Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

Hey there. Wanna make your voice heard at a Board of Supervisors meeting? We're all ears. Here's how you can get involved. First, hop online and look at the agendas. This will give you the scoop on what's coming up before the board. Each agenda item includes a brief description of the issue, the recommendations, and potential impacts. If you need more detail, check out the detailed reports online. Those are called board letters. Then decide if you want to speak at Tuesday's general legislative session or Wednesday's land use session.

You'll have three opportunities to have your say. Let's start non agenda public comment. This is your chance to talk about things that aren't on the agenda, but try and keep your topic related to county government. For non agenda public comments, you can speak at either the Tuesday or Wednesday session, but not both. So pick your day accordingly. And keep in mind, the board can't act on the spot. They'll refer your comments to the chief administrative officer who will look into the issue. Last thing, the board will hear from the first 10 speakers, five in person and five by phone at beginning of the session. Then all the remaining speakers will get their chance to speak after the discussion items. During the consent agenda, the board handles a bunch of routine items with one vote.

If you want to comment on an item, keep it simple. For example, I'm John Doe speaking on item five, and I agree with approving the contract. Discussion items are the main event where the board debates before making a decision. Want to speak at one of the meetings? It's really easy. Just hop online and fill out a quick request form at publiccomment.sandiegocounty.gov. Pick the meeting you're interested in, hit the register button, then fill in your details. Make sure to include a phone number if you plan on speaking by phone. Prefer speaking at the podium in the board chamber? No problem.

Just pick the in person option. After that, just check off the agenda items you want to talk about and let them know you're for, against, or neutral on them. Hit register and you're good to go. A confirmation email will land in your inbox to wrap it up. If you're speaking by phone, the email will include the instructions for how to dial in. Be sure to submit your request early. Once public comment begins on the agenda item, we can't take any more requests to speak. And if you have documents, hand them to the deputy clerk when it's your turn

to speak at the podium.

Now, you get two minutes to speak, but if lots of people want to talk, it might get cut to one minute. So, you might want to consider writing two sets of comments. One for two minutes, another one for one. That way, if time's cut, you won't be scrambling. There's also a countdown clock at the podium to keep you on track. Once you're at the podium, stay on topic. Stick to the current agenda item. If you stray off topic, you might get a gentle nudge to get back to the point. Keep your comments related to the agenda item's recommendations because that's what the board is relying on to make a decision. Also, speak directly to the board. They're the ones making the decision. When your time's up, it's up. Overstaying might mean getting muted or even ask to leave. Now for some ground rules. For safety, keep aisles and doorways clear.

If there isn't a seat, head across the hall to Room 302 or the 4th Floor balcony to watch the meeting. Respect is huge. Everyone should feel heard. That means you, other speakers, and the board of supervisors. Disruptive behavior gets one warning, and after that, a deputy sheriff might show you the door. So let's keep it respectful. Your voice matters, and we want to hear from you. We're all here to make a difference.

Supervisors, land use legislative session, and housing authority meeting to order. Ryan, please call the roll for today's session.

Thank you, chair Lawson Reamer. And just noting for the record, housing authority tenant commissioner Higgins will be absent from the meeting today. With that noted, tenant commissioner Barry?

Present.

Supervisor Anderson? Supervisor Desmond? Here. Chair Pro Temagiri?

Here.

Vice Chair Montgomery Steff?

Here.

And Chair Lawson Riemer?

Here. Before we begin, I'll take a moment to address our house rules. Public engagement is the corner cornerstone of transparent and accountable government, and these board of supervisors meetings are primary venue where all San Agans can make your voices heard. The county is committed to work environment free from unlawful discrimination and harassment, including sexual, racial, religious, age, disability, and other forms of harassment. Speakers may not use loud shouting, threatening, profane, or abusive language to any member of the board, staff, or general public.

All remarks and questions must remain on topic during the duration of your speaking time and must be addressed to the board and not county staff. Any speaker who engages in comments that breaks these rules will be issued a warning. After one warning, you will be asked to leave the chambers for the remainder of the meeting. Finally, speaker threatening violence may be reported to law enforcement and removed. We will now proceed with closed session reports. Counsel, is there a report for yesterday's closed session?

Good morning. The board of supervisors met in closed session on 03/03/2026 from 04:12PM to 04:43PM. All board members were present. All items on the closed session agenda were heard except item 18 a. The board took the following reportable actions.

On items 18 b and s a o one a, Vera Scott versus La Mesa Spring Valley School District, by a vote of five to zero, the board authorized the San Diego County Sanitation District to be defended by county council. On item 18 d, Sierra Club versus County of San Diego by a vote of five to zero, the board authorized county council to appeal the superior court's decision allowing Sierra Club's challenge to the Harmony Grove Village South development. On item 18 f by a vote of four to one, with supervisor Desmond voting no, the board authorized county council to initiate litigation. Particulars about that litigation will be disclosed to any person upon inquiry after litigation has formally commenced. End of report.

Thank you. We now proceed with non agenda public comment. This is an opportunity for the public to address the board on subject matters within our jurisdiction, but not on our agenda today. The only action we may take is a referral to the CAO. Under the board's rules, speakers may speak once per meeting, either at yesterday's or today's but not both sessions.

To better facilitate the meeting, we have five speakers in person and five speakers by phone, and the remainder of a non agenda public comment will be heard at the close of the session. In order to ensure timely commission of the agenda, any discussion items with 10 or more speakers, for any discussion item with 10 or more speakers, individuals have one minute. As a reminder, members of public that are not English speaking and need interpretation assistance receive twice a lot of time for their comments, And audience members shall not whistle, clap, stomp feet, or do anything that disrupts the proceedings. If you disrupt the meeting, you'll be given one warning. If you disrupt the meeting again, you will be asked to leave the chamber. Ryan, please call the speakers.

Thank you, chair Lawson Reamer. We have 11 total requests to speak on matters not listed on the agenda, one individual in person and 10 requesting to speak by phone. For those that have requested to speak by phone, if you could please dial into the conference line now using the instructions that were provided to you. We'll now begin with the in person speakers. I'd like to invite forward Dorothea Flanagan. You have two minutes to address the board. Dorothea Flanagan. Not seeing any movement in the chamber. We'll now hear from those that have requested to speak by phone. Again, in accordance with the board's rules, we'll be hearing from the first five callers. The remaining callers will be heard at the conclusion of today's session. Again, when it's your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted. You'll hear a recording that will tell you to begin your comments, and we will go ahead and begin with our first caller.

Hi. Good morning, supervisors. My name is Madison, and I'm here today because the public narrative around cannabis is shifting and not in a good way for public health. Researchers at the University of California San Francisco published a study in JAMA cardiology finding that chronic cannabis use, whether smoked or eaten, is associated with significant cardiovascular harm. In fact, regular users had blood vessel function reduced by nearly half compared to non users.

Marijuana smokers showed a 42% reduction in vascular function and THC edible users showed an even greater 56% reduction. The impairment to arteries, their ability to dilate properly, is a key predictor of heart attack and stroke risk. This adds to growing research including findings from Massachusetts General Hospital showing that marijuana use is linked to increased risk of heart attack and stroke even in otherwise healthy adults. Marijuana is often framed as benign or even wellness oriented, but the science is catching up. Whether smoked, vaped or eaten, THC products are not harmless.

As you consider policies like the social equity cannabis program, which increases access to these harmful products, I urge you to weigh this mounting evidence. Public health, including long term heart health, deserves to come first. Thank you.

Thank you. We'll go to our next speaker.

Good morning, members of the board. My name is Kelsey Coughlin, and I'm a voting constituent for supervisor Tara Lawson Raymer. I'm here today to speak speak speak speak speak the animals, and our county cannot speak cannot speak for them themselves, so I will. First off, the Carlsbad Shelters volunteer program has been effectively shut down for over a year, and the consequences are visible and devastating. Community members, including myself, have been actively reaching out, pleading for the opportunity to come into the shelter and provide enrichment and socialization to the animal.

And for over a year, prospective volunteers have been turned away. Meanwhile, dogs sit in the kennels without adequate stimulation or exercise, without human connection, and without advocacy. Help is offered and refused. How do we justify that? I ask you to take immediate concrete actions to reinstate this program.

Second, we cannot ignore this the role that spay and neuter access plays in this crisis. Overcrowding in both the Carlsbad and Benita shelters does not appear out of nowhere. It's a predictable result of insufficient preventative care. Inaccessible spay and neuter services directly drive intake numbers and euthanasia rates rise with them. Investment in low cost spay and neuter programs is the single most effective long term solution. Animals

are

being euthanized not because they are beyond saving, but because they are not being given adequate time or the support needed to work through manageable challenges. Finally, supervisor Tara Lawson Reamer has been aware of the cruelty and neglect affecting the horses on Artesian Road, yet nothing has changed. The suffering of these animals matters to the people in her district and continued inaction is unacceptable. Missus Animal abuse, and if you turn away without commitment to change, you are complicit in it. I will continue to show up, and I will continue spreading the word on and off social media platform to inform every voting constituent in this county of

Thank you your time is up we will go to our next speaker.

Good morning, board. My name is Kathleen Lipnick. It has been painful to watch what seems like a long term strategy to eliminate over half million unincorporated voices as they have as if they have nothing of value or interest to this board majority. The indications of the strategy of the new board majority had in mind began with planning development services taking over the agendas of unincorporated planning groups. It came into clearer focus with former supervisor Fletcher's most unmerited, unwanted, and potentially long term destructive policy of the his euphemistically titled cannabis equity framework for the future.

The future to which he referred was the marijuana industry's future because it certainly was not on behalf of the future of unincorporated communities. Yesterday, the board spent a fair amount of time talking about heart disease when in fact the very policy that you have adopted contributes to that. Whether it's smoking or edibles, marijuana is bad for people's hearts. I also would like to refer to an unincorporated area letter comment that was in the paper, and it's it it speaks volumes for what is going on. Many people, she says, do not realize that if you live outside the city limits, you are a resident of unincorporated area.

