Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

All right, everybody. Good morning. I'll call to order the 05/12/2026 regular meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. Excuse me. Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Here. At this time, would you please stand and join us and pledge allegiance to our flag? Ready? Begin. All right. The next item of business is approval of the minutes from the 05/05/2026 meeting. Can I get a motion?

Okay. Any comment? All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Next item of business is the county executive officer report. Mr. Horton, is there anything to us get started with today? No report this morning, Well, you, Mr. Horton, for subbing in here for CEO Miyasado. And, Madam Clerk, are there any announcements or changes to our agenda today?

Thank you, Madam Clerk. At this time, the next item of business is the administrative agenda. Right now I have a few items pulled by the Board and the public. Looks like, just to make sure I have it correctly here, for the Board we have point A2, A31, A40, and A46. Any other items that my colleagues want to have pulled? Okay. And then from the public, we have public point A1, A2, A4, and A18. Okay. So at this time, I'd take a motion to approve the balance of the agenda. So those are all items except for A1, two, four, eighteen, thirty one, forty, and forty six.

Second. Motion by Hartman and second by Lee. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. All right. At this time we'll go ahead and move to a couple of items that were pulled, well as our honorary resolutions that we'll be presenting here today. And we'll go ahead and do those in order, and we'll start off with item A1. You, Madam Clerk, read that into the record? And then I believe we have somebody from the public that's speaking on A1. So once you read it into the record, I'll have the and read the resolution, then I'll have the speaker speak. We'll take a vote on it and then we'll do the pomp and circumstance.

please Actually, before we do that, I just need a motion to approve item A1.

I'll second. Okay. So we have a motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Sorry. Wow, tongue tied this morning, Sorry about this. Motion passes unanimously. So would you go ahead and read the resolution and do the presentation?

I just had a question for you. So if we know a young person, could you tell us the age range for which people are eligible and how they would access your services?

And what kind of information do you give when you first Minimal.

And then how long till the person hears back?

And then does it deal with things I mean, serious things like schizophrenia and serious depression, and then help guide people?

Well, you. Those are extraordinary opportunities for people who really need it. Thank you.

Madam Clerk, will you please read administrative item number two into the record?

Before we get there, I do have yeah. So this one was pulled by the public as well as by myself. And I just wanted to ask a quick question of counsel just to kind of understand. I know it's a little odd on resolutions, but when I was reading over our agenda today, I saw this resolution and, you know, I I support it. I I everything in there, I I mostly agree with. And but it was a little bit different than most resolutions that we we get. You know, I've read probably over a thousand resolutions since I've met the board. This one looks more like a policy statement than a resolution. I know Supervisor Hartman, I've reached out to her and she explained to me that what this was for, but it just looks a little bit differently than other resolutions. And I just want to make sure, you know, it of reads like a policy statement more than a resolution.

Usually we do resolutions for organizations or to commemorate some special week. Madam Counsel, would you just tell me like what is the binding obligation of a Board when we adopt these honorary resolutions? Are they policy of the Board? Or is it is it more of a, you know, aspirational goal setting type of opportunity for us? I just want to kind of understand that a little bit better because I don't want to come back and hear this later on to say, hey, your board adopted this, so you need to do, you know, x, so you need to do y in the future, because I think that that's a really bad precedent

You know, I think resolutions are times to just celebrate organisations and what's great in our county. And this is something that we can all celebrate, but I just want to make sure it's in context so it doesn't get used later on in some way that wasn't initially intended by the Board. So would you mind just is it what is the binding obligation of a resolution like this to the Board?

A policy rate. So I just wanted to clarify that on behalf of Supervisor Hartman. I had asked Supervisor Hartman because I want a clarification, but I want to clarify for the public too. Yeah. Supervisor Hartman.

I just wanted to raise one other issue of the impact of resolutions. Sometimes for public works, when we pass the resolution, then that gives them an opportunity for allowing flags things on public spaces acknowledge what we're pinpointing as valuable.

Right. And so again, I'm not opposed to this resolution. Just wanted some clarification. I just read a little bit differently, and I didn't know if anybody in the public read it a little bit differently as well, so I just wanted to ask that question and get that clarification. So thank you for indulging me on that. And so I do believe we have a couple of public commenters on this item, so I want to give public comment on the item before we adopt the resolution. So Madam Clerk, can you please bring up the first public commenter? And I'm going to ask the public commenters to try to keep it to two minutes. We have a lot of public commenters here today and general public comment. So on the A items, if you try to keep the two minutes, some of you may prepare for three. Let's try to keep it down so that we can get to everybody today.

And I'm going go ahead and close public comment on this item at this time. Scott?

Alright. So back back to the board on this. We need to adopt this. So I'll take a motion to adopt this resolution. So a motion from Supervisor Hartman and a second from Supervisor Lee. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Those opposed? Motion passes unanimously. All right. Now would you go ahead and read the resolution to the record.

Supervisor Capstan and Supervisor Hartman. Well,

thank you. I really appreciate this resolution and biodiversity. It's, you know, so many issues that we deal with up here are kind of massive issues that kind of confront us in our face. And just to stop and think about biodiversity, to think about that seed bank at the at the garden, you know, these are I'm just grateful that there are scientists, that there are advocates, that there are people working in these 30 organizations that are frankly, thinking about things that I don't think about all the time, seeds and nature and the different types of insects that we really depend on as a as a s

Thank you, Supervisor Cap. Supervisor Hartman.

