Good morning everyone. We're ready to go here. So we'll ask everyone just to get situated. Okay. Good morning everyone. We're ready to go. So we're going to open our meeting and the welcome meeting of the Board of Supervisors meeting for Tuesday, August 20th, 2024. We have a couple quick announcements to make. Supervisor Pashant is absent for today's meeting due to personal reasons. There are hearing devices available on the left side of the dius. These board chambers are T-Core compatible for hearing devices. And finally, speaker slips are available at the back of the chambers. You can see the yellow slips in the wooden holder back there and also at the side of the dius here. So that concludes all my announcements and I'll ask you to join me in the salute to the flag please. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God, individual with liberty and justice for all. Okay. So that brings us to our consent agenda this morning. And the consent agenda this week is items number one through 30. So if you wish to speak or make a public comment on any of the items one through 30 on the agenda. Grab a speaker's web. Otherwise, we'll go ahead now and open. Public comment on the consent agenda. And I have a few requests to speak. We'll start with McTrews, followed by Greg Graywell. Good morning. McTrews, Director for the County Health Agency. Requesting the plural item number 12. We're currently in negotiations with a vendor and think we'll have an announcement within the next couple of days. So we'd like to bring that back to the board with full information. Great. Thank you so much. Greg, Greg, and Greg Obygary Kirkland. I got you. You can just put it in the box. Yeah. Thank you, Board. My name is Greg Graywell. I was speaking to the state water sales. And I agree that the excess water that we have, as long as we have enough in reserve, we shouldn't take an opportunity where we can get back some revenue that we should take this opportunity on a regular basis, not just this time, to put the water to benefit your use and not to have a chance of losing it. We have an opportunity here, and I think it's a good opportunity. The things I want to make sure of, which I've talked to between RAC and through Mr. West Thompson is I want to make sure that the money is put in the proper account like it wasn't last time. So for 10 years we had the state water sales money, $6.8 million. It was put in a wrong account and used for 10 years, and then the grand jury made it be moved back. So they moved back $6.5 million, put it in the proper account. And but we lost the interest on that money. And that money belongs to the tax payers who pay property taxes in this county. You get no benefit from the state water. So the grand jury wrote that the county should ensure that all funds that are derived from passing future sales or exchanges of the county state water, accounting with the state water project, allotment, be credited to the state water contract tax fund and reduce the financial tax burden placed on property tax owners. So we have six and a half with whatever interest it's there right now. This is an almost no other six. It's about time that even with the subcontractors, I know they get the first crack that there's extra water. I have no problem with that. They should get the first crack at it. But maybe they need to buy a bigger buffer. Maybe there shouldn't be so much buffer that's left over. If they have the buffer and they have extra water, let them sell it. But that means somebody's got to pay back for the 60 years we've been paying for this. For 35 years we couldn't get any state water because we were paying to build the system and there was no cost of branch. And so the tax has been levied on the property owners here for a long time to do this, and it's about time that they see some benefit. Thank you. Thank you. Gary Kirkland and I think we might have a few speakers. I'm a lot shorter than him. Very Kirkland test hero. I'm here to talk about consent item number. I think it's 15. I wrote it down down about having a dog at the somewhere in the county buildings somewhere. And my position is I've been bit several times and I get nervous around dogs. I don't think there should be dogs in county buildings for people like me and others who don't want to have dogs if they're nervous or have been bit several times. That's that part of it. The second is we're going to pay a deputy sheriff and has to go through the union to take care of a dog. This is the union run and look and the county agreeing to this sort of thing. If a volunteer wants to bring a dog to the county, the county is okay with it. That should be fine, but we taxpayer should not have to pay for a dog handler at the county at all. That should be up to volunteers. I'm sure there are dog lovers in this county who would love to bring their dog or dogs to the county anytime the county wants one to force a debt to get a deputy sheriff to do this is absurd. Thank you very much. Thank you. And the last request to speak. I have a request, Kathy. I saw you sit down somewhere. Kathy Wells. Oh. Oh, there you are. Right in front of me. The item that you want to speak on would you like to kind of save that until we start into our presentations? Sorry, I've never done this before. No, it's all good. You're welcome to speak right now, but I thought you might want to focus when we're talking about that. So I'm going to set you aside right here and call you up again in a few minutes. Okay, great. That concludes our request to speak, and I don't see anyone coming forward with a speaker ship. We're going to close public comment on items 1 through 30 and ask the board members if they have comments questions Or want to pull anything for separate folks supervisor Pauline. Thank you, Chair. Good morning everybody. I just have comments on item 21-25 and 27 Okay, supervisor T. Flake Good morning everyone Before I make any comments, I just want to give a Supervisor Keith Lane. Good morning, everyone. Before I make any comments, I just want to give a big shout out. And thank you to our first responders. I lived in the neighborhood with on fire at 3 o'clock this morning. I four o'clock this morning. I don't know what time was. I could see a big raging fire on the hill. And boy, they just did a fantastic job. I could see everybody mobilizing quickly. It was really near our campus and I just want to say thank you. I know everybody in the neighborhood was out this morning and we're so impressed with that response. So I want to note that. I just have comments on 1821 and 27 please. Supervisor Goodson. How good. How cool that. So we're going to start with 18th, the leisure tea slide. Thank you. Yeah. I just want to recognize those volunteers of the Civil Service Commission, we have an annual report. There's some really important data in there regarding our workforce. You know, we don't do any of this work up here without everybody out there that's part of the county workforce. And so it's really important that we have a civil service commission that has this thing that it does and provides us with all sorts of support. But they have an annual report there and I just want to note that and so thank you. Yeah and I will jump in on 18 as well and thank you for listening our I volunteer, these are volunteers, community volunteers that some of them have put in many, many years on a commission and they spend a lot of time putting a lot of hours to help the county government kind of operate better. So thanks, thanks to them. Let's see, 21 Supervisor Pauline, you've wanted to make comments on 20. Thank you chair I just wanted to commend public works for the creative thinking on on this particular item I think this is a great step forward in terms of Working to be physically responsible with the limited resources that we have as it relates to state water and On item 25 I wanted to also extend my appreciation to public works for moving the sheriff's substation in the POMO forward. That's a really important project. I'm glad to see that we're going out for the statement of qualifications to hire the design build entity. And then 27 I'll reserve my comments with regard to our new underare and sending my best regards to our current under-share Mr. Vogue under item 28. I'll hold my comments there. Okay, great. Supervisor Keith, thank you to head comments for 20 minutes. Yeah, the sale of excess state water outside the county, which is what has to happen at this point, but it's the first start of really what we're seeing over these last few years a really this state beginning to manage its water and making sure that we when we have access water it can go to places when move water and store water and do different things and so you know again, here's to public works and partners making sure that we're doing that getting revenue back in and you know and then eventually we'll be able to get some of that access to water and put it into those groundwater basins that are in overdrafts. So thumbs up. Okay and then 27. Spellvisor Pauline wanted to speak. Art already has mentioned 27. Yes. And supervisor Keith Wright? Yes. Yeah. We're really happy to be welcoming I already have mentioned 27 and supervisor, Keith, right? Yes, we're really happy to be welcoming Chad as the new under secretary. And the Sheriff's Department. We've already had some interaction with Mr. Nicolphin and we're just really happy to have him as part of the team. So congratulations. Great, and I want to, I see Chad way over there. I just want to congratulate you. It's been a lot of hard work you deserve it. And I think that the county is lucky to have you. So we appreciate you coming in and taking this position. I'm sure if I might add while we're on the topic, you know, before I'm to share a vote, exits the door at the end of the month. I'll add my appreciation for Chad coming forward. Stress, my appreciation for your long connection, particularly with the North Coast. My wife, Sherry, sends her regards and memories of you playing sports in middle school. So you've been around here for a while and you've given great service to the county. Really successful to Mr. Vogue and we'll talk about him in just a bit. Okay great. Now last call for my colleagues if you wanted to vote on anything separately, don't see any of that. So we, I'm reconferent motion, I'm a sensitive agenda please. So moved. Second absent item 12. Absent item 12. Okay, we have two seconds tonight. Hit Jimmy. Okay. So we have a tea's like, pardon. Well, call vote please. Supervisor or tea's like? Yes. Supervisor pardon? Yes. Supervisor Gibson? Yes. And Jefferson, I don't know. Yes. So now we're going to move on to our presentation. So we have some great presentations. I have a patient. Wasn't one pulled? Yes. Oh, but number 12. Got it. Yeah, that motion included point 12. Some presentations we're going to start with, item number 28. A resolution commending under Sheriff James Vogue upon his retirement of 13 years with the County of San Luis Obis. Sheriff coroner's office. So we'd like to call Jim Vogue up to podium. Please add as well as Sheriff Parkinson. Put your spot here Jim. Supervisor Keith Lake has a resolution to read. Yeah, what an honor. It is to read the resolution commending James Jim F. Vogue upon his retirement for 13 years about standing service with the County of San Luis Obispo. Whereas James F. Vogue began his career in law enforcement in 1972 with Los Angeles Police Department as a police officer. And whereas Jim's memorable moment on a job occurred when as a sergeant he met his future wife Ramona who was also an LAPD employee. It was love at first sight. Their metal union producer son Jimmy who has followed the family law enforcement tradition. He is in Orange County Deputy District Attorney assigned to a human trafficking task force and whereas Jim's tenure in LAPD he was promoted through the ranks and retired at the rank of Commander in 2007. His last assignment was the Commanding Officer of the Internal Affairs Group. And whereas Jim was Sheriff Parkinson's first hire in February 2011 as Commander. He immediately established the Sheriff's Office Professional Standards and Training Unit. And whereas in 2018, Jim was appointed by Sheriff Parkinson as the under Sheriff. And whereas Jim is an outstanding representative of the Sheriff's Office to the communities we serve and has received numerous letters of appreciation during his years of service, recognizing him for his community outreach and high level of service. Now therefore, be it resolved and ordered by the Board of Supervisors of the County of San Luis to the Spostate of California, that James Ethore B and here by is commended for his outstanding 52 years of law enforcement service and his dedication as under Sheriff to the Sheriff's Office and to the County Mission. But we also resolve that Jane Jeff Thore will be missed and we wish him the very best of health, happiness, and good fortune in his retirement. Thank you. I'm going to go back to the other side. I'm going to take my three two one. I'm going to take my three two one. I'm going to take my three two one. Push it down. No, no, no, no. Well good morning Ian Parkinson's chef corner. Thank you for honoring Jim If you can't tell by the look on his face he does not want this That is a sign of how humble Jim is and not only is accomplishments, but also the fact that he never wants to be it padded on the back, he just wants to do his job. So I'm just going to tell you a couple of things that are not on the proclamation. So I met Jim in about 2009, 2010. I was running for the very first time for Sheriff. And one of the platforms I was running on was re-instituting Internal Affairs professional standards. Jim happened to catch a statement from me about that and came by at the time I was working at the police department and dropped off a card. We met for lunch and Jim shared with me that he had a little bit of knowledge in this area. So to put it in perspective for just a minute, the internal affairs in Los Angeles police department is over 300 employees. So very large organization to run in itself. So Jim shared some of his knowledge with me and I got to know Jim. And as you stated in the proclamation, Jim was the very first hire I did. The minute I actually won and took office, I gave Jim a background and we got started and hiring him. Jim has really changed something dramatically for us. He's changed the culture that not only polices and trains are owned, but the procedures that we have in place are really all because of Jim. Jim couldn't have been a better commander and charge of internal affairs. And since leaving that position, he has gone on to mentor probably most of my executive staff here in internal affairs, which has been really important to pass on his knowledge. The one thing about Jim, I mentioned his his humility but the fact is is that he's running out of sleep space and that's probably why he's actually retiring because it's going to run into his patch any day uh... the the odd thing for me was when jim started uh... in that position i kind of expected that deputies kind of wanted to stay away from his office the guy that investigates you know uh that investigates errors or purposeful mistakes is not probably going to be the most popular guy in the world. And what I learned I was dead wrong. Not only did he always have an office full and not because of the investigation, but because they wanted to pick his brain, they wanted to meet with him, but Jim became a mentor to many, including myself. Jim taught me what he knew and he brought that professionalism to our organization, and I'll forever be in his debt. Now Jim didn't want to do this. But fortunately, Jenny Brunek, my department administrator who produces these things, did it against his will. Unfortunately, Jenny is the one that controls this because she should be up here as well because she also is retiring and I'm losing her as well. So I just wanted to add a little bit to that. For those who don't understand one of the undershara fees, he is the second in charge of the Sheriff's Office. So when I'm away, the undershara fees in charge, he's got an excellent staff, most of which are here present. And he, I think, has created a great bond, but day-to-day operations are really controlled by the undersharaf. This is Jim, as my third undersharaf, soon to be the fourth behind me, and I'll just mention him since you brought him up in his contract, is that today is Chad's birthday. I wasn't going to say anything. But he asked me to. Once again, thank you for honoring Jim Boge. Fortunately, he is still nearby in Cambria. And I'm trying to get him to volunteer again, maybe after a little bit, but thank you. First of all, I'm sure it's right.ider didn't want to come here, but Jenny, who will get even with her later, set this up, but I am truly honored and humbled by all of you for this situation. First person I want to thank is Ian Parkinson and he's right. He was running for office at the time. I was even looking at it because I'm not a big end of politics but my wife was and she said you got to see these new sheriffs you know candidates and I looked at them and I thought he was the most square-to-way out of all the candidates, but of course I waited for the primary to make sure that he was, and he had the most number of votes. So I did after that, newly was going to be a sure thing and dropped off a business card. And after four free lunches, the, you know, I was his first hire and happy to be there. The thing is, he gave me this opportunity after a full career. I wasn't expecting to do it again, but I think we all as we age, we feel that we still have some worth in other areas and then I thought that this might be a perfect opportunity. I was there for part time. I didn't even know I was part time but because I showed up every day and did my eight until they told me you ran out of money, I didn't understand. But anyway, so I fixed that up. So I do want to thank the sheriff for giving me that opportunity. The second group I want to thank is County Government itself. I didn't realize how much. I know I worked with, certainly, Mr. Gibson, where I was a coast commander, but as soon as I became under sheriff working with you, it's been a great group. I've really enjoyed working with you. You disagree sometimes, but you're never disagreeable. And I think that collaboration between you is really what's good for this county. The next group I want to thank on my colleagues here. Many of them are in this room. This is always a team effort, especially my two professional staff ladies, Vicki and Jenny, because they always have the answers for me, and I always have a lot of questions. So they've helped guide me through this, and my colleagues here, my custody staff, my deputies, you really, I've been doing this a long time over 50 years, and I've never seen a group of better professionals anywhere in law enforcement, and I've seen a lot of law enforcement. So I just want to thank them for being here and always having my back. And last but not least, my wife, behind me, Ramona, she's always the one that pushes me. She still says I'll be a, I would be a sergeant in South LA, pushing a black and white if it wasn't for her. And she's probably right on that. I had a lot of good times being an actual police officer at the time. But as I said, I'm very proud and humbled to be in this position, believing it. And as many of you know Chad Nicholson, the birthday boy, he's been ready to take my job for about 10 years now, so now and what I mean that not in a bad way when when he was a deputy you could tell this is somebody that was going somewhere very sharp brilliant cared about people which is one of the most important things and cared about this county and doing the right thing so I know I'm going to be in good hands so once again I want to thank everyone for this opportunity. Let's see. I don't have any requests to speak from the audience. If anyone else wants to come make a comment, you're welcome. Hi Pat. Supervisor Gibson. Thank you Madam Chair. Let me, let me add my thanks to Jim for his service to this county. But as I, as I was reading the resolution and realizing you've been in this for over 50 years, I realized how much change you'd seen in the business of law enforcement and how many challenging times you've been through. And I'm thinking in Southern California, there were a number of very difficult situations that you experienced. And certainly to the extent that that involved the internal affairs, I can manage the challenge. I will also acknowledge your deep connection with the North Coast as a resident of Cambodia and proud to know that we will see you around in that community and I know your connection there. But I want to just stress my appreciation, especially for your time at Wood Coast Station, which was only 18 months as it turns out. What surprises me, it was a while ago. I know my wife, Sherry, passes along her regards. She was at the time, the District Two Legislative Assistant, and you know, acted with you a lot. And the tone that you brought to our dealings and your ability to connect with our communities was extraordinary. So appreciate all that you've done, all the challenges you faced here in the county as well and wish you the very best in whatever the next phase might bring for you, sir. Take care. Professor Ortiz, right? Thank you. Well,, Shari. Peace. Thank you. Well, I just want to say, Jim, that I