This means you do not have a city hall, you do not have a city council, and you certainly don't have a mayor. In reality, unincorporated communities have had their been deprived of their elected district supervisors by effectively turning over the power to the three board majority who have mostly urban residents in their district. That is not in the best interest

Thank you. Your time is up. We'll go to our next speaker.

Good morning. Peggy Walker. Supervisor Lawson Reamer has proposed the consumer fairness on public protection units to shine light on deceptive map deceptive practices that carry high public costs. If this unit is to function as a public watchdog, will it investigate untruths routinely promoted by the marijuana industry, particularly claims about so called medical marijuana now refuted by peer reviewed scientific research about high potency THC dangers or illicit marketing targeting youth? Will the unit disclose what experts have long warned that commercialization of marijuana fractures families, destabilizes neighborhoods, and destroys young lives.

You said small deceptions can lead to financial harm. The marijuana industry's central perception is that its products are risk free and nonaddictive. Marketing delivers that message because drug demand responds directly to perceived risk and access, but the consequences are highly costly. According to Harvard Medical School research, researcher Bertha Madras, substance use costs exceed $1,000,000,000,000 annually in lost productivity, disability, cognitive impairment, and emotional disruption. Will this unit disclose the millions spent annually on marijuana related health care for physical and neuropsychiatric harms, on marijuana related child neglect, domestic instability, or high prevalence of substance abuse among the homeless, which costs an estimated 30 to $60,000 per individual annually.

A consumer fairness and public protection unit submitted to fairness must scrutinize and disclose the magnitude of

Thank you. Your time is up. We'll go to our next speaker.

Good morning. My name is Blair, and I'm here today to advocate for the animals in our county shelters who cannot speak for themselves. The volunteer program in the Carlsbad Shelter must actively be reinstated and properly managed. Volunteers are not optional. They are essential. They reduce staff burden, improve animals' outcomes, and strengthen community engagement. Without a functioning volunteer program, animals lose critical enrichment, socialization, and advocacy. That directly impacts their mental health, their adaptability, and ultimately, whether they live or die. Secondly, spay and neuter efforts are the most effective way to reduce intake and prevent overcrowding. When access to low cost, accessible spay and neuter services are limited, intake increases and overcrowding worsens.

Insufficient access directly contributes to higher euthanasia rates. Investing in these successful spay and neuter programs are not just compassionate and is fiscally responsible and a proven long term solution that addresses the root cause rather than the symptom. We are also deeply concerned that animals are being euthanized without being given adequate time or support to overcome manageable challenges. Many behavioral and medical issues are treatable with basic intervention, foster placement, or volunteer support. Euthanasia should be a last resort, not a response to a lack of staffing, lack of resources, or lack of programs.

Our community cares deeply about these animals. We are asking you to prioritize life saving policies, invest in prevention, and ensure that every animal is given a fair chance. Thank you.

Thank you. And chair Lawson Reamer, that concludes public the request for non agenda public communication this morning. Again, all remaining speakers will be heard at the conclusion of today's session.

Okay. Thank you very much. We now proceed with the formation of the consent agenda. This is items one through four and item seven. All items are routine and will be acted upon with one motion. Well, I'll call alternate public comment after my colleagues have an opportunity to pull any items they would like for discussion or make any comments. Vice chair Montgomery Stepp.

Just for clarification, item number seven is on consent as well? Yeah. Okay. For item number seven, I just want to thank Luz and the Parks and Rec team for bringing this item to the board. I know it's been a lot of back and forth here, but this park project is extremely important to the community. With that, I will move the consent agenda. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. I have a motion. Chairperson Tamagiri. Thank you. I'm not pulling any items.

Just a quick comment on item three regarding the Southern California coastal water research project. It is one of the most important scientific partnerships that we have for protecting water quality in San Diego County. And through SCORP, we've been able to meet increasingly strict state and federal water quality mandates without driving up unnecessary costs for the public or for development. But beyond these these benefits, this partnership is also an opportunity to run the region's most advanced coordinated monitoring programs,

and

I really think that we should leverage this work to bring more focused, consistent, science driven monitoring of the Tijuana River Valley. Happy to support the item and request that staff continue to leverage our membership to the benefit of our border region as it relates to the Tequana River pollution as well. Thank you.

I have nothing to pull but I' pleased to hear from our colleague IV' worked closely with them in the past so I was curious what your thoughts were so thank you for that.

Supervisor Desmond?

Nothing to pull and no comments.

I also have nothing to pull and no comments so we'll go to public comment.

Thank you chair Lawson Riemer. Have eight total requests to speak on items on the consent agenda, three individuals in person and five requesting to speak by phone. For any individual that did request to speak on items on the consent agenda by phone, if you could please dial into the conference line now using the instructions that were provided to you. We'll begin with the in person speakers. As your name is called, please come forward and stand on the arrows until it is your turn to speak at the podium. You'll then have two minutes to address the board. Please begin by stating your name for the record. Also, when speaking, please identify which items on the consent agenda you are speaking about. I'd like to invite forward the first three individuals, allegedly Audra, Cesar Javier, and Jennifer Royston.

Everything that you're doing in the consent is you know, it's it's interesting the way you guys wanna say that you wanna protect our public health and safety. And, you know, with the inequities that are going on in this county, it's very sad because, you know, yesterday there was a gas leak and it's like, didn't bother anybody. It was like, no, let's just keep doing the meeting. Right? I got beaten up outside of the chambers by a sheriff and nobody nobody cared about that.

There's homeless people out on the streets that are dying and suffering and nobody seems to care about that. You do a lot of work, paperwork to make it seem like it. And, you know, we come to you all the time talking about the children that are suffering at the hands of HHS and Elizabeth here in her organization. And so when you say these things and you even want to test the water it's like you have to have the sewage still coming in to be able to do that.

And so I feel

like why aren't we stopping that? It's like nobody you guys act like we can't do anything but let's test them and give them air purifiers. I mean when are you actually going to stop that? Like go to Mexico and be like we're not doing commerce with you guys until you stop because they don't like when it goes into their communities and so that's why they put it in ours. And it's like people shouldn't have to suffer for decades just wanting help while you guys sit here and claim that you you do that.

Animals get abused that you know about all the time. I mean the county is covering up sexual abuse with Malaika and Zaya And it's like, and they're about to terminate parental rights so that the mother cannot even be a mom anymore. While the children beg to go home every time.

Cesar or Jennifer?

Hi. My name is Jennifer Royston, and I'm here today because, first of all, I want to try to get the attention of my FBI because we all know that San Diego's FBI is deeply involved with the trafficking also.

So those

keywords are because we know the FBI is always listening. Kash Patel, Pam Bondi, terrorists, terrorism, bombs, assassinations, and our great president Trump. Now, you guys are allowing the county to convince these ignorant social workers that these children are gonna have better lives, where they're gonna be exploited, abused, and permanently damaged. And none of you really give a shit, and I just don't I cannot comprehend that in my mind. I'm just like, are you guys even really real?

Or does money really control you that much? I just don't understand. And I guess I must be a moron. We all know that I didn't graduate high school, but I I am a strong defender of my rights. I am a defender of children.

And if you're a bully, I'm gonna kick your ass and I'm gonna I'm here today and I will not stop. I'll make you hear me. I'll make your cities hear me, your neighbors hear me. I'll put your names out there. Morales, when you told me, oh, that is a beautiful video of a beautiful family knowing that the county of San Diego took my beautiful boy away and then scared him, intimidated, drugged him, manipulated him, took him away from his entire family and isolated him.

Shame on you. And you know what? We have a great president, and know when those bombs are done dropping everywhere around us, those bombs are gonna come right here. And all you motherfuckers are gonna go to jail.

Not seeing any movement in the chamber by Caesar. We'll now go to our callers. We'll hear from those that requested to speak by phone. Again, when it's your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted. You will hear a recording that will tell you to begin your comments, and we will go ahead and begin with our first caller.

Paul Bold, agreement with so called Water Research. So 50,000 per year for five years to an outfit that used advanced DNA methods to link Mexican sewage to US beach pollution. When we know some of it actually comes from The United States. Seven, subcontractor for the Talabo Park project. The current contractor, they refused to do the work required and says it was directed to continue rock crushing and extra work activities above and beyond the approved NTE change order amount.

Sounds like the companies need to break from each other. Johnson Tractor Incorporated has good reviews. I say go with Johnston. Reports, though, are that you hired a convicted embezzler on the Narkin Sentinel Prevention contract, and she did that again for at least 200,000. Then on when I warned the county about hiring a high guy at work provider who flunked an LA County audit.

So you need to listen better and do a lot more research on who you hire. One, repealing and reenacting voting codes. It would be nice if the agenda attachments said what they were instead of just an attachment number or letter. Many agenda items have the attachments labeled with proper description. If you want to promote transparency with the public, just do it. Section ninety one point one point one zero five requires a permit for many changes. It would be nice if there were a chartered table in the code to show

Thank you. Your time is up. We'll go to our next speaker.

Good morning, board of supervisors. Anne Riddle here. Thank you for this opportunity to call in from my workplace. I do not take it the least bit for granted. It is a difficult project, but I think it's important to share our thoughts on those items that we are particularly involved with.

I called in to speak to consent item one, two, and three, all of which I support. But I particularly like to draw your attention to item one and the staff report language because I have some concerns about the way that we are putting things and our transparency and our willingness to own problems when we have them. It mentions under the sustainability impact that the changes they're making, the improvements, the upgrades to the laws and policies are to safeguard public health and well-being and reduce the demand on our first responders, good things all, during natural disasters resulting from climate change. Let's be really clear that there's a lot more going on, particularly with the floods, and this does address the floods that we had here in our city a couple of years ago that still have left people in a bad situation and have not had the remediation and support they needed from the county and as well as from the city is not everything is the fault of climate change. Sometimes it's because we, as a city, we, as a county, do not take good care of our residents.

We don't meet their needs. We don't clear out their drainage ditches maintenance is deferred, these are the results that happen. We have good evidence of what's going on in item three when there is the need to bring in others to clean up water that's affect and air, I might say, that affects the well-being of people in the South Bay.