Thank you very much to all the organizations who brought this forward. I just wanted to emphasize that Santa Barbara County really is a hotspot for biodiversity, and we're in the midst right now of the sixth great extinction, and and it's being caused by human activities. And so we are in a really precious place, not only where north and south meet, but the transverse mountains and the extreme wet and dry means that the species here have adapted to live in very extreme and conditions. And they teach us a lot about how to survive, and there's lots of things we can learn. But we can talk about u

Our job is to recognize that we wanna keep a healthy ecosystem. So I was intrigued when I heard that a report on biodiversity would be a good thing. I wonder if the biodiversity working group, if we could work what we're ultimately looking for, we're involved now in our open space element, which is to look at our county and public properties, but then we're leading up into our conservation element. And that's where we will embed principles into policies that are enforceable. So we need to prepare for that, and I think the report would be a good strategy.

I wrote my PhD dissertation on the Endangered Species Act. My interest in biodiversity goes back many decades. So I'm here to help, and I'm grateful for all the work that you're doing, because we live in a very precious place, and we're the trustees. Thank you.

Thank you. And I would note that in all the advisory committees and things the county has, we don't really have one on biodiversity. So I would welcome whatever input we can get. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Thank you. All right. Madam Clerk, our third and final honorary resolution today, would you please go ahead and read that into record? And we've already adopted this one, so we can go ahead and read that fully.

Everything's been said, by the way. Kids come free to all our concerts. And thank you very much.

Thank you. All right. We're going to go to item A four. That was inadvertently pulled. So we just need to read that in record and adopt that.

So since this is my motion, I'll make a motion that we approve this resolution. Second. Second by Supervisor Lavinino. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Okay. The next item of business that will go in order here will be item A18, and that's been pulled by the public. Madam Clerk, will you please read that into the record?

Alright. I'll go ahead and get a motion on this item to approve Second. Okay. Motion by Hartman, second by Lee. All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. All right. So the next item of business is actually going be A29. We actually already adopted A29, but we had a public speaker who wanted to speak on this item, and so we're going to go ahead and allow the public to comment on A29. And I believe we have one speaker, and I've allocated two minutes for them to speak on this.

All right. Thank you, Ms. Noble. We've already adopted this item, although I know Supervisor Hartman had a question for Director Sneaden. Director Sneaden, would you please come on up?

Thank you. And as you're coming up, I just had a quick question. How maybe you could explain how state law has changed, and then how your review process of different roads throughout the county in light of that law is taking place?

Hartman the chair. Chris, if you could hold the light. There you go. Wrong way. Supervisor Hartman to the chair. Thank you for that question. Yes. As as you recall, as Gary Smart presented at the departmental item on this, the state laws have changed to allow some more flexibility for local agencies in implementing changes to speed limits, and we are programmatically going throughout the county and implementing the new changes on kind of a priority basis and working our way across the county.

And I'd just like to add, you're very receptive to neighbours and people who ask you to review areas. Sometimes it's not possible, but I really appreciate your department and especially Mr. Smart being so open to people's ideas.

Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Supervisor Hartman. Thank you, Director Sneaden. Again, this item has already been adopted by the Board, so there's no additional action that needs to be done here. So we're going to credit and carry on to item A31, and I believe Supervisor Hart will you go ahead and read that record, and I think Supervisor Hartman needs to make an announcement before we vote on it.

And this property is directly adjacent to mine, so in abundance of caution I will recuse.

Excellent. All right. So we'll wait for a moment for Supervisor Hartman to exit the room. And then I'll go ahead and make a motion to approve item A31. Second by Supervisor Lees. Any further discussion on A31? Okay. Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye.

Opposed? Motion passes with four affirmative votes with, of the balance of the Board and with Supervisor Hartman abstaining, no, accusing herself. So four zero one there. Okay. With that, we'll go ahead and ask Supervisor Hartman to come back in, And we will go ahead and move to item A40, which has been pulled by Supervisor Hartman and Supervisor Lee.

All right. Supervisor Lee? Good. I would like to

invite the Santa Barbara Bowl Foundation representatives to come up and give us a presentation about what they have been doing in our community.

I just wanna say thank you. Thank you for what you have done for our music programs, which are so important to our whole accounting community. So it kind of leads up to the question, is there gonna be like a band contest eventually down the road where

Great. Thank you. Thank you, Supervisor Supervisor Hartman and Supervisor Lavannina.

Well, thank you so much. It's very exciting to see your the bowl is really a jewel in our crown for the entire county, and this outreach is terrific. I did have one question. I think we forwarded to you a letter that we received from Alan Hancock president Kevin Walther about the box office advantage that you don't have to pay the ticket fees, add ons, if you can go to the box office in Santa Barbara. But for people in the Valley or Santa Maria, that's a 90 to a 150 mile round trip.

And so I I just wondered if there's some opportunity, not a box office up here, then phone or or something so that that's more widely distributed.

And you're, I mean it's not just the individual, but he raised the issue, but you're working on it.

sure. You. Supervisor Hartman. Supervisor Lavonino.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah, I just want to say thanks. I mean, it is a, what you said, deliberate decision. I don't know what the impetus for that was at this present time, but I appreciate it. We have seen, I'd say over the last seven to ten years, so many more South County based organizations that are really investing a lot more into the North County. It's not just the population, it's the need. It's looking at all of us as one county, one future. It's looking at a broad scope. And when that happens, it needs to be applauded.

Outstanding job. Really appreciate it. And now when I'm buying a ticket, I'll feel even better, right?

Yeah, thank you, Supervisor Lavinino. I would just say that, you know, these assets are county wide assets. And I think it's, you know, some of these historic inequities that have taken place in our county, you know, it's great that we're starting to try to make up for that and that, you know, this is a good first step in those directions. So we appreciate that. I know, Surazza Kappa, I just saw your light there. Wanted to add just one other comment was don't forget the junior high bands. That's a big thing in the North County as well, and that's the feeder program to our high school program. So if we don't catch them in junior high, sometimes they won't participate in high school. So I don't know if there's a way for you guys to work them into that process, but I know that that's a very active program in the Northern Santa Barbara Counties, our junior high band programs. And so especially junior hires, they're always looking for a way to belong.

