Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

Recording in progress.

Okay, good morning, everybody. We will be calling the regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday, June 23, 2026 to order. We please have the Pledge of Allegiance led by Supervisor Centella. Thank you. Clerk, can we have a roll call, please?

Supervisor Zenger?

Here.

Supervisor Kosmicki?

Here.

Supervisor Sotelo? Present. Supervisor Curl? Here. And Supervisor Velasquez is absent.

Thank you. Is there a motion to acknowledge the certificate of posting?

So moved.

Second. All in favor?

Aye.

Board announcements, any Supervisors have any announcements at this time? Yes, Supervisor Caruso, go ahead.

I just have one announcement, Mr. Chair. I was unable to attend the Saddle and Horse Show parade because of visiting a family member, and I just wanna remind everybody, the Saddle and Horse Show event is actually in Rodeo, it's this weekend. Friday, Saturday and Sunday, I'm volunteering all three days. If you go to the grandstand, you'll see me and my son. We are excited to support this. It is a huge event for our community. And if you haven't been, I highly recommend you come on Saturday and join us at the barbecue. So thank you so much. And I appreciate all the volunteers that are going to be working all three days at the rodeo. So thank you.

Thank you. Any other announcements, updates? Okay, moving on to public comments. Opportunity to address the board on items of interest not appearing on the agenda. Do we have any public comment for items not on the agenda?

Yes, all right. I actually have 11 cards in front of me, I believe. So I'm gonna call out three to four names. As soon as the first person speaking ends, the next person please come up. We're gonna start with Thomas Welsh, followed by Elvita Robinson, followed by Tammy Aviles. So everybody can hear you on Zoom.

Good morning Board of Supervisors and to the community present. My name is Thomas Lemus Welsh. I'm the president of the League of United Latin American Citizens, otherwise known as LULAC. For those of you that are not aware, LULAC is a nationwide civil rights based organization across the US. I'm here today to address support along with the Santa Clara County and the California Attorney to file suit to stop the Gilroy Detention Center or offices that are planned to be built about 15 minutes from us. What I would like to say is, you know, in the year 2026, where all have been seeing some pretty egregious things happening across the nation, where I think you see experiences and cries out of, am I detained or am I free to go? Am I detained or am I free to go? In 2026, it's, unheard of for children, for adults, for many of us that look to be of a certain racial profile to be asked, are you a US citizen? Where were you born? Where were your parents born in 2026? Am I being detained or am I free to go? In 2026, we continuously see this. We see the impact that it has on families, on children being detained. The approach that has been taken is really about infrastructure. And as a community, as a representative of the LULAC, I would like to put forth the support of the suit to file against the Gilroy Detention Center, because in the end, as we all know across the US, it's about the patterns and anywhere where there's infrastructure of any type of field offices, detention center, the infrastructure and communication, that's where we'll see the rise of the communities having to be experiencing constitutional violations and having to answer questions of where were your parents born? Where were you born? Are you a US citizen? And then hence, am I being detained or am I free to go? We, as a representative of LULAC, I would respectfully ask that you support the lawsuit with the California Attorney General, Santa Clara, Monterey County, and ask that San Benito County joins and embraces as brothers and sisters. I guess my time is up. Thank you. Thank you for your time. Good afternoon.

Good morning, Board of Supervisors and my friends on the board. I rarely come here. My name is Elvira Zaragoza Robinson. I'm a longtime attorney here in San Benito County and I've done a lot of criminal work. And when I see and hear that there's a detention center coming close to us, I'm upset, I'm angered, I'm enraged. I support everything that that young man just said. I don't need to repeat that. But I'm asking our board, you, to join the Public Rights Project amicus brief, submitted by Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, and to please add these two items to your next Board of Supervisors meeting. Number one, agendize a no staging zone policy, prohibiting the use of county property, parking lots, parks, and other county owned or controlled land for civil immigration enforcement staging and operations. And number two, develop an emergency response and community support plan. That's what I'm asking you. So thank you.

Tammy's coming up after Tammy. We'll have Lizette Rodriguez, Joe, and Seth Capron.

Good morning, Chair, Board, everyone here. My name is Tammy Aviles, and I am with the Friends of the San Benito County Free Library. I just wanted to share that we have an upcoming fundraiser, Bingo with the Friends, on Saturday, July the 11th at the Garden Shop and hoping that you can join us. Please check us out at sbcfriends.org as well as at the library. Summer has started and the various programs lunch at the library, summer reading program, please check out what's happening at the library at sbcfl.org. And just wanted to pick up on what Supervisor Carro said that the Rodeo is this weekend and Hollister Rotary is doing the concession. So please stop by and pick up your soda from our stand. We appreciate the support. Thank you for your time this morning.

Well, go ahead Seth. After Seth will be Lizette and then Joe.

Good morning, I'm here to urge you to take action like many of your constituents who are here in the audience to join the amicus brief in Santa Clara County and to take action to prevent ICE and border patrol agents from using any county property or cooperating in any way with ICE. I don't think it matters what your position is on our national immigration policy. ICE has discredited itself and this is a moral issue that I feel like you need to take a stand on. I hope that you will do that.

Thank you.

Good morning, supervisors and community members. My name is Lisa Rodriguez-Pena, and I'm here on behalf of the Catholic Charities of Monterey County, as well as the San Benito Solidarity Network, as well as a local business owner and an immigration attorney to ask the board to please join the lawsuit, the Santa Clara file and the California Attorney General, and also to place the items already mentioned on your agenda. I have previously witnessed the fears and suffering immigrant families living in every single day. The families I serve, it's your neighbors, they're your farm workers, they're your business owners, and children and parents, people who contribute to these communities and simply wanna live without fear. Having Immigration Detention Center in our communities will cause serious harm. Research and lived experience have shown repeatedly that detention centers raise grave concerns, inhumane conditions, lack of transparency, and systems that are often to paradise profit over human dignity and human rights. The consequences beyond those detained when fear takes hold, people stop coming into town. They stop supporting local businesses, accessing healthcare, and participating in civic life. That hurts all of us. We are already seeing serious strength in immigration court, large caseloads, limited notice, and inadequate access to legal services. Expanding detention infrastructures, it would only make it worse, and it would only make our due process violations, it would only increase our due process violations. We ask you to add these items to our next agenda and vote in favor. You have the power today to send a clear message to San Benito County, a message that you stand in community trust and human dignity and the well-being of everyone in our community, including all of your neighbors. We are counting on your leadership. Thank you.

Morning, Supervisors. I come before you to discuss what I had to discuss a couple weeks ago about the issue with corruption that happens when we're not looking. I have here the minutes of other schedules, of other meetings. This one's from August 9th, 2022. Supervisor announced he had a meeting with Clifford Moss regarding impacts of the initiative, reference to Measure Q. August 23rd, 2022. Supervisor announced educational outreach on Measure Q ad hoc. I'm leaving out the names for a reason. I don't like to single people out in public. September 13th, 2022. Supervisor announced meetings with county staff regarding an educational program for the November election, more specifically Measure Q. October 11th, 2022. Supervisor announced he had attended the Measure Q and voting education meeting. Supervisor requested a future item on the next meeting agenda for resolution to be adopted for a vote in support of Measure Q. It's been going on for a while now, as you can tell. October 25th, 2022. Supervisor announced he attended the Benito-Link Forum against Measure Q. Thought those were supposed to be unbiased, but oh well. Supervisor provided a brief background on taking position on Measure Q. Moved by supervisor to adopt resolution opposing Measure Q. Motion 4-1-0. Motion passes. So the contract here from July 1st and ends on February 20th, 2023. I forgot where it was, but somewhere to the tune of $45,500. Here's all the payments. If you add them up, it's worth $45,500. And here's a stipulation from the FPPC when they came after us and fined our butts for $18,000 on four counts of breaking campaign law. Motion passed five to zero. If five commissioners from Sacramento can all see that this was an intentional attempt to sway our elections, then clearly it was no accident. So here's the problem I have, is that they took $63,500 of our money to tell us we don't have the right to vote on our community's future. So here's what I got. Got an initiative. I made this maybe about a week or so, and especially about the last part, most of it came out on Sunday night. Very important to me, and I have here the intention to circulate, and I can start this whenever I want. I'll speak more later on, thank you.

Next in chambers, Jenny Wallace, followed by Praxedes Solorio, Diane Ortiz, and Sean McKenzie.

Good morning and thank you for your attention this morning. My name is Jeannie Wallace. I'm a longtime resident of San Benito County and I'm here to talk to you about the ice facility that's being prepared adjacent to Gilroy. Well, I'm also a retired history and government teacher and so I look at this through that lens. What we have going on in this country right now is a tragedy. We have a rogue executive branch in the federal government, which is engaging in extra legal activities and utilizing the federal agency ICE in order to do that. The purposes of the activities ICE has been engaged in really are threefold, to terrorize immigrant communities across our country, to intimidate those who would use their First Amendment rights to protest the abuse of power, and to solidify support among those in the community who are economically struggling, especially white populations, by scapegoating minority populations. We've seen this in history. We've all taken US history classes in high school and in college. We've seen this before. It never ends well. We've seen it in Nazi Germany. We've seen it in Stalinist Russia. We've even seen it, though, to a lesser extent, a horrific extent here in the United States with the relocation and imprisonment of Japanese Americans. This is not a new thing, and we should not be taken by surprise to see how it unfolds. There are human rights abuses well documented in ICE facilities across the country. Legal monitoring has been shut out. Governors, mayors, members of Congress, county supervisors have been locked out of these facilities even though they have the legal right to inspect them. This can only be because the agency is trying to hide its abuses of power and its violations of the Constitution. Because of federalism, the division of powers between the federal government and the state and local governments, we are under no obligation, you are under no obligation to cooperate. You're not part of a federal agency, you're not a subsidiary of the federal government, and you do not have to be complicit in this. Please do add to your agenda the items that were requested earlier. Please do join the amicus brief with the California Attorney General and the counties of Santa Clara and Monterey and protest this facility being opened. It can only be here to make things worse for us. i'm sure when you took this position, you were thinking about the budget, the economy local infrastructure serving the Community, but now you're in the position of being called upon as the first line of Defense for our Community, please take that seriously Thank you so much.

dear supervisor chair singer and board members my name is and i am a mother and i am proud to call hollister my home having lived here for so long i have witnessed firsthand how much our community struggles due to lack of investment Our community already faces challenges, and I know the severe risk our family would face if ICE facility near Gilroy is built. There is an urgent need for all of us to be on the same page. We must do everything we can to ensure our community is not only prepared, but safe. This is why I urge you to join in the Amisquis brief alongside Monterey, Santa Cruz, and our own city of Hollister. To block the development, please add this to the agenda for June 24th and to June 30th. We cannot afford to be left out when the safety and stability of our families and our neighbors and our local economy are online. Thank you for your leadership and for protecting San Benito County respectfully. Call us to resident and mother. Thank you.

Good morning, supervisors, staff, and community members. My name is Diane Ortiz. I'm the CEO and founder of Youth Alliance, serving youth and families in San Benito County and across the region. I am also a longtime resident of San Benito County. Today, San Benito County has an opportunity to demonstrate local leadership at this moment. As you know, a private equity firm from Beverly Hills under contract with ICE has acquired more than 25 acres just south of the San Benito County line. While this facility may not be located within our county boundaries, its impact will absolutely be felt here at home. Our families, businesses, and workforce are deeply interconnected across this region. The establishment of an ICE detention facility in Gilroy will have direct consequences for San Benito County residents, our young people, our agricultural workforce, local businesses, and our economy as a whole. We respectfully urge the county to join the amicus brief being filed by Monterey County and the Public Rights Project before the end of June. We ask that this item be agendized immediately on June 24th or June 30th so San Benito County can be included. By joining this brief, San Benito County would stand alongside neighboring jurisdictions in defense of constitutional rights, due process, family unity, and community safety. It would send a clear message that our county is committed not only to expressing its values but to acting on them. Monterey County, Santa Cruz, and San Mateo Counties along with cities including Hollister and San Jose have already taken a stand. Please, San Benito County should stand with them. This issue is deeply personal to me and to all of our young people and families that are here today. Through my work with youth and families, I see firsthand how fear and instability affect entire communities. When people are afraid to go to work, take their children to school, or seek services, the impacts ripple throughout households, businesses, and our economy. Our community thrives when people feel safe, rooted and able to continue, not when they live in fear. What happens in our neighboring community will affect us here at home. We are connected regionally and through our roads. Many young people, business owners and parents here in this room and in the community are concerned and asking for your leadership to protect San Benito County. I respectfully urge you to act now and ensure San Benito County joins this important amicus brief. Thank you for your time, your consideration, your leadership, and your commitment to our community.

As Sean McKenzie walks up, followed by Sean will be Enrique Arreola, Isabel Munoz, and Steve Vompley.

Thank you good morning good morning supervisors, I really want to echo what Dan just said about that you have an opportunity here, this is a moment that is. upsetting enraging and frightening to us in the Community here, but it is an opportunity for you because. 10 years from now, the cruelty and barbarism of ICE is something that pretty much everyone will have pretended to always been against. And you have an opportunity here now to stand up for your constituents and your community. And I really strongly urge you to take it. I would guess that most people in San Benito County don't actually know yet that an ICE facility is being prepared just outside our borders. And as they find out, they're going to be like many of us already are upset and enraged and frightened for our community members and for some of us personally for our parents for our neighbors for our children uh And they're going to want to know what you have done to prevent this from happening. And options have already been laid out for you to join in this lawsuit to take up these agenda items, but also get creative. This is going to be an all hands on deck situation. Whatever you can do now to stop ice from moving in just outside the county line. People will know people will appreciate and people will re, elect you. Thank you.

