Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

All right, welcome back everybody. Um, we're actually going to formally adjourn our special meeting that we uh started earlier. Um, in that meeting, we had a uh resolution that was adopted by the board but was not yet presented. I'm going to take my chair's prerogative and present that a little later in this meeting um for a recent retiree from the county. Um, with that, um, Madame Clerk, will you please call the role or actually now welcome to and I'll be starting the regularly scheduled April 7th meeting of the board of supervisors here in Santa Barbara. Madam Clerk, will you please call the role? Supervisor Caps here. Supervisor Hartman here. Supervisor Lavanino. Supervisor Lee here. And Chair Nelson

here. Let the record reflect that Supervisor Lavanino is absent. Would you please stand and join us in pledge allegiance to our flag? Ready, begin. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Our first order of business here this morning is the adoption of the minutes from the March 10th, 2026 regular meeting. May I get a motion? So moved. Second.

Motion from Cap. Second from Hartman. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion passes unanimously. Next item on business CEO report. Cio Mado, 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 Koopa has been awarded the 2026 secretaries 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 were recently reviewed by the state as part of their annual federal assessment. This is a large achievement for any child support um office and so this compliance rating is due to their the casework by their dedicated child support officers. So again congratulations to the child support services team.

And that concludes my report. Thank you Miss Miado. Madam clerk, do we have any changes or announcements for this today's meeting?

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 of public participation and instructions on how to provide public comment on items listed on today's agenda or during general public comment, please refer to page 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 two. If you have any questions, please contact the clerk of the board's office at area code 805-568-2240. Again, that number is 805-568-2240. And that concludes my announcements for today.

All right. Thank you, madam clerk. Um, the next item of business is administrative agenda. Would any board members like to pull items um from the administrative agenda? CC resol. Is that still right? Any other items? Um, I'm going to pull A27. Again, Madam Clerk, there was no additions to the administrative agenda. Is that right? Uh, Chair Nelson and members of the board, we have one or two requests to speak from the public on A23. A23. So, be appropriate to get a motion on the balance of agenda with the exception of A23, 24, and 27. Is that 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. A second. Second by Supervisor Caps. Um, any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Oppose. Motion passes unanimously. Okay. At this time, we're going to go ahead and begin with um our resolutions to be presented. And we'll begin with item uh administrative item number one. Madame clerk, will you please read admin 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 JB Fickland Jr. longest standing clergy in Santa Barbara County. And joining us in person today, we have Reverend Fickland and Connie Alexander Bolley Bodie, president of Santa Barbara NAACP unit 1070B. And I will go ahead and read the resolution. Whereas Reverend JB Fickland 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 3rd Sunday evening, February 20th, 1966, Reverend Fickland 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 faithfilled journey. and on the 3rd Sunday of March 1971 marched triumphantly from 735 East Haley Street to their new church home at 4:30 East Figueroa Street. And whereas Reverend Fick Fickland 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 Fickland 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 pullpit into the broader civic life of our community. Now, therefore, be it hereby ordered and resolved that the board of supervisors of the county of Santa Barbara does hereby honor Reverend J.B. Fickland 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, past 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. Uh 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 Fickland 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 as that banner st 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 um and not given so so easily to all. So thank you and rein you want to have a couple words.

Sure. Say thank you. Thank you to all our supervisors and to all the people that have come to share with me on this great morning. Look, I know how the astronauts uh feel now. I feel just Amen. Amen. Could I tell just a little story as to how perhaps I got here? Uh in the early days of my ministry, I uh had a privilege to serve on this on the senior citizen. I bought my badge to prove it. Amen. My badge to prove. I had worked on the uh 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 and I often wondered why am I sitting here with these seniors and and and that I'm so young and now I understand why I was sitting with those seniors all because I received my 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 my members and friends who are here today. God bless you and thank you so very very much.

Behind you. All right. Beautiful. Okay. Madam clerk, will you please read administrative item number two into the record?

Chair Nelson and members of the board. Administrative item number two is sponsored by Supervisor Hartman. It is to adopt a resolution of commendation honoring Carrie McKinnon for serving as branch supervisor at the Salvain Sanz and Losivos libraries for 25 years. And joining us in person today, if you can please make your way to the podium is Carrie McKinnon. And I'll go ahead and read the resolution. Whereas Carrie McKinnon served as branch supervisor of the Solving Sanz and Losivos 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 story time and family focused activities, lectures on natural history and other topics, and an online children's book club during the COVID pandemic, community reads, and readaloud events. And whereas under Car's leadership, the Salvain 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 Sanz Valley Graange, where she helps to achieve its mission of fostering fellowship and goodwill in in our diverse communities through cultural, educational, and social activities, supporting sustainable agriculture and preserving the character and historical significance of the Graange 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 McInnon for her many years of service to the Sanz Valley community as a head librarian, Graange leader, and community volunteer. Pass and adopted today,

super Herman.

Uh yes, libraries are only as alive as the people who run them. And uh Carrie McKinnon has been at the center of community life at the library in solving for for 25 years. Um 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, a firstgen. Uh he was struggling with English. He was struggling with reading. he was struggling. Uh he he wouldn't write. Um but Carrie had a range of programs. She always knew how to uh when I was first in the valley, she she recruited me to help generate um ideas for programs. She she had a nose for seeking people out to contribute to the uh 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 uh this teacher just sparked something in him and so he um he stayed late and and he'd never done that before talking to her excited about what he was going to write. Uh he's gone on to earn uh well he he went to Dun on a scholarship. Then he uh 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 and uh I can't ex I can't begin to count how many lives the thing the programs that she's instituted have influenced. That's just one case. Um but the ripple effect is tremendous. Um she brought county hazardous waste people there to teach composting. Um she pioneered things with uh the valley um natural

history society. She would set that up. So learning is lifelong. It it doesn't stop when you're a child. Uh and then her husband was just featured in the indie this week. He's a drama was a drama teacher at the high school. And so she actually has directed plays um the enemy of the people uh which was really uh rave reviews in the valley. So, um, she's and and as you can hear, she continues to work in the Graange, uh, on 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, um, I I really miss her presence. Um, but she created an institution that will outlive even her. and these ripple effects uh are 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 um for your kind words and your recognition today. And especially thanks to Supervisor Hartman and solving staffer Megan Deonhoffer 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 I'm thankful. Um looking back it seems that 25 years went by in a flash. Um I even spent one year in the Buton Library. I will tell you that. Um, but public service has always been about finding out what people in the community need and finding a way to make it happen. Um, creating partnerships, access and 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 Sanz Valley, city of Salvang, and from you yourselves, the supervisors who made sure that the county libraries get funded. Um, 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 allimp important role of the library as a brickandmortar 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, Miss McKinnon. All right, Madam Clerk, we now please read administrative item number three into the record.

Chair Nelson and members of the board. Administrative item number three 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 Wenegger, executive director and Helen 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 Arbarium 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 horiculture and sustainable land management. And whereas as a public serving educational institution and living museum, the Santa Barbara Botanic Garden 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 con 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 hereby ordered and resolved that this board of supervisors of the County of Santa Barbara does hereby acknowledge and honor the Santa Barbara Botanic Garden Centennial anniversary celebrating 100 years of

leadership in conservation, science, and education and extends its appreciation to the staff, scientists, volunteers, partners, and supporters whose collectively efforts 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 uh resolution. And uh you only turn a hundred 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 Tory Pine. Uh Tory Pines. I was actually on Santa Rosa Island that day and visited the ancestors of that Tori of those Tory pines uh on Santa Rosa Island, one of only two places in the world where they uh grow naturally. The other places in La Hoya 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 at the garden that was planted 90 years ago and the people who planted them could would 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 uh brings the garden together. I want to acknowledge Dr. Steve Winhanger, our executive director, and the incredible staff at the botanical garden. Uh do come up there. It's in a beautiful, wonderful place and a place of beauty, a place of hope, a place where biodiversity can thrive. Uh, and 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. Uh, thanks so much for your support today. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. Um, madam click, we'll go ahead and move on to administrative item number four.

Chair Nelson and members of the board. Administrative 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 Wandowski. And if he can please make his way to the podium and anyone else who is with you that you 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 values, valleys, mountains, and areas in between. And whereas light pollution results in roughly three billion per year of wasted energy in the United States and contributes to dis diminished energy security. And whereas Santa Barbara Countyy'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 starfield night passed and adopted today. Chair and members of the board, I'm Mike Wondowski and on behalf of uh all the groups involved in our coalition countywide uh to pursue this resolution and proclamations throughout the county. Thank you so much. Um these groups have uh diverse uh purposes, but where we overlap is our care about the protection of dark skies and actions uh to take 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 is 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.

Thank you, Supervisor Hartman.

Yeah. I just want to thank you all for your work. It's a subtle matter how um light pollution affects our lives, but we we evolved in a certain environment and when we change that, I think it really affects things that we don't even appreciate. Um 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. Uh it's not just honorary, you're actually changing uh changing the light uh educating us and and helping us change our ordinances and and uh protecting our night sky. So thank you so much.

Thank you, Supervisor Hartman. All right, Madam Clerk, if we go ahead and move on to administrative item number five, would you please read that in the record?

Chair Nelson and members of the board, administrative item number five is sponsored by Supervisor Caps. 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 Bant, and Michelle Graham. If you can please make your way to the podium, and I'll go ahead and read the resolution. Whereas participation in stable, highquality 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 respons responsive to the child care 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 as 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 child care and education professionals with the Santa Barbara County Childcare Planning Council. First Five, 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 age care professionals, past 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 highquality 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. Thank you, Supervisor Caps. Yeah, I just uh you can tell how in sync uh 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're go ahead and um Thank you, Spre Caps. We're gonna go ahead and read U. Madam Cler, will you please read item number six into the record?

Chair Nelson and members of the board. Administrative item number six is sponsored by Supervisor Caps. 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 from donate 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. And a single individual's donation of a heart, lungs, liver, kidneys, pancreas, and small intestine can save up to eight lives. And donation of tissue can save and heal the lives of more than 75 75 others. And whereas organ donor 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 Lifecal donor registry online at any time by visiting www.donatlifecal.org or for Spanish speakers due duntovida California punto ohe. And whereas residents can sign up to be an Oregon eye and tissue donor when applying for or renewing their driver's license or ID cards at the California Department of Motor Vehicles or California residents interested in saving a life through living kidney donation may visit www.livingdonationcal.org. Now therefore be it hereby ordered and resolve 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 in do 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. Um, having the some people ask why am I here? Well, I'm alive because I have a kidney transplant five uh 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. There's you've got a group of people in this county that are looking for organ donations. And having um a pink dot on your driver's license so you're able to be uh your organs can be donated is great. So, 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.

Miss Brown,

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 um very 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 runwalk in Isuza, but we cover all seven counties. And we also invite you to come to Scott's walk, which will be September 19th. And we have an awesome time at Lead Better Beach. Thank you very much for supporting organ eye and tissue donation.

Thank you. this this proclamation will be end up at the runw walk. Uh basically it'll go and there'll be people about 20,000 people that'll be looking at it and then afterwards it'll go to either the Santa Barbara city or the Galita city uh DMV because so people can see how that the county of Santa Barbara supports organ donation. Thank you very much.

Well, thank you again, Scott. and I have my pink dot. So, make sure you guys get yours, too. So, all right. So, um I'm going to take uh a brief uh chair's prerogative to make an announcement where we're now going to be doing the um resolution from the special meeting for Miss Boule. So, at this time, Madam Clerk, would you please read the resolution for Miss Boule? 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 accommodation honoring Mindy Boule 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 Boule and our public defender, Tracy Makuga. Whereas Mindy Ble 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 Ben Benzender 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 appointee appointed appellet 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 Union steward. 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 acquitt, 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 Boule 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 defenders office. a total of 75 years of institutional knowledge, talent, character, grit, and no one exemplifies that more than Mindy. Um, I'm going to correct one thing is Mindy usually works seven days a week, not six. And I'm sure her family is grateful um that that's no longer going to 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've absolutely refused to treat any of our clients, no matter what the charges have been, with anything less than pure exceptionalism and and providing them dignity and respect. If you want to say someone is a zealous advocate, that's who Mindy Boule is. Um, I will say there's, you know, at least from my

perspective, I would say Mindy Ble outworks everybody in the room. There's very few people that meet beat me to the office, but Mindy does every morning um very often. Not today.

Not today. Not today. And I also count myself as as one of the individuals that have learned from Mindy. Um, 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 Mid'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. Um, 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. Um, I know those hard nights, those long nights, those holiday dinners that were missed, those weekends where I know you were 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 have 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 clients and our clients and the community we serve. You're going to 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. Thank you, Supervisor Lee, Supervisor

Cap, Supervisor Nelson, Supervisor Hartman, um, Chief Public Defender Vuga, Chief Trial Deputy Adrien Galvan. Thank you so much. Um, thank you for your leadership and thank you for I have so much gratitude for that I had the opportunity to become a public defender uh 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 um I am just uh so filled with gratitude and I I'm sorry for my late arrival and um but uh I I know I I leave our office in good hands. we have some wonderful upand cominging attorneys and that um I I couldn't be more proud of and so thank you all so much.

Thank you again, Miss Ble. And Mr. Galvan, I think you might be the only one left in the office here pretty soon if you're not careful. So, um, all right. And just for the record, that was a special announcement that we made. Um, the adoption of the resolution for Mindy was done in our special meeting this morning, and that was item administrative number, uh, five. And so, we're going to, um, get back to the presentation of the resolutions um, for our regular schedule meeting, and we'll start we'll continue our we'll continue with administrative item number seven. Madam Clerk, will you please read that in the record? Chair Nelson and members of the board. Administrative item number seven is sponsored by Supervisor Hartman and Supervisor Lavanino. 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 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 healthconscious 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 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. Mr. Wilkinson. Good morning, Chair Nelson and fellow supervisors. I'm here today with Trina Long and Susan Li from County Health Department. I'm 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 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 a 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 nonprofits who maintain thousands of acres to serve as outdoor gyms and natural sanctuaries. And most importantly, it belongs to the community members from Carpanderia 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 c 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 trail head, 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 healthyeoplehealthytrails.org or to learn more about the dozens of outdoor activities that are posted there that take place in the month of April. Thank you.

Thank you. I am proud to be the coordinator of our county health uh CalFresh healthy living program. Um 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 trial steering committee was such a natural fit. This initiative reflects the power of partnerships, bringing together public health, healthc care 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 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.

Uh, Supervisor Hartman. Yeah, you can't pick up a magazine or a newspaper without seeing some article that's telling us get moving. Uh whether it be for our physical health, our mental health, or or our spiritual health to connect us to something bigger. And and if you don't have trails, it's not very inspiring to go because you have to worry about your safety. You worry about air pollution. So, I really uh commend everybody who works on trails. It's it's not the easiest thing because they 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 uh smaller trails organizations, but his work on the Baron Ranch Trail um deserves special uh call out. He he's worked with our public works department, our parks department, and and put great signs and it was all fixed. Uh, one of the greatest days I've ever had was riding my horse on that trail. Uh, and then came the Alisol 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 uh, 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. Um, let's go ahead and move on. Um, Madam Clerk, can you please read administrative item number eight into the record?

Chair Nelson and members of the board, administrative item number eight 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 in actions taken by public safety telecommunicator professionals form the foundation for an effective response. or when a hostage taker or suicidal individual calls 911, the first contact that individual has is with the public safety telecommunications professional who negoti negotiation skills can prevent the situation from worsening. And whereas during crisises, 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 16 163,000 calls for service while ex 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 sa life-saving contributions of the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office emergency call centers public safety telecommunicator professionals passed and adopted today.

Sheriff Brown. Thank you, Chair Nelson. Members of the board, uh during National Telecommunications uh safety week, we proudly recognize the dedication, the skill, and the professionalism of our law enforcement dispatchers. These unsung heroins and heroes are oftentimes the uh the vital link to people in need and those who call them are reassured and are helped uh not just by the responding sheriff's deputies but by the uh advice and the uh comfort that is provided to them from our dispatchers. Their ability to think clearly under pressure uh to provide unwavering support uh 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 and the tremendous job that they continue to do 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Uh they are to be commended but especially so during this special week. Congratulations Miss Farley.

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. Thank you. Well deserved. All right. Thank you. Uh, Madame Clerk, will you now please read administrative item number nine into the record?

