank you.
Good morning Chair Nelson through Chair Nelson. Of the 25 Carpentria-based licensed cannabis businesses 16 operations have installed multi technology carbon filtration or equivalent equipment. The nine Carpentria based operations pending equipment installation were issued Cannabis License Revocation Letters Last Friday, April 3rd. The first class mailed letters service of notice to the applicant will register on April 8th and if applicants choose to appeal their appeal requests are due on April 20th.
Trustee Lee is that sufficient information to get out there or you have other?
That's good well the reason why I pulled this so I have concerns about the Genesis systems and if I can ask Lisa Plowman from P&D a few questions
Supervisor Lee through the chair. So there have been some questions raised about the different technologies that can be used in the greenhouses and we have been doing some research, and I had a meeting yesterday with Paul Schaefer from SCS Engineers who has conducted both the study for InVinity and the study for Autumn Brands And he indicated that both the units are effective, they're different.
He indicated that the question about the secondary emissions that might come from a unit like Genesis, he said the way they did this study at Autumn Brands there, There is no emissions that are measurable in the formaldehyde and the ketone classification. So he said it's safe, he believes it's safe to be applied in other greenhouses. He said the autumn brand study isn't necessarily directly applicable to another grower meaning the units per acre Because Autumn Brand has a low odor load and so they required less units, but he recommended that they use between 11 to 15 units per acre for Genesis.
There was also a question just about the efficiency of the units and he said it's hard to compare the two studies because at Everbloom you have a very very high odor load And so when you measure it after it goes through the system, you will see a very high percentage of reduction. So that's where that 80% reduction in odor comes in. He said with Autumn Brands they have a much lower odor load. So when it runs through the system, the reduction in odor is a lower percentage. So he says just it's hard to compare those two studies.
But he does believe both technologies are effective. He believes both technologies are safe
So even though you say that I still have great concerns about the safety of and effectiveness of this system to Genesis system so what is Your staff doing to make sure that it is effective. Are you? Doing third party evaluation.
So I mean SES engineers is the 3rd party evaluator and they're the ones that have been doing studies for the installation of the Genesis units at different facilities, he's not they're not doing them forever every facility but there are a qualified engineer that did the analysis. And the units are carb certified they don't produce ozone So I feel confident that the units are safe. I'm meeting with Erin Gillette from APCD on Friday to have a further conversation with her about it, but at this stage, I feel that the units are effective and safe to be installed in greenhouses. That's based on the information I have received from the scientists that did the analysis.
And can you talk about any byproducts that can come from this system, the Genesis system?
So there's a study. I'm going to share with you a study that we did last year. Formaldehyde and ketones where the substances of concern but we have a study here and I'm happy to share it with any of the board members that have And it goes from formaldehyde to acetone. Yes, benzadelhide. So I have a list and none of them are really even very measurable when the test was conducted and he said when he did conduct the test it was in the most intensive environment. It was in a processing facility where the odor was very high. And so he believes that these test results would be replicated.
1:08 – 1:1618 turns
Good. My goal is to make sure that the workers there are as well safe and that should be one of our top priorities, as well as order control. Is there any enforcement systems in case it doesn't work?
So in the event that the systems do not work and they trigger a threshold. Our threshold, which is D over T odor at the property line then we will they will be in violation of our code and we will send them notices of violation and then work with them to correct that problem.
Thank you for your explanation.
Yeah I'm happy to share any further information if board members need it and I can share this study
All right, I believe we have one public commenter. But before we get there, just as a supervisor that's interested in this topic as well, I'll be very interested in APCDs concurrence with those findings as well. I think that would help all of us just to make sure you know having the other organization with the second set of eyes on it. So just adding that to the conversation.
I believe we have one public commenter
Yes, General Nielsen and members of the board we have one request to speak on this item. We're going to Zoom with Anna Carrillo. Anna?
Before she starts we're gonna go ahead and close public comment on this item. Go ahead Miss Carrillo
And Anna oh there you go
Okay, sorry. Okay well thank you for talking more about this item I was very concerned about specifically Autumn Brands because when I did get the OAP it said the OAP was submitted on March 9th. I'd been in contact with Aaron Briggs the week before and it was still in review and then And then I even got a comment from Aaron Briggs the Monday, March 9th. You know it's still in review and then I come to the meeting and it's been approved. And so I did get a copy of the OAP. I had to request it through you know the county portal um and The document says It was submitted on August. I mean on On April or March 9th, and was approved on March 9th. And the signature and on the 1st, the 1st cover page was the 9th and the last page was the 9th where this engineer signed so I was kind of curious how that process worked because I knew the had been submitted.
You know, on December 18th. I mean, I was given that information and then my other question is on the list of growers that have been receiving their letters of denial. There are two other growers three other growers who are not on the list and so I'm just wondering you know who were three of them were also going to do the Genesis. And my concern with the Genesis is because the APCD You know, with when Laura or when it was at the March 10th meeting a PCD was on the phone and said they didn't recommended for you know cannabis and something also related to maybe a state document. Where they didn't recommend it for, you know, cannabis. So that's where and I'm reading the letter, the board letter that was submitted from Carmela Beck. And so those are my questions.
You know, where is Genesis? I understand what you just said about for Autumn Brands. What about these other 3 growers who May not be getting letters because they were close to having the Genesis and maybe even had them on site But maybe hadn't installed them because their OAPs hadn't been approved by When the letter was written about when the extensions, you know We're going to be given so those were my concerns. Thank you very much
Thank thank you miss Creel
and that concludes public comment on this item
Okay back to the board any additional comments or questions supervisor Hartman
I had a question about the OAPs. Do outside scientists review those to make sure that there are enough units? And then, what standards are we using to protect workers inside the greenhouses? How do we determine that?
So Supervisor Hartman through the chair. Geosyntech is our third party consultant that reviews all of the OAPs to verify that it'll be effective so they provide comments on the OAPS, they return them to the growers and the engineers that prepared their studies and then they respond so it's a back-and-forth process until Geosyntech in the county are satisfied It's it is and I I understand the board's concerns and I share them to wanting to make sure that workers are safe but it is not, that is not a role that the county planning and development department plays.
So that is a worker safety issue that I think would be handled by another state department. And is it handled
Or is this something that's sort of outside the OSHA or regulatory framework?
Yeah, I can look into that a little bit more. But I know that the units that we're talking about are CARB certified so we know that they don't produce ozone. So the Air Resources Board has signed off on these particular units but I can look into what the regulatory requirements are and get back to the board.
And then I would be interested in answers to Ms. Carrillo's questions, I know we don't normally do that in public comment but this is such an important issue.
So I heard a few questions and I'm not sure I have all of them but she asked a question about where the OAPs for some of the other growers that are proposing Genesis and they're in review I had committed to the board that we would sort of pump the brakes on Genesis until I got more information about the efficacy of the system and the safety of the system. So those OAPs are still going through review with GeoCentec and county staff.
And... Do you recall what her question was? She did have a question about whether or not growers, there are some growers that have purchased the units already and started using them. They don't have approved OAPs yet. So those growers that purchase the units and started using the equipment I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong with the CEO's office, those growers did not receive a letter regarding their license And I think those were the main questions.
1:16 – 1:2524 turns
And so I have an additional question. There was a set of operators who were close but they wanted an extension, what is their status?
So we have two additional growers that have come into compliance that had sought And it's Emma Wood and CP1. And they now have approved OAPs, and they have installed equipment.
And so I'm going to ask you to speculate a bit but the smell in Carpinteria has not gotten any better. When do we think that these new technologies will be up and running and really making a difference?
So I think what it depends on who you ask. Some people say it has been reduced, others don't feel that has been reduced. I try to go through the community. I rode my bike through there this weekend just to see where the odor is coming from But I think what we need to do is get everybody the equipment and get it up and running, and then assess where we are. We go out and take regular tests, and I'm happy to share – we have a dashboard.
We take regular tests with GeoSentech that lists where we're getting complaints, and then we go out and we do testing. We use the nasal ranger. And we can document all of that. And I think once we get all the growers in compliance, then we look to see to make sure that the odor is reduced to a satisfactory level and then we assess if there's anything additional that needs to be done by the board.
And remind me the appeals process and how long that can extend the timeline. Yeah so the appeal
process, I can answer it but either way it's 60 day period for the CEO's office for the license so they get their letter they have to appeal it within a specific time frame and then There should be a hearing within that 60 day time period. If there's anything else you want to add?
I just want to be more specific because there is a little bit more time so go ahead. Yeah,
as I mentioned the letters of the receipt of the letters will be on April 8th they have 10 days to request the appeal so until 420 is when we need to receive their appeal request form Then they have a 60-day period to have the hearing within. And then the hearing officer has 30 days to provide their decision, so that's the timeline.
And then what happens with the decision?
If the decision is to uphold the revocation, then the operator would be required to cease operations.
And so they'd have to take their plants out or what would happen? What does cease operations mean?
There'll be a small wind down period for the operation to shut down and make sure that they're compliant locally and with the state with regards to plants and metric track-and-trace
And then if that happens, just trying to play it out. Are they out of the system? Out of the cap and they would have to reapply if they wanted to?
They would be required to reapply and at that time they'd have to have operating equipment in place in order to get through the process.
So we're probably 90 days a little more out? Yes ma'am. Thank you
And just to add one thing to for supervisor Hartman and the rest of the board. The growers are some it appears or trying to get the equipment installed so they can come into compliance with that with chapter 50. All
right, thank you. Miss miss
Okay, thank you. So this is interesting information about the testing of Genesis so I appreciate it and I would love to see the study and so it's Paul what's his last name? I'm happy to hear that it's him who did the testing as well as on the inventory at Everbloom. So just to kind of do the quick narrative, Supervisor Nelson and I went to Everbloom many times as we were contemplating this ordinance that we're now seeing the implementation and discussing here in this item And at Everbloom you cannot smell it, maybe traces. And so that's what yields the 84% that Mr. Schaefer did that study which by the way cost the industry $900,000 and so we came up with that notion to put it in simple terms let's try to come up with something that legislates this and that's with the technology using carbon We didn't want to name a specific brand because that wouldn't be appropriate for government.
And so we just named the technology or the equivalent, but then to see that there was operators that were choosing something that yielded not 84%, but 42% which is not equivalent if you do the math. But now you're saying that the same... You're giving this explanation which we didn't have at the last hearing That the same tester is saying it's not the same result because the smell wasn't.
As bad. I mean, so now it's interesting is the point is that the smell has to be as bad in order to set the bar to test whether or not the reduction will be seen. So I guess my simple question is does Paul Schaefer say as an independent tester? Is there no smell at Autumn Brands?
He says that the goal he well, I mean I've been out there. I went to the site and visited it and when you get to the road, there's no smell when There's no smell. I smelled it very faintly in one location right as I walked up to a building at the front of the property, but I couldn't smell it anywhere else. And by the time you get to their property line, you can't smell it.
So it's it's they they only have 8 units breaker. And that's that's what they're using in their meeting the threshold, they're not exceeding I wouldn't even say they're meeting if they're not exceeding the It really is based on each grower. You have to do the analysis for each grower on the number of units per greenhouse, per acre. And so typically he thinks it'll be more units per acre for the other growers because they may have a higher odor load in their greenhouses.
Sure and to Supervisor Hartman's question about the workers I mean another huge motivation for this ordinance are the workers and when we We're at Everbloom, you know we heard from the workers how wonderful it is to leave work and not smell like cannabis and go pick up your kids from school. And so I do think maybe it's not technically in the mandate of your work but it certainly is our motivation as supervisors to do this well. So I look forward to going out to Autumn Brands. I'll ask for an invitation And see for myself, but thank you for this update and it does make it very complicated. But I think we also just need to look at the big picture and we're just trying to make it so that it doesn't smell because those are the emails that we continue to get Director Plowman they don't they have not stopped and we're looking forward to the day when we don't hear the complaints that it still smells.
Thank you.
All right. Thank you Supervisor Kaps. All right, seeing no other lights on we actually need to get a motion to receive and file this item. 824 can I get a motion to adopt staff recommendation?
I'll make the motion to adopt staff recommendation A and B.
And I'll second.
Okay all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Alright We'll move on to our last administrative item is Item A-27 and that's been pulled by me. Madam Clerk, will you please read that item into the record?
1:25 – 1:2915 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the board, Administrative Item Number 27 is from the Fire Department. It is to consider recommendations regarding revisions to the rules and regulations of the Santa Barbara County Fire Department's Board of Appeals and appointment of candidates onto the Board of Appeals.
Right, I pulled this item. I was going to ask for a continuance on this to the April 21st meeting. This is the reconstitution of the Fire Appeals Board. Fire Department has offered up some potential candidates but I also wanted to look at potential candidates from my district as well to get a balance of appointees so I just needed a little bit more time to dig into that for myself. I've asked Deputy Chief Pat Fyde If that delay would cause any undue complications. And Deputy Chief, if I may just maybe confirm for the public and my colleagues that wouldn't cause any problems for you guys in the short term if we waited another couple weeks before we reappointed the members of this board?
Yeah, Chair Nelson and members of the Board, we can support a continuance on this. I think our intent is, and everyone's intent here shared So we don't see any problems with the continuance.
All right, so Supervisor
Hartman? I just had a question. So how are they typically appointed, the members of this board?
They're not. So it's worth noting that I don't think this board has seen an appeal in many, many years, probably 10 or 20 years. So we don't think that there's a lot of historical record for Board letter that you have creates a process that's adopted through Chapter 15, the amendments to the fire code. That allows for the board to select representative members who are skilled in an appropriate area so that they would be able to speak or make decisions with experience and competence in that specific area.
But it hasn't seen any action for awhile?
It's been quite some time.
And remind me then what are they advising on
So this would be a board to hear an appellant's opposition to a decision made by our fire marshal's office or by our fire chief. Historically, we've been able to resolve just about all these internally through communication with our constituency and this formalizes the process where an appellant could raise that question to a board in a more formal setting.
Thank
you.
In my understanding, there's currently one appointed that by the second district by Supervisor Caps at one point and so again I was just looking for that opportunity to maybe potentially do the same from ours or select from a list that the fire department has provided people willing to serve. So that's why I was asking for the continuance to give me a little bit more time personally and I want to thank Fire Marshal Tan and again Deputy Chief Bide for bringing this forward with us and so I'd make a motion to continue this item to April 21st. Second.
All right, any further comments or is there public comment on this item? Madam Clerk.
Chair Nelson and members of the board we have no request to speak from the public on this item.
Seeing no further comment all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed motion for continuance is passed and that concludes our administrative agenda. Right it's the time will move on to our general public comment these are four items that are for topics that are not on our agenda but is under the purview of this board. And so Madam Clerk, do we have any general public comment today?
1:29 – 1:346 turns
Yes, Chair Nelson and members of the Board, we have two requests to speak in general public comment today. We are going to remain here in Santa Barbara and begin with Catherine Hannah to be followed by Kissa Mosley. Catherine?
As Catherine comes up I'm gonna go ahead and close general public comment. Thank you.
Hi, good morning board. My name is Catherine Hannah I'm a junior at Westmont College and I am part of the Kingdom Causes Fellowship this semester that's been working on coming up with solutions in an action plan for specifically dealing with CSECI within our county. I'm here to report that after a long semester of hard work we have come to North Star goals for three-year action plan as well as specifically implementation of what we're going to be doing within the next 100 days which we have three different categories that we're going to be focusing on, a business coalition.
We have family navigation centers that were kind of starting to ground roots work our way up to establishing some of those within our county as well as working with an already established organization known as Anchorage. Kisa is going to speak on that one more specifically after me. But I am excited to just share that we'll be starting that next. I will not be here this summer, other interns will be taking over but I am excited that I'll be returning in the fall and I'll be more focused on the business coalition.
Our goal with that is we're going to start having monthly meetings with... We currently have five businesses that have signed onboard and ideally we're gonna get some more as this progresses. But we're going to start working with them to see what they can do to help support just their own staff and then also get involved with their communities more and come around this issue.
And I'll hand it over to Keisa after me, but thank you so much. Also if you have any questions you can email my email is katharine.hanna at kingdomcauses.org Thank you. And we
will now go to our final speaker, Kisa Mosley. Kisa?
Thank you yes good morning Board of Supervisors yeah so I just wanted to echo what Kat just said but my name is Kisa I also attend Westmont College and I'm a part of the fellowship as well with Kingdom Causes Working To End Child Sexual Exploitation in Santa Barbara And so I last shared with you guys like a little bit over a month ago on February 24th. And during that time, Kingdom Causes and other organizations in the community have been making a lot of strides to implement steps meetings projects to work towards our goal of ending CSECI in Santa Barbara City. And so our three year action plan Like Kat mentioned, involves two other projects as well. But the one that I'm assigned to partners with Noah's Anchorage which is another nonprofit in Santa Barbara known for their shelter services to youth in the community and the staff at Noah's works endlessly to provide support for these youth in need and they do the hard work of making Noah's a very welcoming and inclusive and reliable space for those who need it.
And so Kingdom Causes and NOAAs are both organizations sort of centered around serving the most vulnerable youth in our city, and so we just want to ask for you guys' continued support with amplifying the work that NOAA's is doing as well as Kingdom Causes and reminding your constituents that these are issues that affect the city and that we need their support as well as yours to continue to implement this systemic change that will hopefully result in early intervention and prevention efforts that will help to end this crisis. And so yeah, thank you again for your time and please reach out if you have any questions or ideas. My email is kisa.mosley at kingdomcauses.org Thank you
All right, thank you both and that closes public comment. I'm just going to take it just one pause for a second is have a quick question for the CEO before I take us a short break. No not yet. Just a quick just a pause. All right we're going to go ahead and take a five minute break and we'll come back to start for departmental items. Welcome back to the April 7th, 2026 meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors regular scheduled meeting in the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. We're going to go before we start departmental item number one we're gonna go back to CEO's report. CEO Miyasato?