Enrique Arreola.

Good morning members and the board and the public. My name is Enrique Arreola. I am the president of MEG, the Management Employees Group. I'm speaking today regarding comments made during last week's board meeting concerning the MEG and the ongoing bargaining process. First, I want to acknowledge the important work that you play in serving our community. MEG members share the same commitment. Everyday Management Employees Group diligently work to provide quality services, support county operations, and help meet the needs of our residents. For that reason, it was disappointing to hear public statements suggesting that Meg has been selfish or responsible for unnecessary county expenditures because an agreement has not yet been reached during this year's negotiations. Respectfully, Meg rejects that characterization because that is simply not true. If there is a perception that Meg has acted selfishly during the process, then I believe the board may not have been provided with complete and accurate account of circumstances. Throughout negotiations, Meg has participated in good faith while the county's best and final proposal was effectively presented at the first bargaining session and has remained substantially unchanged. Meg has continued to engage in the process by presenting alternate proposals and seeking solutions at each bargaining meeting. That is not conduct of a group unwilling to collaborate. It is a conduct of a group committed to reaching a fair and mutually beneficial agreement. It is also important to recognize the dedication and sacrifice demonstrated by MIG members. The information shared during bargaining reflects that management employees have donated approximately 7,410 hours and although utilized 2,633 hours of paid time, bank members still contributed a total of 4,776 hours, the equivalent of nearly 597 days. Those donated hours represent hundreds of thousands of dollars in value provided to the county and its residents. These do not reflect selfish acts. They reflect commitment, professionalism, and a willingness to go above and beyond in support of the county and the community we serve. Meg remains committed to respectful dialogue and productive bargaining. We ask that the same of all board members. Public statements that assign blame or characterize one's party's motive do not help advance negotiations or foster the collaboration relation between the county and its employees we serve. As elected officials, I encourage you to seek full understanding of the facts surrounding these negotiations. and informed perspective will better serve both bargaining process and the public's interest. Meg remains ready to work collaboratively, negotiate and go faith and reach an agreement that recognize the values of employees who make the government successful. Thank you for your time.

So I have Isabel Munoz followed by Steve Wempley and then Jeanette Neal.

Good morning members of the board and my beloved community. My name is Isabel Muñoz and I am a Hollister resident, a mother and a community organizer. Hollister is our home. I know our parents, our youth, our children and their stories. We are a resilient community, but we are also vulnerable. Our families need us more than ever. We cannot ignore this, and we must stand united. I urge you to join the amicus brief alongside Monterey, Santa Cruz, and local cities to block the illegal ICE facility in Gilroy. San Benito County will be severely impacted if it opens. Our safety, families, and our agricultural economy are at risk. Mass deportation threatens to contract California's agricultural GDP by 14%, hurting our local businesses. Please place this on the agenda for June 24 or 30. our immigrant and farm worker community build this county. Thank you for your leadership in protecting us. Respectfully, Isabel Muñoz.

Good morning, Chairman, Supervisors. Over the last five years, I spent hundreds of hours training and coordinating a team of 15 to 20 election observers for the primary and general elections in 2022 and 2024. I also coordinated a team of canvassers to validate our county election records. I'd like to share with you some of what I've seen and learned. First, we had great cooperation from our local elections office. They encouraged us, educated us, and kept us informed. When voters occasionally realized that observers were present, they seemed comforted to know that someone was watching the process. During canvassing, voters on both sides expressed appreciation that citizens were taking time to validate election records. I once saw a voter check in and discover that her party registration had changed. Her existing distrust of the process only increased. I understand from my work with the elections office how the system can do that, but involuntary change like that is not well received by voters. Voters are proud to show ID. I've seen many voters come into a vote center, whip out their ID, only to be told that it's not necessary. Voting is a tremendous opportunity we have in this country, but it's devalued when essential matters are ignored. During canvassing, we obtained responses from over 45% of the doors that we knocked on. Respondents were nearly always willing to talk with us once they knew what we were about. One respondent volunteered the statement, I only vote for who they tell me to. That makes you wonder who are they and what else are they doing, assuming the respondent was not being humorous. Our survey results show that 22% of people believe that it is acceptable to offer money for a ballot. Nearby county asked the same question of a much larger sample size and they got 23%. Have these people seen and heard of people buying ballots without consequence and concluded the lack of consequences means there's no crime? We found two registrations with identical names and similar age at the same address. The voter confirmed that he was the only person with that name at that address. It appears that he was double registered for a considerable period of time. I estimate that 12 to 15% of registrants at any given time are not valid electors due to have moved out of the county or for a variety of other reasons. that's likely a state issue, rather than a county so i'm not blaming anybody here, you can see that we have some positives and some things to be concerned about the citizens are speaking, thank you for listening, I hope you found this useful.

Good morning, supervisors and board members. My name is Jeanette Neal and I'm a resident of Hollister. And I am here today to ask you to sign on to the lawsuit to prevent ice facilities being built in our neighborhoods. This affects our community members and it also affects our commerce. It affects so much that a lot of people may not realize that it's not just individuals. These are family members, these are hard-working people, these are people that are here for the same reasons that we are here. I'm here today with a group of young people and I'm going to ask them just to stand peacefully and hold up their signs so that they have a voice. They are representing other youth in this community that may not have been able to wake up this early to be here. And here they are. I'm going to stand silently and if you can turn around and show others the signs that you bring here today. I'm gonna end with asking people to just stand peacefully if you are for what we are here for today. Thank you so much for listening and your time.

Thank you. Next in chambers, I have three more in chambers and then we have some on Zoom. So we'll start with Esther Perez followed by Sarah B. Munoz and then Laura.

Good morning ladies and gentlemen. My name is Esther and I am an angel mom. My daughter Anisha Torres was murdered and poisoned by fentanyl May 2nd of 2025. She was lured by an MS-13 gang member and murdered at his house. We need a nice facility to take all these drug dealers, drug lords, I don't care who they are. I don't care what color they are. Legal or illegal, we need a nice detention facility because we need law and order. The Liberal Democrats, they are lawless. They don't care for law and order. We need law and order. We need protection. Many people have died in this county. I don't know the exact count. Recently, another man also was poisoned with fentanyl. It's embarrassing that these Democrats want these children to help them push their lawless agenda. You should all be ashamed of yourselves. I don't care if you're lawyers, if you run cab, whatever you do, I don't care who you are. You should be ashamed of yourselves to bring these kids here with these signs when these kids have no idea what is going on. There's many angel moms like myself who suffer struggle every day for the loss of my daughter. My daughter was a beautiful woman inside and out. She was living in a rehab, got her life ahead of her. And I saw her after the autopsy. The sight of her will never leave my mind. You people don't know what you're asking for. You cannot come here and say, hey, let's be more lawless. Let's go against the federal government. Nobody is gonna win against the federal government. They will pull all the funds from this county and this county will have nothing. So you should do something, teach these kids to obey the law, to fight against the gang members, against the MS-13 and the Tren de Aragua. And I don't care if they hear me, because you know what? You guys are just pushing agendas, liberal democratic agendas that have nothing to do with law and order, with freedom. My daughter had, was a beautiful, smart woman with her life ahead of her, and it's gone. Why? because there's no law and order, because of open borders, because we don't have enough facilities to lock up all these criminals that are murdering everyone, that are murdering people. There's 15 year old, 15 year old pregnant mother died of fentanyl overdose. I've met angel mothers, their son's 11 year old boy shot in the head. by a 13 MS 13 gang member it was here illegally so yes we do need a nice facility and I hope they build it fast and I don't care who doesn't like what I have to say that is the truth and we need to uphold the law in San Benito County we should not join Santa Clara and all that nonsense with Rob Bonta and filing any lawsuits against the federal government because no one's going to win against the federal government thank you

Good morning, dignified supervisors. My name is Sarabi Munoz, and I come to stand before you as not only a resident of Hollister, California, but a friend to many people that come from immigrant descent. I come to you with statistics. and to ask that you join the brief lawsuit following monterey santa cruz and santa clara against the isa detention center being built in gilroy isis no longer only border control they are being used as a secret police force they are being brutal and they are something that is only described as barbaric And for my statistics, these are all gathered from a public government website called DataUSA. The vast majority of our population is Hispanic, 69.3% to be specific. And the vast majority of this Hispanic origin is Mexican. And as to follow our population, 22% growing to 27 are immigrants, 82% of which being of Latino origin and foreign born. Each and every one of these people are at risk, this is no longer about if you are legal or not, or if you are a citizen, they are racially profiling they are going based off of whether you have an accent or not. The news is being. Withheld from us ice is no longer a. act to keep us safe. It is being used to take away what makes counties like ours great. San Benito County, its power lies in its diversity and its culture. And our diversity mainly comes from immigrants. Our county would not be what it is today without the people that were brave enough to venture. Migration is an earthborn right. Animals do it for safety. However, humans are the only group of people that call it illegal. There are many families out there that are cowering in fear of being taken when they have done no wrong. And there are families that are scared of leaving their house. There are hard, hardworking immigrant families that are scared. It's not just a power. It's not just one or two people. There are many people at risk. Everybody is at risk. And it's only a question of am I next? Is my family next? People are living in fear and I come as a high school student that has witnessed this firsthand. I am a friend to many people that came from immigrant families and many have come to me with tears in their eyes saying that they are nothing short of fearful. This fear is something no child should ever have to withhold and carry that burden on their shoulders. No child should ever have to watch their back and look for an ICE police officer waiting to handcuff them. I may be a child I may be only 14 years old, but I am not clueless I have done my research, I have learned. I asked today that you join the lawsuit Thank you for your time.

Laura.

hello good morning hi supervisors um my name is laura and i live in district four that's angela's district hi angela um so i'm coming to you today many things i could speak about but the one that's on my heart are the people who live in my district the parents and the children who are being overtaxed and they are without their part that has been promised them for six years I see other developments being built and they have their park almost immediately. And a lot of effort is put into it. And mine, for some reason, is part of this big kind of fantasy now, a river walk. And I don't know how much money has been allocated for that, if it's coming from the state or if it's our general fund, but I am asking you to separate us. We want our park. And if we'd have had any other supervisor, someone who lived in my neighborhood, we'd have our park by now. I know that you would advocate for our park. And we just want basic, simple, something for our children to play in. They're growing up. They have nowhere to kick their ball. The balls go in the street. It's dangerous. We have... were basically a thoroughfare for the homeless now, or have been ever since the beginning. And they even managed to tear down the new fence that's beautiful, but I knew a fence wouldn't do it. They're using it for firewood now. The fire department needs an access, but not from our neighborhood. This park would benefit all of the surrounding neighborhoods, the Kay-Havinian homes, and then the older homes that are on Hospital Road. they could come and use our park. And so just the basics, some grass, some trees, a bark play structure and simple digi rock and water, what is it? The plants that don't require a lot of water. And we have CFD that I have a problem with. It is a large amount of money, $1,800 now per household. I don't know if it's every household in our district or just the newer homes, but CFD I found out is kind of a play on uh on the abbreviation it's not california fire department it's um uh street sweeping or something or like just so can someone please look at this astronomical amount of money i just feel like there's i don't know if it's nepotism in this county there's so many names in the auditor's office our taxes and in the hospital board i just feel like there's you know, there's conflicts of interest here. But this money, I check on them all the time. I take walks and I take pictures and send them in to someone, I think Linda Young. But yeah, and I support ICE. I'm not sure if all of you are aware, but ICE and CPB are arresting criminals, child rapists, drug traffickers. Excuse me, your time is up. Okay, so go to the ICE. Elia Salinas in Chambers. Excuse me. All right.

All right, Ellie, hold on. Excuse me. Can you please, you need to step out. Thank you.

Good morning Board of Supervisors. I haven't been here in a while. I'm sure you all missed me. In October of 2024, I came before the Board of Supervisors just before the election asking for you to consider how you were going to react with should Trump win what the administration was doing with Project 2025. And it has happened under the under the first administration there was a Senate Bill 54 and that's for the for the law enforcement and they have to do a report every year. I don't know how many how many times a year, but they do a report, but I could San Benito County Sheriff's Department in the last two years has only. has had only one violent detainee transferred to ICE. All other requests have been denied. I too, I don't want to repeat what everybody has said, but I would like you to place it on the agenda before the deadline to please join the Attorney General with the amicus brief. San Benito County is a large workforce of immigrant agricultural workers and hospitality. There isn't a place that you can go in and sit down and eat and you're not gonna see an immigrant in the kitchen or an immigrant serving you. So I believe that we have a consensus that you will do something about it so that you can join. I would be extremely disappointed and would not want to see any one of your names on a no vote. So please, please do that. I'm also requesting that All MEG members, actually all San Benito County employees deserve respect and not to alienate them. San Benito County lost an employee asset to Monterey County. She was San Benito County CAO Ray Espinosa's right hand. spoken very highly by coworkers. It is surprising why the current CAO slash CEO would not learn from instead of humiliate, alienate such knowledgeable employee and actually other employees. So I would ask that you Board of Supervisors pay attention to what is happening behind closed doors. You may be witnessing, you may not be witnessing, but there's a lot of reports on the workforce that you have here that is very unhappy. Thank you.