Thank you. Your time is up. We'll go to our next speaker.

It really is ridiculous. You guys blame the you blame global warming, but at the same time, you don't recognize the mistakes that you're making that caused the floods that, you know, we don't clean up the straight ditches because we want nature back. And then a bunch of houses get flooded, and then you go and then city of San Diego chooses to sue 11 people and blame them. I find these kind of actions terrible. Why don't you be honest with the people and say, hey.

Look. It's getting hotter in San Diego because we put concrete on everything. The humidity is going up because of the same deal. There's a lot more moisture in the air because the ground isn't breathing anymore. We have no desire to go ahead and fix it because we wanna turn city Of San Diego into a super city.

I mean, you're forcing, let's say, Carlsbad to go ahead and put low income housing when they don't have a problem with it up there. They don't have a problem with homeless, but we need the NGOs over there so we could go ahead and change the leadership. This is really kind of screwed up, the fact that you'd totally disrespect us completely, ignore the people around there because you found a way to go ahead and cheat the election, both the republicans and the democrats. Republicans started it off with the league of women voters in the nursing homes. There's no question about that.

That's in history. That's in California history. We tried to go ahead and address it, and then we chose to ignore it. And that problem became bigger. So am I wondering why we became Israel's, you know, play toy? No shit. We allowed them to go ahead and steal our elections, and they control a lot of our our congresspeople. Are we wondering why if we're turning into fifteen minute city? Same deal. Oh, George Soros took control of most of the local officials, and you guys are just following in line. Not everyone. I mean, Jim Devsman, once you're gone, they're gonna go ahead and replace you with someone that is more in line with Joel.

Thank you. Your time is up. And chair Lawson Riemer, that concludes public comment on the items on the consent agenda.

Okay. Thank you very much. We have a motion by vice chair Montgomery Stepp and a second by chair proto McGarry. Please vote.

And chair Lawson Rumer, that motion passes unanimously with all supervisors being present and voting aye.

Okay. Thank you so much. Okay. We'll now move on to our discussion items, beginning with discussion item, from, one. And this is the notice public hearing, approve the public housing agency annual plan and supporting policy documents, and amend and approve the '25 to twenty nine five year plan and the significant amendment to the 2526 annual plan.

Authorized execution. The sorry, authorized executive director of the county housing authority to execute all public housing agency certifications, approve the public housing five year capital fund program plan, authorized applications for additional program funding, and accretion of new or expansion of existing partnerships. Wow, that was quite a mouthful. Do we have a presentation? We don't have to? No. Okay. We do? We do. Okay.

Good morning, chair Lawson Riemer and members of the Housing Authority Board of Commissioners. The County Housing Authority administers a housing choice voucher, public housing, and other rental assistance programs serving more than 25,000 residents across San Diego County. These programs support the county's vision of housing for all and the county's framework for ending homelessness. Each year, the housing authority prepares an annual agency plan to outline new initiatives, update policies, and set strategies to address the housing needs of our most vulnerable residents. Today's action request your approval of the annual agency plan along with related authorities necessary for the administration of the housing authorities programs.

Here with me today are David Estrella, director of housing and community development services and Nick Martinez, assistant director. I'll now turn it over to David.

Thank you, doctor Hernandez. The housing authority serves approximately 11,100 households through the housing choice voucher, public housing, and other rental assistance programs. The housing authority jurisdiction covers the unincorporated areas and 13 of the 18 cities within the region. Over $18,000,000 each month is contributed into the local economy through rental assistance payments to over 4,000 partnering landlords. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development or HUD requires housing authorities to prepare and submit five year and annual agency plans.

The county's current five year agency plan sets the housing authority's mission, long term goals, and quantifiable objectives. The annual agency plan outlines new activities for the upcoming fiscal year and includes the policy documents for the section eight housing choice voucher program and the public housing program. Additionally, the county housing authority has applied to HUD to convert funding for the county's public housing units to project based vouchers, increasing the revenue that can be drawn down to support the ongoing operations and maintenance of these housing units. The conversion requires an amendment to the current five year and annual plans. In developing the annual agency plan, the housing authority engaged the community through a variety of outreach efforts.

The plan was presented to the resident advisory board which includes housing authority program participants and residents. The plans were posted on the HCDS website for a forty five day public review and comment period. The public comment process was announced in multiple publications and languages as shown on this slide. In addition, an email blast was sent to over 160,000 recipients and information was shared on the Engage San Diego County website. This hearing marks the end of the public comment period. All comments received were in line with the plan. I'll now turn it over to Nick to share more details on the plans and additional recommendations.

Thank you, David. The annual plan outlines activities that the county housing authority will be undertaking or expanding in the upcoming fiscal year. This includes continuing to expand the use of project based vouchers or PBVs to support the creation of affordable and permanent supportive housing. Specifically, the county has a 119 units in four developments that will be coming online in 2026. We have over 300 more units at eight developments planned for 2027 and beyond.

This will add to 387 currently, PBV units in operation. That county housing authority also owns and manages a 121 public housing units at four sites in Chula Vista. We are including an amendment to the current five year and annual plan to support the financial repositioning of the public housing units. This will shift our funding revenue to a more sustainable section eight project based model. Residents will continue paying an affordable rent, and the additional revenue will help preserve the long term affordability of the sites.

The required amendment provides details about the updated post conversion procedures and outlines resident rights. In addition to the approval of the agency plan and amendments, we are requesting approval of the five year public housing capital fund action plan to receive grant revenue from HUD. The capital fund grant is a part of the current funding stream for public housing. As stated previously, the financial repositioning will substantially increase the revenue for upkeep of these properties. The grand amount for 2026 is estimated to be $367,000, which will supplement operating expenses and go toward energy efficient projects supporting the county's sustainability goals.

Today's actions include receiving public testimony, approving and authorizing submission of the agency plan and required amendments, and improving the public housing capital fund plan. In addition, today's actions will also authorize the county housing authority to apply for additional program funding or vouchers as opportunities become available. This concludes staff's presentation. We're available to answer any questions you may have.

Do any of my colleagues have any questions? Okay. Thank you very much. We'll go to public comment.

Thank you, chair Lawson Riemer. We do have 10 total requests to speak. Six six individuals in person for requesting to speak by phone. Also, I'd like to note for the record, we did receive one e comment on this item, which was in opposition. For any individuals that requested to speak on this item by phone, please dial into the conference line now using the instructions that were provided to you. We'll go ahead and begin with the in person speakers. As your name is called, please come forward and stand on the arrows until it is your turn to speak at the podium. You'll then have one minute to address the board. Please begin by stating your name for the audio record. I'd like to invite forward the the first three individuals, allegedly Audra, Cesar Javier, and David Moody.

There we go. Yeah, it's interesting to see how you guys continue to get more funding and the problem just continues to get worse with homelessness. It seems like we're funding homelessness and not solutions. I'm wondering when you guys are actually gonna go talk to the homeless because they do want help and you guys it's like the problem keeps getting worse. I couldn't even do the point in time count this year because dreams for change, the guys you contracted with that are complicit in deaths at Tent City, kick me out because they don't like the exposure of deaths and sexual assaults and all of the nefarious and neglectful things that are happening with the homeless.

So, want to know when you guys are actually gonna go have conversations with them and really figure out what's going on because people wait for decades on HUD. And it's like you guys do all this busy work to make it seem like we're making a difference, but you can go and talk to these people and know you're not because they're continually kind of being pushed back. It'll be, you know, like, the process isn't going the way that it should and the way that would get people into housing, and that needs to change.

Next two speakers, Cesar Javier, David Moody, Jennifer Royston. You may come forward in any order.

Did you say David Moody?

I did say David Moody. Yes.

Hear that well.

No problem.

My name is David Moody. I'm the chairman of the senior residents council formed to create provide provide a voice for seniors. That's Bill Joyce, my co chairman. Excuse me. I gotta turn the stupid phone off.

I wanna thank you, first of all, for creating affordable housing for seniors. I'm a benefactor. I live in Paul Downey residence in Claremont. It's a nice, very nice place. But I'm here to also warn you that the word affordable is quickly drifting away.

We were told in our certification and recertification process that we were would not have a rent increase till 2027. On Thanksgiving, we were gifted with notice that we were receiving an 8.8% raise of rent effective January 1, and we only moved in in the spring. The annualized rate of increase was literally

Sir, that's your time. Thank you.

14 or 15%.

Thank you. Thank you.

No. I just wanna complete

Thank you, sir. If you continue talking, I'm gonna have to ask you to leave the meeting. Your your time is is complete. Thank you. Who's next?

Jennifer Royston, Luis So to, and Raquel Acosta.

Yeah. Can sir? Sir, if you have anything written down and you wanna hand it to our team, we would love to read it. If you have anything written since your time was

expired. Quickly, we moved into affordable senior housing. Sir. It's a mixed campus.

Sir, I'm gonna pause you one second. Before you begin your comments, could you please state your name for the record?

Okay. William Joyce, resident at 5257 Mount Etna. It's an affordable senior complex mixed with a new family affordable complex. We are being roadblocked by the housing commission, by the developer, by the property manager concerning safety hazards. We are seniors.

The the traffic patterns of a mixed campus is becoming very unsafe. They're ignoring our requests for speed bumps, for signage, for speed control. We've also petitioned many times for first responders cannot find our building because they're not adequately numbered like required by the California fire code, numbers over the main entrance, numbers on high, five buildings, no numbers. The developer ignores us, the property manager ignores us. The fire department ignored me. The city code enforcement ignored me. We need help as seniors. It's bordering on senior abuse.

Thank you. Jennifer Royston, Louis So to, and Raquel Akofsa. If you could please come line up on the arrows, it'd be greatly appreciated.

Jennifer Royston, those keywords are bomb bomb terrorist terrorism, our great President Trump. Kash Patel, we're asking you to come in here because we got plenty of housing here in San Diego to house our homeless. We have plenty. Send send somebody here during the day to record our bars, our restaurants, our hotels. Our city is desolate, and it's desolate because the Democrats have overran our city.