like your style. I can imagine right on so many of the folks that work with you enjoy doing that, exactly, because the way that you have approached us and the way that you handle yourself and the way that you exude a certain level of calm and dignity and it's just those qualities that are just really outstanding and I'm really grateful that I want to say thank you to Ramona for continually pushing a year and you know having you think about the second career and go forth and really serve our county in such a magnificent way. So here's two years together in the future. Thank you. Supervisor Pawdick. Thank you, Chair. I've only been here for about a year and nine months, but I want to say, Jim, that every interaction that I've had with every single one of your insurer Parkinson's deputies has been positive. You know, from the custody side to, you know, the patrol deputies, I just have to extend my appreciation for what you and your Parkinson have done to train such a well-qualified workforce. Thank you and I wish you the best of your time. And I want to say thank you too and I see Ram see Ramona by stand up. So thank Ramona for all these years. You and Chef Parkinson have created a situation. The Chef's department is highly regarded. We appreciate you so much. And through all the ups and downs, you've done just a fantastic job. I mean, the Chef's department in this county is so well respected. And I know that that is because of you all there and even bringing in a bringing in a replacement that I'm sure I'll carry on. That just speaks to you know the caring that you have for the county and the dedication to the county. So we certainly thank you. I'm in a hand this back to you and we appreciate everyone being here. If any less call of anyone else wants to, you guys are magnets to the podium here. I love podiums not calling you. We appreciate all of you being here to support this, changing the garden, the send-off for Jam after all of his dedicated years of service to really the whole entire state of California. So thank you so much. You can probably tell we've had a little bit of, we're having issues with the audio. So we're going to have to take just a couple minutes break before the next presentation and work on that for just a second and it'll come back better. So So go with us. Thank you. Yeah, I'm good. Yeah. OK. Again, I apologize for the delay, but we're ready to move on in the agenda to item number 29. And this is a resolution recognizing Brian Atwell upon his retirement. After more than 14 years of service as a program supervisor for the health agency behavior health department. And we're going to ask supervisor Gibson to read this resolution. Thank you, Madam Chair. And if Mr. Atwell would come to one of the lecterns? Yep. And Nick, you want to join us? Mr. Degrees, standing by. It's my pleasure to read Resolution Recognizing Brian Atwell would, upon his retirement, for 14 years about standing public service to the County of San Luis Obispo. Whereas Brian Atwell has been employed by the County of San Luis Obispo. Whereas, Brian Atwell has been employed by the County of San Luis Obispo Behavioral Health Department since August 2010, and is now retiring from his role as program supervisor in charge of 24-7 crisis services at the psychiatric health facility henceforth to be known as the Puff. Whereas, Brian Atwell, starting as a janitor in a locked psychiatric unit in Los Angeles, went on to hold clinical positions as a psychiatric technician trainee at Metropolitan State Hospital as a psychiatric technician at a Tascadero State Hospital and as a medication nurse at Aegis Medical Systems in a Tascadero. Brian ultimately came to serve the county as program supervisor at the Puff. And whereas Brian Atwell completed his drug and alcohol certification, as well as his psychiatric technician license at Cypress College, and he will be remembered as a mentor to his staff promoting their advancements academically and in their careers. And whereas Brian came to distinguish himself by building working relationships with all local emergency rooms and law enforcement agencies, facilitating regularly scheduled solution-based meetings that established a new forum for communication and collaboration. And whereas Brian changed the culture of the inpatient unit by reducing the use of seclusion and restraint at the puff and never being afraid to get his hands dirty working side by side amongst his staff. And whereas Brian served and will continue to serve as an approved trainer for the San Los Spisbo County Sheriff's Department Crisis Intervention Training Team. intervention training team. And whereas Brian is as a licensed pilot out of Sierra Baker Papa, San Luis Obispo County's McChesney field will be fondly remembered for offering a free scenic flight as retirement gift to leaving employees. And whereas Brian Atwell serves a legacy, leaves a legacy within the community. He joined a taskadero, Kiwanis in 2001, and partnered in creating a taskadero, Kiwanis action club in 2009. He continues to serve as current district administrator for all Kiwanis action clubs in California, Nevada, and Hawaii, assisting adults with developmental disabilities gain their own autonomy as service providers in their communities. And whereas Brian Atwell will not be leaving his work in mental health services, but rather be volunteering his time as the new president of the National Alliance on Mental Illness, San Luis Obispo. In this role, we, he will continue to fight for those afflicted with mental illness, as well as the family supporting them. So now therefore, be it resolved in order that the Board of Supervisors for the County of San Luis Obispo State of California, hereby commends behavioral health program supervisor Brian Atwell for his 14 years of dedication to the county, clients, staff, and the community of the county of San Los Abispo, and be it also resolved that Brian Atwell has wished the best of health, happiness, and fulfillment in his retirement. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We're going to have a photo. Yeah. Do you have anything to join? Yeah. One more. Three, two. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I don't know. Hello. Nick Drews. I'm the director for the county health agency. I just want to say what an honor it is to be the one who gets to say thank you to Brian at well today. And I'd like to say it not just on behalf of our county with a big seed but on behalf of our community. It's not an exaggeration to tell you that there are people alive today because of Brian Atwell. It's not an exaggeration to tell you today that there are people in our community that were at one time going through the lowest of lows and made it back to becoming productive, healthy members of society because of Brian Atwell. So his presence is extraordinary and will be forever missed here at the county. For those of you who don't know, the puff, our psychiatric health facility, Brian was the lead supervisor there for many years over a decade. It's a 16 bedlocked facility and it's for those who are experiencing severe psychiatric crisis. Crisis aren't limited to 24-7. Brian would be on the phone three o'clock in the morning. He'd be on the phone on Christmas, on the weekends, on his birthday, on his loved ones birthdays. Brian was always available for those who needed him. I think one of the first memories I have of Brian was a tour of the puff that I did many years ago. And I was walking through it and there was a young woman, I would say she's probably 18 or 19 years old and she stood out to me particularly because she reminded me a lot of what my daughter will look like when she's 19 years old and she's stood out to me particularly because she reminded me a lot of what my daughter will look like when she's 19 years old. And she was sitting on the ground in a courtyard at the back just rocking back and forth really quietly. You could tell that she was just having the worst day of her life. And Brian was sitting there silently right next to her. And it was his presence that you could tell was making a huge difference, just being there for her. And I think those moments stole me two different things. One about what we're dealing within our community and the value that our puff and a crisis unit like that provides to the community. The second is the type of man we're dealing with. We're talking about right now. There is no man with more integrity that I have ever met who is a better human being than Brian at will. And his colleagues will tell you the same thing. There are a few stories that we had during the retirement party that I don't think are polite enough to be told in the Board of Supervisors. But they involved Brian putting on gloves, taking a mop and cleaning up, because he wouldn't ask anybody to do something that he wouldn't do himself. So he led. He was a mentor. He was a collaborator. If you talk with our hospitals, they'll say nothing but positive things about him. The Sheriff's Department, the probation department, our public health department, he facilitated all of these. The one solace that I have, Brian, is that you're not leaving us, that you're not leaving the county. He's going to become the president for NAMI. NAMI is a wonderful organization. It's basically there to support and improve awareness around mental illness. He'll be doing it voluntarily, which is even more impressive and says something about him. But one of the things that I think goes unsaid a lot in this community is the impact that mental illness has on family members of those who are mentally ill as well. And to know that there is now a person like Brian, that's gonna be at the lead of that, taking those issues on, gives me a lot of solace. And so I'm really happy to still have you and work with you. I know there's even a call tomorrow morning I'm really happy to still have you and work with you. I know there's even a call tomorrow morning that I think you'll probably be on around noon with NAMI. So it's not over and I look forward to many more days with you. Thank you. Before you take the podium, we have another request to speak. Kathy Wells. Before you take the podium, we have another request to speak. And Kathy? Kathy Wells? And Kathy, you can use the other podium too, if you like. And speak to Brian. OK, so I had this eloquent speech prepared, and I left it at home. And I'm really nervous. So I'm going to do the best I can here. My name's Kathy Wells. I worked on the puff with Brian for 13 years. When I first started on the puff, Brian wasn't a supervisor yet. And when I met him, the first thing I noticed is he would sit with the patients. You know, I was new to this. I'm a retired airline employee, so I knew nothing about it. I started at the puff as a temporary on call, and I thought I would just be there a short time and move on and not the case. But anyway, the first thing I noticed about Brian was he would come to work and actually sit with the patients, which was great. So he really cared, and I could tell. Brian taught me so much just to stay for, I just thought I was going to stay for a short while and ended up here 14 years later. And also when I met Brian, he told me he was a pilot and having had worked for the airlines. I thought, oh great, a pilot. Very quickly, because their egos are like big. He was anything but egotistical and so humble. The things I can, when I think of Brian, what comes to my mind is integrity, honesty, a forward thinker. He is very always very supportive, kind, very fair, hard working and just kind of a no baloney kind of guy. I learned so much from him and thank you, Brian. We didn't always agree on things, but one thing I can say, I always maintain a really super high level of respect for him. When we closed the puff and went on, I was really hoping that I would continue to work. Sorry, that I could continue to work for Bryant. It didn't happen, but you know, things happen in life. I just, I wish I could still work for him. I learned so much and he's such a wonderful person and being a pilot, I guess I can say, fair winds and smooth skies skies my friend. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Kathy. And Brian, the microphone is yours. Well, thank you. I'd like to thank you supervisors for the recognition and for the work that you do in leading us in the work that we do. And I want to also commend Jim Vogue on his retirement and his storied career. And I'd like to point out that some of the changes that he was able to implement at the jail has improved services for our community members who land in jail. I think one of the big events that he helped to create along with Captain Landgrave was to be able to have the correctional sergeants write 5150s to be able to help people that are in jail but meeting criteria for grave disability, danger to themselves and danger to others to write the 5150 and get them over to the mental health inpatient unit quicker, quicker access to service and that's definitely improved things. I appreciate the the the creation of the CIT that the Sheriff's Department brought in 2018 and I we just finished our 24th class since 2018 and that that training has been so popular. It's not only just for the Sheriff Department We have agencies throughout the central coast that ask for seats to come be trained in the mental health crisis intervention training. It's a phenomenal work they do and just I'd like to final for the jail, point out that the phenomenal work that the Sheriff's Department does, operating the third largest mental health facility in this county behind a task at our state hospital and California men's colony, just based on a default of the number of inmates that are admitted to San Luis County jail with the mental health diagnosis. And the work that they've done to help bring services with well path, well path staff. It's phenomenal. I'm grateful for the opportunity that I've had to be able to be a part of the mental health delivery system for the community in San Luis Obispo. And I want to recognize the great employees that we have, the staff who come to work day in and day out, that nobody ever sees the work that they're doing right now to provide that service 24-7. And my final comment, I want to point out, I just want to express, and this is for all the employees, both at the jail and everybody working in the community mental health system. I don't think it's any coincidence that as Angie and I parked the car across the street on the curb this morning, we I got out of the car. I went to the meter and as I turned around, a gentleman stopped me and said, you saved my life one time. Between the jail and the inpatient unit, you saved my life. And today, I'm engaged with my mental health services and I'm sober. Thank you. How does that happen? But it's, you know, that's providence that that is the way it is. But that happened because of the great work that so many of our county employees do day in and day out that we never see. And I just wanted to share that because that comment that that individual that community member who gave me on the street was for everybody for all of us in this room. So thank you. Thank you, Brian. And comments from the board, supervisor Gibson. Thank you, Madam Chair. Mr. Atwell, obviously, much less want to do. And I think back over the time that you've been here 14 years, how much change you've seen as well, how many challenges you've intersected. I think it's fantastic that you're moving on to lead NAMI. That advocacy, and especially that advocacy through the lens of your experience is going to be absolutely essential to helping this board continue to improve our behavioral health system and look forward to working with you on that in the future. Thanks, sir. So, Professor Ortiz Lake? Yeah, very well said, Brian, on acknowledging what it takes in regards to these most challenging situations for people who have struggles with their mental health and their families that surround them and trying to find answers. And it does take a village, as you said, and also just so many dedicated staff members. And I want to thank you for your passion for this. You'd be a great spokesperson to continue to do that. And I guess you'll be doing that with NAMI. And that is really says a lot because it's true. Just like Supervisor Gibson says, we really need people that are practitioners to help public understand the path and that there is a path and that there is healing that does happen. And then we'll see you out there on the 28th of September at Laguna Middle School for the walk of beautiful lives walk, yes, so that we can all support the families and the individuals. And so thank you for your service. Supervisor Palateen. Thank you, Brian, for your many years of service. It's very clear that you've maintained the human element and all the work that you've done. Hearing the testimonial that you would actually sit with patients and understand their needs or just be with them is evidence of the fact that you have been able to do your job in a profound way and not just I can't imagine what what some of you deal with that some some moments the crisis level of the individuals and how it may it may seem impossible to help those folks but maintaining that integrity of character and appreciate your how you exemplify public service to everyone else that works in the department and wish you many years of success in your retirement. And Brian, I want to thank you as well. Your dedication to the county and all the service you've provided. It says a lot about you as a person that you're going to take that experience and we're not hearing you say I can't wait to get you know my next vacation or my retirement vacation but you're going to take that experience and work with NAMI and try to give give other folks the benefit of all that experience and so thank you thank you very much it's an honor to be able to recognize you today. Thank you so much. With that, we are going to move on. We have one more presentation today. It's item number 30 on the agenda and it's a resolution proclaiming August 2024's child support awareness month in San Luis Bispo County and Supervisor Pauling is going to read the resolution. And let's see, Natalie. Yeah. Thank you, Chair. It'll be my pleasure. This is a resolution proclaiming August 2024 child support awareness month in the County of San Luis Obispo. Whereas the County of San Luis Obispo Board of Supervisors declares August 2024 as child support awareness month to recognize the contributions of child support professionals and increase public awareness of the services governmental agencies provide to help support families in meeting the needs of their children. And whereas we encourage all co-parents to remember the child support program is based on the principle that the engagement and participation of both parents contributes to the success and overwhelm well-being of their children. And whereas the mission of California's local child support agencies and professionals is focused on delivering vital child support services to help meet the financial, medical and emotional needs of California's children and families. And whereas, the governor of the state of California Gavin Newsom states in his child support awareness month letter dated August 2024, California's families span many diverse structures and backgrounds. And California Child Support Services works to connect families of all kinds with support to care for their children. While each family's needs are unique, the shared goal is ensuring every child is provided for and feels safe and loved. Whereas the County of San Luis Obispo Department of Child Support Services provides services to approximately 4,500 local families. And in fiscal year 2223 distributed over 15 million in collections, which benefits our local economy and supported over 7,000 children. Statewide California collected approximately 2.3 billion in child support last year. And whereas, the San Luis Obispo child support professionals are committed to providing the highest level of service to families in need. Staff work collaboratively with parents and other agencies to increase support collections, provide information and resources, all in an effort to ensure we have healthy and successful children living in our community. And whereas child support services recognizes the importance of transparency and aims to decrease stigma and misinformation surrounding child support by increasing public accessibility through our many outreach efforts in the community. Through these efforts, the department strives to deliver excellent services to families while providing the support they need to raise their children. Now therefore be it resolved and ordered that the Board of Supervisors of the County of Salem, Subispo State of California does hereby proclaim August 2024 child support awareness month in the County of Salem, Subispo. and I'm going to ask you. So I'm going to ask you. I'm going to ask you. I'm going to ask you. I'm going to ask you. I'm going to ask you. I'm going to ask you. I'm going to ask you. I'm going to ask you. I'm going to ask you. I'm going to ask you. I'm going to ask you. I'm going to ask you. I'm going to ask you. There we go. Three, two, one. Three, two. Perfect. Thank you Chairperson Arnold, members of the board. I'm Natalie Walter, the director of Child Support Services, and I appreciate the opportunity to be here today to celebrate Child Support Awareness Month. As you mentioned, we have