And, you know, I think that's one of those populations that's often underserved, is their junior hires. So just keep that in mind as you guys future development of the programs. Supervisor Caps?

No. Appreciate, Supervisor Lee, that you asked for this to be on here because the the bowl is really a magical place. And, also, music in our schools is, and it's not, you know, something we can't take we shouldn't take for granted because it's schools are so strapped. And as a mom of a a band kid, I mean, it's it's for them to even go to the bowl and see sort of the potential and what they potentially could experience even just as as patrons, it's it's such a wonderful connection. And the fact that you're really making an emphasis on North County is you're hearing from us is just a wonderful

Alright. Thank you, Supervisor Caps. Alright. I think we just want to

And you being up here in person in Santa Maria says a lot.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Waller. So we actually need to go ahead and get a motion to adopt this item. So it's item eight forty. Can I Mr? Resley, do want to make a motion here?

Second by Mr. Resell Lavignino. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passed unanimously. Thank you. right. We got one more. I know there's some of you guys public commenters that want to get to public comment, and we'll get there here in a moment. But Madam Clerk, we read the last administrative item that's been pulled, item 46, and it's been pulled by supervisor Capps.

Yeah. Thank you. First of all, I just want to acknowledge that we're that you all are bringing this forward earlier than has happened in the past. Usually it's been towards the end of

that was somewhat deemed a little late for the immigrant community and the advocates, so appreciate that it's coming in June. So that's a good thing. I just wanted to request, and it's just a request that we augment what's been required to be reported with some additional information. The Santa Barbara News Press had a report that in addition to the official transfers of between the jail and ICE, there are eight times more arrests that happen on jail premises. And so if possible, if you could speak to those when you do your report, that would be very much appreciated by myself.

Again, that's a request. Also too, we've gotten some questions about so I'm not asking for that now because we're just agendized for the SET hearing. Also, request I have is to speak to sort of some information that's been put forward by constituents about the SCRAM technology and what happens with inmates when they're released, and some potential protocol issues there. Third, a request has been made to the chair through me, I don't know if they requested it to you directly, to have a set time so that advocates who work can participate more easily. I think that's a reasonable request.

And also, two, when I was board chair, I officially invited ICE to participate or just be a part of, at some point, be present in our community, not the way they are in raids, absolutely, but actually speak as an official. That request was official, was completely ignored. And so I'm just, again, extending through the potential of the TRUTH Act if ICE representative could be a part, and so we could actually have more comprehensive information. Because, again, you all have what's required by California state law, but in my estimation, as was definitely highlighted by that report, we're only get

Good morning, Supervisor Caps, Chair Nelson, members of the board. Thank you for having us. We do want to be clear that on the twenty third, the sheriff will be present. And he is not only going to provide the board and the community what he's legally required to provide, but also is going to offer a little additional information on how us as an organization are working to conform to Senate Bill 54. So we will have that additional information for you, and we look forward to seeing this team on the twenty third. All right. Thank you, Under Sheriff. And as Chair, Survivor Cavs brought this up to me this morning.

I'm open to trying to find a way to accommodate as many people as possible in this public and transparent process that is both required by law, but also I think something we all want to do as part of our values on this Board. So I'll be amenable to finding an appropriate time to set a hearing for. Okay. All right. So let's go ahead and take a motion to set the hearing for the what's that date there?

So moved. And I just wanted to clarify, not as part of the motion, but I'm going put those requests in writing so that my words are clear. But I will move to set the hearing for June 23.

All right. We've a motion for Supervisor Caps. A second by Supervisor Hartman. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. All right. So that's the conclusion of our administrative agenda. We're going to, at this time, move on to general public comment. General public comment is for items that are not on today's agenda. I know that we have many of our employees that are here today that want to speak to some of the issues that we're dealing with our budget, so we want to hear from you. And so Madam Clerk, how many general public commenters do we have at this time?

All right. And I think we've been there was a request made that we try to keep it to two minutes if possible. But we will try to show some grace there too. I know many of you are passionate about this topic and want to make sure that we hear from you. And so I think we'll go ahead and start with public comment. Madam Clerk, I think we heard that we wanted to maybe start in Santa Barbara today? Okay. Go ahead We'll go ahead and close general public comment this time.

Thank you. I just want to make an announcement to those that are here in the room or in the public. I know there's going be a lot of things that you guys agree with and maybe even things that the Board agree with. We prefer that you guys do the kind of the jazz hands for applause. That way we see what your that your affirmative affirmative approval, but at the same time, we kinda keep things in order and keep things moving along instead of having a a a period of time of clapping and also just helps balance out the public comments. So, Madam Clerk, can go to item number two.

Francisco, that that is your time. Thank you.

Doctor. Sebastian. Thank you, Sebastian. Sorry about that.

Alright. Thank you, madam clerk. And I just wanna thank our county employees and advocates. Please know that we hear you and that we are taking these issues very seriously as we move forward over the next weeks and months. Thank you.

All right. We'll go ahead and take a short break, and then we'll be coming back from Department Item Number one. All right. Welcome back, everybody, to the 05/12/2026 meeting of Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors in Santa Maria. We have completed our general public comment as well as our administrative items, and we'll start off with Department Item Number one.

Madam Clerk, will you please read that into the record?

All right. Thank you, Ms. Miller. Madam Clerk, are there any public comment on this item?

All right. And I don't see any lights from my colleagues. Is for my part. I appreciate the minimal length of this that says in board letter that says to be completed by December, and I think this is the purpose of these extra help assignments is to really bring somebody back to make that transfer. And so I appreciate your department's efforts towards this, and so I will be supporting it this one. So thank you guys for including most of the information that I need in your Board letter. And again, I'll be willing to support this. So if I can get a motion from one of my colleagues, Supervisor Lee.

I move staff recommendations A, B, and C. Second.

Okay. So we have a motion by Supervisor Lee and a second by Supervisor Hartman. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favour signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? The motion passes unanimously. Thank you, Ms. Miller.