They have gangstalkers that stalk harass the people that believe in God and believe in our great president. This should be stopped. We don't need no more fucking money. You need to put people on the empty houses you guys have because you've got them all over the city. And that's what our our government needs to come our our president needs to come take a look at. Look at all the houses we got empty. We got plenty of houses. You guys don't need no more money. Stop filling your pocket and leaving these people on the streets thinking you deserve something because you deserve the dirt.

Last call for Cesar Javier, Luis So to, and Raquel Acosta.

Raquel Acosta. I'm going to focus on Equis, out of state grantees. We're funding out of state people. They're hiring out of state. They're bringing them in. Government shut down for a month where they could not do anything within the housing, and they're not giving the house a month extra in which they need it because they couldn't do anything. The people, the representatives that help them, they don't do anything, they just check-in with them, they don't do any they're lying to them on their credit applications, they're telling them to put their own credit, obviously. Homeless people don't have good credit, so their applications don't get approved, and then they get kicked out. 34% of houses is what they claimed, that would be 170 people. I was in the hotels, 170 people did not get housing.

That makes me wonder if they're falsifying the numbers by outing the homeless and then housing people that they know, or taking the cash on their hand after that to, you know, for their own pockets. They're telling clients there's no funding last year. When they got funded in October, it just seems problematic. They just kicked out a pregnant lady of seven months. Knowing that she was pregnant, she asked for the extension. And, the whole month the month that they needed extended is So

you go. Thank you. Alright. Not seeing any more movement in the chamber. We will now hear from those that have requested to speak by phone. When it's your turn to speak, be unmuted. You will hear a recording that will tell you to begin your comments, and we're gonna go ahead and begin with our first caller.

Hello. Good morning. My name is Gil Vera. I'm a director of the House of Justice Collaborative at Legal Aid Society San Diego. Legal aid regularly works with and represents, section a voucher holders, navigate the complex HUD HUD and admin plan regulations.

And so I'm here to comment on the proposed changes to the 2026 section eight admin plan. Overall, we are agreeable with the changes being proposed, and we submitted a more detailed public comment via email. But I just wanna highlight two issues that we're seeing with our clients. One in relation to abatements, and that occurs when the unit has failed inspections, and as a result, the section eight half payments are are stopped. What we would recommend is currently the unit, the the contract is terminated after ninety days, and what we have seen is landlords use failed housing quality inspections as a way to terminate and evict section eight tenants and avoid having to go through the normal process because what happens is when that contract terminates, you as a section eight tenant have to move and use or you lose your voucher.

So we're recommending that under the

Thank you. Your time is up. And chair Lawson Reamer, not seeing any other callers called in. No movement in the chamber. That concludes public comment on this item.

Okay. Thank you very much. Do any of my colleagues have any questions or comments on this item?

Yes. I just I'll I'll move approval, but I do have a question about the community engagement piece. It just I've asked this before, but it seems like we kinda have our traditional print media, and so I I wanted to see if we could expand that a little bit. I know at least one of the publications may not get the reach that it that it once got. And so there and then there are other ways, I think, that barring what other restrictions that we may have, that we can find ways to reach out to people.

I know it's, you know, it's a lengthy document and everything, but I think that we should modernize a bit our this this communication piece. So that is all I had with regard to public comment. I'm getting heard the information and gathering that to to respond. Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you so much. Chair Porto Maggiore.

Thank you, chair. Just a quick, comment. I just wanna mention that this item keeps our core housing programs funded and functional, allowing us to modernize aging homes and maintain stability for thousands of families. It's a practical action with real impact for the people who rely on these programs every day. This is important because without these updates, we risk losing momentum on preserving affordable homes and risk making it harder for families to stay rooted in their communities.

These adjustments strengthen the foundation of our housing system and support long term stability. I'm pleased to see an equity focused approach embedded throughout this update centering the needs of older adults, people with disabilities, families with children, veterans, and those most at risk. Our values must show up in our policies and this moves us towards a housing system that is fair, accessible, and centered on community well-being. So I look forward to expanding our partnerships and securing more resources, especially in these difficult times when things are being made even more difficult for people to access housing. Thank you very much for your work, and that concludes my remarks, chair.

Thank you so much. Supervisor Desmond.

Thank you, madam chair. I'll second the the motion, and I just wanna make sure staff gets together with the the with the people who came and and spoke on specific properties and and issues staff could reach out to them and if there's something we can help. It might be the city of San Diego. I don't I don't know what the addresses are, but if we reach out and help and and see what their issues are and and get a little clearer and if we can help do that.

Yes. Definitely, supervisor. We have staff in the in the chamber to to follow-up.

Thank you. Thank you. I wasn't sure who I was talking to here. Glad to be here. Thank you. Glad you're all here.

Thank you. We have a motion and a second. Any other comments? Okay. We'll have to do

a voice vote for this item.

Thank you, chair.

Call the roll.

Thank you, chair Lawson Reamer. Lieutenant commissioner Barry?

Yes.

Supervisor Anderson? Aye. Supervisor Desmond?

Yes.

Chair Pro Temagiri?

Yes.

Vice chair Montgomery Stepp?

Yes.

And chair Lawson Reamer?

Yes.

And that motion passes unanimously with all tenant commissioners who are present voting aye. Okay.

Thank you all very much. I'll give the team a minute to get reorganized. Thank you, commissioner Berry. Okay. Thank you so much.

We may now move on to item number five, notice public hearing and an ADU ordinance amendment, including the separate sale of ADUs and related CEQA exemption. I'll hand the floor to the county team for a presentation.

Good morning, chair and board of supervisors. Item five is our second zoning ordinance update of the year. Today, staff is requesting the board to consider the accessory dwelling unit zoning ordinance amendment, including options related to the separate sale of ADUs. The amendment before you today includes two project outcomes. The first involves amending the county's zoning ordinance to update and clarify the accessory dwelling unit or ADU section for better alignment with new state laws.

Periodic zoning ordinance updates and improvements are a shared objective with board of supervisors and stakeholders. The second was directed by the board of supervisors and involves developing a local program under assembly bill ten thirty three, which would allow for the separate sale of ADUs. This supports attainable homeownership opportunities and supports opportunities to age in place or transfer generational wealth. First, we'll review the draft zoning ordinance updates to align with new state laws. An ADU is a secondary dwelling unit of up to 1,200 square feet on a residential property, and it provides complete independent living facilities for one or more people.

In recent years, California has significantly expanded ADU laws to increase housing supply. ADUs have become an important housing option, supporting multigenerational living while fitting into existing neighborhoods. Construction of these units have increased both countywide and statewide. New ADU legislation was adopted in 2023 and 2024 prompting this current amendment. This amendment updates the ADU ordinance to comply with mandatory state requirements and clarify public guidance.

During outreach, many inquiries focused on the number of ADUs allowed on a single family parcel. Comments referenced ADU density bonus programs adopted by other jurisdictions, including the city of San Diego. It is important to clarify that county is not proposing to adopt an ADU density bonus program as part of this amendment. The county follows state guidance on the number of ADUs allowed on single family parcels. Under current state law, a single family parcel may include one primary dwelling unit, one detached ADU, one junior ADU, and one attached per conversion ADU.

This means a single family parcel could contain up to four units. With the state making it easier to build ADUs, ADUs have become a major source of new housing production in recent years. As shown in the table, the number of ADUs permitted in the unincorporated county has remained relatively consistent over the last five years. Due to this, some community members have shared comments about neighborhood impacts, such as changes in density, infrastructure capacity, and parking. While these topics are outside of the scope of this amendment, they were noted and will continue to inform the county's long term housing and planning efforts.

Now we'll look at a b ten thirty three and the optional program, which would allow the separate sale of ADUs. AV ten thirty three is an opt in legislation, meaning the county can choose to develop a local program allowing the sale of ADUs as condos. This legislation applies to both single family and multifamily residential zones. The purpose of the legislation is to expand homeownership opportunities. The purpose of the legislation is to expand homeownership opportunities by including smaller, more attainable units within existing neighborhoods, making homeownership accessible to a broader range of income levels.

Additionally, this program may provide seniors an opportunity to downsize while remaining in their communities or to age in place. This legislation is also aligned with the county's housing for all initiatives and advancing the board's adopted five p goals to produce homeownership opportunities. It's important to note that a local program under a b ten thirty three would not increase the number of ADUs allowed on single family parcels under state law. In March 2024, the board of supervisors directed staff to evaluate the feasibility of allowing the separate sale of ADUs in the unincorporated area. In response, staff conducted outreach with stakeholders, property owners, and the development community to better understand interests, concerns, and ideas for how a local program might be structured.

Based on that input, in October 2024, the board directed staff to move forward with developing a local program for the separate sale of ADUs and to explore potential local eligibility criteria based on public feedback. The amendment brought forward today provides options for local eligibility criteria under this program. Next, we'll look at specific requirements that must be met to allow for the separate sale of ADUs. While jurisdictions may choose whether or not to adopt a local program under AB ten thirty three, certain provisions are mandatory if a jurisdiction opts in. Selling an ADU separately requires the creation of a condo.

This applies to both the primary home and the ADU, and the ADU must have a final building permit. The project must meet the requirements of both the Davis Sterling Act, which governs condos and HOAs, and the subdivision map act, which regulates line division and condo creation. A homeowner's association is required and new covenants, conditions, and restrictions would be recorded to establish the HOA. This ensures clear rules for handling shared spaces and responsibilities. Each condo unit would be assigned its own separate property tax bill.

A critical step in converting existing ADUs to condos is to notify utility providers. Water, sewer, gas, and electric agencies will make the final determination on whether any changes such as separate meters are needed. Finally, properties on wells or septic systems need approval from the county's department of environmental health and quality before a conno map can be filed.

Following the board's direction, staff conducted public outreach to help inform the potential local eligibility criteria for the separate sale of ADUs. Community engagement is at the center of the county's approach to planning and decision making. Through this lens, county staff reached out to specific stakeholder groups. From 2025, staff held a variety of engagement activities, including webinars, stakeholder meetings, community planning and sponsor group all chairs quarterly meetings, and community planning group discussions, engaging residents, the building industry, and environmental organizations across the unincorporated area. During these discussions, some community members raised concerns related to infrastructure, parking, density, and rental housing, while others noted potential benefits such as expanded home ownership opportunities, support for multigenerational households, and increased financial flexibility for homeowners.