quite a few staff here today, and part of the reason I was able to get them over was the power is out in our building. But we just got noticed that it's back on, so I know they're all very anxious to get back there. So, as stated in our resolution, we know that when both parents are engaged in participating in their child's lives, it has a huge impact on the success and well-being of their children. Our program and staff do what they can to support this effort. At our core, we are a self-sufficiency program, helping parents help each other to provide for their children. Staff's goal is to support, educate, and engage parents, helping them navigate through the complex legal system, allowing them to focus on raising their children while we handle the details. Our services are available to all parents, regardless of financial status, and we are constantly striving to make our program easy to apply for and our services easily accessible. Today, I would like to acknowledge the staff that show up each and every day to administer this program. This is not an easy job, and staff often find themselves on the receiving end of parents' frustrations and discontent, but they know their work matters, so they support each other and they operate together. They make time for fun, team building, and are always looking for ways to do more, be better and support parents. Child Support Awareness Month promotes education and understanding of the Child Support Program in addition to recognizing the staff for all they do to make the County of San Luis Obispo a better community and a better place for our children to grow and thrive. Thank you. Thank you, Natalie. Comments from the board. Supervisor Pauline will start. Thank you, Chair. The theme of today is thinking our public servants for what you do and everybody who works in child support. Thank you very much for the difficult job what you do and everybody who works in child support. Thank you very much for the difficult job that you do and the service you provide to the county. Really appreciate you. So, if I say T say, your department is outstanding. It's well noted and, you know, it's hard enough to raise a child with everything going well. Little alone, the kind of challenges the parents have and then when's the marriage ends to the vitro that can come forth and the frustration, etc. and the fact that you guys are always looking out for those children. That is the best investment we can have. So thank you so much for doing that and to continuing to come in every day and you know people yelling or whatever happens. So you know I can just imagine but I do love the idea of you know as I say it's important to have be happily divorced and when you can work together for your children and so continue to to make those things happen for those kids. Thank you. Supervisor Gibson. Thank you Madam Chair. I would venture to say that very few of our residents even know that the county has a department of child support services and fewer still would be able to tell you a thing about what you all do. So I'm delighted that we're bringing awareness to it and add my appreciation for the work you do largely out of the public eye, challenging as I'm sure it is and you're carrying on a long tradition of excellence in your department within this organization and I thank you very much. And I too just want to thank you all for being here. I'm actually glad the power went out, so you could all join us today. And but over all the years that I've been working here as a supervisor, I know when supervisor Gibson said, you know, you have a record of excellence. And I know that to be true. In fact, over the years, I think you've broken records for the support that you've been able to collect, the support that's due to family so these children can be taken care of. So anyway, we really appreciate you and we know you're always over there working diligently and when your power's on, right? But we appreciate you being here today and being able to recognize the work that you do. So thank you so much. Right. Yeah, and I don't have any other requests to speak on this item. So we are going to close this item and move on to general public comments. And we'll give it just a minute. We'll open general public comments starting with Gary Kirkland and then followed by Jeff Edwards. Oh, there's Jeff. I was looking over here and Gary Kirkland. It's Gary still. Okay. Jeff, why don't you go ahead. We're going to switch a I was looking over here and Gary Kirkland. It's Gary Stoy. Okay, Jeff, why don't you go ahead. We're going to switch a route here. We're going to have Jeff Edwards followed by Gary Kirkland. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning board members. My name is Jeff Edwards. This past Saturday, I attended the Aviation and Aerospace job fair at the Oceano County Airport, also known as L-52. While I was there, it appeared there were about 30 people, the majority of which were vendors, and very few young people, which was kind of the focus, I thought. Surprisingly, there were people from the TSA out of Santa Maria representing the federal government and they were recruiting folks to work at TSA. Likewise, there were reps from SpaceX out of Van and Berg that were recruiting folks. I asked another vendor trust automation why they were there and I was told our CEO just said to show up and they really didn't know why they were there. I expected to see vertical takeoff and landing vehicle and drone exhibitions demonstrations. There was none of that, no startup companies, no innovators, none of that. Now I agree the aviation narrow space industry is a great career path for many young people, but any connection to L-52 is tangential at best. Let's be candid. The job fair and other similar events at L-52 are a futile attempt at making L-52 something that it is not. Nor will it ever be. So what's the purpose? Well, the idea is when you go back to the Coastal Commission for projects at L-52, you can represent that there's a broad public and community support and that the airports are a real asset. Well, in reality, L-52 is a ball and chain around the collective leg of O'Shiano, and L-52 is no economic engine, no source of new jobs, or will it be at any time in the future? After almost 80 years, I believe it is time to applaud the history of L-52, but then move on and realize the potential of the airport land, not just for L-Shiano, but for the entire county. Contrary to assertions that closing L-52 would cost millions, it actually has the potential to generate millions of dollars in revenue, new revenue. As former District 3 County Supervisor Evelyn Delaney penned in a recent op-ed piece, and I'll quote, as you drive by, it is a rundown eye sore referring to L-52. It's like having an ugly permanent scar in the middle of your face. Thank you. Okay, Gary Kirkland and Gary will be followed by Jeff Spat. Debbie, you're too quick. I was outside. Sorry. Gary Kirkland from the task of the arrow. One of the issues I wanted to talk about is the idea that this board is going to restrict people's right to give presentations to board meetings by not allowing us to use the AV equipment that we paid for. And I have several comments and questions about that. What if I bring my own AV equipment? I bring my own screen, I bring my own overhead projector, is it, according to my wife, is the county going to allow me to use the county's electricity? It's not my electricity, I paid for it, but it's not mine. Can I plug something in? And I, of course, knowing me, I go a little further. Is this county air or is it my air? Am I allowed to breathe while I'm here? Because this is county air, not my air, I guess. And this is a direct assault on free speech. And this is what you're trying to do. I see the O'City of Oregon. Andy is going to limit speakers to one minute. I understand around the state, see stack, and others are trying to do everything they can to limit the public's right to speak. And this rules that you made last week are an example of that. And we have to fight back against this and allow people to speak and say what they want. Without you being offended, although I can bring a sign that say, I'm offended by some of the things you say, should we stop that? Where does offense stop? Where does it stop? Where does it do the idea that you can be offended by what somebody else shows or somebody else says? Okay, that's that issue. They also, I want to commend John Pashon for addressing the Coastal Commission about Coastal Commission trying to shut down launches at Van and Berg, not only SpaceX and other private companies trying to launch, but also the Air Force. I find that hilarious. And they're worried about sonic booms and at the beach and the animals off the coast. If North Korea or China decides to launch a nuclear strike against Vandenberg to prevent us from countering that, is it going to disturb the people lying on the beach if a nuclear device goes off? Is it going to disturb the birds if a nuclear device goes off? Also, SpaceX and other companies are an economic boom to this county. Reach, I think, is the name of it. They should be up in arms about what the Coastal Commission in so should you because you're killing or coastal commission is killing economic opportunity in this county. And what's going to happen is if coastal commission gets their way. Thank you, Gary. We're going to leave. Thanks. Thank you. Jeffrey Speck and Jeffrey will be followed by David Rickford. Good morning. My name is Jeffrey Speck, lifetime resident of the city of San Luis Obispo. Would I generally speak about it these meetings is would I believe local corruption and misuse of we the people's money? This last Sunday on Madonna Road there was a man that had a butcher knife waving it at traffic. Slow PD was able to take the man into custody without anyone getting hurt, including him. We have a severe mental illness crisis here in the whole county. I live in San Luis Obispo and I watch this crisis daily. Yet, it's in the city, yet it is the county's obligation through mental health services to address this situation. Now, it gets talked about a lot, but the solutions never make it to the agenda. Who exactly is in charge of this agenda? We need more input from we, the people, and from this board. So important items can make it to the agenda. It is incredibly disturbing to me. The number one important thing in this room in my opinion is the voice of we the people in serving the will of we the people. Yet we are seeing more and more of the voice of we the people being suppressed voting to shut we the people up. This is not a republic. This is the behavior of a dictatorship. I'm very concerned. You folks up here, you work for we the people. The voice and the will of We the People. We need to take this into deep consideration. Start serving the will of the people. Instead of suppressing the voice and the will of We the People. We won't use any names of the folks that are responsible behind this. Do the right thing folks. We the people. Thank you. Thank you. David Rickford and David will be followed by our last speaker Greg Graywall and if anyone else wishes to make comments this morning, grab a speaker's lap. David Rickford? No? Oh, Greg Graywell Thank you board Greg Graywell Creston resident I want to bring back something that was brought up here earlier on the state water stuff About how the state Understands and is doing a better job. The state created the problem. The state built half of the storage capacity. They sold 4.23 million acre feet of water and built storage for half. That's a Ponzi scheme. They cannot deliver what they did. And anybody believes that they should invest in state water is ridiculous. When you take the water out of the canal, it's $467. When you move it 15 miles to Devils Pumping Station, it goes to $1800. When you take it up to the treatment plan at the top of $46, it goes to $2,300. And when you treat it, it goes to $2,500. When you get it out of shandon. Here a few weeks ago, you approved a plan to do another study when we have six studies on what to do with state water and maybe dump it for recharge. You don't use the 100 acre feet. You have it shanning because that would cost you $250,000 and you pump from the basin that you tell other people they can't pump from the basin which cost you $30,000. So I don't know how anybody could afford to dump that. You're not going to grow grapes and make wine by buying $2,500 in acre-foot water, which you're going to grow grapes and make wine by buying $2,500 an acre foot water, which you're gonna have to declorinate to put on the ground. Yet, we have 436,000 acres in the basin, and an annual rainfall over 12 inches, but if you just figure out 12 inches, that's an acre foot. That's 436,000 acre feet of water that's available with stormwater capture, which is free free water and you can do very little Infrastructure work with bladder dams and other things to capture that water that's free To recharge the basin because we use less than a hundred thousand. We use a 90 thousand range And we have 400 so these 36,000 landing on the ground. It's time that the people that want to be in charge of management actually take a class on how to manage and not just make up stuff. And then as far as this equipment goes, I've been coming here for a long time. I've always used the overhead projector. I think it's just kind of cold to put up documents so people can follow along and read them. I've never realized that somehow that was going to hurt somebody and all the documents that I normally use 99.9% of the time are the county's documents So if we can't use the equipment then you guys should produce the documents and hand them out to everybody in the audience So they can read what's going on. Thank you Thank you. David Rickford last call to do so. I'm going to introduce the documents and hand them out to everybody in the audience so they can read what's going on. Thank you. David Rickford, last call. Are there any other? Yeah. Sure thing. Thank you. Thank you. We'll just have you state your name. Okay. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. Okay. My name is Elliott Johnson. I'm a Los Osos resident. And I'm here to express my concern over the limiting hours of Montana or a state park. I understand that the kiosk is potentially going in. And you guys are shaking your head. The key ask is not going in. Wonderful. Well, that is great news. I'll just take a moment and express my gratitude for that. And sitting here listening to you to all honor Mr. Atwell and the mental health is very honorable what he does is amazing. And you've all have the ability to cast a vote for the mental health of our whole community. And that place is more than a psychiatrist to a lot of people. And just my main concern limiting the hours, first thing in the morning after sunset, generations of people go out there in the morning, all walks of life to enjoy that to its fullest capacity. It being closed would vastly change the lives of many people who built their lives and bought homes and lived here, going in and out of that park for over 40 years. So thank you very much. There's no kiosk. Wonderful. Have a beautiful day. Thank you. Thank you. I don't have any other requests to speak so seeing no one rushing up to the the dius we are going to close public comment and move on to item number 32 on oh sure that supervisor T's like yeah I just want to address Mr. Edwards and his assessment of L52, and that is that you have it backwards, sir. I take to tell you, but this is just the beginning of what the potential is there. And because we have to get coastal commission approval to do any kind of infrastructure development and all of that, we're moving out through the community to build up that educational piece. But the asset itself is just really beginning, going to be blossoming. And so yes, there's opportunities there because we already have one ES, ES arrow company. So there's that happening, but there's much more to come. So I'd say stay tuned and thanks for your comments. Okay, we're going to move now on to item number 32 and we'll ask the clerk to introduce the item, but I just want to say I'm looking forward to this and Really happy to have Marina Owen in the in the room today that give us this presentation. So That's the clerk to introduce and the way we go Item number 32 presentation from the health agency and send Cal Health to provide information on medical behavioral health Hey, Nick. I'm not sure you're on. Are you on? There you go. Nick, the rewes director for the County Health Agency. I think this is my third time before you this morning. So I hope you're not sick of me yet. But I promise this is my last. before you this morning, so I hope you're not sick of me yet. But I promise this is my last. And this is a good one. This is a presentation to your board on Senkel Health. We try to do this at least once a year, and we're going to be trying to do that in the future as well, because I think it's useful for the community to know all the work that's going on with Senkel. Supervisor Paul, you actually mentioned something about today being the day where we recognize a lot of our public servants. There's a lot that's happening outside the county as well with some of the partners we work with. And I believe today you're gonna see some of that through SenCal and the many great activities they do in collaboration with the county as well as on their own. I happen to be on the board of SenCal along with Supervisor Ortiz Legg and Supervisor Arnold as well was with me earlier. And I just wanted to say that what you're going to see today is a great look forward about the many things that are happening and the many things that will be happening as a partnership with their county. So with that, I'd like to turn it over to Marina Owen, who's the CEO of Senkel. Madam Chair, members of the board, thank you very much, Mr. Drew's the beautiful introduction. We're pleased to be here today to speak with you around the journey of transformation and integration. I would add a journey of partnership with the county. Every time I've had the opportunity to be here in your chambers, I'm impressed by the breadth and depth of the issues that you all address. And we're here to talk a little bit about the health world today. And as I begin, I wanted to share, you know, that that Senkhal Health had the opportunity to talk to you about a year ago. So this is your update on the work that we've been doing. As many of you know, we're a mission-driven nonprofit health insurance organization here in San Luis Obispo. We administer the medical program here locally. What's really valuable and why this is my 17th year at Sunkel Health and I joined 21 years ago is because of this local governance and our commitment to being a community asset. We're a public-private partnership. We're a public agency but run like a business and we're accountable to the communities that we serve. For about 40 years, Sen. Cal Health administered the Medi-Cal program in Santa Barbara, and this is our 16th here in San Luis Obispo. We are bored, adopted a new vision for the organization a few years ago, and the vision was really about being a trusted leader in advancing health equity. And around our communities thriving and achieving optimal health together. Our mission as an organization hasn't changed. However, we've taken on new roles and expanding our role and reach to provide additional services to our membership. And so a little bit about the members that we serve and our shared clients and constituents in the community. We now serve almost 240,000 medical members in residents. That's one in four in San Luis Obispo. So that's an incredible growth in the program over time. We serve one in three residents of Santa Barbara County. The types of services that we provide include both physical and the mild to moderate behavioral health services in partnership with the County behavioral health agency and your health agency, which provides some services for those that are experiencing more, more acute and severe behavioral health needs. The health insurance that Sincal's able to provide is provided at little or no cost to those who are low income residents that qualify and our members include, you know, many in our community is represented by the picture on your screen, but families with children, seniors, persons with disabilities, you know, pregnant women, and those in the child welfare system. When a member is enrolled in the MediCal program, they're automatically enrolled in Sincal Health, and that gives us an opportunity to really work on shaping and improving the lives of those in our county. The real innovation of Ronson Cal Health with Mr. Drew's described is around our local governance. So we're locally governed by those that are residents of the county and also in important positions that give them a breadth and depth of expertise to bring to us. And so Supervisor Ortiz Leg, Mr. Drews, Debbie Arnold, Supervisor Arnold in the past have served on our board. We're also guided by multiple advisory committees. Many of your county leaders and staff participate in our local steering committee, which includes healthcare providers, these are the community's community's community's community's So our 13 member board provides us a real breadth of expertise and I'm really grateful. When I joined Sincel Health in this role three years ago, it's for this purpose, it's for this reason because of