1:34 – 1:4213 turns
Thank you Chair Nelson I was remiss in my earlier report this morning and we wanted to give you some an update some stats on Soletobia which happened this past weekend as you know so I've asked Sheriff Brown if he could come up and just Kind of give a high-level overview and the statistics.
Thank you Mona, thank you Chair Nelson and members of the board. I'm here to report some good news to you today, some excellent news and that is that the weekend's festivities in Isla Vista were very manageable, were a shadow of their former selves in terms of problems and issues everything from arrests, citations, medical emergencies all of that way down in numbers and I'm going Commander Schmidt will give you those numbers in just a moment. It was a great day and it was a good way to see the community in the form of the Community Services District sponsor an event, and the University sponsor an evening event that Helped make it very, very positive in its outcomes.
And so I just want to say strong thanks to all of them but I also want to say thanks to you because it was your unanimous vote of the music ordinance that we really believe is key to making sure that we had the success that we had over the weekend and with that I'd like to turn it over to Commander Joe Schmidt who was in charge of the operation he'll give you a briefing on
Good morning Chair Nelson and Board of Supervisors. I'm here to give some brief stats on this weekend so for, I'm going to start with 2025 stats so you can see the impact it's had. So in 2025 last year we had 485 people cited in 84 physical arrests that's 84 people that were booked into our jail for a total of 569 enforcement contacts This year, this last weekend we had 42 citations and six physical arrests for a total of 48 enforcement contacts. That's a 92% decrease in enforcement activity which is remarkable so thanks again for your support and just real briefly also very important is the decrease in medical calls For EMS contacts, it was a 94% reduction in medical calls compared to last year. And for hospitalizations only 2% to the hospital versus 25 last year so that's a 92% reduction.
So noise ordinance was effective this was a great partnership between stakeholders and Isla Vista all of us with the primary goal of keeping that community safe and it worked so thank you.
All right, Supervisor Caps please.
Yeah thank you I'm so glad you both are here today and I want to thank your entire team as well as the other first responders Ventura as well as our firefighters is our our ambulance services that were out there we supervisor Nelson supervisor Lee we ought to see it firsthand And there's so many people that were there for the health and safety of young people that call Isla Vista home. And it was remarkable to see.
I do want to report on the fun side, not that I'm the best narrator of that story but it was really fun and it really was emblematic of the best of Isla Vista coming together. It's a magical place and that was on full display this weekend with Isla Vista Community Service District taking the lead with this Soletopia, with strong support from the students. With strong support from Isla Vista Recreation and Parks District.
So many people coming in with this new Soletopia vision that really paid off, that pulled off it. With 8000 people partaking in a safe sanctioned through our board, through our county festival much like the festivals that we have around the county You know, where there's bands and a beer garden with you know ID being checked everything. And it just really came together and it worked and you know I want to do I want to note that your teams were out there many of whom on a holiday weekend for them Easter weekend and that's sacrifice so I was able to thank as many of them as possible but please extend the thanks because We're all doing that for the safety of young people and to see the statistics really says it all, and I just hope we're on a new path for the future.
Thanks
I just wanted to point out, Chair Nielsen if I could that the stats that Commander Schmidt gave you. That was for the three-day weekend so that was over three full days so the event itself it was an absolute shadow of its former self and it just was a huge success in so many different ways and as a result of the teamwork was apparent in so many different aspects of that day. So again kudos and thanks to you for helping make that happen.
Thank you Sheriff. Supervisor
Lee? I too want to say thank you for your hard work. I was there, I was very impressed about the operations and I want to thank you and all the deputies and the partnership that came together to make this successful. So there was a picture taken is it possible that we get a copy of that? Yes. Thank you. I appreciate it. So what's the plan for next year? Is it the same Type of ordinance, partnership.
Yes, we're gonna also support the Seoul Topia Festival and encourage like with any operation especially when it's year one. We learn a lot so there were some takeaways things that we can do better but the plan is to really scale back our staffing still have enough staffing to keep the event safe but it'll be a much smaller percentage of public safety that's that's the hope and I know we can achieve it based on what we saw this weekend.
Great work thank you. Thank you Supervisor Lee and Commander Schmidt. Supervisor Hartman?
Well, I just wanted to say we expected this to be an experiment that might take several years to be successful. So to see the great weather and we used to pray for rain but to see the great weather and this level of success and I worried well maybe kids are going to be in their rooms and overdosing on drugs and sort of be out the public eye, but that didn't happen either. It was uplifting and people wanted to be part of it and I'm just so proud of everybody who contributed.
I think just as a final thought that one of the things that really was evident that it was really a locally based event. We did know a lot of out-of-town people that came and who frankly were causing the majority of the disruptions and the problems in years gone by, so keeping it local as a strategy same approach to Halloween I think really paid off in this instance.
Yeah, thank you, Sheriff. And as was mentioned before I did attend and so many people to be thanked out there. Obviously, I think the top of that list is, of course, Commander Schmidt that's really took this under his wing and then also Supervisor Capps for the political courage. The whole board had to pass it but that's your district and obviously it's a tough decision to make but it was the right one. And I think that should be appreciated and honored. So again, thank you for everybody on their participation in this.
And with that, we will go ahead and on to department item number one. Madam Clerk, would you please read department item number one into the record?
1:42 – 1:506 turns
Chair Nelson and members of the board, departmental item number one is from the county executive office. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the Richards Ranch reorganization local agency formation commission LAFCO file number 24-08 tax exchange arbitration. And that is it.
Morning Chair Board, Wade Horton with CO's office. With me are Clara Tobin and Jesse Steele also at the CO's office and Deputy Fire Chief Bide and Fire Marshal Tan as well as Public Works Director Sneddon are also available to answer questions. Today we're presenting the Richards Ranch Reorganization and the outcome of the tax exchange arbitration between the county in the city of Santa Maria This item is ultimately about ensuring that any jurisdictional change maintains fiscal balance and protects the county's ability to provide services.
We are recommending that the board reject the proposed tax exchange allocation based on the fiscal impacts and supporting findings I'll walk through today. Next slide. The proposed reorganization involves four parcels totaling approximately 43.7 acres, planned for residential and commercial development. The application requests annexation to the City of Santa Maria and detachment from several county service areas and districts including fire protection. This action requires a property tax exchange to address the transfer of service responsibilities.
This slide outlines the process leading to today's item. The city application was filed in February 2025, followed by the Auditor-Controller's report in March. The County and City then entered into negotiations supported by a jointly commissioned fiscal analysis. After mediation in August 2025 did not resolve the issue, the matter proceeded to arbitration in February 2026 with the decision issued on March 3rd. Today's item is the county's required response Current property tax allocation framework relevant to the project area is shown here.
Percentages in bold were the subject of transfer and negotiation. Property tax allocation is the primary ongoing revenue source, and how it is allocated directly determines whether the county can sustainably provide services. The county reviewed 12 comparable tax rate areas from prior city annexations. Of those that allocated property tax to the county, the county received on average about 19.6%, with the city receiving approximately 10.1%.
The audit controller also identified a directly comparable tax rate area within the city that allocated 19.9% to the county. The takeaway here is that there's a consistent precedent that is materially higher than what the city had proposed. The Orcutt Community Facilities District levies an annual special tax on development to fund public services and facilities needed to support growth in the Orcut area. If this development were to occur in the unincorporated area, the county would expect the parcels to be in the Orcutt CFD and the development would generate approximately $425,000 annually to support county services.
Under annexation that revenue is lost to the county even though future revenues Residents will continue to use county supported amenities such as parks and regional services. This represents a structural loss, revenue goes away but service demand does not. The county's proposal address both ongoing and one-time impacts. On the ongoing side, the county proposed receiving 75% of the general fund and fire property tax revenues as well as retaining CSA 5 revenue which would have resulted in a 24.1% allocation to the county and 8.7% to the city.
On the one time side, the proposal includes approximately 2.3 million for transportation and partial offsets for Fire Station 25, which will be located less than one half mile from the site. Additional provisions address transportation responsibilities and water service within the Orcutt Community Plan area. Overall our offer was designed to align revenues with cost and maintain service levels.
Separate from the arbitration process as part of negotiations we also propose a regional housing needs allocation or arena transfer. The city proposal provides for a 50% share of general fund and fire property tax revenues to the county with no one-time payments for infrastructure impacts. While the proposal includes some additional revenue From smaller districts, it doesn't address the larger structural issues particularly loss of CFD revenues. The city offer results in a 17.2% allocation in the county and a 15.7% allocation to city which was selected through the advisory arbitration process.
The fiscal impacts of each proposals are summarized here along with the will then fiscal analysis referenced in the board letter. All scenarios shown include the loss of approximately 425,000 in annual or cut CFD revenue. Under the wheel down analysis on the left column which assumes a 75% allocation and general fund property tax and 50% of fire property tax to the county. The resulting net annual impact is negative $102,000 Under the county's proposal, the middle column which includes a 75% allocation of both general fund and fire property tax revenues as well as retention of revenues from CSA 5. The county breaks even Under the city proposal on the right, which includes a 50% allocation of both general fund and fire property tax revenues along with the continued revenues from CSA 5, the North County line district and the Mosquito District.
The estimated net annual impact to the county is negative $212,000 a year creating a structural deficit. Based on the analysis, staff recommends the board reject the city proposal selected through arbitration. The proposed allocation does not generate sufficient revenue to cover county expenditures, does not account for the full cost of fire protection services and eliminates significant one-time contributions for infrastructure. It also is inconsistent with both independent fiscal analysis and established tax rate area precedent.
The findings of fact formalize the basis for this recommendation. First, the city proposal is financially insufficient and results in a net loss to the county. Second, it is inconsistent with the assumptions used in both fiscal analysis prepared during the process. And third, it falls below the allocation levels reflected in existing comparable tax rate areas.
Recommended actions are as follows. Receive and file the report on the arbitration outcome Reject the property tax exchange offer selected by the arbitrator and make the written findings of fact and attachment C to the board letter as to why the recommended offer was not accepted. And determine these actions are not subject to CEQA. That concludes our presentation, we're
available for questions. All right thank you Mr. Horton is there any questions for the board before I go to public comment? Okay seeing none Madam Clerk do we have a public comment on this item?
Yes, Chair Nelson and members of the board. We have four requests to speak from the public on this item.
Okay we'll go ahead and close public comment on this item and start first speaker.
We will begin here in Santa Barbara with Chun Wu to be followed by Michael Stolte.
1:50 – 1:576 turns
Welcome morning chair Nelson members of the board I'm Chun Wu, Assistant City Manager, city of Santa Maria. I wanted to provide a city perspective to the work that's been done over the last year or two. Just want to comment that the work that the city staff had with the county staff were cordial professional and we certainly put our rigor into the work so I wanted to state my appreciation for that.
In regards to the fiscal analysis, the county states Our offer was lower than the fiscal analysis. Both independent third party fiscal analyses show that the county will see an increase in revenue, including the one in which they had extensive input, the Wodan study. The independent third party arbitrator commissioned by both the city and the county selected the city's offer clearly demonstrating that it was the most reasonable.
I'm going to touch on some comments in regards to the CFD, fire and infrastructure. In regards to the CFD it's stated that the county will forego $425,000 annual revenue if the project develops in a city. However, the city contends that the nearby city residents would not or should not incur significant maintenance and operational costs. In regards to fire protection, as we know this is a shared response there is information that shows that the city continues to provide greater response compared to the county especially prior to the construction of Fire Station 25 Infrastructure improvements, we think that the county had unusually high number of requests for the city to imburse the county for past and future infrastructure improvements that will serve Orchid.
And we think these improvements carry benefits that go far beyond the proposed project. We certainly would follow the required fair share approach or in line with what's governed by AB 1600. You know, all in all I think the city has engaged with the county in a long process with mediation and arbitration. And we ask that the county respect the information and the outcome of that process.
And if more time is needed, That we have a continuance to a date certain. This concludes my remarks, thank you.
Thank you Mr. Wu.
We will now go to Michael Stolte to be followed by Jeffrey Pemstein.
Chair Nelson, members of the board. Good morning and thank you for your time today. This is a little awkward we actually thought we were going to be coming after lunch session so the vast majority of people that are gonna be speaking today are not here they're actually driving down as we speak but I will go ahead and try to carry forward We respectfully requesting a short date certain continuance of this item until June 9th, 2026 to allow time to reconcile what we believe are material issues in the staff analysis.
At a high level we are seeing a consistent theme in the report an effort to evaluate this site based on what it could be in the county rather than what it is. We see that in ORCID CFD assumptions and we see that in the County Fire Revenue Assumptions We provided a few documents of which show the independent third-party analysis for the tax exchange, of which show that the county's side of this arbitrator's decision is in fact a net positive to a high dollar amount.
This site has been in the county zoned as it is today since 1990s. It does not have a viable water source and for decades through prior ownership including Walmart for nearly 20 years, now us for five there's been no feasible path to development. During that entire time the county has not solved water, has not initiated a project, has not rezoned the site and has not advanced CEQA to make it developable even foregoing it as a staff recommendation So to now assume that the site might generate if it were developed in the county and use that as a reason to deny annexation is not grounded in reality.
It is hypothetical being treated as a loss, and what I mean by that is Will Dan and Natelson two independent parties reviewed this tax exchange. In both cases they showed that the county would be net positive by hundreds of thousands of dollars per year Additionally, the tax exchange was a 50-50 split for County Fire. You know there have been concerns that County Fire would lose this district and thus would lose revenue.
As of right now the site cannot be developed and thus County Fire has really basically zero revenue from the site. In reality the annexation is requesting that the site go to City Fire but City Fire and County Fire have a mutual aid agreement So regardless of who serves the site first, they are paid for those calls. But more importantly in the tax exchange it was agreed between the city and the county that County Fire revenue would be shared 50-50 between the city and the county.
So between the ORCID CFD being used and not in that analysis to show a negative $400,000 loss. We believe that we should receive a continuance to review this further date certain June 9th please. Thank
you Mr. Stolpe.
We will now go to Jeffrey Pemstein to be followed by Lori Tamura in Santa Maria.
1:57 – 2:024 turns
Morning Chair Nelson and members of the board. I'm Jeff Pemstein, I'm with the National Association of Home Builders. Appreciate your time this morning. So I'm here on behalf of our partnership with the Home Builder's Association of the Central Coast and our members at Richards Ranch. NHB represents 640 chapters around the country in over 140,000 members throughout the U.S., and our focus is to support good projects and housing for all.
So today it's not a big surprise. We're in the midst of the worst housing crisis that we've had in this country since, since the end of World War II and California is in the crosshairs of that and Santa Barbara County is ground zero for that so when we see first-time homebuyers age 40 and we see average pricing of housing nationally 400,000 little over 800,000 in the state And 1.2 million in your fine county, it's not a secret that there are folks who are facing housing insecurity and the problem isn't getting better. So why do we why are we here on Richards Ranch? We generally take on large scale big regulatory issues and policy issues but on occasion we see good projects And on occasion when we see those good projects, we try to at least offer our support and guidance from our years of experience.
I've been in the industry in California for over 40 years. I had a chance to review your fiscal information and the good work that was done by county staff and city staff and my former company that I worked for many years ago, Wildan Associates. And what I would say to you is you're not that far apart. But this is such an important decision and this is such an important piece of the puzzle at the final step of the development process, which is a long and arduous process as you all very well know.
It seems incongruous to throw out the baby with the bathwater. So we're here to offer our support, we're here to offer our guidance. We think that at a minimum trying to continue this discussion and again I would say you're not that far apart so to tank a good project over this last step would seem to be folly. So I would humbly ask your board to respect and offer the continuance for the project to the next date certain. Thank you
Thank you, Mr. Epstein.
We will now go to Santa Maria to hear our final speaker, Lori Tamura and Chair Nelson and members of the board I would just like to note for the record we did have a few requests to speak after the chair had closed public comment on this item.
Laurie good morning, Lori tomorrow with urban planning concepts land use planner in Santa Maria Valley and been involved with the richest ranch project for over 6 years working with Michael on moving this project through to what we thought would be a successful attempt. Uh, we have gone through the city planning process. We went through 2 rounds of environmental review in order to respond to comments that were provided by the county.
We went through the housing rezone process and was hoping to work through that County process. Um, we finally went to the planning commission at the city as well as the City Council with recommendations of approval for this annexation. The development plan, the maps and we then made a formal application to laugh go. and work through the LAFCO process. We know that between the county and the city, there were additional steps that this project went through over the last year. In total of this project has been through six years of hearings process cost community engagement on a number of levels. And we're here today as was noted, we're at the last step And it seems like we're very close to an agreement, but we want to be able to resolve this without having to go back to the new step.
I think. Particularly during the housing rezone efforts, this project was discussed quite heavily with the supervisors and there was a lot of community support for it. And particularly because it includes a commercial component. And that was being recommended by the city, the county staff. And so we think that there's a win here for both sides and we hope that the board will accept and direct staff to take a continuance for two months so that we can resolve these final details.
Thank you very much.
2:02 – 2:0910 turns
And as the clerk had mentioned, there was two speakers that came in after I closed public comment. But in the interest of public participation, I'll go ahead and reopen it for those last two speakers to be able to comment on this item.
All righty, thank you chair Nelson and members of the board. I did notice one of the members did log out so I will begin with Jocelyn Brennan on zoom and then we will go to Damian Mavis. Damien if you can please re-login to Zoom that would be greatly appreciated. Jocelyn?
