Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

Good morning. I will call to order the July 7th, 2026 regular meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?

Here. Please stand and join us in pledging allegiance to our flag. Ready, begin. I pledge allegiance

Next item of business is approval of the minutes from the June 23rd regular meeting. Can I get a motion? Hartman moves approval. Second. A motion from Hartman, second from Lee. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Next item up is our County Executive Officer report. CEO Miyasato, do you have a report for us today?

Thank you, COO Misato. Vice Chair Hartman, do you have a, okay, saw your light on there. All right. Next word of a business is clerk's announcements. Madam Clerk, do we have any announcements or changes to today's agenda?

Next item of business is our administrative agenda. I see that Supervisor Capp is your point 8, 20, and 27, and I also understand that 27 is being pulled by the public. Are there any other items that the board has? Not seen any. Any other items by the public, Madam Clerk?

Okay, so I'm looking for a motion to approve the administrative agenda with the exception of 8, 20, and 27.

Okay, motion from Hartman, second by Capps. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. All right, we'll go ahead and begin our honorary resolutions and start off with item number one. Madam Clerk, will you please read that item into the record?

Director, Catherine, I just want to say thank you for your work, for you and your team, for what you do for our community. When I visited there, I was able to meet former county supervisor Bill Wallace there. So it was an honor to meet him, see him. So continue what you're doing, and thank you again.

Thank you. I just want to give testimony to the fun that's had there and the music. And I didn't witness this in person, but I saw on the news on KYT just such an incredibly heartwarming story about the prom that you recently held with a real prom with dancing and strobe lights and all the rest. So good job just keeping such a fun spirit for everybody. Well done.

Thank you, Supervisor Capps. Next item will be item number two. Madam Clerk, will you please read that item into the record?

Madam Clerk, will you please read administrative item number three into the record.

WELL, THANK YOU, CHAIR NELSON. I BET YOU ALL DIDN'T KNOW TODAY THAT YOU WERE GOING TO COME HERE AND MEET THE MAYOR OF CHINO STREET. and an American hero who clearly has impacted such a family, a legacy of people who have given back as well. So it's our honor, Supervisor Lee and I, to be able to work on this resolution. And I drive Chino Street a couple of times a day and I always pay tribute to you, sir. It's wonderful to have you here in person. We are together on Memorial Day because of your service to the Navy and clearly what a life of service, thank you.

Supervisor Lee. Mr. Lopez, I just want to say thank you for your service to our country and our community. I know you're known as the mayor of Chino Street, but I see you more as the hero of Chino Street. So thank you for all you do. And I just appreciate everything you do. Thank you.

Thank you. Tough act to follow there. Madam Clerk, will you please read administrative item number four into the record?

All right, that concludes our resolutions, and now we will take up the items that were pulled by board members and members of the public, and we'll start with the first one being A8. Madam Clerk, will you please read that item into the record?

Yes, thank you. I pulled this. We asked for these audits of the overtime issue with the jail. It's been an issue of concern, and I wanted to provide some transparency to this, which was one of the purposes, and also echoed by the grand jury asking for more oversight. And so I know that some progress has been made, and I thought it would be a good chance to highlight some of that progress, if that can be shared. I don't know if anyone from the sheriff's office is here.

COMMANDER HUDDLE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME UP?

OR IF WHOEVER WOULD LIKE TO SHARE THAT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THE PLATFORM THAT THERE HAS BEEN SOME PROGRESS AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO SHARE.

And do we know, I know a lot of the, you're doing, it seems to me from reading the report, you're doing what you can outside of the agreement with the board, between the board and the union. Is that an accurate assessment that it's, much of it has to do within the agreement and that really is between the, that's really within the MOU?

I know that process is ongoing and also was identified with the grand jury report. Speaking of the grand jury, do we have a date yet? I know that's a process between the Sheriff's office and getting scheduled here within the board. Do we have a process, a date yet scheduled for when that comes back?

As chair, we have it scheduled for August 25th.

Okay, good, and Chair, with your permission, I mean, we do have our auditor here. I didn't want to interrupt her if she wanted to add any of her assessment.

And while we have Ms. Schaefer up there, I know the Board also requested to look at some other departments besides the Sheriff's Department. Could you give us just a status update of where we are with that process and when we might be able to get a report back to the Board?

Right. Any further discussion on this? Is there, Madam Clerk, is there any general public comment on this item?

Okay. Any further discussion here at the board? Okay. I will take a motion to approve staff recommendations, which I disbelieve is received and filed here. So moved. Second. Any further discussion on that? All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Next item of business is item 820. Madam Clerk, can you please read that item into the record?

Again, Chair Nelson, I pulled this because I thought it was of significant development with our budget process. We were all hoping that the governor would sign what the legislature had come forward with, which would provide some relief to our staffing challenges and layoff situation. And that indeed happened. And so again, it was put here on the agenda, but I believed it was worthy of some acknowledgement given the impact on people and our staff. So I wanted to highlight this and again, share the information to everybody.

And I know you were preparing for that with some optimism. What's the timeframe for those positions?

Okay. So just so it's, I know it's pretty complicated and these are people's lives and these are important jobs and a lot of community members are quite anxious about what this means for their healthcare. Can you explain exactly what we're voting on today and why it requires four-fifths?

I JUST WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE OUR LEGISLATORS UP IN SACRAMENTO THAT FOUGHT FOR THIS MONEY AND WERE ABLE TO PUT IT IN THE FINAL PACKAGE THAT WENT TO THE GOVERNOR AND CHANGED HIS ORIGINAL PLAN AND HE AGREED. SO WE'RE GRATEFUL THAT WE'RE ABLE TO DO THIS AND IT RESULTED IN NOT AS MANY LAYOFFS AS WE HAD AGREED TO IN OUR BUDGET.

Thank you, Supervisor Capps. I actually had a couple of questions as well in regards to this. Sure. I just want to understand, so this money's coming with and we're going to provide new services that we weren't necessarily going to provide next year or we were going to provide these services no matter what? Yes. We were, okay. Yes.

Okay. And so then we're going to take that excess funds and hire back some staff. Is that what I'm hearing?

So we're going to serve the same amount of population we were going to serve previously. We've just now staffed up. Yes. Because we have some excess funds. Yes. Was there any discussion on whether we might potentially, because we backfill with general fund this year, right? Was there, I guess this may be a question for CEO Miyasato. You know, when these new funds came in, was there any discussion about potentially retrieving some of those general funds back to the general fund? part of this process?

I understand, and I appreciate what we're trying to do in taking this opportunity. I guess my preference would be to look at maybe a balanced of restoring some positions and also restoring some of that general fund, especially knowing that next year's might be worse. And so that's my personal preference. I'm okay with the plan that you guys have. I'm not going to change the last minute, but I do think that we might want to look at that as some of these funding sources change over the next year. You know, I was okay with us backfilling with general fund as a stopgap, as a patch to restore servi

Two points. I think this came up during the budget hearings and we were hoping this would happen and now it has. Dr. Hamami, could you just put a finer point on are we just hiring people and we'll have to let them go next year or are we bringing people back and then increasing productivity so that we can bill more even at a lower rate? and then maintain that level of service? Because I think your vision here is really important, especially given the other cuts to health that we anticipate and are seeing.

all right um with that any public comment on this item madam clerk chair nelson and members of the board we have no request to speak from the public on this item all right um any further discussion of the board see none can i get a motion i will move staff recommendation okay second in the second by hartman any further discussion all those in favor signify by saying aye aye opposed motion passes unanimously thank you And this brings us to our last administrative item. And I believe that's item A27.

All right, this item is pulled by Supervisor Capps. Would the speaker like to go to public comment first?