Quickly through item number one, and we're going to go to item number two. And depending on how long item number two goes, we may or may not hit item number three before we take break for closed session. So we'll kind of play that by year. So we'll go ahead start with item number two.

All right. Thank you, Director DeBro. And just before I go to Supervisor Caps, there's no public comment on this item, is there?

All right. Then I'll kick it off to supervisor Capps, who's our board's representative to the PUF.

Yeah. Thank you so much, Chair Nelson. And thank you, director Navarro. I've enjoyed being representative on on the PUF board. It's, I mean, it's such a challenging place to be. It's a challenging work. But the results are stunning. Just looking through the survey, I don't know what other entity gets 86% or whatever it is. Hotels don't get that. It's it's pretty remarkable.

So kudos to the staff and and just to acknowledge the kind of commitment that it takes for a a professional to work in such a challenging environment. I've heard Supervisor Lavinino say that before in his time on this board. So I just had one question about the length of stay, because there has been a drop, as you noted, and I just was hoping you can elaborate as to why, what the reasons would be in terms of time of stay. I think the first two quarters of the year there's been a drop since then. So if you could elaborate as to some reasons as perhaps why.

Yeah, and again, you know, we don't often hear directly from those who receive these types of services. So just reading through the survey and seeing the comments that people wrote was just so satisfying as a board member to see folks writing like, the staff gave me the kind of care I needed, and this was the exact place I needed to be. I'm I'm not quoting verbatim, but it's just very heartfelt reactions. A few complained about the food, the breakfast, but the coffee. But, you know, just really acknowledging that this is the type of care that these individuals needed in a locked facility.

And, again, I'm new to this board, and I learned a lot from this survey. So it was very enlightening. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Supervisor Kapps. Supervisor Hartman?

Yes. I had four questions, but first with a preface. The audit twice in a row wasn't just a one off, an anomaly. That's extraordinary. And I do hear that people want to work at the PUF, that there's a camaraderie there, and I think that that's extraordinary. My first question has to do with what is it that makes for a super PUF? I mean, you can build Medi Cal, but what is it in the structure of the services? Okay.

Because we have a lot more services there that we offer. Okay, thank you, that helps. My second question, at one point we were looking for a waiver to try to expand the number of beds from the federal government. I think that came with lots of additional requirements. And we now have more flow, as you say, more options. But I just what is do we do we have enough beds at the PUF? Where are we in terms of that waiver discussion?

Okay. And you mentioned the CSUs. I mean, are one strategy to keep people out of the POF if we can meet their needs there. How well are they working?

Yeah. Thank you for that. Final question. How many repeat people do we have? Do you track that as a success measure? I mean, it a revolving door? Or are we really able to help people stabilize and stay stable over the long run?

Thank you, Supervisor Hartman. Any other comments or questions from the Board? Not seeing any. You know, I've got a chance to serve on the PUP Governing Board previously, and I learned a lot and know that. So a lot of hard work and a lot of history to get to where we are today. But I think it's really important that we continue to keep that level of attention on this really important asset that we have in San Barbara County. So thank you for your work.

For Thank the you, Director Navarro. If I can get a motion to approve staff recommendations A and B.

Okay. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? The motion passes unanimously. Thank very much. We're getting close to lunch hour, but I think we want to try to squeeze in the next item. So if we have all the staff here, don't want to waste their time. I'm going let them get back to work here. So we'll go ahead and read Department Item Number three into the record.

Spencer, before you go further, can you restate that about the co response piece?

Questions from the board. Let's kick it off with supervisor Kapsch, and she's Well, a member I'm just I'm

very proud of all of the work, and it's been a real learning experience for me to be part of the CCP and and just to see all that's in motion. It's really in motion. That's how I feel about it all. And it's a challenge just to track all of the different moving parts, and I know that's really the challenge for you all because everybody is rowing in the right direction, but trying to just keep that is a daily challenge. And so the fact that there's now better data is promising, and I know that's a recent development.

And I know that, you know, we're about to get the diversion strategic plan, and that's also an accomplishment to to cheer on. So I guess my only question is what's the next step, or how do you even know what to bring forward to track and to present data, to present progress? Because, again, there's so many different moving parts. I think we're gonna get into the co response a little bit later, but what's the next step in terms of presenting public data?

Great. Thank you. And thanks for that powerful ending, that that real life example. The undersheriff just attended a meeting with me and my staff yesterday about some neighborhood concerns about La Posada. And so it just hit home for me to just think about all of the success and life changing work that's happening there, and so to hear that story was particularly powerful.

Thank you, Supervisor Caps. Supervisor Lee and Supervisor Hartman.

Got it. Thank you, chair Nelson. So how does the CCP interact with the JJCC? A lot of acronyms in that.

All right. Thank you, Supervisor Lee. Supervisor Hartman.

I just have two points. The first is could you expand about the freedom to choose? This is the first time I'm learning about it. I, of course, know about Ready and other programs, but this one catches my imagination.

So about how many people are involved? How long has it been going? How will you evaluate its success?

But in a sense, then, it's people with lived experience who've been in that position, and now they're coming back to counsel people and say you really can make a change. Is that a correct understanding?

No. Just to understand who the people are who are working with the jail residents, and what their motivation is, and why the jail residents might be responsive to them.

And so the courses are a whole range of things?

So is it more GED kinds of things, or is it more life skill?

Okay. Thank you. So my next is it's really just a comment. The CCP, I've I've never served on it. I've only attended one meeting.

But it really is structurally able to bring together our criminal justice partners, put money on the table, and and and and then evaluate the programs in a way that we really rely on. And what what you did with jail study was really appreciated. What what you're determining about co response and how to be more productive. We're we're getting information from you that is extremely valuable to us. And it's not easy for departments with different missions to really come together and find what's common and even to be responsive to the direction that the board and the county wants to go.