Hello, Chair Nielsen and council members. I think you can hear me. Yes
we can please proceed
OK thanks. I am the interim executive director for the Home Builders Association of the Central Coast which serves Santa Barbara County and we do support the continuance of this item. We strongly support this project Richards Ranch. We urge you to take the necessary actions to work with the city of Santa Maria and come to a tax exchange agreement The HBA feels that denying this agreement would be precedent setting, and it's deeply concerning for us and for the housing industry to see something like that happen. It signals that even projects aligned in adopted plans and infrastructure availability may face unpredictable outcomes creating what we call a chilling effect on development and future investment in the area.
As outlined in the county staff report, this project proposes 750 workforce residential units and affordable units. County cannot expect vacant land to be developed under these conditions, and other key sites have appropriately moved through the annexation process to access needed infrastructure. This project follows that same well-established path and should be treated consistently.
From an industry perspective, prolonged delays on projects like this have real and compounding consequences Every year a project is stalled, it costs increase. Financing becomes more challenging and the ultimate price of housing goes up. We want to also acknowledge that this project reflects many of the principles that HBACC and our state national partners NAHB and CBIA consistently advocate for efficient use of infill land within an existing urban footprint delivery of both market rate and affordable housing The next item on the agenda is a recommendation for the board to approve coordination between jurisdictions to align infrastructure and land use and water.
Advancement of housing opportunities in a high cost region so please continue this item and ultimately we hope that you will accept arbiters tax exchange determination
And chair Nelson members of the board we will now go to our final speaker Damien may this Damian.
This is Damien Davis, hopefully you all can hear me again. Good morning, chair Nelson and other board members. My name is Damien Mavis with covel up where a For-profit real estate development specializing in market rate affordable housing. In the San Luis Obispo area, we've been at it for about 20 years and we're co-developing this project with Michael Stolte.
And what really got me interested in this project was the variety of housing that really met an affordable by design need in the area, as well as creating this commercial node for the uh in this existing neighborhood. At any rate we requested um why we requested annexation is you know simply five years ago 2021 there was really no water and unfortunately that really hasn't changed and then in looking at the virtues of a successful LAFCO site. We really meet all of them and this process of annexation supports the orderly development of the City of Santa Maria as well as within this sphere of influence. Moving forward to the housing element, we requested to be rezoned in the housing element. Staff included Our site in the housing element as essentially the most ready shovel, ready project in North County has great infrastructure.
Obviously extensive measure a dollars have been spent on it and unfortunately we weren't included on in the housing element. We were noted that we could potentially become part of it with a development agreement. And we were told that that could be a very short process, basically back to the Board of Supervisors by June I think was the quote. You know, we fully engaged with county staff.
We realized that the timeline was extremely extended Uh, and we wouldn't be able to put it together. So here we are, uh, you know, we've completed in the city of Santa Maria. Um, you know what? I think unfortunately is a huge impact of this of the delay of this project is. You know, townhomes basically were selling at about $450,000 when we started this process and now they're at about $650,000.
That's a $20 million increase in housing costs to the community and your constituents. And unfortunately they're the ones that really lose when we continue to delay this project. So I would echo Michael's sentiment. We would like a continuance to June 9th hearing to be able to address these final issues. Thank you very much.
And that concludes public comment on this item.
All right back to the board. I'll just let my colleagues know, I'm not interested in any continuance. I think we have the information in front of us to be able to make a decision today. That said, I will open up two questions from the Board staff and then We'll go into deliberations after that. Is there additional questions for staff?
I do, I see the fire department. Do they have any comments they want to make or say about this?
2:09 – 2:1719 turns
Supervisor Lee through the chair our desire is to provide public service so currently through the RFCC we're providing closest resource response to all the areas. The first as we sit today the first fire engine into this area is going to be a county engine at a station 21 That's without any changes. We have a proposed Station 25 which would be just .4 miles away from this site, so our proposed fire service is only improving in the area.
I would say that probably 80% of our response profile into any given area is that of a single engine. So 80% of the time right now you're going to see a county engine be the first into that area and with the addition of Station 25, that's only going to improve. Currently for our multi-engine response, if it was like a structure fire response where we see four or five pieces of apparatus, county would represent three of those five.
With addition to that our County Fire Department serves its community with paramedics on every fire engine and that's not something that the city can say. Again this resources are going to go no matter where the tax basis falls. Our desire is sustainability and it's to keep tax dollars in alignment with service delivery So I think that the service delivery that's being provided today and that will only improve in the future warrants maintaining the alignment of this. But I can answer any questions that you might have.
All right, thank you Deputy Chief Bide. Any other questions for the fire department? Other questions for staff, Supervisor Kaps?
Yeah, I just wanted to ask staff too in light of the comment about potential losses or not to the county if you could just talk about the calculations.
And if we can have the presentation back on the screen.
So here are the three options that were discussed in the staff report and also the presentation so just to reiterate, if you look at the net annual impact that's an annual impact for ongoing revenues and I feel like a middle proposal what we propose we would essentially be revenue neutral so we would break even on an annual basis Under the city proposal, there would be approximately $212,000 loss to the county on an ongoing basis. And that's the primary reason why we're recommending not to accept this tax change agreement.
All right thank you Supervisor Kaps. Supervisor Hartman?
Yes, so I'd like to understand a little bit more about the process. So this went to mediation what happened in mediation?
We met with the city in good faith and I would like to echo John's comments that the discussions were nothing but cordial and professional. However, we could not come to an agreement in mediation. And so we collectively selected an arbitrator with the city.
So was there a mediator who rendered some decision?
They did not render a decision, we cannot come to agreement but we did have a jointly agreed to mediator that facilitated the conversation. Following mediation, we were not successful so we proceeded arbitration where the city and the county presented their last best final offer and ultimately the arbitrators selected this city's offer.
And did the arbitrator offer additional rationale for that choice?
No.
And so where does it go next? Internally, this would end the process is would this go to a court?
So what I can say is from the LAFCO perspective, if either the city or county rejects the tax change offer, the annexation application can't be approved by LAFCO as far as what the next steps are. I can't speak to that.
OK, thank you. All
right, thank you. So at this time we'll go ahead and move on to deliberations. Since this is in my district I'm going to go ahead and kick things off on deliberations. Sorry Mr. Stolte the time for public comment is over. Thank you. You know, I want to just kind of reflect on what happened through the arbitration process. This first came to the board for some direction from us and I think that what you saw actually in the arbitration process was actually a bit of a compromise from already with the direction from the board where staff took what the board had which was actually even probably more Leaning towards the county and found some kind of place that they could reasonably defend to us as supervisors but also into the taxpayers, but also to the arbitration process.
And so that was what was offered and I would think that that would be our counties bare minimum. And you know, I don't even know if I would be able to support that. Cause I think that there's other policy implications and services delivery there. This is just looking at a very narrow thing of just the fiscal side of it. And so there's a lot more that goes into this but that's what we're looking at here.
And so, you know I do want to credit the city of Santa Maria and our staff on working hard towards trying to come to some type of solution here. Unfortunately, I think My concern from the beginning that this is going to be hard to accomplish, both the goals and of the county. I think one of the public commenters said that support a project that is aligned with adopted plans.
And it's really clear that this project actually is not in the adopted plans of the city of Santa Maria. City of Santa Maria is going through a general plan process right now And they're making no efforts towards even including this project in that plan. That said, the county has a plan in place. We have the Orchid Community Plan adopted. And this is what we actually call a key site. And they say key site for a reason because it's really important piece of that project. And so if you look at it, it's a peninsula into the orchid area. It's a key piece of orchids entire EIR that existed and funding plan around the Orchard Community Plan. So it's really important that the county honors that plan, and so you know I it brings me no joy that we're here today but I am going to eventually make a motion after my colleagues make their comments to support staff recommendation here and reject the Tax Exchange Agreement.
Any other comments from staff before I make that motion? Or colleagues. Okay, I'll make a motion. My
lights
are on. Sorry, I didn't see you there first. Please, Supervisor Hartman.
Yeah, I have another question for staff and that has to do with the request for an extension. Do you feel like there's any hope that there could be some kind of common ground found
2:17 – 2:2111 turns
Based on the proposal from the arbitrator, this before you today. Staff would not recommend that the county takes a $212,000 annual loss.
Is there any I mean this is hard to say but in negotiations sometimes parties move? I guess that's the question
So we're, and this is incident supervisor. We're dealing with the city of Santa Maria. The next steps of this project for the board directed staff to engage with the developer in the city. We could certainly do that again but what's before you today is a tax change agreement specifically with the city of Santa Maria and that's what staff's recommending your action would be to reject that specific proposal
But at least if I remember what I heard the city is also asking for more time. Is that not correct? Yeah
Understanding the process that we've gone through arbitration The arbitrator has selected proposal and that's what set forth in statute and every I would refer to County Council to expand on that I Don't see how extending this process based that the arbitrator has already found. And recommended a proposal that extending the timeline I don't see what where we what we would do with that.
It seems to me that the city might change its position some. It sounds like you, the county changed its position some. I guess this has been so problematic from the get-go and it's a site that is a complex site but it is an infill site and it does have a lot of infrastructure. It would provide needed residential and commercial And I think the developer has been trying every which way to Sunday to figure out what might work and running into roadblocks everywhere.
And I don't feel proud about this. All
right, thank you Supervisor Hartman. I do feel proud about the work that our county's done on this and I know it's been a difficult process. You know, I do think that this is unfortunate but it was potentially predictable and I'm gonna make a motion to adopt staff recommendation A3C.
And I'll second.
Is there any further deliberations on that? Should we do a roll call vote? Okay. All right, Madam Clerk can I do a roll call vote? A motion by Nelson to adopt staff recommendation and a second by Supervisor Lee.
Roll-call vote Passed 3–1 motion to adopt staff recommendation A3C. And I'll second. Is there any further deliberations on that? Should we do a roll call vote? Okay.
Show transcript
Motion passes 3-1
We're going to go ahead and get in department item number two before we head to closed session. Just give us a moment while we change out staff.
2:21 – 2:3416 turns
Turn Nelson and members of the board departmental item number 2 is from the behavioral wellness Department and the sheriff coroner's office. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the sheriff's office and behavioral wellness co-response program and funding update.
All right, I think we have. Apologize here. Sheriff Brown kicking it off for you.
Commander Smith please. Alright good afternoon hello again. Commissioner Schmidt with the Sheriff's Criminal Investigations Division. We're here to talk about a very important role for the community, and that is the co-response teams with Behavioral Wellness and the Sheriffs Office. And here to present on that is Dr. Sherilyn Lee of the Sheriff's Office Behavioral Sciences Unit.
Thank you, Commander. Good afternoon, Supervisor Nelson and the rest of the board. I'm happy to be here. So I'm Dr. Cheryl Lynn Lee. I am a police and public safety psychologist and currently serving as the behavioral sciences manager for the Santa Barbara Sheriff's Office. So here today we are to talk about the joint program between the Sheriff's Office and Behavioral Wellness, commonly referred to as County Co-Response.
So this program pairs an expertly trained crisis intervention trained deputy with a licensed mental health practitioner from Behavioral Wellness, and their job is to respond to calls in the community where there are mental health crises. Currently we have teams that work 10-hour shifts and they operate from the unmarked sheriff's vehicles. We have four county teams, we have two that are currently placed in South County and two that are placed in North County. The teams share coverage and we have coverage seven days a week countywide In addition to responding to calls that come through 911, the co-response teams also provide outreach and follow up and engage in what's commonly known as behavioral threat assessment and management. Working with individuals in the community who are of concern and have intent to commit targeted violence.
The teams are scheduled based on the call volume that we see through our CAD dispatch system. We generally see the highest number of calls come from South County and Goleta area. As you can see here, the delineation of North County and South County and where the teams are currently operating from. When we started our co-response program, we started off in South County and we have continuously grown over the years which I will share with you next.
The teams dispatch from their respective stations but respond to their entire area of responsibility and if we are short staffed the team may listen and respond to calls countywide. We follow up with individuals based on the location of the individual or the exigency and the reason for the follow-up So this slide takes you through a timeline of the co-response program which began in 2018. In 2018 our co-response program began as a pilot program where we had one deputy and one clinician that responded to calls one day a week. That program was so popular that we were able to continue the pilot and gather data that allowed us to procure over $2 million grant in 2020, which allowed us to field the first two full time teams.
In December of 2023, we went to the CCP Community Correction Partnership and we were able to procure our fourth team. And you can see between March of 2024 and fiscal year of 26 and 27, we have outlined the different funding sources as they have changed over the years And we currently have two teams unfunded. We have one team that will go to vote with the CCP on April 22nd, and then a fourth team that currently has no identified funding source.
Here you can see the cost for each of the teams and where it is the fiscal, or the money is coming from to fund each of the teams. So you can see the cost per team for behavioral wellness and the practitioners, the licensed clinicians I spoke of. And then you can see the cost per special duty deputy for the expertly trained CIT deputies and the equipment that they require to do their job. So the program level cost for four teams is about $1.9 million dollars. That's the annual program cost As of right now, we have two teams that are funded through the BSEC grant for fiscal year 26 and 27. That was a grant recently procured by the Sheriff's Office to fund two teams.
As I mentioned earlier, we have a third team that is currently going to be voted on April 22nd by the Community Correction Partnership or the CCP. And then our fourth team as you can see, we do not have identified funding for it to continue beyond this fiscal year. So here you see the co-response volume in terms of volume of calls. And so between January 1 and December 31st, 2025 is what these numbers cover for the Sheriff's Office in total we received about 4,561 calls for service where there was a mental health crisis component.
Of those we had 2,070 calls that were covered by one of your four co-response teams Now, what's particularly unique and exciting I think about the co-response teams is they're not only responding to the mental health concerns of the community but when there is downtime or they're otherwise not engaged in a mental health crisis call, they do also assist with patrol calls. If they are closest to a fire that breaks out, they will respond to that fire and wait for patrol to get there to relieve them so they can go back to serving the community and mental health But what you see here is the breakout of how many calls they responded to that were primary mental health crisis in nature, and how many calls they responded to that were not primary mental health in nature but were what we commonly refer to as patrol assists.
This is a chart that shows you the dispositions or what we do with the individuals that we come in contact with. And so as you can see it's the same time frame as the previous slide January 1st through December 31st of 2025 and what you can see here is there were 34 arrests, there were 322 individuals or cases with which we provided follow-up 143 individuals, both adult and juvenile were placed on psychiatric holds so involuntary holds.
We were able to safety plan with 186 individuals. That large number the big purple piece of the pie you see there voluntary and other those are individuals that we were able to convince to go to the hospital voluntarily if that's what they needed or were otherwise connected with service providers that they already had or that they needed follow-up appointments for And then you see canceled or no further action. That might mean that a co-response team was en route to a call and then they were no longer needed on the call itself.
So this is the dispositions. And that is the conclusion of the formal presentation.
Thank you. Questions of the Board based on presentations? Supervisor Hartman.
So I'm trying to understand exactly what people are doing. I mean if I look at the numbers, the 2070 that's about six calls a day it's not a lot so do the co-response team, the law enforcement and the be well employee do they spend the entire shift together driving around?
Yes ma'am, with the exception of there are times where the clinicians need to do paperwork and so they will be at their station or their respective offices doing said paperwork.
So they each report to their own departments is that correct? And they each have administrative responsibilities related to that? Yes that is correct We're going to start with a brief overview of what we're doing. Patrolling and dealing with instance.
I can speak on the sheriff's side of that equation. We try to minimize the amount of paperwork and only do what's necessary, and so it's relatively minimal. I don't have that number in front of me however.
And do you have...I'm always interested in how much we're using the sobering center and what we used to call the CSUs and I haven't gotten a new name yet but how often People are referred to those. It's sort of in a big category and what you've presented
Sure, my understanding is that I don't have those numbers in front of me But I do believe that my colleagues at behavioral wellness might have those numbers available for you
And I'll ask that in a minute. So if I understand the city of Santa Barbara also has two co-response teams, but if I'm correct they don't have a person in your position they each report to one WL and one to their law enforcement is that correct?
That is my understanding but that is a program that does not involve the sheriff's office and so I would defer to my colleagues at behavioral wellness to answer that question more.
So I'll ask for follow up questions but so then could you describe your role
Absolutely. So my role is I directly supervise the deputies that are on the team. I provide training, consultation direction and support for the deputies on the team as well as the clinicians and also when there are high acuity cases or very complex cases I will get involved in case management and case mitigation Attempt to assist with dispositioning the case in particular with those individuals who intend on committing acts of targeted violence or when there's an individual that the co-response team comes in contact with and needs to go to jail.
I will often call WellPath and help be a conduit and try to support that individual upon their release, and when we have particularly acute individuals going to hospitals, I will also liaison with the hospitals and ensure that they have the information in the field from the co-response teams and help So
you supervise the law enforcement, but Be Well still does the The professionals on the mental health side. So I had an opportunity to do a ride along recently and it was really in the Goleta area, and what I learned was interesting in that many of the calls that law enforcement gets are community welfare. You know you have to be ready for that dramatic moment of violence but Thank you very much.
A lot of them are mental health and responding to issues that can be deescalated. And it seems to me that the CIT training is really critical, and I understand that that's not happening as much. Could you describe that? We are currently in the midst of a grant where we have the funding to
2:34 – 2:4926 turns
I have two full-time 40 hour CIT courses, one of which we finished last month, I believe. And the other one is scheduled for the first week of June. In that course we will have a full array of sheriff's deputies whereas previously we would have municipalities also attend the course. Now this course is being offered just for our sheriff's office employees or deputies.
So we are currently doing crisis intervention training, and that's the 40-hour model. All of our deputies also have the eight hour CIT training as well.
And do we know the proportion relative? Forty hours versus eight hours of the law enforcement
Yes ma'am We do have that number I do not have it in front of me
Okay, and then could I if any my questions have generated any thoughts for the sheriff and director Navarro
So thank you. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today on co-response. It's an important part of our crisis continuum here in Santa Barbara County since 2018 I know that John Winkler does have some data and specifics on The types of calls a number from our dashboard that he can share with you if you have more specifics But I think in terms of the Santa Barbara PD model that you asked about I wanted to give you some context and information on that program There are two positions that are assigned to the Santa Barbara PD. They actually are in a partnership with us, they have some grant money and we pay for one clinician and they pay for one clinician currently.