the great work that our board does. And so I'm pleased to talk about a few topics here introduce behavioral health integration. We're going to be talking about the California Advancing Innovative, Innovating Medical Initiative, and then we're also going to be talking about behavioral health transformation. So I'm pleased to introduce Jordan Turetski, who's our Chief Operating Officer, and she'll talk to you about behavioral health. Thank you. Thank you, Marina. I certainly apropos given what we've heard in your chambers this morning. And so I'll talk briefly about behavioral health services in the medical system and in medical behavioral health is a shared benefit between health plans and county behavioral health departments. So SinCal Health holds responsibility for mild and moderate services and we partner with our county behavioral health departments who hold responsibility for severe mental illness services and substance use disorder services. And we enjoy a very strong collaboration and partnership as you can imagine our shared members have a continuum of care across mild, moderate, and severe. So strong integration and collaboration is really important to ensure a good experience. Prior to 2022, Sinkel Health partnered with the Holman Group who administered mild and moderate behavioral health services on our behalf. We recognized a real opportunity to bring those services in-house to really capitalize on those local relationships that we have and what we believe we do very well in terms of quality and access. And so as of January of 2022, my goodness, more than two and a half years ago, we directly manage mild and moderate behavioral health services. That means that we contract our providers, we pay our providers claims, and we're there to support our providers and members, which is something that we take great pride in. And so this slide just briefly shares a bit of the scope of mild to moderate services. What do we mean when we say mild and moderate? We mean individual and group therapy. We mean outpatient, laboratory, drugs and supplies that have to do with some of those outpatient mental health conditions, psychiatric consultation, applied behavioral health analysis. This is services for architos that have autism and similar diagnoses and then psychological testing. So kind of the next step towards preparing for severe mental illness treatment. And so we know that in San Luis Obispo and certainly across the state access to behavioral health services is challenged. And it has become more challenging over the last five years, certainly with the pandemic as well. And in fact, the most recent San Luis Obispo Community Health Improvement Plan highlighted access to care and mental health services as a priority area of focus over the next few years. Since January of 2022, when we brought these services in house, we've partnered closely with our local providers to build and bolster our network. We've added over 20 groups in the last few years and that work continues today. It's never done, ensuring access and choice for our members and in partnership with our county is a high priority for us. What's also very exciting is as we've worked collaboratively to implement programs under CalAIM, we see a synergy with behavioral health services. Sobring centers are a really great example. So the Sobring Center that just opened my goodness, I think it was two months ago already. Direct connection to substance use disorder treatment, to mental health treatment. So just really pleased to be partners with your county in those efforts. And to talk more about CalAIM, sobering centers and so much more, I'll hand it over to Ms. Blanca Zunica. Thank you, Johnny. Good morning, board. My name is Blanca, and I'm the social director of Care Management at SenCal Health. And I would be providing you with an update on CalAIM and how some key initiatives such as ECM and community supports are helping our members who are the most vulnerable in our community. So just a high level CalAIM known as California Advancing and Innovating Medical is a multi-year initiative led by the Department of Health Care Services. And really, one of the goals is to enter a medical with social services. So really shifting from just treating the illness to treating providing whole person care. And what does that mean? Of course, addressing the medical, social, and behavioral needs of our members. And one of the things about CalAIM is ensuring that there's equity and improve outcomes across the state through a no-wronged or approach. CalAM's implementation is done through a faced approach, so there's several initiatives that we have implemented. In 2022, we went live with enhanced care management, which is a new medical benefit that provides comprehensive care management services to high-risk members. And then community support services, we provide services to address the social needs of our members. We also provide community health worker benefit, dual services, and also through Kelly, we have invested over $20 million to expand capacity for enhanced care management community supports and other local initiatives. As of July 1st 2024, I'm happy to share that we're offering all 14 community support services which are optional for plans like us to offer but we know that it's necessary for our community. Some of these community support services really focus on targeted interventions for members. For example, medically tailor meals, supports members with chronic conditions, recuperative care, helping members have a place to go after they leave the hospital. We have the housing supports, not only to support members to find housing, but also to secure housing through housing deposits and then stay house, because that is really important. And as Jordan mentioned, we are glad that we open a sobering center in San Luis Obispo, that's through the partnership with behavioral wellness, good Samaritan shelter, to really prevent some of our members going into the hospital, or the jail, and they can have a safe place to get the care that they need, including mental health and substance use disorder services. Looking ahead in 2026, we plan to offer a special needs to a program, so integrating MediCal and Medicare to provide comprehensive care and care management services for many, many members, which we're very excited about. And what is enhanced care management? So as I mentioned earlier, enhanced care management is a new MediCal benefit that is designed to assist members with in-person comprehensive care management to the most vulnerable. Members who are enrolled in ECM are assigned a lead care manager that coordinates all aspects of the member. So if they need coordination to medical appointments, behavioral health appointments, or they need oral care, this lead care manager works in partnership with other providers and the members PCP to address this need. ECM is built on the success of health homes and hope for pilot programs who really show success that providing services where the member lives and seeks care really improves outcomes. ECM is designed for certain populations of focus identified as high risk or vulnerable by the Department of Health Care Services. This includes individuals experiencing homelessness, those transitioning from incarceration, members transitioning from skilled nursing facilities, those with severe mental health or substance use disorders needs, and of course, children and youth involving the child welfare services. And ECM is supposed to provide comprehensive and tailor services to those specific populations. One thing that we are committed to is expanding access to ECM and community support services in San Luis Obispo. So here today we have spent over $9 million in providing funding to local agencies that are embedded in San Luis Obispo that already serve our members as you can see to the left the number of agencies. And then also agencies that provide services in San Luis Obespo as well as Santa Barbara. We funded also San Luis Obespo Behavioral Health, Public Health Department in the slow sheriff's office. And lastly one of the important things about ECM and community support is it's it's integration really supports members that have behavioral health needs. And for example, the lead care manager not only ensures that the member goes to their appointment, but also those that are underdiagnosed or are not connected to county mental health or our multi-moderate services that they get the care that they need. In addition, what we notice is that out of the members that we have a sign for outreach and engagement, 15% have actually agreed to participate and have enrolled, which I think it's a good enrollment rate giving that there's a lot of apprehension about the services, and so we've seen success for rates which we're really pleased about. And then for community supports, a lot of the services are designed to support members with mental health needs in particular, housing tenants in sustaining services. So as we know, it's not only a challenge to get somebody housed, but to keep someone housed, it will not be successful if you don't have a whole team to make sure that you're paying rent on time, that you're getting mental health services, that you're taking your medication, and that you have a successful tendency. So we're very pleased with that service, and we're seeing your outcomes of that as well. And then lastly, we're seeing that a lot of our members, over 900 that have SMI, SUD needs have access at least one or more community support services. So we're trying to integrate to both programs to improve the health outcomes in our communities. And now I'll pass it to Dr. Dorie Noso, our chief equity officer to talk about SBHIP. Great thank you. Good morning. This is an example, another example of our journey of integration and partnership. And with the Student Behavioral Health and CENTYP program, CENTCal Health partners with the school districts. And the program's intention is to improve coordination of child and adolescent behavioral health services to increase the number of students enrolled in Medi-Cal who are receiving behavioral health services, to increase non-specialty services on or near school campuses, so really making it accessible for the students and their families to enter or to acquire services, access services. And this is really meant to address the health equity gaps, inequalities and disparities that we're seeing in the schools. We have three school districts in slow, county who are participating with us. That's the San Luis Obispo County Office of Education, Lucia Mar Unified School District, and San Luis Coastal Unified School District. So when we invited the school districts to come and partner with us, these are the three schools that raised their hands and said yes. And taking an account of the local needs, these three schools landed on four targeted interventions that is to build their behavioral health wellness programs, to build their behavioral health screening and referrals, and to build stronger partnerships to increase access to medical services in its entirety. Also to increase the pathways for parenting and family services. So when we look at our partnership and the scope of work, early indications through quarterly reports, we're finding that we are achieving the anticipated outcomes. And some of them are we're seeing a decrease in the reports of emotional distress, including anxiety, depression, and suicidality. We're seeing that decrease, decreasing. We're also seeing a decrease in the number of suspensions and expulsions. We're seeing, conversely, an increase in the number of MediCal eligible students who receive school and community-based behavioral health services. We're seeing an increase in school attendance, and we're seeing an increase in the student's ability to proactively address challenging emotions. So and and this is really an incredible opportunity for our schools just to build the systems to ready for the multi-payer fee system coming up. And with that I'll pass it back to our CEO Marina. the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the health and support of the intervention and wellness and services earlier on in someone's need, the less of a burden perhaps on the specialty mental health department. And so we're really committed to being your partner in that way. So as we think about what's on the horizon, more is needed. A lot of progress has been made and we know more as needed. And so behavioral health transformation is on the horizon. And so the California voters did pass prop one. That builds on the ongoing efforts to address those that are most vulnerable and need the most significant support. It evolves the Mental Health Services Act, modernizes it, to the Behavioral Health Services Act, and then has some goals that are listed here, including expanding capacity of behavioral health facilities. And so, Sinkel Health is really a partner as the county embarks on this really significant journey where we're in a very supportive of the Behavioral Health Strategic Plan that the Health Agency and your board is engaged in. journey, where we're in a very supportive of the behavioral health strategic plan that the health agency and your board is engaged in. As we think about the milestones that are coming up, significant stakeholder engagement and readiness for applications in the summer, we're simply here to support. The greater, you know, the local access improvements that are able to be provided the better off the constituents that our members are. So when we think about our considerations in next steps, really, they're around, particularly with the challenging state budget situation, they're around sustainability going forward. And so the good news is that the state budget maintained funding and momentum around the ECM benefit that Blanca described. Sincal is also committed to continuing the sustainability around the community support benefit. These are services that are identified as in lieu of or instead of, so instead of a hospitalization, someone's diverted to a sobering center. Instead of experiencing emergency room visit after emergency room visit because of a chronic illness, they're redirected to their primary care provider. And so the commitment that Sinkel has is simply simply it's not only the right thing to do, but it's cost effective as well. There's two programs that were intended to be catalysts surrounding funding and access improvements and those include the student behavioral health. That sustainability while the program ends in December, the sustainability continues through the state billing system that each of our school districts are engaged in being connected with. And then Senka will be issuing the last round of funding around the housing and homeless citizens in a program. What I think is one of the most exciting items on the horizon is transitional rent. And so the state did receive approval the . And so the state did receive approval to offer a 15th community support. And that is up to six months of rent for those that are transitioning out of certain settings that put them at greater risk of becoming homeless. And so that includes those leaving incarceration or the justice system. Those leaving the homeless shelters or the justice system, those leaving the homeless shelters or the recuperative care facilities. That involves those leaving and transitioning out out of these types of settings, particularly child welfare. So is those the age out of the system have that extra support that they need. That will begin in January of 2026. There is also an early pathway that we're learning more about. And we'll be speaking about that actually with our community partners and with with your staff this week at our community steering committees around CalAIM and explore what that early pathway may mean around transitional rent and if there's interest for sincal health leaning and doing that in 2025 a little earlier. So with with that I think we're two years in to this transformation that has been the Calame journey and really the the surveys that are statewide identify our community as really a standout community in a certain measures, the first is trust in partnership. And that's incredible because it is the, you know, we're innovating really at the speed of trust in collaboration. We're also at the size, the members that are being seen in the program size is about those of some of the larger counties in the state of California. So we're caught up in starting to make really big improvements. As we end the presentation, really, it's about what our members say and clients say about their experiences and so we captured that in this video called Fresh Start. It's only a few minutes. It illustrates how five cities homeless coalition, one of our partners in Sincel Health have heavily improved the lives of those that we serve and so thank you for your technical support and for your time today. and Sincel Health have improved the lives of those that we serve. Thank you for your technical support and for your time today. We'll keep the video and thank you for allowing us to be here. Thank you. Thank you to homelessness they are. Most of the time when you actually get that back story and you realize it was one or two things that led to this person being on the street. And longer somebody spends on street, the more difficult it is to get back into housing. CalAIM, the California Department of Healthcare Services, initiative to transform Medi-Cal, recognizes there is no one-size-fits-all solution to homelessness. Five City's Homeless Coalition uses CalAIM funding for programs that provide personalized paths to permanent housing. We serve populations that are currently experiencing homelessness. They're living on the street in their cars, in motels, doubled up with other households. But we also serve people who are at risk of homelessness. So they might be in housing right now and they can't pay their rent or they've gotten a notice to vacate and they don't know what they're gonna do next. There's I think these sometimes misconceptions of why people are out on the streets and while some of those might be true, a lot of the time it's, you know, it's a result because of other things. I think these people are really in need. They're just asking for support with their situations that they're going through. So this is really that hands-on support with those clients to make sure that from start to finish, they have all the resources that they need to access these services and what we can provide in terms of resources after they've moved in. They lack access to healthcare, lack, the rental history or the criteria that a lot of property management and owners are looking for. There's a lack of affordable housing for sure. Being able to provide something like a landlord incentive to help move somebody in, it's that extra assurance that if something goes wrong, your costs are covered and with the Cal Calam and the housing sustaining services, not only can we provide some extra incentive, but we've also got the case management that's coupled with that. My name is Monica. I became homeless through a series of events that took place. And my mom passed away. The grieving process was very difficult for me. I started having some issues with PTSD and depression. I had relapsed as well. I'd been clean and sober for about six years and so everything just kind of compounded and started to unravel for me. She is a prime example of somebody who, you know, just needed that kind of short term help get me back on track. And it's just incredible to see for someone who really is just ready to put in the work. You know, there's a lot of pre-work that goes in in terms of the applications and the navigation. But we can't just put somebody in housing and expect them to be successful. a lot of pre-work that goes in in terms of the applications and the navigation, but we can't just put somebody in housing and expect them to be successful. Not having a stable place makes it makes everything unstable, basically. Five cities homeless coalition, their help and support has been a game-changing, life-changing situation for me. They gave me dignity and then they had solutions that situation for me, they gave me dignity. And then they had solutions that were attainable. And they treated me like a person, a human. So that for me, at that particular point in time, I needed that the most, you know, just having compassion. I will meet people halfway if they meet me halfway. I think we're never going to do more than the clients doing. We really try to empower clients to have leadership and really kind of take the first step towards whatever their goal is. I think what CalAIM is doing and providing these services is going to ensure that once we move people back into housing that they're actually able to sustain that housing and they're not going to fall back into homelessness. It's been stressful but thank God that I have a place to be able to just be private, heal and begin the process so like it's increased my faith, felt so much more support. I have a place that I can call my home. So in that sense, I feel like I'm beginning to get my footing. One of the big things too about being here is that I feel so safe. I just feel so absolutely safe. and it's such a blessing. Very nice, Marina. Thank you for sharing that. Like I mentioned, we'll continue to be, to be San Luis Luis, your partner in all of this work. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Let's see here. Do we have any board questions before we go out to public comment on this item supervisor holding? I have a question, but surprise, Gibson go. Yeah, I have a couple of questions. Thank you. I mean, it's a time of tremendous change with CalAIM and Prop 1. I was great to hear your reference our behavior health strategic plan in any further commentary on how that guides what you see in the future. That's, you know, I'm interested in that. That's one question. Yeah, very important question. And what, what we, as I mentioned, what we, what do we do is provide the mild moderate services and supports, but we can be a strong partner in your application. Your request for application to the state for any bond funding. We can also as a CINCAL Health Organization provide additional funding around grants and access initiatives that we have underway to support any ongoing services. If we're able to bring and draw down additional state funding into the county. And so we both have local funds and state funds in addition just to strengthening the applications through the data we can provide in our partnership. So I worked a lot with behavioral health as they framed that strategic plan trying to get a common language to talk about these myriad services if we provide and to Mr. Druze I think it would be helpful if we could make sure we line up the efforts that SenCal does in our continuum of care so we can keep as a board keep tracking our progress toward meeting some of these objectives. I absolutely agree. I also would note another element that's probably worth, I guess, noting is the community health assessment that the public health department has done. The community identified three areas that they felt were the most important areas for us to focus on in health. Number one was access to care. Number two was behavioral health. Number one was access to care. Number two was behavioral health. And number three was essentially healthy communities and homelessness and finding homes. And I think we also need to, when we work with Senkel put it in that picture as well. So behavioral health, but as well as the other two categories because I think as you heard today, there's a lot that they're doing across the spectrum. Yeah, be helpful. My other question is a big broader scale. And that is on the ballot. To November, we have Prop 35, the Managed Curial Organization or MCO tax. Can you speak briefly about how that passage or failure to pass would affect SenCal and us on the ground locally. Yes, good question. Thanks for highlighting Prop 35. Sincal Health is part of an association, the local health plans of California, which is partnered with many medical associations across the state in a safety net coalition that helped guide the priorities around how that MCO tax funding would be spent. in a safety net coalition that helped guide the priorities around how that MCO tax funding would be spent. Part of the challenge could be as the state's looking to invest in redirecting those funds to improve the medical program would be that there would be different priorities. You describe different sets of language. And so the support that Sincal has provided through that safety net coalition is in partnership with the California Medical Association, the hospital association, the clinics association, and the plan for the government. In support of Prop 34. So Sincal Health is not able to as a public agency take a position of support on Prop 35. However, our association is partnered across the state in a way that provides information on its benefits to constituents. The benefit of, for those that support Prop 35, the benefit is that it's guaranteed that the funding would be available every year as opposed to be redirected to the general fund based on the state's fiscal condition. Which is the part of the budget solution for this year. And just, do you have a sense of, obviously, that at the core of Prop 35 is the question of provider reimbursement rates? Do you have a sense of how much of a difference that would make to our providers here, locally? So Prop 35 would make permanent provider rate increases to primary care, behavioral health, and other provider categories. At this juncture, we're engaged in an assessment to determine just how much more. However, we see that many of these rates would increase to about 90% of Medicare. Medical pays less than that. Okay, thank you. Yeah, thank you. So, Roger Pulding. Thank you, Chair. Really appreciate you being here and giving a comprehensive presentation. Very helpful. One of the components of enhanced care management is step down services related to the jail. And I see that we have Dr. Dribinski and Captain Landgraf here. I appreciate you being here. Obviously, there's a lot going on. A number of different mandates, CalAIM, et cetera. And I understand we've staffed, I believe, through the Department of Social Services, folks to do the work with inmates or those in custody to make them eligible for Medi-Cal. Can you just give a little update as to where we are there and then what we might envision a year or two from now in terms of how that could work? Because I know that's a really important piece of this equation. It's a very important piece and so our work with justice involved is critical and I would love to defer if possible to either Jordan or to Blanca to talk about our ongoing partnership and work with your team specifically around this initiative. They're closest to the work. And I think you'd appreciate that answer. Thank you. Thank you so much. Yeah, like as you mentioned earlier, we're really working closely with the slow Sheriff's Department to be a partner with pre-release services. And I know that the state is asking everybody goes live by 2026 and there's other, I believe four other counties are going to go live, so just learning from them are best practices. So really, I think right now the we're meeting in a weekly basis, I'm sorry, in a monthly basis to start learning more about the workflows. How is that warm hand of going to be from when somebody leaves the jail, getting them connected to the ECM care manager out in the community to make sure that there's a discharge plan, make sure that that member knows where to go for services and then also making sure that not only the member gets connected to the ECM care manager but there's continuity with behavioral health services that they're connected to county mental health services before they leave the jail or once in the community, make sure that they're connected to those services. So I think it's more of having those monthly meetings, collaboration, working on workflows. How is the work being done now, and how is that gonna look like with a pre-release case management services. And we also have partner with Scott, who's a consultant, reentry services, that's very work-sclose with the Department of Health Care Services, who's also helping us to develop some of those workloads and work with the great team of Dr. Soneski. So. Glad to hear that all that collaboration is occurring. Yes. Appreciate it. Definitely. Thank you. Supervisor Tees, thank you. Yeah, thank you. I don't really have any questions. I think that both my colleagues gave some good questions, but I just also want to say thank you and You noted that Sen. Cal has been recognized at the state level and I think that For the audience to know that how fortunate we are to have Sen. Cal as our provider You know, we are only sharing with Santa Barbara County which really helps there's lots of similarities in our counties. We have some ways to go in certain aspects, but I can tell you that every time that I have a request to SenCal regarding, could you think about this nonprofit to work with, whether it's a justice involved nonprofit or something that's working with other specific communities? They're on it in a minute. When I ever ask about a specific patient that may have an issue that can't seem to connect with their services within 24 hours, I get a response and they are on it. You know, this is very complex. And particularly when you look at these changes that have come forth down from the state and for our staff to be able to figure out, how do we fit in here. This has been a really successful relationship at this point and I think that we've got a lot to be proud of, a lot to work to do in front of us, but being very solution oriented and as noted collaborative, I think that we just again can't be more fortunate. And I really want to speak to the accountability. The accountability is so important when you're talking these kinds of monies and with the public trust in regards to what it takes to run an organization like this and to be able to respond to the oversight that's necessary to make sure that all dollars are spent in the right way, that they're doing an excellent job, and this very well functioning organization. So again, thank you for coming here and sharing, and there's so much more to talk about. So we look forward to that. Thank you very much. Now we have a fantastic staff. Thank you. Yes, you do. We don't have any other questions, but I'm going to open it to public comment. I don't have any requests to speak up here. Anyone? We're going to close it to public comment and bring it back to the board for deliberations or comments, closing comments. Does anyone else have any? I think I made my comments. Thanks for being here. Thanks for the comprehensive presentation. The partnerships really appreciate it. Thank you. All the other supervisors. So I will take my turn to just let you all know how much I appreciate you. I really enjoyed the years that I spent with you as a board member. And so that gives me the ability to say with certainty that you've just been a wonderful partner and in this complex world of health care that we're all living through, the organization is so professional. I appreciate you all very much. So thank you. Thank you. It's a real privilege to be here and to support and serve. We have a wonderful team and they make all of those things happen. So have a wonderful rest of your day and we hope to be here in a year talking about the outcomes that we've done together. Thank you. Okay. Okay. We have a request for just a quick break. So in two or three minutes we'll go ahead and start up with item number 33 on our agenda. Her a standard review by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, following FEMA initiated updates to the County Flood Hazard Maps, exempt from CEQA. Great. Thank you. And so we have our planning and building department here to present. Trevor, do you start us off? the city of New York. Thank you. Thank you. Great. Thank you. We have our planning and building department here to present. Trevor. Yeah. Start us off. Thank you. Chairman Arnold. So Trevor Keith, planning and building director. So with us today, I've got Cheryl Journey, our deputy on the building side. And then I have Shani Ciong. She is our supervisor in the long range section recently promoted and then Corey Han are long range planning manager and then for additional questions if you have it we've got a contingent from public works present an update to the counties flood hazard area standards and the recent efforts A little bit of context here the county participates in the National Flood Insurance Program Which is managed by FEMA the federal emergency management agency as of recently in 2022 FEMA updated the flood Emergency Management Agency. As of recently in 2022, FEMA updated the flood hazard maps in the county, which during the public review period, public work staff has also conducted several public outreach after meetings to the affected communities via the community advisory councils. So following the map updates, FEMA then conducted a standard community advisory councils. So following the map updates, FEMA then conducted a standard review of the county's floodplain management ordinance, which resulted in minor modifications needed to be adopted by your board today. It is important to note that these modifications do not create substantive changes to the county's existing development review process. The modifications include the following, updating their references and definitions to be consistent with the new FEMA flood data and flood plain management guidance to adding and revising some floodplain management definitions. And lastly, moving flood hazard specific definitions to the appropriate ordinance sections for better clarity. Again, these changes do not result in any substantive changes to the county's existing development review process. It has been determined that the audience amendments for these minor changes would not have significant effect on the environment, and therefore a notice of exemptions have been prepared pursuant to SQL guidelines, section 15062. It is recommended that your board adopt the ordinances amending both County Inland and Coastal Land Use ordinances and also the county's local coastal plan to update the flood hazard area standards and its associated definitions with minor modifications as requested by FEMA. Following your action today, the department will then submit the coastal land news auditons to California Coastal Commission for certification. This concludes my presentation. Thank you. Any questions of the board? Questions? Everyone's quiet up here. So we'll open this item for public comment. I don't have any requests to speak. Do you have a request to speak? Sure. Yep. Hi, Greg Graywell. I have a couple questions. So since we're updating a flood stuff, is there any part of this that can contribute or should be extended into stormwater capture? And the areas, since we've done the studies on the interconnectivity of the flood areas where the surface water will come back into the different basins and we're talking about capturing the flood waters There's an executive order from the governor for self-certification on storm water capture and we need the recharge so Why wouldn't that be part of anything that's dealing with our flood waters and I'm just asking a question. That's it. So thank you. I don't see any other requests to speak up here. So we'll go ahead and close public comment. Bring it back to the board for questions, comments, deliberations. Don't see any lights on. Move staff's recommendation with thanks for their efforts. Okay. Okay. We have a motion in a second, but maybe I can ask anyone in planning. Is it maybe not even in your purview to work on the water issues which are usually over there in public orcs but do you consider when you're working on these floodplains and identifying them or making adjustments to the documents? Right. so this, Cory Hawn, Plenty Vision Manager for our long range. This effort was limited to just making sure that the county's requirements are consistent with FEMA standards. Yeah. Anything else that scope was not considered as a process. Yeah. But if public works has any question, or anything that they want to add to that discussion we welcome public works. Okay, join in. I know we cut you off guard, but thank you. Yeah, David Graham public works. So as as was mentioned in the beginning of the presentation and something that Is really important to keep in mind that FEMA conducted a floodplain remapping study that concluded last year, I believe. And as part of that process, there was opportunity for local input and we did do that. And so we were able to talk with them and fine tune the limits of their remapping. That has nothing to do with substantively nothing to do with the edits that are in front of you today. That's a separate process that FEMA does. They periodically audit our floodplain ordinance to see where it can be kind of tightened up and where our definitions can match their definitions. So that's why if you looked at the red line attachment, you'd see most of the edits are on just reorganizing the ordinance, putting sections in a different area of the ordinance itself, or making minor changes to the definitions. Okay, thank you for that. Yeah. Okay, May I ask the motion maker just to repeat the motion? Was that just a motion? I have to recommend that. That's a recommendation. And a second. So we'll ask for a roll call vote, please. Does the motion include leaving the reading of the ordinances? Yeah. Yeah. It's all listed under, everything listed under staff recommendation. Supervisor Gibson? Yes. the . We're going to move on to closed session. We're going to move on to closed session. Item number 34 and thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Plenty staff. Item number 34 on our agenda. We're going to open closed session up to public comment. We do have one request to speak. Richard Marketson. Richard Marketson, I didn't know when to make this comment. I didn't know if it was open public but I'm going to go with it here. I didn't know if it was open public, but I'm gonna go with it here. I'm president of people helping people in Los Osos and have been for 13 years. Before that, I was vice president for seven years. I've been on the community center board in Los Osos for 13 years. There's not much at the community center, I don't know about or what's going on, because we have an office. People have been able to have an office in the community center. I think we're the only nonprofit in the county with an office in the community center. Community center board meeting was last night. And to four of the board members surprise, there was a consent item on your agenda last week that approved a consent to sub-lease to the Los Ososos Chamber of Commerce with an attachment of a signed sub-lease by two members of the chamber and two members of the South Bay Community Center. I believe that document, those both of those documents are not employed. The South Bay Community Center Board has had no, made no, taken no position on this. There has not been nothing at our meetings. We have not had discussion. It's come up that they would like to use the center. They lost their facility a couple years ago. But our board members, four of our board members were stunned last night. And we've been told that agreements being signed by parks and being sent to us. We didn't know the terms, we didn't know the rental rate, we didn't know any of the details. And the four other four board members feel that three board members went rogue on this With no input from the rest of the board. I believe this is that's why I brought it to close session I don't know if this is where it needs to be discussed But I believe that agreement is no. I'm going to you have nothing in the record That it was ever on an agenda for the South Bay Community Center to approve negotiations or moving forward on a sublease of the center to the South Bay or low-sou-sou's Baywood Chamber of Commerce. And I was involved when we did the last sublease. I think County Council will remember in 2013, Xi and Linda van Fleet did the last sub-lease when we added 600 square feet to the building and that process went on for months before we even got permission to add on and everything related to that was approved by the South Bay Community Center Board and was in the minutes. There is nothing with this proposal that was approved by the entire board. I think you guys got played and I think those three board members have egg on their face. Thank you. Okay, that concludes I don't have any other requests to speak for a closed session, no? Then I'll ask council for a time estimate. Yes, Regent Nile County Council. There is no closed session today. Okay. We are going to break then afternoon. We'll be reconvening the meeting at 1.30 today and taking up item number 35. Okay, we are ready to go here and we are going to begin our afternoon session with item number 35 on the agenda and we'll ask the clerk to introduce the item. A hearing to consider adoption of a resolution of an necessity for the acquisition of real property interests required by Ray B. Bonnell for the Bob Jones pathway, closing project located between Avala Beach and the city of San Luis Obispo by four fifth vote. Great, thank you. And we have public works here to present the item. Good afternoon, members of the board and public. I'm John Wadell, Deputy Director of Public Works. We have a number of county staff, including public works in parks here to be part of this resolution of necessity hearing and available for questions. I would like to introduce Vicki Moore. Val- Val- Sorry. Valerie Moore. Something was wrong. To give the presentation, she has been busy and working on this project in the right away for quite some time, negotiating and completing acquisitions of several properties. And we're here to discuss a specific property, which is the Ray-Bennell property for the project. Good afternoon. I am here today to present to the board for consideration a resolution of necessity for the Bob Jones pathway gap closure project. Today's resolution of necessity hearing process will include receiving staff comments, taking testimony from property owners and considering all of the evidence in determining whether the real property interests are necessary for the public project. Confirming that the statutory offer has been made to the property owner and adopting the resolution of necessity which requires a for-fist vote. A necessity hearing is the first step in the two-part process to exercise eminent domain. It supports or determines the necessity of the property for processing an action in superior court. The necessity criteria are, does the