Building on this outreach, several consistent themes emerged across stakeholder groups. Feedback from outreach informed the local eligibility criteria included in the proposed amendment. Next, we'll review key themes raised by stakeholders. From a development and permitting perspective, we heard that while many ADUs function well as rentals, not all are currently set up for separate ownership. Stakeholders emphasized the need for clear requirements related to access, parking, and utilities.

Related conversations about infrastructure highlighted the importance of ensuring adequate water, sewer, and utility metering while an ADU is proposed for separate sale. These requirements are in place under existing codes and would continue to be enforced when an ADU is converted for separate ownership. We also heard strong interest in environmental and locational considerations, particularly in rural and high fire severity areas. While state law limits the county's authority to restrict where ADUs can be built, existing fire safety and environmental standards remain fully in place and would continue to guide where subdivision for a separate sale is feasible. Regarding impacts to affordability, feedback reflected both enthusiasm for expanding home ownership opportunities and concerns about potential effects on the rental market.

Because separate sales ADUs is new in California, local data is not yet available. However, findings from other jurisdictions suggest that allowing separate sale can expand attain attainable homeownership without significantly reducing rental supply. Staff will continue monitoring for emerging data. The amendment includes draft language allowing the separate sale of ADUs under a b ten thirty three reflecting state law requirements and incorporating options for local eligibility criteria developed through public and stakeholder input.

Next, we'll walk through potential options for local eligibility criteria. This decision will shape how a local program is implemented and which ADUs would be eligible for separate cell. While AB ten thirty three establishes a state baseline for the separate cell of ADUs, local agencies retain discretion to adopt additional eligibility criteria. The state baseline would allow any type of ADU to be sold. However, junior ADUs may not be sold under AB ten thirty three.

These options illustrate possible local approaches. However, the board retains flexibility to determine the structure that best aligns with county goals beyond the options provided today. Option one establishes a local program based on the state framework which implements a b ten thirty three as written, allowing separate ADU cells with no additional local requirements. Next, we'll look at an option that would create opportunities for owner occupants. Under option two, the separate sale of an ADU would be allowed only if a right of first refusal is put into place.

This means that each con owner must give either their current tenant or another con owner living on the same lot the first chance to buy the unit if it's put up for sale. The right holder would have sixty days to match a purchase offer. Implementing a right of first refusal would establish a clear process for ADU condo sales with some additional procedural steps for participating property owners to follow. Ongoing monitoring of sales would be needed to ensure compliance. Next, we'll look at options that could define and limit what types of ADUs may be sold.

We have two options in this category. Under option three, separate cell would be allowed only if the ADU is detached from the primary structure. This option is intended to simplify the process and provide greater predictability for property owners by reducing shared infrastructure between units. Under this approach, ADUs that are physically attached to the primary dwelling would remain under the same ownership and would not be eligible for separate sale. Option four relates to new versus existing ADUs.

Under this option, separate sale of ADUs would apply to new development only and not to ADUs existing prior to condo mapping. The condo units in common areas must have been mapped prior to the construction commencement of any ADUs that could be sold separately. This option would not extend to previously constructed ADUs. Since 2020 alone, approximately 1,700 ADUs have been permitted in the county. These units would not be eligible for separate sale under this option.

The option would exclude previously built ADUs and future condo conversions. Option five is to not opt in to a local program under AB ten thirty three. The county would not adopt provisions allowing the separate sale of ADUs and existing regulations would remain in place pending any future board action. These options provide a framework for how the program could be implemented locally. The planning commission reviewed these options and expressed concerns that local criteria would restrict implementation, and they ultimately supported a fully state aligned approach as the most flexible and expensive option of the program.

Next, we'll review recommendations provided by the planning commission and community planning groups. On 12/05/2025, the planning commission recommended that the board of supervisors adopt the ADU ordinance amendment, including a program for the separate sale of ADUs as written under state law without any additional local eligibility criteria. Additionally, during public review of the amendment, five community planning groups submitted letters opposing the separate sale of ADUs and ADU development in general. While each community planning group expressed concerns, two groups, Valley Center and Fallbrook, voted to recommend that the county opt out of creating a local program under a b ten thirty three. Today's request is for the board to find that the ordinance is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, consider and adopt the section of the ADU ordinance that addresses updates needed to comply with mandatory state law, and consider the section of the ADU ordinance that allows the separate sale of ADUs and at the board's discretion provide direction regarding local eligibility criteria to be applied to the separate sale of ADUs in the unincorporated area.

This concludes our presentation. Staff are available to answer any questions.

Okay. My colleagues are eager to comment on this item. So supervisor Anderson.

Thank you, madam chair. I we requested information from our attorney earlier. I'm the only supervisor that lives in unincorporated, and I have an ADU. And I wasn't sure if I'd be able to participate in this conversation. And if our counsel wouldn't mind just addressing publicly what she sent me privately, then we can we can avert any possible future communications of of accusations. Thank you.

Sure. The

summary of what I shared was that based on the facts as I understood them from the district two staff and and my understanding of the ordinance that there would be nothing in the, no conflict of interest here that would prohibit, supervisor Anderson from participating or voting or put the board's decision today at risk. And that is the gist. If the board wants more, I can provide it. Okay.

It's your choice. Supervisor Desmond. Okay.

Thank you. I I know there's been a lot of interest in this item, and and you said it was Valley Center and Fallbrook. Both the planning group said they don't want they don't want any of this. Is that was that right? Yeah. So, you know, and thanks to everybody for participating and for bringing this forward. We need housing. And the ADUs make up a large portion of our new construction in San Diego County, unfortunately. That's the case. But allowing for the separate sales of the ADUs could help help renters get into homeownership, especially given the average cost for a modest single family home.

Appreciate the staff's efforts. You gather the stakeholders' feedback and and resulting in options two, three, and four that go beyond the state law. But I tend to agree with the planning commission's unanimous recommendation to implement the ordinance consistent with state law option number one. I don't wanna bog down property owners with more regulations, and community members will still have a chance to comment on input when an ADU project goes through the condo map process. They will have input, you know, from neighbors and and and people concerned.

If we're gonna adopt an ordinance ordinance, I want it to be as flexible as possible to give homeowners or homebuilders room to make their projects work. So although it's not a perfect solution, being able to sell ADUs to gather more housing, it's a step in the right in that direction. Our young generation has been shut out of the housing market just with the the the astronomical cost of homes here in San Diego County, and at least this gives people a step in that direction for some type of homeownership. So I'm in favor of adopting the ordinance consistent with option one without establishing additional local eligibility requirements. So it's a motion to approve staff recommendation at option one.

Vice chairman, can we step?

Thank you. I actually wanna hear public comment. I do have some questions, but I wanna hear public comment before I

have the discussion. With you when we come back from public comment. Anyone else initial questions for staff before we turn to public comment? Okay. It's okay. You can talk twice. We'll begin with public comment.

Go

ahead. Thank you, chair Lawson Rumer. We have 14 total requests to speak, five individuals in person, and nine requesting to speak by phone. I'd also like to note for the record, we did receive three e comments on this item. Two were in favor. One was in opposition. For any individuals that requested to speak on this item by phone, if you could please dial into the conference line now with instructions that were provided to you, go ahead and begin with the in person speakers. As your name is called, if you please come forward and stand on the arrows until it is your turn to speak at the podium. You'll then have one minute to address the board. Please begin by stating your name for the audio record. I'd like to invite forward the first three individuals, allegedly Audra, Alonzo Gonzales, and Cesar Javier. Yes.

I have a question. How much is it costing us to have seven of them sitting up here given a presentation. It's kind of interesting, but this program is going to bring in money for sure and aging in place that is terrifying to think about you guys wanting us to age in place. And home ownership, it's interesting because people can't afford rent, but yet we're like they're gonna buy a home, we're gonna help them. How are you guys gonna help them do that?

Or is this just a money making opportunity? For sure. Because there's plenty of homes, it's just the rents too high. And again, I'm not sure how you think those people are going to come in and be able to afford that, but doesn't really matter. And you're gonna pass it even though the people in those communities said we don't want it. It's a shoo in. That means you're going to make sure it happens. And, you know, it's just sad because there's fire dangers, parking problems, evacuations, like, all these things that you guys don't really care about, but you do care about our public health and safety. Right? Good.

Alonzo Gonzalez, Cesar Javier. Go to the next three speakers, George Ching, Jennifer Royston, Jesse Schmidt. You may come forward in any order.

Good morning, supervisors. My name is George Shing with the Pacific Southwest Association of Realtors. Thanks for your time. I'm here to speak in support of the local implementation of AB ten thirty three. PSR supports the implementation of AB ten thirty three specifically for developments that are four units or less and that have a priority for owner occupancy. As mentioned, there's a severe shortage of properties that are available for purchase at the entry level, and this policy has the potential to create opportunities in that realm. So, we encourage you to to implement it locally. Thank you.

Alonzo Gonzalez, acting director of the San Diego Housing Coalition, echoing George, Ching's comments in support of this action. I really wanna thank staff for all their efforts to get us here, and I especially wanna thank the activists who helped broker this program throughout the state, especially our own our own leaders here with the Casitas Casita Coalition, including Rafael Perez. So I wanna support it exactly how it is with option one because although the other options have their pros, the truth is it's already an onerous enough process with the time and investment that's required that we're seeing in other municipalities is very small, slow participation because it's already timely and costly to do the mapping process. In fact, I'd go even further and ask the board to ask staff to explore allowing junior ADUs to be attached to ADUs as a component to make it more worthy and worthwhile for owners to split the lots. Thank you.

Good morning, board. This is Jesse Schmidy, state policy manager for Alliance San Diego and co convener for the Coalition for Equitable Development. Here before you today in strong support of this item. We are in a housing crisis. Families are doubling up, seniors are aging out, and young people who grew up here cannot afford to stay here.