And they ride together all day long. They are a team together and in 2025 alone those two teams encountered 981 unique individuals and of those 981 I would like to This is a team that does proactive follow-up with each case
following the interaction. I don't mean to interrupt, but do you also have the numbers of arrests in that group? I think it's important to know as well. I don't have
the numbers of arrests on that.
Sorry to interrupt. Please continue.
But I can get that information to you. So that is how that model operates. And
how is law enforcement in Santa Barbara and the Be Well or mental health people, the supervision
Our folks are supervised by our staff. They're part of the crisis services team under the supervision of Connor Pierce and Branch Chief John Winkler, and the officers in Santa Barbara PD there's a I think it's commander and I don't know have the name of the commander they had a change in leadership there We're going to be talking
a little bit about how we're going
To speak to the display of the funding in the teams, Santa Barbara be well we are funding all teams for co-responsible with the sheriff and Santa Barbara PD for the next year. We were able to realize some revenue gains last year and prioritize those. to keep these funding streams for one more year, to match the funding that our partners have and over the next year we will work with Santa Barbara Sheriff as well as Santa Barbara PD to figure out what the ongoing funding will be.
And does the City of Santa Barbara have a position like Dr. Lee's? No. And so how is that function served?
It's part of their community services team I think the leadership of part of her Community Services Division I apologize, I'm not very familiar with her department and the names of the different branches. But my understanding is they're part of the community services team.
And then at one point we were looking at what role fire could play and you were looking at the city of San Luis and just wonder if you could give us an update on what you learned there?
Well, what we learned is that it's a great model up in San Luis and they do have them responding with fire. We worked here, Branch Chief Winkler along with Susan Grimacy our chief strategy officer put together a great CIT training for the fire department and we were rolling. And we were gonna start with a pilot of just a couple of days a week similar to how the Santa Barbara Sheriff co-response started with BWEL. Unfortunately they underwent a significant amount of change and a lot of challenges that were happening so at this point following the CIT training which they're very pleased with, they have not yet been able to reengage with us to start the pilot of one or two times a week. But we did learn from them that roughly, a number of their calls was it 20?
I can't remember the number of calls but they have a significant percentage of calls that they respond to that are primarily behavioral health in nature. So it seems like a good partnership and we hope to be able to do something.
We'll continue looking at that. And Sheriff Brown did you have any thoughts
I do supervisor Hartman through the chair. The reason for the co-response teams are really to improve crisis response and to make sure that we deliver two types of first responders, if you will, to someone who is in crisis in the field. And that is the law enforcement officer and the clinician. What that allows is for A model that results in reduced numbers of arrests of people who are mentally ill. It results in a decreased use of force against people who are in crisis.
It also connects individuals to care rather than jail oftentimes, not all the time but oftentimes and these programs enhance officer safety they reduce emergency room visits they build community trust by providing on-scene expert assessment and deescalation. And the reality is even though many of these calls in hindsight look as though they could, well these could have been handled by probably a single clinician or something else, the reality is when they come in, when the 911 calls come in, there are oftentimes very very uncertain as to what's actually going on can be very volatile It's important we believe to have the law enforcement element there with the clinicians going out. I think if you were to poll the clinicians themselves, they would tell you that they feel much more comfortable in that environment than if they were to go out on their own.
Our model has been really a very positive one and it hasn't been without some ups and downs. We have two different organizations here, two different cultures but I think the people on the front lines have made this work as a result of their levels of cooperation and Sure that I speak with for Tony and myself that we're both committed to this and making this a successful project endeavor. That's a partnership between our agencies, and it's not needed all the time but it is needed And I think that.
Many members of the community, particularly in the mental health community feel strongly about it as well. The other thing I wanted to just mention is and I just want to make it recap it was on the slides but we do not have funding for that fourth team's sheriff's deputy in the current budget And as you're aware, there's significant challenges along with the budget as well. So unless there is some change to that this will be a future we'll be looking at in the next couple of years with three teams and not four for the county but for the county unincorporated areas and contract cities But the good news is that funding from the Sheriff's Office is in hand and is also in hand with behavioral wellness as well. So for the next two years, probably the two most challenging years that we're going to have county-wise, we have things taken care of as far as those frontline services.
Thank you, Sheriff Brown. Supervisor Capsen, I've got a couple questions as well.
Yeah, thank you. This is a really interesting report I remember before I became a supervisor reading about this program and just it's so innovative and then actually before I started Sheriff Brown, I visited the jail upon your invitation and I remember that you highlighted this program that was a presentation I'm just so impressive And so my question is, is very basic and it's really about what qualifies as a mental health call.
I will share my bias that as six years on the school board when the school board had to interact with disciplinary action you could make a very direct connection to mental health with every disciplinary action that we had to take. And so I do have a bias that in an ideal world where resources were not an issue, you could see that almost any call or at least many of the calls would have a mental health component and so I just am curious as we acknowledged your dispatchers how is that distinguished? How do you make the call that one is a mental health call and one isn't And with that, I would ask how could you potentially expand so that more calls are referred to these teams? Because I understand sometimes they're sitting idle.
Supervisor Capps, through the chair thank you for that question. We have worked diligently over the last eight years with dispatch to be able to define what it is from a dispatch perspective that would account as a mental health crisis call. Generally speaking when somebody calls and their loved one is in crisis they'll tell us that my loved one has bipolar 1 disorder or my loved one is experiencing psychosis. They're very verbose and so when we get that information that gives us an indication You know, oftentimes we don't know if the individual is suffering from mental health until the deputies are actually on scene or the co-response team is on scene and then we can see that behavior. And the value of having co-responses is that when there's an active call for service and it sounds like it might be mental health, the clinician can look up that individual's name and date of birth and then we can verify okay they are somebody that's within the behavioral wellness system, there is primary mental health going on, we can go ahead So I'm going to go ahead and get started.
Thank you for having me. And then those would be the calls that we would categorize as being primary mental health. And you're right, most calls in some way shape or form could probably be considered mental health when people are in crisis generally speaking their mental health is not doing well But what we're particularly good at working on is the individual with primary mental health, like a serious and persistent mental illness.
You know somebody that is suicidal they may not have a mental health diagnosis but that is certainly a mental health crisis. That would be another good example of that.
I mean I guess what I'm getting at is it common that a call is made and the thought is sort of oh that would have been great to have Clinician there after the fact, because I can't imagine that it's sort of identified. How often is it identified by the person calling? Oh my spouse is schizophrenic or oh my... It would just seem like that would be a slim minority of the time when in fact of all the opportunities when a clinician would be extremely helpful in such situation.
Just some data that speaks to that point, that behavioral wellness has been tracking since last year with the mobile crisis benefit and our reset to the access line in terms of taking the mobile crisis benefit calls. You know this is a new mandated service through the state. We have 40% of our calls are coming from law enforcement in the field. There may not be a co-response clinician available We're We have that relationship that we've built really well over the last several years with our law enforcement.
And as we've again is alluded to in your board report on the 2024 KPMG analysis of our crisis services, really also did a deep dive into our crisis services and really of course the value and the benefit of the co-response model. And also helped our law enforcement partners as well as our community to also understand times when you could call Just the access line directly if there's not a co-response team available to me. So it's a full continuum now and it requires each piece to make sure that we're as responsive as possible to the community.
Okay, that makes more sense thank you thanks for the
explanation. Supervisor Caput I just want to add to that as well The teams that we currently have and certainly moving forward with three are not, they're not 24-7. We can't cover every hour of the day. And so there are gonna be times where Sheriff's deputies do respond to calls and there is no clinician available to respond immediately with them or a co-response team in which case we'll notify Behavioral Wellness and Mobile Crisis will respond but in the times when Mobile Crisis is available There are times an occasion where sheriff's deputies who are responding to what may appear to be reported as a generic disturbance or some other call, they get to the scene and find out that there is a mental health component to that call. And they can then call for the co-response team to come and handle that call.
2:49 – 3:0229 turns
Okay, that's helpful thank you
When I'd like to just piggyback on some of this conversation about those calls, and that's what's really important. So what Dr Lee is providing in your department with the training to CIT training? And I think that's I'm going to hear from the advocates here is that we want to eventually get to all 100% of all of our deputies having that training. Of course, there's challenges to that because you have staffing issues and pulling people out for 40 hours to get trained in CIT is creates the overtime issue that we're struggling with as well. So it's, you know, there's all these different factors that are pushing in on there. And, you know, because it seems that having a co-responsible team is the first option. That would be great to have, you know, the maximum resources.
But if they're at least secondarily is having those who've gone through the 40 hour training program. And then I think all of them have the eight hour training Now which
is all the sheriff's deputies, all the custody deputies and the dispatchers.
Which is huge you know and I think that's the work that that investment to the Sheriff's Department has put into this that I guess you know all the advocates are going to come up here and talk about how excited and thankful they are for that and that we could we need to do two more um I've got a couple of questions but I just kind of want to help set the stage that you know what I actually asked for this item from the board if we were looking at potentially cutting one these positions because I really wanted to make sure that we This presentation for us last time that we had this type of presentation at Supervisor Hart was up here. So, you know that kind of shows that we've had a couple new supervisors since then and I thought it's really important to highlight this and bring this back, you know, to the top of mind for all of us to see how important it is to me, you And an important, but also a cost savings tool because that de-escalation often means no hospitalization which we all know how expensive that is.
That's in our budgets. But then there's also the jail side if we arrest somebody and then what that does to our... We're all talking about trying to lower staffing numbers. We can't reduce this and then say that we want less beds, right? So I mean these are things that were this is one of the mechanisms that we use to potentially reduce beds is having these de-escalation events.
The numbers that we have from 2025 have about 2% of those calls lead to arrest. Sheriff can you give me an idea of what Maybe a normal contact with, I mean is it 2% about right or is it usually a little bit higher when it's not in a co-response? Is that, because I think I remember before that it's typically a higher percentage are arrested with contact with the deputy. It absolutely
is a higher, without the team it would be a much higher arrest. Right,
much
higher. We were just handling it with sheriff's deputies alone. I don't have those numbers. I don't know if Dr. Lee does at present, but when we first started the program in the first year when we reported back, you can maybe comment on that? You remember the numbers from that? We did this analysis and it was significant. Yeah there was a pretty
impressive presentation. And
if you look, it's still pretty significant. If you go back to the pie chart,
you
see that the numbers of actual arrests were
34 out of 1,420 contacts. That's
a very limited number of people and unfortunately sometimes there are just no alternative to the arrest if a serious crime has been committed you know something that and the person is still a danger there really isn't an alternative to the arrest so They're very, very made as a last resort by these teams. I mean they really want to make sure that they look for every alternative, de-escalate and use any alternative that they can to incarcerating someone but sometimes as I've said many times to you before Our jail has a lot of people that have mental health issues in the jail that are there because they've committed very serious crimes. And that part is going to continue no matter what form we have to respond to the call.
Right, and it's not ideal but you know it is one of the treatment options actually is jail. You know obviously you guys now have the MAT treatment for everybody Eligible there and so that's also a program that you guys are running. So, you know I just want to commend your department on how being innovative in this area. You know, I think and I'll get to you of course Director Navarro it's that community policing this is kind of what this is the heart of that and so responding to what's going on in the community and with somebody. So many of our police officers are often social workers, but now we're putting the training around it and actually sometimes including a social worker.
And so I think that's really a big part of that community policing model. Director Navarro did you want to make some comments? I
also wanted to just touch briefly and address Supervisor Hartman's comments around the relatively low number of calls For co-response, it's averaging just under six a day in the county for four teams. And so I think and to speak to the comments that Dr. Lee made regarding currently they're not necessarily at the same place all the time or riding together but I think that in our discussions recently and as we look at the recommendations from KPMG and as we look at the success of the models in terms of more interaction more contacts with folks ongoing through the Santa Barbara PD co-response model, that is a commitment we have moving forward to really looking at how we can better keep the teams together during the day and really proactively responding to areas where we know folks who are gathered that tend to have a higher level of need in crisis.
That is also a place where co-response teams intervene And that's the national model and the California model. So we are definitely looking to increase utilization because we do understand, especially on the clinician side, that less than two hours a day of productive work out in the field directly with clients is not the most cost-efficient and effective and that there's other need per the 4,000 calls versus the 2,000 we were able to respond to so...
Yeah, and I would just like to make the comment you know six cases a day or what the number was. I mean but those are six you know that 98% of them were not going to now go to jail and so I think that's where that costs you. I see this as almost an insurance policy You know that we have that in place so that it can take care of kind of a safety net for many of those people. I'm not necessarily looking for the most you know these aren't widgets, these are people and you know I don't mind if they're the right cases then that's a great number if it's solving the problem. I want to solve the problem not necessarily just You know fit into a spreadsheet. Supervisor or sorry Sheriff Brown and I would get the supervisor Hartman.
Yeah and I think the analogy is also very similar to the fire department you have fire stations that are staffed with firefighters and some of them get a handful of calls a day. And they don't respond but they're always there and always available when a big call comes in right. And that is also very similar here. It's also one of the one of the issues that we've had in the past has been our statistical record keeping Things are different for us than they are for behavioral wellness. Behavioral wellness looks at it in a very clinical, is this a clinical call? Is this something that required our people? Is this something that we can ultimately Bill in terms of Medi-Cal and what have you. Our response is really, is this a call that was appropriate for our people to go to?
Did it save other deputies having to go to a call? And did it leverage the limited number of people we have as well? Understanding that many of these calls that we get, the person could be gone by the time they get to the scene. It could be called in by someone who is not familiar with that person but somebody's screaming or creating a disturbance. By the time we get to the scene, that person is gone so it doesn't mean there wasn't a call or need to get them out there. It just means that they weren't there when the team arrived. Same with someone if there's somebody that's mistaken for having a problem and there's some other issue or something going on and it's resolved. Not a mental health issue, but it was enough of a concern to somebody that they called the dispatch to have somebody go out.
So I think you gotta look at it from the whole system and the perspective of being able to respond and particularly those calls that we have had where there's absolutely no doubt that lives have been saved. People who have had suicidal ideation and are about to commit suicide. A very dramatic one where a guy was up in a tree with a rope around his neck And ultimately did jump. But because the team was there we were able to get to that person cut that rope get that person down and save that person's life without without the team it probably wouldn't have had the same outcome. Thank you Sheriff
Supervisor Hartman I want to get to public comment.
Yeah a couple of questions a comment. How do you how do you choose those officers and those clinicians for this job? Do they volunteer
Sure. I think one of the greatest things about seeing this program progress over the last eight years is we had a deputy promote out of the program last year and seven deputies then wanted to test for that position, to be in it ongoing so we have a testing process. We're actually opening recruitment right now one of our deputies had a service retirement And so it's like any other position at the Sheriff's Office. We have folks that want that position, then they'll put in a memo for it and then they will go in front of an oral panel of three sergeants and then they will get selected based on their training, their experience, and their investment.
A lot of the deputies have personal as well as professional experience with mental health in their families and so they're deeply motivated to be a part of the solution for this because they want to be apart of it. On the deputy side I can speak to that.
And clinicians?
On the clinician side, it's open recruitment and it's definitely specified as a co-response team and a member of a team that will respond with law enforcement in the field to mental health crises.
Yeah I just had a comment I guess and then observation. I'm proud to be from Santa Barbara County because we don't have a problem with abuse of force And we don't have problem, people do know how our law enforcement officers do deescalate and they bring that to the job every day. I was going door-to-door in Goleta one time and I knocked on a woman's door and she proudly told me that her son was with the sheriff's and he was in the co-response team So there's a lot that we are really committed to this, the community as a whole.
I think officers have been doing this for a long time but I think to have an additional skill set and support around them Thank you very much. and maybe aren't as fully part of the team as they would like to be, and as they should be, and as we've seen somewhere else. So for my part I would like to encourage more of that. I don't know how to do it but that's kind of what I've got my finger on.
Thank you.
We definitely have identified those differences between some of the teams locally and we have a commitment to working on those more collectively this year.
If I can also comment on that real quickly, Supervisor Hartman through the Chair. Our clinicians are very, very excited to work with our deputies. It's great to see the relationships that they've built and in fact once a month we have crisis negotiation training with the specialized team at the Sheriff's Office and it's often our co-response clinicians that are there assisting with the training, observing the training, giving feedback. They assist in the CIT training that we do when we run scenarios. So they are there as actors. They are also there as evaluators for the deputies that are exercising the de-escalation skills that they just learned, and so we have in no uncertain terms incorporated them into the sheriff's family and give them as much training and exposure in working together that we can.
Thank
you Dr. Lee. Okay I think we want to open up to public comments so we can hear from the public on this program. Madam Clerk do we have any public commenters on this item?
Yes chair Nelson and members of the board we have four requests to speak from the public on this item. We are going to remain here in Santa Barbara to begin with Maria Valencia, to be followed by Lynn Gibbs. And
we're gonna go ahead and close public comment on this item.
Maria?
3:03 – 3:099 turns
Good afternoon super good afternoon Chair Nelson and supervisors I am the chair of the Santa Barbara County Behavioral Wellness Commission I am also a NAMI member and family-to-family teacher. As outlined during both the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office and Behavioral Wellness co-response presentations to the Behavioral Wellness Commission and today, it was clear crisis co-response teams have been widely proven A best practice for mental health crisis, especially considering not just for efficiency parameters but more so outcomes like de-escalation, lowered incarceration rates and most importantly gradual trust by the Santa Barbara County families.
in the co-response teams to provide this without jeopardizing anyone involved. Pairing trained CIT, trained law enforcement with clinical expertise allows for deescalation on scene assessment and immediate linkages to appropriate services Continued investment in co-response teams aligns with best practices and crisis intervention, promotes more humane and effective outcomes for individuals in crisis, yields long term cost savings by decreasing jail bookings, hospital admissions, and emergency responses.