Okay, so on Zoom, Celeste, you've been unmuted and you have three minutes.

Good morning, everyone. My main concern was the proposition that supervisor Colin Kosmicki was going to bring forward is not on the agenda. So I just wanted to remind the board that I did not find the new agenda for tomorrow's meeting. I believe the I'm not too sure if the Sheriff's Department or the association put out a post saying that there might be a special meeting tomorrow. So if we can get that out so the public can see it and there can be more transparency towards the proposal. because I would like to see, and I'm sure others would as well. Also for the ICE attention, unfortunately, I feel that it's best we don't open up that can of worms. It's not in our county. We do have a large conservative population, and some people are in the middle, but it's best that I think because you're the board from the county, of your constituents do support that ICE facility in law and order. So that's it. Thank you. Have a great day.

So you've been unmuted and you have three minutes. You need to unmute on your side.

Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Good morning, supervisors. My name is Barry Kott. I'm from Aromas, San Benito County side of Aromas, California. I too have come to urge you to join with the state of California, Santa Clara County, Monterey County, Santa Cruz County, and the city of Hollister in fighting against the proposed ice facility just outside of Gilroy. I do appreciate the remarks of the angel mother. That's a horrible, sad story. However, they're not targeting. If they were doing, as the president claimed he would be doing, and they were going after criminals, gang members, drug dealers, murderers, who are... that would i wouldn't be here asking that i wouldn't have any concern but to do that they don't need new facilities they have plenty of facilities for small numbers of people who are criminals that's not what's happening that's a very very small part of what they're doing all over the country where there have been ice raids they're detaining all kinds of average working class, working people, but they're targeting by race and by color and by last name. From a personal stand, I can tell you that I was in agriculture for 41 years. I started working at Monterey Mushrooms nearby on in the prunedale area about 43 years ago during that time i worked with hundreds of undocumented workers i didn't see them as special they were hard-working wonderful people the first two decades that i were there i was there we had two amnesties the first one was under ronald reagan and i saw literally hundreds of people on the farm going from illegal to becoming, you know, legal workers and many, most of them later on became citizens. But that's not what's happening now. I can't imagine if those people had simply been deported. And I just couldn't imagine seeing that the company would have fallen. It never even would have existed. And that's the kind of impact we could see um we could see again uh the impact on the local economy as well as just all these people that we know and work with and love let's say uh have them harassed and deported whether they're legal or undocumented it's it's out of control and no facility would be necessary for for them to go after the small number of violent criminals that are actually at work So I urge you to go along with the suggestions that were made by the second commenter, Elvira Robinson. Thank you.

Three minutes. You'll need to unmute on your end. You're unmuted. Can you speak?

Thank you, supervisors, staff, and community members. My name is Megan Wilden, and over 100 years ago, my great-great-grandfather, Philip Dougherty, overcame immense hardships to immigrate from Ireland across this great land all the way to San Juan Bautista. For the past five generations, my family has lived in this area. At the time my great-grandfather immigrated to the United States, Irish people were treated poorly here, taken for granted, and discriminated against. Despite this, he worked hard and was able to start a cattle ranch and raise a family. Today he is buried on the hill in the San Juan Bautista Cemetery. Immigrants continue to make our country and our communities strong and vibrant. I strongly oppose the building of an illegal ice holding facility in nearby Gilroy and hope that you do too. Specifically, I am here today to ask that you join the amicus brief to support and strengthen the lawsuit filed jointly by Santa Clara County and the California Attorney General to block this illegal development of an ice facility near Gilroy. The counties of Monterey, Santa Cruz, and San Mateo, and the cities of Hollister, San Jose, Palo Alto, and Alameda have already signed on with many more in process. San Benito County should be part of this as our county and community will be severely impacted if the ICE facility opens near Gilroy. The amicus brief is being prepared by the County of Monterey with the Public Rights Project with plans to file by the end of June. So your action is urgently needed now. Please add this to the agenda on June 24th or June 30th so San Benito County is part of this important amicus brief. Unless you are 100% Native American, you are the child of immigrants, and this should be important to all of you. Thank you for your service and for all your good work each and every day.

City of San Juan Bautista, you've been unmuted and you have three minutes.

thank you good morning thank you board of supervisors and also audience in the chambers and on zoom my name is Jackie Morris-Lopez you may know me as council member Morris-Lopez from the city of San Juan Bautista this morning I'm speaking on behalf of myself as a resident of San Juan Bautista, lifelong resident of San Benito County. I am in 100% agreement with the previous speakers that spoke in opposition of the new ICE detention center proposal to be built outside of Gilroy. I have two issues that I wanted to touch on briefly. I don't want to repeat what others have said. The obvious reasons, there's horrendous violations of human rights occurring daily at these detention centers. They're not only picking up criminals as others like to be persuaded to think or imagine. These are everyday working hard people, some already in the court process to gain citizenship. The other issue that I have is the AI Center that was approved very under the cover I want to say in the city of Gilroy I attended their city council meeting last Monday and witnessed a huge amount of citizens from Gilroy in opposition to that AI data center I find the connection between the two facilities very suspicious as we know that data centers do provide us with our ability to get on the internet use other you know, internet and technology. But there's been a connection that with that AI data center, number one, it was passed without public hearing, without review by their planning commission, and also going up to city council. It was passed by a simple signature by a staff at the city hall who was in charge of economic development. i would be really upset and concerned as a citizen and as a council member solely speaking on my behalf if that were to happen in our county without any public review or even an ordinance that addresses that the ordinance that was used to pass this ai center was drafted in the 80s which did not even have the existence of ai data centers on the record so two things please oppose the ICE detention center for all the reasons that were spoken before me and also please look into an ordinance for AI data centers if you already as you already have put a moratorium on the battery storage center thank you for all that you do I consider these two very important issues that may be coming to our county soon so we need to be ahead of the curve thank you very much have a good day

Next, it's an email address. I'm not sure how you pronounce that. If you can please state your name, you have three minutes.

Good morning, can you hear me?

Yes, we can hear you.

Okay hi my name is Karla Torres and I'm a long time resident here from Hollister community advocate and I'd like to thank you for your leadership and all you do in the community board of supervisors and good morning to the community. i urge you to take action today to protect our community our people our agriculture and our businesses please join the amicus brief with local jurisdictions as previously mentioned and regardless of how you feel about immigration policy this proposed detention center will impact our community gilroy is right next door to us and is has proven to be not friendly, attacking people of color, regardless of immigration status. We need to learn from what's happened in L.A. and in Minnesota, and we do not need that here in San Benito County or any of our area or California, for that matter. so please do what's right san benito county board of supervisors join the amicus brief put these other resolutions that we need to protect our community on your next board of supervisor meeting and do the right thing for all involved because when there's a target on one member of our community it does impact everyone regardless of our background We are neighbors here. We are friends. We work together. Salmonero County is different in that way. And so let's keep protecting our community. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. I have two more. Irma, you've been unmuted and you have three minutes.

Hi, good morning. My name is Irma Gonzalez. I'm here as Vice President of the League of United Latin American Citizens of San Diego County. LULAC is the oldest Latino civil rights organization in our country, and it has been part of our community for decades, standing with families who have lived, worked, and sacrificed to make San Diego County what it is today. I'm here because our community is hurting. People are scared. And the proposed ICE detention facility in New Gilroy has opened the wound that many of our families know all too well. Our county is the place where generations of immigrants and farmworker families have built their lives. These are the people who pick our crops. They run small businesses. They sit beside us in church. They are the heartbeat of this county, and right now they're afraid. I am asking you to join the amicus brief. San Benito County should not stand on the sidelines when our families are the ones who will feel the impact most directly. They are not targeting criminals. If they were, I would not be here today. Even if you are an American citizen and think you are safe, you are sadly misinformed. You yourself can be picked up and deported simply because of the color of your skin. I want to be clear. This is not abstract. This is not theoretical. This is about the mother who will be too afraid to take her child to the doctor. The father who will skip work because he fears a checkpoint on the way to the fields. The teenager who will wonder if today's the day their parent is torn apart and their family is gone. We know what happens when fear takes hold. Children stop sleeping. Parents stop driving, families stop participating in the community, and when families retreat into the shadows, the entire county suffers emotionally, socially, and economically. I've lived in San Diego County my entire life. It has always been a place where people look out for one another, where we show up for our neighbors, where we believe that every family deserves safety, dignity, and a chance to build a better life. Joining this amicus brief is not just a legal action, it's a statement about who we are. It's a promise to our families that we see them, we value them, and we will not abandon them. I ask you from the heart, please stand with us. Stand with the families who built this county. Stand with the workers who feed this region. Stand with the children who deserve to grow up without fear. Thank you for your time and your commitment to the people of San Diego County.

Thank you, and one last one. Marnie, you've been unmuted and you have three minutes.

Thank you. My name is Marnie. I'm with No Camps California. I am also wanting you to sign on to the amicus brief. The ICE facility proposed to go up in Gilroy is a terrible idea. It's bad for your community. I've been involved on the ground talking to people whose loved ones have been kidnapped and terrorized by ICE. ICE is not picking up criminals. They are just picking up whoever they want. The facilities are filled with people who have no criminal record, who are just trying to do everything right, who go to their hearings and are picked up. They're being brutalized. They are dying of medical neglect. Many of them are now hunger striking because the conditions are so deplorable. And this is not going to make your community safer. It is not going to help us keep our community safe when we are locking up people who are not criminals and then torturing them and letting them die. It is a terrible idea and I urge you to Be compassionate and also just be smart about this. This is not going to make your community better. It's not going to make you safer. It is not going to make you more economically solvent. And so I urge you to consider no more of these camps going up. We have tons of facilities already here and the conditions are terrible. We do not need another one. All of them should be closed. And the last thing we need to do is open another one. Thank you.

I have one more, Lizbeth. Go ahead, Lizbeth.

Good morning, Supervisors. My name is Lista Stovall, and I serve as a program manager at Watsonville Law Center. Although our name includes Watsonville, we serve our families through the tri-county region, including San Benito County, Monterey, and Santa Cruz. I lived most of my life in San Benito County and come from an immigrant family with deep roots in the community. I am here today to urge San Benito County to join the amicus brief opposing the proposed ICE Detention Facility Center in Gilroy. This issue is personal to me. Growing up in San Benito County, my family and I worked in San Benito Foods, picked onions in the fields and worked at local packing companies. Those experiences taught me the value of hard work and showed me firsthand how much our local economy depends on immigrants and farm worker communities. My own family has experienced the impact of immigration enforcement, and through my work, I continue to see the fear and uncertainty it creates for our families. Parents become afraid to seek healthcare, access services, report crimes, attend school events, and seek legal assistance. When families live in fear, our entire community is affected. a detention facility near Garoy would impact far more than those detained. It would affect families, businesses, agriculture, and the overall well-being of communities through our region, including Seminole County. The people who work in our fields, packing houses and restaurants, stores, and local businesses are part of the fabric of this community. The San Bernardino County has been shaped and strengthened by immigrant farm worker communities for generations. As someone who has lived here most of her life, I want our county to be known for protecting families, supporting community, community wellbeing, and standing up for the values that make our community strong. I respectfully ask that you join the amicus brief and stand alongside neighboring counties and cities in opposing this facility. Thank you for your time and leadership and consideration.

That concludes public comment. Okay, thank you. Before we move to consent, County Council, I think we had some changes to the agenda, right?

Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the Board of Supervisors. I just want to note that there's a typographical error in the listing for closed sessions 5.3 and 5.4. They make a reference to section 54956.9 when it should be to D4. So 5.3 and 5.4. The typographical error should be corrected to read government code section 54956.9 . Thank you. Thank you.

Moving on to consent agenda. These matters shall be considered as a whole without discussion unless an item is removed from the agenda. Do any supervisors have items they wish to remove from consent? Yes, Supervisor Kosmicki. Yeah, Mr. Chair, 1.3. Okay. Any others? Yes, Supervisor Tello. 113, please. What was that? 113. 113. Zuccaro, any?

Yes, Mr. Chair. I'd like to pull 1.17 and 1.19. 17, 1.19.

Okay, thank you. Do we have any public comment on the remaining items of consent that were not pulled?

If you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on Zoom. Please press star nine and the raise hand icon. And I have no public comment.

Thank you. Is there a motion to approve the consent items except for the ones that were pulled, which is 1.3, 1.13, 1.17, and 1.19? I move to approve.

Is there a second? I'll second.

Can we have roll call vote, please?

Supervisor Zenger?

Yes.

Supervisor Kosmicki?

Yes.

Supervisor Sotelo? Yes. Supervisor Curro? Yes. 4-0 vote. Motion passes.

Great. Thank you. 1.3. Yeah, so I'm pulling this because I have to abstain from this item. The entity involved in the contract with Behavioral Health was a source of income of $500 or more in the past 12 months, so I will need to step out and recuse myself due to potential conflict.

Thank you. Great, thank you. Can we get a public comment on this item, please?

If you'd like to make a comment on 1.3, please provide a speaker card. And on Zoom, please press star nine or the raised hand icon. And I have no public comment.

Thank you. Any questions, comments from the rest of the board? If not, serve motion.

I move to approve. I'll second.

Thank you. Can we have a roll call vote, please?

Supervisor Zenger?

Yes.

Supervisor Sotelo? Yes. Supervisor Curro? Yes. I have a 3-0 vote with one abstention. Motion passes.