Chair Nelson and members of the board. Administrative item number nine is sponsored by Supervisor Lavanino. 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 Lavanino 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 sus suspected child abuse and neglect in 2025, responding 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 familia 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 ad 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 an integrated and family centered system of community support. And whereas every child matters and a safer world begins with engaged community members who share responsibility for children, family, and community well-being. Now, therefore, be

it hereby ordered and resolved that this board of supervisors of the county of Santa Barbara does hereby acknowledge April 2026 as Child Abuse Prevention Month in Santa Barbara County, passed and adopted today. Miss Krueger. 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 uh 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 and awareness month.

Thanks, Amy. Shar 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 and sound show that the cumulative financial impact of this abuse is $178 million accured 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 health care needs, special education, criminal justice involvement, and limited lifetime productivity. To put the numbers in perspective, $178 million could send nearly 9,000 children to preschool. It could pay for over a thousand 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 2425. 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 uh upcoming budget challenges and state funding around uh child welfare services. So thank you for highlighting that today. All right. So we're going to move along on our administrative agenda. Um we have three items that have been pulled. Um one one by the public and two by the board. Uh we'll go ahead and take these in order. The first one being A23 which was pulled by the public and I believe there's two speakers on that item. 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 2 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. Okay, I'm going to close public comment on this item at this time.

Thank you. Uh, good morning, uh, Frank Thompson. Great to be here. Really opens your eyes and ears to experience all of 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 Shore. I'm sure you're very familiar with him as CEO of um Sanctuary Centers who is retiring and in a moment you'll hear from Stephanie Drake who is the new uh CEO for sanctuary centers. But um we did come to say thanks today. It's a relatively complicated um subject. Um 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 and the community services and housing uh department. Uh 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. um Lucille Boss, you know, Joe Deornick and uh Jesus Armas. Uh all of them pitched in and really made a difference here. So wanted to be sure and recognize them. I'll 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. Stephanie,

thank you. Uh 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, Mr. Rick. And that concludes public comment on this item. All right. Any further discussion on A23? Okay. Not seeing any. Can I get a motion to um adopt staff recommendation A through C or actually make sure I got that right? Madam clerk, could you help me? I guess it's Nelson. Members of the board. Yes, that is correct. Uh we would approve staff recommended actions A through D. A through D. I'm looking for that motion. I move to uh approve staff recommendation A through D. Okay. Supervisor. Second. Okay. So motion by supervisor Lee. Second by Supervisor Hartman. All in favor signify by saying I. I. I.

Opposed. Motion passes unanimously. All right. Thank you both. All right. Next item on the agenda that has been pulled by Supervisor Lee is um item A24. Madame Clerk, will you please read that item into the record? 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. Cus or see supervisor Lee, do you have a question or No, the staff won't go first if they want to make any comments.

I believe um 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. Uh uh Chair Nelson through uh Chair Nelson. Um of the 25 carpentry based licensed cannabis uh businesses, 16 operations have installed multi-technology carbon filtration or equivalent equipment. The nine carpentia based operations pending equipment installation were issued cannabis license revocation letters last Friday, April 3rd. Um the first class mailed letters service of notice to to the applicant will register on April 8th and if applicants choose to appeal their appeal requests are due on April 20th. 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 um 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 green houses 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 Infinity and the study for Autumn Brands. uh and he indicated that um both the units are effective. Uh they're different. Um he indicated that the question about the secondary emissions that might come from a unit like Genesis. He said the way they did the study at Autumn brands there he says he there is no emissions that are measurable in the formaldahhide and the ketone um classification. So he said it's safe. Um he believes it's safe to be implied in other green houses. 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. Um, there was also a question just about the efficiency of the units and he said it's 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 um high percentage of reduction. So that's where that 80% reduction in odor comes in. He said with um 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 it's just it's hard to compare those two studies. Um 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, this genesis system. So what is your staff doing to make sure that it is effective? Are you doing third-party evaluation?

So I mean SCS engineers is a third party evaluator and they are the ones that have been doing studies for the installation of the Genesis um units at different facilities. He's not they're not doing them for every every facility, but there are a qualified engineer that did the analysis. Um, and the units are carb certified. They don't produce ozone. Um, so I'm I feel confident that the units are safe. I'm meeting with Aaron 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 green houses. 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 are there's a study formaldahhide and ketones were the the 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 an interest in it. but that measures the different types of um possible um carbons that could be detected and it goes from firmaldahhide to acetone to methyl proline to so there's benz benz benza you're going to you're going to test my ability to pronounce some of these terms but um yes benzadelhide um so I have a test 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 does he believes that these test results will would be replicated.

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. Um is there any enforcement systems in case it doesn't work? Is it so I in the event that the systems do not work and they trigger a threshold um our threshold which is D overT um 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. Good. Thank you for your explanation. Yeah, I'm happy to share any further information if if board members need it and I can share the study. Yeah.

All right. I I believe we have one public commenter, but before we get there, I'll just as a supervisor that's interested in this topic as well, um I'll be very interested in in APCD's con concurrence with those findings as well. I think I that would help all of us just to make sure, you know, having the other organization um with a second set of eyes on it. So, just adding that to the conversation. Um, I believe we have one public commenter. Yes, Jon Nelson and members of the board, we have one request to speak on this item. We're going to zoom with Anna Curo. Anna, before she starts, we're going to go ahead and close public comment on this item. Go ahead, Miss Couo. And Anna. Oh, there you go.

Okay. Sorry. Okay. Well, thank you for um um talking more about this, you know, item. I was very concerned about um specifically Autumn Brands because I 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. Um and then on um 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 um on April or March 9th and was approved on March 9th and the signature in on the first page cover page was the 9th and the last page was the 9th where this engineer signed. So I was kind of curious, you know, how that process worked because I knew the OAP had sub been submitted, you know, on December 18th. I mean, I was given that information. Um, and then my other question is on the list of um um growers that have been receiving their, you know, 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. Um, and my concern with the Genesis is because the APCD, you know, with when Laura C or when it was at the March 10th meeting, um, APCD 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, you know,

that's where and I'm reading, you know, the letter, the board letter that was submitted from um Carmela Beck. And so, those are my questions. You know, where is Genesis? You know, I understand what you just said about for Autumn Brands. Um, what about these other three growers who um 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 um when the letter was written about when the extensions, you know, were going to be given. So, those were my concerns. Thank you very much. Thank Thank you, Miss Creo. And that concludes public comment on this item.

Okay, back to the board. Any additional comments or questions? Supervisor Hartman. Um, I had a question about the OAPS. Do do outside scientists review those to to make sure that there are enough units to

and and then how are we what standards are we using to protect workers inside the green houses? How do we determine that? So, Supervisor Hartman through the chair. Yeah. Uh Geocentech is our thirdparty consultant that reviews all the OAPS uh 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 um Geocentech and the county are satisfied. Um it's it is and I think we sort of have to be careful here. Um I understand the board's concerns and I would I share them too wanting to make sure that workers are safe but it is not that that is not an a role that the county planning and development department plays. Right. So that is a worker safety issue that I think would be handled by another state department.

And and is it handled or is this something that's sort of outside the OSHA or regulatory framework?

Yeah, I I can look into that a little bit more. Um but I know that the units that 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 sort of what the regulatory um requirements are and get back to the board and then um I would be interested in answers to Miss Couo's questions. I know we don't normally do that in in public comment, but um this is such a an important issue. So, I heard a few questions and I I'm not sure I have all of them. Um, but she asked a question about where are the OAPS for some of the other growers that are proposing Genesis and they're in review. Um, 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. Um, so those those OAPs are still going through review with Geocentech and county staff. Um, and

do you recall what her question was?

Oh, 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 purchased the units and started using the equipment, um I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, um with the CEO's office, those growers did not receive a letter regarding their license, um because they have the equipment and that's the way chapter 50 has been drafted. They don't have their OAP that's approved by PND and so they received NOVs from us. um we it's tricky when you have two different um regulating ordinances and code sections but that's I believe how that has transpired and I think those were the main questions I heard from her and and so I have an additional question there there was a set of uh operators who were close but they wanted an extension um what is their status

so we have um two additional growers that have come into compliance that had sought and it's Emma Wood and CP1 um and they now have approved OAPS and um they have installed equipment and so um I'm going to ask you to speculate a bit but the the smell in Carperia is not gotten any better. when do we think that these um new technologies will be up and running and really making a difference? So, I think what um it depends on who you ask. Some people say it has been reduced, others don't feel that it has been reduced. Um I try to go through the community. I rode my bike through there this weekend just to see where the odor is coming from. Um, 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 um we have a dashboard. Um, we take regular tests with Gioentech that lists where we're where we're getting complaints and then we go out and we do testing. We use the nasal ranger uh 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 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, um the it's it's 60-day period. um 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 um there should be a hearing within that 60-day time period. If there's anything else you want to add, we just want to be more specific because there is um a little bit more time. So, go ahead. Yeah.

So, um as I mentioned, um the letters uh the receipt of the letters will be on on April 8th. They have 10 days to request the appeal. So until 4:20 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 um hearing officer has 30 days to provide their decision. So that's the timeline. And then it what happens with the decision? What what's if the decision is to um uphold the revocation, then the operator would be required to to cease um uh operations and and so they'd have to take their plants out or what would happen? What does cease operations mean?

There there'll be a small windown period for the operation to shut down and make sure that um they're compliant locally and with the state with regards to plants and metric track and trace. And then if that happens, just 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 um 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, are trying to get the equipment installed so they can come into compliance with the with chapter 50. Yeah. All right. Thank you, uh, Miss Miss Plow, Supervisor Hartman or sorry, Caps, I apologize. Sure. Okay. Thank you. So, this is interesting information about um the testing of Genesis. So, I appreciate it and I would love to see the study. Uh, and so it's it's Paul, what's his last name? Schaefer.

Schaefer. And it's I'm happy to hear that it's him who did the testing as well as on Infinity at Everloom. Um, so just to kind of do the quick narrative, uh, Supervisor Nelson and I went to Everbloom many, many times as we were contemplating uh, this ordinance um, 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 um and that's with the technology using carbon. Uh we didn't want to name a specific brand because that wouldn't be appropriate uh for um government. And so we just named the technology or the equivalent. But then to see that there was um operators that were choosing something that yielded uh not 84% but a 42% which is not equivalent if you do the math. Um but now you're saying that the same you're giving this explanation which we didn't have at the last hearing. um that the same tester is saying it's not the same result because the smell wasn't as bad.

Yeah. Right. I mean, so now it's an interesting So the point is that the smell has to be as bad in order to um 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 that's the goal.

He he Well, I mean, I've I've been out there. I went to the site and visited it and um when you get to the road, there's no smell. When you walk around the the green houses, there's no smell. I smelled it in 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. Okay. And it and it um and by the time you get to their property line, you can't smell it.

So, it's it's they they only have eight units per acre. Um and that's that's what they're using. And they are meeting the threshold. They're not exceeding I wouldn't even say they're meeting it. they're not exceeding the threshold of D 4 D overT. Um, and as I indicated, he thinks that a um 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. Um, and so typically he thinks it'll be more units per acre for the other growers because they have a they may have a higher odor load in their green houses.

Sure. And to supervisor Hartman's question about the workers, I mean, another motiv huge mo motivation for this ordinance are the workers. And when we uh were at Everbloom, you know, we heard from the workers how wonderful it is to to leave work and not smell like cannabis and go pick up your kids from school and and and and so I do think maybe it's not technically in the mandate of of your work, but it certainly is our motivation as supervisors to to do this well. So, um I I look forward to going out to Autumn Brands. I'll ask for an invitation and and see for myself. But thank you for this update and um 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 for forward to the day when we don't hear the complaints that it still smells. Thank you.

All right. Thank you, Supervisor Caps. All right. I see no other lights on. Um, we actually need to get a motion to receive and file this item. Um, A24. Can I get a motion to adopt staff recommendation? I'll make that motion to adopt staff recommendation A and B. I'll second it. Okay. All in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed. Motion passes unanimously. All right. We'll move on to our last administrative item is item A27 and that's been pulled by me. Uh, madam clerk, could you please read that item in the record?

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 continuence on this to the April 21st meeting. Um, this is the reconstitution of the fire appeals board. um 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 a balance of appointees. So, um I just needed a little bit more time to dig into that for myself. I've asked uh Deputy Chief uh Pat B if that delay would cause any um undue um complications. And um uh Deputy Chief B, will you just maybe confirm for the for the public and my colleagues that that wouldn't cause any problems for you guys in the in the short term if we waited another couple weeks before we appointed reappointed the members of this board?

Yeah, Chair Nelson and members of the board. Um we can support a continuence on this. I think our intent is and and everyone's intent here shared is to have competent and representative members on this board. So we don't see any problems with the continuence. All right. Um, so Supervisor Hartman. Oh, I I just had a question. So, how how are they typically appointed the members of this board? They're not.

So, it's it 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, I don't think that there's a lot of historical record for that. Um, but the 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 that they would have be able to speak or or make decisions with with experience and competence in that specific area. But it hasn't seen any action for a while.

It's been quite some time. And remind me then what are they advising on? So this would be uh a board to hear an appellants opposition to a decision made by our fire marshall's office or by our fire chief. Historically we've been able to resolve just about all these internally through communication with our with our constituency. Um, this formalizes a process where an appellant could raise that question to a board in a more formal setting. Thank you.

And my understanding there's currently one appointed that by the second district by Supervisor Capso appoint. And so again, I was just looking for that opportunity to maybe potentially do the same from ours or select from the list that the fire department has provided of people willing to serve. So that's why I was asking for the continuence to give me a little bit more time personally. And I w want to thank uh Fire Marshall Tan and and again deputy chief for um B for bringing this forward with us. And so um I'd make a motion to continue this item to a to April 21st. Second. All right. Uh any further comments or is there public comment on this item? Madam clerk, Chen Nelson and members of the board, we have no requests to speak from the public on this item. See no further comment. Um all those in favor uh signify by saying I

I opposed. motion for continuence um is passed and that concludes our administrative agenda. Right. This is the time we'll um move on to our uh general public comment. These are for items that are um for topics that are not on our agenda and but is uh under the purview of this board. And so u madam clerk, do we have any general public comment today? Yes, J 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 Katherine Hannah to be followed by Kissa Mosley. Katherine, as Katherine comes up, I will go ahead and close general public comment. Thank you.

Hi, good morning board. My name is Katherine 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 and an action plan for specifically dealing with Casey within our county. I'm here to report that after a long semester of hard work, we have come to Northstar goals for a 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 we're 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. Um, Kissa 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 on board and deal ideally we're going to 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 in involved with their communities more and come around this issue and I'm I'll hand it over to Kisa after me. But thank you so much. Also, if you have any uh questions you can email my email is Katherine K a t h r i ne. Hannah Han Na at kingdomcauses.org. Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Hannah. And we will now go to our final speaker, Kissa Mosley. Kissa,

thank you. Yes. Um, good morning, Board of Supervisors. Yeah. So, I just wanted to echo um what uh Cat just said, but I'm my name is Kissa. 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 um to work towards our goal of ending CSKI in Santa Barbara City. And so our three-year action plan, like Cat mentioned, involves two other projects as well. But the one that I'm assigned to, partners with Noah's Anchorage, um, 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 uh, and reliable space for those who need it. And so Kingdom Causes and Noah 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 Noah is doing as well as Kingdom Causes and reminding your con constituents that these are issu issues that affect the city and that we need their support as well as yours to continue to implement this systemic change. um that will hopefully result in early intervention and prevention efforts that will hope 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 kisa.mosley@kingdomcauses.org. Thank you.

All right. Thank you both. And that um closes public comment. Um I'm just take a just one pause for a second. Just have a quick question for the CEO before I um take us a short break. No, not yet. Just a quick just just a pause. All right, we're going to go ahead and take a fivem 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. Um we're going to go uh before we start departmental item number one. We're going to go back to CEO's uh report. Um CO Misado. Thank you, Chair Nelson. I was u remiss in my earlier report this morning. We wanted to give you some an update some stats on Soultopia which happened this past weekend as you know. Um so I've asked Sheriff Brown if he could come up and just kind of give high level overview and the statistics.