We commissioners recognize the value having crisis response tailored to a person's individual needs and circumstances, which is why we need to continue to retain crisis intervention training and co-response teams as well as the mobile mental health crisis benefit for nonviolent situations. We thank the Sheriff's Office and BWO for seeking a grant to fund continued services for next fiscal year.
As always, we thank you for your continued support of co-response and look forward to collaborating with you.
We will now go to Lynn Gibbs to be followed by George Kaufman. Lynn?
Thank you Supervisors. Can you hear me?
We can.
Co-response CIT training and Laura's Law, the Assisted Outpatient Treatment Program have been our NAMI signature advocacy initiatives for the past several years. First to advocate for getting those programs and then over the years To retain them and strengthen them. I can tell you that my colleagues in other California counties are envious of us having this program And having the Behavioral Sciences Unit in the Sheriff's Department because you know there are counties that don't have that.
I don't often tell our family story but I think there is an event regarding co-response that's illustrative of why this program is so important to our family members My daughter who's 41 years old lives happily and successfully in independent living, but she does have a serious mental illness. And there was a period of time from the age of 18 to 28 where she had a lot of instability and it was very difficult to get help for her during those periods when she was voluntarily homeless. So I can look back on the time before co-response, and I know how difficult that was.
Coincidentally shortly after we got the pilot program, she was off her psychiatric medication And when that happens, she deteriorates pretty quickly. And she gets in a disoriented state where she no longer knows she needs to eat. And she was afraid of going to the hospital. And so, she went out and she hid out at a friend's house who was away out of county on work. So the co-response team went there and she wouldn't answer the door.
They had to go through a bedroom window in order to get to her. And she was very frightened and combative. And so under other circumstances, and without that team, she might well have been arrested and incarcerated and her life could have taken a very different direction at that point. But they were able to calm her down and get her safely to the hospital. And this is not, although you know this was a unique experience for us it's not a one-off event In mental health crisis and We just value this program in these teams so much. It's hard for me to express how Very important it it is to us to keep and strengthen this program.
Thank
you. So, thank you.
Thank You Lynn
we will now go to George Kaufman to be followed by Tom Franklin George I
3:09 – 3:146 turns
Okay, I'm going to do something that I don't usually do. I'm just throwing away my notes because this board has already raised all the questions and issues that I had hoped to raise and the significance of that is that I don't think we've ever had a group of supervisors that has been better informed or more interested in committed than you have And we want to thank you for that. We also want to thank you and the executive's office in the two departments, sheriffs and behavioral wellness for the collaboration that has taken place over this past year to get us to the point where we at least have a stopgap measure to keep these programs in place.
And up until today I've been uneasy about the future. But what I've heard and seen today leads me to believe that we're going to find a way, going forward collaborating as we have seen illustrated so beautifully today to find a way out of this where we can have a seamless crisis response system that responds to individuals at the exact level of need that they and their families have in the moment of crisis.
I think we can do that, it won't be easy but we will do it and I especially appreciate your commitment to this I want to say thank you on behalf of the community.
Chair Nelson, members of the board. My name is Tom Franklin I'm president of NAMI Santa Barbara County and exactly what George said we really appreciate your support. I have some notes here that I was going to read from but because of all your questions great questions by the way and Supervisor Hartman I am also very proud to be a member of this county and a resident of this county for those same reasons Our organization encourages people to call 911 knowing that law enforcement may respond, which is very different from a lot of other jurisdictions.
People watch the news and excuse me. And see some of the things that are going on in other parts of the country. That is not what is happening here, so I'm pretty much a perfect example of how this program works any deputy that's been assigned to the San Ynez Valley has been to my house. For the past 10 years, I've been calling 911. And so I've seen what happens when there is no CIT training. I've seen what happens when there is CIT training and I've had co-response teams show up to my house.
And actually when there was no CIT training, it was okay. There's never any abuse or anything like that but now it's like magic what the officers do with the clinicians do with our loved ones. It is like magic I've been in a situation where my loved one is completely out of control and have watched officers talk them down to where he not only didn't go to jail He stayed home.
So that's a big deal. It's a really big deal to our members and when we call 911 I've had the dispatcher from 9-1-1 stay on the line with me and wait till somebody arrives, which is amazing. I've called the access line when the access line dispatcher stays on the line with me this works This is
Those positions go because we have right now to North to South and I'm with what's the one room. Maybe that's not for public consumption yet, but do you guys have any idea? What were that fourth if that's unfunded?
Yes, so based on call volume if we were to exist with three teams only if the fourth one were to remain unfunded. We would have two in South County and one in North County just based on the call volume most likely.
Based on call volume okay if you guys are using that as a criteria and that's even with having two teams in Santa Barbara so they were actually going to be four teams in the south coast and one in the north and just based on call volume? Director Navarro is that
correct? I just wanted to make sure, I just want that on the table of what we're looking at. Just so we knew and you know the comment I would make for
3:15 – 3:2314 turns
Greg and Tom, you're fine Dr. Lee is you know I know you guys said you feel uneasy up until this day. I'm going to feel uneasy up until June, to be honest with you guys as we move through this budget process. You know some of these, this fourth position not being yet funded. And we have other challenges that the board is a concern. Even the whole unit within the Sheriff's Department has some threats fiscally, and so even though you hear it from all of us there are going to be some really tough decisions we're going to make as a board in trying to balance a budget and having to have competing priorities. So again I wanted to make sure we heard this today Ahead of budget hearings so that we could have this front of mind as we went into that discussion.
But we're not out of the woods yet, I think. I think we all know that. So I just want to make sure you guys know that today's not approving funding for that fourth position and everything is okay. We understand but we also understand other challenges as well and I want to make sure the public understands that. Supervisor Hartman?
Yeah, two points I still want to explore and the first one Chair Nelson you started to touch on. We have greater call volume in South County but our population and really I don't understand why we have that differential And it's my understanding, I know Lompoc doesn't have co-response. I don't believe the City of Santa Maria does but I'm not sure. Okay so we've got more urban resources down here so can you help me understand that better?
Supervisor Hartman through the chair. Yeah, the call volume in Lompoc is a lot lower we do have co-response there We have a mobile crisis teams that cover Lompoc and obviously Santa Maria and Santa Barbara. I'm not sure if that answered your question. Well,
it's just a matter of resource allocation and we have two teams in the city already of Santa Barbara and you're recommending two teams more in South County Which would leave, you know one team in North County compared then to four in South. I don't understand that given the population is greater and I would think people in North County aren't that much more mentally healthy than down here so tell me what's going on?
Yeah, I mean, I think we will continue to look at the call volume and the resources both the mobile crisis teams and the co-response teams. And if there seems to be still more of a need in North County, we would make that shift. We have mobile crisis coverage and we track our response times on a regular basis. And if we see response times going up then we would make changes in the staffing allocation. So
are you having more mobile crisis unit? Calls in North County or is it about equal or how does
that work? Actually, we get more calls in South County too from mobile crisis. So South County is higher than Santa Maria and then Lompoc is then smaller than that. I don't really know exactly why that is to be honest if some of it is just the nature of the transient population potentially in Santa Barbara. We tend to see more acute cases in Santa Barbara even outside mobile crisis so that could be part of it too.
I also think it might be when we look at the demographics of our county, there's also stigma and there's also culture. And there's also just that experience with who may respond. And so I think that that's why it's been really a priority of ours in B-Well for the last three years to make sure that we're focusing on a crisis system that uplifts all options I appreciate that 911 may be an automatic for a lot of folks, really trying to get the word out that there are options for those who are fearful to call 911 if their loved one is experiencing some kind of crisis.
And so that we have a full range is the most important piece. That would be four teams in the south but we do have a larger some large unincorporated area here in the South County that we definitely I think one team is definitely needed from the Sheriff's Department in South County along with the two Santa Barbara PD teams.
At least one team you said and then my other question, you mentioned the KPMG and that's kind of stale in my mind what what have you accomplished? What are you working on that was identified in KPMG in terms of our crisis response?
I know one of the recommendations was that we have regular supervisory and management meetings, and that's something that we did implement. We are having those meetings on a regular basis. That was the one, and then also joint metrics and targets was another recommendation from KPMG, and we did work closely with the Sheriff's Office, and we came up with joint metrics and targets that were trying to track That, as you know, has been a challenge the two departments. Sheriff Brown has mentioned that. Two different missions, two different ways of looking at the data and the importance of the data with both departments but I think we've gotten a lot closer to having some shared metrics and targets that were going to be following moving forward too.
What is ahead? What's the next challenge or thing that you're working on?
I think as Director Navarro mentioned, really tightening up the ship with the co-response teams. Looking at how some of the other co-response programs in the state are working. We did do a presentation to the CCP last week around making some changes to how we're allocating calls to co-response and using co-response more for some jail discharge scenarios or jail bookings when someone's coming into the jail. And the jail recognizes that this person is in a behavioral health crisis and probably shouldn't be booked but needs to go to an alternative treatment destination, and using co-response to facilitate that transfer. Doing more of that so increasing the utilization of the teams specifically through a closer relationship with the jails and that's something that we're going to be moving forward not just with the CCP funded team but with all of the co-response teams.
Thank you. That's really important to me is that in times of a really constrained budget, that we're using every person who works for the county in the most productive way that we can and I think that's still a challenge for these teams so I'm glad to hear that
Thank you Supervisor Hartman. And I would just kind of say, you know things are different North and South but I also think that because you know NAMI's had such a big footprint down here and the advocates have been so vocal down here it's there's a bit greater awareness And that's one of the things I'm concerned about. Even though it's less utilized up the north, I don't want to take away that resource because I do think it's going to slowly build as people are understanding what it is.
So again, it's something that I can't say it's an absolute but it's definitely my priorities as we look at our budget this year is trying to have that fourth team fully funded and as well as supporting the training that we have within the Sheriff's Department to make sure that those that are being responded to are fully prepared and equipped to do that. Any other questions from the board or any of the comments? Seeing none, this is just a receiving file. We're not going to make any recommendations today, no decisions on funding or whatnot but just an overall appreciation to all those that participated in this presentation as well as the general public that continues to advocate on behalf of this really important successful program. So with that I'll take a motion for staff recommendation A and B receive and file and not a project under CEQA.
Okay. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. All right so we're going to transition into closed session but for the purposes of agenda management We're going to hear the film commission item, I think it's D4 immediately after closed session before we go to long-range planning. So i just want to make sure planning staff doesn't realizes they're not going to be first up they'll be second up that will be a short item before long range planning so just want to put that on the radar for those who are watching at home. So with that Madam County Council will you please read the items that we will be discussing in closed session today?
3:23 – 3:254 turns
Thank you Mr. Chair, members of the board. In closed session today the Board is scheduled to hear two items of existing litigation. The estate of Michael John Ochsner versus the County and Gopay Ogany versus Curtis in the county those are both Santa Barbara Superior Court cases One item of anticipated litigation, a decision whether to initiate litigation. Conference with real property negotiators assessor parcel numbers 081-130-019 and 060. Our agency negotiator General Services Director Kurt Klagerquist, the negotiating party Sanjay Garg on behalf of owner Gaviota Terminal Company and under negotiation our price in terms of payment And we also have conference with labor negotiators for all bargaining units, underrepresented employees, managers and executives.
The agency designated representatives are CEO Monomi Asato and Human Resources Director Christine Schmidt. Yeah I would say it's between an hour and a half but our best estimate is an hour and 15 minutes.
I'm
gonna go knock
it out real quick.
3:31 – 3:4013 turns
Welcome back to the April 7th meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors in the Santa Barbara hearing room. We're coming back from closed session. Madam County Council, will you please report out on actions taken in closed session?
Thank you Mr. Chair, members of the board. The board met in closed session two items of existing litigation Oxnard versus the county and Galpa-Yaghani versus Curtis one case on deciding whether to initiate civil litigation conference with real property negotiators for 16899 Highway 101 and conference with labor negotiators for all bargaining units unrepresented employees managers and executives and the board took no reportable action
All right, thank you. And as announced before closed session we're gonna go slightly out of order and skip to department item number four. Item by Supervisor Lee's office and kick it off with Mr. Cooper.
And Chair Nelson members of
the board. So please read into record, thank you.
Departmental item number four is from Supervisor Lee. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding an informational presentation regarding the establishment of a Santa Barbara County Film Commissioner
Good afternoon, Chair, Supervisors. Before you today are two of Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisor's most dramatic staffers to give you a presentation on a Santa Barbara County Film Commissioner.
We concur.
At a high level this is a pretty straightforward issue. Got to make sure that works. There we go. This is a pretty straightforward issue. Santa Barbara County is already a world-class filming location, but we don't currently have a single coordinated front door to help productions navigate the process
But all that could change. So a little history of Santa Barbara County's filming background, we had in the 1900s we had the Flying Ace Studios that was set up down off Mission Street in Santa Barbara and this was kind of called Hollywood before Hollywood so this was the largest movie studio in California and filmmakers flocked to the county for There are diverse landscapes, so rolling hills for westerns, coastlines and harbors for swashbucklers, a thriving urban center not to mention a very skilled labor market and a bunch of artisans to bring these productions to life. So Flying A Studios made about 1,000 films in 10 years and they helped establish California as the center of the film industry.
As that industry grew, production moved to Los Angeles but we've remained a sought-after location for diverse landscapes, historical architecture and a reputation as a place where creatives want to live and work. So we've seen Santa Barbara grace the big screen and the small screen for many decades. So just a few, The Ten Commandments were filmed at the Guadalupe Dunes. Montecito stood in for Miami in Scarface. Stearns Wharf saw an alien invasion in My Favorite Martian. And most recently La Purisima Mission featured prominently in this year's Oscar winner for best picture One Battle After Another. So clearly the county looks great on screen.
So why does this matter? The opportunity here is significant. The county's recent economic forecast shows the creative economy generated approximately 3.8 billion in activity locally, and that number is growing. At the same time, the state of California has extended its film and television tax credit program through 2030. That program has allocated some $750 million per year which is expected to increase competition among regions To expect production and that's where this steps in. Given our proximity to Los Angeles, we are well positioned but we're not currently structured to take full advantage of that program.
Today for PUC oh I'm the one ahead Today productions often have to navigate multiple jurisdictions, departments and processes without a single point of contact. They struggle to find locations or a local workforce. In fact our only point of contact is our friend Gwen Baylor from our permitting department who is represented here today the permitting department by Lisa Plowman to answer questions at the end of our presentation.
The lack of coordination can create delays and uncertainty which in turn can push productions to other regions that offer a more streamlined experience.
So we have a solution for you. This is not a big new bureaucracy, this is not a new department, this is one position focused on two things. First providing a one-stop service, single point of contact for helping producers and productions navigate permitting timelines requirements as well as being a source of guidance on locations. Second, this role will focus on supporting and tracking economic development with measurable outcomes. So this includes tracking metrics like filming days, local spending, tax revenues, local hiring. What is the impact? And hopefully the impact is raising our profile.
We want the county and our incredible cities to thrive and to be recognized for what they contribute. So we would like this role to do coordination and outreach that leads to increased tourism. A great example is sideways, and what has been dubbed the sideways effect. So in 2004, the Oscar-winning film Sideways was shot almost entirely in San Ynez Valley and it ushered in substantial economic benefits almost overnight.
In just one year, the visitation in the valley went up by 20% and sales of Pinot Noir increased 16% nationwide. And in 2004, there were about 60 wineries in the valley. And now there's well over 300 and our wine country has become a major source of tourism. So sideways is proof that good exposure results in clear and immediate economic opportunities for our communities.
One of the other advantages of having a film commissioner is being able to work collaboratively with the State Film Commission to harness data. You can see on the board here one of the regional expenditure reports from Big Little Lies, this is the first season. In county filming, the total direct spend was $2.24 million. By the second season that had grown to $3.69 million I'm going to talk a little bit about our T O T rate. We're currently operating with 2 point $4 million in hotels which up with our T o T rate would be about $340,000 going directly to the county that's on top of $334,000 in location permitting fees so So our board letter outlines a few potential models for implementation here, and we look to you for guidance. But the recommended approach that we've been working on for about a year is to establish a position within the currently existing arts and culture framework ideally and possibly in collaboration with the City of Santa Barbara as a co-funded model with the ability to scale if additional cities throughout the county participate There are also some alternative options including public-private partnerships or hybrid models that separate coordination and other functions.
The reason we're not recommending this is that it's been done in the past to limited effect, and we wanted to make sure that this program got off to a great start. So this is a relatively small investment that can drive real economic activity. Hotels, restaurants, local well-paying jobs and long term tourism exposure. And we have an infrastructure for it. We already have world class filmmakers who live and teach locally, a skilled workforce that grows every day with the pipeline of young talent coming from our local universities and colleges and an international film festival.
Of course we have an incredible network of tourism and hospitality partners, some great hotels across the county to take advantage of folks who come to shoot for a long time. And the thing that we really want to highlight is we're not creating a demand. We're simply capturing it. People want to do business in Santa Barbara. We want to bring them here.
3:40 – 3:469 turns
So today we are not approving a program, we are asking for direction. We are seeking direction to staff to return ahead of budget hearings with options for establishing a film commissioner including potential structures and funding sources. We expect to work closely with the community services department and planning and development to return with hard numbers and a clear structure We believe that a film commissioner is gathering low-hanging fruit and bringing some much needed economic development activity to our county, and now is the perfect time. This is about being more than coordinated, more competitive, and more intentional about an industry that already wants to be here. So thank you, and we look forward to any questions!