public interest and necessity require the proposed project? Is the project capable, compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury? Is the property to be acquired necessary for the project and has an offer as required under the government code been made to the owners. The project is located south of the city of San Loce Obispo and runs approximately 4.5 miles from the octagon barn to the Ontario Road Trailhead parking lot. The county has acquired the portions of the trail alignment shown in green, representing approximately 70% of the alignment. The county is still pursuing negotiated agreements with four property owners shown in yellow and is seeking a resolution of necessity for just one parcel, the banel property. The project completes a 4.5 mile segment in the bicycle transportation network between San Los Obispo and South County. It provides a path separated from high speed vehicles for non-motorized users. It is key to increasing bicycle commuters along this corridor and crucial to reducing congestion on Highway 101, the county's most heavily congested roadway. The subject property consisting of five parcels, totaling approximately 146 acres, is zone rural lands and agriculture. Improvements include four residences, a shop, barn, stable, and other sheds and corrals. The pathway alignment runs along the western border of the property indicated by the dash jello line next to the 101 freeway. This portion of the property is used for farming and pasture and includes the San Luis Obispo Creek corridor. The owner is Ray Benel. The right of way needs from this parcel include a 1.21 acre permanent perpetual easement shown on the slide in yellow and a 1.02 acre temporary construction easement for a term of three years with a 9 to 12 month construction window. Over 80% of the right-of-way needed for this pathway is already encumbered with existing permanent easements shown in pink, including oil and gas. Owner outreach has included early discussions with the property owner during the project planning and design process, resulting in project redesign to mitigate the owner's concerns. Multiple requests for meetings with property owner which were rejected, including an offer to meet with the outside of praiser hired by the county to appraise fair market value of the property and the right of way needs. An offer of just compensation was made to the owner on June 7th, 2023, and amended offer letter on May 7th, 2024. To date, the owner has rejected the county's offer. These are the key findings that must be made and are included in the resolution of necessity. In summary, the key findings are. The public interest and necessity require the proposed project and the acquisition of the real property interests. The planned project is most compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury. The proposed use will not unreasonably interfere or impair any public use. The compensation offer required under the government code has been made to the property owner. No further environmental review is required and this action is not prohibited under California law. It is recommended that the board open and conduct a hearing on the adoption of the resolution of necessity. Adopt a resolution of necessity authorizing the chairperson to execute all necessary documents and authorize the director of public works to complete the actions necessary to close the transaction. Questions of the board? If I could, Madam Chair, I'll go ahead and supervise your polling. I'm ready for the presentation. I appreciate it. Just a couple of questions. Can you confirm the amount of funding that has been expended to date for this project? So, as Pauling, it's in the staff report. Yeah, I see the figure at 6.8 million. Is that correct? To date, that would include all all funds through the life of I see that figure at 6.8 million is that correct? To date, that would include all funds through the life of the project. Yes. Thank you. And then in terms of the CTC grant from the state of California, the total amount of the grant is 18.25 million is that correct? Yes. Okay. And we would lose that grant if the action today doesn't proceed with a 4-fifth vote is that correct? Yes, based on the timeline deliver which we have a grant deadline of March 2025 to be ready for construction including right away. We would lose the grant. And how much was the offer, the total value of the offer made to this particular private property owner? We don't have that number. It's not public information. Okay, I thought there was information in the staff report about that. Maybe I'm incorrect, but I'll just ask it another way then. We have provided an offer in good faith subject to law in this case that would be the fair market value of the interest we're hoping to acquire based on just compensation. Is that correct? Yes. OK. Thank you. Those are all my questions at this time. Professor Gibson. Thank you, Madam Chair. Along the lines of the offer, your staff report referenced an offer in 2023, 2023, and an amended offer. Can you speak at least generally to the nature of the amendment. There were there was an amended offer to once the actual area of the needed right way was secured with an official meets and bounds. So then we replaced the exhibit that was a rougher interpretation of the needs with the actual needs. And so the offer was modified slightly. And the offer is based on the, also on the appraised appraisal that was conducted. Praise the, yes. Okay. I guess the question then is should this board pass this resolution of necessity? What happens next? What would be the process? We don't end up exercising imminent domain and just taking people's property. We have to, you know, compensation has to be made and that's a process that's either a negotiation and or action by court. So what are the various pathways ahead of us? Should we decide to move forward today? So should we decide to move forward? A case would be filed in Superior Court. The amount of just compensation would be deposited with the Secretary of State and held secure there until this until the case was completed. The county would pursue possession of the property in advance of actual determination of just compensation. And then the end of the case would be determining that just compensation and paying that out to the property owner. Okay. And just compensation at this point amounts to an amount that's confirmed by the appraisals, that correct? That is true. During the court proceeding, I'm sure there would be evidence to, to, to, from both sides to determine what maybe an adjusted amount of just compensation would be. And we could argue over the amount. Yes. And during this whole time negotiations are still feasible. We could continue to negotiate with the property owner during this time. OK. And as I understand it right now, the offer's only cash or only monetary compensation. But as I look on the aerial photo of this area, there is a land that's immediately between the property under consideration here today and the Highway 101 easement. It's actually a piece of county-owned right of way for Cloverdale road. And you know, we I have suggested and it's been part of the conversation that that piece that's short dead end piece of Cloverdale road could be abandoned to the property owner as part of a compensation package. Can you confirm that that's correct? Well, with the current plans for the trail, there will be a section of Clover Ridge that is not needed. And so that's not been discussed, but that is something that definitely would be feasible of manning that road to that property owner. Okay, so that can't be entertained until we get into negotiations subsequent to a resolution of necessities that that's my understanding and is that yours as well? Yes I mean that is something that could be okay worked out through engines. So in act we're looking for an easement to to put this trail across the property there are other easements there and that was another question I had. But in fact, by abandoning, we could actually add to the area of the owners holding there if that, if he were to accept or the court were to determine that was fair compensation for the T.K. Yes, that is possible. And back to the easements in place right now, you said they were oil gas and water or that's not the case. I think that's the case. Yes, that is possible. And back to the easements in place right now. You said they were oil, oil, gas, and water. Or the, what's the nature of that? Is that actual infrastructure in the ground? Pipes in the ground. You know, I don't know that if those were, those are old easements that are in place. We did not investigate whether the easement, whether there's infrastructure in those locations. Okay, cool. Thank you. Supervisor T. Sly. Thank you. Good afternoon. I want to go back to the compensation that has been established. But if we had other forms of, in addition to what is the fair compensation rate, if let's say there was some other funding that came through our funds or something that exceeded what the fair market value is, is that something that we can do if there was a deal struck so to speak, meaning that if we could offer more than what it was worth. Sure, the county is able to come to an administrative settlement for an amount above that number. Okay. Typically that's justified by the whatever terms, we come to. I see. Okay. Thank you. I want to go back to. We we casually throw around the term CTC. John, if you wouldn't mind. Highlighting again what the CTC actually is. The $18 million came from. The California Transportation Commission is the oversight body of both this active transportation grant program, as well as a lot of transportation agencies and work within the state, including CalTrans, and really the funding for many transportation programs within the state. And so because it's coming from CalTrans transportation program funds, CalTrans obviously saw a value in this being more than just somebody's joyride place for bicycle. And can you explain further on that, what made it attractive in relation to the amount of money that we were awarded? Sure, I mean, this trail is key connector between San Luis Pistpo and South County. There's an existing bike paths and bikeways network through San Luis Pistpo start all the way up through Cal Poly. This would be a close a major gap in that network for transportation. I mean, the show obviously also has recreational uses, but a key component, and especially for this ATP grant, is the active transportation component to connect North County, or San Luis Obispo with South County. It is also part of the 101 corridor plan for the widening of 101 through Shell Beach and Pizmo Beach and just that whole corridor plan in increasing alternative transportation methods through the corridor as part of that 101 widening project. There'll also be adding to the bike lane network in Shell Beach Road and in Shell Beach along Shell Beach Road to further close those gaps of Class I paths. And this is a key part of making that full connection to encourage more transportation and more commuting through active transportation and increase the safety of that network. Just one more question. Thank you for that. On page five of 26 at the very top, it discusses the project provides needed secondary emergency access to the Barron Canyon Ranch area. Can you highlight on what that means actually? Explain that. Thank you. Yes, the project has designed, and as we went through the design, looking at the the needs of the parcels and residents along the alignment We was added we added the capacity of the bridges to hold vehicle traffic and and that was a component that's discussed is the Both the option for secondary egress from the North Monay Road area, including Bering Canyon, as well as quick and accessible the ability for fire fighting to quickly get into that area, all along the adjacent to Highway 1, where it's the source of many, you know, state highways are a source of many fires, and so providing an avenue for fire equipment to get in there and address fires quickly. Yeah. So, okay. That's an important safety aspect. Thank you. Supervisor Gibson, do you have more? Okay, I had a couple of questions, John. You just talked about the cost supervisor Pauline had asked a little bit about the cost of this trail extension. I'm going to call it the extension and that's what I'm asking you to clarify that the $6.8 million that we've spends. The $18.2 million that is the Department of the California Department of Transportation's grant. Totally 25 and then the other day, slow-cog head offered or made available $7 million more. But that all just is the price tag on the extension, meaning the 2.5 mile original Bob Jones trail through Avala. That was paid for already. So this is just, we're just talking the extension. the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property of the property to the property owner representative. And so I think it's Kristen. And am I saying, Brennbrole? Am I saying your name right? OK, great. And Kristen, we've noted it on your slip as well. That you have 20 minute presentations. Thank you. I don't know if I'll meet it or not, but we did submit a letter on August 16th with a detailed statement of objections so that you would have the benefit of those comments and points in advance of this meeting and to have as part of your consideration here today. So I won't be here. Kristen, I'm not that mainly to break up your train of thought, but will you pull that mic up a little time, get closer? We just had a new audience. Just a little. Stalled and so. And I'm just. We're still adjusting everything. I don't know how to make it go up higher. Is that a little bit better if I'm right here? I think someone's coming to turn you up. I think I might not. you up. Thank you. All right. Thank you. I know everyone wants to care what you're saying. So thank you. All right. So that's far. I've heard questions about funding and expenditure of funds and and what I am informed of about the motivation distinct motivation for proceeding today is that there is a concern for a loss of funding, loss of project funds for this project. That is not in fact part of the inquiry that's meant to be before you today. You're considering whether or not to adopt a resolution of necessity to take private property for purposes of you today, you're considering whether or not to adopt a resolution of necessity to take private property for purposes of constructing a portion of this trail. There are certain findings that you're required to make and critical among those that I want to talk about is whether or not the project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury and whether or not the property sought to be acquired is necessary for the project. And in relationship to that, I note that your resolution necessity, the proposed resolution, talks about general plan policy 3.12. There hasn't been any discussion about that yet, but I know everyone's aware of it. The policy that's not, for some reason, identified in the resolution or I don't think it's identified in the staff report either, is policy 3.11. It's a related policy and it simply says, eminent domain will not be used for trail establishment. Period. M&M domain will not be used for trail establishment. And I find it inconceivable that anyone could look at the proposed action today and say that what is proposed to happen here is that this board is going to authorize anything other than the use of M&M domain for trail establishment. To develop the Bob Jones trail on my client Ray Bennell's property. And I want to note that Mr. Bennell has been objecting to the location of this portion of the trail and his property since I think at least 2010. He's got correspondence that he's submitted over and over again, raising real and concrete concerns about public safety issues, concerns for residents in that area, safety concerns, issues with fire with trespassing, legitimate things that he raised also in connection with the environmental review process that was done, I don't know, something close to 10 years ago now. A fairly stale process that we think should be updated. But in any event, the county's been on notice a long time that Mr. Benel is not willing to sell his property, and that he has been relying and raising time and again, the fact that there are general plan policies that have been in place since I think 2004 or 2006 that say you can't use them in a domain for this purpose. I appreciate the commentary about the fact that there are good reasons for this trail to be put into place, lotable project goals. And that's all fine and well, but this part is had an option, the county has had an option for quite some time now, which is if it doesn't to be a good idea to find it well but this part is an option. The county is an option for quite some time now, which is if it doesn't like the policies that it itself imposed, it can amend those policies. It can take them out of the general plan, but it hasn't elected to do so. If the will of the county, the board, the people is to use eminent domain for this type of purpose, then that process should have been undertaken to make it known to the public that there was going to be a change of policy and to do it the right way with notice an opportunity for public comment, participation, and to weigh the competing values of utilizing eminent domain or not for this type of purpose. This is an end run around that process. And frankly anyone who cares about due process of law, public participation in government should be appalled at that. That instead what's occurred here is that a single private property owner is being made. you know, I think he would tell you to feel a villain, right? He doesn't want to sell his property. He doesn't have to choose to. And there's a policy in your general plan that is not meant to be optional. I saw, I think it's in the resolution in this SDProposed itself, and note that this is simply a planning policy. You can choose to ignore it. I find it hard to imagine that we're a private property owner or developer of property to come before the board and ask to do something that was inconsistent with the policies of the general plan. That the board would say, sure we can just ignore it. I don't know what that kind of message sends to citizens about government accountability and fair application and consistent application of our laws. Plans or plans, plans can be changed. But here, these are policies that have remained in place. No one has elected to change them. You have to deal with them. You have to confront them head on. And that hasn't been done here. So the idea that you could find that the greatest public and least private injury is to go forward with adoption for resolution necessity to take property when you have an inconsistent general plan policy. It doesn't jive. You don't have evidence before you in light of that to go forward. The EIR for this project referred to the policies, referred to the fact that M and domain cannot be used and expressly accounted for the fact that there would have to be other options utilized or you'd have to have gaps in the trail. And that was known and that's been known the whole way along. Staff or whomever in their infinite wisdom decided to go and secure funds that assumed that you could utilize a condemnation process that everyone's known all along you couldn't utilize because you hadn't unwilling property owner irresponsible and not Mr. Bennell's fault. Not this board's fault necessarily, although I don't know decisions at different points of the process, maybe should be looked at a little more carefully. This is a manufactured crisis you're facing. Loss of funding, loss of money that's already been utilized, shouldn't have been utilized if you couldn't make good consistent with your policies on use of the funds. The concern for securing a pot of money, and the sacrifice of adherence to your own policies, rule of law, Mr. Bennell's fundamental rights, sacrifice those because the pot is big enough. That's a concerning look. And I would hope that members of this board appreciate that that's not a message that you wanna send. You don't have this policy to begin with, to tell people that because it's convenient, because it makes it more affordable, we can go ahead and take your property. It's inconsistent and it undermines the findings that you're required to make. If you go forward today on this record in light of those policies, I think it's unavoidable that you're required to make. If you go forward today on this record and light of those policies, I think it's unavoidable that you're gonna have committed a gross abuse of discretion. We cited case law and are written submission to you. And not only because, it's just generally appears to be a foregone conclusion accepting the funding and moving forward, you're basically pre-committed yourself. And on that record, making this a foregone conclusion, just simply a rubber stamp, renders any resolution you adopt in reality. Won't be valid. No point in doing it. I think, and I would hope that members of this board would value public process, would value public participation and would care about ensuring that environmental review has been completed and full, that all of your teas have been crossed and eyes dotted and that you've done it in the right way. And I don't think that you can say that today. Urgency, a sense of urgency about project funding, is not a reason to make findings