Thank you Mona. Thank you Chair Nelson. Members of the board um here to report some good news to you today uh some excellent news and that is that the uh weekend's um festivities in Isa Vista were very manageable. uh were uh a shadow of their former selves in terms of problems and issues. Everything from arrest, citations, medical emergencies, all of that way down in numbers. And I'm going to let uh Commander Schmidt give you those numbers here in just a moment. But um it was a really um it was a great day and it was a good uh uh way to see the community uh in the form of the community services district uh sponsor an event and the university sponsor an evening event that that helped make it very very um 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 was the key to making sure that we had the success uh 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 it.

Good morning, Chair Nelson and Board of Supervisors. Um 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 this had. So in 2025, last year, we had 485 people cited and 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. Um, 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 uh last year. So, that's a 92% reduction. So, um, noise ordinance was effective. This was a a great partnership between stakeholders in Isa Vista, all of us with the primary goal of keeping that community safe and it worked. So, thank you.

All right. Uh, Supervisor uh Caps, please.

Yeah, thank you. I'm so glad you both are here today and uh I want to thank your entire team as as well as the other first responders, Ventura, as well as our firefighters as our um our uh ambulance services that were out there. We Supervisor Nelson, Supervisor Lee, we ought to see it firsthand and there are so many people that were there for the health and safety of young people that call Vista home and it was remarkable to see. Um, I do want to report on the fun side. Not that um I'm the best uh narrator of that story, but um it was really fun and it really was emblematic of the best of Isa Vista coming together. It's a magical place and that was on full display this weekend with Isa Vista Community Service District taking the lead with this Soultopia with strong support from the students uh with strong support from Isa Vista uh recreation and parks district uh so many people coming in with this new Soultopia vision that really paid off that pulled off that with 8,000 people partaking in a safe sanctioned through our board through our county uh festival uh much like the festivals that we have uh around the county, you know, where uh there's bands and a beer garden with, you know, ID being checked, everything. And it just really it came together and it worked. And you know, it I I want to do I want to note that um your teams were out there, many of whom on a holiday weekend for them, Easter weekend, and that's a sacrifice. So, uh, I was able to thank as many of them as possible, but I please extend the thanks because, uh, 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. Thank you. That and um, I just wanted to point out, Chair Nelson, if I could, that those stats that Commander Schmidt gave you, that was for the for the three-day weekend, right? So, that was over three full days. So the uh event itself uh it was an absolute shadow of its former self and it just was a huge success in so many different ways and it it was as a result of the teamwork that uh was uh apparent in so many different aspects of that day. So again kudos and thanks to you for helping make that happen. Yes. Thank you Sheriff Supervisor Lee.

J 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 I appreciate it. So um I So what's the plan for next year? Is it the same type of ordinance partnership?

Yes. Uh we're we're going to also support the Soultopia 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 our staffing. Still have enough staffing to keep the event safe, but it'll be uh 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.

All right. Thank you, Super Lee and Commander Schmidt. Supervisor Hartman. Well, I I just wanted to say we expected this to be an experiment that might take several years to be successful. Um to so to see the great weather. I mean, we used to pray for rain. Um but to see the great weather and and this level of success and I I worried, well, maybe kids are going to be in their rooms and overdosing on drugs and sort of be out of uh the public eye, but that didn't happen either. It was uh uplifting and people wanted to be part of it and I'm just so proud of everybody who contributed. Yes. I think one one of just as a final thought that one of the things that really

uh was evident that it was really a locally based event. We didn't know a lot of out of town people that came and 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 uh Halloween, I think really paid off in this instance. Well done.

Yeah, thank you, Sheriff. And I, you know, as was mentioned before, I I did attend and I just, you know, so many people to be thanked out there. Um, you know, and um obviously I think the top of that list is of course Commander Schmidt that's really took this under his his his wing and then also Supervisor Caps for the political courage. I mean it whole board have to pass it but you know that's your district and obviously it's a tough um decision to make but it was the right one and and I think that that um should be appreciated and honored and so again thank you for everybody on their participation in this. Thank you. And with that we will go ahead and on to department item number one. Madam clerk will you please read department item number one into the record.

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 Richard's Ranch Reorganization Local Agency Formation Commission LFCO file number 24-08 tax exchange arbitration and uh that is it.

Morning chair board Horton with CEO's office. With me are Clara Tobin and Jesse Steel, also with the CO's office, and Deputy Fire Chief Bide and Fire Marshall Tan, as well as public works director Snedden are also available to answer questions. Today, we're presenting the Richard's Rants reorganization and the outcome of the tax exchange arbitration between the county and 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 support 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 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 audit controllers 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 to the arbitration outcome. 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 Orca 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 uncorporated area, the county would expect the parcels to be in the Orcut 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 resident res 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 21 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 1 half mile from the site. Additional provisions address transportation responsibilities and water service within the Orcut 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 negotiations, we also propose a regional housing needs allocation or arena transfer. The city proposal provides for 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 to the county and a 15.7% allocation to the 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 willown analysis on the left column which assumes a 75% allocation of 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 CSA5, 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 CSA5, the north county line district and the mosquito district, the estimated net annual impact to the county is negative2 $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 co cost of fire protection services, and eliminates significant one-time contributions for infrastructure. It also is inconsistent with both the 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 SQA. 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 any public comment on this item? Yes, John 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 the first speaker. We will begin here in Santa Barbara with Chun Woo to be followed by Michael Stotley. Chun, welcome.

Good morning, Chair Nelson, members of the board. I'm Chun Wu, assistant city manager, city of Santa Maria. I wanted to provide uh the city perspective uh to uh the work that's been done over the last year or two. Just want to comment that uh the the work that the city staff had with the county staff uh 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, uh the county states that our offer was lower than the fiscal fiscal analyses. Uh both independent third-party fiscal analyses showed that the county will see an increase in revenue, including the one in which they had extensive input, the wild study. The independent third-party arbitrator commission 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 uh some comments in regards to the CFD fire and inf and infrastructure. You in regards to the CFD uh it stated that the county will forego 425,000 annual revenue if the project develops in the city. However, the the city uh contends that uh the nearby uh city residents uh would not or or should not incur significant uh maintenance and operational costs. In regards to fire protection, as we know, uh this is a shared response. Uh there is information um that uh shows uh that the city continues to provide uh 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 reimburse the county for past and future infrastructure improvements that will serve Orchid. And we think these these improvements carry benefits uh that go far beyond the proposed project. Uh we certainly will follow uh the required fair share approach uh or and or in line with what's governed by AB600. You know, all in all, uh I think um the city has engaged uh with the county in uh in a long process uh with mediation and arbitration and we ask that the county respect uh the information and and the outcome of that process and uh if more time is needed, uh the city asks that uh that we have a continuence to a date certain. Uh this concludes my remarks. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Woo. We will now go to Michael Stolley to be followed by Jeffrey Pemston. Michael,

Chair Nelson, members of the board, good morning and thank you for your time today. Um, this is a little awkward. We actually thought we were going to be coming after uh lunch session. So, um, the vast majority of people that were going to be speaking today are not here. They're actually driving down as we speak. Um, but I will go ahead and try to carry forward. Um, we're respectfully requesting a short date certain continuence 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 Orchid 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. Um the site has been in the county zoned as it is today since the 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 has been no feasible path to development during this that entire time the county has not solved water has not initiated a project has not reszoned the site and has not advanced squa to make it developable even forgoing it as a staff recommendation in the housing element. 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 Nadlesen two independent parties reviewed this tax exchange. In

both cases they showed that the county would be net 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 orchid CFD being used and not in that analysis to show a negative $400,000 loss, we believe and that we should receive a continuance to review this further. Date certain June June June 9th please.

Thank you Mr. Stopppy. We will now go to Jeffrey Pemstein to be followed by Lori Tamura in Santa Maria. Jeffrey.

Morning Chair Nelson and members of the board. I'm Jeff Pemstein. I'm with the National Association of Homebuilders. Appreciate your time this morning. So, um, I'm here, uh, on behalf of our partnership with the Homebuilders Association of the Central Coast and our members at Richard's Ranch. Um, NHB represents 640 chapters around the country and over 140,000 uh, members throughout the US. And our focus is to to support good projects and housing for all. So, um, 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, uh, 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 firsttime home buyers age 40 and we see um, average pricing of housing um, nationally 400,000, a little over 800,000 in in the state and 1.2 2 million in in your fine county. It's 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 Richard's ranch? We generally take on largecale 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 um from our years of experience. I've been in the industry in California for over 40 years. I had a chance to review your your fiscal information and the the good work that was done by county staff and city staff and my former company that I worked for many years ago, Wan 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.

um it seems um it seems in congruous to throw out the baby with the bathwater. So, we're here to offer our support. We're here to offer our guidance. Um we think that um at a minimum trying to continue this discussion and again I would say you're not that far apart. So to um tank a good project um over this last step would seem to be folly. So I would humbly ask your board to um respect and and and uh off and offer the continuence for um for the project to the to the next state certain. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hemstein.

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. Thank you, Lori.

Good morning. Lori Tammora uh with Urban Planning Concepts, uh land use planner in uh Santa Maria Valley and been involved with the Richard's Ranch project for over six years, working with Michael on on moving this project through to uh what we thought would be a successful uh attempt. Uh we have uh gone through the city planning process. Uh we uh went through two rounds of environmental review. Uh in order to respond to comments that were provided by the county. Uh we went through the housing reszone process and uh 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 um we then made a formal application to LAFCO and work through the LAFCO process. Um we know that between the county and the city there were additional steps that this project went through over the last year. In total this project has been through six years of hearings process cost uh community engagement on a number of levels. And we're here today, as was noted, we're at the last step and it um seems like we're very close to an agreement, but uh we want to uh be able to resolve this without having to go back to the the uh new step. I think uh particularly during the housing reszone efforts, this project was discussed

quite heavily with uh the supervisors and there was a lot of community support for it and uh particularly because it includes a commercial component and that was being recommended by the city, the county staff. And so we um think that there's uh a win here for both sides and we hope that uh the board will accept and direct staff to take a continuence for uh two months so that we can resolve these final details. Thank you very much.

Thank you Mr. Mura. 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, um, 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 Joselyn Brennan on Zoom and then we will go to Damen Mavis. Damian, if you can please relog into Zoom, that would be greatly appreciated. Joselyn, hello, Chair Nielson and council members. I think you can hear me. Yes, we can. Please proceed.

Okay, thanks. Um, I am the interim executive director for the Homebuilders Association of the Central Coast, which serves Santa Barbara County. And um we do support the continuence of this item. We strongly support this project, Richard's Ranch. Uh we urge you to take the necessary actions to work with the city of Santa Maria and come to a tax exchange agreement. Um the HBA um 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 and adopted plans and infrastructure availability uh may face unpredictable outcomes creating what we call a chilling effect on development and future investment in the area. Um as outlined in the county staff report, this project proposes 750 uh workforce residential units and an affordable unit. County cannot expect vacant land to be developed under these conditions and other key sites have appropriate appropriately moved through the annexation process um to access needed infrastructure. This project follows that same wellestablished 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 the HBACC and our state national partners NAHB and CBIA consistently advocate for. Efficient use of the infill land within an existing urban footprint. Delivery of both market rate and affordable housing. coordination between jurisdictions to align infrastructure and land use and water

advancement of housing opportunities in a high-cost region. So, please um continue this item and ultimately we hope that you will accept the arbiter's tax exchange determination and allow Richard's ranch project to proceed to LFCco. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Brennan and Chair Nelson, members of the board. We will now go to our final speaker, Damian Mavis. Damian. Hello. This is Damian Mavis. Uh hopefully you all can hear me. We can.

Um good morning, uh Chair Nelson and uh uh other board members. Um my name is Damen Mavis, uh with Coellup. We're a for-profit real estate development specializing in market rate uh affordable housing uh in the St. Louis Vispo area. We've been at it for about 20 years. Uh and we're co-developing this project with Michael Stolty. Uh and what really got me interested in this project was the variety of housing uh that really met an affordable by design uh need in the area as well as uh creating this commercial node for the uh uh in this existing neighborhood. At any rate, we requested um why we requested annexation uh is you know simply 5 years ago 2021 uh there was really no water and unfortunately that really hasn't changed and uh then in looking at uh the virtues of a successful LFCO site we really um meet all of them and uh uh this process of annexation supports the orderly development of the city of Santa Maria as well as uh within the sphere of influence. Uh moving forward to the housing element. Uh we requested to be reszoned uh in the housing element. Uh staff in included our site uh in the housing element as essentially the most uh uh ready shovel ready project in North County. has great infrastructure. Obviously, extensive measure a dollars have been uh spent on it.

Uh and unfortunately, uh we weren't included on in the housing element. Uh we were noted uh that we could potentially become part of it with a development agreement. Uh and we were told that that could be a very short process. uh you know basically back to the board of supervisors by by June I think was the quote. You know we we fully engaged with county staff uh we realized that the timeline was extremely extended uh and we wouldn't be able to to to put it together. Uh so here we are uh you know we've completed SQUA in the city of Santa Maria. Um, you know, what I think unfortunately is a a huge impact of this of the delay of this project is, you know, town homes basically were selling at about $450,000 when we started this process and now they're at about $650,000. You know, that's a $20 million uh increase in in housing costs uh to to to the community and your constituents. and unfortunately they're the ones that really lose uh when we continue to delay this project. So I would echo Michael's sentiment. You know, we would like a continuence to uh June 9th hearing uh to to be able to address these final issues. Thank you very much.

And that concludes uh public comment on this item. All right, back to the board. Um I'll just let my colleagues know. I'm not interested in in a continuence. I think we have the information in front of us to be able to make a decision today. Um that said, um I'll open up to questions from the board of staff and then um we'll go into deliberations after that. Is there additional questions for staff? I do. I see the parking department. Do they have any comments they want to make or say about this?

Supervisor Lee through the chair. Um our desire is to provide public service. So currently through the RFCC we're 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 that is station 21. Um that's without any changes. We have a proposed station 25 which would be just point4 miles away from this site. So our proposed fire service is only improving in the area. Um, 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. Um, 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. That's not something that the city can say. Again, this the resources are going to go no matter where the tax basis falls. Um our 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 those. But I can answer any questions that you might have.

All right. Thank Thank you, Deputy Chief Bide. Any other questions for Jeff the Fire Department? Other questions for staff? Supervisor Caps. Yeah, I just wanted to ask staff to um in light of the the comment about um potential losses or or not um 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 um 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 uh for ongoing revenues. And if you look at the middle proposal, what we propose, we would essentially be revenue revenue neutral. So we would break even on an annual basis. Under the city proposal, uh we would uh there would be a approximately $212,000 loss to the county on on a going basis. And that's that's the ba that's the primary reason why we're recommending not to um accept this tax exchange agreement.

All right. Thank you, Supervisor Caps. Supervisor Hartman. Uh yes. So I'd like to understand a little bit more about the process. So, this this went to mediation. What happened in mediation? We met with the city in good faith, and I I would like to echo uh Jun's comments. The the discussions were nothing but cordial and professional. However, we could not uh come to an agreement in mediation. And so, uh we collectively selected an arbitrator with the city and

so so was there a mediator who rendered some decision? They did not render a decision. We we could not come to agreement, but we did have a a jointly agreed to mediator that facilitated the conversation. Um following mediation, we were not successful. So, we proceeded arbitration. Um were the city and the county presented their last best final offer and ultimately the arbitrator selected the city's offer. And did the arbitrator offer additional rationale for that choice? No.

And um so where does it go next? Um internally this this would end the process is would this go to a court? So what I can say is is from the LAFCO perspective if either the city of the county rejects the tax change offer the annexation application can't be approved by LAFCO. As far as what the next steps are, um I can't speak to that. Okay. Thank you. All right. Thank you.