Supervisor Lee, let's kick it off.
All right I just want to say great work. I know the two of you in the office has been really working hard at this and a very interesting conversation in our office about this but first I want to ask Lisa could you please come up? Thank you So Mike, so could you explain what is the process if someone calls and asking about filming in our county?
Yeah. Supervisor Lee through the chair. So people will call our office and ask questions about locations, film permits and we usually see two different types of individuals that call. There's people that know where they want to film and then there's people that have no idea where they want to film. They're looking for more information. So when they come in after they submit their application it can take anywhere between three days to two weeks And then the people that we spend time with, 15 to 20 minutes per person who doesn't know where they want to film often they go away and we don't hear back from them.
So I can tell you that we probably get at least one call or email a week so like 52 a year And about 50% of those or half of those, we are able to help them find either get their permit or find a location. So there is an untapped resource there. So my team estimated that we probably lose out on 25 to 50 film permits a year. Wow. And then I can tell you in terms I just have information about permitting. Yeah,
Well, we don't have any way of capturing that data. But the purpose of this, so we're hopeful that if we move forward that we can collect all that data in the future and make sure to report back or the film commissioner would report back to the Board of Supervisors about that impact economic impact.
Good. That's
my
question. Thank you. Thank you, Supervisor Lee, Supervisor Hartman and Supervisor Kaps.
Sure, well first my congratulations to you. I think this is exactly how our eight hour rule is supposed to work that if it will take more from staff than to put this proposal together like you have and present it so I really appreciate the great staff work out of D1 I think there's kind of a magic around film and everybody, it's bigger than life and we're excited about it. And I certainly appreciate that would like to see more of that.
In our beautiful county but I am daunted by this budget season and whether this would be the priority right now. I also just logistically, I think a one-stop shop is great but we have so many jurisdictions beyond unincorporated. We have the eight cities, we have state parks, The state fish and wildlife, the reservation forest service. So I mean there's lots of jurisdictions and I'm not sure exactly how a one stop shop works with all of that. I mean you've got to go through the permitting process through those others.
Director Plowman noted the, and I'm really for this idea over the long run. So I'm just raising some questions. Director Plowman mentioned how much money comes in but that partly is to pay for staff work it's not profit So I guess it keeps people employed, but that so you get basically you get the rent. What's financially in it for the county? We would get the rent for our roads or parks or things that we own that we could get.
I don't know if permits we can charge more for film permits than actually cost reimbursement
3:46 – 3:516 turns
Supervisor Hartman through the chair, we can't charge more than it costs us to process the permit.
Okay so then that's for direct economic impact that's not a source of revenue and then we do get hotel and TOT but the big thing with film is the indirect impacts that you the other businesses and and that isn't to be dismissed it's really important Again, I'm with you know do I want this or do I want social workers and we're in such a constrained budget year. And I know you're saying that we will make it up over time if we can resolve sort of the one-stop shop deal enough good relationships that one could streamline the permit process even through other jurisdictions If staff has time, I think it would be great to kind of establish a foundation here.
I'm wondering if the film festival, if this would fit within their bailiwick at all? If we had a good partner, I know we also have the Nature Track Film Festival which is growing and there's another film festival in Goleta. So we have a lot going on and how to kind of Get our arms around it and get all that energy directed. So I'm supportive but I can't guarantee that I would vote for it in the budget, but I am eager to look forward to more analysis.
If I could respond to just a couple parts of that. Pardon me, the goal with the film commissioner was not to directly increase revenue to the county. It would be essentially to pay for the position but to grow the economy of the county. This is an economic development program but in a small part and one of the things that I want to make sure that I directly address is one of the real advantages to having a film commissioner we if you put this slide back up there for one sec I don't know how that works or not.
So this is a shot at the, I think your district at the La Prisba Mission so it's on state land but right now we don't have any way to coordinate with the state about filming to help them find other locations nearby to find hospitality to find local workers if we had a film commissioner and we can work collaboratively with the state to make sure that we were essentially finding those services and needs for productions that were going on state lands. So now we have, we don't have any way of even collecting that data. We don't know other than anecdotal evidence how long they shot, how many nights they got out of TOT where they stayed what they did maybe they all stayed in Napomo I mean we don't really know and so that's one of the other advantage of this is addressing exactly what you're bringing up there
Great thank you Mr. Cooper, Supervisor Kaps.
Yeah I appreciate it. I applaud the creativity and the fact that you all are putting together fresh, brand new ideas that I haven't heard of. But I have heard a lot from folks like Peter Rupert and others about the need for economic development and the fact that we don't have a designated department in this county and we certainly do it in a lot of ways and we all are for it but to provide more emphasis in such a niche way which with a very small amount, which I clearly would see would pay for itself immediately. I would imagine is brilliant, I think. And so my question would be have you or would you consider you reference all of the talent that exists here already with directors, producers, writers? So many people from Hollywood who live here either full time or part time or retired here.
I could see many of them becoming really involved in this at the beginning. Maybe that's already happened if you could speak to that, but Andy Davis comes to mind, the director of The Fugitive who is such a communitarian already so maybe you could speak to that and that would be part of my direction would be to really involve a council of people to help boost this off the ground and provide invaluable connections from the get-go
Absolutely, so one of the structures that we've talked about and looked at is with our initial film commissioner creating an advisory committee. Yeah. And structuring the advisory committee such that we had a lot of experienced people getting involved in essentially helping us to do some of that outreach work because a lot of this is making sure that once we do it that people who are shooting things and people who are out there in Hollywood We've had a couple of light conversations but I have not
3:52 – 3:5723 turns
Thank you Supervisor Caps. I like Supervisor Hartman, you know love the idea of obviously concerned about cost but I think what your guys are talking about is more than just cost. You guys are talking about authority and having somebody with the title to speak on behalf of the county to be a coordinator, to be cheerleader, to be a convener And with that title as the Santa Barbara County Film Commissioner. And I think, you know, somebody looks up in our area doesn't know the difference between Goleta and Santa Barbara sometimes right? Or Santa Barbara County but we, but that's, but our commissioner would understand that and would be able to help navigate that go no you're in Montecito now and now you're back on, you know, on into city of Santa Barbara and work those things out that without that local knowledge wouldn't be a would be very difficult for somebody so Totally support the concept, definitely support moving forward with coming together with a budget and some numbers.
You know I think over this next two years it's probably really important to engage with other parties on the cost you know I think that the county contribution If there's any money, it would be very minimal that we could go in this. But I think at least creating the office, build the structure for it. I think the funding eventually will come and if you guys especially can fund it with other funds, I think it will have that proof of concept and then you guys can prove out to us that it really should be funded because it is actually making us money Potentially with additional TOT increases and whatnot. So very supportive of what you guys are trying to do.
Thank you, Supervisor Lee for your leadership and your staff's engagement on this. This is not only eight hour rule but I always talk about our role is we're legislators too. And so you're taking that mantle and actually bringing policy to the board which I think is... I love it when we do that because I think it really is bringing policy from the people to county government. And so that's exactly what we should be doing.
Thank you. I appreciate the support and remember it takes money to make more money, right? And that's our genesis of this conversation. We do have many people in my district that want to highlight the best of our county and I think we are the best people here to be able to do that is giving Daisy and Wade the opportunity to go out and make magic happen which they did today so I believe in them. I trust them that they will do their best and yeah.
I did want to mention that Rocket Man was filmed at Santa Maria Airport, so just make sure next presentation. It's really important to
us. I will make sure we get Rocket Man
there. And the Spirit of St. Louis was filmed at Santa Maria Airport as well. So another classic
film. We did get a Guadalupe.
No,
you guys did good.
We'll make sure
we get a D4 in
there. There's the Odd Fellows too out there at Guadalupe, that was done there as well so a lot of great all throughout our county. So Supervisor Lee would you like to make oh actually is there a public comment on this item?
Chair Nelson and members of the board we have no requests to speak from the public on this item.
All right Supervisor Hartman
I have a neighbor, her profession is locations. Finding locations so there is a whole profession there and I think that's the kind of level you want to talk to people to promote.
And a big part of this is having a location book most counties have a location book And it's a easy way for people who are looking to shoot here for something as basic as a car commercial, to find some great places to shoot I think you'll find for things like car commercials that people are often shooting again and again in the same locations. And so just providing that clarity and giving people those that guidance of where to start looking is going to be really great.
I would think the courthouse would be an amazing venue, but I don't know if any films there.
Right? I had one on. Yes. Meryl Streep is in front of the courthouse.
It's complicated. And this is the Santa Barbara Farmers Market in the movie.
There's a couple of extras at the farmers market off screen.
Supervisors, if you're going to be approving staff's recommendation I just want to point out that it says staff. It's very general but I've been talking to the wonderful director over there in CSD to help lead this and do the evaluation so just want to be clear that's the staff we were talking about.
That's where all our quality of life goes.
Mr. Armas is there anything that you like to add to this conversation? I should give you that chance to run no
Well, one of the I think one of the skills one has to learn to practice when in this environment is to read the room. So I think I will stay quiet and do my work
3:57 – 4:1412 turns
well. I do think you know it's a perfect fit within you know The Community Services Department to be leveraging these relationships. A recent trip of myself and some Supervisor Capson and others to Japan, they had a department of arts, sports, leisure so it was much broader and I kind of got my mind thinking about what we need to be doing broader and this is right with that in mind so I really appreciate that.
And this is good stuff. So Supervisor Lee, would you want to go ahead and make a motion?
I do. I move to approve staff recommendation ABC. Of course you do. It's your staff.
Okay. But yeah. Is there a second?
Sure, I'll second.
Any
further discussion on this motion? I just want to say great work and we're proud of the work that you have done so thank you.
Yes. Item 3. As chair, and one of my hats that I wear for the county involves me attending a meeting in San Diego this evening. And so I'm actually going to step out of this meeting and hand it over to Supervisor Hartman, my vice-chair, to finish chairing today's meeting. But I will be leaving this meeting in good hands for the remaining items. I do have it right here for you.
Madam Clerk, would you read the item into the record please?
Vice Chair Hartman and members of the Board. Departmental Item Number 3 is from the Planning and Development Department. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the Long-Range Planning Division LRP Fiscal Years 2026 through 2029 Work Program.
Director Plowman.
Madam Chair, Members of the Board. Each year, we return to the board at this time prior to the budget to outline what our next fiscal year will involve in a long-range planning division. And we try to map out and project what we will be doing over the next three years to give the board an idea of when we will have staffing available to work on new projects.
So, Mr. Tuttle is here and I'm going to turn it over to his very capable hands to make the presentation. We also have Elise Dale, Assistant Director who oversees long-range planning. So with that, Mr Tuttle?
Thank you Madam Chair, members of the board, Alex Tuttle with Long Range Planning and we'll commence the presentation. So today what I'll be doing is highlighting some of our accomplishments from this current year. Touch on some of the factors that influence the work that we can conduct and accomplish in any given year, and then walk through what we as staff recommend for the work program for the upcoming fiscal year.
So this past year and continuing through the next few months, there's a lot that we've accomplished starting with the housing element implementation. That's an ongoing work effort 25 programs nearly 100 action items that were committing to as County departments throughout the next or rest of their housing cycle specifically we obtained certification of our coastal zone rezones to provide for housing within Carpinteria and Isla Vista.
We tracked no net loss in our progress towards meeting our arena, and pleased to indicate that we are doing well in that category. We just released free pre-approved ADU plans that are available to the public to use, to support property owners efforts to provide more housing opportunities. I will be coming to your board in a few weeks on our local preference program in coordination with CSD and we've developed a framework for initiating amendments to our zoning code to incentivize moderate income units through state and NC bonus provisions With regard to the Ag Enterprise Ordinance, once that was adopted we've been working to improve sort of our public opportunities in terms of updating a website to provide information to the public so that applicants know what they can and cannot do on their properties.
And are continuing to learn with each new application as it comes forward and applying that to the next projects to continue to improve that process. To wit, we addressed and adopted some clarifying provisions in our zoning code as part of a recent cleanup item to further improve and clarify certain provisions of the Ag Enterprise Ordinance. We're continuing to work with Coastal Commission staff on the certification of the Ag Enterprise Ordinance in the coastal zone.
We do anticipate some action being taken on that later this summer. With the environmental justice element, we completed the draft of the environmental justice element. Got through three planning commission hearings and achieved unanimous adoption by your board just a few weeks ago. That was our first new element within the comprehensive plan in several decades.
With the utility scale solar ordinance amendments, we completed the draft and final EIR and have initiated decision-maker hearings. We got through the Montecito Planning Commission and are currently working with the County Planning Commission, and we do anticipate bringing that project to your board for consideration later this summer. With several comprehensive plan element updates, we have the open space element update. Last summer, we received board direction on the scope of the project and are continuing to work through draft amendments in meeting with stakeholders on that With the circulation element, we've been working with a consultant on traffic modeling and data collection in support of the update and anticipate completing that data collection effort in the next few months.
With safety element update, we completed last year the evacuation modeling and planning aspect of the project and are currently continuing to work and refine our climate adaptation planning strategies and action items. We did recently apply for a grant from the state in upwards of $300,000 that we will find out if we're awarded in the next couple months that would help cover some of the costs of our sea level rise adaptation planning.
And lastly on this slide, the airport land use compatibility plan amendments. We've completed the draft of those and will be initiating decision maker hearings later this summer. In addition to all the various planning documents and policy documents, there's been numerous ordinance amendments that we've processed in the last year including a large comprehensive ordinance streamlining amendments that your board adopted in January.
And we'll be coming to your board next month on a briefing for the third phase of that effort with a ministerial permit streamlining to get board direction on moving forward with that project. And then various other ordinance amendments including getting certification of our telecom amendments in the coastal zone, as well as our cannabis odor control ordinance amendments in the coastal zone.
We adopted the senior mobile home park overlay And a general amendment cleanup package by your board last month in February. And then lastly, per boards direction last fall we've drafted phase one oil and gas phase out amendments that will be taken to the County Planning Commission tomorrow. So as you can see a lot that we've accomplished but there's always more work to be done There are various factors and considerations that we always have to keep in mind as we plan out our work program.
Those include the fact that many of our projects are multi-year work efforts, and have ongoing commitments. There's sort of a never-ending supply of state mandates that keep us busy and on our toes, and tend at least in recent years have tended to occupy a significant majority of our staff resources. We have numerous projects that we've adopted but that require ongoing implementation efforts like the housing element And then with respect to board requested projects, often we have to work to pivot and make adjustments because of our limited staff resources.
When the Board asks us to take on a particular project it often requires delays to occur on other work that we have on our list. And then lastly from a budgetary standpoint, there's been a lot of discussion throughout today and in other hearings about constrained budget. Last year when I came to you we had 15 full-time equivalent staff. As to help with the county's budget shortfall, we have had two vacant positions that we have left open. And as part of our upcoming budget, we're proposing to unfund both of those two positions.
We are requesting restoration of one of those too but either way, we'd be looking at either going down to 13 or 14 full-time equivalent staff so that is a reduction from our prior levels Other funding sources, we are the one division within planning and development that is largely general fund supported. The rest of our work in our department is cost recoverable.
Historically we've had grant opportunities to help supplement some of that general fund but a lot of grants have been drying up particularly at the federal level so that's something that we can't always rely upon That said, as I mentioned we're always looking for new grant opportunities and we did disapply and hope we'll get good news on that. So all that being said let me dive into our staff recommendations.
There's a number of services that our staff sort of every year comply with to support various countywide and regional work efforts. And that's sort of just a consistent ongoing workload of about one-and-a-half FTE. What you see here in the presentation is Two columns on the right, one representing if we had 14 FTE full-time equivalent to work with and the second column on the far right.
If we were not to have that second position restored and we're working with 13 FTE. Most of the change would happen in sort of the non mandated board items which I'll get to in a few moments. With any division there's always sort of the business side of things with our supervisors and our training, our budgeting, division admin and supervision. And then getting into the meat of it we'll get into the specific projects and I've broken it down by those that have some type of mandate versus those that are non-mandated.
Many of these are a continuation of existing projects that are ongoing, including the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan amendments. Circulation element update as I mentioned open space environmental justice although recently adopted there are some implementation commitments as part of that effort with our housing element as I mentioned and as you're well aware it's an ongoing significant work effort that requires a fair amount of staff resources Our safety element update, which has been a multi-year effort comprised of various phases and we're currently working on our climate adaptation phase of that.
And then sort of two newer projects that have sort of risen up the list. One is short term rentals in our coastal zone. We currently don't have active regulation or code regulations for short term rentals. That's a project that has been delayed for several years. It's listed back here as a mandate because we did include it as a program within our housing element and through that have committed to complete it by the end of 2027, so that would require us initiating that probably halfway through next fiscal year.
And then the last is objective standards. And this was a requirement or sort of ask of the Coastal Commission with a recent certification of an ordinance amendment, which is to establish more objective standards in our coastal zoning ordinance and our policies so that when we're reviewing housing projects and we're limited to only applying objective standards, we don't fall short in terms of our ability to protect coastal resources.
But as you can see, we don't have a lot of staff time allocated to that. But it is something we have committed to working on in the next few years. And then in more discretionary non-mandated work, we have worked towards the Ag Enterprise Ordinance and getting that certified in the coastal zone. Some nominal or limited ongoing work with the Climate Action Plan implementation One area where you see a difference in terms of how we would allocate staff between if we had 14 or 13 FTE is in our zoning ordinance amendments for ministerial streamlining.
When we brought phase two to your board back in January, we did commit to completing that and bringing that back to your board by the end of this calendar year which will require a significant work effort but that's one that could be impacted with that restoration of that position Some limited work on the rec master plan in support of CSD. The oil and gas phase out ordinance amendments, we're currently working on phase one and we'll be completing that this summer which will then lead us into phase two which is the phase out and next fiscal year would largely be involving selecting a consultant to initiate CEQA review once the amortization study is completed.