I PULLED IT SO THAT THE PUBLIC WOULD HAVE A CHANCE TO HEAR ABOUT THE DESIGN PLANS BEFORE WE VOTED.

EXCELLENT. SHOULD YOU WANT TO HAVE SOME, DO YOU WANT STAFF TO ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT WHAT THE PLANS ARE FIRST?

I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. THANK YOU.

Right. Thank you, Mr. Patton. Ms. Capps.

So just again on that, because I because of the intense community interest on this, can you speak or just emphasize the community engagement element?

Okay. Well, I look forward to hearing about that and helping to get the word out. Thank you.

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

A couple of questions. In the design, will there be enough space for activities like the public defender meeting space? And how do we assure that? I'm having a hard time understanding how the proposal is and how flexible and responsive you can be to concerns of the community or concerns that maybe haven't been fully identified or vetted yet. And one of them is, I think, space for attorneys to meet with clients.

So the board has voted five zero for one and a half pods. We do see that our jail population given lots of policies that we've invested in is declining. Are we absolutely committed to outfitting that half pod or can that retain some flexibility over time?

And I'm not sure if you're the right one to answer this, but it's very important, to me at least, that we begin thinking about and designing how we decommission the old jail, South County Jail, used to be known as the main jail, to alternative and better uses. What we don't want is to have to have O&M costs for two jails when we're done with this. we need to reduce our O&M costs. That was a big incentive to try to put more units in North County. So can you speak to that? Are you the right person?

So not just how you move people, but how we use that differently. What options are there?

That's exciting. So if I understood A.C.O. Horton, we probably need the 1.5 pods if we're going to fully decommission and that will be more efficient ongoing, is that?

All right. All right. Thank you. Let's go to members of the public who've also pulled this item. Madam Clerk.

that concludes public comment for it uh administrative item number 27. all right thank you back to the board supervisor hartman uh yes first of all i'm i'm really glad that we're doing a design build i think we learned from the previous construction that this is a good way to go it does beg the question for me who makes the final decision on the design is it the sheriff is it the criminal justice partners general services does the board have a role And is there, so often up here, we send things off and then it comes back and it's done, it's fully baked. So in terms of transparency, what more c

Who would be on the governance committee?

But I mean, one of the comments that we heard today from Mr. Severance and echoed by others is we want a jail designed to meet our policies. And as we've heard, we have a lot of people who are mentally ill, people with substance use disorders. So clearly, those need to be in the mix as well as public defender and the DA and others probation. So I think that I'm eager to hear more about how this unfolds. So when will it come back to us?

I really appreciate Supervisor Hartman's line of questioning. I just think this is not a typical building, and so those who have skills that are unlike mine that do buildings, what i'm looking for and i think that's what you're getting is sort of an engagement plan an outreach plan how can we ensure that that's happening and if it's happening great but we we're looking to make sure that it is so that we can make sure that they the the folks that have the expertise about the things that supervisor hartman is raising are having the input at the right time so that we don't have to go back and mak

And if I might add something, we have a lot of transition happening. Right. And so we want to make sure that there's continuity with these principles.

That's great. And you certainly have a variety of different perspectives. So who is the lead on the outreach to the community?

Okay, thank you both. With that, we've done public comment on this item. We've had discussion. Can I get a motion on this item from the board?

Supervisor Capps? Yeah, I'm happy to move staff recommendation.

All right. I'll second. Okay, motion from Capps, second from Hartman. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. All right, that concludes our administrative agenda. We're going to go into general public comment, and then after that, we'll take a small break before we start departmental items.

Okay, so with no general public comment, we'll go ahead and take a five-minute break, and then we'll come back to begin our de-agenda. All right, welcome back to the July 7th, 2026 regular scheduled meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. We've completed our administrative agenda in public comment and we'll be getting our departmental agenda at this time. Madam Clerk, will you please read departmental item number one into the record?

All right. Thank you. And we'll kick it off with Seth.

All right, thank you, Mr. Schenk. Questions from the board? I see no questions from the board. Do we have any public comment on this item?

Right back to the board. I guess you answered all our questions. I'll just say for the record, you know, I'm not a big proponent of increased fees or taxes, but I am always supportive of this one. It's an investment, really, is what it is. And your department does a really good job making sure that each one of these dollars that are coming off our tax bills go directly into projects. And I think people appreciate that. I think this is one of those that I could actually support in the future. You guys went out for some additional benefit assessment to the public because I think it is really suc

I'll make a motion to acting as a Board of Directors for Flood Control and Water Conservation District to move staff recommendations A through D and one through four.

All right, thank you. Supervisor Labanino, a motion there? Second. Second from Supervisor Hartman. Any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Great job. All right, Madam Clerk, we will now move on to Departmental Item number two. Will you please read that item to the record?

All right, questions from the board? Supervisor Hartman?

Yeah, I have a couple. First of all, you just, congratulations. It looks like those, at least the first two sets of programs, Santa Barbara County is pulling beyond its weight compared to our neighbors to the north and south. So I assume that's, you're really hustling out there, so appreciate that. When you talk about serving hard-to-reach customers, you talked about Guadalupe and Santa Maria. I just wonder if you could elaborate a little bit about Lompoc, which also has underserved customers. They are not served, however, by PG&E, so maybe that is the issue.

Good to hear. And when you talk about hard to reach people and the subsidizing utility rates, where do seniors fit in that?

So this program or this set of programs is really to help people who otherwise wouldn't be able to afford this. So you're not really focused on who are the biggest energy users and trying to reduce that way, but really to help those who might be left behind if they didn't get some additional support.

So I remember maybe five, seven years ago, you couldn't find somebody to install a heat pump. Could you talk about your training program and how, what, is that the biggest impact or how now you see them everywhere?

That's exciting. And my last question is just about agriculture. You mentioned, I think, five different entities that you were working with. I'm not sure how that fits with your hard-to-reach mandate, but just hoping we can do more there and wondered if you could elaborate a bit on that for me.

So just to follow up a bit, so in agriculture is it mainly water pumps or what, where would you get the most savings in energy use?

All right. Thank you, Supervisor Hartman. I just have a few questions. In the presentation, you talked about these funds coming from the investor-owned utilities. But those funds are really coming from rate payers, right? I mean, it's kind of a misnomer. It's like basically saying Harry Hagan funds the county, right, to say the investor-owner utilities do. So I think in presentations, I think it's really important to reflect the accuracy of that. So I just wanna make sure that that in the future is more reflected and it might be also good for us in some of these presentations to know how much

Okay, it shouldn't be. I mean, it's right there. I looked at it on my bill, and I see the public purpose tax there, and there's also the franchise fee tax. And so all those are there, and obviously they're able to collect the franchise fee tax, and they pay out to the jurisdictions. So It shouldn't be. So send the email, CC me on it, and then we'll follow up and make sure we get that number. It shouldn't be a hidden or a secret by any means. So that was my, I think that was my main point here on this. Any other questions from the board? Oh, Supervisor Capps.

Just one question. I appreciate the effort with the hard to reach population. That's obviously challenging. Are there efforts with renters and can you describe those strategies?

MOSTLY WITH PROPERTY OWNERS, YOU ARE GOING FOR THE BIG APARTMENT COMPLEXES, MOSTLY?

Well, thank you for the information and for the work. it's painstaking to reach these populations and to do so day after day. So thank you.