Great. I guess I'll go get Supervisor... Thank you, moving on to 1.13, Supervisor Citello.

Thank you, I just wanted to make sure that we get proper recognition, approving the proclamation declaring the week of July 19th through July 25th as Pretrial Probation and Parole Supervision Week and recognize the outstanding contributions of our San Benito County Probation Department.

Great, yes, thank you. We have the proclamation, I believe, somewhere, right? Do we have any public comment on this item?

If you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on Zoom, please press star nine or the raised hand icon. And I have no public comment.

Great, thank you. Ms. Sotelo, did you want to? I move to approve. Thank you. I'll second. Roll call vote, please.

Supervisor Zenger?

Yes.

Supervisor Kosmicki?

Yes.

Supervisor Sotelo? Yes. Supervisor Curro? Yes. 4-0 vote, motion passes.

Thank you.

Can I go up and give the certificate? Okay, so anybody from probation that would like to come up, we'll do this proclamation right now. It's been a real pleasure for me. I've sat on a lot of committees with probation, the Juvenile Justice Committee, and just worked really hard with this group over the last four years. And you guys are incredible. And so it's a real honor to be up here and honoring you all. Probation holds individuals accountable through transformative evidence-based and court-ordered rehabilitative programming, while also helping them to permanently transition out of the justice system and onto a healthier, more productive life path. Probation departments serve as key connectors within the justice system and local communities, maximizing the resources available through courts, local governments, law enforcement, social services, behavioral health providers, schools, crime survivor organizations, and nonprofit agencies. Probation professionals balance the need for accountability with the opportunity for individuals to engage in treatment and rehabilitation, providing the structure and support necessary to change lives and reduce future crime. Now therefore, be it proclaimed, the Board of Supervisors of San Benito County hereby recognizes the significant contributions of San Benito County Probation Department and hereby acknowledges and commends the critical role of California's probation professionals and proclaims the week of July 19th through the 26th as pre-trial Probation and Parole Supervision Week in honor of your ongoing dedication to justice, rehabilitation, and community safety. So thank you all. Ashlyn, do you want to say anything?

No.

Here's your certificate. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. No, I'm really proud to work for this department and all these people that are here. They do a great service to this community. And thank you for this recognition. It's really for them.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Can we get a picture?

Yeah, let's do it.

Down there?

Yeah.

Picture.

You're supposed to be in this picture.

Great, thank you. Moving on to 1.17.

Okay, Mr. Chair, thank you so much. I'm pulling this item mostly just to give a little history and make sure that we're all on the same page as this item moves forward and this request of County Council and the the clerk of the board and the county clerk. Back many, many years ago, I wanna say it was probably 2016, we created via a policy, a very detailed and chart of how we handle conflicts of interest. It was a huge passion project of mine, and I'm sorry, I'm trying to get to the top so I can actually say what it's really called. It is Exhibit C, the Conflict of Interest Code and Policy. And I just wanna make sure that all three entities or departments are aware this was months legal review and coming up with the best way to review and implement a conflict of interest code. This code, unfortunately, in my opinion, has not been fully embraced and adhered to by all of prior administrations. And I'm very hopeful with our new CEO, our new county council, that this conflict of interest code, you'll start with what we already created. It's from January 26, 2016. I have a copy if you need a copy sent to you. This code lays out not only who's responsible because you can't have how it was prior to this policy, you would have everything went through administration and county council for review of conflict of interest. a department head knows more about conflicts within their department than anyone else in their department. They know what their employees are working on, they know what their employees responsibilities are. It is imperative that department heads or their designees are reviewing the 700 conflict of interest forms that are filed by their departments. It's imperative that If there is a potential conflict that it is reported to administration and county council, we cannot just have things filed and put on a shelf. And I feel like this policy has been treated that way. Even with all the effort and energy we put in there, we tried to look at every scenario, new hires, transfers to positions. It really gives a workflow and a communication between HR. We would have new positions created or we'd have new hires and we would never be notified in the county clerk's office that we need to ask for a conflict of interest code. So it's all about communication and collaboration and I'm very hopeful that moving forward that this is implemented completely and that the board is aware of how each entity, not only the department heads, HR, clerk of the board, county council and administration, and the board of supervisors are responsible for ensuring that we do not have conflicts within our employees and our departments. So with that said, I know you have to open it up to public comment, but I just wanted to make a point of this. We worked endlessly for over a year, and I want to thank Michael Parsons, who was a key instrument and individual that helped make this policy even possible.

Thank you. Let's open up for public comment.

If you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on Zoom. Please press star 9 or the raised hand icon. And I have no public comment.

Great, thank you. Is there any other comments? If not, I'll entertain a motion.

I'll make a motion to approve.

Can we have a roll call vote, please?

Supervisor Zenger?

Yes.

Supervisor Kosmicki?

Yes.

Supervisor Sotelo? Yes. Supervisor Curro? Yes. 4-0 vote. Motion passes.

Thank you. 1.19. Microphone, please.

Microphone. Microphone, please.

All right. My apologies.

This is AMR. There are a couple things I want to point out. In this attachment, if you go to, I believe it's scrolling. I thought I had it up right on my screen and I didn't. On this addendum, you'll see an exhibit. I believe it is, my apologies. rolling as fast as I can. There it is. It is Exhibit A, the EOA map. And you can't really read. I even reached out to AMR to get more information, and I didn't hear back from them. But there is a map of the county and it shows where there are extended response times. I do not believe those extended response times in this amendment are showing the true response times because of the lack of road and infrastructure that we have. And I would like that to be looked at more closely because the response time to South County, in one part of this, from what I can somewhat read, it says rural is 30 minutes. I don't believe there's anybody that can get to New Idria or to Pinoch in 30 minutes unless you drive like some of our county roads crew because they drive really, really fast as Supervisor Sotelo and I know. I want that to be looked at and make sure that it's current because it does impact the lives of our residents in South County. The other thing I want to ask is, is there a reason that we're extending all the way to 2029? One of the items that we discussed at the fire advisory committee was the discussion of consolidating a potential special district for fire with emergency response? And is there an out clause prior to that that we won't be penalized for? I'm not an attorney. I try to read these contracts and see where the out clause is. I just would like those two items addressed prior to approval, if you don't mind.

For the sake of providing you with the right information, this was a request by the manager that oversees this department. So I will request to table this item for the next meeting, for the June 30th meeting better, so that we can get the information that you're requesting, which is valid, and potentially lower the deadlines for the contract. I will recommend that.

And the only reason I'm bringing this up is I don't want us to be in a position that we don't have leverage in negotiations. And since this is a sole source, the future, if this is the only option is looking at that with the potential fire advisory committee.

That's correct. So I will recommend you to table this item for the upcoming meeting.

Then I would recommend tabling the item if the board so agrees. Do we need to make a motion on that? Okay so I'd like to make a motion to table until the June 30th agenda. I will second.

Great. Can we roll call vote on that, please?

Just for a real question, though, if I may. Yes. Because the main issue that seems to be at stake here is the contract term. And I don't know if county council, I'm looking at 1.2, which is term of contract. The term shall commence July 1st, 2021. Obviously, that's prior and shall terminate on June 30th, 2026. So that's. That's also odd that that has that language in there, that the term of the contract has not been amended to the current in item 1.2, I shall say, on page six. But I would just say if there's any language in here that allows, it says unless, terminated earlier, so that seems to imply that there is some sort of termination clause. And I'm not seeing that, the word search is not allowing me to look at that right now. I didn't see it when I went through it initially, but that would be basically what we're looking at here is trying to figure out if there's a termination clause. And if there isn't a termination clause, then we would need to set the end date at somewhere in the 2028 range to go in line with the potential item that's coming before us.

Mr. Chair, members of the Board of Supervisors, there is a separate amendment document that is in your packet that modifies the term of the original contract and extends it from June 30th, 2026 to January 1 of 2029. There is also a termination provision, but only termination for cause.

That's what I was worried about.

And that's based upon a major breach and major breach is defined.

So we would either need to change the language to say termination with no cause. or change the dates basically and bring it back. I don't see that other document you're referring to. I see the amendment and I don't, maybe I'm missing it, but I see AMR amendment number one contract, extension request letter, sole source justification, and an agenda fact sheet. So I don't see what you're referencing on my end.

Thanks. So if you look at amendment to contract number one, right that's what i opened up if you open that up you should see on the very first page under paragraph 2 a term of the contract and it says the term of the original contract is extended from the current expiration date of june 30th 2026 to a new expiration date of january 1 2029 right and you're the lawyer but maybe on the other 1.2 maybe make the adjustment there as well so it's clear that this these are new dates i guess

Thanks. Hey, we had the motion made a 1st and a 2nd to continue the item to the next meeting. So can we have a vote on that place?

Do we need to have a friendly amendment approved with the comments from supervisor? because I believe we first and second, did we not do that? So I would do a friendly amendment to include the comments from Supervisor Kosmicki for the minutes to ensure that those comments are reflected in the vote. Do you agree with the second Supervisor Sotelo?

Well I guess I'm just not really clear what we're adding. I mean I think there was a clarification question from him on the contract and I believe that in all contracts it included the original contract that was there. The amendment is stating that the new terms are from June 30th, 2026 to January 1st, 2029. So I guess for me it's a question of we're now going to go back and change the language in the original contract. That's what gets a little bit confusing.

And if I may, I'm just basically pointing out that we have two options here. One is to change the contract so that it states you can terminate without cause or to change the contract to state a date that's in the 2028 range to align with the feasibility study. Those are basically... the two items that we would be looking at.

Okay, so looking at potentially even a different term of contract.

And making sure that we have cause or no cause included, right? Yes, and we would have to go back to AMR essentially and have at least a discussion with them about whether they have a preference because this is a two-way contract. This is not a one-way contract.

I believe there are three things total. One is the exit clause to be able to get out of the contract in case of the special district formation. The second is clarification, making sure that the dates are appropriate. And the third is the response times on that rural area of the map, because I do not believe they're current.

Is this realistic that we can get this back to us by next week, by Wednesday?

I think it all depends on the availability of AMR to have a discussion. I will try to do my best. We'll contact the staff right now to see if we can.

Is there any possibility of us getting like an extension for something like this where maybe like we can just continue, you know, next week you can bring us the extension for 30 days, 60 days, 90 days, whatever it is, kind of more of an interim solution as we figure out kind of, because I feel like there's a lot that's packed into this item, and I don't know that a week's time will be enough to get all this done, but if we can maybe get like an extension.

We're looking for both options. Okay, thank you.

Mr. Chair, I believe we have to get an extension or have an agreement. The contract expires on June 30th, and we will not have AMR services, so we need one or the other. One of those two is going to have to happen. Thank you.

Yes, Mr. Chair, members of the board, I believe your direction is very clear, and we will bring back to you next Tuesday either an extension or an agreement consistent with the board's direction.

Okay, and since we've gotten into this, we need to check for public comment on this one.

If you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on Zoom. Please press star 9 or the raised hand icon. And I have no public comment.

Okay, so they have the direction, but we do have a motion on the floor. So are you ready to vote on this motion? Is it understood?

As long as Supervisor Sotelo, did you second my clarification? Sure, I second it. Thank you.

Great, can we have a roll call vote, please? Yes.

Supervisor Kosmicki?

Yes.

Supervisor Sotelo? Yes. Supervisor Curro? Yes. 4-0 vote, motion passes.

Great, thank you. We have our public hearings. Do we need to take a five minute break at this time? Usually we do not. Okay, five minute break. We'll take a five, that's five minutes, not a 10 minute break, five minute break. Great, thank you. We're going to move to the public hearings, starting with item 2.1. The previously noticed Prop 218 public hearing schedule for June 23rd, 2026 has been canceled and a new hearing date has been set for August 11th, 2026. We'll be hearing this August 11th. We will take public comment on the continuance of the item, not the item itself, but if you'd like to make a comment on the new scheduled date, you can do that at this time. Is there public comment on that?

If you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on Zoom. Please press star nine or the raised hand icon. And I have no public comment.

Okay, great. Thank you. Any other comments or questions to the board on that? Okay, that'll be continued. 2.2, also continued item off calendar due to the decisions made at the Planning Commission. Same thing, we will take public comment on the continuance of the item, not the item itself at this time. Is there public comment on that?

I do have one. If you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on Zoom. Please press star nine or the raised hand icon. And I have Sophia Schwarsky.

All right, looks like she's all set.

Okay, then no public comment.

Thank you. Okay, moving on then to public hearing item 2.3 from Mr. Abraham Prado.

Okay, so you have two different ones on here. I just need the presentation. Yeah, I want the presentation. specific sections.

Thank you.