That's another one where if we're not able to restore that second position, the allocation towards that project could be impacted. And then utility scale solar as I mentioned were in our planning commission hearings. We do anticipate completing those and getting to your board later this summer so once that's adopted it would be staff spending time to get it certified in the coastal zone.
And then sort of the last is kind of a bucket of ordinance amendments that we try to tick off or work through as time permits. And this is one where it's somewhat of a luxury in terms of being able to allocate resources too, and we've made good progress in years past but this is one where without that additional position it could see some reduction in staff time available to work on some of those efforts.
4:14 – 4:216 turns
And I just wanted to. Clarify for the board how we identified which programs would see a reduction in staff. And that is primarily because those are the programs where you have some flexibility. They're not already in process or some other program with another department that we're obligated to assist them with and so these are all, the highlighted ones are flexible and can be changed by the board and if that's what the board is interested in today then we'd appreciate feedback on that.
I know you can't see the detail on this slide, but this is a calendar showing each of these projects over the next three years and sort of the green is The blue is sort of the high level of work effort associated with the projects, whether it's drafting the amendments or going through the hearing process. The blue is when we're in the Closer Commission certification phase of a project that's generally more intermittent staff time and less work effort associated with it.
And then the brown or beige Those are just some limited staff time with implementation, but what you can see from this schedule is essentially over the next two years we're pretty well booked up in terms of staff capacity. But come fiscal year 28-29 we do start seeing some openings That is now. We do know that state mandates keep coming our way, for example there's already a new mandate to update our conservation element by 2028 so when I'm before you next year presenting that one will likely be added to the list and take up some of that capacity.
You know, things come up that we don't anticipate and things change. And so things always seem to fill up the void but you can get a sense of opportunities may be presenting themselves over the next couple years. So as I mentioned, we sort of have this bucket of ordinance amendments and this is one where this list has been informed by either Specific board direction or maybe a staff initiated idea or from individual board members So the list currently includes farmworker housing and streamlining ag employee dwellings Cleaning up our ordinance for regarding special events that's been on our wish list from a staff perspective For several years, and we just have never been able to get to it. I Updating our procedures and process for the HLAC and nominating of landmarks.
Looking at our permit requirements for equestrian facilities, particularly in our AG-1 zones. And then we always have sort of a general cleanup package but this is certainly an opportunity where we would be looking for as Ms. Plowman indicated input from your board as to whether you have any particular priorities or anything that were haven't included on this list Generally we try to just kind of work through them as best we can throughout the year when, as time permits.
Don't anticipate being able to complete all them in any particular year and then they just kind of keep rolling over into the next. In addition to those ordinance amendments, there's sort of a list here of future projects more on the horizon over the next few years. One project is the coastal resiliency local coastal program amendment. This was a project that was worked on a number of years ago but we ended up not being successful in getting it through the Coastal Commission and withdrew our application It's one of those that we keep pushing out year over year.
There is the opportunity for some additional grant funding that may be able to support that work and we do have, speaking of state mandates as I mentioned earlier there is a state mandate to do coastal resilience or sea level rise adaptation planning but it's not until 2034 so we do have some time for that but that's one Updating our comprehensive plan amendments to align with changes that have been made with regard to Sustainable Groundwater Management Act.
Other comprehensive plan updates, we have many in the works right now but probably the next in line as I mentioned is a conservation element. That's the next mandate but we have various other elements that haven't been comprehensively updated in many years. Looking at our CEQA thresholds, several of our CEQA thresholds are fairly out of date. And in particular one that keeps popping up is our groundwater thresholds and a need to update those but that does take staff time and resources and potentially consultant dollars One that was mentioned last year and appears here again is revisiting the Isla Vista Master Plan.
And then the last thing on this list is with our recent adoption of amendments to address indoor odor control for cannabis operations, looking at opportunities for addressing outdoor odor control for outdoor cannabis. So with that, our recommended actions for your board are to receive this report on our work program. Provide direction to staff regarding the allocation of resources not only for this current upcoming fiscal year but for future work program items over the next three years and then lastly determine that action before you today is not a project under CEQA.
And with that, happy to answer any questions.
Thank you Mr. Tuttle. Do board members have any questions?
Yeah go
ahead.
So do we have a tree policy in the county meaning is there South Coast North I mean a South and North County tree policy?
4:21 – 4:2716 turns
When you say a tree policy you mean like a... How do we deal with trees in general? We do not. In the coastal zone, there is an ordinance that regulates removing certain native trees or trees that provide habitat for monarchs. Outside of the coastal zone, there's no tree ordinance except for in the rural areas. There's oak tree ordinance that was adopted I think when I was no gray hair and very young, fresh out of grad school.
It was one of the first projects I worked on back in like 2005 but that was really more addressing a large scale oak tree removal that we were seeing happening with a lot of the wineries that were coming in and vineyards Outside of that, there's policies that preserve or address trees. But those policies only come into play when development is proposed. There is no ordinance specifically outside the coastal zone addressing tree removal.
So is there a policy where you cut one down and plant two or three?
For there's no specific policy that perhaps within a certain community plan like caveat, I think has specific ratios replacement ratios. But we do have policies in various community plans that talk about avoidance or mitigation of trees if they are removed Nothing as concrete or specific as like a specific replacement ratio.
Okay, and replacement with developments the reason I asked I would like to add something to the long-range calendar. I know you have a lot on your plate but this is important especially in my district. Trees are important for many reasons so I would support like to direct that your department look at a tree policy that's comprehensive with development and how we go about I would like to hear from the board about having outreach working with the community to get their input about how do we approach trees, tree removal replacement etc. Is that something that I could ask?
Supervisor Lee through the chair you can certainly ask We're not going to make that a priority for next fiscal year. The majority of the board would have to give us direction to do that and we would have to decide what we wouldn't be working on in the section that's through board
Okay, I just want to put on the radar that it is a priority for myself.
Supervisor Lee, I'm trying to get a better sense of what you mean. I think of Goleta as a tree city and they've got nonprofits working to get more trees on private land. I think of our public works department. I know that they have when they have to take trees out on sidewalks and roads They do have a replacement policy at least in Isla Vista. I don't know if that's throughout the county, so I'm trying to get a better sense of what you're thinking and that might... I think of the film What Your Staff Just Did? That was a great proposal and maybe they would like to do something like that again to flesh out what your driving at
My idea is because we are going to develop many housing in the future, I want to make sure that we develop housing that includes trees in its plans.
So maybe you could talk about our landscaping requirements.
Supervisor Lee through the chair. We certainly do have landscape requirements for housing projects that include tree canopy and tree cover in our multifamily In terms of objective design standards, there are certain requirements for making sure that trees are incorporated and with the recent package that your board adopted back in January we bumped up the landscape percentage to 15% of a project would have to be landscaped. So in terms of development proposals and dealing with tree removal or proposing We actually have a pretty good foundation of regulations.
What we don't have though is if someone is not proposing any development and they just wanted to cut down their tree in their backyard, we don't have anything that would stop them from doing that.
Okay and also including native trees. They're important with fire especially so I just want you two think about what can be done and filling holes that are there about trees
Supervisor, it might also be helpful. I mean there's different departments that work with trees right? So planning is talking about what policies have in our landscaping policy. Chris Nedna at the back we have policies and public works about trees in the in the public right-of-way networks. And parks as well obviously in the parks so maybe it'd be helpful if we could provide as a starting point some information and also you're talking about what the fire department has concerned that maybe as a starting point we can put some information together For you and your staff, and then if we... And from there if there's further action you'd like to take then you can bring it. We can bring it back or you can let us know.
That would be very helpful.
Thank you.
Important matter, thank you. Supervisor Kaps.
Thank you thanks for the presentation I appreciate this every year because it's a good reminder for me that so much of the work you do is mandated by the state and very ongoing and very meticulous and you know I'm sometimes guilty of wanting you all to switch gears and this is a good reminder that you have to keep Trudging along and things that take a long time. That's why you're planners so anyway to that effect I just wanted to ask because I do share the vision that I know we we share up here that if we eliminate cannabis odor that your department won't have to spend resources on Cannabis odor, I am seeing some head nods And so I just wanted to refresh my memory here of how much your department is spending on FTEs on cannabis currently
4:27 – 4:3319 turns
So supervisor caps through the chair. So the cannabis enforcement is in a separate it's it's in a separate fund so long-range planning isn't working on that yeah, so I think it's around we said they can look to you around $330,000 that we're spending on enforcement Not all cannabis, so that's our other zoning code enforcement and then also cannabis enforcement. So
but in terms of FTE Oh
I think three
three people
yeah,
and how many people are in long-range planning?
we have 15 positions that were this
fiscal year okay,
and we're looking at either 14 or 13 for next fiscal year
Okay, well again the one of the many purposes of the ordinance that the board passed unanimously is that we get to a point where we're not having to enforce. Thank you
I had a couple of questions before public comment. The first is about our safety element. Could you just describe, there seems to be lots of pieces and I don't know that that's ever come to the board as such and I get questions so I just...I don't need a long thing but just what are the pieces of it?
Supervisor Hartman through, oh! You are the chair, Madam Chair Yes, there are many parts to the safety element and I am going to turn it over to Mister Tuttle to lay those out for you but some we have completed and others were still working on and will be getting to completion in the next year ish or longer.
Right so there are various State mandates or state laws that have been passed over the last several years. And it's a bit of some moving goalposts because new laws keep coming and so new requirements keep getting added on. But when the project was initiated, sort of the comprehensive safety element update was initiated several years ago. It started with a vulnerability assessment Climate change vulnerability assessment.
And then there was sort of three prongs to it, one was looking at our fire hazard mitigation strategies and updating our safety element with policies to comply with I don't remember the particular state law but that was completed back in 2024 I believe. And then last year sort of the second big phase was this evacuation modeling and planning I want to start by saying thank you to the Board of Supervisors for this effort and a study that was completed with the help of a consultant that was completed last year to satisfy another state requirement.
And then the current phase that we're working on is adaptation, specifically climate adaptation. That effort is considerable because it requires a lot ready or in a position to adapt to the changing climate.
Has the board been approving each part, or do we get it all at once? Or how does that work?
No, the board well the board did approve the fire hazard that the safety element updates that were done to address fire hazard mitigation. With the evacuation study that will it was just a study that was completed there will that will inform some updates to the safety element itself that will come to your board but has not come to your board yet so your board hasn't taken any other action on any of that.
The vulnerability assessment came to your board as sort of informational a number of years ago, but it wasn't a document that was adopted per se. But all of it comes together or culminates in various updates to the safety element itself and so that's why it's kind of under this larger umbrella of the safety element update.
Thank you. That's why I didn't fully understand it and the adaptation plan is really geared towards addressing the vulnerabilities that we identified, right? So this is we identified where were vulnerable and now we're trying to identify solutions or ways to mitigate those vulnerabilities
from sea level rise.
That's one of them. It's really multi hazards, sea level rise it's excessive heat it's wildfire you know it's kind of all the hazards that come with potentially come with climate change. The grant that we just applied for through the state that is specific to sea level rise so if awarded that grant that would help fund our sea level rise portion of our adaptation strategies but it's only a small piece of the larger effort.
Thank you, my last question has to do with HVAC we met talked about it we were exploring whether whether we can simplify the historic landmark designation not to come to the board so that that would save HVAC some money and be part of our overall more efficient Thank you.
4:33 – 4:388 turns
Madam Chair, so we have talked about it internally and we are looking at the possibility of including in one of our cleanup items. So Mister tell I have discussed We're going to remain here in Santa Barbara
Well, good afternoon members of the board. Mark Shatillo and I'm appearing today on behalf of Save Montecito Ukes in part and if there's a time or questions about safety element I can also have some thoughts on that but I really want to focus on the tree protection ordinance because this is something that was approved as part of the Montecito Community Plan, which has itself gone through some revisions. It included a provision that we would have a tree protection ordinance in the Montecito Utes on the East Valley Road are a stately stand of trees that have historic value based on their connection to the original Crockersberry orchards that were there and really helped define our community.
Trees as we all know provide aesthetic, biological, some climate benefits with cooling, fire benefits and really lend to the character of our community. If you ever have a question about how important these trees are just look at Ventura where they really don't have the same kind of urban forest or tree on the south coast plain that we do and the character of the community is very different. But as I was preparing for this presentation, I looked at some of the other elements of the community plan and I realized that actually there are tree protection ordinance expectations or expressed requirements in the Summerlin Community Plan. The Eastern Goleta Valley Community Plan has a policy to preserve protected trees but there's no definition of protected trees.
The Toru Canyon Plan and of course the Mission Canyon Community Plan each have specific expectations with respect to the protection of protected trees We're arguing and urging your board to adopt as a priority in the ordinance amendment package, the adoption of a tree protection ordinance. That is necessary because this would create a separate process for evaluating and protecting our trees, separate from development. Currently what happens at times is people will purchase a piece of land cut down the trees and then come forward with a development proposal The trees are gone, so then there's no protections that are required. So the importance of a tree protection ordinance in order to ensure that both there won't be mischief within the environmental review process but also the opportunity for our community to be more involved and engaged in the protection of protected trees.
Always looking at the wrong, I'm looking here for this timer and it's up there now. So I have less time than I thought. So the value of these trees they overlap with butterflies with habitat riparian Esha so it's really a thread that goes through a lot of the ecological and aesthetic function in character of our communities. So we would ask that your board consider identifying this as a priority To be accommodated if not this cycle as soon as possible to adopt a standalone tree protection ordinance with consideration of one that would apply throughout the South Coast.
Thank you Madam Chair.
And if I may, are there any model ordinances that you're aware of that already exist for counties in California?
Well the city has a tree protection ordinance it's not exactly a model it's a little muddled but it provides enough pieces that I think we could easily do that. We do have the oak tree protection ordinance but as staff mentioned that's not really been effective because it's looking at larger scale. But yes there are definitely models out there that could help accelerate the process of adoption.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Any comments from staff? I don't believe so So we could add this to the list if that's the pleasure of the board.
Well, I think what we wanted to do is first go back and yeah look to see what we have and then work from there because I think there are a lot. I mean this County is not shy about protecting resources so we do have a lot of policies in environmental review process. There's tree protection There's a lot of layers that already exist.
4:39 – 4:4818 turns
And that would really be a foundation for any ordinance anyway and what we have in our community plans. Right, okay all right I guess we're concluding this item may I have a motion A through C? Staff recommendations today's sure so moved second All in favor say aye. Aye. Passes unanimously, Madam Clerk I guess it's number five next would you read that into the record?
Vice Chair Hartman and members of the board departmental item number five is from the Public Works Department it is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding an ordinance amending chapter 15a of the Santa Barbara County Code relating to floor plane management.
Let staff switch out here Director Sneddon.
Good afternoon, chair Hartman members of the board I'm a turn over to Matt Griffin and his team to run this one thank you.
Good afternoon chair Hartman members of the board. I'm Matt Griffin with County flood control with me today is a room where isn't John us and Katrina Brunaso for their development review team. The item before you today is an amendment to chapter 15 a of The proposed amendments are primarily administrative in nature and don't significantly change the requirements put on new development. And with that, I'll hand it over to Aurora.
Thanks, Matt. Good afternoon. So as Matt mentioned we are here today to present the Ordinance Amendment to Chapter 15A of the County Code related to floodplain management. So here is an overview of what this presentation will cover. We'll first start out with a background of the County Code, Chapter 15 A. Next we'll move on to the purpose of this amendment, a couple of amendment examples and then the recommended actions.
All righty, so to provide some background the National Flood Insurance Program also known as the NFIP is administered by FEMA and makes federally backed flood insurance available in communities that agree to adopt and enforce floodplain management ordinances. The County of Santa Barbara adopted the NFIP in 1979. The Community Rating System Program, also known as a CRS program is a voluntary incentive program that encourages floodplain management practices that actually exceed the minimum NFIP requirements.
As a result of participating in the CRS program, communities are eligible for discounted flood insurance policies. Currently the County of Santa Barbara holds a class 6 rating which results in a 20% discount on insurance policies. The County of Santa Barbara joined the CRS program in 1990 And county code, Santa Barbara County Code Chapter 15A the Floodplain Management Ordinance is administered by development review staff. This applies to structures and maps special flood hazard areas and it is based on NFIP in the CRS program regulations such as elevating the finished floor above base flood elevation. This ordinance was last updated in August of 2018 And just a fun fact down below, currently there are 962 flood insurance policies in the unincorporated county totaling around $300 million worth of coverage.
All right so next moving on to the purpose of this amendment. So one of the goals is to improve clarity of the language in the ordinance. Another is to remain in compliance with the State of California Department of Water Resources Model Floodplain Ordinance and FEMA's NFIP and CRS requirements. We also feel that this amendment will help support safe development in the special flood hazard areas.
And lastly, this amendment will help support the County of Santa Barbara's ability to apply Ordinance 15-A to development within FEMA preliminary special flood hazard areas. With that I'll turn it over to Katrina.
Thank you, Aurora. This is not close enough. Okay before I get started on our key amendment examples, I just want to reiterate that all of these examples are considered best practice in our industry and have already been implemented here by staff in many occasions for years at this point. They're being added to the ordinance language to provide clarity to the public Our first example is a non-conversion agreement. By definition, a non-conversion agreement is a legal document signed by the property owner and recorded on the property deed that restricts non-habitable enclosures in areas below the base flood elevation plus two feet from being converted to a prohibited use such as habitable living space, finished rooms or other uses inconsistent with Floodplain Management Ordinance 15A and the terms of the issued building permit.