So I just think well done and thank you.

All right. Thank you, Supervisor Hartman. I just had a couple of questions just on the funding and what our purview is on this. You know, understand it's group. Supervisor Cap sits on there. You know, what this Board didn't agree with the funding priorities. What are our what's our recourse?

I mean, does it need approval from the Board to move forward on your budget? I know, you know, it's obviously a working group, proposed budget, you guys kind of do this in a collaborative manner, but there's also Board priorities, too. And I know you guys are kind of looking up at what we care about and trying to figure out how to fund these things and keep us happy, and then also work the working group happy. Can you speak to that? I'm just trying to I want to make sure I understand it a little bit better.

Okay. Well, you for that explanation. I think that's helpful for all of us because, you know, there's the initiatives that you guys are trying to move forward to get data on, and then there's things that we need to do, especially in a in a tiny budget time where you guys are looking at it and go, maybe that's something we can pay for that the Board still has a priority or other departments have priorities on. And I want to thank you guys for stepping up on that co response piece for that third team. Help me where you guys are at with that fourth team. I know, Spencer, you kind of went over that a little bit. Is there funding potentially to fund it in this budget year for that fourth team if things align and you guys get the data that you need and there's some political will within the

Okay. Thank you for that. And I just want to highlight for that committee is that this third team is either going to be north or south. And so one of those communities is going get left out if their fourth team isn't funded. You know, it's been a priority of mine whether we fund it with CCP dollars or general fund dollars. I think it's something that should be funded. I think that we need to have parity in equity. And I know that's one of your guys' priorities on that list is equity. And so maybe that's a plug for that to be a good one time use for this next year's budget. So thank you.

And I just wanna add, I really appreciate your oversight and productivity and the analysis. Because I think that that's really important. And we don't have that ability. We depend on you and that you develop a consensus around this among the criminal justice partners. That's invaluable.

Okay. Thank you, sir Hartman. I failed to ask, is there any public comment on this item?

Okay. Any further I know we're getting lunch here, but I have all these partners here. Are there any of the departments that wanted to speak briefly? Right? Not Oh, Supervisor Just

one more acknowledgment of the working group and how hard the working group works, because you hear that title, and sometimes I just have been so impressed with what I hear from my representative, Eleanor Gardner, of my team and just the cohesiveness and how much they really roll up their sleeves and get a lot done. Thanks to them.

Well, again, thank you, Supervisor Caps, for you and your district serving a significant role on behalf of the five of us on that Commission. So with that, I'll take a motion to adopt A through D, which is accepting presentation as well as signing off with hopefully at least two of us voting on it because it's approved, I think, at that point, but hopefully all five. So I'll take a motion.

All right. So any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. So congratulations. And thank you guys all for being here. All right. At this time, we'll go ahead and recess for closed session. Madam County Counsel, could you please tell us what we'll be discussing today?

Okay. So hour and a half. So we expect to be back here at 02:00 for our fourth and final item on the departmental agenda, the permit streamlining. So thank you. I'll be back.

Okay. Welcome back to the 05/12/2026 meeting regular regularly scheduled meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors of Santa Maria. We're returning from closed session. Madam County Counsel, can you please report out from closed session?

Excellent. Thank you. All right. Well, that brings us to our fourth and final item today, departmental item number four. Madam Clerk, you please read that into the record?

Alright. Director Plumman, take it away.

All right. Thank you. I think that's probably a good idea to go to public comment and get that here from the public on this. Then we'll kind of go back to the Board and ask some questions

All right. Thank you. Questions from the Board? I know I have quite a few. So, supervisor Lee?

Okay. I'll start it. So if someone gets a land use permit, can they build something that's outside of the zoning requirements?

Okay. Good. So let's move on. So what's the purpose does a land use permit appeal serve? I mean, why?

Okay. Good, good. Great answer. So, why are you proposing, especially number two, how would these changes apply in communities like Mission County and Montecito and Summerland, where the design review is part of the community's expectations, where it is very important about that review. How would that impact those communities?

Good. I appreciate you saying that. So moving forward, so if we exempt more commercial changes of use from parking requirements, What protections do we have for residential areas that have existing parking issues?

So are we gonna consider parking at all, or we just gonna throw out the window?

So I don't like it as a general rule, but I would like to explore FAR as a criteria for design review. So can you explain more about what that could look like?

Good. And my last question, I just want to be clear. Option two is for design review for single family residential. Would that have a trigger or something like FAR then move it into a more traditional review process?

Yeah. Thank you. That's my question. Okay.

Alright. Thanks, supervisor Lee. Supervisor O'Capps.

Yeah. Thank you. I I mean, I welcome all these a lot of these changes. I know you're been working on this, and and I know you get these comments too, but just out and about people say, oh, you know, I tried to do this, and it's cost me so much money, and it took me fifteen months. And I know you shared those frustrations.

So I just look at things like making it so that people can just do pools and not have to go through this arduous process, or even better yet, HVAC systems or small structures. So this is music to my ears to just know that this will be much faster. And to that point, I've been asking, I'm just wondering if you track like a shot clock sort of do you have a sense of when a project starts, how long it takes? And if is there an awareness among staff of this is taking a really long time. I need to elevate this.

I'm just wondering if there's, I know every project is different, but is there sort of a sense of an average length for an ADU, an average length for, yeah, ADU as an example, an average cost? I don't see that here. I've been asking, and I just am curious because I think, you know, if it's way above, does that trigger some sort of supervisor to say, hey, this is way out of line, or we really need to what's going on here kind of thing to make sure that it's kind of you know, it's not taking because it's hourly. And I just wanna make sure that along with these reforms, we also are making sure th

So the goal here, just to state it plainly, is to make things go faster and to make things be less expensive. Okay. To that end, and you can say no, will you do you ever foresee getting to the point where you say an average you know, an ADU permit will cost you approximately x and take you approximately, well, I guess you just said it, sixty days.