Okay, hello there. Good morning, Chair and members of the board. Stephanie Reck, Senior Planner. I will be presenting the Title 25 code amendments today. As a brief historical recap, the county adopted comprehensive amendments to Title 25 in June of 2022. Following implementation of those amendments, staff identified several areas where additional clarification and refinement would improve administration and interpretation of the zoning code. In March of 2024, staff presented a discussion item to the Planning Commission regarding various provisions that would benefit from further evaluation. Since that time, multiple zoning code amendments have been reviewed by both the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors with a detailed summary of those actions provided in the staff report. Throughout those discussions, several items were identified for additional research, stakeholder input, and legal review before being brought forward as part of a future amendment package. Today, staff is presenting a focused package of amendments to Title 25 that have undergone extensive review and analysis. The proposed amendments update multiple sections of the zoning code to improve clarity, enhance internal consistency, address implementation challenges staff identified through code administration and ensure that regulations continue to function as intended while supporting orderly development throughout the county. So the amendments presented today affect Title 25, Chapters 1, General Provisions and Administration, 2, Permits and Other Planning Actions, 3, Zoning Map and Districts, 7, General Development and Design Standards, 8, Standards for Specific Uses and Area, and 9, the glossary. So these amendments clarify administrative procedures and approval authorities, improve consistency throughout Title 25, update development review thresholds, clarify permitted uses in zoning districts, establish standards for vehicle storage and repair in residential areas, Modernized pet shop and cannot regulations and update accessory structures and provisions. Many of these changes again are based on issues identified through project processing code enforcement activities or public inquiries. So, administrative and procedural amendments largely consists of housekeeping and clarification items. These updates clarify review authority, appeal procedures, permit processing requirements, and terminology throughout the code. The amendments also establish a two year waiting period after project denial before a substantially similar application may be resubmitted. These changes improve consistency and reduce ambiguity during project review. So development plan review threshold amendments clarify when projects are exempt or when they require a minor or a major development plan review. The update also allows projects initially processed under a minor development plan review to be elevated to a major development plan review when warranted by project complexity, public concerns or potential impacts. The goal is to provide clear pathways while maintaining flexibility for unique circumstances. So the land use tables received an extensive update. The revisions clarify whether uses are permitted by right, require an administrative use permit or require a conditional use permit. The updates affect agricultural, residential, commercial and industrial districts and improve consistency across zoning districts. Many of these changes reorganize existing regulations. So, agricultural and cannabis updates can be seen throughout the land use table amendments. These amendments clarify regulations for agricultural serving commercial activities. The ordinance updates provisions for wineries breweries. Tasting rooms, agricultural sales and other related uses. The cannabis section is reorganized to clearly identify allowed activities to implement consistent permitting requirements in the zoning code as adopted during our comprehensive cannabis code amendments to titles 5, 7 and 19 in 2024. No new cannabis provisions are provided within. We're just ensuring consistency between the cannabis code and title 25. Residential property standard amendments increase the maximum accessory structure size allowed in residential districts from 1,000 square feet to 2,500 square feet before an administrative use permit is required. The amendment also updates agricultural building standards and revises accessory dwelling unit provisions to allow two ADUs per lot to maintain consistency with state law. These changes provide additional flexibility while maintaining county oversight over larger structures. So new standards have been added addressing vehicle storage and repair activities on residential properties. The regulations limit the number of disabled vehicles that may be stored outdoors to two vehicles requires screening from neighboring properties and public view and establishes operational standards for smaller parcels. The purpose was to address nuisance conditions while still allowing residents to perform reasonable maintenance activities on personal vehicles. So the county's kennel regulations also received an extensive rewrite. The regulations establish clear definitions for pet shops, commercial kennels, and hobby kennels. It adds permit requirements, setback standards, operational standards, maintenance requirements, and animal welfare provisions. The goal is to create objective standards that are easier for applicants, staff, and the public to understand. The uses will be allowed in associated zoning districts with an administrative use permit, unless it is 2,500 linear feet from an established commercial farming operation, in which case it would require a conditional use permit. So standards for short-term rentals have been included in county code. These standards identify where short-term rentals are permitted and ensures consistency between land use districts and the proposed regulations. Short-term rentals are allowed no more than 28 days in length, require a zoning clearance and a business license, and can be operated on any lot with a single family or multifamily residents, including agricultural and commercial districts, which allow for said residential uses. So staff recommends that the board open the public hearing, receive staff presentation and planning commission recommendation from the first reading, receive public testimony and close the public hearing and introduce, waive the second reading and adopt the proposed amendments to Title 25. Thank you for your time and I'm available for any questions or if you would like to review specific provisions of the code, I have it available.

Thank you. Let's go to public comment.

If you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on zoom, please press star nine or the raised hand icon. And I have no public comment.

Okay, any questions from the board members.

Thank you for all of the history that you attached in there. It really made reviewing this item so much, I wouldn't say easier. It wasn't the best read for me. Sorry, I tried to put everything together. I have a couple of questions and maybe I just missed it in some of the red line document. The establishments of two-year waiting period following the project denial, what's it currently? One year?

I don't believe there is one currently.

So there's no, so they could piggyback an application right after. Okay. I just wanted to know if there was a reason that we went to two years. If we didn't have anything, it makes sense. So I just need clarification on that one. When it comes to the cannabis activities, the zoned areas for cannabis activities, does that include dispensaries?

Yes, so it includes cultivation, distribution, manufacturing, retail, and micro business. So dispensary would be included under retail or micro business.

And in that zoning, and I'm sorry, I'm a visual person, I would rather see it like on a GIS map, that's just how I am. But how close are dispensaries to populated areas?

It would just depend on the zoning district. So we could create a map and show that to you. But they do have to comply with various setback requirements. So 300 feet from any off parcel residents, 600 feet from a sensitive use, a half a mile from a sphere of influence. So there are there are setbacks they have to comply with that would sort of mediate any like direct impact

Does that include schools?

Yes, they're sensitive use and require 600 foot setback.

Okay. What was that footage? 600 foot setback.

That's it? Yes, that is what we amended the code to be. It is consistent with state law.

Okay. The definition of accessory building, when it goes from a 1,000 square foot to 2,500 square foot, do we have any current projects where that is allowing them to do something that maybe they shouldn't have done? Not to be vague.

2,500, I think... No, not right now. Some of the ones we have are actually larger than 2,500 square feet, so they would still go through the administration. They still have to go through the administration.

OK, just making sure, and I'm sure you know what I'm talking about. The added setback standards. for the pets and kennels. That added setback standards, that's not addressing the committee that was created to talk about animals around parcels and agriculture. That's still a separate committee that's going to be meeting and having public discussion. Do I have that correct? I just want to make sure I'm on the same page. Okay, then those are all my questions and concerns and thank you so much for your presentation. Thank you.

Thank you.

Yeah, Mr. Chair, I just want to say thank you, everybody. This has been a long process putting this together. A lot of work has gone into this, a lot of collaboration, discussions back and forth, a lot of stakeholders involved. And I think you've done a great job and looking forward to hopefully getting an approval. Thank you.

Thank you, I'm just curious in some of the, a few of the different sections it talks about, it's actually removed 4-H projects and FFA projects. Are they included somewhere else now or have we just taken out that categorization in its entirety?

so that was direction from the planning commission and the idea was that activities covered under 4-h are already regulated throughout the chapter under like animal keeping like animal husbandry so um they're already allowed in the agricultural and commercial districts so the planning commission didn't want to over regulate 4-h so their activities would still be allowed in those zoning districts so we just removed the land uses not to again over regulate 4-h

Okay, great. Just wanted to clarify. Thank you very much. Those are my questions.

Thank you! Yeah, thank you so much. Like was mentioned, I've been working on this for quite a while, so. I have no questions that haven't been asked. At this point, I'll entertain a motion. If there is one.

Yeah, I will make a motion. So here, open. See, introduce to waive. Introduce waive, second reading in a doc order in support of supervisors amending.

Thank you, is there a second? I'll second. Thank you. Can we have roll call vote, please?

Supervisor Zenger?

Yes.

Supervisor Kosmicki?

Yes.

Supervisor Sotelo? Yes. Supervisor Curro? Yes. 4-0 vote, motion passes.

Great, thank you. Thank you, Supervisors. Thank you. Moving on to item 2.4, this is from, we had this before and we're finishing it up now, Tom.

Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board, the public, Tom Slavich, County Assessor Ian. This is a continuance from the June 9th meeting, Williamson Act. We have three applications and you have a detailed staff report. I'll just go over the highlights. You're here today to just look at the applications, review them and see basically if they're allowable under the Williamson Act. That's basically your role today. Um, the 1st application we have is a bum garner paths and this, uh. Williams that contract is a 911 acres. Uh, it's down in South county, 47 miles off the Hollister and older and this road. Uh, the applicant is requesting basically outdoor cannabis cultivation in 2 phases. 1st, phase phase. Number 1 is 20 acres. Phase number 2 is 35 acres. A total of 55 acres. Um. Basically, industrial hemp and cultivation of cannabis is allowable under the Williamson act. And there was a question the last time about where these. Applicants were in relation to or wine trail. Um, we have a hospitality area and so in your packet, there's a map that was created and it shows each applicant as to where they are in relation to the wine hospitality sites. So, in this situation, um. The cannabis cultivation is not within the wine hospitality area at all. And it's not within the half mile buffer zone of a hospitality venue. So it complies with this exclusion zones on this cultivation map. So in this situation, the 55 acres will encompass basically six acres of the preserve and the rest of the preserve is going to be used for ag grazing. So I'm here today to answer any more questions that you might have.

Thank you. Open up the public hearing for comment.

If you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on Zoom. Please press star nine or the raised hand icon. And I have no public comment.

Great. Closing that, bringing it back to the board. We have any questions at this time? Theresa Crow, it looks like you do.

I just want to say thank you. Being able to see it visually with all the areas, I'm sorry, I'm just a map person. It helps me understand where it's at. But I would like to request to staff as these applications move forward, especially along the wine trail, if we could have a conversation offline, making and ensuring that we don't want to disrupt the wine industry down there. So I will be following that as it moves forward. But thank you so much, and I appreciate all the clarification. And I just wanted to confirm that we weren't stepping on any areas of concern. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other comments, questions? Is there a motion?

I'll make a motion to approve.

Second. Great, we have first and second. Oh, we have a question. We need to do these separately?

Yeah, I think so.

Resolutions?

Yes. as a crew sure i will do uh let's see here thank you so let's go to the first one yeah i think we need to do these separately okay so let's do um we it would be approve the application for um compatible use request from baumgartner uh has lca contract number 17-6 seconds

Okay, we're first and a second on that item. Can we have roll call vote, please?

Supervisor Zenger?

Yes.

Supervisor Kosmicki?

Yes.

Supervisor Sotelo? Yes. Supervisor Curl? Yes. 4-0 vote, motion passes.

Then I would make a motion for the approval of the compatible use requests for a Russell Enns LCA contract number 76909.

Probably would want to hear each one individually before you make that motion.

Each one, oh okay sorry you're gonna present, sorry. I jumped ahead. I'm jumping the gun because, well, I read it all already, sorry, my apologies.

Do you want to? Or did you make a motion? Did you pass the first one already?

I'll remove my motion. It's been rescinded. I'll rescind my motion.

Okay. All right. So next one is Russell ends. It's 114 acres. It's down in the South County again, 12 miles off of Hollister and Lime Cane Road. On this particular request, we have outdoor cannabis cultivation requested on 39 acres. And again, it's an allowable act under the Williamson Act, industrial hemp and cannabis cultivation. In this particular situation, the cultivation is within the wine hospitality area, but it is not within the half mile buffer of the hospitality serving venue. So it is, or it does comply to the exclusion zones in the map that is attached. In this situation, 39 acres out of the 114 represents 34 acres of the preserve, the remaining will be used for grazing and your committee recommended approval of this compatible use.

Thank you. Okay. Um, any questions from the board? Uh, yeah, public comment on, yeah, we'll do go open up for public comment on this part of it.

If you'd like to make a comment on this application, please provide a speaker card and then zoom, please press star nine or the raised hand raised hand icon. and I have no public comment.

Great, thank you. Is there a motion?

So I'll make the motion to approve the application of the compatible use request for Russell N's LCA contract number 76909. Is there a second?

Second. Okay, can we have a vote please, roll call vote?

Supervisor Zenger?

Yes.

Supervisor Kosmicki?

Yes.

Supervisor Sotelo? Yes. Supervisor Curro? Yes. 4-0 vote, motion passes.

Thank you.

Okay, we go to the last application. This is prime land capital LLC. This contract is roughly 75 acres. That's in the Williamson act. It's 8 miles north of Hollister and lovers lane. The request here is to have an outdoor cannabis cultivation on roughly 20 acres of the property. Again, this is an allowable use in the Williamson Act. And in this situation, it's not near or not within the wine hospitality area. It's way up in North County. And it's not within the... half-mile buffer zone of the hospitality venue, so it does comply with the exclusion zones. In this situation here, the 20 acres out of the 75 represents 27% of the Ag Preserve. The remaining will be used as a walnut orchard and some grazings, and your committee recommended approval of this compatible use request.

Thank you. Is there a public comment on this application?

If you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on Zoom. Please press star 9 or the raise 10 icon. And I have no public comment.

Thank you any questions on this.

i'd like to make a motion to approve the application compatible use request for prime land capital llc lca contract number 72 dash 005.

So, thank you, a first and a second can we have a roll call vote, please.

Supervisors anger yes supervisor cosmic yes supervisor so cello yes supervisor curl yes for zero vote motion passes okay great Thank you, thank you, thanks.

Moving on to regular agenda item 3.1 is to discuss the approval of a modification to the fairview corners frontage improvements.

The fair view corners.

Good morning board members. I would like to introduce to you Adolfo Gonzalez. He is assisting us in the engineering department today in the absence of deans. But deans actually prepare the presentation and work with Adolfo before his vacation and he is prepared to make the presentation. Please also know that part of the presentation is on my request, an option that you're gonna see today. based on the funding that we have available and the staff that we have available to maintain those facilities. Thank you.