that are not supported by the evidence. And I would be happy to take questions, but I think we've laid out authority that responds to the points that are cited in the resolution of necessity. And I know that there are, I'm sure others who want to comment on this. But the notion that you've been bound by these general plan policies in some way that's impermissible, that's cited in the resolution. Not true. Go amend the general plan. The notion that government code 6 5 402 only looks at location purpose and extent of acquisitions. I don't know how you could say that's not implicated. only looks at location purpose and extent of acquisitions. I don't know how you could say that's not implicated. When you know that this location site with an unwilling property owner is unavailable, absolutely implicated. You have an EIR that discusses 3.12 and discusses, the nature of it being an impact, grading it. I think it implicates sequa. There are responses to all the points that are made here, but I would ask the board to take pause and really think before it goes forward with an action that frankly will lead to the parties being mired in litigation over the issue. Which isn't going to be in the public interest or Mr. Bennell's interest or anyone else's. Not the greatest public, but certainly not the least private entry. Thank you Mr. Morgueh you said you'd be available for questions so this would be our time. We're still on the clock I'm looking at it Rita or I Want to make sure we're following that but we still had time on the clock second ago We can ask questions the board can ask questions. Okay I'll see oh supervisor Paul thank you chair actually as a procedural matter I have questions for county council responding to some of what was alleged. Okay then do you mind if I go first? Yeah of course that works. Okay and then you just stop me if I'm going out of out of the lane. Okay Mr. Enbro thank you. I did have a couple questions. Do you know how long Mr. Vanilla's thank you. I did have a couple questions. Do you know how long Mr. Vanille is on this particular property? Oh, I'm sorry. Don't know the answer to that question. I do know that he has been at least since prior to 2010. So he's a long time owner of the property. And I'm assuming he's been paying property taxes all the time on this property or we know about it. Yeah. And then the other question you may or may not know, but this has been going on a long time. So this is the first time we've had a discussion on this die. So I'm just kind of going off memory here, but at least for the $18 million grant, Mr. Medell had sent us, I think all the board at that time received correspondence some years ago and I'm sorry I don't. Copies of letters that he'd actually sent to the CTC during the grant hearings. So my point here is those letters that he's been sending letters for a long time to a lot of different hearing bodies stating the fact that this property is unavailable. That's what I guess I'm asking for confirmation. Yes, absolutely. Going back to 2010, 2015, when the EIR process was going on, he's been very active and vocal and attentive to what's been going on. He's aware of this project. He's well informed about the general plan policies.. He's aware of this project. He's well-informed about, you know, the general plan policies. And it is aware of concerns that not only he has, but residents there have, and objections they have to the location of the trail. He has advocated for moving that segment of the trail and pursuing an alternate alignment for it. And I gather there were some hiccups to looking at that process, but I also don't think that there was really meaningful review or analysis of that alternative. I think it's on Ontario Road. He has very serious credible concerns that he's raised time and again. I mean, he's really, really put everyone on notice of those concerns and given an opportunity for it to be worked out. We're talking about over a decade worth of time here. If the general plan, and everyone was aware of the general plan policy and that he was concerned about that, and that he was relying on that to say, you cannot force this upon me. There's been ample time for that to be addressed. But it strikes me that there's no evidence on that record, on this record, that there is will amongst the public, political will, to change that policy. I mean, I don't know where it leaves you if you're just going to start making ad hoc decisions that are in violation of the policy, but leave it intact. What are people to make of it? They have no certainty that it will be enforced in the future. Okay, I didn't have any. Thank you for answering those questions. Those were my questions. I don't see any other lights on. So thank you very much. Oh, supervisor Gibson has been. Well, you'll the floor to supervisor Paul Ding, who had questions of council. I have similar concerns I believe I the arguments to my ear sound extremely weak and I'd be interested in council's views on that. So are you saying you don't have questions? I don't have questions. Okay. Thank you very much. Okay. I have a question. Oh, wait. Yeah. So if I hear you correctly, you're suggesting that if we change a policy, and the general plan policy, which we can do, that somehow is going to change Mr. Binell's mind, is that what you are doing? I'm not saying it's gonna change Mr. Binell's mind. I think he's gonna be a staunch advocate against this alignment of the trail and his property. However, what I mean to put forward is the notion that if you're going to make a sort of different value judgment, you're going to adopt a new policy about whether or not it's appropriate if it's necessary. If it's in the best interest of the public that in instances where we're going to put a trail in, it's okay to use eminent domain versus not, then that discussion should be had in full with respect to that policy and the appropriate forum with the appropriate process. Let's see. I wanted to ask about the easements that currently exist. Why did Mr. Bernel give easements to four or five different utilities, et cetera, in that same location, if that land was so valuable to him. I would be speaking on a turn to say whether or not in all instances, those were utilities that easements that were granted by him rather than a predecessor if they're older utility easements, which oftentimes are quite old ones. They may predate his ownership or if he granted them, I mean, it's a far different thing if say there is a gas line underneath the property, right, which isn't bringing traffic to the property, which isn't putting feet on the ground, bikes on the ground, impacting the use of the property or creating some of the safety issues that he's raised. It's a different situation. There are different considerations there. Thank you. No further questions? Okay. Thank you. No further questions? Okay. Thank you. Thank you. We mean it this time. Okay. We have questions for our county council. So, supervisor Pauling. Thank you, Chair. And I appreciate the property owners representative zealously advocating for her client is in fact your job. So nicely done. A couple of questions just for our county council. When we look at some of the legal arguments being made to undermine this board's authority to act in this way, one of the primary legal arguments has been made that there's an inconsistency with general plan policies. And if you could just shed some light on whether if in fact that inconsistency exists, and the public health system is a very important thing to be able to do with the public health system. And if you could just shed some light on whether if in fact that inconsistency exists, what bearing that has on our decision today? Sure. So, John, the county council's office. So, it did. There is a policy obviously that she's correct in terms of what those policies are. The board is authorized in order to interpret those policies or in some instances maybe not go along with those policies. In terms of SEQUA, it says that when you're looking at the project or the action and comparing it with those policies, in this instance is the conservation open space policy, right? You have to discuss it and you have to look at it. And the original EIR looked at it and it said, look, we are not going to, we're not going to be using eminent domain for this proceeding. So that's how the original EIR looked at it. As a project moved forward, we realized that eminent domain will likely be, we're likely going to be facing that. So when we brought the resolution of the necessity, what we did was we looked at the potential for this board to look at taking eminent domain action and we did some subsequent environmental analysis. And that's on section 10 of the resolution of necessity. So Sequa says, okay, when it comes to planning and land use policies, what are the environmental impacts? And if you look at a panic G, they look at things such as, in terms of the policy, does it physically divide an established community? In this instance, no. Does it conflict with any applicable land use plan policy or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project, adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? And no, this is very procedural. It's how you acquire land. The last one is does a policy conflict with any, does the action conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? The answer to that is no. So then in terms of what form of subsequent environmental analysis do we look at, there's filtering criteria in the Sequit guidelines. That's in 15162. So if you look at, well, it's kind of long-winded, but if you look at section E and subsection 10 of the resolution necessity, it goes through that filtering criteria. So the change in the project is going from acquiring property voluntarily versus now acquiring property potentially by eminent domain. And then, Steakwood tells us we have to look at three different things. Does that change? Is that a substantial change in the project requiring major revisions of the EAR due to the involvement in new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects? The answer to that is no. Two, does the change, is it a substantial change with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, which will require major revisions of the EIR due to involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of a previously identified significant effect? Answer to that is no. Thirdly, is this new information of substantial importance which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the IOS certified as complete which shows any of the following that the project basically will have a new it's a new increase or a new environmental fact or a mitigation measure wasn't sufficient. So it all looks towards what it all looks at the environmental impacts of that change. In this instance, it's simply just how we are acquiring property, right? So we showed our work under SICWA. That's what the resolution and necessity does. That's what subsection 10 does with resolution and necessity. It goes through all that filtering criteria and it analyzes, you know, when we, that originally I R did not contemplate the use of eminent domain. Now with resolution necessity, we are contemplating it. That is a change in, let's say, the project and the action and we went through the steps to in order to show our work and the board is authorized to use or to adopt a resolution necessity. We feel like it is, we've complied with sequels, not an abusive discretion. We've made some, there are some differences between what that policy is in terms of being a recreational policy for recreational trails. This is in part recreational trail, but in large part a transportation project. So, so there's some interpretation this being done here, and that looks closely at that change. So, so we as staff feel like, yes, there's an interpretation of this being done here, and that looks closely at that change. So we as staff feel like, yes, there's that policy and effect. We've gone through the process to show our work in terms of that this is not a significant effect on the environment, and we put it all in the resolution and necessity. Hopefully that explains it. That really does, and so just the basic question is, do you think that our action today to move forward with eminent domain is legally defensible in a court of law? Yes. Thank you. One of the other things that the council for the property owner mentioned was the idea that I think she used the term, this is a manufactured crisis and she was alluding to the idea that loss of funding is a concern of our board as the primary justification for taking a serious action like this. And that's certainly not the way I see that. If that's putting words in this board's mouth, we've yet to deliberate, but in fact, there are so many different benefits to this project. And so if I could, maybe Mr. Woodell is the proper person to point, staff person to point my attention to, but I don't think the presentation really encompassed the benefits associated with this project. You talked a little bit earlier about the, how it relates to the multimodal plan for South County, including improvements to Highway 101. But in general, I think there was some Q&A earlier about the fire emergency response, egress, considerations. But the benefit even goes beyond that. It's a public safety function in that we've had fatalities, you know, due to the lack of safety as it relates to bicycle access from the community of Alibaba to the City of San Luis Obispo. This would improve that. This would benefit the economy in the sense that we would be connecting to communities and the South County region to the city of San los Obispo. The the benefits are multifaceted. So maybe staff could just opine a little bit on that and it could be better directed to legal council. I just want to respond to the allegation that the maybe staff could just opine a little bit on that. And it could be better directed to legal counsel. I just want to respond to the allegation that the justification for eminent domain is somehow a manufactured crisis. In fact, it's been 10 years or more in the making, six point, what was it? $8 million expended to date on this project. An $18.25 million California Transportation Commission grant, which is quite impressive that we were able to obtain a grant that is not common at that scale for our region, leveraging another $7 million investment from our regional council of governments. This has been a fight in the sense that the community has rallied for years together to advocate for this project. Government agencies have made it a priority. We've gotten it to this last mile, this last piece of property, and we're talking about an easement over a sliver of land where there are already utility easements. I'm just, I'm seeing that this idea of a manufactured crisis is, is completely incorrect and inconsistent with the true justification for this project. And I don't know, maybe I'm just opining here. I should be asking a specific question, but you might add that it's irrelevant. Well, I think that's a good good that's a good comment. When I stop my questions at this point in time and turn over to supervisor. Yes, questions. No, we'll go out for a problem. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. In response, I mean, I think raising an objection to the arguments we heard from the applicant's attorney, which are absolutely appropriate. This is a conflation of a bunch of grievance in terms of whether this is a manufactured crisis. And I could turn to counsel to confirm that the legal basis upon which we undertake eminent domain is detailed in the findings of the resolution. And there is nothing in there that speaks to the timing of the timing of grant funding. It is not that we lose this grant does not help us justify eminent domain. Is that correct? That's correct. It's all about the project. And so it is not in the findings and this resolution will stand on its own. Similarly, this board has leeway. It has judgment to apply and whether a particular policy applies to the project at hand. And we find that this is a transportation project. It has got obvious alternate transportation benefits to be had. It is funded by transportation dollars. And as such, we can determine that the policies regarding recreational facilities don't apply, even as this feature might be used for recreation. I would liken that to any road in the county road system. If someone rides a bike on a road to get out and get some fresh air, they're using our roads for recreation. Many of those roads have been built with property taken by eminent domain, similarly small pieces. So again, council can verify it is within this board's purview to, in fact, our responsibility to decide and council can verify it is within this board's purview to in fact our responsibility to decide the applicability of any policy in our general plan. And if you just get a confirmation. Yeah, that's correct. And I mean, if you look at subsection 10E, I mean, that finding is specifically there in terms of that that policy is in a applicable because it only raised to trails. I mean, and you can call it used to be called the Bob Jones trails now called the Bob Jones pathway. And we don't have a policy on pathways. So there, so there we go. Similarly, the, had a number of other things, but Mr. Bennell's long ejection to this project and to negotiating, selling land for this project is not a defense against an imminent domain proceeding. Is that correct, Council? That's correct. Similarly, it's irrelevant how long he's owned this piece of property. That's correct. Okay. So, you know, I supervisor Pauling I appreciate the County property owners council is here to do a particular job but for the benefit of the public who's we're about to hear from I think shortly just understand that our county council finds no legal basis in the arguments that have been offered here. And that we are proceeding as we always do with extreme care in the application of eminent domain. The key here is again minimal, minimal harm. And I think that's useful to again look at the aerial photograph and note that this path has been pushed to the absolute limit up against highway one. We're not striking a path across the middle of anybody's property. We are locating this in a way and have engaged in long negotiations to try to accommodate the concerns expressed by the property on or to to know effect so this is not an unusual situation This is not this is a Situation that we absolutely can defend and we've been years in the making getting to this point today. I Appreciate that old yield the floor Okay, I think we're finished with our questions. we're going to go to public comment. So we're going to go ahead and start with Bruce Hilton and then Bruce Hilton, followed by Eric Greening. Thank you. Good afternoon. Members of the board, appreciate the discussion. And agree, Mr. Bennell is just representing himself and his attorney as well. My dad is attorney from the county here and one of his first clients was a ranch that is now under Lopez Lake as, due to a resolution of necessity. So that's what we have to do sometimes for the public good. And then I'd like to talk to about this policy because I was actually in the room, helped write this policy. I've been with county parks as a volunteer on the trails committee and also with the parks commission for almost 20 years now. And so when we were writing that policy, it was directly in relation to comments from the ag community. And at that time, I was actually a member of the Farm Bureau and the Cattleman's Association. And actually a relative of your supervisor, Arnold, came to one of the parks commission meetings and said, hey, why is this corridor out in rural lands go right across my front door? So we understood the concerns of these rural trail corridors that were, you know, mapped out for long-term planning that people would be concerned. And so for those types of trails we crafted a policy that said for trails in these rural areas across Ag Land, we won't use eminent domain. And that, you know, that alleviated those concerns. That's why the policy went through. But it was absolutely not written for this case. I was there. That's why the policy went through. But it was absolutely not written for this case. I was there. I was in the room working to craft this policy. And in this case, we're adjacent to the Highway 101 corridor and there's no other options. And so I want to speak a little bit about that too with my one minute left. I've made some dissenting opinions as a parks commissioner. The Nupomo basketball courts is one because I thought there were other options. There were better options. I wanted to look at schools, school courts, and I think it's important what you've done in Supervisor Arnold too, say, eminent domain should have the, you know, our resolution of necessity should have this highest bar We should look at every option and I strongly believe that we have we've done everything we've looked at Ontario road We've it's just there's Ontario road 101 the creek. There's not There's not another option. So we've done everything we can we can and I think it's important that you've you know You've advocated for that. I've done the same as a parks commissioner, but looking back, I'm thankful that the Nampomo basketball courts are there. And I play with my nephews there and I see how they brought the community together. So I think, let's do our