Once the application's complete. That could take months.

I'm just, again, I've asked this before. Just, and again, if it's no, it's no. But I just think that setting expectations would be incredible. If it's impossible, I can accept that.

Yeah. I just encourage that because, again, the stories that I hear, and I just was at a I just heard this the other night. You know, they got into the project, and then it just the cost escalated. And, again, I'm not casting any aspersions. And then they're in, and then it's one of those dilemmas. Do you pull out, you've already spent you've spent $90,000. Do you just keep going even though that is not at all what you budgeted for? So if possible, and I'm repeating my request, if a range of cost could be Presented to the public. Sure. I think it would be incredibly helpful. Sure.

Like, you wanna put in a pool. It's going to cost you x.

I'm on for $500 right now. Think that might be a

little Fantasyland. Of I have some questions about design review. So what does it cost to do design review? So Mr.

But you still pay your planner though each time to prepare

Your planner showing up to that, he's getting charged $300 an hour to be there at that hearing to present your project.

There's quite a few hours that go into preparing for your project to go to design review, right?

Yeah. But we're paying a planner during that time.

Okay. So you can submit stuff without having to pay? Mean, because we have design I mean, we're paying we're charging 10,000 to $20,000 for a planner consult at this point. So I'm trying to understand.

Okay. And one of the things you brought up here was simple zoning clearances versus complex zoning clearances. And so, you know, we were trying to get a simple zoning clearance during the Ag Enterprise Ordinance. Right? And I don't think anything of that has been simple. Is this this new category? I mean, would that eventually apply to other things as well that you guys are trying to create? Because, I mean, that was the direction the Board gave you, was that it really wanted to be truly over the pet counter. Is there anything you guys can be able to do to actually create an over counter zoning permit? Or is that is this Yes.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, guess I'm just really suspicious of this just because I mean, hopefully, but I mean we just we've given direction like this before on other things and then it turns into, you know, doctoral level work. I mean, there's no even our simple stuff now that you guys already have the simple, you guys spend months, I mean, sometimes even a year just for a permit for a house. You know, I've got something right now that's already $70,000 deep just on an akin or script of a house.

You know, so and that's what's the problem, right? I mean, that we're just over processing these things. We're over spending time. I applaud you on trying to reduce these things, and I hope I don't I don't think I mean, I think still the culture within the organization is gonna over process these things even under exemptions. The fact that you guys can't do over the counter through just a simple process submitting it that way, you know, is another proof of that, that it's really, you know, you're going to take it take two or three weeks to actually receive it, another week to maybe figure out

Again, it's a broken system. I hope this somehow makes it a little bit easier. I will try to give you guys some constructive comments, but I'm really not overly hopeful.

I've been doing this for too long, and I've seen it. At some point, when are you gonna, like, you know

since I've been here, don't think I've ever seen a package come that was this aggressive as far as I mean, let's just put it on this scale. Francis Romero I know. Called in and and wanted us to move this and thought it was a great thing. She's probably the last person that's ever gonna come in and say anything positive about PND. So I get the the hesitancy and the but

We've given this direction like this before, That's my point.

Okay. I, for one, appreciate it. I'm glad we're moving in the right direction. I mean, when I read this report, was like, dude, this is what we've been talking about for twenty years. So so maybe it is. I've never seen it come as a staff report with recommendations. Maybe there's always direction from the dais, and that's the problem is we were directing from the dais without a board majority to try to make this happen. But, you know, these things aren't North or South, Republican or Democrat. Somebody trying to build a house or put a pool in or a shed, it means it's it's important to them. So Yeah.

I think the fact that everybody's kinda shared the pain along the way now is gotten us to the point where I think everybody sees that something needs to be done, and it was I'm more hopeful and positive. Hopefully it happens.

You can balance me out. Supervisor Hartman.

Well, I do see this as the third and final phase of a comprehensive three phase process. When we hired Director Plowman, we asked her to take this on. And you've done it. And now we have to make some hard decisions. I just have a few questions.

On commercial use, if you're going from a use that is relatively less intensive to more intensive, For example, maybe a restaurant to a drive through where you have a lot more people coming in and out, say. Or you're going from a storage unit maybe to a gym. You've got more traffic. It's not just the parking, it's the traffic. Is there any way to take that into account? Or I mean, if it's much more intensive use.

Okay. And since you explained it that way, I guess I parking is a surrogate. Think it's more traffic that people get worried about, at least in my experience. But I think what I hear you saying is that the commercial uses are similar enough that that's unlikely to trigger a big concern about neighborhood traffic increases. I

Got it. Just two other quick points. So when you're exempting things proposing to exempt things like HVAC or backup generators, is is is there a longer list? I was curious about water heaters. And then in terms of generators, I know APCD has cutoff between where you need a permit not, and wondered if that would make sense here.

And then my final question is sort of weighing this about, do we still hold standards for community plan areas? And the Gaviota Coast or Scenic Highways, those are something I've got top of mind trying there was a lot of blood, sweat and tears that went into the Gaviota Coast plan. And so I'm going to be trying to defend its integrity to the extent that I can.

Thank you, Supervisor Raman. I wanted to lean into a little bit of that next piece of building permits, because it's only the planning side, which is about half of the problem, right? So are there any efforts in place to try to address the difficulty getting through the plan check and the building process?

And that should happen with our exempt permits then as well. Right?

you say that you're complying with the setbacks?

So But on a planning side, if you if you and your permit say I'm gonna comply with the setbacks, why would we need to verify that?

Yeah. I understand that. But, you know, like you're, you know, you're trusting on the building permit side on these simpler things. I think that's what the what we're looking for in the development community on these exempt permits is that say, if I comply Trust me because I said I comply. If I don't comply, then you're going have a building violation or a planning violation. And so it's proving your innocence versus, you know, the other way around. So I I think that that's because what to to get for you guys to check on whether I comply is ten, twenty hours, which is 3 to $6,000. That it is.