Well, good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Is the microphone on? Again, Adolfo Gonzalez, and I'm assisting Public Works while Mr. Catatta is away. So today I'm presenting to you the Fairview Cornish frontage improvements. The project location, the project is located north on Fairview Road, north of Airline Highway. And as you can see on the presentation, the island that we'll be discussing today is located within the green boundary zone. A little bit of background in November of 2012, the board adopted the five corners specific plan, the five corner specific plan, which allowed for a residential project of up to 220 residential units. In July of 2018, the planning commission approved the tentative subdivision map. And per the approved subdivision map, the Fairview Road improvements included a traditional landscape median island. The developer is ready to proceed with construction of the landscape median island. However. Every road is a county maintained roadway and maintenance of the landscape median island was inadvertently omitted from the community from the CFD. Established for the subdivision. So the maintenance of that landscape meeting and island will fall on the county. Unfortunately. Our county road maintenance division does not have the. Necessary experience and or the resources to maintain a traditionally landscaped median island. As an alternative we're proposing to modify the design from a traditionally landscape median island to a decorative hardscape drought tolerant design, which would allow us to which would require minimum maintenance and minimum watering. And some of the features could include embedded cobblestone, decorative boulders, decomposed granite, drought tolerant plants. So those are just some of the suggestions. And as you can see, these are some of the examples. This particular example includes some DG decomposed granite, some cobblestone, and some drought tolerant plants. Here's another example of what it may potentially look like. Here's another example. So the median island located in front of the development, in design, it is very similar to the islands along Fairview Road, further down near Santana Ranch, or what is it, Camino Campesino, which is the former Cesar Chavez. Very similar to those. So what would be the benefits of the proposed median island design? It's an attractive, it still maintains the attractive gateway feature. It incorporates the cobblestone, the boulders and the drought tolerant landscaping. It does reduce the long-term maintenance obligations and lifecycle costs. uh minimizes the irrigation requirements uh and it does eliminate the intensive uh landscape maintenance by the county crews it does continue to provide a sustainable aesthetically pleasing and fiscally responsible improvement for the county Staff's recommendation is that the Board approve a modification to the Fairview Corner's frontage improvements to allow construction of a decorative cobblestone median island with decorative boulders and limited drought tolerant landscaping In lieu of the landscape medium shown on the approved head of subdivision map finding that the modified medium designed is consistent with the intent of the approved frontage improvements subject to review and approval by the county engineer, thank you and with that i'll take any questions that you may have.

Could you do me a favor and can you go back to the presentation? I just want to give you some ideas of what we discussed yesterday. In the presentation, go to the next slide. I think that is the third one, the next one, that one. Can you please give us an explanation of what kind of stone is that one?

I think it's called embedded cob stone and the benefits. This particular example is cobblestone and it's embedded in concrete within within the median island there as you can see the landscaping is minimal uh with with planting or uh landscaping material that's going to require very very minimal watering we've got some boulders here to provide a more pleasing aesthetic design and overall the maintenance on this as you can see there are some succulent plants uh within within the landscape area so all of these are all drought tolerant they have a very short period of establishment brute establishment and uh it's literally no maintenance once these plants are established thank you we go to public comment please

If you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on zoom please press star nine or the raised hand icon. And we have one Joe.

So over us fairview road I don't know if you guys have taken care of your lately but there's a there's like these four bumps in the road that run from. I don't know, whatever that gated community is called, Chellevice, just like that, I don't know what it's called, to be honest, to the Fairview Corners areas. Was that for the Fairview Corners? Because someone really screwed up that road. And I'm not comfortable with the idea of someone ruining the road that I pay for and then charging me for the privilege of that. Just a voter and a taxpayer, just one of many. And I think it is rather unfair that we incur these costs and it doesn't matter who owns it, the money can go to someone can pay for this and I don't think it should be us it's just not right, so I would just feel the need to call this out, thank you.

I have no further public comment, thank you.

Sir, as a crow.

and mr chair and county council if this is not the appropriate time for this conversation please interrupt me and tell me it's not uh agendized correctly for this i've had three in that specific area of uh the road i've had three issues come up. The road, the trenching across the road, and the fact that the trenching across the road has caused these huge dips. I've had several residents from Cielo Vista that have reached out to me. The light pollution, the lights on the street, and I've already reported this to Building and Planning, the lights on the street are so bright It's the exact same area of this and did it meet our light pollution regulations? And then drainage plan. There's already a concern now that the houses have started to be built is that the drainage in that area is not adequate for the runoff that's gonna be coming. Is that okay that I said that? Or would you like me to ask to have that a future agenda item?

Mr. Chair, members of the board of supervisors, you're free to handle it either as direction to staff to investigate and get back to you directly, or to have this agendized as a future item. It's entirely up to you, but given that these are unique issues to your district, it may be more time and time effective for us to investigate and get back to you directly. And if you feel that there's a broader need, then we would bring that to the board.

Okay, I'm good with that, if you guys are good with that. I just wanted, because it's in that exact area, all of these concerns have happened. So I appreciate the presentation. And I, only other question I had is, you know, the maintenance is very low on that median aisle example that was brought up by the CEO. What about weeds? The thing I do not like about these type of medians is that if weeds are able to come up through them and then they're not maintained and then they just look trashy, not to be so blunt, but is that style with it embedded in concrete going to be able to keep that weed issue under control?

So the... Quick response is yes. Again, the cobblestones embedded in concrete, so that creates a layer. The landscaping, of course, will use some fabric, a weed barrier. There will be decomposed, there could be decomposed granite. placed around the landscaping, the plantings to further prevent or minimize the growth of weeds. So again, and that's what would make it very maintenance, very minimal.

Okay, and this construction of this is by the contractor under the original plan. It's just the maintenance is the issue because it's a county road and we did not have that as part of the CFD.

Do I understand? That is correct. The construction of this median island is paid for, is part of the development.

Okay. I just would want to make sure, since it is part of the development that we do everything we can to ensure that whatever barriers underneath to prevent weeds, so that it stays Nice and keeps the aesthetics looking pretty correct and stated in the recommendation, so the design of the landscaping and the cobblestone.

Uh, is subject to approval by the county engineer. So we'll, we'll make sure that we're looking in, you know, ensuring that, uh, it's minimum maintenance. That's perfect. Thank you so much.

Thank you Mr. chair. Yeah. Is there a way of doing this? So there's no maintenance. Picking a design that has no maintenance.

And if the developer wants... Only stones and cement and that's it?

Well, the problem I have here is a principal problem. And that's the issue of the county in the past, not making developers pay their fair share for these things and not ensuring that the county is not faced with, you know, whether it's $10 or $10,000, any sort of financial costs going forward. And so for me, this is a principal issue. And if... I think we should choose an option that basically has no maintenance involved or if the developer would like to put more money toward it in some fashion, then so be it. If they believe their homes are more sellable with some nicer looking design, then they should pay for it. I don't think the county taxpayers should be paying for this sort of stuff any longer.

It is your request, if I understand correctly, we can try to do... have a discussion with the developer if he's willing or she's willing to maybe assist with the maintenance or have additional ideas to minimize or to avoid completely the maintenance.

If they want something that goes beyond stones that require no maintenance, then they should pay for it. This is enhancing their development to try to make more money. They should pay for it, not the taxpayers.

I will coordinate with the staff to have the conversation. If that's the requirement, would you like to delay the approval of this project to later? Do we have a deadline to comply with this?

The developer is ready to start construction. So everything's laid out. Basically, the roadway has been completed. um construction started basically so they're they're ready to lay this out just important to mention that um in terms of the landscape meeting in Ireland it is part of the specific plan which is what requires that landscape meeting right

but the county's paying for it as far as the maintenance goes. I understand the county's not paying for it.

The maintenance, that's what I made a request that instead of doing a regular maintenance and regular landscaping to do more of a desert type, which requires much less maintenance.

The least the better, the less cost the better. I just think we have to send a message here that we're not gonna do this any longer and stop. making exceptions that's we're making another yet another exception even though you know this supposedly this was inadvertently omitted I find that hard to believe um you know now here we are again having our taxpayers have more liability for long-term liability it's not a big dollar amount again this is a principal issue for me it's not whether it's ten ten thousand a hundred thousand dollars we have to stop doing this thank you

Thank you. I mean, I think the point of this item coming before us is we are trying to minimize costs, right? And so I think the original design had a much more heavily intensive landscaping design concept. I think the whole point of this is that we are trying to continue making our community look beautiful, but at a much reduced cost. And so I really appreciate the collaboration and you guys coming and bringing us some alternatives to really save some cost. My question would be, How is this in comparison to the other medians that are already existing on Fairview Road? I know we have, there's a large median that was put in in front of Santana Ranch. Is this comparable to that? I would want to stay consistent with some of the things that we're doing so that you don't go from just, because even if we just hypothetically, we just did a concrete median, weeds can still get through, right? There's always a certain element of a little bit of maintenance. We have to be realistic. But as well as there's weeds growing on the sides of the roads that we have to maintain. So I understand that every single design is going to have a little bit of maintenance, but what is, you know, what's the difference between what is existing and what we're proposing? main difference is is the type of landscaping that will have again drought tolerant but how is it in comparison to the one that's in front of say santana ranch it would be very similar okay so it'd be a consistent look then driving down fairview road you would have a median and then you're continue driving and then there's a median that somewhat matches correct okay um Is the cost more for the developer right now going with this new model opposed to just, I don't know what was in the original proposed for this, but I'm guessing like, I don't know, oleanders or something. I'm guessing that this new model that we're kind of asking for because we didn't consider the maintenance of it is an increased cost to the developer.

not necessarily an increased cost to the developer the developer is still uh will still lay out the infrastructure for irrigation if we if the county decides in the future to to to uh change the landscaping to irrigated landscaping so all of the infrastructure is going to be remain the same it's just really the material the cost really is not a huge cost to construct, is not a big difference.

Okay. Okay. I would just think that there's an increased cost with all the cobblestone work and all of that. There is an increased cost, but it's not substantial. Okay. Okay. Okay. I'm good with it. Thank you very much. No further questions.

Thank you. Yeah, I mean, so the meeting in front of Santana Ranch, I think has trees, right?

It does, there are trees. I just saw it on Google Maps. Right, so it's certainly... There are trees, but that requires to have an irrigation system.

Yes, exactly, understood. Okay, so what is the ongoing cost if we were to pivot from what it was to what we're suggesting here? What's the difference that we're looking at? Is this...

To begin, we're struggling at the county level with the staffing to even maintain the parks that we have. We have made a switch lately to move parks maintenance from the roads group to the maintenance group. because we have seen a delayed maintenance on those facilities, so we're trying to accommodate the new staff to be able to maintain the parks. Having additional landscaping to do in those areas will require to have additional staff members. And the problem that I'm having also, to be honest, is the irrigation systems eventually fail because they hit so the sprinkler system goes off and then there's an emergency you have to fix it. In this scenario what we're presenting doesn't require that system. That's a huge issue for us to be always maintaining those facilities in the middle of the night when we don't have the stuff available for it.

Yes, absolutely. Absolutely. I'm 100% in favor at the minimum doing something that is presented here, if not less. I don't want to be stuck with the ongoing bill from the nice irrigation-based landscape. But I want to get clarity, I guess, Supervisor Kosmicki, your suggestion would be... Cobblestone only. Cobblestone only, no plants. And then the developer would pay for that completely and the county wouldn't have an ongoing cost. Okay.

Versus the bushes that we have to sort of maintain.

Now, what was the, in terms of the developer, you said you wanted to...

If the developer wants to pay for the, put some money in some fashion, we'd have to work out with them. Then that, if to make it look nicer for their development, then so be it. Then they could have the right to do that. But as far as the county liability goes, I, you know, have them pay for what is the minimum, cobblestone and, you know, any sort of landscaping. If they want landscaping, then they should pay for it. because there's an ongoing cost.

Okay. We can try to negotiate with the developer, but I'm not giving you any assurances because this project has been approved for years.

What I'm saying is if they don't want to go beyond the minimum, then the minimum is, you know, cobblestone looks nice to me. I think it looks fine. I don't personally have a problem with it. That's just where I'm at. I know in an ideal, we want a bunch of flowers and a bunch of nice things, but somebody has to pay for that and the taxpayers have to pay for it. And we don't even have staff to maintain our bathrooms at Santana Ranch Park. I mean, we have bathrooms that are being vandalized and stuffed with God knows what, and we can't even maintain what we have now. So why are we adding more maintenance to what we already can't maintain? That's kind of where I'm at, basically. And really it comes down to more principle than anything. Developers should be paying, county shouldn't be paying for ongoing maintenance for this sort of thing. Mr. Ruggiero.

I'll agree that developers need to pay their fair share. None of us were on the board, at least I don't think any of us were on the board when this was approved. The CFD does not include this area, is what you stated?

That's correct.

Why can't we do an annexation? Why can't we update the map to include it?

We would have to go through, revise or amend the process and redo the calculation in terms of the assessment. So I'm not exactly sure how long that process would take.

Because the value of the homes, already we've seen an impact on the residents around that development that have been negative. By the county making a stand of not having it be aesthetically pleasing will only hurt our existing residents, let alone the new residents that move into that development. I don't agree that we just pave it with concrete and call it a day or cobblestones and call it a day. We need to make our community blend together and blending it together with drought tolerant vegetation is an alternative that will be much less costly for the county. But if there is a way that the developer is willing to like maybe front the CSA or the CFD the money to be able to maintain that area and then go through the CFD annexation process and have an assessment done for what that, we're talking about such a minimal amount of land right there. This is not a huge area. And I guarantee people living in that community would benefit instead of just having cobblestone. So I can't go that route.