So outside of the legal definition, if you look at the figure I have at the top here, you'll see a area labeled enclosure. The labeling of C2B is the finished floor that would be at base floor elevation plus two feet or higher. So the goal of this non-conversion agreement is that the owner will attest that they understand that enclosure area is made for floodplain management purposes. It is not safe to live in. So they are attesting that they understand that and they will not convert it to a livable space at any point.
Our next example is flood vent factor of safety. Areas below the base flood elevation plus two feet, like crawl spaces, some garages and the enclosure example I had above are required to have flood vents to equalize the pressure of flood waters on walls There are specially designed vents available for this purpose, but homeowners may use standard air vents for the purpose of flood venting. When vents are not specially designed we require the vents to be slightly oversized to reduce the likelihood of them clogging during a storm.
So the bottom two figures are exactly that you can see traditional air vents with meshing over them They've been completely blocked by debris during a storm event to prevent this from happening or lower the likelihood We just require that those air vents be slightly larger than the minimum nationally recognized Just because we know that areas here have more debris Our third example is the ability to use FEMA-issued preliminary firm data.
On July 15, 2026 your board moved to adopt the use of FEMA preliminary firm data published March 26th 2024 and revised May 15th 2025. This language clarifies that adoption and allows us to use additional preliminary data published by FEMA in the future So on the left-hand figure, the left hand side you'll see a light blue as well as red areas. Those are the effective firm areas or floodplain boundaries. Those are the minimum requirements by FEMA that we have to enforce. On the right side you'll see a darker blue and red. That is the preliminary data that was adopted by the board. Again, we just added this to clarify to the public that this is required and allows us to adopt additional preliminary data when FEMA publishes it.
The last and most broad example that we have is that we broadened and clarified terms. We've added several definitions, non-conversion agreement for example when needed for clarity and unified language across the ordinance. This includes specifying our preexisting free board requirement BFE plus two feet in areas where it may have been previously implied or mislabeled. I couldn't think of an engaging photo for this one so please use your imagination. Moving on to the recommended actions The recommended actions for your board today are as follows. A, consider the introduction first reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 15A of the Santa Barbara County Code relating to floodplain management. B, read the title of the ordinance and waive further readings.
And C, continue the hearing to the administrative agenda of April 12th 2026. Thank you for your time and staff is available to answer any questions.
Do
board members
have any questions? Do we have any public comment?
Vice Chair Hartman and members of the board, we have no request to speak from the public on this item.
So basically we're just trying to upgrade our standards to be in compliance with federal requirements and be eligible for insurance so our homeowners are eligible for insurance and discounts is that
Chair Hartman, that's correct. The federal standards kind of continually evolve and so amendments are needed periodically to stay up to speed.
And do you have any reason to think these might be controversial in any sense?
No I don't think so these are pretty straightforward amendments.
Okay I guess we're ready for a motion A through C in today's board letter
Second.
All in favor say aye. Aye. Madam Clerk, last item number six.
4:48 – 5:019 turns
Vice Chair Hartman and members of the board departmental item number six is from the fire department it has a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the California Fire Safe Council wildfire County coordinator grant program county quarter coordinator program update
Oh, okay. Wondered what happened. Chief Tan.
There we go. First, I want to thank you guys for taking the time to add us to the agenda. This is actually one of the requirements of the grant program I'm about to talk about so I appreciate you guys taking the time to do your part to ensure we continue to get this grant funding into the county.
Would you introduce yourself?
Yes! Thank You Joan. I mean I'm Anne-Marie Parkinson and I'm the Executive Director for the Santa Barbara County Fire Safety Council. Been in the role for almost three years now with the organization for just under five and then joining today with me is Fred Chan County Fire Marshal.
Fred Tan, County Fire Marshal here just assisting Anne Marie in sponsoring this board item.
Thanks for that, Fred. So the California Fire Service Council wanted all the counties to provide this presentation to the Board of Supervisors just to give an update about the impact and future of their county coordinator program. And also thought it was a good time to elicit feedback on how the board sees the Fire Service Council or the Wildfire Resilience Collaborative which I'll talk about later in the presentation can improve and work better towards Advancing wildfire resilience efforts in the county and advancing collaboration amongst all the agencies involved in wildfire resilience efforts.
So starting off with what is County Coordinator Program? It was a concept developed by CAL FIRE and the State Fire Council, in recognition of all the funding that was coming down from the state after 2017-2018 very devastating fire years And recognizing that, I think you guys sometimes know too much money at one time is not always a good thing. And so not all groups were using funds efficiently. There's duplication of work. Groups were maybe having capacity but lacking experience to get projects done and so they developed the County Coordinator Program.
which supports one entity per county to encourage, develop and... Sorry Fred. Next slide. Thank you. Encourage, develop county-wide collaboration and coordination amongst wildfire mitigation groups. So essentially being the hub of knowing who's involved in the county wildfire mitigation, who's doing what, help bridge connections, help prioritize projects and get project shovel ready So this was a pilot program started back in 2021. In Northern California, 2022 it was expanded to the rest of the states and this is where now retired County Fire Marshal Rob Hazard came to the board and recommended that the Fires Council be awarded these grant funds since only one entity per county can sit in this position and receive the funding He made this recommendation recognizing the council has been around since 1997 and involved in the county collaboration space since then.
We are getting started with a lot more staff and capacity to sit in this role, and Wildfire is our sole focus as an organization. And we are countywide and not bound by any jurisdictional boundaries. So the board agreed and we were awarded those funding in 2023. We are now on our second round of funding from Cal Fire and California Fire Safety Council, and just announced a few weeks ago that they're getting another round of funding for this.
And to me, the city's continued investment in this program despite their significant budget deficits and a continued big push for Acres Treated, to me really signals that county-level coordination is big priority for them, and it's very essential to the state. They're wanting us to utilize wildfire mitigation funds a lot more efficiently and effectively to get projects done so we don't keep having tragedies like L.A. and Paradise.
So as the program has advanced CAL FIRE and the State Fire Council have gotten a better sense of what they'd like to see from this program. And they're really seeing the County Coordinator position as a mechanism to help translate state priorities into action at the county level And I want us all to move forward together in a unified direction. And I will say that State and CAL FIRE are caring so much about coordination and advancing their state initiatives, that their new grant program requires regional coordination.
And is giving extra points to applications that, not extra points but ranking higher applications that are incorporating state initiatives into those applications. So I don't have a slide on this because I just went out to webinar about this last week. But this new program is being sourced from Prop 4 which passed last year at the state level. They're going to call it the Regional Wildfire Landscape Resilient Grant And one of the key requirements to apply for these funds is that projects must be multi-benefit projects that have been identified as a regional priority using a transparent prioritization process that integrates data driven analysis, practitioner expertise and community inputs. And they're defining a regional plan as one that must include a defined partnership with clearly defined roles and responsibilities, a defined boundary and implementable strategy with defined actions and timelines.
So from that definition to me I wouldn't consider Santa Barbara County in a position yet to apply for this funding we do have several CWPPs but they're usually bound by jurisdictions and while they do have data-driven analysis to me the prioritization process is not as transparent there's no I don't think much linking the data driven The modeling to direct recommendations for why certain things being prioritized over others.
And they often are very regional restricted and then very much so lacking the implementable strategy with defined actions of timelines. So I'm going to talk more in the presentation later about how I think through this kind of corner position, we're helping the county get in line to be better qualified and competitive for these grant funding in 2027. And it'll say the minimum award for these grants is $5 million which is quite a lot of money.
So CAL FIRE putting their intentions into action of trying to get more consistency across all the counties. This current year 2025, which is their second round of funding, they requested that all the county coordinators have consistent tasks amongst the county coordinators and we're trying to get us on the same page and set the foundation for future coordination work. And I'll just point out at the very least the Countywide CWPP requirement where they're just asking us to assess a possibility of this happening in each county I'd say to me that really indicates that CAL FIRE doesn't want to keep funding small regional CWPPs or ones that are bound by jurisdictional boundaries. It sounds like they're looking more at a much broader regional efforts to get jurisdictions to talk and coordinate amongst themselves, recognizing FHIR does not follow jurisdictional boundaries.
Fred if you want you can always talk more about kind of what you hear from the FHIR side because you work more intimately with CAL FIRE but that's kind of the sense I'm hearing from these grant requirements that they're passing down. I think the county doesn't have one yet. I haven't seen Too much of an interest in that, but I'll talk later about how I think the tasks that County Coordinator is taking can help push us to that step naturally.
And then we just added on four additional tasks that we would like to work on this year. One I want to point out is a mitigations map, which will be meant for the public to communicate who's doing what around the communities, what projects are being done, planned, proposed so community has an understanding of what's being done to reduce the risk to their areas and then I'm talking now about the Technical Advisory Committee that Fred and I have co-started Technical Advisory Committee will sit under the Wildfire Resilience Cabinet. Several of you may know this group, they presented to the board before they were started in 2021 through Coastal Conservancy funds. You know started by the RCD with collaboration from Legacy Works CEC, Sharon May Consulting and McInnis Environmental And Fires Council is now partnering with the RCT to continue to champion this collaborative forward where it's going to become an umbrella that helps foster collaboration amongst all the wildfire mitigation and emergency preparedness and recovery organizations in the county.
It's not gonna be its own organization or 501c3, it's simply just a collaborative that's being championed forwarded by some like-minded passionate groups And so under this umbrella will sit a handful of committees. Myself and RCD will co-lead it for now, hope to open up the group to—open up the steering committee to more organizations to participate once we kind of got it off the ground in a foundation that's set up. We did have one committee already get started which is the Technical Advisory Committee. We had our first meeting back in January I believe of this year And so the Technical Advisory Committee, like I said is co-led by myself and Fred. We have a charter we meet quarterly. It's made up of local experts with the logos represented on the slide here and there is process to include other experts across the county should we have missed any one key.
And so this group will work on creating a regional plan where we will aggregate gaps in project needs across the county create a transparent prioritization process and ultimately rank landscape built environment in community project priorities. And so that's where feedback from communities, especially fire risk communities who have action plans about things that they feel they need to feel more safe in their regions can be incorporated into this process.
And so through this, the Technical Advisory Committee going through these steps I think it's something that can make us then very competitive for CAL FIRE's new grant program and will meet those criteria that I listed out before. And also thank you through this process or essentially what we're doing is using countywide data across jurisdictions to create a prioritized list of projects which can essentially become a county wide WPP I just want to briefly list some of our Fire Council's accomplishments in county coordination this, just this past year 2025.
Connecting with over 118 wildfire mitigation groups in the county and outside the county we created 38 new fire risk communities now we have 72 total in our county when I started Well, under five years ago we had zero. And then I see the Fires Council getting more into the space of acting as a money pass-through where we can use our capacity and resources to help write grants, to deliver funding to other groups to focus on the mitigation implementation work versus being bogged down by grant writing.
And just initial Priorities of how the Fires Council and the new county grants can continue to support collaborative efforts across the region. So continuing to oversee and manage the wildfires in Scarborough, the Technical Advisory Committee, creating this prioritization process which again will make us competitive for Cal Fire's new grants. And helping see this as a space to start aligning state priorities with, thank you.
With all the local plans, the county and the other city jurisdictions have put together that tie in wildfire concepts but then they're all just spread across different plans. So trying to loop those all into one space. So with that, just overall seeing the value of coordination across our county as helping us all move forward together where we're enhancing efficiency and project implementation by connecting stakeholders, aligning all of our resources and our strategies across our different jurisdictions. Ensuring funds can get into the county. Now CAL FIRE's new grant is requiring this.
Starting to move the needle a lot more on advancing wildfire resilience efforts for leveraging everyone's resources and capacity just gets stuff done and coming up with a long-term strategic plan with our stakeholder and community inputs to make San Barbara County more fire resilient. And so with that, I'll open up to any questions or any feedback on what you guys see that Fire Council or this collaborative can do along with county fire to continue to advance wildfire mitigation efforts in the county.
Board members? None from Supervisor Lee. Supervisor Katz?
I mean no questions, just a gratitude. I'd love to see the progress and the expansion and the fact that all these grants are coming out and more money coming in and more volunteers and just always so appreciative of the work that is happening. Thank you.
5:01 – 5:1112 turns
Yes, Supervisor Lee.
I just say great work Anne-Marie your team has done a fantastic job reaching out to different communities and I know you're growing the Carpinteria community so continue doing what you are doing because it's working. So thank you appreciate all your hard work
I see the collaborative as kind of one piece of your work, and the Fire Safe Council is another. But a lot of the work that you're doing on the Fire Safe Council I think does fit within the CAL FIRE issue areas that they want to see progress developing locally appropriate resources. I don't think you bragged enough on what you're doing But the Fireside Council has someone free of charge who will go out and evaluate your home to see what you can do better to make it safer. So they said defensible space assessor, but you do a much bigger and you get a written report and it's really fabulous.
And you do grazing programs and chipping programs And now there's a new program to educate contractors about home hardening. Once you get into this, there are so many threads to pull about how to retrofit a property and make it more fire safe and then how to work with your community and then how to work with your broader Thank you very much. And now to keep them all coordinated is an additional task and a really ambitious one. But I serve on the board of the Fireside Council, and I've seen the organization grow not only in budget from just a few thousand dollars to millions each year in grants but in capacity and what you're doing for our county What's really exciting is that most of the fire departments in the county have representation on the board, so it's already the hub for collaboration.
So any public comment Madam Clerk?
Vice Chair Hartman and members of the Board we do have one request to speak from from the public on this item. We are going to remain here in Santa Barbara with Mark Sciatillo.
Good afternoon again, Madam Chair, members of the board. Mark Shatillo speaking on this item on behalf of Friends of Mission Canyon and the Committees for Land, Air, Water and Species. As a resident of the WUI zone I've got to say thank you to both you folks and to the whole Fire Safe Council apparatus and the incredible collaboration and amazing volunteer and community led process that this typifies, that this represents I think we're all better for it.
In my view, it reflects the expanding infrastructure that we need in order to respond to the escalating threats of wildfire and the risks. And those are not only what we've seen in terms of climate change but also the intensification of housing in the wildfire hazard areas. I wanted to just take the moment to remind your board the significance of objective risks of wildfire. That is the only, the objective public health and safety risks are the only authority that are left to your board under the recent generation of state housing laws. So when you see a project that may involve housing but it's in an area where it's unsafe because of the circumstances You the county is required under state law to have objective standards, excuse me. Objective standards that identify the public health and safety risk as being unreasonable.
I think this was a big part of what S or AB 747 which triggered the safety element improvements that were discussed at the last item and Madam Chair you mentioned one of the specifics it's required that hasn't been addressed was that modeling of evacuation that Mr. Tuttle referenced. That study that KLD prepared was very helpful and I've used it in a number of, and I will present it to you again in the Paint-a-Cave project but there needs to be standards that flow from that. That was the expectation of that legislation and the county has fallen short on that and I think that may short change your ability to actually direct where housing should go and how risks could be mitigated This month's copy of the Environmental Law News Public Law Journal has an article on this, and I'll just read the last paragraph which is one sentence.
It will be critical that local agencies employ aggressive tactics to reduce risk of wildfire, explore options for improving ingress and egress in the event of an emergency, and push Sacramento to allow local governments to deny projects that create unreasonable risk. This is all part of the amalgam from our volunteer efforts to our land use and regulatory actions. And I would encourage you to direct staff to look very carefully at these issues and make sure that we do the very best we can. Thank you.
Thank you for drawing that to our attention. Any more, any final comments from Fire Marshal Tan or
Ann Marie? I just wanted to thank you Joan for your kind words and always appreciate you being a cheerleader for the organization and the time you serve on our board to help us get us to where we are today and Greg I need to stop being so humble sometimes and brag about the organization. I'm getting better at that but also give a shout out to County Fire where yes we have several representatives on our board but County Fire, I think we work with the closest with getting projects and where our staff are working. And I don't think we'd be as successful without Rob and Alfred and all the staff time that have dedicated to just giving us advice and helping get permits and projects done. It's a great team effort that we're having.
Would you briefly describe the regional wildfire mitigation project? Because I think I think what we haven't touched on is the scientific background that you all can tap with UCSB and with the West, scientists in the West and how we're applying that.
Yeah, so for the Regional Wildfire Mitigation Program it's more of a philosophy where we're looking at having this holistic approach to wildfires lands through landscape built environment and community programming. So much of I think what I see and what has been in the past is a focus on just landscape mitigations where if we just built fuel breaks nope we're good or I said already scope pamphlets were good but to truly get to wildfires land it's a lot lot more than that Looking at maybe nature-based fuel buffers where we're planting oaks that help protect communities but also help sequester carbon so these multi benefit projects. It's looking at assessing our build environments, you know, understand the vulnerabilities of our hospitals and mobile home parks.
So I'm going to go ahead and open it up for questions. And then the communities know how to equitably engage and educate and organize communities to do their parts and be prepared for evacuation. So it's a very holistic perspective that's why in our Technical Advisory Committee, it's not just the fire agencies and Fire Council we're including OEM, the Planning Department, Botanic Garden.
UCSB on the research side. And so part of this philosophy has been adapted by the Moore Foundation, which I think is what you're getting to Joan, looking at wildfire resilience throughout the entire Western United States plus the western part of Canada trying to how do we scale up these initiatives with technology and community-based groups to really move the needle make a change so we don't keep having these tragedies?
Right. So so we're nested from the individual home to the fire safe, fire wise neighborhoods all the way to a regional plan all the way to the western U.S., and kind of growing more integration there. I think one of the things is of note, I think the old idea was you just as you said create fire breaks, you just clear cut And what we're learning is that there are fire resistant plants, native plants. There's ways to manage a natural landscape to protect communities so you don't have to just bulldoze everything. So that is really exciting. So may I have a motion for A through B to approve today's board letter?
So moved A and B.
And I will second that. All right all in favor say aye. I and so we accept that report and we are now adjourned until budget workshop starting Monday April 13th right here in Santa Barbara.