Planning Commission

Election of 2026 Planning Commission Chair

• Commissioner Ford nominated Tony Guy for the position of Chair.
• The nomination was seconded and the motion passed.
• Commissioner Guy was officially elected as the 2026 Planning Commission Chair.

Agenda Status Report and Projection Report

• Staff proposed scheduling adjustments to accommodate a streamlining ordinance package for the Board of Supervisors.
• The commission approved a special hearing for October 21, 2026, and a workshop for September 30, 2026.
• Regular meetings scheduled for September 2, October 7, and October 14, 2026, were cancelled.
• Staff agreed to brief commissioners on projected items to facilitate upcoming site visits.

Planning Commissioners Informal Reports

• Commissioner Park highlighted upcoming events including Farm Day and the California Ag Tourism Summit.
• He noted his participation as a panelist on tourism at the RCRC conference.
• A slide regarding a local waterfall discovery was shared to illustrate local tourism potential.

Minutes of the July 1, 2026 Meeting

• A motion was made to approve the minutes from the previous meeting.
• Commissioner Guy abstained from the vote due to his absence at the prior session.
• The motion to approve the minutes passed.

Director’s Report and Board of Supervisors Hearing Summary

• The Director summarized recent Board actions, including the approval of the Rose General Plan Amendment.
• Findings were reported that ICE detention facilities are not a permitted use under current county codes.
• Updates were provided on Acela permit software implementation and utility-scale solar ordinance amendments.
• Upcoming Board hearings regarding solar, coastal funds, and oil and gas amendments were listed.

Change of Owner, Operator, and Guarantor for the Santa Maria Asphalt Refinery Development Plan

• Staff recommended approval of the administrative change, noting the applicant is current on fees and in compliance.
• Applicant representatives highlighted over $12 million in restoration investments and local economic benefits.
• Public commenters supported the transfer, citing reduced trucking emissions and local job creation.
• The commission unanimously approved the change of owner, operator, and guarantor for Permit No. 95DP001.

Agenda Item 4: Election of 2026 Planning Commission Chair

• Commissioner Ford nominated Tony Guy for the role of Chair. The nomination was seconded. A vote was taken, and the motion passed. Commissioner Guy was elected as the 2026 Planning Commission Chair.

Agenda Item 5: Agenda Status Report and Projection Report

• Staff presented the projection report, noting upcoming hearings scheduled for August 26, 2026, and September 9, 2026. Staff requested scheduling adjustments to accommodate a streamlining ordinance package intended for the Board of Supervisors by year-end. The proposed schedule included:
• A workshop on September 30, 2026, at 1:00 p.m. for the County Planning Commission.
• Cancellation of the regular County Planning Commission meetings on September 2, October 7, and October 14, 2026.
• A special hearing on October 21, 2026, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., with a continuation date of October 28, 2026, if necessary.
• Commissioner Park moved to set a special hearing for October 21, 2026. The motion was seconded and passed. Commissioner Park moved to cancel the meetings on September 2, October 7, and October 14, 2026, and to change the time of the September 30, 2026, meeting to 1:00 p.m. The motion was seconded and passed. Commissioner Park requested that staff brief all commissioners on the projected items for the upcoming hearings to facilitate site visits. Staff agreed to coordinate with the manager to provide this information.

Agenda Item 7: Public Comment

• The Chair opened the floor for public comment on items not on the agenda. The Clerk reported that no public comment slips had been received. No public comments were offered.

Agenda Item 8: Planning Commissioners Informal Reports

• Commissioner Park provided an informal report highlighting upcoming events: Farm Day on September 19, the California Ag Tourism Summit (September 23–25), and the RCRC conference (September 23–25). Commissioner Park noted that he would be a panelist on tourism at the RCRC conference and shared a slide regarding a local waterfall discovery to illustrate local tourism potential.

Agenda Item 9: Minutes of the July 1, 2026 Meeting

• A motion was made to approve the minutes of the July 1, 2026, meeting. The motion was seconded. Commissioner Guy abstained from the vote as he was not present at the previous meeting. The motion passed.

Agenda Item 10: Director’s Report and Board of Supervisors Hearing Summary

• The Planning and Development Director provided a remote report summarizing recent Board of Supervisors actions and upcoming items. Key points included:
• Approval of the Rose General Plan Amendment and Rezone (July 7).
• Determination that an ADU application was incomplete (July 7).
• Findings that ICE detention facilities are not a permitted use under current county codes.
• Updates on the implementation of the Acela permit software across multiple departments.
• Progress on utility-scale solar ordinance amendments, including exemptions for small standalone battery energy storage systems and agricultural properties.
• Upcoming Board hearings scheduled for August 18 (utility-scale solar, HAG 4 rezone), September 1 (Coastal Resource Mitigation Fund fee reassessment), and September 15 (oil and gas amendments prohibiting new well drilling).

Agenda Item 11: Change of Owner, Operator, and Guarantor for the Santa Maria Asphalt Refinery Development Plan

Staff Presentation

• Staff presented a request by CAP Resolution Partners LLC, doing business as Santa Maria Road Materials, to change the owner, operator, and guarantor for Development Plan Permit No. 95DP001. Staff noted that the request is administrative and exempt from CEQA as it does not result in physical changes to the environment. Staff confirmed that the applicant is current on fees, has provided insurance coverage, and has entered into a compliance agreement to address outstanding violations. Staff recommended approval of the change of owner, operator, and guarantor.

Applicant Presentation

• Representatives for the applicant, including Beth Collins (attorney) and Chip Moore (managing member), presented the case. They stated that the applicant acquired the facility through bankruptcy proceedings and has invested over $12 million in restoration. They highlighted economic benefits, including local job creation and the reduction of trucking miles by processing local oil into asphalt rather than transporting it to Bakersfield. They noted that the facility’s emissions are low (approximately 15 metric tons annually from fired equipment) and that upgrades to boilers have significantly reduced SOx and NOx emissions. They addressed questions regarding lead contamination (remediated by a prior party), insurance coverage (currently $7 million, to be increased to $20 million upon operation), and the market area for asphalt (predominantly local, with some regional distribution).

Public Comment

• Two members of the public commented. One speaker, a local rancher, supported the project provided it had no affiliation with a specific individual named in the comment, citing the benefits of using local oil for asphalt. The second speaker, commenting online, supported the transfer as an administrative procedure that would reduce trucking emissions and sequester carbon in asphalt, while noting that the restart of operations is a separate process.

Deliberations and Vote

• Commissioners discussed the economic and environmental benefits of the project, including the reduction of trucking miles and the use of local oil. They noted the applicant’s financial stability and compliance efforts. A motion was made to accept the staff recommendations, make the required findings, determine the request is not a project under CEQA, and approve the change of owner, operator, and guarantor for Permit No. 95DP001. The motion was seconded. The vote was unanimous, and the motion passed.

Adjournment

• The Chair asked if there was any reason the meeting should not be adjourned. No objections were raised, and the meeting was adjourned.