All right. So, at this time, we'll go ahead and move on to deliberations. Um, you know, since this is in my district, I'm going to go ahead and kick things off on deliberations. Sorry, Mr. Stole. The time for public comment is over. So, um, thank you. You know, I want to just kind of reflect on what happened through the arbitration process. You know, this first came to the board for some direction from us. And I think that um what you saw actually in the arbitration process was actually a bit of a compromise from already the direction from the board where um staff took what the board had which was actually even probably more um leaning towards the county and found some kind of place that they could reasonably defend to us as supervisors but also and to the taxpayers but also to the arbitration process. And so that was what was offered. And I I would think that that would be our county's bare minimum. Um and um you know, I don't even know if I would be able to support that because I think that there's other um policy implications and services delivery there. Um 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 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. Um unfortunately I think um my concern from the beginning that this is going to be hard to accomplish um to both the goals of and of the county. Um I think one of the um public commenters said that you know um support a project that is um 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 one of the what we actually call a key site and they say key site for a reason because it's it's a it's a really important piece of that project. And so um if you look at it, it's a peninsula into the orchid area. It's a a key piece of um Orchid's entire EIR that existed and funding plan around the Orchid community plan. So um it's really important that the county uh honors that plan. Um and so um you know I it brings me no joy that um that that we're here today, but I'm I am going to um eventually make a motion after my colleagues um 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. Uh um my lights on. Oh, sorry. I didn't see you the first Supervisor Hartman. Yeah, I have another question for staff and that has to do with um the request for an extension. Um, do you feel like there's any hope that there could be some kind of common ground found based on the proposal from the arbitrator um this before you today? Um, I staff would not recommend that the county takes a $212,000 annual loss.

Is 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 we're in this in instance, supervisor, we're dealing with the city of Santa Maria. Um the on next steps of this project, the board directed staff to engage with the the developer and the city. We could certainly do that again. But in what's before you today is a tax change agreement specifically with the city of Santa Maria. Um and that's that's what staff's recommending. um your action would be to reject that specific proposal.

But 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 a proposal and that's what's set forth in statute and I I would refer to county council to uh expand on that. Um I I don't see how um extending this process based that the the arbitrator has already found um uh and recommended a proposal that extending the timeline. I I don't see what where what we would do with that. It seems to me that I I that the city might change its position some. It sounds like you uh the county changed its position some. I I guess uh I mean th this has been so problematic from the get-go. Um and it's a site that is a complex site, but it is an infill site. Um, 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 um, I don't feel proud about this.

All right. Thank you, Supervisor Hartman. Um I uh do feel proud about the work that our countyy's done on this and I know it's been a difficult process. Um you know I do think that this um is unfortunate but it's it was potentially predictable and um I'm going to make a motion to adopt staff recommendation A3C and I'll second. Is there any further uh deliberations on that? Should I do a roll call vote?

Okay. All right. Madam clerk, can I do a roll call vote? The motion by Nelson to adopt staff recommendation and a second by Supervisor Lee. Supervisor Caps. I. Supervisor Hartman. No. Supervisor Lee. I and Tre Nelson. Hi. Motion passes 3 to one. All right. Thank you.

We're going to go ahead and get in department item number two before we head to close session. Just give us a moment while we change out staff. Hi, good. Char Nelson and members of the board. Departmental item number two 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. Uh, Commander Schmidt, please.

All right. Good afternoon. Hello again. Um, Commander Schmidt with the sheriff's uh, 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 sheriff's office. And here to present on that is Dr. Cherylyn Lee of the Sheriff's Office behavioral sciences unit. Thank you, Commander. Uh, good afternoon, uh, Supervisor Nelson and, uh, the rest of the board. I'm happy to be here. Um, so I'm Dr. Cherylyn Lee. I am a, uh, police and public safety psychologist and currently serving as the behavioral sciences manager for the Santa Barbara Sheriff's Office. So, uh, here today we are to talk about, um, the joint program between the sheriff's office and behavioral wellness, uh, commonly referred to as county co-response. So, this program, uh, pairs an expertly trained crisis intervention, uh, 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, uh, crises. Uh currently we um have teams that work 10-hour shifts um and they operate from uh 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 um and we have coverage seven days a week countywide. Um in addition to responding to calls that come through 911, um the co-response teams also provide outreach and followup and engage in what's uh commonly known as behavioral threat assessment and management, working with uh individuals in the community who are um of concern and uh have intent to commit targeted violence. The teams are scheduled based on the call volume um that we see through our

CAD dispatch system. Um we generally see the highest number of calls come from South County and Galita area. We um as you can see here the delineation of North County and South County and where the teams are currently operating from. Um when we started our co-response program uh we started off in South County and we have uh continuously grown over the years which I will share with you next. Um the teams dispatch from their respective stations but respond to their entire um area of responsibility and if we are short staffed the team may listen and respond to calls countywide. Um we follow up with individuals uh based on the location of the individual or the exitency and the reason for the follow-up. So this slide takes you through a timeline um 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 uh one clinician that responded to calls one day a week. Uh that program was so popular uh that we were able to continue the pilot and gather data that allowed us to procure a uh over $2 million grant in 2020 which allowed us to field uh the first two full-time teams. In uh December of 2023, we uh went to the CCP, Community Correction Partnership, and we were able to uh procure our fourth team. And you can see um between March of 2024 and uh fiscal year of 26 and 27, we have outlined uh the different funding sources as they have uh changed over the years. And we currently have um two teams un unfunded. Um we have uh one team that uh 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 uh for each of the teams and um where it is the uh fiscal

um where 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. Then you can see the cost uh per special duty deputy for the um expertly trained uh CIT deputies and uh the equipment that they require to do their uh their job. So the program level cost for four teams is about $1.9 million. That's the annual program cost. Um as of right now, um we have uh two teams that are funded through uh the BSEC grant for fiscal year 26 and 27. That was a grant recently procured uh by the sheriff's office uh to fund two teams. Um, as I mentioned earlier, we have a third team that is uh currently going to be voted on on April 22nd uh by the Community Correction Partnership or the CCP. And then our fourth team um as you can see we do not have identified uh funding for to continue uh beyond this fiscal year. So here you see um the corresponds volume um and in terms of volume of calls and so between January 1 and December 31st of 2025 is what uh these numbers cover for the sheriff's office. In total um we received about 4561 uh calls for service where there was a mental health crisis component. of those uh we had uh 270 calls that were covered by one of your four co-response teams. Now um what's particularly unique and exciting I think about the co-response teams is they're not only responding to the mental health uh concerns of the community, but when there is downtime um or um they're otherwise not engaged in a mental health crisis call, they do also assist uh with patrol calls. if they are closest uh 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 the community in mental health. Um 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 uh what we commonly refer to as patrol assists. This is um a chart that shows you the dispositions or what we do uh with the individuals uh 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 uh there were 34 um arrests. Uh there were 322 uh individuals or cases with which we provided follow-up. um 143 individuals, both adult and juvenile, were placed on uh psychiatric holds, so involuntary holds. We were able to safety plan um with 186 individuals. Um that large number, the big purple piece of the pie you see there, voluntary and other, those are individuals that we were able to uh convince uh to go to the hospital voluntarily if that's what they needed or were otherwise uh connected with service providers that they already had or that they needed follow-up appointments for. Um and then you see canceled or no further action. That might mean that a co-response team was in route to a call um and then they were no longer needed on the call um itself. So this is uh the dispositions and that is the conclusion of the formal presentation.

Thank you. Uh questions of the board based on presentation. Supervisor Hartman. Um so I'm trying to understand exactly uh what what people are doing. I mean if I look at the numbers the 270 um that's about six calls a day. Um it's it's not a lot. Um so do do the co-response team, the law enforcement and the bewell employee do they spend the entire shift together uh driving around? Yes, ma'am. With the exception of uh there are times where the clinicians need to do paperwork. Um and so they will be at this uh at their station at their respective offices doing doing said paperwork.

So they each report they each report to their own departments. Is that correct? And they each have administrative responsibilities related to that? Yes, that is correct. Um and do you have a sense of how much relative how much time reporting versus out on the street? Um I believe the the question uh Supervisor Hartman is uh how much time do they spend recording or reporting actually writing reports the administrative part of the job as opposed to the um patrolling and and dealing with instances.

Um I can speak on uh on the sheriff side of that equation. Um we try to minimize the amount of paperwork and only do what's necessary. Um and so it's relatively minimal. I don't have that number uh in front of me, however. And uh do you have um 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 the new name yet. Um but how often people are referred to those? It's sort of in a big category in what you've presented. Sure. Um my understanding is that um 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 I'll ask that in a minute. So, if I understand, the city of Santa Barbara also has two group co-response teams, but if I'm correct, they don't have a person in your position. They each report to uh one to UL 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 I'll I'll ask for follow-up questions, but uh so then could you describe your role?

Absolutely. Um so my role um is I directly supervise uh the deputies that are on the team. Um I provide training, consultation, uh direction and support uh for the deputies on the team as well as the clinicians. And also when there are um high acuity cases or very complex cases, I will get involved in case management and case mitigation and attempt to assist um with dispositioning the case. Um 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 to jail, um I will often call Wellpath and help be a conduit and try to support that individual um upon their release. And when we have particularly acute individuals going to hospitals, I will also liazison with the hospitals and ensure that they have the information um in the field um from the co-response teams and help manage the case as is appropriate.

So you supervise the law enforcement um but be well still does the the um the the professionals on on the mental health side.

Correct. Um, so I had an opportunity u to do a ride along recently and it was really uh in the Galita area and what I learned was interesting in that many of the calls that law enforcement gets are our community welfare. I mean it it's um you know you have to be ready for that dramatic moment of violence but in in my case it was a 76 year old woman who was lost from her husband a suicide um that was being threatened. It it seems to me that our officers um have a huge range of things they have to deal with and um a lot of them are mental health and and and responding to um issues that can be deescalated and it seems to me that um the CIT training is really critical and uh I I understand that that's not happening as much. Could could you describe that once once you're finished, Dr. Lee, I'd love to hear from both our sheriff and our uh our Bwell Sure.

director, but um if you could answer that,

happy to speak to it. Um we are currently um in uh the midst of a grant uh where we have uh the funding to uh have two full-time 40hour CIT courses. uh one of which we finished last month I believe um and the other one is scheduled for the first week of June. Um in that course we will have um a full uh array of sheriff's deputies. Um whereas previously we would have uh municipalities also attend the course. Um now this course is being offered just for our sheriff's office uh employees or deputies. Um so we are currently doing crisis intervention training and that's the 40hour model. All of our deputies also have the eight hour CIT training as well. And do we know the proportion relative uh 40 hours versus eight hours of the law enforcement?

Uh yes ma'am we do have that number. I do not have it in front of me. Okay. And then could I if if any of my questions have generated any thoughts for the sheriff and and director Navaro.

So um thank you um CEO Monasado and chair Nelson and board. Um, 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. Uh, I know that John Winkler does have some um data and specifics on um the the types of calls and number from our dashboard that that he can share with you if you have more specifics. But I think um in terms of the Santa Barbara PD model that you asked about, I wanted to to give you some context and information on that program. There are two um positions that uh are assigned to the Santa Barbara PD. They actually um are in a partnership with us. They have some grant money and we we pay for one clinician and they pay for one clinician currently. Uh and um they ride together all day long. They are a team together and uh in 2025 alone those two teams uh encountered 981 unique individuals and of those 981 um only 149 required uh hospitalization and all of those were done of course by our clinician those those involuntary holds the 911 in unique individuals does not include all the encounters because this is a team that does proactive followup with each case I jump question 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.

I don't have the numbers of arrests on that. Sorry to interrupt. Please continue. But I can get that information to you. Um, so that that is how that model that operates. And how how is law enforcement in Santa Barbara and the be well or mental health people the supervision?

Our folks are supervised by our staff. Um they're part of the crisis services team under um the supervision of Connor Pierce and um branch chief John Winkler and the officers in Santa Barbara PD. Uh there's a com I I think it's commander um and I'm I don't nab the name of the commander. They had a change in leadership there that oversees their two officers. and and does that ever lead to issues where where you I mean I guess that's the collaboration and that's really what is um the challenge and the reward of this program is that you've got two different departments coming together with two different skill sets from Chief uh Gordon I have not heard any concerns um in fact they are very happy with the program and um to speak to the uh display of the funding and the teams Santa Barbara um be well we are funding all teams for co-response both with the sheriff and uh the 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 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. But

and and does the city of Santa Barbara have a position like Dr. Lee's? No. And and so how is that function um served? It's part of their community services team. Um I think the leadership of part of her community services division and 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 um at one point we were looking at what role fire could play and you were looking at the city of St. Louis and just wonder if you could give us an update on what you learned there.

Yeah. Well, what we learned is that um uh that it's a great model up in St. Louis and they do have them responding with with fire. We worked here uh uh branch chief Winkler along with Susan Grimacey, our chief strategy officer, put together a great CIT training for the fire department and we were rolling and we were going to start with a pilot of just a couple of days a week similar to how the Santa Barbara sheriff co-response um started with Bwell. 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 we were very pleased with, they have not yet been able to re-engage with us to start the pilot of of one or two times a week, but we did learn from them that roughly um a number of their calls, what was it 25, I can't remember the number of calls, but they have a significant um percentage of calls that they respond to that are primarily behavioral health in nature. So, it seems like a good a good partnership and we hope to be able to

we'll we'll continue looking at that. And Sheriff Brown, did you have any thoughts?

Um, I I do. Uh, Supervisor uh Hartman through the chair. Um, I just want to kind of recap here that the the reason for the co-response teams are really uh to improve crisis response and to make sure that we deliver two types of uh first responders, if you will, to someone who is in crisis in the field and that is the uh the law enforcement officer and the clinician. What that allows is for um a model that uh 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 uh emergency room visits. They build community trust by providing onseene expert assessment and deescalation. And the reality is even though um 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, they're oftent times very very uh uncertain as to what's actually going on. Can be very volatile and uh can be very dangerous. And so it's important uh we believe to have the law enforcement element there with uh the clinicians going out. And I think if you were to pull the clinicians themselves, they would they would tell you that they feel much more comfortable in that environment than if they were to go out there on their own.

They have.

And um but in any event, um our model has been um has been really a very positive one. And uh it hasn't been without uh 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 um as a result of their levels of cooperation and I'm I'm sure that I speak with for Tony and myself that we're both committed to this and making this a successful project uh uh endeavor that's a partnership between our agencies and it's not needed all the time, but it is needed many times in in in the scheme of things. And so we want to make sure that we have a system that provides um this as part of the response, part of the options that we have. We we have the other uh contracted services and other responses that are available. But uh nevertheless, we think this is an important component and I think that um many members of the community particularly in the mental health community feel strongly about it as well. Uh the other thing I wanted to just mention is and I just wanted to make make it recap it. It was on the slides, but uh we do not have funding for that fourth team's sheriff's deputy uh in the current budget. And as you're aware, there's significant challenges along with the budget as well. So it in unless there is some uh change to that uh this will be a future we'll be looking at in the next um couple of years with three teams and not four for the county but um for the county unincorporated areas and contract cities. But the uh the good news is that that funding from uh the sheriff's office is in hand and is also in hand with um uh behavioral wellness as well. So for the next two years, probably the two most challenging years that we're going to have countywise, um we have things taken care of as far as those

frontline services. Thank Thank you, Sheriff Brown. Uh Supervisor Capsson, 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 and just it's so innovative and then I actually before I started uh uh Sheriff Brown I visited the jail upon your invitation and I remember that you highlighted this program that was a presentation I um just so impressive um and so my question is is is very basic and it's really about what qualifies as a mental health call uh I will share my bias that as a 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 re 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 do how is that distinguished? Uh how how do you make the call that one is a mental health call and one isn't? And with that I would ask how um could you potentially expand so that more calls are referred to these teams because I understand sometimes they're sitting idle.

Um Supervisor Caps through the chair. Thank you. Thank you for that question. Um, we have worked diligently over the last eight years with dispatch uh to be able to define what it is from a dispatch perspective that would count as a mental health crisis call. Generally speaking, when somebody calls um and their loved one is in crisis, they'll tell us um that my loved one has uh bipolar one disorder or my loved one is experiencing psychosis. They're very um verbose. And so when we get that information, that that gives us an indication. You know, oftentimes we don't know um 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-response is that when there's an active call for service and it sounds like it might be mental health, the clinician can look up um 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 we can go ahead and um proceed um ac you know as as we need to um within the dispatch system um if there are certain words um like hospitalization or schizophrenia or bipolar or different things like that and I can get you the list of what all that is exactly um we would put that in what we call the mental health bucket um and then those would be the calls that we would um uh categorize as being primary mental health and and you're right most calls uh in some way, shape or form um could probably be uh considered mental health when people are in crisis. Generally speaking, um their mental health is not doing well. Um but what we're particularly uh good at working on is the individual with primary mental health, like a serious and persistent mental illness. Um 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 um of that. I mean, I guess what I'm getting at is is it is it common uh that a call is made and the thought is sort of, oh, that would have been great

to have a clinician there after the fact because I I can't imagine that that it's sort of identified. How how often is it identified by the the person calling? Oh, my my spouse is schizophrenic or oh my I mean 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 a sit situation.