Thank you. I remember my other question. So just trying to understand the function of this public purpose tax that's on our bills. Does when we do an investment plan that we send to the PUC, does that impact that rate on a local level or is that just pulling from a pool out there so when the puc assesses that public purpose are they doing that in a regional way or are they doing that just straight across throughout the state of california a flat rate so because what i want to also understand is if if we ask for more money does that mean that that basically just goes on our locals bills or are

And we're doing that through a fee that's on their bill, right? It's not coming out of the profits of the investor-owned utility, right? It's coming out of the fee.

So answer my question the public purpose programming charge is just a percentage. It's not a programmatic cost. Correct. Okay. Great. Thank you. That clarifies it for me. Did I ask Madam Clerk whether we had any public comment on this item? I think I asked. Maybe I didn't.

All right. Thank you. Any further questions from the board? All right. Seeing none, I think this is receiving a file. I'll go ahead and take a motion from one of my colleagues.

Okay, a motion from Hartman for staff recommendation and a second from Supervisor Capps. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. All right, moving right along. Some of the same players, I think, or at least we have some guests here. Madam Clerk, will you please read department item number three into the record?

All right, Director Amos, do you want to kick us off or get us started? Right to Mr. Brent.

All right. Questions from the board? Supervisor Hartman.

Let's see. The first is one of the promises of 3CE and CCAs generally was to bring more governance and more resources locally rather than off to, officers and shareholders of the investor-owned utilities. And I think that 3CE is realizing that promise where you showed the kinds of programs that you're reinvesting in here. I wonder if you would first mention your new office and describe where that is and who's working there. And then would you talk more about virtual power plants and how that has an opportunity to realize some of our shared goals?

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

Hey, Mr. Williams. So I'm glad you brought up data centers. Are there any plans to regulate or talk about in-house mini data centers at homes? I know Navita is pushing out this pilot program where they're going to install these many data centers that people can install at the residence. Have you guys talked about that?

All right, thank you. I had a little bit question about the legislative affairs on the permitting reform. It said on your on your sheet there said more on a federal level is the permitting reform that you guys are advocating for. Can you guys go into that? Are you guys doing advocating for permitting on the local level or at the state level as well?

protect the the residents but also facilitate the affordability and clean energy goals of those residents yeah the feedback i'd give you is i think that i think everybody up here on the board wants permitting streamlining but i do think we also still want to retain local control And so I know that there's a lot of efforts out there to bypass locals and having some say in the process. So I know I wouldn't be supportive of that and I think it'd be inconsistent with our legislative platform. So when we're larger members on that end. But I mean, I think we definitely want to see ways to deal with

Sure, when I talk about local control, I'm not talking about additional regulatory burden that the locals would try to put on a project, but just having discretion is really what I think is important to all of us, is that we're the voice of the residents of this county, and I think we want to have discretion on potentially project siting, project impacts, and I think we need to make sure that we retain that as much as possible without just giving that over to the state or maybe interest that lobby for exemptions. And so that's what I'm always concerned about. I think there's always a deal to b

Yeah, just one final question, given we have your expertise here. You showed a chart that mainly we're getting our daytime energy from renewable sources. So the real key is storage, how we get energy in the hours in the early evening. And I wonder if you could talk about battery innovation, both what 3CE is doing and just more generally.

All right. Thank you, Supervisor Hotman. Thank you, Mr. Williams, Ms. Brandt. Madam Clerk, is there any public comment on this item?

All right. Any further questions or comments from the board? Seeing none, I'll ask for a motion to adopt staff recommendation, receive and file.

Motion from Hartman, second by Capps. All in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passed unanimously. Thank you very much. All right. We are running a little behind, so we're going to start to keep going and see if we can catch up a little bit. I will make an announcement here at some point after consulting with the clerk on what our time management looks like, but we will go ahead and move forward with item number four. Madam Clerk, will you please read item number four into the record?

All right, before we begin, we'd like to see if there's any ex parte communications to disclose on behalf of the board. Supervisor Lavagnino. I have none to report. Supervisor Hartman.

Supervisor Capps, none. And I also have no ex parte to disclose. So with that, we'll go ahead and turn it over to staff. I believe, Director Plowman, are you going to kick us off?

At this time, we'll ask for a presentation on the appellant. Ms. Sandoval? Ms. Sandoval, you're going to have 10 minutes to do a presentation. And if you don't use all 10 minutes, we'll reserve that time for you to do later on in the rebuttal. Yeah, take your time.

We'll get it up here for you in a second.

Thank you. You got 40 seconds extra there. All right, so at this time, Madam Clerk, is there any public comment on this item?

Is that, real quick, so those materials that have been given to the board already at this point? Okay, okay. I'm concerned about the board having to consume these materials and make a decision based on these materials in a very tight time frame.

Ms. Sandoval, I'm handling it. You'll get a chance in your rebuttal to do that. So before we go too far into your public comment, you're more than welcome to do a public comment. I'm just concerned about this being the record if we're needing to act upon it. I haven't seen it, I haven't read it, and so I'd hate to make that a part of the record in that case.

Okay, so we'll go ahead and do public comment. Actually, give me a second here. I want to make sure that... doing this appropriately and make sure that you have your proper due process and you get a chance to voice your your um i don't know opposition or support i actually don't know so i just want to make sure we're doing this appropriately madam county council can you give us some direction here

I guess at this point, so would they still be distributed? It can be distributed.

OK, great. So let's go ahead and I guess so distribute them and then we'll go ahead and get you started here in a moment on your public comment.

Madam Clerk, just for the record, so these documents, we have not yet accepted them into the record, but they have been distributed. They are available in the back of the room as well as to the appellant and to staff.

putting that online which might take uh anywhere from five to ten minutes okay well i think we'll go ahead and proceed with the public comment this time and then we can make sure that those are fully in the record and potentially open up public comment at the end if there's any necessity after everything is online um so with that mr amspoker is that correct yes sir thank you please proceed thank you good afternoon members of the board my name is todd amspoker

All right, thank you. Going through my script here, I wanted to make sure I didn't see opportunities for the board to ask questions of either the staff or to the appellant. We definitely wanna do that before rebuttal. So I'd like to go ahead and ask questions of staff at this time or the applicant about these requirements.

So we need to expedite ADU permits, but we do have to look at public health and safety, right? And I assume that the flood control issues and the fire issues deal with health and safety.

So I guess I'm wondering if an applicant refuses to provide the information, can you just deny the permit within the timeframes and be done with it?

on the project if someone just refuses to provide the information yes we can just take that action and deny so this is my first experience i believe both on the planning commission and now on the board where we have an appeal of an incomplete determination and it's an it's a bit of a puzzle

Okay. Supervisor Lee, you have some questions?

I do. So the applicant keeps saying the state promised this and promised that. So if the state said that you can build 18 story building on your property, I'm sure we have a process to allow, disallow that, right? We don't have to keep the promises that a state, wherever they made promises in our county.

so there's nothing to decide because the application is not complete it is not complete incorrect all right i've got a few questions here as well um so if we did find it was complete today i guess i have a question about process um it's basically since it's going through the appeal process is the next timeline kind of being told at this point or if we found that it was complete would automatically now be approved as well because we're probably past the timeframe that we needed to approve the project. So I don't know if that's a question for staff or council here. I think I just need to underst

Well, but if we determined it complete today, is that deemed complete today or was it deemed complete previously and therefore that timeframe started and it might be an approved project at this point? I think that that's important for us to understand.

So we need to resolve that. So that's something I need to know here. I think that's an important question for this process.

I still have some other questions, but if you, so can we go ahead and bring up the slide five in the staff presentation? I've got some questions about that. Madam County Council, do you have an answer for us?

Okay, so then I would start a timeframe for staff then to go ahead and give conditions on the project, right?