Mr. Chair, I mean, these are just design preferences. For me, I just, I don't see what's so bad about cobblestone. I had a few plants that we have to maintain, just kind of seems like we're just adding work and costs to ourselves when we have the choice of just doing, I mean, it's not as if we're, you said paving, we're not paving, we're asking, requiring them to put in cobblestone, which does go beyond We're just talking about plants that our staff now has to go out on a routine basis at some point and maintain. And like I said, the example, until we can make sure that our bathrooms are not being stuffed with human waste and people can't go to the bathroom in our parks, we don't have staff for that. I'm not willing to pay a dime more for more maintenance that we don't have staff for.

Thank you. So regarding the CFD idea, that would be they would have a small increase in the CFD rates and then that would go towards maintaining this. But we don't know, is that... Is that feasible? Does that make sense? Could we do that?

I mean, like you said, we'd have to get the developer to front it initially because it would take too long to... We can explore the idea and come back with you with options of whether or not, number one, to negotiate with the developer, and number two, to explore the CFD portion and come back to you with... or review of the project?

I would be open to that because then the county wouldn't be on the hook for the long-term maintenance with yet another thing. I'd be open to that. I think that makes sense. But we'd have to have that talk with the developer, I think, right?

Mr. Chair? And understanding the CFD does not require any LAFCO process. A CFD is ran by the county. So this is a negotiation with the developer in getting them to help us out for a bad past mistake from a prior board.

Okay. I think we need to... Take a motion on this. Yeah, I mean, I don't know if.

Has anything further, um, I would just move that we at least explore with the developer further options that would, um. To explore the possibility of removing county costs going forward through landscaping needs and what we can do to make this, uh, median. Pleasant looking, but without. adding costs and staff time for the county going forward. And whatever mechanism that might be, whether it's through CFD adjustments or the developers willing to pay something, I would like to explore. That would be the motion.

Okay, there's a motion. Is there a second?

I'll second with a clarification. I would like, with any recommendation that comes forward, actual maintenance costs and what we're talking about. Are we talking about $100? Are we talking about $100,000? Thank you.

Yes, question. So this will be essentially tabled until August, right? How does that play into the timeline of what this developer is trying to do with Fairview Road and getting this, like, is there anything that can be done to address some of the issues that you originally talked about with some of the, you know, kind of, bumps in the road, are we delaying the process of getting some of those items fixed while we're hung up on landscaping?

Yes.

So I would rather us make somewhat of a decision today so that we can get Fairview Road a little bit safer, a little smoother. I don't think it's a huge cost and the developer is paying for all of this. Yes, the ongoing is we, that's the whole point of this item today is bringing it back so it is way more less maintenance. I think with what's there, it is very, very minimal. And I think we're kind of arguing over something that is so minuscule right now. This is kind of ridiculous. So I would rather, I will not be supporting the motion. I would rather see this move forward rather than stopping progress over potentially, you know, a hundred bucks a year.

Mr chair, I think it's ridiculous that we have how many parks that we have stuffed toilets that can't be maintained. We don't have the staff to do what we currently have, and that we're considering adding more staff time and costs to the county. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. We have a motion and a first and a second, I believe. So can we vote on that motion please?

Supervisor Zenger?

Yes.

Supervisor Kosmicki?

Yes.

Supervisor Sotelo? No. Supervisor Curro? No.

Motion fails.

Okay.

I'd like to make a motion. I agree with Supervisor Sotelo completely. I was trying to do a compromise. My compromise is really truly in the benefit of our existing residents that are already impacted by this development. I would make a motion to approve with that third option, ensuring that the developer is paying for all of the construction and that the least amount of maintenance is impacted on the county. So it would be that option three, which would have the drought resistant and the embedded cobblestone.

So I'll second that. with a friendly amendment, if that's okay, that we continue exploring and talking in negotiations with the developer to see if we can get them to maybe front some ongoing costs and explore the ideas of working it into the CFD into the future.

I would accept that friendly amendment.

Okay, so to clarify then, this would be, we're moving forward approving it and then also asking if they would like to help.

Not if they'd like, if the CFD can be expanded to cover the cost, or if they are willing to negotiate with staff on some sort of an agreement for maintenance.

But it's approved either way then? Yep. So they could say no, if I understand. Okay. Can we, we have a first and a second with a friendly amendment. Can we vote on this, please?

Supervisor Zenger?

No.

Supervisor Kosmicki?

No.

Supervisor Sotelo? Yes. Supervisor Curro? Yes. 2-0 vote. Motion fails.

That's why there's usually five, I guess. Okay.

So I will recommend that we come back with options, other options, and then upcoming meeting for you to make a decision. Let's give us a few days just to explore options. We would like to continue this item for June the 30th.

Okay, that's good. Great, thank you. So we do have, we have someone prepared to speak with us at noon in closed session. And it's gonna be a long one and we still have a few more items. So I think at this point, we'd probably take a break to grab lunch, grab food so we can be back in there by noon. There's someone waiting. So we'll move to closed session then. And is there any public comment, closed session items?

If you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on Zoom, please press star nine or the raised hand icon. And I have no public comment.

Okay, thank you. So we will go to closed session and be back a long time from now. Okay, we are back from closed session. County Council, is there anything you report out?

Mr. Chair, members of the board, supervisors, based on the two closed sessions that were conducted, there is no reportable action. However, we will be recessing to closed session following the regular agenda portion of this meeting, and we will report out following our closed sessions. Thank you. Thank you.

Back to regular agenda, item 3.2. This is from County Council.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the Board of Supervisors. As you are aware, Senate Bill 707, which became law effective January 1 of 2026, made significant changes to the state's open meeting law, the Brown Act, and one of those changes requires each legislative body, so we're talking every city, county, special district, et cetera, that they must adopt a formal policy which addresses telephonic or internet service disruptions that prevent remote access to one of our meetings. You may recall at our last meeting, we had some challenges with respect to access, that is remote access, and we had a disruption. Thankfully, we were able to resolve that disruption after a few minutes. What this policy is required to say is that once there is a disruption, we must stop the meeting. We must undertake reasonable efforts to resolve the disruption and to regain remote access. And if we are unable to regain remote access after one hour, then the board may proceed in open session notwithstanding the fact that all of its reasonable efforts were unsuccessful. The policy also is required to state that while there is this one hour and we are undertaking efforts to regain remote access, the board may recess to close session during that one hour period of time. So what is before you is a very specific policy. There's very little discretion that the law provides to the legislative body with respect to how this policy must read. SB 707 is very specific and this policy contains all of the required elements. So we are asking that this board adopt this policy that we will be following as of today. The required effective date is July 1 of 2026. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there public comment on this item?

If you'd like to make a comment on zoom please press star nine or the raise 10 icon and in chambers, please provide a speaker card.

And I have no public comment, thank you, any comments from the board. Not only 10 emotion. There is to approve as recommended. Second, every person a second can we have roll call though please supervisors anger. Yes.

Supervisor Kozmicki?

Yes.

Supervisor Sotelo? Yes. Supervisor Curro?

Yes.

4-0 vote. Motion passes.

Great.

Thank you. We're going to 3.3. This is from the clerk.

Good afternoon, Chair, Board. So I'll be going over a couple of other changes regarding SB 707. As our County Council has mentioned, there have been some changes to the Brown Act. So I'll briefly review some of the new legislation that has been implemented for counties to expand public participation requirements. share the changes and ongoing efforts that our county has already implemented and have a board discussion on what additional efforts can be made by the county to emphasize the county's ongoing commitment to transparency, accessibility and community engagement. So, as county council mentioned, was signed into law on October 3rd, 2025, and significantly updated and modernize the brown act in order to align with evolving technologies and increase public expectations for accessibility and transparency. The changes that have been made is the most comprehensive overhaul of the brown acts. And so it was enacted in 1953. Most changes established will be going into effect on July 1st, 2026, and I will review some of those new changes as well as the changes that our county will need to implement. So, some of those changes include permanent integration of teleconferencing during meetings, distribution of the brown act text to all new board commissioners commission members. Additional transparency obligations, including oral reporting of executive compensation, removal of sunset dates for temporary pandemic era rules, such as the expansion of just cause for board members and commissioners. Adoption and implementation of a meeting disruption policy, as was previously discussed language access and equity, such as translation of agendas and public meeting web pages for counties in which a non English language is spoken by more than 20%. So, for San Benito county, we have 14% of constituents of speakers that speak English less than well. Which is a threshold, so we do not fall under the requirement to provide translation and interpretation services and mandatory translation of agendas and website content and the information on the percentage of non English speaking language. Um. Speakers in accounting was provided by the California clerk of the board of supervisors association and verified by the population information is based on the United States census. Based on the calculation, only 5 counties in California meet the criteria. Those are Imperial Los Angeles, San Francisco, Monterey and Tulare. And lastly, SP 707 requires that eligible bodies engage in outreach to underrepresented and non English speaking communities. So with this in mind, San Benito County has already taken some steps to fulfill the new requirements. We have already implemented two-way remote access links for boards, committees, and commission meetings as we do here for Board of Supervisor meetings. And that information on how to access Zoom meetings is explained on each agenda on the first page. We also have it on our webpage under Clerk of the Board and under Board of Supervisors. We also provide information on how to submit in-person and written public comment on the first page of the agendas, as well as our website. On our peak agenda page, where meetings are posted after they've been, or where they're posted, sorry. There's an opportunity for members of the public to sign up to receive an email whenever any agendas get posted. On the same page, and I can show you where this page is at. So on this page, the public can access and search previous meeting agendas, minutes, and videos. And we have our online document archive where the public can browse and search for staff reports, agendas, contracts, minutes, ordinances, resolutions, and meeting recordings. As of the end of May 2026 we have a total of 436 subscribers that get notification of agendas with an engagement rate of 91%, which means that 91% of the subscribers open and click the links to the agendas when they receive them. Live meetings are also broadcasted and accessible to the public on various platforms, such as here peak agenda zoom Facebook and YouTube. So one change that our county has not done and does need to implement is that we currently have not done an outreach to underrepresented communities. Some possible options are to increase our social media presence when agendas are published, or we can also provide a survey to the public through our social media platforms and county website to find out how public members would like to receive their information on meetings, how they would prefer to engage and provide the service in both English and Spanish to be able to reach the underrepresented communities. And at the last meeting it was requested we also include information on Spanish translation options to be discussed. So our current AV upgrade project does not include Spanish translation because the grant that is being used for that project cannot be used for ongoing expenses. It's only to be used for one-time expenses and translation services usually require a yearly ongoing fee. But in 2025 actually researched the cost for Spanish translations for our meetings, and I received a few quotes that varied from about 10,000 to 20,000 dollars a year, depending on the amount of languages we wanted to provide and the amount of public users. So, if the board would like, we can move forward with including Spanish translations during our meetings. I can definitely work on getting updated information cost and being to look for possible funding as well. I'll leave for the board to discuss.

Thank you. Any public comment?

If you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on Zoom. Please press star 9 or the raised hand icon. And I have no public comment.

Thank you.

Any comments from the board? Mr. Chair, I would just say on the efforts to get more word out, it might be just worth putting the agendas out, like you said, on social media beforehand, just say, you know, the agenda is now available if you'd like to look at items on the agenda. Here it is, basically, Facebook and Nextdoor, Instagram. I don't know if we have a Nextdoor account. I don't think we do.

No, not that I'm aware of.

I have a question. So there's a requirement to have the agenda available in Spanish,

Only if you are over the threshold of 20% and we are not, we're at 14%.

Okay. And the other question is when you're talking about translations, there is a difference between able to speak two languages and being a translator. So I just want to clarify that a translator has to be a certified translator if it's needed in the future.

Right and so the translation services that I had previously researched, we're all based. Um, so that the public 1 of them, the public could come in, we have a QR code that they use, they download an app and then during the meeting, they can read it in their own language.

Mr. Chair, I really appreciate you getting the, even though we don't meet the 20% threshold, understanding that when we do have resources trying to reach out to those underserved individuals because they can't or aren't able to read the agenda in English, I think is something that I want to keep on the back burner to be able to continue discussing. AI and the technology of AI and automatic translations, even though we don't hit the 20%, it doesn't have to be a certified translator at this time, even if there was some sort of AI conversion that is a free app service that allows residents. I would also recommend with in voter outreach pamphlets and in elections, because everything is bilingual in elections and required to be English and Spanish in San Benito County. It is a great area of being able to have a filler page inside a voter guide, have a insert in a mailing. I would coordinate with any department that has that type of ongoing outreach requirements already and just piggyback onto them so that it is as inexpensive as possible. for you to meet those requirements that's my recommendation, but I would I do really appreciate. The attempt to try and get us bilingual here.

Thank you. A couple questions. So on one of the slides it talked about how all public meetings now have to have the audio and visual, the two-way communication. So does that mean that every single one of the committees that we have all have to now be fully on Zoom or whatever it is, because I know that we have some committees that we've been meeting and it hasn't been, we've had it available by Zoom maybe a couple times, but it's not a recurring thing. As of July 1, every single time that they meet, we are going to have to be, it all has to be on Zoom.

So currently all the committees and commissions that we clerk already do that, but I think I'd need further clarification as to like other commissions if they do, because I know like the Board of Supervisors does for sure, so.