Sure. I just some data just that speaks to that point that um behavioral wellness has been tracking um since last year with the mobile crisis benefit and uh our reset to the access line in terms of uh taking the mobile crisis benefit calls. You know this a new mandated service through the state. We've have 40% of our calls are coming from law enforcement in the field. There may not be a co-response clinician available or the at the time. So we are the law enforcement across the county is reaching out to our access line for like this is not us this is mental health can you send your team. I see. So it's not the uh consumer or the the the person.

So 60% of the calls are coming uh the majority of them I think another almost 50% are coming from the community and family members. Um and about 20 about 20 about 40%. So about 20 more% are coming from the hospitals, about 40% from law enforcement, about 40% from the community calling the access line. But we have that um 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 um our community to also understand times when you could call um just the access line directly if there's not a co-response team available to you. 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 explain. And Supervisor Caps, if I could just add to that as well,

um the the teams that we currently have and certainly moving forward with three are not they don't they're not 247. We can't cover every hour of the day. Yeah. And so there are going to be times where uh sheriff's deputies do respond to to calls and there is no clinician available to respond immediately with them or a co-response team in which case we'll notify u behavior wellness and mobile crisis will respond. But uh in the times when mobile crisis is available, uh 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. Okay.

To come and handle that call. Okay, that's helpful. Thank you.

One I'd like to just piggyback on some of this conversation about those calls and that's what's really important. what Dr. Lee's providing in your department with the training, the 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, you know, there's all these different factors that are that are pushing in on there. And you know because it seems that having the co-response team is the first option that would be great to have you know the max amount of resources but if there you know at least secondarily is you know having those that have gone through the 40hour 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 an investment that 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 and that we could we need to to do to more. Um I've got a couple of questions, but I just kind of want to help set the stage that you know um I actually asked for this item come to the board um if we were looking at potentially cutting one of these positions because I really wanted to make sure that we had this presentation for us um last time that we had this type of presentation. Um 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 was really important to to highlight this and bring this back, you know, to the top of mind for all of us to see how important to it is. Um to me, you know, I find this humane and important, but also a cost-savings um tool because, you know, that deescalation often means, you know, no hospitalization, which we all know how expensive that is, right? I mean, that's that's hitting our budgets. But then there's also the jail side if we arrest somebody and then what that does um to our you know, we're all talking about trying to lower our staffing numbers. We can't reduce this and then say that we want less beds, right? Right. So I mean these are things that we're this is one of the mechanisms that we use to potentially reduce beds is having these deescalation 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 when it's not in a co-response? Um, is that because I I think I remember before that it's typically a higher percentage

are arrested with contact with the with absolutely is a higher without the team it would be a much higher arrest if we were just handling it with sheriff's deputies alone. I I don't know that I don't have those numbers. I don't know if Dr. Lee does at present but we 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? I mean we did we did this analysis and it was a pretty impressive presentation. I think we'd also and if you look and it's still pretty significant if you go back to the pie chart. Yep. 2%. You see that the numbers of actual arrests were 34 out of 1420 contacts. That's

a very very limited number of of people. And unfortunately sometimes there are there just no alternative to to the arrest. If the a serious crime has been committed, you know, something that and the person is is is still a danger, there's there really isn't an alternative to the arrest. So, uh, 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, deescalate, and use any alternative that they can to uh incarcerating someone. But sometimes, as I've said many times to you before, our 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 and that's that part is going to continue no matter what form we have to respond to a call

and and it's not ideal but it you know it is one of the the treatment options actually is is jail you know obviously you guys now have the Matt treatment for everybody that's eligible there and so that's also a program that you guys are running so you know I just you know want to commend your department on how being innovative in this area you know I just um you know I think and I I'll get to you of course um Director Navaro is that you know community policing this is kind of this is what this is is the heart of that and so you know um you know responding to what's going on in a community and with with somebody and some so many of our um police officers are often social workers but now we're putting the training around it and actually sometimes actually including a social worker um and so I think that's really a big part of that social that community policing model director did you want to make some comments on

I also wanted to um just touch briefly and address um supervisor Hartman's comments around the relatively low number of calls for co-respon response. It's averaging it's just under six a day uh in the county for four teams. Um and so I think and and to speak to the to the comments that um Dr. Lee made regarding um currently they're not necessarily at the same place all the time or writing 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 of the models in terms of more interaction and and um uh more contacts with folks ongoing through the Santa Barbara PD co-response model that that is a commitment we have moving forward to really looking at how we can better um keep the teams together during the day and really proactively responding to areas where we know folks who are ga that gather that tend to have a higher level of need and crisis that is also a place where co-response teams intervene and that's the the the national model and 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 um directly with clients is not um the most costefficient and effective and 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 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 are now going to now go to jail. And so I think that that's the where that cost. I mean, I I see this as almost an insurance policy, you know, that we have that in place so that um 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, um these aren't widgets. These are people and you know, um I don't mind, you know, if they're the right cases, then that's that's a great number. You know, if it's if it's solving the problem, I want to solve the problem, not necessarily just, you know, fit into a spreadsheet. Um supervis or sorry, Sheriff Brown, and I want to get to Supervisor Hartman.

Yeah. And I think the analogy is also very similar to the the fire department. You have fire stations that are, you know, staffed with firefighters and some of them get a handful of calls a day. Y and they don't respond, but they're always there and always available when a big call comes in.

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 recordkeeping. Things are different for us than they are for uh behavioral wellness. Behavioral wellness looks at it in a very clinical, you know, is this a clinical call? Is this something that uh you know, required our people? Is this something that we can ultimately uh bill in terms of medical and what have you? Our our response is really is this a call that uh was appropriate for our people to go to, did it save uh other deputies having to go to a call and did it leverage the limited number of people that we have as well. And understanding that many of these calls that they 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, you know, familiar with that person, but somebody's screaming or creating a disturbance. By the time we get to the scene, that person's gone. So, doesn't mean that there wasn't a call or a need to get them out there. It just means that they weren't there when the team arrives. Same with someone or if if 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 uh have somebody to go out. So, I think it's you got to look at it from the whole system and the uh perspective of being able to respond and particularly those calls that we have had where there u there's absolutely no doubt that lives have been saved. people who have had su suicidal ideiation and are about to commit suicide. Very very dramatic one where a guy was up in a tree with a ne a rope around his neck and ultimately did jump. But because the team was there, we were able to uh get to that person, cut that rope, get that person down and save that person's life. Without without the team, it it probably wouldn't have had the same outcome.

Thank you, Sheriff Supervisor Hartman. Then I want to get to public comment. Yeah, a couple of questions comment. Um, how do you how do you choose those officers and those clinicians for this job? Do they volunteer?

Sure. Um, I think um, 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 um, to be in it ongoing. So, we have a testing process. Um we're actually opening a recruitment right now. One of our deputies had a service uh retirement and so um it's like any other position at the sheriff's office. We have folks that want that position. Um 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. Um, a lot of the deputies have personal um, as well as professional experience with mental health um, in their families and so they're they're deeply motivated uh, to be a part of the solution for this. So, it's because they want to be a part of it on the 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 run a co-response team and a member of a team that will respond with law enforcement in the field um, to mental health crisis. Yeah, I I just um had a comment, I guess, and then a a observation. Um I'm proud to be from Santa Barbara County because um we don't have a problem with abuse of force and we don't have problem people do know how to our law enforcement officers do deescalate and they bring that to the job every day. I was going door todo in Galido one time and I knocked on a woman's door and she proudly told me that her son was a police uh with the sheriff's and he was in the co-response team and uh so there's there's a lot that uh we we are really committed to this the community as a whole and I think that it's um I I think officers have been doing this for a long time but I think to have an additional skill set and support around them to do it with even more knowledge is is is extremely helpful and and I think the job satisfaction on that side is really good. But I worry that on the clinician side, the mental health professionals that um their job satisfaction may not be as good. I think that they're sort of tagging along and and 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 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 uh on. Yeah. Thank you. We definitely have identified those those uh differences between uh some of the teams locally and um we have a commitment to working on those more collectively this year.

Darkley,

um if I can also uh comment on that real quickly. Um Supervisor Hartman through the chair. Um, our clinicians are very very excited to to work with our deputies. It's great to see the relationships that they've built. Um, and in fact, uh, once a month we have crisis negotiation training, um, with the specialized team at the sheriff's office. And it's often our co-response clinicians that are there assisting um, with the training, observing the training, um, giving feedback. They assist in the CIT training that we do when we run scenarios. So, they are there as actors. There's al they are also there as evaluators for the deputies that are exercising the deescalation skills that they just learned. And so we have uh in no uncertain terms incorporated them into the sheriff's family um and give them as much training and exposure um in working together uh that we can.

Thank you. Thank you, Dr. Lee. Okay, I think we want to open up to public comments so we can hear from the public on this uh 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 going to go ahead and close public comment on this item. Maria,

good afternoon super good afternoon chair Nelson and supervisors. I am the chair of the Santa Barbara County Behavioral Wellness Commission uh fifth district. I am also a NAMI member and family-to-f family teacher as outlined during both the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Office and behavioral wellness co-response presentations um to the behavioral wellness commission and today it was 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 deescalation lowered incarceration rates and most importantly gradual trust by the Santa Barbara County families in the correspondence teams to provide this without jeopardizing anyone involved. Pairing trained CIT trained law enforcement with clinical um expertise allows for deescalation onseene 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 non-violent situations. We thank the sheriff's office and BWwell

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 can you hear me? We can.

Thank you. Um co-response CIT training and um Laura's law, the assistant outpatient treatment program have been our uh NAMI um uh signature um advocacy um initiatives for the past several years. um first to advocate for for getting those programs and then over the years to to to retain them and and strengthen them. Um, I can tell you that, um, my colleagues in other California counties are envious of course 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. Um, I don't often uh uh tell our family uh story, but I think um there there's an event regarding co-response that's illustrative of why this program is so important to our family members. Um my daughter um who's 41 years old um lives um uh happily and successfully in independent living. Um and 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 uh she was voluntarily homeless. So I can look back on the time before co- response and and and and I know how difficult that

was. Um, coincidentally, uh, shortly after we got the pilot program, um, she, uh, was off her, um, psychiatric medication. And when that happens, she deteriorates pretty quickly. Um, and, uh, she, uh, she she gets in a disoriented state where she no longer knows she needs to eat. And, um, she was, uh, afraid um, of going to the hospital. And so she went out and uh and and she hid out at a a friend's house who was away out of county um on work and um so the co-response team went there and uh she wouldn't answer the door um and they um had to go through uh a bedroom window in order to get to her. and she was very frightened and uh 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. Um but they were able to calm her down and get her safely to the hospital. Um and this is not um although you know this was a unique experience for us um it it it's not a oneoff event um in mental health crisis and we just value this program and these teams so much it's hard for me to express how very important it it is to us to 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.

Okay, I'm going to do something that I don't usually do. I'm just I'm 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 and committed than you have. And I we want to thank you for that. We also want to thank you and the executive's office and the two departments, the sheriff's 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 stop gap 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 uh during the uncertain financial climate that we all find ourselves in right now. So, um you'll hear more from us next week, but but right now, I just want to say thank you on behalf of the community. And we will now go to Tom Franklin who is our final speaker on this item. Tom,

Chair Nelson, members of the board, my name is Tom Franklin. I'm president of NAMI Santa Barbara County. And exactly what George said. Um, 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, uh, knowing that law enforcement may respond, which is very different from a lot of other jurisdictions. um 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, um I'm pretty much a perfect example of how this program works. Any deputy that's been assigned to the Sanz Valley has been to my house. Um for the past 10 years, I've been calling 911. Um, 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. Um, you know, there's never any abuse or anything like that. But now it's like magic. What the officers do, what 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 the officers talk them down, talk him 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 um when we call 911, I've had the dispatcher from 911 stay on the line with me and wait till somebody arrives, which is amazing. I've called the access line when the access line uh dispatcher stays on the line with me. This works. This system works. So, thank you. Thank you, Miss Franklin. And that concludes public comment on this item.

All right. Um, back to the board. Um, I have a quick question. I think Supervis has question about the positions that we're looking at next year. We're funded with three positions now. Um, the fourth positions unfunded. Um, where would those positions go? Um, because we have right now two north, two south, and would the one I don't know, maybe that's not for public consumption yet, but do you guys have any idea what where that fourth if that's unfunded? Um, yes. So based on call volume, if we were to um exist with three teams only if the fourth one were to remain unfunded, um we would have two in South County and one in North County just based on on the call volume most likely

based on call volume. Okay. If you guys were using that as a criteria, um and that's even with having two teams in Santa Barbara. So there would actually kind of be four teams in the south coast and one in the north. And just based on call volume is and director Naro is that yeah, our Ball clinician is funded for four team. that person would just be assigned to the crisis services team and operate in in in the mobile crisis benefit.

All right. Okay. I just wanted to make sure I just want to that on the table of what we're looking at um just so we knew and um you know the comment I would make for um Greg and to Tom you're fine Dr. Lee um is uh you know I I know you guys said you felt uneasy up until this day. Um I'm going to feel uneasy up until June to be honest with you guys as we move through this budget process. um you know some of these this fourth position not being yet funded um is and we have other challenges at the board is a concern. Um even the whole unit within the sheriff's department is um has some threats fiscally and so um you know even though you hear it from all of us there are going to be some really tough decisions we're going to have to make as a board and trying to balance a budget and having to have competing priorities. So, um, again, I 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 I think I think we all we all know that. Um, so I I just want to make sure you guys know that today's not approving funding for that fourth position and everything's okay. Um, we understand, but we also understand other challenges as well. And I want to make sure the public understands that. Um, Supervisor Hartman.

Yeah. Two points I still want to explore. And the first one, uh, Chair Nelson, you you started to touch on, um, we have greater call volume in South County, but our population and really, uh, I don't understand why we we have that differential, and it's my understanding. I know LMPoke doesn't have co-response. I 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?

Uh, Supervisor Hartman through the chair. Yeah, the call volume in LMPoke is a lot lower. We do um have co-response there in the um sheriff's jurisdiction. So, not the city of Loke. two days a week. One of our response teams does operate out of LMPoke and and takes care of the unincorporated area of Lampoke. Um, but we have mobile crisis teams that cover LMPoke and obviously Santa Maria and Santa Barbara. Um, I'm not sure if that answered your question. Well, it's I I it's just a matter of resource allocation. And if we have two teams in the city already of Santa Barbara and 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 is greater. And I would think um that people in North County aren't that much more mentally healthy than down here. So um tell me what's going on.

Yeah, I mean I think we will continue to look at the call volume and 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. Um we have mobile crisis coverage and we track our response times um on a regular basis and if we see response times you know going up then we would make changes in the in the staffing allocation. So are you having more um mobile crisis unit calls in North County or is it about equal or how does that

um actually we get more calls in South County too from mobile crisis. So South County is higher than Santa Maria and then LMoke is is then smaller than that. I don't really know exactly why that is to be honest. If it's 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 um even outside mobile crisis. Um 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 um just that experience with who may respond. And so I think that that's why it's been really um a priority of ours in Bwell for the last three years to make sure that we're focusing on a crisis system that uplifts all options for everyone. And while I appreciate that 911 may be uh 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 um if their loved one is in is is experiencing some kind of crisis. Um and so there's that that we have a full range is the most important is the most important piece. And yes, we do have um that would be four teams in the south, but we do have a a larger some large unincorporated area here in the south county that we definitely I think one team is definitely needed um 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? Go ahead.

If I can rem Yeah, mine's a little bit stale, too. I know one of the recommendations was that we have regular um supervisory and management meetings and that's something that we did implement and we are having those meetings on a regular basis. Um 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 we're trying to track. That as you know has been a challenge the two departments um Sheriff Brown has mentioned that two different missions, two different ways of you know looking at the data and the importance of the data with both departments. But I think we've we've gotten a lot closer to having some shared metrics and targets that we're that we're 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 Navaro mentioned, really tightening up the ship with with the co-response teams. Um looking at how some of the other co-response programs in the state are working. Um, we did do a presentation to the CCP last week around making some um, changes to how we're allocating um, calls to co-response and using co-response more for some jail discharge um, 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 that transfer. Um, doing more of that. So, increasing the utilization of the teams um specifically through um a closer relationship with the jails and that's something that we're we're going to be moving forward not just with the CCP funded team but with all of the corresponds.