ADUs are one of the fastest, least destructive, and most cost effective ways to create housing in existing neighborhoods. Allowing the separate sale of EDUs opens the door to homeownership for working families who are locked out of the market. We would encourage the board to look at the possibility of adopting both options one and two, ten thirty three. We do not believe the right of refusal would add additional requirements to the separation of sale for ADUs and would encourage the board to look at adopting both options. Thank you.

Thank you. As our next speaker is coming in, I'll call, our final in person speaker, Martin Lipizzarias.

Was Martin going first or am I going?

No. You may speak.

Again, I say we have plenty of housing in San Diego. It's the cost of living. It's like you guys keep building more houses and more crap and letting people put more crap on top of other crap and it's like we have plenty of housing out there. Plenty. I mean, if the real FBI would take a look, they'll see that most of our apartments are deserted. They're brand new, but they're all deserted. You'll see a light here and there on trying to make it look because we know how the democrats, they always play like it's the illusion. The illusion they're gonna kill you. The illusion that they're gonna do this. The illusion that it's everybody else except for them ripping apart our cities.

And, it's unacceptable. We have plenty of housing. We don't need to keep building and building and building in San Diego. You got shit, make it work. You know, lures things so people can actually live there.

Good morning, chair and supervisors. My name is Martin Arias, and I serve as the taxpayer advocate for the San Diego County Assessor Recorder County Clerk's Office. I'm here to voice assessor Jordan Marks' strong support for item five, the ADU ordinance amendment. This proposal updates the accessory dwelling unit section of the zoning ordinance through an amendment that aligns our local framework with a new mandatory state laws while introducing an opt in program that allows the separate sale of ADUs. This creates smaller, more attainable homeownership opportunities in San Diego for San Diego County residents.

This is an innovative approach to expanding housing affordability while maintaining property tax clarity and predictability. It reduces confusion for homeowners, provides certainty for assessors and builders, and strengthens compliance benefiting both the taxpayers and the county. At its core, it's a win win, expanding attainable homeownership for residents while supporting efficiency, transparent county operations. Thank you.

Thank you. And now we will hear from those that have requested to speak by phone. When it's your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted, you'll hear a recording that will tell you to begin your comments, and we will go ahead and begin with our first caller.

My name is Sharon Haven. I've spent forty years in land development in East County, and I'm currently involved in ADU development. You know all the reasons why it would be a good idea and some of the drawbacks. I can support the Planning Commission recommendation. I particularly support option three as probably the least problematic overall in terms of having people that close to you that own a house and they're a junior ADU makes it difficult.

So I support option three totally, and I strongly oppose option four as discriminating against people who have built their ADUs for the same reasons and who have followed what is expected of them by county regulation. Please don't create separate categories of ADUs. Please support this.

Thank you. We'll go to our next speaker. Our next speaker is Paul. Your phone might be muted. Okay. We'll come back to you, Paul.

Yes. Good morning, board of supervisors. My name is Leslie Perricone, and I am a third generation San Diegan. I am strongly in in favor of item number five, option number three, because I believe people who are property owners should have the right and opportunity to sell any detached ADU that is legally on their property and has been built according to an in compliance of all building codes. The housing crisis in our city are currently absolutely prohibited for young people, especially ones starting out their careers in San Diego and for older retired residents.

I also want to comment on an opposition of option four because, we currently have a detached legal permitted to code ADU on our property. It was built in order to help my mother who was in need and couldn't afford a rental property in San Diego. I don't feel that anyone with an existing ADU

Thank you. Your time is up. We'll go to our next caller.

My name is Celeste Goyer. On behalf of the nonprofit to see the coalition, I urge you to vote yes on agenda item five using option one, the language from state law to provide the most flexibility for residents. We don't recommend option two, which duplicates existing provisions of the San Diego County subdivisional unit section 81.105 that already require noticing of existing tenants and a ninety day exclusive right to contract. We don't recommend option three, which would ban conversion of attached ADUs. Condo conversions for attached departments have well established pathways for delineating ownership boundaries.

This option would unfairly eliminate lower cost attached ADU conversions. We don't recommend option four, which would exclude those with existing ADUs, causing lower resource homeowners who can't afford to build a new ADU to be locked out from important aging in place strategies. And the data in attachment f on no reduction in rental housing supply has been noted. Opting into AB ten thirty three with option one will help bring back attainable starter homes in San Diego County. Thank you for considering it.

Thank you. We'll go to our next speaker.

I got a question. Why would last subject I wasn't able to talk? I signed up for every item. Do you just pick and choose, or did I have to reregister every time because you wanna kick me out? Besides the point so we're okay with fraud. Right? I mean, seriously. I mean, we're not working for the people anymore. We have ungodly amount of houses. You're gonna keep on sinking more money into these projects that only benefit contractors.

I don't know why because you wanna turn San Diego into a super city that is surrounded by military, which is very stupid and right next to the border. But I guess you guys are ready for any problems that may take up with, you know, escalating all over the place. Right? You guys are all ready for that. Right? Or that's not your problem? I mean, I thought you guys were there to supervise us, but you don't really care about our safety, apparently.

Thank you. Your time is up, and we will go back to Paul to see if he is on the line.

Thank you, Carla Bold. I hope you can hear me now.

We can hear you, Paul.

Hello? Great. This upward sale of an ADU would be nothing to theft of Banner's property, which he or she paid for inherited, especially if the ADU buyer was made to tenant in in common. Moreover, the original owner would lose the nation's control of who occupied the ADU, which was so so a thief, madman, pedophile, rapist, or murderer could move in without the owner being able to control a situation. In a sense, they are just gonna lead to disaster and litigation for years.

One of the planning groups mentioned that the original property might be reassessed at current market rates upon the construction or sale of the ADU, but the owner could end up paying mega bucks. The new ordinance has too many

Thank you. And your time is up. And, chair Lawson Riemer, that concludes public comment on this item.

Okay. I'm calling now on supervisor sorry. Vice chair Montgomery Steff.

Thank you very much.

I have a couple questions. I'm going back and forth about option number two. Right? So I don't agree with option three, option four. I I think we should certainly move forward with option one.

I know that in the ordinance, sort of the options match up with the alternatives that are included in the in the draft ordinance that we have before us. But what I'm trying to I'm trying to think through all the positive and negative impacts of a right of first refusal. Right? So I know there's an additional sixty day period where the the renter has the opportunity to make an offer regardless of if the seller has current offers on the table or or not. Right?

So that's right of first refusal. My I I don't know if we can find other language that maybe does not add a lot of additional layers on the process, but my main concern is that investors will buy ADUs and then continue to rent them out.

Yeah.

And that I'm trying to avoid that. And so we we heard from a lot of folks. I know the CITA coalition in particular has done done a lot of work on this up and down the state, but the primary purpose is for really folks to enter into the market and people who otherwise would not be able to, not for investors to buy up a bunch of ADUs and continue to rent them out. So it is it the I wanna the language, I think, for the right of first refusal is on page 12, I think, of the ordinance. Understand some of the concerns about further restrictions, but is there what about the primary residence or owner occupancy type of language?

Would that be would that be appropriate? I'm really trying to find a way because I I don't I can't support anything that doesn't kind of at least provide a process or a backstop to allow first time home buyers to have the opportunity.

So I think that's a question for county staff, and I just totally agree with my colleague. I think that's one of my primary concerns as well. So that's my big focus is here as well is how do we kind of target this program for for folks that are renters, are already occupying the space, first and first time home buyers as well. Thank you.

Through the chair, vice chair, previously, the state did require when someone would construct an ADU for the primary resident to remain in either the primary home or the ADU. I share that just for context. Recognize that's not the specific question. The state changed that law years ago, shifting away from it. In terms of a requirement to require a person purchasing the ADU, which would become a condo, to be the resident, I am not familiar with any state law that would prohibit it, but I would look to my friends and county council to ask if we have any insights on that now or if we would need to research it to determine if we have the legal ability to make that a requirement in the ordinance.

Yeah. Thank you. To the chair, we would need to research that question. So at this moment, I don't have an answer to whether this board could restrict the sale of the ADUs to certain population of, individuals, whether that's

I I don't know. Oh, yeah.

I'm I'm I'm pretty sure that's not legal. Yeah. But I I just want to make sure that we're providing opportunity based on the spirit of the law, which is that first time folks that want to enter the market can afford to based on the cost structure.

If the if the question is more along the lines of can we develop county programs to facilitate these folks purchasing these ADU units that there are no legal issues with that program.

Vice chair, through the chair, I think there's a combination of of potential possibilities that we could look at here. One could be a combination of the right of first refusal component. I know there's some additional existing laws around that. We could also look at first time home buyer programs that are managed through our housing and community development services, pair those up so that folks who might be interested but do not have the experience or perhaps capital to necessarily do this at least have the bolstering of that support program. So we could look at working with them as well so that at least we have an infrastructure in place to make it more likely for those individuals. I don't know that we could definitively say that that would not happen as I as I don't think you're saying, but we could provide some opportunities to streamline that possibility.

Go ahead. Go ahead.

Quick little weigh in. I remember we're having similar conversation when I was mayor of San Marcos, and I think I'm not sure how it went. Bobby, you might have been there at that time. But the think we made some units or or housing that they had to be owner occupied for the first year or whatever the time period was. So there so at least there's deterrence, but you there's no guarantee, but that was something. So if that's something we could look into, that might be a fix. And I don't know what the time if if you can do it for a year or two year whatever whatever the options are. But I do remember that conversation. We say they'd have to be owner occupied for x amount of time.

San Marcos has some good housing policy.

And we did affordable housing before it was cool. We had 10% of our housing was affordable. Yeah.