I mean, I I hear from people all the time. I know supervisor Laban, you know, like, I've got a lot of unincorporated area. I've got a lot of people that are that go in and then they decide not to do anything, or they just build it without a permit. Right. Because it's just so expensive to even comply, even So, for zoning

So, again, I I think that's an area that we could do some additional work, especially on the building side, to be looking for more exemptions there or letting people get their own plan check, having a profession a state license plan checkers, what the county does. It makes sense that we let people do that as well or even building inspectors. Know, there's there are state licensed people that have stamps that are licensed by the state that have bonding insurance, things that we don't even have for ourselves when we when we go out there and check other people's work. So those are some some ideas

And then I think the other piece, I think, in simplification is looking at using more exemptions on CEQA. Think often we're doing projects, you know, we're going through a Sequa processes that, you know, are more robust than are necessary because we're off, you know, we're trying to protect against some of these potential appeals. But I do think that there's lot, there's, you know, most jurisdictions use exemptions a little bit more aggressively than we do. And I think that that's something that we should lean into more.

Okay. Thank you. Other questions? No other questions? Okay. I guess we need go through the spreadsheet and give you some direction, or some of these questions.

I read that a few times. I had to try to figure out what the difference was between the two. Yeah. So when I finally got it Yeah. You know, it's ministerial and appealable. Then under ministerial, if you choose ministerial, do you want to break that up into a simple and complex review of your staff?

And so but what about if somebody wanted to build that FAR 50? Like, it's all against every single setback. Is that going be a ministerial permit, is that appealable? Is there something that eventually triggers?

And just, you know, kind of basic law on land use is that, you know, if you have a parcel, should be able to build a house on it, right? Isn't that kind of a basic concept of right? So we're just saying this is kind of a property rights question here, right? In some ways, I mean, you have a right to build a house. We're starting from that point. Build your house. But the processing's going to be either simple or complex, depending on what kind of house you want build.

All right. Thank you for the explanation. But I do think we need to kind of move through some of these, because I know one of my colleagues asked to leave a little early here, I want to make sure their opinion is made in here. So I'm okay with two. I don't know what anybody else is at.

I'm two just because so two is non appealable, though. But it's basically, it's you guys doing the review and taking the neighbor out of it. And see, that's key to me because I think I don't think I've ever been in an appealable situation with a single family home that made sense when we got through the whole thing and you guys had run it through the wringer. So I think removing the appeal process on a single family dwelling is the way to go. Supervisor Hartman?

Again, I'm thinking about the Gaviota Coast. I'm thinking about McMansions. And I'm not sure that two adequately deals with that. So I tend to favor one where there's thresholds.

Could we make two, but in certain, like, special areas, you know, some that are carved out that, you know, that are over 5,000 square foot houses or in scenic zones that that might trigger the appeal? I mean, make an appeal is really the exception, but in really high focus areas.

And I'm going trying give you some carve outs. Because there are some of our areas that we've gone through extensive community planning areas, like Old Town Orchid, Bell I know you guys have you have some as well that kind of still need design review there. You know, those are areas that, you know, you've kind of built a concept around that, and to kind of abandon that at this point would be really disruptive to those communities. So I think there are I'm going be looking for carve outs.

So, again, size, if if it's a 10,000 square foot house, 12,000 square foot house, could that be under two exempt?

Yeah. So that's why I prefer number one where you've got Yeah. There's some cutoff or maybe tiered. But if it's really big and a really big impact on the neighborhood or the view shed,

Well, maybe what might help too is if you guys are going through this process, because you're taking direction here. again. And it comes again. As we you know, are there some, you know, 95% to 98% of this should be ministerial. You know, I think what I'm hearing from Supervisor Hartman is that there are some of those areas that are a little bit special that could screw up the, you know, bad apple, could mess up the whole bunch here, right?

Okay. Let's think about this. What's going to actually happen? We're going to start carving out. Right. And it's going to be the entire 3rd District, And not that's the way it's gonna be because you don't want anything on that ridge line. We don't want anything over there. We don't want anything on Gaviota. We don't want and and then you're gonna say Old Town Orchid. You're gonna go with Mission Canyon and Hope Canyon and all these places. And it's like Yeah. Cool. So you can build in Santa Maria. You know?

We're gonna lose what we're trying to do here. We're we're trying to tell them to go faster and make it less expensive. Yes. But I still want control over it, and you you can't have both. It's the old fast, cheap, and whatever.

Yeah. Okay. Jurisdiction's pretty narrow.

So I've got a couple twos from Steve and I. I didn't hear from Roy or or Laura, as you're trying to figure out some consensus here where we're at.

I confess I have a a challenge with planner speak. And so, I mean, I I'm

we met, so I'm not this is this is this is on me, but, I mean, I lean towards towards two. But I just yeah. I don't know how many questions we have, but it's it's daunting.

But Carvelles is important because my district is very scenic and Yeah.

Which is all our districts are very specific in rural.

So but and I think that's where we're that's where I think we're getting planning the same. That's where design review is going to come into place. And you know what, after I was, you know, so negative, I want to try. We need to try something, guys. We have to do something different. So, I mean, this may be painful for some of us, and we may have to come back here later on and change things in a couple of years because maybe it went crazy. It was, you know, maybe too successful. That'd a good problem to have. But knowing the history of how things have gone, it's probably not going to lead to uncontrolled, unfettered development that we're gonna be really uncomfortable with.

to make things faster and cheaper, and we also with carve outs, I also think that's an invitation For neighborhood appeals. I'm not comfortable with the carve out concept. Every district is scenic.

Okay. That takes us to design review, right? And so what's exempt? You're asking us on that exempt single family homes, some tiered approach, or just Yeah, can you walk walk us through Sure.