Okay, I think that's an important fact for us all. So I wanted to go through slide five to ask a few questions. I know in our checklist we're asking, I guess there's a checklist that these are the four items that we're looking at right now, why it's incomplete. Do we know whether, I mean, do we know, or does Carpinteria Summerlin Fire Protection District know if there is fire sprinklers within the existing residence? Because, I mean, wouldn't they have to get a permit to do that?

I understand. But is there any public record of when sprinklers are installed or that just gets done without a permitting process?

Would that still need to be on the plans?

And I understand that on the conditions. I'm just not sure if that's needs, you know, it sounds like a yes or no question on the application. So I'm kind of going through these. Right. So.

Okay. So, but that could be a condition of a project though. It could be fire access.

All right, so then the next one is showing location of the closest fire hydrant. Is that also the public record? Do you guys know where the fire hydrants are at?

Okay. And then thank you again. I just want to make sure that those things are already in the public record. That's kind of my, my concern about it being on a complete checklist. And I guess my next question is for flood control on whether you guys know where the flood hazards are.

So when you're within 20 to 30 feet of a flood hazard delineation?

All right. Do we have that information in the record as part of this appeal?

All right. Thank you. Those are my questions. All right, so that's the questions from the board. This time is a five-minute rebuttal from the appellant. And so welcome Ms. Sandoval back up, right? Is that correct?

actually got one more question i got one more question why miss sandoval is coming up um could the board make determinations on completeness on a few of those items but not all those items today or do we have to either say that they're all complete or none of them are complete because there's four items that we're saying that are needed for completeness that are not we could find that all four weren't met. Do we just need to find for one, two, three, four?

Okay, thank you. But unless all of them are complete, you would- Then it's still incomplete. Correct. Yeah, functionally. Okay, thank you. Ms. Sandoval, it is your time to come up here for a rebuttal. I know it's a lot coming at you quick, but it is the time for you to come up here and present your rebuttal.

Okay. So personally, I didn't see that it had any relevance to the completeness, so I didn't make a motion, and I didn't see my colleagues make a motion, although if one of them wants to make a motion, I'll put it in the record. I wouldn't be supportive, but it's a four-fifths vote, so I don't know if anybody is interested in that. I think there's plenty of information here just about the consistency outside of that. Ms. Sandoval, so you have five minutes and 40 seconds for rebuttal.

All right, thank you, Ms. Sandoval. Any further questions of staff or questions for Ms. Sandoval, actually, as well? So Supervisor Hartman and Supervisor Levin, you know.

State law does favor expediting permitting of new housing, particularly ADUs, but it does have additional requirements for public safety. It seems like a fairly straightforward thing. So what's really at issue here?

So you object to filling out a checklist about whether there's a turnaround where the hydrant is, where the flood control?

Yes. There are those items that were on slide five about why your application is incomplete. And it's simply a checklist. And I guess my question is, what's the big deal? I mean, why not just fill this out?

This is, Ms. Sandoval, this is a completeness hearing. So what we're trying to do is we're not trying to look at the entire project and we're not looking to necessarily approval. We're looking very narrowly at completeness. So these are the four items that we're looking at and we're going to make a decision on based on today.

All right. Thank you, Ms. Sandoval, for that request. But we'll keep on the questions of the board. Supervisor Hartman?

So that raises a question, and I see that our county council is looking, but I would like them to weigh in. But thank you, Ms. Sandoval. I appreciate better understanding what your position is.

Supervisor Levinas, do you still have a question?

Well, I think Supervisor Hartman hit exactly what I was trying to get at. Do you want to build this or do you not want to? I mean, I'm trying to figure out. It's pretty easy. I mean, we have gone, we've burned a lot of time here, and we're really spinning through the spoke here, and I'm just trying to figure out, you know where the fire hydrant is? You know where this is? It's just, do you want to do it or don't you? Or would you rather just argue about it? That's the part I can't figure out.

ALL RIGHT. SO YOU WOULD RATHER FIGHT IT. I GET IT.

Yeah, exactly. Yes, understood. While Supervisor Hartman waits for County Council on her question, any other questions from Supervisor Capps or Supervisor Lee here? All right. Supervisor Hartman, you might have to defer now to staff comments, and then we'll come back to County Council if that's all right. Now turn back. Thank you, Ms. Sandoval. If we have some additional questions, we'll ask you to come back up. Thank you. Go ahead and turn it back to staff while we wait for county councils. Thanks, Supervisors. Willow, if you could pull up the slide.

Now back to the board for deliberations. Supervisor Lee, since your district, you want to kick it off?

Thank you. Oh, it's pretty clear to me. So based on all the information before me, I'm going with the staff recommendation and I'll make the motion to accept A, B and C. All right.

So motion by so comment and already a motion by Supervisor Lee. Is there is there a second there? We can still discuss that motion. Yeah. Is there a second on that motion? Okay, so there's a second on that motion of the staff recommendation, but we'll have further deliberations and discussion. Do you want Supervisor Levin?

I'm just curious, how many ADUs have we processed ballpark-ish in the last couple years?

And then you just go back and forth with the applicant and work it through?

Okay. Supervisor Hartman, do you have any further deliberations? I've got a couple comments.

Well, it seems like the appellant may be mixing up two different parts of the law and pre-application deemed complete and then once it's deemed complete. I think that that has cost everybody a lot of time and even the appellant a lot of money. And I'm sort of puzzled about why we're here, but we have a motion and a second and I intend to support it.

I'll weigh in with my support for the motion and the second. I was hoping that there might be some resolution today. Sometimes a date on the books gets some incomplete, gets some movement, and again, we have spent a lot of time, and I know the There's a lot of energy going towards this, and I just wish it had been more productive.

Thank you, Supervisor Capps. As far as I'm concerned, I think a lot of our requests are often superfluous in the county, that we ask for a lot of things that might necessarily not need to be there that should already be in the public record, like fire hydrants. If that was the only one on here, I'd say it was complete. We have that in the public record. We know where they're at. we shouldn't be deeming something incomplete. Fire sprinklers, we should know whether they are, or we should assume that there is, and then if we want the higher standard, maybe that we'd have that option for an appell

Yeah, that raises a question for me and something I think I heard in the comments. I mean, is it your duty, P&D, to fill out the application? I mean, please comment on that.

So that begs the further question, can you assist or would we have information that could help somebody get through this?

That's correct. Because that's a record that you rely on in the future. That's correct.

DO THINK A LOT OF OUR PROCESS SOMETIMES REQUIRES THE HIRING OF PROFESSIONALS TO DO ALL THIS STUFF WHICH I THINK IS UNFORTUNATE ESPECIALLY WHEN WE ASK FOR PEOPLE TO PRODUCE INFORMATION THAT WE ALREADY HAVE IN OUR OWN RECORDS. I DO THINK THIS NEEDED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BECAUSE OF THE OTHER EVIDENCE ON THE RECORD SO I STILL THINK WE COULD HAVE A SIMPLER PROCESS FOR APPLICANTS ESPECIALLY IN SOME OF THESE AREAS OF PUBLIC INFORMATION. I THINK THAT'S REALLY INFURIATING FOR THE PUBLIC FOR THAT. BUT THAT DOESN'T CHANGE MY VOTE HERE AND I THINK THAT WE'RE TALKED OUT HERE. We have a motion and a secon

Opposed? The motion to deny passes unanimously. All right, we're going to, I think, try to get one more item in before lunch, and it's going to be a short lunch today, only half an hour. So, yeah. So Madam Clerk, we'll roll right into this. Madam Clerk, will you please read departmental item number five into the record. And those of you for department item number six, sorry that we couldn't get to that before lunch, but we will only have a short lunch before we, about a half an hour. So we won't be long. So hang in there.