Well, yeah, because like let's take Public Defender Oversight Committee. You guys don't clerk that, right? We'd love for you guys to clerk that, but so what happens when we have these committee meetings that aren't necessarily supported by our Clerk of the Board staff, how do we run those meetings and run them in an efficient way that is accessible for the public, you know? And so I think that's a question that I've got on how are we going to do these things or will every single committee be run through the clerk of the boards? Greg, do you have any insight into that? Not to put more work on you, but I just wanna understand this clearly, like how is this going to work in a practical sense? let us look into that further and we'll be able to report back to the board as to exactly how expansive this is okay that would be great um the other thing that um you know as we talk about kind of agenda outreach, and I love the idea, the usage of social media. I know that that puts, again, more workload onto you, sorry. But I was just curious, is there a way that we can start getting our agendas earlier? We used to get them on Wednesdays, and I mean, this agenda today, I think I got it at 5.30 on Friday. Really, really tough. it's tough for us right but this is like our our job and so we make it work but when we want involvement from the community and we're trying to reach kind of out into our community and make sure that they have information publishing an agenda that late is really really difficult and so i know that it's not part of the law but as a as a supervisor i would love to see us get back to agendas are posted by wednesday If we can, so those are my comments, so thank you.

Yeah, that's definitely something we can work on and, um, I know in our policy, our board policy, it does state that we would be publishing on Wednesdays prior to the meeting. So, yeah, definitely something we'll work on.

Okay, thank you. Um, so I guess there was. be given same direction here. So do we need to take a motion on anything when we see the presentation?

No action needed, just direction.

Yeah. Okay, great. We're all set? Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, now we are moving, that concludes regular agenda. We're moving on to the Geologic Hazard Abatement District. So the board, it's adjourning as the Board of Supervisors and reconvening as the Board of Directors of the San Benito Geologic Hazard Abatement District. 4.1, is there a motion to acknowledge or to put a post in?

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. Okay, all in favor, aye.

Aye.

Is there any public comment of items of interest not on the agenda?

If you'd like to make a comment on Zoom, please press star nine or the raised hand icon. And I have no public comment.

Great, thank you. 4.2, consent. Approve the action minutes of the April 28th, 2026 meeting. Is there a motion to approve the minutes? So moved. Is there a second?

I'll second.

All in favor, aye.

Aye.

Okay. Next, 4.3, adopt resolution to approve the Geologic Hazard Abatement District budget for fiscal year 26-27.

hello hi can you guys hear me well enough yeah okay um good afternoon uh chair and board members my name is haley ralston i am a geologist with ngo and ngo serves as the gad manager for the san benito gad so today we're bringing the annual gad budget for fiscal year 26-27 to the board for approval so action being considered this afternoon is adopt resolution approving the san benito gad budget for fiscal year 26-27 So, we'll just provide a brief overview about the GAD and funding and the budget. So the GAD is funded by supplemental property tax assessments for the homes specifically within the promontory at Ridgemark development. And that's a total of 90 residences in that community right now. That's the only active community within the GAD at this time. So they're the only ones currently funding the GAD's operations in a proposed budget. Um, the proposed assessment limit for this coming fiscal year is, uh, 1577 dollars and 76 cents and that assessment limit is adjusted annually for inflation. We reference the index month of December every year. So, from comparison to last year, it's an increase of 3.04%, which is about $45 compared to the assessment last year for the residences. And the revenue stream or budget is divided up into reserve accumulation, maintenance and operations. And it was as administration, so here's just a brief breakdown of the budget for this coming fiscal year. We anticipate, or we're proposing a budget amount of 133,906 dollars broken down as shown here with. A little bit for gad manager, and then outside professional services for admin routine day to day operations for the gad with the majority of the budget being spent on preventative maintenance operations, which are items such as. surface drainage ditch cleaning detention basin maintenance routine monitoring of the site also vegetation management for fire suppression the gad does now own a couple of the open spaces parcels next to the residences near south side road and vienna drive there so and we did recently just complete weed abatement for the spring of this year And then we have a little bit of budget as well for special projects, which are typically or included in this budget items for GIS portal maintenance that we use for monitoring and maintenance tracking and then also for website maintenance. We have established a website and it is up and running specifically for the San Benito GATT. Where residents can review it and see items related to the gad upcoming board meetings a site plan and also there's a contact form on there as well that they can submit to us as the gad manager with any questions or concerns they may have about the gad. So as well included in the budget is just a summary of the GAD's current account balance. If you may recall that the GAD has a separate treasurer from the county serving as GAD treasurer and the GAD's account is separate from the county finances as well. So completely separate altogether. So for this coming fiscal year, Uh, with the assessment revenue, and a little bit of investment revenues on the existing funds in the account, we anticipate a revenue of about 152,000 dollars. And after the proposed expenditures of 133,134,000 dollars, we estimate the. Gads account balance to have an increase of about 18,000 dollars. And the purpose of the GADS reserve is to continue building for long term maintenance, capital improvements, but also emergency response. If you guys are familiar with that community, there is a pretty large natural sandy slope that is prone to a lot of erosion depending on how winters go. So the GADS, you know, primary concern is to help protect the homes and those related improvements in those areas that could be subject to such hazards. So again, our God managers recommendation is to adopt the resolution approving the budget for fiscal year 2627 and we're available for any questions aboard may have.

Thank you, there any public comment on this item if you'd like to make a comment in chambers, please provide a speaker card on zoom please press star nine or the raised hand icon. I have no public comment.

Thank you. Any questions, comments from the board?

Because this is currently all the GAD is all in District 4, there are a few future agenda items that I would like to make recommendations. And I wanted to ask council, we don't follow board rules on this. This is a separate body and future agenda items I could, could I, can I bring forward? for like our next meetings and stuff. There are several unfinished things and since Steve Loop has left, there's not as much coordination. And I met with Haley yesterday for over an hour going through some of the areas that we need to kind of bring back to this body for approval and making sure that we have all of our ducks in a row. um and then uh education um to the residents there's several residents out there that don't even understand what the gad is a kind of like gad 101 uh to be able to bring that forward in a future um and explaining why the reserves and how we're budgeting are so important to be able to have enough money in case there is a failure. There were a few other things. I mean, we talked about the treasurer investment policy outside council as opposed to county council. Should the GAD in a future agenda, should the GAD be completely separate? So more like Glasgow, where everything's separate. There are things that I just would like to ask if the board would mind if I work with Haley for future items so that we can kind of keep these things moving forward, if that's acceptable. I know it's not on the agenda, I just, sorry.

So really quick before, so Kit, Can we finish this item and then we'll go to the future agenda discussion?

Is there a future agenda item discussion? I don't think there is on this.

Okay, sure.

As it relates to the district, yes, the board may at this time direct staff to bring back certain items on a future agenda. I would suggest that because I believe Supervisor Kerr raises an excellent point, and that is for all of our future agendas, I would suggest that we add an item for each separate entity in which this board will then recess and reconvene as the last item be items for future board or district consideration. so that we keep the items separate and they're discussed within the scope of your convening as that separate entity. And so I've spoken with the Clerk of the Board, and so we will be adding that to all of your future agendas. Thank you.

Thank you so much. And I have no questions on the budget except for when it comes to our reserves and how that reserve policy, what that's going to be in the future, which I will bring forward at a later date. But thank you so much for your time yesterday. It was very educational and I look forward to working with you.

Great, thank you.

Thank you.

I've got a couple questions and it might be, it might fall in line with what you're talking about, Supervisor Curl. One is when I, when I estimate what the revenue is, it is different from what the revenue that you're saying it is and so I'd like to understand where you got your numbers from. and I'll kind of go into why I'm asking. Based on the numbers that I got versus what the expenses are for the proposed budget, it only leaves a little over $8,000 this year that's, I'm thinking going into reserves, is that enough? Yes, we have some money sitting there, but if you ever had major repairs, $300,000 not going to cut it. And if we're only adding potentially $8,000 annually into this, it's going to be a long, long time before there's enough money in there that really makes a difference if you ever had some major repairs that need to be done. So I'm a little bit concerned about our reserve limits and I would like to understand where the revenue is and I'll tell you how I got to mine. So I just took the 90 residences and I timed it by that property assessment and I got to just under 142,000. So I'm thinking there might be a little bit of a typo in our report, it shows 152,000.

so if you do you have the budget document in front of you on page six uh at the top of the page six it says estimated receivables for estimated fiscal year 26 27 revenues here we have broken out the assessment number you just mentioned the 141 998 that's the proposed assessment limit times 90 for the residences and then the line item just under that is the anticipated investment income of nine thousand nine hundred dollars So that's where the additional revenue. Okay, thank you.

I appreciate that clarification. So those were just, I don't know if it's in line with what you're kind of asking with the reserve, but I'm very concerned with the reserve amount, and I appreciate the clarification on the number.

Can I touch a little bit on that? Yeah, please. We definitely do recognize that and are prudent in trying to put as much towards reserves as possible, and when we prepare annual budgets, you know, we're Preparing it with the intent of anticipated expenses, but we're hoping maybe not necessarily all that is spent. So any extra will just continue to stay in the reserves and build it over time. This is still a younger gad with a relatively small amount of units. So it is going to take a little bit longer for us to build up that reserve, but we're hopeful in years that we don't have significant. Winners or geologic hazard events. We don't have to dip into the reserves. We can continue to build that. And as we discussed here with board member is to bring back an investment policy that they got treasure can start to invest those funds as well and grow those even more. So, overall, I think. We're okay right now, but yes, we're definitely thoughtful of that. And also GADs can borrow money or take loans out to and pay that back through the assessment. And so there's mechanisms like that in the event that it does not have enough money to respond to a hazard, but we hopefully don't anticipate that, but there's different avenues. Okay. Thank you.

I appreciate that. You're welcome. Thank you.

Thank you. Any other questions this time? Is there a motion then to adopt the resolution to approve the 26-27 budget and authorize the chair to sign the resolution?

I move to approve.

Second? Second. Okay, roll call vote, please.

Supervisor Zenger?

Yes.

Supervisor Kosmicki?

Yes.

Supervisor Sotelo? Yes. Supervisor Curro? Yes. 4-0 vote, motion passes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. That concludes the GAAD. Returning to the Board of Supervisors meeting, we have future agenda items. We have one future agenda item request from Supervisor Sotelo. Go ahead.

Oh, we're gonna do it right now?

Why not? Do you want to do it later?

No, I'm good right now. I just didn't know we were doing it right now.

Let's do it, yeah, if you're ready. What do you got?

Okay so I put in a future agenda request because I was hoping that we can maybe create a policy that is consistent that really helps the community, helps our staff really understand you know if they're looking for a certificate of recognition, a proclamation, anything that we have kind of a consistent policy. I think there's been some confusion as well as the use of the county seal on some certificates And I know every county does it a little bit differently, and so I would love for us to explore what a good policy would look like for our county. Do we want to only consider full board certificates of recognition? Are we open to having individual supervisor certificate of recognitions? What all of those look like? But I was just hoping I brought this agenda item forward so that we could hopefully create a policy that we could all be very clear on, the public is clear, And that, you know, I think that when somebody wants a proclamation, we have a policy that somebody can go online, they can see what that is. And if there are important milestones coming up, et cetera, they can, you know, an employee can do it, a community member, a supervisor, any one of us. But it really, it kind of opens us up a little bit more to us not being responsible for every single item that we have a policy that is consistent and is open for the community to use. So we don't have to remember every single event because it would be so clear that the community know, oh, this month of Women's History Month, let's say, and I want the board to recognize that. Well, if they put it in, but we wouldn't have to remember every single event. I feel like every month has its own designation, every week has a designation, many days have its own designation. And if there are important designations to the community, they could bring those forward. But it's not our responsibility or the clerk of the board's responsibility to make sure that we don't ever forget anything. And so I wanted to be very, you know, kind of very transparent with the community, give equitable access to everybody that wants to do this in identifying what the process is and what our policy is kind of moving forward. We don't have a clear policy and I think it's left a little bit of confusion, at least it has for me, and so I would like some clarity and a consistent policy.

Great, thank you. Yeah, I'm good with that. I have no problem with that.

Sure. Is it possible to include the suggestion I brought up at least for discussion about just basically if there's a month, you know, designated that we agree on that it's basically permanently?

No, because the board changes, so we can't permanently.

Pull back. If they don't like it, then.

No, I think it's the community or our responsibility to make sure that it gets on there. I just think we're setting ourselves up. We're making it more difficult for ourselves by automatically, okay, once you've done this, who remembers to do that?

I thought that was the goal of what you were trying to do.

I think it complicates things. I'm trying to simplify. I just think that that adds a layer of challenges.

Okay, is there public comment on this? if you'd like to make a comment in chambers please provide a speaker card on zoom please press star nine or the raised hand icon and i have no public comment great okay well there's consensus then thank you this is a future item um all right next we have to return to closed session and finish our closed session items which we already took public comment on so we will um go to closed session and return for adjournment afterwards Okay, we are back from closed session. County Council, do you have anything to report?

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the Board of Supervisors. There is no reportable action except as to item 5.3. The Board of Supervisors has authorized that San Benito County be part of the Monterey County effort to file a friend of the court brief in support of the Santa Clara County lawsuit regarding the construction of the ICE detention facility in Gilroy. This action is taken by the Board of Supervisors in order to demonstrate support to the agricultural industry and workforce in San Benito County. Agriculture is an extremely important part of the county's economy and it must be presented, must be preserved and protected. Thank you.

Thank you. That's the end of the meeting. We are adjourned.