Thank you. I 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 in the most productive way that we can. And I 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 in North and South, but I also think that because, you know, NAMI's had such a big footprint down here and they the advocates have been so vocal down here, it's there's a bit greater awareness and, you know, that's one of the things I'm 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 and and um so again, it's something that um I can't say it's an absolute, but it's definitely going to be one of my priorities as we look at our budget this year is is trying to have that fourth team fully funded and as well as supporting um you know the training that we have within the sheriff's department to make sure that um those that are being responded to are um fully um prepared and and equipped to do that. Um any other questions from the board or any further comments? Um seeing none, um this is just a receive and file. We're not going to make any recommendations today. No decisions on any funding or or whatnot, but um 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 this really important successful program. So with that, I'll take a motion to um a for staff recommendation A and B receive and file and not a project in a squa. So moved.

Second. Okay. Uh any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed. Motion passes unanimously. All right. So, we're going to transition into close session. But for the purposes of agenda management, um we're going to hear the film commission item. I think it's D4 immediately after close session before we go to long-range planning. So, I just want to make sure planning staff doesn't doesn't realize they're not going to be first up, they'll be second up. That'll 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, um, Madame County Council, will you please read the items that we will be discussing in close session today?

Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the board. In close session today, the board is scheduled to hear two items of existing litigation. The estate of Michael John Oxner versus the county and Gulp Oani 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 0813019 and 060. Um our agency negotiator, general services director Kirk Loggerquist with negotiating party Sanjay Gar with on behalf of um owner Gaviota terminal company and under negotiation or price and terms of payment. And we also have conference with labor negotiators for all bargaining units, underrepresented employees, managers and executives, the agency designated representatives, our CEO Monomyato and human resources director Christine Schmidt.

Yeah, I would say it's between an hour and an hour and a half, but yeah, our best estimate is an hour and 15 minutes. Knock it out real quick.

Welcome back to the April 7th meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors in the Santa Barbara hearing room. Um, we're coming back from close session. Madame County Council, will you please report out on actions taken in close session? Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the board. The board met in close session. Two items of existing litigation, Oxner versus the county and Galpa Yagani versus Curtis. Um, one case on deciding whether to initiate civil litigation, conference with real property negotiators for 1689 Highway 101 and conference with labor negotiators for all bargaining units, underrepresented employees, managers, and executives. And the board took no reportable action.

All right. Thank you. And as announced before uh close session, we're going to go slightly out of order and skip to department item number four. Items uh item by uh supervisor Lee's office and kick it off with Mr. Cooper and Chair Nelson, members of the board. So, please read it in the record. Thank you.

Departmental item number four is from Supervisor Lee. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding anformational presentation regarding the establishment of a Santa Barbara County Film Commissioner. Good afternoon, uh, chair, supervisors. Before you today are two of Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors, uh, most dramatic staffers to give you a presentation on a Santa Barbara County film commissioner. We concur.

At a high level, uh, this is a pretty straightforward issue. Got to make sure that that works. There we go. Uh, this is a pretty straightforward issue. Santa Barbara County is already a worldclass 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, um, a little history of Santa Barbara County's filming, uh, background. Uh we had in the 1900s we had the Flying A Studios that was set up down um off Mission Street in Santa Barbara and this was kind of called Hollywood before Hollywood. So this was the largest mo movie studio in California and filmmakers flocked to the county for their diverse landscape. So, rolling hills for westerns, uh, 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 a thousand films in 10 years. Uh, and they helped establish California as the center of the film industry. Um, 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. Monaceto stood in for Miami and Scarface. Stern's Wararf saw an alien invasion in My Favorite Martian and most recently La Parisima 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 8 billion in activity 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 prep Oh, I went ahead. Today, productions often have to navigate uh 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 peritty department, who uh is represented here today, the peritty department by Lisa Plowman, uh to answer questions at the end of our presentation. Uh 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. Uh 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, a single point of contact for helping producers and productions. navigate permitting, timelines, requirements as well as being a source of guidance on locations. Uh 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? Um and hopefully the impact is raising our profile. Um, we want the county and our incredible cities to uh 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. Uh, a great example is Sideways and what has been dubbed the sideways effect. So um in 2004 the Oscar-winning film Sideways was shot almost entirely in Sanz Valley and it ushered in substantial economic benefit benefits almost overnight. Uh in just one year the visitation in the valley went up by 20% and sales of Pino Noir increased 16% nationwide. Um, 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 be being able to work collaboratively with the state film commission to harness data. Um you can see on the board here one of the regional expenditure reports from Big Little Lies. This is the first season. Um county in county filming the total direct spend was $2.24 million. By the second season that had grown to $3.69 million with $2.4 million in hotels, which uh with our toot rate would be about $340,000 going directly to the county. That's on top of $334,000 in location and permitting fees. So that works out to $675,000 in direct uh to the county for just one season of one show. So our board letter uh 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. uh ideally and possibly in collaboration with the city of Santa Barbara as a co-unded 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 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 a 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.

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 lowhanging fruit and bringing some muchneeded 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. Um I just want to say great work. I know the two of you in the office has been re re working hard at this and um very interesting conversation in our office about this. But first I want to ask um 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. Uh supervisor Lee through the chair. So um 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. Um, so when they come in after they submit their application, it can take anywhere between two uh 3 days to two weeks. Um, and then the people that that we spend time with, 15 to 20 minutes per person who doesn't know where 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 um about 50% of those or half of those we are able to help them find um either get their permit or find a location. So there's there is an untapped um resource there. Um so my team estimated that we probably lose out on 25 to 50 film permits a year.

Wow. Um, and then I can tell you in terms of permit application and fees, in 2024, we brought in around 63 $64,000 into the department for those applications. And then in 2025, it was closer to 59,000. So, a slight decline. Got it. Do you think there's a what's the e economic impact from those filming in our county? Do you have a number on that? I don't have a number on that. I just have information about permitting. Yeah. Well, we don't have any way of capturing that data. Yeah. Part of the purpose of of this. So, we're

hopeful that uh 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 Caps. Sure. Um well, first um my congratulations to you. I think this is exactly how um our eight hour rule is supposed to work that if if it will take more from staff than to put this proposal together like you have and present it. Um so I really appreciate the great staff work out of D1. Um, I I guess I'm um I see the the I I think there's kind of a magic around film and and everybody it's bigger than life and we're excited about it and I certainly uh appreciate that and would like to see more of that in our beautiful county. But I I am daunted by this budget season and whether this would be the priority right now. I 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, we have the state uh fish and wildlife, uh the the reservation forest service. So, I mean, there's lots of jurisdictions, and I'm 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. Um, uh, Director Plowman noted the, um, and I'm just I I'm really for this idea over the long run whether I 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. Um, so I guess it keeps people employed. Um but but that so so you get basically you get the rent what's the count what's financially in it for the county. We would get the rent

for our roads or parks or or things that we own that we could we could get. I I don't know if permits we can charge more for film permits than than actually uh cost reimbursement. Supervisor Hartman through the chair. We can't charge more than it costs us to process the permit.

Okay. So, so then that's for direct economic impact. That's not a source of revenue. And and then we do get hotel and toot. 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. Um, again, I'm 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. Um, so I if if staff has time, I I think it's will it would be great to kind of establish a foundation here. I I'm wondering if the film festival if if they could if this would fit within their Bailey Wick at all if if we had a good partner. I know we also have um the nature track film festival which is growing and then there's another um film festival in in Galita and and so we have a lot going on and how to kind of get our arms around it and 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 I am eager to look forward uh to more analysis. And if I could respond to just just a couple parts of that,

pardon me. The the goal with the film commissioner was not uh 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 I want to make sure that I I directly address is one of the real advantages to having a film commissioner. We if you could put the slide back up there for one sec. I don't know how that works or not. So this is uh shot at the I I think your district at the Laisba mission. So it's on state land. Um, 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, we could work collaboratively with the state to make sure that we were we were essentially finding those services and needs for for um productions that were going on on state lands. So now we have we don't have any way of even collecting that data. We we don't know other than anecdotal evidence how long they shot, how many nights they got of toot, where they stayed, what they did. Maybe they all stayed in uh Napomo. I mean, we don't really know. And so that's one of the other advantage of this is addressing exactly um what you're bringing up there.

Great. Thank you, Mr. Cooper. Supervisor Caps. Yeah, I I appreciate I mean first of all uh I applaud the creativity and the fact that you all are putting together fresh brand new ideas uh that I haven't heard of. Uh but I have heard a lot um from folks like Peter Roupert and others about the need for economic development and the fact that we don't have a designated department in this county and we don't we certainly do it in a lot of ways um and we all are for it but to provide more emphasis in such a niche way which was a very small amount which I clearly would see would pay for itself immediately I would imagine um is brilliant I think. And so my question would be uh have you or would you consider you referenced all of the talent that exists here already with um directors, producers, writers, so many people from Hollywood who live here either full-time or part-time or have retired here. Uh I could see many of them becoming really involved in this at the beginning. Um 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. Uh, 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 is with our initial film commissioner creating an advisory committee. Yeah.

And um structuring the advisory committee such that we had a lot of experienced people getting involved and essentially helping us to do some of that outreach work because uh 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 are aware that you know we're we're a more hospitable, friendlier place to shoot and please come. And a lot of that um can be done with the assistance of some of the absolutely incredible people who've been living in our county for a long time who are really um dedicated to this community who would be willing to to help out and and we've had a couple of light conversations but um have not explored it sort of beyond part of a a bigger structure.

Okay, it's great. Thanks.

Thank you, Supervisor Caps. Uh, I like Supervisor Hartman, you know, um, love the idea. Obviously concerned about cost, but I think what you guys are talking about is more than just cost. You guys you guys are talking about authority and having somebody with a title to speak on behalf of the county, to be a coordinator, to be a cheerleader, to be a um, a convenor. And so with that title as a Santa Barbara County Film Commissioner and I think, you know, somebody looks up in our area doesn't know the difference between Galita and Santa Barbara sometimes, right? in 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 Monaceto now and now you're back on on you know on into city of Santa Barbara and and work those things out that without that local knowledge wouldn't be would be very difficult for somebody. So totally support the concept, definitely support moving forward with uh coming together with a a budget um and some numbers. You know, um I think over this next two years, it's probably really important to engage with other parties on the cost. Um you know, I I think the the county contribution would if if there's any money would be very minimal that we could we could go in this, but I think at least creating the office the office build the structure for it. I think the funding eventually will come and eventually, you know, if you guys especially can fund it with other funds, um I think it it will have that proof of concept and 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 toot increases and whatnot. So very supportive of what you guys are trying to do. Um thank you, Supervisor Lee, for your leadership and your staff's um engagement on this. This is not only eight hour rule, but you know, I always talk about our role is we're we're we're legislators, too. I mean, and so you're taking that that mantle and actually bringing, you know, what's policy to the board, which I think is um I love it when we do that because I think it really is um bringing policy from the people to county government. And so that's exactly what we should be doing. So, thank you,

Sue Resley. Thank you. I I appreciate the support. And remember, it takes money to make more money, right? And that's our genesis of this conversation. I we do have many people in my district that want to highlight the best of our county and I think we have the best people here to be able to do that. Just giving Daisy and Wayey 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 the best and um yeah I did want to mention I did want to mention that uh Rocket Man was um filmed at Santa Marie airport. So just make sure next next next presentation it's really important to us. I I will make sure we get we get Rocket Man there

and the and the Spirit of St. Louis was filmed at the Santa airport as well. So another classic film we will we will get we did get a a Guadalupe saw you guys did good. We'll make sure we get a D4 in there. There's Odd the Oddfellows too out there at Guadalupe that was done there as well. So um a lot of great all throughout our county. So, um, Supervisor, uh, Lee, would you like to make a Oh, actually, is there a public comment on this item? Chair Nelson and members of the board, we have no request to speak from the public on this item. All right. Uh, Supervisor Hartman.

Uh, I have a neighbor, her profession is locations, finding locations. So, there there is a whole profession there and I think that's the kind of level you want to talk to people to promote. Yeah. And, uh, a big part of this is is having a location book. Most counties have a location book. Um, 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 um, 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 uh, that guidance of where to start looking is is going to be really great.

I would think the courthouse would be an amazing venue, but I I don't know if any films there, right? I I had uh I have one on Yes. Merryill Street is in front of the courthouse. It's complicated. It's filmed there. And this is the um There it is. The Santa Barbara Farmers Market. Yeah. In the movie. And there's there's a couple of uh extras at the farmers market off screen.

Supervisors, if you're going to be um approving staff's recommendation, I just want to point out that it says staff. It's very general, but I've been uh talking to the wonderful director over there in CSD to help lead this and do that evaluation. So, just want to be clear that's the staff we were talking. That's where all our quality of life goes. Mr. Armis, is there anything that you like to add to this conversation? Probably should give you that chance to 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.

Well, I I I do think um you know, it's a perfect fit within you know the community services department to be leveraging these relationships. um a recent trip of myself and some and supervisor Caps and and others to Japan, you know, they had a department of um arts, sports, leisure, you know, so it was a much broader and I kind of got my my my mind thinking about what we need to be doing broader and and this is right with that in mind. So I'm I'm really appreciate that and um I think this is good stuff. So with um Supervis 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. Uh but yeah. Is there a second? Uh sure. I'll second. Okay. Any further discussion on this motion? I just want to say great work. I'm really proud of the work that you have done. So thank you. We we asked. Yes. Um with that um all those in favor signify by saying I.

I opposed. Motion passes unanimously. All right, we're gonna go ahead and move to item number three. Um, as chair, um, and one of my hats that I wear for the county, um, 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 to finish chair, my vice chair to finish chairing today's meeting. Um, but I will be uh leaving this meeting in good hands um for uh uh the remaining items. Leave me the script. I do. I have it. It's right here for you. Thank you.

You're there. Appreciate you. Madam clerk, would you read the item into the record, please? Vice Chair Hartman and members of the board. Departmental item number three is from the planning and development department. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the long range planning division LRP fiscal years 2026 through 2029 work program.

Director Plowman. Uh, Madame 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 um will involve in the long range planning division. And we try to map out um sort of 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. Um, so Mr. Tuttle is here. Um uh 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 I will commence the presentation. So uh today what I'll be doing is highlighting some of our accomplishments from this uh current year. touch on some of the factors that influence the work that we can uh conduct and accomplish in any given year and then walk through what we as staff recommend for the work program for uh the upcoming fiscal year. So, uh this past year and continuing through the next few months, uh there's a lot that we've accomplished uh starting with the housing element implementation. That's an ongoing work effort. uh 25 programs, nearly 100 action items that we're uh committing to as uh county departments uh throughout the next uh or rest of their housing cycle. Uh specifically, we obtained uh certification of our coastal zone reszones uh to provide for housing within Carpondria and uh Vista. uh we uh tracked no net loss and and our progress towards meeting our arena and pleased to indicate that we are are doing well in that category. Uh we just released free pre-approved ADU plans that are available to the public to use to support u property owners efforts to provide more housing opportunities. uh we'll be coming to your board uh in a few weeks on our local preference program in coordination with uh CSD and we've developed a framework for uh initiating uh amendments to our zoning code to incentivize moderate income units through uh state and bonus provisions. With regard to the A enterprise ordinance, uh once that was adopted, we've been working to uh improve um sort

of our our public uh opportunities in terms of uh 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. uh to we uh addressed and adopted some clarifying provisions in our zoning code as part of a recent cleanup item to further improve improve and clarify uh certain provisions of the a enterprise ordinance. Um we're continuing to work with coastal commission staff uh on the certification of the a enterprise ordinance in the coastal zone. Uh we do anticipate some action being taken on that uh later this summer. with the environmental justice element. Uh we completed the draft of the environmental justice element, got through three planning commission hearings and uh achieved unanimous adoption by your board uh just a few weeks ago. That was our first new element within the comprehensive plan in uh several decades. uh with the utility scale solar ordinance amendments, we completed the draft and final EIR and have initiated decision-maker hearings we got through the Monosito Planet Commission and are currently uh working with the county planning commission and we do anticipate bringing that project to your board for consideration later this summer uh with several uh 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 uh draft amendments and meeting with stakeholders on that. With the circulation element, uh 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 a safety element update. Uh we completed last year the evacuation modeling and planning uh 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 uh and upwards of $300,000 that uh we will find out if we're awarded in the next couple months that would uh help cover some of the costs of our sea level rise adaptation planning. And lastly on this slide, uh the airport land use compatibility plan amendments. We've completed the draft of those and we'll be initiating decision maker hearings later this summer. Uh in addition to all the various planning uh documents and policy documents, uh there's been numerous ordinance amendments that we've uh processed in the last year, including a large comprehensive ordinance streamlining amendments uh that your board adopted in January and we'll be coming to your board next month on uh a briefing for the third phase of that effort with a ministerial permit streamlining um to get board direction on on moving forward with that project. And then various uh other ordinance amendments including getting certification of our telecom uh amendments in the coastal zone as well as our cannabis odor control ordinance amendments in the coastal zone. Uh we adopted the senior mobile home park overlay and a general amendment cleanup package by your board uh last month in February. And then lastly, uh, per board's direction last fall, we've drafted, uh, phase one, uh, oil and gas phase out amendments that will be, uh, taken to the county planning commission, uh, tomorrow.