I do think and I I think not that we want to be like the city of San Diego and all things, but they they I think they have some similar language, so I would like to to look at that. I'd certainly wanna move forward as quickly as we can on this, but I do think that's an important part of the conversation. And so it it it it would that require us because it it requires a a little bit of additional legal analysis, Would it require this to come back as a part of the the motion with that direction, owner occupancy, principal residence language? We could

probably do I'm just thinking procedurally. We could probably do option move forward with option two today and come back to the board with additional, potential parameters in the similar vein that you'll you'll provide us as additional options. So I mean, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that that would at least allow us to move forward already and then come back and, you know, I don't know how long you guys would need, sixty days or ninety days or whatever you would need to say, hey, in addition, here are some maybe it's the one year owner occupancy or additional parameters we could put on.

Yeah. I I see no obstacles to that plan. If staff begins working on, the draft the ordinance, then we can simply provide our legal advice directly to staff, and that will be included in whatever this this board receives back. Oh, that's great.

Okay. So you could just move move it back and come back with an ordinance of along the lines of option two and including potential other similar legally compliant possibilities for us to promote first time homebuyers and owner occupancy. I am

good with that. I'm good with, having an ordinance come back to us with that with that language that is a little bit more expansive already because I know the language we have does include the the alternative option too. But I want to make sure that that's the right thing to do. And then now since we have the owner occupancy principal residence conversation And then I promise I won't I promise I'll vote on that, but I I do think it's very, very important. And then for the first time home home buyer programs, we have an awesome one at the county.

We work with the housing commission. It just needs more funding. Like, people the realtors, the loan officers, they all know. They all are very engaged in those programs. We just you know, we run out of money very quickly.

And so if we wanted to talk about having one specifically for ADUs, it might, you know, it might the pot might last a little bit longer because the cost of ADUs will probably be less than the median cost right now of a million dollars for a single family home. But we do have programs already that that provide that infrastructure. They just need additional capital. And I know, supervisor, you had a comment question.

Yeah. I really don't like option two. Can we move it forward and then come back with research on on owner occupied first? Because I the right of first refusal, think I that's just it could get messy and and delay and and and draw out sales that I I just to me, I'd rather make it cleaner. And and I I'm I'm fine with maybe coming back and with options for owner occupancy. But I'm I'm not gonna vote against it for the right of first refusal. I'd I'd rather have it out, and then maybe it comes back with that or other options.

My understanding is no matter what, it's gonna have to come back in ordinance. So maybe we can just direct staff to move forward with an ordinance to adopt a b one zero three with a number of options that would promote owner occupancy and first time home buyers, and one of the options could be right of first refusal, one of the options could be the one year requirement for first time home ownership, and other options that might arise in the course of research or feedback from board members so that we're not delayed on moving forward this ordinance, but the ordinance comes back with, like, at least two we've identified and potentially additional options along these lines as kind of created through feedback from the board and staff research.

Ryan, did you get that whole motion?

I can say it again.

I'm fine with those options, and moving option one today, and then come back with other ones that promote homeownership and and maybe even the right of first refusal at that point. Thank you.

Okay. And I will go ahead and and second that motion as it is understood right now. Agree. And I tend to on the side of the owner occupancy, but I wanna have that conversation legally and and I also wanna still look at the for the right of first refusal.

Inga, did that make did you catch that?

Yes. I was thinking it might be helpful to this board and to me to to understand what the motion on the floor is.

Yeah.

Okay. And will you say it again?

That would be wonderful.

To move forward today with drafting an ordinance to implement to implement a b one zero three, including options in that ordinance draft to promote first time home buyers and home ownership, including but not limited to the right of first refusal and, one and an owner occupancy required for the first year or longer, and any additional legally compliant options, that county council identifies through conversations with board offices.

That works for county council. Thank you.

Is that okay? Sorry. I got really excited to make a motion.

So not the muddy things, and and the motion's fine. But on the new ADUs, there's gonna be nobody in there, so there is no

That's right.

First review. So it's really only the current ADUs that are have something in. Okay.

Alright. I think that's why I thought your addition or your thoughts about the one year owner occupancy recurrence very interesting because it sort of gives us more tools in the toolbox for different kinds of circumstances. Yeah. Thank you. And yeah, very smartly, we're I've been asked about a timeline. What timeline would be workable?

I think the time line on the floor was sixty days. One hun one twenty might be better for PDS. I don't wanna over overpromise on their behalf.

We would appreciate that, chair and board members so that we can do additional outreach. We've also talked about the level of effort that staff is extending right now on various housing items so we can return with, our other zoning ordinance updates towards the end of the year, or if we could have one hundred and twenty days that allows us to vet this properly and fold this into our work plan.

I'm gonna defer to supervisor Desmond and vice chair Montgomery Stepp on a timeline. That's what

As soon as you can.

Yeah. I I think I think I am okay with giving the one hundred and twenty days, but I would like a a bit more urgency just around this. I think there is an ordinance before us. Right? And so we're just we're asking for that direction that I won't repeat. But I would like to see something because I would like to get this moving forward. I think it would be it's good for for the county, and I would like to see it move forward, but one hundred and twenty days.

I I mean, we so maybe we could say June by some before the June?

That's one hundred and twenty days.

I've Okay.

Great. That's the motion on the floor. Any additional comments? Supervisor Anderson.

Thank you, madam chair. If, as I understand it, AB ten thirty three explicitly states that HOAs must approve the sale of the ADU, that, as I understand it, the jurisdiction must include this in the ordinance. If we move forward, I think we have to do that. I just want to make sure we address it. The second thing is the bill also states that the individual processing an application for the sale of an ADU through the condo conversion process must provide written authorization from HOA, which is not a big whoop dee doo.

However, I don't know what the condo conversion process requires, and we may want to look at what the county does on that so that we're not just stamping something that's not effective. You know, when I think in terms of people wanting to do this, the first thing that came to mind since I started on a water board was the utilities. Most of these ADUs are tied to the same water meter, to the same electric meter. Not that that can't be overcome because we have duplexes that share water and electricity. But I think that we need to state in our ordinance what are some of the solutions to this or at least address it in some way.

Otherwise we're approving something and no one's going to march off to do it and then we'll be right back here again delayed as we have to address these things. Perhaps staff can speak to it. Maybe my concerns are unwarranted. But I was thinking if you were an LHOA, you could rent it, but if you want to sell it, they have to approve it. And then when they approve it, you're going to have to have some sort of mini HOA or condo rule of how you address all these things in whether there's common area between the two homes, not that they're individual.

So I I just wanna make sure we're looking at this in a very conclusive manner, inclusive manner where we're taking on all these all these issues.

Would you like Seth to respond, or is it just your comment?

No. No. I'm happy for them to respond. We've talked about this briefly prior. I had these concerns before, but I just wanted to make sure that it's addressed as we move forward with those options because no one's talked about it up to now.

Go ahead. Supervisor Anderson, we can, during this time that we are evaluating these other components the board has directed us to, we can take a closer look at exactly what would be in the ordinance and then how we would implement that to ensure we're not missing these items. Anything else to add from the staff?

Through the chair's supervisor, currently, the assembly bill does require the utility providers to approve whether they want separate meters installed or they would allow the existing setup. So we will include that in the additional research for the update in the future.

For many utilities that meter as we do all these things, what looked like very affordable housing becomes very unaffordable as we add meters and as we add these things. So I I agree with my colleague in making more attainable housing. I just want to make sure that we're being thoughtful in our approach. Thank you.

Chairpartame Aguirre.

Thank you, and thanks for addressing the question about timeline. That was my question, how fast we can bring it back. But I'm supportive of the motion on the floor. I think that having a set of options is important, know, especially as it comes to right of first refusal. Thank you, supervisor Desmond, for that example you offered. I think that's an interesting one and something I'm willing to consider when this comes back to us. So supportive. Thank you.

Great. Thank you so much. We have a motion on the floor in a second. Wait. Let me pause. Supervisor Desmond, you're currently listed as the maker of the motion. Do you wanna be the maker of the motion as I articulated, or do you wanna swap it out and have me be the maker of the motion? We will make it supervisor Desmond's motion. Onward we go. Thank you.

And chair Lawson Riemer, that motion passes unanimously with all supervisors who are present and voting aye.

Okay. Thank you so much. Okay. We move on to item six. Special election to levy special tax in Permanent Road Division Number 1000, Zone Number 9 B Harris Annex in Rancho Santa Fe, and related CEQA exemption.

Do we have a a presentation? It's okay if we don't.

Chair, we do not have a presentation, but we're more than happy to answer any questions for the board today.

Great. We'll just begin with public comment then.

Thank you, chair Lawson Riemer. We have six total requests to speak to individuals in person. Four requesting to speak by phone. Also, I'd like to note for the record, we received five e comments on this item. Four were in favor, and one was neutral. For any individual that requested to speak on this item by phone, please dial into the conference line now using the instructions that were provided to you. We'll go ahead and begin with the in person speakers. I'd like to invite forward allegedly Audra, Cesar Javier, and Jennifer Royston. You have two minutes to address the board. Please begin, by stating your name for the audio record.

So I'm wondering why these roads have deteriorated so badly that, you know, why are why haven't they been maintained with the money that's been in this fund already, and then the funds are going to run out, but for what reason? What's where's that money been going is is the question. So I mean if they're not being maintained now, why would adding more taxes on the people's property benefit them? Are you just deciding now that it's

like well if we get

the money, if we get more because these funds will not last us, right? They will eventually run out. Where are they, who what's it going to be spent on? I mean, again the roads aren't being maintained. So the idea is to come back to the people, right, and levy a tax because then if they don't pay that then you can take their home too. How cool is that? That's why the tax assessor was so stoked about that last item, right? Yeah, let's definitely get involved with that. So yeah, and then just voting. It's like I mean the registrar of voters are gonna take care of this, and we already know that our elections are messed up and fraudulent as Justin's been trying to tell you guys for years and was fired for.

Right? But let's trust that process because as long as we have what is it two thirds vote yes, well then it passes right? And you guys get more money. Oh but it's definitely not going to be rigged right because the people are going to say yes we want to pay more money for maintaining the roads that we've already paid for that you don't maintain now. Good. It's so interesting to see the way the government works. You guys care so much about money and you'll do anything for it. Traffic chill, whatever. Right? It's good. That's why you guys are self imploding and it's good because you just hand us what we need to watch it happen.