Thank you. Ms. Haggerty, are you going to go ahead and take it from here? Oh, actually, before we get there, we need to check for ex parte disclosures on this communications. Supervisor Lavadino?

Supervisor Capps, any ex parte disclosures on this item?

Okay. And I do not have any ex parte disclosures as well. Supervisor Lee, do you have any ex parte communications to disclose? No. Okay. Thank you for the patience there. And go ahead and take it from here.

All right. Thank you, Ms. Haggerty. Any questions from the board before we get to the appellant's presentation? All right. There'll be other, yeah, if you'd like to wait. Service of Caps? All right. This time it would be the 10 minutes for the appellate's presentation.

All right. Thank you. Questions for Ms. Was there any attempt to even pay any type of the penalties at all?

Okay, and I just want to make this clear. So you're asking the penalties be waived because the owner was ill?

Did she attempt to at all contact anyone to help her? Do you have any documentation?

And are they here right now or just you representing?

PAIN THEY SUFFERED I MEAN THERE WAS A YOU KNOW SHE SHE SUFFERED FOR A LONG TIME I JUST WANTED TO HELP THEM HERE BASICALLY THANK YOU ALL RIGHT THANK YOU SUPERVISOR LEE SUPERVISOR CAPS YEAH I'M SORRY TO HEAR ABOUT THE ILLNESS AND UM BUT I JUST JUST BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE I HEARD AN ANSWER WAS THERE AN ATTEMPT TO WORK OUT A PAYMENT PLAN OR BE IN TOUCH WITH THE WITH THE COUNTY

All right. Supervisor Hartman, then I have a question as well. Please.

Sorry, I'm still trying to understand this. So she also had a husband who was retired?

All right, Supervisor Lavagnino. Thank you. My question's more for staff. So I know what happens when somebody doesn't pay property tax. You know, we have something that we can attach to, and it's a long process, but I never understood, what happens, and not just a rental, but let's say we had a hotel or something that just quit paying TOT. What is the recourse, and is it laid out in statute? Or has that ever happened? I mean, I know it happens on rentals.

Okay. So there's nothing, we've been through this before. So the ordinance is pretty cut and dried. There is no grace period. There's no...

I have a question. So we began this audit in 2022. When did the short-term rentals begin on that property?

So just the period that we audited is that the operations just happened to be the same three years that we went back and audited? Okay, because I think we only get to go back three years, if I'm correct, right?

Okay, I want to get some clarity from... So, did you guys in your investigation determine that the audit period was the same type of operation, or did you guys have any detection that there was operations prior to your statutory period that you were able to audit?

So we don't know on your guys's side, whether that happened and that three years just happens to be the only three years that they owned it. Okay. All right. Um, okay. That's, uh, the information there, I guess our next step in this appeal is to ask if there's any public comment on this item. Thank you. We'll, we'll get back to you here in a moment. chair nelson members of the board we have no request to speak from the public on this item all right actually i'm going to have you come back up um it's a rebuttal do you have any you've got five more minutes if you want to discuss anything else or

Okay, thank you. All right, but while you're up here, it seems like Senator Hartman has a question for you.

So, I missed your relationship to the LLC?

And if I understood you correctly, you're saying that the IRS has some flexibility or forgiveness and so you thought you would inquire here if that were possible.

And does this create a financial hardship? It is. So I don't see evidence of that. Not that we have that as a factor that we can consider, but I'm not sure you've made that case.

Were you looking for her to respond to that?

Yeah. What are the implications for the family, the LLC, if they have to pay this penalty?

All right, thank you, Supervisor Hartman. All right, thank you, ma'am. Back to staff, any further comments from staff? Okay, no additional staff comments. Back to board for deliberations. Anybody like to deliberate or make a motion?

It's my district, so I'll go first. I want to help, but I just cannot find the findings to help you and your client get to where you want to be. So based on everything that I've seen, I don't know if you want to deliberate or raise for a motion.

I don't think there's any further questions from the board, so I think we're ready. I mean, I'm comfortable with the motion. All right. And we'll then open up for discussion after there's a second, if there's a second.

So I'm inclined to go with staff recommendation A, B, C, and D. Okay. Which is to deny the appeal.

Which is to deny the appeal. All right. All right. Is there a second for that motion? Second from Supervisor Hartman. All right. Any further deliberations on that motion? um yeah i i guess i'm going to support this motion um you know it is uh i know i feel for the people who get stuck in these situations but there's a basic fairness and obligation that we have up here to enforce these rules and um uh i'm comfortable with it um i did have yeah it doesn't matter in the emotion so yeah i support the motion supervisor

Yeah, it sounds like the problem isn't cash, but cash flow. And so I think the Treasurer's Office has been somewhat accommodating and would encourage however you can help within the parameters you have to work within, so.

All right. All right. Supervisor Capps and Supervisor Lavagnino.

And I think it's also important to know that this has been a long time when people have been doing this. So I think that you go into this business now, you're fully aware that you need to be paying TOT. I don't know how long the Airbnbs and VRBOs have been around, but it's no longer a new gig. So this is part of the deal. And we need to send a message that, unfortunately, you have to pay your taxes.

Yeah, I was going to make the same point, and also that it's just a fairness issue to all the others that are, you know, I feel I've been, I've gotten behind the eight ball before just on IRS stuff, and it's no fun. Once you get into that web, it's difficult to get yourself out. But this is a fairness issue to everybody else that is paying their TOT on time. And I just want to give a shout out to the staff as well, that this is... this is kind of what we're expecting from that office is that it's not easy and obviously it's not fun to do these track downs. But as I said, this is one of the rea

All right, thank you, Supervisor Lavagnino. So seeing, I think we're all discussed out here, so if we can, we've got a motion and a second.

A and B, let me just double check. Yeah, that's right, A and B. A and B, yes. All right, motion and a second. All in favor signify by saying aye. Oppose? The motion passes unanimously. All right, we're going to go ahead and take a short lunch break here before we get to Department item number six. Madam County Council, will you please read for us what we're going to be discussing in closed session during that break?

Okay. We may go a little long, but we're going to try to keep to it and be back no earlier than 1.35. All right, welcome back to the July 7th, 2026 regular meeting of the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. We're just coming back from closed session. Madam County Council, can you report out on what we discussed?

All right, thank you very much. Now we'll get back to departmental item number six. Madam Clerk, would you please read that item into the record?

All right, before we get started, let's go ahead and disclose any ex parte communications. Supervisor Lavigneau, do you have any?

I did meet with the RAFs in person in my office. I don't have the date. It was maybe 10 days ago.

Okay. Supervisor Lee? I met with the RAFs yesterday over Teams. All right. Thank you.

And now Supervisor Koepp. I met with both Jeremy and Megan RAF over Teams yesterday, and we discussed the history of the project, the operations, and all their their community engagement that they've been involved in so all right with that we'll go ahead and turn over to the treasurer tax collector and miss rafferty for your presentation please

All right, thank you, Ms. Rapporty. Treasury Tax Collector's Office before we hear from the appellant. I did have a question for clarification about the audit. So the audit period was April 2022 to March 2025. Again, one of your three year windows you looked at. It appears that they paid in September 2023 through February 2024. So So they didn't pay before they paid and they stopped paying? I just want to make sure I understand.

Okay. All right. Thank you. We're gonna have time for the phones presentation. We'll have 10 minutes.

Thank you and well-timed. All right. Questions for the refs at this time? Yes. Supervisor Hartman.

uh... so you are very much involved in the development of the ag enterprise ordinance and during that period uh... the county allowed home stays and short term rentals on ag one and other properties but ag two properties were not allowed that right uh... and you started I guess what I, did you know about TOT or how, explain, because we get, you know, these ordinances were drafted for hotels, people who are in this business. Help us understand your knowledge at the time, where you were coming from.