So, as you can see, uh, a lot, uh, that we've accomplished, but there's always more work to be done. There are various uh, 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 uh ongoing commitments. Uh there's a sort of a never-ending supply of state mandates uh that keep us busy and on our toes um and uh tend at least in recent years have tended to occupy a significant majority of our staff resources. Uh we have numerous projects that we've adopted but that require ongoing implementation efforts like the housing element. Um and then uh with respect to uh board requests projects uh often um we have to work to uh pivot and make adjustments because of our limited staff resources. Uh when board asks us to take on a particular project. it often requires uh delays to occur on on other work that we have on our list. Um and then lastly, from a uh a budgetary standpoint, there's been a lot of discussion um throughout today and in other hearings about uh constrained budget. Uh last year when I came to you, we had 15 full-time equivalent staff. Uh as to help uh with the county's uh budget shortfall, we have had two uh vacant positions that we have left open and as part of our upcoming uh budget, we're uh proposing to unfund both of those two positions. We are requesting restoration of one of those two, but uh either way, we'd be looking at either uh going down to 13 or 14 full-time equivalent staff. So, that

is a reduction uh from our uh prior levels. Um other funding sources, we are the one division within planning and development that is largely general fund uh supported. Uh the rest of our work in our department is um cost recoverable. Uh historically we've had grant opportunities to help supplement some of that general fund. Um but a lot of grants have been drying up particularly at the federal level. Um so that's something that we can't always rely upon. Um that said, as I mentioned, we're always looking for new grant opportunities and and we did just apply and and hope we'll get good news on that. So all that being said, let me uh dive into our uh staff recommendations. Uh there's a number of services um that our staff uh sort of every year uh comply with to support various uh countywide and and regional uh work efforts. Um and that's sort of just a consistent ongoing workload of about one and a half FTE. And what you what you see here in the presentation is um two columns on the right. one representing if we had 14 FTE uh full-time equivalent to work with and the second column on the far right uh if we were not to have that uh second position restored and we're working with 13 FTE uh most of the change would happen um in sort of the non-mandated uh board items uh which I'll get to in a few moments. Um with any division there's always uh sort of the business side of things um with our supervisors and our uh training our budgeting uh division admin uh and supervision and then uh getting into the the meat of

it. Um we'll get into the the specific projects and I've broken it down by those that are uh have some type of mandate versus those that are non-mandated. Many of these are 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 uh there are some implementation uh commitments as part of that effort. Um with our housing element as I mentioned and as you are well aware it's an ongoing significant work effort that requires a fair amount of staff resources. uh our safety element update um which is has been a multi-year effort comprised of various phases and we're currently working on our climate adaptation phase of that. Uh and then sort of two newer projects that are uh have sort of risen up the list. One is short-term rentals in our coastal zone. We currently don't uh have a active regulation or code regulations for short-term rentals. Uh that's a project that has been delayed for several years. Uh it's listed back here as a mandate because we did include it as a program within our housing element and uh 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. Um and then the last is objective standards and this was a requirement uh or sort of ask of the coastal commission with a recent certification of our u of an ordinance amendment uh which is to establish more objective standards in our coastal zoning ordinance and our policies so that uh 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. Um but as you can see uh we don't have a lot of staff time allocated to that. Um but it is something we have committed to working on in the next few years. And then in the more discretionary non-mandated work uh we have uh work towards the a enterprise ordinance and getting that certified in the coastal zone. Um some nominal or limited ongoing work with the climate action plan implementation. Uh, 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. Um, 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. Uh, which will require a significant work effort. Um, but that's one that that could be impacted with the, uh, without restoration of that position. um some limited work on the recreck 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 um this summer uh which will then uh lead us into phase two which is the phase out and uh next fiscal year will largely be uh involving selecting a consultant to initiate uh SQA review once the amortization study is completed. That's another one where um if we're not able to restore that uh second position, the allocation towards that project could be impacted. Uh and then uh utility scale solar, as I mentioned, uh we're in our planning commission hearings. Uh we do anticipate completing those and getting to your board uh later this summer. So, um once that's adopted, it would be uh staff spending time to uh get it certified in

the coastal zone. Uh and then sort of the last is a kind of a bucket of um ordinance amendments uh that we try to tick off or or uh work through as time permits. And this is one where it's um somewhat of a luxury in terms of being able to allocate resources to and u we've made good progress in years past. Um, but this is one where uh without that additional position, it could see some uh reduction in staff time available to work on some of those efforts.

Um, and I I just wanted to clarify for the board how we identified which programs would see a reduction in staff. And that is primarily because that's those are the programs where we 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 um the the highlighted ones are flexible and can be um changed by the board and and that's if 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 um this is a calendar showing each of these projects over the next three years. And uh sort of the green 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. Uh the blue uh is when we're in the clos commission certification phase of a project that's generally more intermittent in staff time and uh less less work effort associated with it. Um and then the the brown or beige is um uh those are just some some limited uh staff time with implementation. But what you can see from uh this schedule is essentially over the next two years we're we're pretty well um booked up in terms of staff capacity. But come fiscal year 2829 we do start seeing some some openings. Um now that's now uh we do know that state mandates keep coming our way. Um for example there's already a new mandate to update our conservation element um by 2028. So, um, when I'm before you next year, uh, presenting that one will likely be added to the

list and and take up some of that capacity. Um, and then, you know, things come up that we don't anticipate and things change and so things always seem to to fill up the void, but uh, you can get a sense of, uh, opportunities maybe presenting themselves over the next couple years. So, uh, as I mentioned, uh, we sort of have this bucket of ordinance amendments and and this is one where, uh, this list has been informed by either, um, specific board direction or or maybe a staff initiated, uh, idea or from individual board members. So, uh, the list currently includes, uh, farmworker housing and streamlining a employee dwellings, uh, 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. Um, updating our procedures and process for the HLAC and nominating of landmarks. uh looking at our permit requirements for equestrium facilities particularly uh in our A1 uh zones and then we always have sort of a general cleanup package but this is certainly an opportunity where we'd be looking for as Miss Plowman indicated input from your board as to whether you have any particular priorities or anything that we're haven't included on this list. Um generally we we try to just kind of work through them as best we can throughout the year when as time permits. um 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. Um in addition to those uh ordinance amendments, there's uh sort of a list here of future projects more on the the the horizon over the next few years. Um one project is the coastal resiliency uh

local co coastal program amendment. This was a project that was uh worked on a number of years ago. Um but we ended up not being successful in getting it through the coastal commission and withdrew our application. Uh it's one of those that we keep pushing out um year-over-year. There is the opportunity um for some additional grant funding that may be able to support that work. Uh, and we do have a speaking of state mandates, as I mentioned earlier, there is a state mandate uh to uh do coastal resilience or or sea level rise adaptation planning. Um, but it's not until 2034. So, we do have some time for that, but um that's one. Uh updating our comprehensive plan amendments to align with uh changes that have been made with regard to sustainable groundwater management act. Um other comprehensive plan updates, we we have many in the works right now, but um probably the next in line, as I mentioned, is the conservation element. Um that's the next mandate, but we have various other elements that haven't been comprehensively updated in in many years. Uh looking at our SQA thresholds, uh several of the uh our SQA thresholds are fairly out of date and in particular uh one that keeps popping up is our groundwater groundwater thresholds and um a need to update those and but that does take staff time and resources and potentially consultant dollars. Um, one that was mentioned last year and is uh appears here again is revisiting the Vista master plan. And then the last thing on this list is uh with uh our recent adoption of amendments to address indoor uh odor control for cannabis uh operations. looking at opportunities for addressing

outdoor uh odor control for outdoor cannabis. Uh so with that uh our recommended actions uh for your board are to receive this report on our uh work program, provide uh direction to staff regarding the allocation of resources not only for this current upcoming fiscal year but for future work program items um over the the next three years. And then lastly to determine that uh the action before you today is not a project under SQA. And with that happy to answer any questions. Thank you Mr. Tuttle. Um do board members have any questions? Okay.

Yeah. Go ahead. So do we have a tree policy in the county? Meaning is there a south coast north I mean a south and north county tree policy? Um, when you say a tree policy, you mean like a fewer trees in general?

Um, we do not. Uh, in the coastal zone, there is a ordinance that um regulates removing certain native trees or trees that provide habitat for like monarchs. Outside of the coastal zone, there's no like tree ordinance except for in the rural areas. Um there's oak tree ordinance that is was adopted I think when I was no gray hair uh and very young uh out of fresh out of grad school. It was one of the first projects I worked on back in like 2005.

Um but that was really more addressing a large scale oak tree removal that was we were seeing happening with a lot of the wineries that were coming in in the vineyards. Um, outside of that, there's policies that preserve or uh address trees, but those policies only come into play when development is proposed. There is no ordinance specifically outside the coasters on addressing tree removal. So, is there a policy where you cut one down, you plant two or three

public works? uh for uh there there's no specific policy that um perhaps within a certain community plan like Gaviote I think has specific ratios or replacement ratios but um we do have policies in various community plans that talk about avoidance or mitigation of trees if they are removed um 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 trees are important. They 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 um 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?

Um Supervisor Lee through the chair. You can certainly ask to put that on the list of future amendments. Um the board, if you wanted 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 sort of board directed programs. So because right now we have the staff fully allocated. Yeah. Okay. I just want to put on your radar that that is a priority for myself.

Yeah. Supervisor Lee, I I'm trying to get a better sense of um what you mean. I I think of Galita 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, um they do have a replacement policy at least in Isa Vista. I don't know if that's throughout the county. So, um I'm trying to get a better sense of what you're thinking and um 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 you're what you're 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 that we have this type of So maybe you could talk about our landscaping requirements. Uh Supervisor Lee through the chair, we we certainly do have landscape requirements um for housing projects that include tree canopy and tree cover. Um in our multifamily uh objective design standards there there are uh certain requirements for making sure that trees are incorporated and uh with the recent package that your board adopted back in January

uh we bumped up the landscape percentage to 15% of a project would have to be uh landscaped. So um in terms of uh development proposals and dealing with tree removal or uh um proposing trees as part of a project, I think we're we actually have a pretty good foundation of regulations. What what we don't have though is if someone um is not proposing any development and they just want to cut down their tree in their backyard, we don't have anything that would stop them from doing that.

Okay. And in also including native trees, they're important with fire especially. So I just want to think about what can be done and filling holes that are there about trees. Supervisor might also be helpful. I mean there's different um departments that work with trees, right? So planning is talking about what policies have in our landscaping policy. Chris Nan is at the back. We have policies in public works about uh trees in the in the public rideway. um that parks

in parks as well obviously in the parks. So maybe it'd be helpful if we could provide as a starting point some information and and also we were talking about what uh the fire department has concerned maybe as a starting point we can put some information together for you and your staff and then if if um 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'll be very helpful. Thank you. Thank you.

Important matter. Thank you uh Supervisor Caps. Thank you. Thanks for the presentation. I appreciate this every year because it's a good reminder for for me that so much of the work you do is mandated by the state and very ongoing and uh very meticulous and um you know I'm you know sometimes guilty of wanting you all to switch gears and and this is a good reminder that uh you have to keep trudging along in things that take a long time. That's why you're planners. So anyway, to that effect, um I just wanted to ask uh because I do share the vision that I know we we share up here that um if we eliminate cannabis odor that your department won't have to spend resources on cannabis odor. I I'm seeing some head nods. Uh and so I just wanted to refresh my memory here of how much uh your department is spending on FTEES on cannabis currently. Um so um Supervisor Caps through the chair so the the cannabis enforcement is in a separate it's it's in a separate fund. So long range planning isn't working on that at all. Okay. Yeah.

So I think it's around Lisa if I can look to you around $330,000 that we're spending on enforcement. That's not all not all cannabis. So that's our other zoning code enforcement and then also cannabis enforcement. So but in terms of FTE people Oh, I think three three people. Yeah. And how many people are in long range planning? We have um 15 positions that were this fiscal year. Okay. Yeah. And we're looking at either 14 or 13 for next fiscal year.

Okay. Well, again, the one of the many purposes of of the ordinance that the board passed unanimously is that we get to a point where we're not having to enforce. Thank you.

Um I had a couple of questions before public comment. Um the first is about our safety element. I 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 um I I don't need a a long thing but just what are the pieces of it supervisor Hartman through oh you are the chair madam chair um yes there are many parts uh to the safety element and I am going to turn it over to Mr. tuttle to lay those out for you, but some we have completed and others we're still working on and and will be getting to completion over the next yearish or longer.

Right. So, um there there are various um state mandates or or state laws that have been passed over the last several years. Um and um it it's bit of a some moving goalposts um because new laws keep coming and so new requirements keep getting added on. Um but the when the project was initiated sort of the comprehensive safety element update was initiated several years ago. It started with a a vulnerability assessment uh climate change vulnerability assessment. Um and then there was sort of three prongs to it. one was uh looking at our uh fire hazard mitigation strategies and updating our safety element with uh policies to comply with I don't remember the particular state law but um that was completed back in 2024 I believe um and then last year sort of the second big phase was this evacuation uh modeling and planning effort um and a study that was completed with the help of a consultant uh that was completed last here uh to satisfy another state requirement. Um and then the the current phase that we're working on is uh is on adapt adaptation specifically climate adaptation and um that effort is um considerable because it requires a lot of coordination with various county departments and really it's looking at kind of similar to the environmental justice element. What can the county do to make sure that we're ready or uh 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?

Uh no, the board well the board did uh approve the the fire hazard the the safety element updates that were done to address fire hazard mitigation um with the evacuation study. Uh that will uh it was just a study that was completed. uh there will that will inform some updates to the safety element itself that will come to your board um but has not come to your board yet. So um your board hasn't taken any other action on on any of that. Uh the vulnerability assessment um came to your board as sort offormational a number of years ago but it wasn't a document that was uh adopted per se. But all of it all of it sort of comes together uh or culminates in uh 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 and and the adaptation plan is really geared towards addressing the vulnerabilities that we identified. Right? So this is we identified where we're 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 it's really multi multi-hazards. It's sea level rise. It's excessive heat. It's wildfire. You know, it's kind of all all the hazards that come with potentially come with climate change.

Um the grant that we just applied for uh through the state uh that is specific to sea level rise. So that so if awarded that grant that would help fund our sea level rise portion of our adaptation strategies um but it's only a small piece of of the larger effort.

Thank you. Um my last question has to do with HLAC. We met talked about it. We were exploring whether uh whether we can simplify the um historic landmark designation not to come to the board so that that would save uh HLAC some money and be part of our overall more efficient and seeing whether we might be able to do that as part of our ordinance cleanup and it was in two different sections and wonder if we've made any progress on that and m Um, Madam Chair, so we have talked about it internally and we are looking at the possibility of including it in one of our cleanup items. So, Mr. T and I have discussed it and um, it's not a major change. Um, in terms of what you have to do to the code to fix it, it's a code that lives outside our chapter 35, which is our zoning code. So, we're just sort of figuring out how we might be able to integrate that.