Right. If we end up having the administrative design process. I hate to say it. What's the point of having our bars then? What would our bars be reviewing?

is that number one or is that number two? Well,

That's good because that will mean less things for the full board.

I think the middle ground actually makes things faster because I think there's exempt stuff Right. That's going be exempt to the And it's stuff that's in between there that would get some so actually I think two is actually the fastest process because it captures some of those things and gets reviewed by staff instead of going to bar.

Okay. Well, understanding that concept, I'm okay with two, if that because again, we're trying to move to a more streamlined process.

two. This is the second one. This is the next two.

Okay. Oh, okay. I thought you were still talking about

Oh, then then I agree with you. 2222 on design review.

Okay. So we're at one two and two two. And we're not and so

So I got the Orchid Community Plan, which is a big community, right? But then I also have the Old Town Orchid.

Right. Then then you have like Los Alamos, but then you have Bell Street. I I and maybe it's more for the commercial piece, and maybe that's already gonna be covered no matter what. It's like Bell Street and Clark and and Old Orchid should have some design reviews. You're trying to keep an you know, a lot of people invest a lot of money into keeping the old town theme. And I think that that is a good use of design review is is to have some additional purview on that. I I don't wanna get into all this extra design review on single family homes and whatnot, but I think for these commercial zones that have been trying to keep a historic theme, think it's important. Supervisor Hartman?

Well, I agree. Los Olivos would be another example. I'm trying to understand I mean, I think people went through blood, sweat, and tears on community plans. did. And I could compromise some, but on the Gaviota Coast, that's one that I think is really I can't override that. And I need to understand better how these changes would affect that. And I'm sorry, have to catch a plane to Sacramento.

So real quick, do you have any commercial thoughts real quick before we leave you or before you leave us?

I'm supportive of the changes that they proposed to commercial and turning over being more productive of those properties. That's important.

Okay. I think those were some of the questions that they're going need feedback on. So I wanted to make sure you got a chance to comment on that. So all right. Back to you, Alex.

Well, I think the question is to Supervisor Lee here on your thoughts on design review.

So I would have hoped that you have reached out to me earlier and so we can let me think about this and

And give you I think that's because this is just looking for some This

So, let me recommend, especially since this is a really sensitive area there, that staff work with the First District on it, because I think that there have some conflict areas there, especially with the they have their own bar just for one community. That I think that's where the most of the work's going to need to be done. And I think the rest of us can get comfortable with what comes out of that.

So yeah. So for now, just let's let's work about talk about it and work it through because Monticello is different from Mission Canyon. It's Monticello is from different from everywhere else.

Why would you keep paying this property tax? No. You can have your own in the ER.

we need to do some things differently. So I'm willing to take the risk here. Yeah. So. I think there's some risk to it, but I think overall the greater good of what we're trying to accomplish here needs to be we need to take some risks.

Like for example, as far as I understand, like going from retail to a restaurant.

Correct. And it's always hard to tell. Don't know if it's going be a popular restaurant or not a popular restaurant. Mean, it's true, right? Mean, some things get a lot of use, you're never going to know until it goes in there. And it may blow up the parking lot and everybody's mad at that one, you know, one retailer. But, you know, and it's kind of the process that has to go through. And that sometimes ultimately becomes a self limiting factor for that business as well, is the parking available.

Okay. I'm seeing unanimity here on that. And I get I think Supervisor Hartman expressed the similar feelings there. So number two, establish thresholds for ministerial commercial development.

And I guess we can play around with that number. If you want to start with 5,000, and we can kind of discuss that and debate it over the next few months when you bring this back to us. I'm comfortable with that number. Do you guys think that that captures a lot of smaller projects?

Is everybody okay, comfortable with Yeah, that

I'm comfortable with that. I I do think we have these areas that we've done some really significant community design work in. You know, that's areas I want to protect, but outside of those areas, I'm okay with a lot of exemptions when it comes to this. You know, a business, they want their place to look nice, Right? I mean, they're the ones that are spending the money. It's their property. They're not gonna try to look at make it look bad. Now I know that there's themes that we're trying to get to, and we wanna make sure that one neighbor doesn't screw it up for everybody else in these these design areas, and that's why we have design review. But other than that, I don't I'm not overly concerned about it. I

would say uniform versus tailored. Right.

But yeah. Okay. Is that helpful for you guys on some feedback here, or are you looking for more?

think that's helpful? Give that. Us some options. You know, what we're really doing is we're bringing the value back to the zoning, you know, that zoning should allow certain uses. Right? Residential should allow a house, and commercial should allow commercial development. I mean, that's kind of what we've kind of overly processed these things at this point, so this kind of opens up a little bit. All right. So you got one more for us?

I think that's something we all want to see done. Yes.

Yes. I think we're all in favor of this. One thought that came out of this was when we were talking about this, or we're going through this. We got residential, we got commercial. We didn't do anything in our industrial zones. I know we have very few. So I just ask you guys to maybe go back and look at that, if there's some abilities to to bring us back some further exemptions in our industrial areas because those are the areas where you should be able to do large development plans without permits or without CUPs, lower level permits.

All right, thank you. So my last statement is, I know it was cranky at very beginning, but nothing would make me happier than be proven wrong. So good luck and I'm signing up to be helpful in the process any way I can to make this a successful plan. With that, I'll make a motion to approve items A through C. I'll second. Second by Supervisor Lee. Any further discussion? Seeing none.

to be A through C. So with the direction my motion included the direction that we had given in the hearing. Thank you. Sorry. That includes that was B A, B and C. Supervisor Levy, do you accept that clarification of my motion? I do. Okay. All in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. All right. Let's go ahead and this adjourns our meeting for 05/12/2026. Our next regularly scheduled meeting will be 06/09/2026, in our Santa Barbara Hearing Room. See you there.