Thank you. And I'd like you to elaborate a little bit more financially. You mentioned the federal money you got and what that means now that it's not there. And just elaborate what this penalty would mean for you. I mean, you'd have to either shrink your operations or stop farming and get outside jobs. But help me just understand the numbers a little more.

Thank you. I have a quick question. What's a CSA?

All right. Just curious. Thank you. I just wanted clarification. I wasn't sure. I didn't know the acronym. Supervisor Lee and Supervisor Kemp. Thank you, Chick. Are you a nonprofit?

We are not. So you're a for-profit business?

Good. And my follow-up question. So your basis of not paying TLTs because you were not sure about how the Ag Enterprise ordinance would have gone, correct?

Did you ever consider paying for it and then asking for reimbursement down the road?

And were you given letters saying what you were in violation? And do you, if you did receive it, do you disregard it or? Yeah. Did you get any letters from the county?

And my last question is, did you at any point contact an attorney to ask for their professional advice, or did you just by yourself decided that this is a gray area that you should not pay?

Well, actually, Supervisor Lee asked a lot of my questions. I mean, I do want to say, I mean, your mission is incredibly impressive and aligns with a lot of my values. And you made the point very compellingly that the farm stay aspect of your work is very much a small piece of the entire mission. And it's beautiful. And it's clearly, as illustrated by these, uh very persuasive letters um such a part of the community but it it does seem to me just again given the fact that you did pay the tot from september to february and then you sort of intentionally stopped i mean did you know the risk or d

Sure, but I did go on your website, and it's beautiful to look, and the reservation system looks fairly professional and, you know, like a glamping type situation. And so, I mean, it is, it's not sort of, I mean, you do have a professional look to those who want to stay. And so I would imagine thought goes into the fact that with that comes obligations, correct? I mean, anyway, I made my point. I think you go see where I'm coming from. Yes, ma'am.

Supervisor Lavagnino, then I have a question. Okay. Thanks.

So first off, I think you're a TV show basically. I mean, you guys should be. And shout out to the kids back there. It's not easy sitting in here and being quiet. And I know my grandkids wouldn't be able to do that. So you're doing something right for sure. Yeah, this is, to me, it's completely different than the items that we've been hearing before where people are in the business of short-term rentals and not being there present. And I get the whole ag ordinance. So I'm looking for a path of how to fix this. I do see on your website that you do have the TOT detailed out now. And so, but it's

I just have one more question on the RAF, and then we actually got to go back to staff for additional comments, and then we'll get into deliberations here, and you guys will get a chance to rebut as well. So since March of 2025, when this audited ended, have you guys been paying monthly from, do we have a record of paying from 25, from March 25 till June of 2026?

Since the audit has started, you guys have gotten back on to at least somewhat of a semi-regular routine. And as far as the permitting goes, it's still not necessarily permitted under the county's.

Understood. OK. Thank you. Those are my questions at this time. At this time, we'll go ahead and go to public comment. You guys can sit down for a minute. We'll have you back up here in a few. Madam Clerk, do we have any public comment on this item?

Yeah. So staff and then rebuttal. Okay, actually going to have to come up and then if you guys would like to make any additional comment, you have an additional five minutes and rebuttal. All right.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you both. Okay, back to staff for any additional comments from staff.

And that's when they're knowingly supposed to pay and they don't?

Understood. Okay. Thank you for the clarification on that. Any additional questions for staff?

I'm sorry, I didn't quite hear or understand.

So talking about this, there's there's potentially, if I understood correctly, a 25% additional assessment if it's done fraudulently. And that's that is the discretion that they have that they did not use in this case is what that's I'm saying that correctly. That's correct. Yep. One question that kind of came up for staff that I was curious about was I know that they're not a nonprofit, but they seem to be offering like a nonprofit. If a nonprofit operates a short-term rental, are they still subject to TOT tax? I know that they sometimes get property tax exemptions and whatnot. Just trying to

Yeah, I think there are some others that do events that, so I was just kind of curious whether that would apply for a nonprofit or not. Okay. Now back to the board for deliberations. Supervisor Hartman.

yes and i've kind of prepared some things to say um dare to dream is an ag 2 100 zone operates as a working agricultural enterprise so it's not an absentee owned vacation rental or an urban investment property or a lodging operation unrelated to what's happening on the land And I think for us in government who understand, oh yeah, the treasurer tax collector, TOT, that's here, planning and development and your permits are there and you gotta do them both. I think for people outside government and people who are, you know, working really hard on the land, that distinction is a really hard one.

PROBABLY DON'T WANT TO USE THAT TERM, BUT QUID PRO QUO. BUT I DO AGREE WITH YOU. AND IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE WE LISTEN TO PLANNING DEVELOPMENT ALL THE TIME AND PND IS ALWAYS ABOUT GETTING US COMPLIANCE, RIGHT? not putting somebody out of business, but trying to figure out a way to get to yes, but that's not the way the ordinance is written. And so we either follow the ordinance or we kind of use our own brains and kind of what people elected us to do and not just, I just don't think every time you just got to go exactly, when it doesn't make sense. And to me, this one doesn't make sense. It d

All right. I'll jump in for a second. Cause I agree with that. We got to figure out a way to make this organization and this group as an asset in the Lompoc Valley. I mean, I totally agree with that. I'm also really concerned about the precedent and about future appeals and having you know, a lot of things come to us that are really great. And so I'm trying to weigh that out. You know, what instantly came to mind for me was actually my Oasis Senior Center. Does a lot of the same things that is brought up here, but yet, you know, has hundreds of thousands of dollars to ask to pay the county for

Yeah, I would say about OASIS that, I don't know if planning and development are here, but the county, when that was largely in my district, we were. OASIS was never in your district. Part of it was, yeah, before it moved. when it was the trailer. Yes, it was. Anyway, that's not the issue. The issue is that the county invested a lot to wind it through a permit process.

First of all, you're wrong on that's ever been a part of your district. So, and we can look at that later on, but I'm just saying that I use that as an example of, you know, I think we should find some sources for it. That's what I'm trying to support you here. Okay, but I was trying to bring up other ways to potentially support it. So I think we should go find some of those places, but I also want them to pay this bill because I think it opens up a window for us if other people come to us and ask for that. So I guess I was trying to support you, but also trying to make sure we keep with the p

yeah thank you i i'm torn on this because i appreciate supervisor hartman's compassion here and the fact that this is in your district and a lot of the farm stays are in your district and this really is precedent setting for you so this is creating a problem for you which i really see as a precedent setting problem because people we'll see this and think, okay, maybe I don't have to, you know, I do really good work and I give away a lot of good stuff. And I mean, it is incredible work. Everybody has learned a lot here today. So that's a side benefit of this conversation. But for what gives me

Yeah, so I'll be supportive of continuing it and trying to find a happy medium because my concern is if we do say not collect the money somebody would be like I'm gonna stop my paying my TLTs because I provide public benefit which sets a precedent throughout a whole county so But yeah, I want to explore what else can we do and continue this discussion if it's possible. Or do we have to do it today?

Let's ask that question of staff or I guess county council. Is it ability for this board to continue this item to a later date so that we can, there's no...

Okay, and there are no legal constraints either on a continued, there's no legal constraints for on the board on a timely decision?