Okay. Well, if we can, then we can check that off at least for now on our list. So, all right. Uh, public comment, Madame Clerk, Vice Chair Hartman, and members of the board. We have one request to speak from the public on this item. We're going to remain here in Santa Barbara with Mark Chhatillo. Mark.

Well, good afternoon, members of the board. Mark Chhatillo. Um and I'm appearing today on behalf of save Monaceto ukes um in part and if there's a time where questions about safety element I can uh also have some thoughts on that but I really want to focus on the tree protection ordinance um because this is something that was uh approved as part of the Monaceto community plan um which has itself gone through some revisions. It included a provision that we would have a tree protection ordinance. And the Monaceto ukes on the East Valley Road are uh a stately uh stand of trees that have historic uh value based on their connection to the original Crocker Berry uh orchards that were there and really help define our community. Um, trees, as we all know, provide aesthetic, biological, uh, some climate benefits with cooling, uh, fire benefits, uh, and really lend to the character of our community. Um, if you ever have your question about how what how important these trees are, just look at Ventura where they really don't have the same kind of urban forest uh, or tree on the south coast plane that we do. Um, 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 uh express requirements uh in the Summerland community plan. The Eastern Galita 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. the 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 this would create a separate process for evaluating and protecting um 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 uh ensure that both there won't be mischief within the environmental review process, but also the opportunity for uh 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. Um so, I have less time than I thought. Um so the the value of these trees um they overlap with with butterflies with habitat riparian ash. So um it's it's really a thread that goes through a lot of the ecological and aesthetic function and 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, this 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 uh because it's looking at larger scale. But yes, there are definitely models out there um that could help accelerate and the the process of adoption. Thank you very much. Thank you. Um any comments from staff?

I don't believe so. So, we could add this to the list if if that's the pleasure of the board. Well, I think what we wanted to do is first go back and look.

Yeah. Look to see what we have um and 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 and in environmental review process there's tree protection that happens and there's tree replacement that happens. Like if you just look to our housing element update program EIR, there's mitigation measures in there that call for um rest or replacement of trees that are removed, particularly like native trees, oak trees. So we there's a lot of layers that already exist. I think it would be good for us to gather that information before the board would provide direction

and and that would really be a foundation for any ordinance anyway. and what we have in our community plans. Right. Okay. Um All right. I guess we're um concluding this item. U may I have a motion A through C. Staff recommendations today. Sure. Uh so moved. Second. All in favor say I. I. I.

Passes unanimously. Uh Madame Clerk, I guess it's number five next. Would you read that into the record? Vice Chair Harmon 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 Snedden.

Good afternoon, Chair Hartman, members of the board. I'm going to turn it 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 Aurora Aurora Zimjanis and Katrina Brunaso with our development review team. The item before you today is an amendment to chapter 15A of the county code, floodplane management. The the proposed amendments are primarily administrative in nature and don't significantly change um the requirements put on uh 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 floodplane management. Um, so here is an overview of overview of what this presentation will cover. Um, we'll first start out with a background of the county code, chapter 15A. 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, um the National Flood Insurance Program, uh also known as the NFIP, is administered by FEMA and makes federally backed flood insurance available in communities that agree to adopt and enforce flood plane 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 flood plane 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. Uh the county of Santa Barbara joined the CRS program in 1990 and county code Santa Barbara County

code chapter 15A the flood plane management ordinance is administered by development review staff. This applies to structures in map special flood hazard areas and it is based on the NFIP and the CRS program regulations such as elevating the finished floor above the base flood elevation. This ordinance was last updated in August of 20 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 flood plane ordinance and FEMA's NFIP and CRS requirements. We also feel that the this amendment will help support safe development in the special flood hazard areas. And lastly, uh this amendment will help support the county of Santa Barbara's ability to apply ordinance 15A to development within FEMA preliminary special flood hazard areas. With that, I'll turn it over to Katrina. Thank you, Aurora. All right, this is not close enough. Okay, uh 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 for by staff um 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- non-con conversion agreement. By definition, a non-con conversion agreement is a legal document signed by the property owner and recorded on the property deed that restricts non-habitable enclosures and areas below the base elevation plus 2 ft from being converted to a prohibited use such as habitable living space, finished rooms or other uses inconsistent with flood

plane 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. Uh the labeling of C2B is the finished floor that would be at base flood elevation plus 2 ft or higher. So the goal of this conversion non-conversion agreement is that the owner will attest that they understand that enclosure area is made for flood plane 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 next example is flood vent factor of safety. Areas below the base flood elevation plus 2 ft like crawl spaces, some garages and the enclosure example I had above are required to have flood vents to equalize the pressure of flood water 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 uh 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 26, 2024 and revised May 15, 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 lefth hand side, you'll see a light

blue as well as red areas. Those are the effective firm areas or flood plane 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 uh to clarify to the public that this is required and allows us to adopt additional um preliminary data when FEM 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-con conversion agreement for example when needed for clarity and unified language across the ordinance. This includes specifying our pre-existing freeboard requirement BF plus 2 ft 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 flood plane management. B. Read the title of the ordinance and wave 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 Cher Hartman? That's correct. um 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. Um I guess we're ready for a motion A through C in today's board letter. So moved. Second. All in favor say I. I I, Madame Clerk, last item number six.

Vice Chair Hartman and members of the board, departmental item number six is from the fire department. It is a hearing to consider recommendations regarding the California Fire Safe Council Wildfire County Coordinator Grant Program, County Coordin Coordinator Program Update. Chief. Oh. Oh. Oh. Okay. Wondered what happened. Chief Don. There we go. Uh, first 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'm Amber Parkinson. I'm the executive director for the Santa Barbara County Fire Rie 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 Tan, County Fire Marshal. Yeah, Fred Tan, County Fire Marshall. Uh here just assisting Ann Marie in sponsoring this uh this board item.

Thanks for that, Fred. So, the California Virus Council wanted uh all the counties to provide this presentation to the board of supervisors just to give an uh 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 virus council or the wildfire resilience collaborative which I'll talk about later in the presentation uh can improve and work better towards um 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 a county coordinator program? Uh it was a concept developed by CalFire and the state fires council in recognition of all the funding that was coming down from the state after the 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. uh there's duplication of work uh groups were maybe having capacity but lacking experience to get projects done and so they developed the county coordinator program uh which supports one entity per county to encourage develop and sorry Fred next slide thank you uh encourage develop countywide collaboration and coordination amongst wildfire migation groups so essentially being the hub of knowing who's involved in the county and wildfire migation 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 the these grant funds since only one entity per county can sit in this position and receive the funding. uh he made this recommendation recognizing fast council has been around since 1997

and involved in the county collaboration space since then. We are getting started without 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 uh we were awarded those funding in 2023. We are now on our second round of funding from Calire and California Fire State Council and just announced a few weeks ago that they're getting another round of funding for this. And to me, the state'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 a big priority for them and it's very essential to the state. um 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 LA and Paradise. So as the program has advanced, CalFire and the state fires council have got a better sense of what they 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. um and are continuing to move and want us to all move forward together in a unified direction. And I will say that know state and CalFire 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. Uh, so I don't have a slide on this because I just went on 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 the projects must be multi-ben projects that have been identified as a regional priority using a transparent prioritization process that integrates a 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 San Barber County in a position yet to apply for this funding. We do have several CWPPS, but they're usually bound by jurisdictions. Um, and while they do have data driven analysis, to me, the prioration process is not as transparent. There's no I don't think much linking um the data driven modeling to direct recommendations for why certain things being prioritized over others. Um and they often are very regional restricted and then very much so lacking the implemental strategy with defined actions and timelines. Uh, so I'm going to talk more in the presentation later about how I think through this county position, we're helping the county get in line to be better qualified and competitive for these grant funding in 2027. And we'll say the minimum award for these grants is $5 million, which is quite a lot of money. So, CalFire putting their intentions into action of trying to get more consistency across all the counties. Uh, this current year 2025, which is their second round of funding, um, they requested that all of the county coordinators have consistent tasks amongst the county coordinators and where they're trying to get us all on the same page and set the foundation for future coordination work. And I'll just point out that they've released the countywide CWP requirement. They're just asking us to assess the possibility of this happening in each county. Um, I'd say to me that really indicates that CalFire doesn't want to keep funding small regional CWPPS or ones that are bound by jurisdictional boundaries. Sounds like they're looking more at a much broader regional efforts to get jurisdictions to c to talk and coordinate amongst themselves recognizing fire does not follow juris jurisdictional boundaries. Fred, if you want, you can always talk more about kind of what you hear from the fire side

because you work more intimate CalFire, but that's kind of the sense I'm hearing from these grant requirements that they're passing down. Uh, 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 Cancer is taking can help push us to that step naturally. And then we just added on four additional tasks that we'd like to work on this year. One I wanted to point out is a mitigations map. uh should be meant for the public to communicate know who's doing what around the communities what projects are being done planned proposed so the community has understanding of what's being done to reduce the risk to their to their areas and then I'm going to talk now about the technical advisory committee that Fred and I have co-started uh technical advisory committee will sit under the wildfire resistance cooperative several of you may know this group they presented to the board before they were started in 2021 through a post conservancy funds. Um, you know, started by the RCD with collaboration from Legacy Works, CEC, Sharon Main Consulting, and McInness Environmental. And fires council is now partnering with the RCT to continue to champion this collaborative forward. Uh, we're 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. Uh, it's not going to 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. Uh myself and RCD will co- co-lead it for now and hope to open up the group to hope open up the steering committee to more organizations to participate once we kind of got it off the ground and a foundation that set up. Uh we did have one committee already to 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 advisor committee

like I said is co-led by myself and Fred. We have a charter we meet quarterly. It's made of local experts with the logos represented on the slide here. Um and there is a process to include other experts across the county um should we have missed anyone 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 fires communities who have action plans about things that they feel they need to feel more safe in their regions can be incorporated into this into this process. And so through this the technicory committee going through these steps um I think it's something that can make us then very competitive uh for CalFire's new grant program and will meet those criteria that I listed out before and I also think through this process or essentially what we're doing is using countywide data um across jurisdictions to create a prioritized list of projects which can essentially become a countywide WPPP. I just want to briefly list some of our fire council's accomplishments and county coordination. This just this past year 2025 um I don't have slides of this connecting with over 118 wildfire groups in the county and outside the county. We created 38 new fire communities. Now we have 72 total in our county. When I started over under five years ago, we had zero. And then I see the fires council getting more into the space of acting as a a money pass through where we can use our capacity and resources to help write grants uh to deliver funding to other groups to focus on the mitigation and implementation work versus being bogged down by grant writing. The last one and just some initial priorities of how the virus council and the new county grants can continue to support collaborative efforts across the region. So continuing to oversee and manage the welfare zone collaborative the technical advisory committee

creating the prioration process which again will make us competitive for CalFire'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 different plans. So trying to loop those all into one space. Um, so with that, just overall seeing the 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 of our strategies across our different jurisdictions, ensuring funds can get into the county. Know CalFire's new grant is requiring this. Uh, starting to move the needle a lot more on advancing wildfire resilience efforts. We're leveraging everyone's resources and capacity just get stuff done and coming up with a long-term strategic plan with our stakeholder and community input to make San Bur County more fire resilient. And so with that, I'll open up to any questions or any feedback on what you guys see that fires council or this collaborative uh can do along with county fire to continue to advance wildfire mitigation efforts in the county. Board members, none from Supervisor Lee, Supervisor Caps.

I mean, no questions, just a gratitude. I um I'd love to see the progress and the expansion and and the fact that they're, you know, all these grants are coming out and more money um coming in and more volunteers and u just always so appreciative of the work that is happening. Thank you. Yes, Supervisor Lee. I just say great work Amarie. You and your team has done a fantastic job reaching out to different communities and I know you're growing the carpenter community. So continue do what you're doing because it's is working. So thank you. I appreciate your hard work.

I 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 Calire issue areas that they want to see progress um developing locally appropriate resources. Um I don't think you bragged enough on what you're doing, but uh the fireside council has someone free of charge who will go out and evaluate your home um to see what you can do better to make it safer. So they they said defensible space assessor, but you you do a much bigger uh and you get a written report and it's it's really fabulous. Um and uh you do grazing programs and chipping programs and now there's a new program um to educate uh contractors about home hardening. And so it's once you get into this, there's so many threads to to pull. um about how to, you know, retrofit a property and make it more fires safe and then how to work with your community and then how to work with, you know, your broader uh region. And so, um the fire safe council is tackling that at all levels. And I always say that we can't expect fire departments to do this on their own. We really need the community to step up and Santa Barbara is really ground zero for fire. But so we've got a lot of people interested and willing and and now to to keep them all coordinated is is an additional task and and a really um ambitious one. But I I um I serve on the board of the fire safe 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 in capacity and what

you're what you're doing for our county. And um what's really exciting is that most of the fire departments in the county have representation on the board. So it it's already the the hub for collaboration. So, um, any public comment, Madame Clerk? Vice Chair Harmon and members of the board, we do have one request to speak from the public on this item. We are going to remain here in Santa Barbara with Mark Chatillo. Mark,

good afternoon again, Madam Chair, members of the board. Mark Chhatillo speaking on this item on behalf of Friends of Mission Canyon and the Committees for Land, Air, Water, and Species. Um, as a resident of the the WOOI zone, I got to say thank you to both you folks and to the whole fire safe council apparatus and the incredible collaboration and amazing um volunteer and community-led process that uh this this that that this typifies that this represents and you know I think we're all we're all better for it. Um in my view it it it reflects the expanding infrastructure um that we need in order to respond to the escalating threats uh of wildfire uh and the risks and those um are not only what we've seen in terms of climate change but also the intensification of housing uh in the wildfire hazard areas. Um, and 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 healthy 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 um 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 uh that identify the public health and safety risk as being unreasonable. Um I think this was a big part of what S or AB747 which triggered the safety element uh improvements that uh were discussed at the last item and madam chair you mentioned um one of the specifics that's

required that hasn't been addressed um was that modeling of evacuation uh that Mr. Tuttle referenced um that 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 painted cave project but there needs to be standards that flow from that. That was the expectation of that legislation. Uh 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 ver uh copy of the uh uh environmental law news public law journals has a a 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 and make sure that we do the very best we can. Thank you.

Thank you for drawing that to our attention. Uh any more uh any final comments from fire marshall ton or and Marie? I just want 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 I need to stop being so humble sometimes and brag about the organization. I'm getting better at that. But also want to 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 the staff time that have dedicated to just giving us advice and helping get permits and projects done. And uh it's a great I think team effort that we're having. Would you briefly describe the regional wild wildfire mitigation project? Because I think I I think what we haven't touched on is the scientific um background that you all can tap with UCSB and with uh the west scientists in the west and how we're um applying that.

Yeah. So for the regional wildfire mitigation program, it's more of a philosophy where we're looking at us having this holistic approach to wildfires lands through landscape built environment and community programming. Uh 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 fuel brakes, no, we're good or we send the race to go pamplets, we're good. It's but to truly get to wildfire resilient, it's a lot lot more than that. It's looking at maybe nature-based fuel buffers where we're planting uh oaks that's help protect communities but also help sequester carbon. all these multi-benefit projects. Um it's looking at assessing our built environments, you know, understand the vulnerabilities of our hospitals and mobile home parks, uh uh communication towers and make sure to mitigate those, but also looking at the policies. Uh some counties have gone above and beyond what the state requires with local policies to protect communities. But environment can also be looking at I think Buton is looking at this of having standardized um templates for home. So if you want to build back, it's much faster once you have those pre-approved plans in place and then the communities, you know, how can we equitably engage and educate and organize communities to do their parts and be prepared for evacuation. So it's this very holistic perspective. That's why in our technical advisory committee, it's not just the fire agencies and fires council. We're including OEM, the planning department, botanic garden, uh UCSB, 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 of looking at wildfire resilience out 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 uh to really move the needle and make a change so we don't keep having these tragedies.

Right. So, so we're nested from the individual home to the uh fire safe uh fire wise neighborhoods all the way to a regional plan all the way to the western US and and kind of growing more integration there. Um, I think one of the things is is of note. I think the old idea was you just, as you said, uh, create fire breaks. You just clearcut. 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 uh, just bulldo 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 I. I. I. And so uh we accept that report and we are now adjourned until budget workshop starting Monday, April 13th right here in Santa Barbara. Thanks.