Good job.

My name is Jennifer Royston. My husband's a heavy equipment operator and we see a lot of nonsense on those roads that aren't really getting fixed, it's like what are they really doing over there? Are you guys trying to hole cover the holes that you traffic the drugs and the people through from Mexico to San Diego? I mean, what are you guys really doing? Because it's not roadwork.

But you see these weird construction sites in very suspicious places. So, Kash Patel, Pam Bondi, bombs, bombs, terrorism, terrorists, assassinations, and our great President Trump. We definitely need you here in San Diego because the trafficking that they're doing, running children through these tunnels, calling it roadwork is unacceptable. You know what's happening in our government. You know the people that are participating with their pockets full asking taxpayers for more money to fix the roads when they don't even fix the roads.

So, we want justice. No peace. No justice, no peace. And, we're waiting for those bombs to start happening in our officials' offices so they start realizing you are not above the law. You are a human and you will serve the people that that's why you get paid. You're here to serve the people, not your greedy selves. I mean you're still going to die. You're still gonna look old. You're still gonna go through all the things that is necessary for you to transfer to the other place, and you're not gonna make it because you're gonna be put to hell.

Thank you. We will now hear from those that requested to speak by phone. Again, when it's your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted, and you'll hear a recording that will tell you to begin your comments, and we will go ahead and begin with our first caller.

Polar Bill, I don't believe that taxes on just the part of the community are good, But the board letter says that the attendees at the community outreach event were generally supportive of the idea of special tax cuts for this community. It is really disturbing, however, that there is no indication of how many comments or what they were. There are no pictures or even descriptions of how bad the world damage is. So, I mean, what's the point of having public discourse if you're going to burial as critical information. I mean, you know, it should there should be some kind of protocol to attach relevant information to every agenda item.

I mean, you know, that said, I'm willing to support an election since it only costs $2,500. However, that's a hell of a lot better than the last supervisor elections, the special elections, which cost multimillion dollar affairs. And, you know, I mean, the cost you imposed on the people are getting ridiculous. And, you know, I don't know how long the people will actually put up with it. I mean, I think the whole thing is kind of ridiculous.

I think, you know, it should be part of the whole commune

Thank you. Your time is up. We'll go to our next speaker.

Well, at least it's clear and on on record the fact that you guys refused to acknowledge the registration fraud when it comes around. On top of that, as I said multiple times, if you go ahead and adopt Julian Brown's technology into our landfill, start recycling the plastic, and the low grade carbon, could go ahead and turn it to graphene. Did you know if you put that into the concrete, you probably need a lot less repairs? You know, it could actually help us with our infrastructure and, you know, create a bunch of money. But, you know, the people cheating for our elections do not want that.

They wanna give that to the private sector. They wanna erase Julian Brown out of the history books so they could get rich. And Monica apparently loves that fucking idea. She doesn't even wanna acknowledge a 17 year old African American kid with a high school project to able to recycle plastic and turn it into fuel. Oh, hell no. We're not gonna go ahead and allow that to happen. We'll go ahead and give that technology to two universities and then fund them to go ahead and create that. How much would it cost to go ahead and start recycling our plastic and recovering some of the money? It wouldn't take that long. We could have done that years ago.

But, unfortunately, we didn't elect these assholes that are sitting above us right now pretending that they control shit. I am so fucking tired of it. I'm looking forward to you throwing me in prison because I called you a fucking cunt. Why? Because you wanna go ahead and show how much fucking power you have. Damian's a piece of shit. He takes a pay cut to in order to go against me. What? He thinks he has a shot if it was a fair judge? But, no, governor Newsom appointed a judge to go after me. Right? That was one of the first fucking cases, but we wanna ignore all that fucking crap. It's

Your time is up. Chair Lawson Rumour, that concludes public comment on this item.

Okay. Thank you so much. Do any of my colleagues have any questions on item six? Any comments on item six? Thank you. I'll second. We have a motion on the floor and a second. Any, any further comments? Okay. Go ahead and vote.

And chair Lawson, rumor, that motion passes unanimously with all supervisors being present voting aye.

Okay. Thanks so much. Now we, return to non agenda public comment.

Thank you, chair Lawson Reamer. We have back here. We still have 10 requests to speak. We have five requests to speak, all coming via phone. So for any individual that requested to speak on this item by phone, if you could please call into the conference line now with the instructions that were given to you, and we'll give you a moment to do so.

Alright. We'll now hear from those that have requested to speak by phone. Again, when it's your turn to speak, you'll be unmuted, and you'll hear a recording that will tell you to begin your comments, and we will go ahead and begin with our first caller.

Hi. My name is Zora Fahim, president and founder of Los Angeles Alliance for Animals. Supervisor Tara Larson Reamer continues to allow one of the most egregious and heinous horse guilty cases this county has ever seen to occur in her district. Because of the continued lack of action from supervisor Tara Larson Reamer, another horse named Penny has been left severely neglected. Penny was skin and bones.

This should outrage every person in San Diego County. But this is not an isolated case. For years, the situation on our on Villa Chardonnay where there is 500 plus animals in the district of supervisor Joe Anderson has also been allowed to continue despite ongoing serious concerns about animal welfare. These cases demonstrate a broader lack and pattern across the county, lack of enforcement, lack of accountability, and lack of prosecution when it comes to animal cruelty. Animal cruelty is not a minor issue.

It is a serious public safety issue. This is exactly why the FBI now tracks animal cruelty cases nationwide. Since 2016, animal cruelty has been recorded as its own offense in the FBI's national crime database because research has shown it is often linked to other serious crimes and violence in our communities. Animal cruelty was given its own crime categories so law enforcement could collect detailed national data on these crimes. When government officials ignore these cases, they are not just failing animals. They are failing the safety and values of the communities they represent, which this county has proven to fail miserably. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. We'll go to our next speaker.

My name is Nancy Knott, and I am in your district, Tara Larsen Riemer. I'm calling regarding the Carlsbad animal shelter as well as the the Bonita. Countless calls and emails have gone into have gone to every supervisor with no responses. I'm not only speaking for myself, but hundreds of citizens of Carlsbad who have had the same result in trying to contact you. We have tried for one year to be able to bring volunteers on at the Carlsbad shelter.

We are told consistently, no. We don't have a position of somebody hired to do that. This has been almost a year. The dog day out, same thing. There is tremendous non accountability at the Carlsbad shelter and which is the one I'm speaking about today. We are now in the city of Carlsbad becoming aware. So, again, I'm not speaking for myself only. I'm speaking for hundreds of people who have called themselves trying to volunteer. I am wondering who is accountable and who is going to hire this mysterious person that is going to allow volunteers into that shelter. Because right now, for the last year, it is running on on its own.

So we are ready to volunteer. We certainly have the volunteers standing in line about a 100 deep at this point, receiving no ability to get in there and volunteer for the dogs and also having no ability for any accountability from the board of supervisors. You have received countless emails, countless letters. You do not respond. So my question is, if this is too much for you, could you please delegate this to another organization in San Diego County? Because the only people that are suffering here are not people. They are the animals. And I can't think of a cruel thing than to be too busy to allow volunteers.

Thank you. Your time is up. We'll go to our next caller.

Good morning, supervisors. My name is Becky Raff, and today I'd like to address a webinar I attended on February 25 hosted by supervisor Lawson Reamer, a Consumer Fairness and Public Protection webinar. While the topic is important, the way the webinar was conducted raises serious concerns, especially in light of yesterday's discussion on transparency and subcommittees and ad hoc committees. The panel featured attorneys who specializes in consumer fairness. Topics included environmental pollution, bad bad faith health insurance, predatory lending, and intended fraud.

According to miss Reamer, our district attorney's office is overburdened, and she emphasized that hiring a team of attorneys could help alleviate this workload. I'm grateful that the county wants to protect consumers. One of the examples cited was the tobacco lawsuit. Products that were advertised and marketed as safe, but later proved harmful, leading to corporate accountability and restitution for consumers who were harmed. What concerned me was the way in which the webinar was conducted.

Attendees could not see the chat. There was no way to know what questions were coming from the public, who was on the call, or even how many participants were present. No participant list was provided, and the lack of transparency makes it difficult to know whether the discussion represented the views of the county as a whole or if the questions were scripted. As the board continues discussions about transparency, I urge you to ensure that public webinars and forums are structured for open dialogue and clear access. Thank you.

Thank you. We'll go to our next speaker.

Good morning, board of supervisors. Anne Rudall here. I thank you for this opportunity. I was in the queue for the housing authority item today and item 17 yesterday regarding the county's medical service. Both items I have a lot of upfront personal experience with as does my extended family. So I'm sorry. I my phone wasn't ever opened so that I could speak. So I'm grateful I made it on. This time, I wanted to share some good news from the public health community. California has enacted the first law, that's the first in the nation, a b four five five.

It requires sellers of single family homes to leave information in writing, it's a form, regarding their property, whether there's been inside smoking or vaping, that's tobacco or marijuana, or thirdhand smoke contamination. Thirdhand smoke contamination refers to the toxic residues left behind when tobacco or marijuana smoker vapor sells into surfaces, dust, and building materials. These pollutants are often indicated in prop 65 as carcinogens sorry, carcinogens and reproductive toxins, and they're very difficult to remove and they they pose particular risk to children, the elderly, and immunocompromised individuals. This is important work recognizing the role of products that are smoked and vaped, be they having the result of secondhand or thirdhand smoke. So I wonder why the county at this point, if they care about public health, would ever move forward with increasing the number of business that smell pot that sell products that are smoke and vape, like marijuana, which is primarily the products that are sold at marijuana storefronts.

This seems unwise and contradictory. We either care for public health, and we recognize how secondhand smoke and thirdhand smoke and vapor affects us or we don't. Let's take a new

Thank you. Your time is up. And, chair Lawson, that concludes the request for non agenda public communication this morning.

Okay. Thank you so much, and thank you to all of our participants and callers. Our meeting is now adjourned.

Thank you. And the next regular meeting of the board will take place on March 24 at 9AM.