Or do we set a precedent if we make a determination one way or the other?

it doesn't matter what happened last time to me. Every appeal to me is different depending on what the circumstances are or what the evidence is. I mean, we had two today that were TOT appeals. One to me was so cut and dry and easy to determine. And this one's obviously completely different. So if the next person comes in and says, well, I don't wanna pay my taxes, you better have a freaking story as good as this one because you're gonna pay that that's just the way it is so um maybe people see it different so i i'm gonna make a motion and we'll see where this goes but i'm gonna request that w

Well, I mean, I want to do it as soon as possible so we can bury this and get it done with. But I mean, what I'm kind of requesting is just for County Council and staff to come up with some options for us that say, this is not a gift to public funds, but you could use 990. Or maybe we've looked with public health and there's a way that they would pay the tax. But then the next year we have a contract for $50,000 or something or $40,000 for nutrition education at the farm, something like that. What kind of program is out there? I just don't know what's available right now. And my preference wou

So Supervisor Labneh has penned that out as a motion. I'd ask Supervisor Hartman, is that an amount of time or would you need maybe some more time to work on trying to find other sources for this? Would that?

I guess I would go in a slightly different direction. I do think precedent is important. I do think we don't want to be deluged, and it's always been pretty cut and dried. But this case doesn't fit that, and I think we can distinguish it from other cases. This is a small working farm. They got caught in the Ag Enterprise Ordinance development in that gap. and they have documented quantifiable public benefits. And so what I'd like to see is if we come back with ways to think about this, just documenting the benefits that they have provided and seeing what those are worth. I mean, they're worth,

So if I'm chairing this meeting well enough, I think I've got two kind of quasi-conceptual motions out here. I have one from Supervisor Lavagnino to continue next week to try to find some potential grant or funding source for them to pay their bill. And then I have another potential motion from Supervisor Hartman that this board makes findings on eventually forgiving this and making some findings that support that, right? Am I understanding your motion or your conceptual kind of motion that you're looking to get to?

Okay, so those are two. So she wants that on table for I guess next, if it did get continued. I'll just lay my cards on the table. I can support an option where we find Work with them to try to find other funding sources to pay this bill, but I do think where I'm at with this and pretty much any text that's due. I think that needs to get paid. I think there's other ways to find income and I think that's somewhere where Supervisor Lavigneau is at and so I could support that. I think it might take more than a week to kind of. Find some different avenues, and that's why I think maybe continuing a

Well, you're the chair, you set the schedule.

I think we should, you know, because we're going to head on break, I think we should give some time so then we can get creative. I agree. And so I would like to see it maybe come back. I'm looking at it. I got it right here. Would 825, that'd be the next meeting that's in Santa Maria. So it's after our break in our second meeting. It'd be in Santa Maria, a little closer to you guys, up there in the North County, is potentially an option. Would you?

Yeah, the date would be okay. I just wonder, could we merge Supervisor Lavagnino in my approaches?

I guess, could we ask staff to bring back both options? Yeah. works for me or you know some findings um at this point i'm not wouldn't be supportive of that but you can we could have staff to have those ready for for you if you could get three votes but i think we should also be looking at other options um to put on the table as well So I guess the motion from Previsor Lavagnino is to continue this to 825. But we're not asking the treasurer tax collector. I think they're trying to figure out, are we asking them to figure out where the... So let me clarify here. So let's clarify this. So we're

okay so that's usually would be the treasurer tax collector would be that department that's correct we'll work very closely with that you'll look work very closely uh treasurer hagan are you guys comfortable with working county i guess okay just sorry clear we're not experts in this kind of field though okay yeah why and i think since this motion or this portion the motion is coming from supervisor hartman I think her office could work with you on some of those potential findings. Is that appropriate or not? Maybe it's not appropriate since it's a quasi-judicial role.

I think that would not be appropriate for the Treasury Tax Collector to work on other options to pay for this. But I do think that if Supervisor Hartman would be willing to help look for those funds as an option in their office.

We're all trying to figure out a way to make it work, right? It makes sense that your office might be the lead on that.

My only, and I don't think anybody's here from public health, but my request is that we would look at one of the options would be the taxes paid, and then we look at some sort of granting, structure with the work that they're doing already that benefits us through public health. We have a whole nutrition assistance department. So if they're providing the funding from the tax and then public health grants them the money back over the next year to do the work that they're already doing, I don't know. I just think that's an option to look at.

Okay. I think it's an option. I think DSS, I mean, there's some nutrition systems there as well. And I think, again, some of us that are, I think we all want to see this be successful. So I think we all can make some phone calls to see if we can bridge that gap. All right. So the motion to continuance, and there's been some direction from the board on a request from staff to come back with some options on the meeting on the continuance to H25. That's a motion from Supervisor Labanillo, right? Okay, can I get a second on that motion? Second. Is there any further discussion on that motion? Super

I just want to hear from the rest, are they okay with that?

Are they okay with the continuance? Okay. All right. Yeah, thank you Supervisor Lee for checking on that. So we have a motion, we have a second, we have a discussion. All in favor of the continuation signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. All right, thank you guys. And we'll go ahead and... Okay, we're gonna take a quick five minute break and then we'll get onto item number seven. All right, welcome back to the July 7th, 2026 regular scheduled meeting in the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors. We will be now beginning Department item number seven of eight. And s

All right, thank you. Questions from the board? Any questions on there? Supervisor Capps.

I just wondered, thank you so much for the presentation. I just wondered if there's, just given all the other building in the area, if there's been any neighbor concerns that have been raised or any outreach?

Supervisor Lee. Any comments from the city of Goleta?

Thank you. All right. Thank you. It's the time now for the applicant presentation. Mr. Fort. i i'm sorry to interrupt but we did we didn't do ex parte and i apologize yes please uh let's do expert day communications i'll go down the line supervisor lavenino now new report supervisor hartman supervisor caps so my uh my team did speak with mr fort which um prompted me to remember to say that thank you for catching on me and sure as lee have you had income nope okay and i have not had any communication either on this project

All right. Thank you, Mr. Port. This time, Madam Clerk, is there any public comment on this item?

Right now back to the board. Any further deliberations or questions or actually questions? I do, I guess I have a question for staff. So with this new zoning, what is the maximum residential potential on that property?

Okay. Thank you. And that'd be another process that they'd have to go through. That'd be a subdivision map at that point, because it'd be greater than four.

Tracked map, if they wanted to go to full build out.

All right, any other questions? Kick it over to you, Supervisor Capps, the senior district.

Yeah, no, I'm supportive of this rezone. I think it's one of these ones, the ag life has passed, and the neighbors are supportive, and it makes a lot of sense from all the reasons that have been discussed, so I'm lending my support.

Awesome. So I also support that when somebody makes a motion on that. I think that it's clear that's surrounded by residential on three sides. Somebody who is a huge supporter of agriculture, I can tell you that that's not a viable ag parcel anymore. It's very constrained by urban creep and it was residential at one point in the past too so it just it does seem like it was an odd parcel the way it was and I actually think this is what good planning looks like good zoning looks like and and um the whole reason why we have zoning is to eliminate conflicts and this i think will will further elimi

Yes, I'm happy to make the motion to accept staff recommendations.

Capps, any further discussion on the motion? Seeing none, all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Thank you, staff. Thank you, applicant. Thank you, Supervisor Capps. All right, now we're gonna go ahead and roll into our eighth and final item here. Thank you guys for sticking with us. I know some of you expected for us to hear this item earlier. Okay, Madam Clerk, will you please read item number eight into the record?

All right, let's kick it off to Director Plowman.

All right, thank you, Mr. Wilson. Question. Sorry, my mic was off. Questions from the board, Supervisor Capps.

Yes, thank you. So just to boil down the planner speak. So are detention centers allowed in this county? Private detention centers?

Thank you. Okay. And I know that you're tracking, as you indicated, and I am as well, what's happening elsewhere, because as we've seen in the headlines, there's now $45 billion dedicated over the next four years towards the building of detention centers. uh so in gilroy there's one that's being proposed and santa clara county is suing with the support of attorney general bonta and they're suing over the fact that detention centers are not approved zoning use in their county code i know we'd have to not there yet or hopefully we will never be but would that be somewhat of the basis that you yo

Okay. So a question I have is just about process within your department, which is big, because, you know, it's happening across the country. they're really literally springing up on communities and it really defies local control. And different counties are experiencing the fact that they've just discovered after the fact that leases have been signed and construction is starting, And so we already have seven private detention centers in California. We know that from reports 32 people have died in detention centers across the country. We just don't know much about what is happening. So I have gr

i know that normally in the process since you you process hundreds of these all the time you wouldn't alert the board but i'm just interested in making part of a motion that at that point you would um we would be alerted as would county council so that we could have the opportunity to present to the board the potential for the moratorium that we're discussing so and that's our recommendation yes um And so I think those are my questions for now, but maybe actually I'd like to ask County Council about the moratorium and how that would work. I know that there's you. We've looked at other what's h

And are the moratoriums also based on the impacts? Because again, I've been tracking the one in Gilroy, and the basis is on sort of the water and wastewater infrastructure, the emergency medical services, the fire protection, the public health impacts, all of these local impacts, I mean, that aren't, that the surrounding community will have to deal with, is that also, A RATIONALE FOR THE MORATORIUM OR THOSE TWO THINGS LINKED WITH THE ZONING OR IS IT A DIFFERENT LEGAL PATH?

All the different impacts, okay. Those are my questions for now, thanks.

All right, any other questions from Supervisor Lavagnino?

So just curious, so we're talking about if a private comes in here, but if the federal government comes in and says we want to build this detention facility, it doesn't matter if it's sound or whatever it is, correct?

So I don't really know the Gilroy one. I know there's a lot of empty prisons in the Central Valley that were like for-profit prisons that were kind of closed down by the state that are now empty. Is Gilroy a whole new build?

And they're generally contracting, excuse me, with private entities. Yeah. But...

I'm just curious why they weren't going there.

They're taking all shapes and sizes, either building new ones from whole cloth or repurposing warehouses. But happening very quickly.

All right. That was questions from the board. I think at this time we will have this item open for public comment. Madam Clerk, do we have any public comment on this item?

And we'll also go ahead and close public comment on this item this time.

Thank you, Mr. Nepa. All right, back to the board. Questions, additional questions for staff? I know I have one question. I guess I don't understand the concept of a moratorium when it's already prohibited. So is it like double moratorium? I mean, so it's already prohibited. So why would we, why would we need another moratorium? So, I mean, if it's, you're telling me right now, somebody came privately to the county and the unincorporated area and said, hey, we want a permit to build a detention center or to do detention. You would say, you can't do that here. You'd have to file like a zoning a

YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THAT. YOU HAVE TO CHANGE OUR GENERAL PLAN, WHICH IS A MASSIVE PROCESS. IT'S GOING TO GO ON A LONG RANGE WORK PLAN.

I also just... All right, back to the board.

Further questions or deliberations? Supervisor Capps.

Just a piece of information that there is a state bill, Senator Cervantes has a bill, SB 1367, which would actually... prohibit cities and counties from approving new land use that would allow for new construction and conversion of existing buildings and that has moving moving well through the in my opinion moving well through the assembly so I'm tracking that so that actually would be potentially an extra layer of protection so anyway I'm ready to make comments okay so comments and maybe a motion I WILL MAKE THE MOTION TO RECEIVE THIS REPORT AND ADD TO IT THE VERY SPECIFIC DIRECTION TO STAFF

And I'm sorry, I just want to finish. I apologize. And I also want to be clear that if an apple this is just more editorial, that if an application does come in, I will be making a motion to direct counsel to prepare an emergency moratorium. That's not part of the motion that's editorial. So the first part I'll repeat is to direct staff to monitor and alert the board and counsel if and when an inquiry or application does come in to construct a private facility on unincorporated land.

SO I CAN SUPPORT THAT MOTION AS SO I CAN SUPPORT THAT MOTION AS LONG AS YOU DO THE MORATORIUM LONG AS YOU DO THE MORATORIUM AFTER THAT POINT, WHICH I AFTER THAT POINT, WHICH I THINK IS WHAT YOU'RE THINK IS WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING HERE. PROPOSING HERE. SO I CAN SUPPORT YOUR MOTION. SO I CAN SUPPORT YOUR MOTION. YES. YES. PERFECT. PERFECT.

YES. YES. BECAUSE WE DISCUSSED IT. BECAUSE WE DISCUSSED IT. I MEAN, I ACTUALLY JUST TO I MEAN, I ACTUALLY JUST TO to give you my thought process, I wanted to prepare the moratorium now and was cautioned that that would not be wise because we don't know what it looks like and where and all of the items that would go into the moratorium. So I stood back. So yes, this would be a sequence.

So if I understand the motion, receive and file, determine this is not a project under CEQA, direct planning staff to alert the board and council when there is a proposal if it when and if there's a if there's a proposal yes we're not necessarily encouraging one we're just saying if that happened you would alert us yep and council and then the board could operate from there um at that point any any board member can bring an item to the agenda at that point so it's not prejudicing us with a direction already on a moratorium it's just saying that we want to know so more information is always bet

Yeah, I mean, I definitely share the urgency of the person who spoke, Larry, Mr. Barron, because I do want to share, I mean, this is not theoretical. This is happening all around us. And it does result, it would result, if we had one in this county, it would result in more detentions. And we already have an extremely high number of detentions. Already, according to 805 on DocuFund, there were nearly 850 arrests reported since January of last year. And it's widely believed that that is because we have an administrative office of ICE in Santa Maria, because it makes it more convenient. because t

All right. Thank you, Supervisor Kemp, Supervisor Hartman and Supervisor Levenino. Oh, Supervisor Levenino.

I was just trying to bring up the stat because I agree with you. And you know, we've done a lot. We've been trying to do a lot. But the reality is the way this is gonna change is people have to vote. That's the way this country works. And we just had an election in Santa Maria. It was embarrassing. I will call out every person in Santa Maria. It's embarrassing. the lack of participation at the polls. Put some of that on me. I'm trying to get people to vote. But when you have, first off, you only have about 40% of people that are registered to vote. And then out of that, 20%, 25% of those peopl

So I encourage everybody in November, do your duty. Get out there and vote. You know, others might say that, well, they're afraid to go to the polls because that's where there might be activity around. We all have a mail-in ballot, you know, and you can go take care of it and be safe. And it was very, very, very discouraged. At the time where I think more people need to be involved in the process, fewer decided that it was important anymore. So just a little service announcement to get out there and vote in November. For whoever you like, I don't care, just vote.

No, and here, here, I'll just pile on because it was also a very safe election and we were worried about that and it was proved to be very safe and effective and our county does a great job.

Sue Rezor-Lee. Good. I just want to say thank you to staff for their great, simple, easy to understand report, and to Supervisor Capps for really leading the charge on this. The committee is, I believe, does feel safer in that we are on top of it. We're trying our best. So I appreciate the patience on this. That's it.

All right. Thank you, Supervisor Lee. And did you make your comments, Supervisor Capps? Are you good? Okay, so we have a motion. We have a second. I think we can do a roll call vote here. So all in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passed unanimously. All right. Well, that concludes our July 7th meeting. Our next regularly scheduled meeting will be in Santa Maria on July 14th. We are now adjourned.