job, but that's not the job today. Today where it's make or break and it's Humpty Dumpty. If it falls apart now, I don't think it's going to go back together so please consider that please move this forward with the resolution necessity thank you. Thank you Eric Greening and then Eric will be followed by Greg Graywell. Thank you I'm Eric Greening whose record shows I have defended landowners when I believe private injury outweighed public good, such as when the DWR was bullying people over the right of way of the coastal branch. However, in this case, I see the needed taking as peripheral to the properties involved and central to the creation of a needed transportation link. The question you should ask yourselves is whether you find the public good greater than the private injury if this was a needed road link for which grant money would be forfeited if you didn't make the finding. If you would, then the further question is whether those of us who don't drive, there are lots of us too old, too young, with disabilities incompatible with driving, with low incomes, or simply willing to sacrifice convenience to reduce congestion, pollution, and climate havoc, whether we non-drivers are less important than those who drive. Do you assume that we drivers, non-drivers, do nothing but recreate while people with cars do all the productive and essential stuff, if so, that's a vicious prejudice. Both roads and non-motorized infrastructure and Bob James is more than a trail. Carry a mix of essential and recreational trips. Many recreational car trips are called tourism and our economy depends on it. Slough and out linking slow and avala is essential to the non-motorized. There is no transit option between those points and transit to Shell Beach requires out-of-direction travel. Avala hosts such essential events as meetings of the Diablo Canyon Independent Safety Committee and a fair number of businesses. The Harbor Commission is currently moving in the direction of a major expansion the public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public public non-motorized commute options are essential to prevent gridlock. I would guess that you wouldn't refuse offered funding for a critical road link for no reason other than suspicion that some people might have fun driving on it. I ask you to offer the same respect to those of us who don't drive. If you can't do that, will you tell us to our faces that you consider us less than equal? I think better of all of you that none of you would stoop to that. Please rise to the occasion of affirming our equality with your action today. Thank you. Thank you. Greg Graywall and Greg will be followed by William Benedict. Thank you very much, Board. My name is Greg Graywall and Greg will be followed by William Benedict. Thank you very much, Board. My name is Greg Graywall. I live in the Creston area on Highway 229. An undivided road that bicycle people ride on all the time that is unsafe. Somehow they get by and they're not hit. I don't understand why they can be on a county, a CalTrans Highway in my area, but they cannot be too close to a CalTrans Highway over here. the property. I agree with the owners representative. This is a taking. This is an end run. It is public info that you should be able to tell what the fair market value is for that 1.2 acres. It should be probably about 15 million. Who spent the money without making sure that the land was secure? Who filed the information to get the grant knowing that you didn't have all these mints? Sounds a little premature. That was fraudulence. Okay. 830 landowners were filed prescription on by this county. I was trying to take our water rights. We've been in court for 11 years. We've won five trials and two stipulated agreements. We're finally at the end of the deal. You go forward with this. Maybe you'll be in court for another 10 years. This is not transportation. This is recreation, and trying to mis- manipulate words so that you can get some other grant money and use it for something that somebody else wants is indefensible. And then we hear about the fire. How many insurance companies are leaving the state of California? My fire insurance got canceled two years ago. So you wanna put a trail, probably, I'm demify yourselves, and then put homeless people that we're gonna live on this trail. So this is the homeless highway, not the Bob Jones highway. And then we got 400 of them in the Salinas River that light fires every day all year long. That emergency services have to go put out and protect who's going to be responsible for that or the trash or they jump the fence and go into the other guys are you going to rebuild his houses if they burn down who's going to be in charge of that are their water mains are their hydrants are the roads for the emergency vehicles I actually know about this stuff because I worked 30 years for LACD fire I didn't sit behind a desk in an office. I went out to the emergencies. I worked next to Griffith Park in other areas where there were stuff where we had horse rescues and bike rescues and people in the river and people doing things. And so you're adding something that is very critical in the fire triangle. That's called an ignition source. You already have the fuel, you already have the oxygen. You're the one's gonna create the problem. If you allow people to go to an area that's inaccessible, that's gonna create the ignition that may start burning other people's homes, especially when we have such a problem than the community of this state with insurance, because of the mismanagement by government who created these problems in the first place. Thank you. Okay, let's see. William Benedict. And William will be followed by Peggy Madavilla. My name's Will Benedict. I live here in San Luis. I'm here as a member of the San Luis Abispo Bicycle Club and on its board. And we have members throughout the county working and riding and enjoying ourselves and supporting where we can improvements in the infrastructure for cycling. Our members have been involved in the Bob Jones trail. We've called it a trail too long. I can't make the switch the path right now, but from its inception and we have done what we can to support that. And again, we are here to support the completion of that Bob Jones trail. I'd like to thank you and the people that have talked so far. It's helped me a lot in terms of understanding the issues you're dealing with. And I came here with the assumption that I would speak for our club in supporting this and nothing that's been said has changed that and that's why I appreciate the clarity that you have brought to this discussion. It seems to me that as you have identified the property that's being needed is a very small and tangential to what the owner has. And it'll bring a lot of positive things to our community and benefits to the environment and to the economics of our county. I think I'll just stop by asking you please to support the resolution of necessity to complete the trail. Thank you. Thank you. Peggy Mantaville and Peggy will be followed by Monica Schechter. Good afternoon. Please adopt the Bond Jones pathway, resolution of necessity. So the county staff can continue to negotiate with the landowner and complete this essential and fully funded active transportation project linking San Luis Obispo to the South County. The project fulfills an essential community need, provides overwhelming public benefits, and has been in the making for years. To date, 6.8 million in county funds have been spent on the project, not including significant staff and volunteer time. Most impressively, the project has received over $18 million in grant funding because it's need ranks so high with the California Transportation Commission. Significant grant funding like this isn't allocated to our region very often. For fitting the $18.25 million grant when all the pieces are in place would be heart wrenching for this community. Additionally, it would severely impact the county and regions ability to rank well when applying for these scarce and highly competitive grants in the future should the county fail to deliver. Please support the staff recommendation so the project can move forward and this much needed multi-million dollar grant and grant opportunities in the future are not jeopardized. Thank you. Thank you. Monica's sector and Monica Monica be followed by Karen. I delight. Hello, board. I'm Monica Schecter. I live in Templeton and I'm here to speak in support of the extending the Bob Jones pathway connecting the city of slow with Avila Beach. I understand that the four and a half miles of this project is designed and fully funded. My family and friends are regular users of Bob Jones. There is a large senior population using this pathway. Acquiring the eminent domain is not pursued lightly, but only when it is a project that greatly benefits the public, which I believe this does. And I would highlight that the Bob Jones pathway would provide the secondary emergency evacuation route for the nearby Bayerin Canyon subdivision, which has been mentioned a very high fire hazard severity zone. The impact to the landowner seems to be minimal. This project meets the measures of Aminit to Maine, specifically to the transportation needs and also safety needs of our community. I especially ask our North County supervisors, Debbie Arnold and John Cushon to please support the Bob Jones project. If we fail to move this project the county I understand will be forced to give back most of the 18 million in grant funding. So please pass this resolution of necessity. I believe it's in the public and constituents best interests. Thank you. Thank you. Karen, I'd a lot. We'll be followed by Gary Havis. My name good afternoon chair Armand Arnold and board members. My name is Karen A.min Arnold and Board members. My name is Karen A. Nalot and I'm a resident of San Luis Obispo and a Board member of the Friends of the Bob Jones Trail. We enthusiastically support the staff's recommendation. We and thousands of other trail users want this trail or pathway, completed for many reasons and safety is first among them. Supervisor Arnold, we know that you deeply care about public safety, which is your top priority as an elected official. In this case, the Bob Jones Trail Connection is both a critical fire and bicycle pedestrian safety issue. We want to commend your vote on February 28, 2023 in support of a resolution of necessity to replace the deficient Dover Canyon road bridge near Pasarovals. You were one of four votes in favor. The Bob Jones trail requires the same common sense and new safety standards as you mentioned then. We had hoped to show the video of you explaining this because the safety issues are so similar to the Bob Jones trail concern. Instead I will cite part of your comments in favor of eminent domain. The issue was fire safety because the property owners did not accept the county's offer to purchase a permanent easement for public road and slope purposes. You voted for eminent domain so the old bridge could be replaced with a modern one that supports fire trucks. You said our standards now of living in these wildland fire areas are different and it's becoming more of a requirement to have these upgraded standards, especially a bridge. The Bob Jones Trail Connector will provide a fire break and emergency egress for Peron Canyon, a subdivision that was completed at the dead end of Monty Road in 1990. Prior to the requirement that such projects have two egress routes where people can be trapped by fire. The need for eminent domain is for only 1.2 acres of private property already encumbered. Please explain why you supported eminent domain for Dover Creek residents and have opposed it for this project even though fire and pedestrian cipher cycle are issue. I implore you to please consider the seriousness of eminent domain for both the danger of fire and the need for safety. Thank you. Thank you. Gary Havis and Gary will be followed by John Long. Greetings. My name is Gary Havis County resident community supporter and board president of bike slow county. Sierra emblem says not for ourselves alone. Please keep that in mind as you make a decision on this resolution of necessity. Project of buy and for the community MI it can compass that it's a project for the community MI it can compass the it's a project for the community it encompasses health safety economic vitality for businesses residents and visitors alike The democratic process provides for equitable resolutions and to land acquisition and I support the determination that this sliver of Land of an absentee land loaners property is worthy of a resolution of necessity. Complete the Bob Jones Trail as an important county transportation infrastructure project with a gap closure segment. It's your responsible action. Thank you. Thank you. John Long. John will be followed by John Hedgebeth. My name is John Long. I currently ride usually a hundred miles a week in the local community and when I ride out to Avola going along Orcett Road there's a places where there's six inches of a shoulder for me to ride a lot of gravel on the road rocks falling in that type of thing if there was a path or I could be away from the cars where they're texting and weaving all over the road, it'd be much safer. So please pass this resolution. Thank you. Okay. John Hedgebeth. I live on a square can in road which tees into Monty roads, I'm kind of familiar with this area. So I have three points I want to talk about. E-bikes, politics and pragmatism. Under E-bikes, politics, and pragmatism. Under e-bikes, well, I rode here on a regular pedal bike, no e-bike, from my house. So I'm familiar with transportation issues with bicycles along the existing route. According to Bicycle Retailers Magazine and the GCN website, there's a really tremendous expansion of e-bikes, and I'm sure you're all aware of it. It allows people that can't do what I did today. Use a very simple, effective, energy saving mode of transportation. use a very simple, effective, energy saving, mode of transportation. So that's the first point I have to make about. Second point is politics, and I got a trail's not a bikeway. You know, I've written all sorts of ways, recreation. I've committed to work here for many, many years for my house in the San Luis Biscoe, along a route that let's say needs a little bit improvement. A little while ago I was contacted by a representative Benel to enlist the support of many landowners around where I lived. I kind of like let that slide. The last point is pragmatism. Along the route that I took today, there have been at least two deaths that I know about. The second point in pragmatism, besides safety and all that, is dealing with the critiques that have been made about fire, camping, et cetera. So we can provide, or you guys can provide, or the public works director here can provide some fencing to separate any of those issues. You know, simple fencing with the very pragmatic way of dealing with those kind of issues. Thanks and I hope you get the gap closure together. Thank you. Gary Kirkland and Gary will be followed by Rob Luein. Thank you. Gary Kirkland from TASKETERL. I'm on the bike committee and I'm an avid bike writer and I'm adamantly opposed to using imminent domain to take away people's property rights for a trail. Now if this is a transportation issue which I love the way Democrats change the meaning of words, and use different words to get the way they want, but if it is a transport, then I want to drive my truck on it. It's a transportation corridor. Is the county going to allow me to drive my truck on this road to leave some of the transportation problems on 101, I'll take the Bob Jones trail to Avalon instead of 101. Is that going to happen? Not likely. The idea that you could give up principle for an expedience is if it if you read the Devil and Daniel Walker, or Daniel Webster, there's two stories. The idea that you give up a principle of imminent domain, not using it for a trail, and other expedient or the monies involved, is the road to hell. And if you don't stand on principle, you'll give up for anything. Please do not use imminent domain. If you can't negotiate in good faith with anyone then you should stop. Thank you very much. Thank you. Rob Lohan, to be followed by Elaine Glo. Madam Chair and Honorable Supervisors, I'm Robert Lohin, the Principal at Resolute Associates. In your package, his correspondence from me to you on a simple fire safety review, Resolute Associates conducted on the Bob Jones Path. Our findings are that with some additional improvements to the path would provide a secondary emergency evacuation route for the Barron Canyon community. The design improvements should include the ability of the path and bridge to accommodate passenger vehicles and light duty trucks, including ambulances, and to design turnouts where topographically possible to allow vehicles to get off the path so other vehicles can pass. I am not here to recommend whether or not you should acquire the easement through eminent domain or not. My analysis indicates that by completing this section of the Bob Jones path, it will improve wildfire safety for the barren canyon community. Thank you all for what you do every day for all of us. Thank you. Eileen Lowe and Eileen will be followed by Susan Funk. Good afternoon, Madam Chair, members of the board. Glad to be here. My name is Eileen Lowe. I'm a resident of our Grande. I'm an avid bicyclist and I'm a career bicycle commuter. I can assure you that a bicycle is a valid means of transportation. It got me back and forth to San Luis Bispo on a regular basis. And I'm also familiar with many of the elements that you're addressing today as the job that my bicycle brought me to was to work care at Cal Trans District 5. And so I'm aware of the eminent domain process. I know that it's a difficult process to orchestrate. It is not taken lightly, and in fact, when you go down this path, it's a path of the last resort. It is not the first thing. And my observation here is that the county staff has done a really good job evaluating all of the options and carefully considering the public need. The resolution of necessity that you're being asked to adopt is really a finding of facts. And this allows for the next level of negotiations to occur. This happens when there is such a high public need and an unwilling seller in this case. I believe that the need for the property has been well established. I believe the alternatives have been duly and thoroughly evaluated. And I think that there's an overwhelming sense of public good that has been established here. the public interest in the public interest. I'm not sure if you're aware of the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the public interest in the of necessity today. Thank you. Thank you. Susan Funk and Susan Funk will be followed by Jackie Parker. Thank you Madam Chair, supervisors. I'm Susan Funk, Mayor Prattima of a taskadero speaking on my own behalf today and want to remind you first of all that North County has a vital stake in this project, in this transportation quarter project, even though it occurs south. And that's beyond the fact that District five includes a significant chunk of the North part of San Luis Obispo and people who really care about this, this form of transportation and the ability to get around more broadly in their community. But it's also a matter of field to our folks who depend, the taxpayers who depend on the county to use its funds wisely. The funds have already been spent on this project if we've heard. And the county will have to repay money from the grant to the state that has already been spent out of those funds on this project. And that's money that can be used to fix rural roads, that can be used to defend rural priorities and it's not responsible to the taxpayers to just toss that money inside. They say, well, whoops, you know, too bad. We're just going to pay out somewhere between 700,000 and 6.8 million depending on, we have, I didn't hear testimony on the refundable amount. But that's a really important thing. I know that the supervisor cares about fielded attack spares. The other thing is they, the impact on other transportation projects. In a task aderro, we're in the midst of updating our general plan to accommodate the, among other things, plan for the a task aderro to Templeton connector. It's the one place where you can't get between those two places, you know, directly, except on the one on one. And that's been in the planning for a long time and we will not have a prayer of getting the money for that project if we have to send back the grant on this trail extension. So I would remind you that coming back to the criteria for the resolution of necessity, that this is fundamentally a transportation project. People who want a recreational trail experience don't typically say, oh, I'm gonna go walk around a few miles down the 101 on the shoulder. Oh, fun. No, this is for a form of transportation that wasn't even envisioned when our parks commissioner noted that the the provision that the applicants-bikes which have now developed that has made this a major commuting vehicle. So I urge you to recognize that this meets the criteria that all of the other available avenues have been exhausted and that North County as well as South County and slow constituents have a real stake in coming together to make sure this project succeeds. Thank you. Jackie Parker and Jackie be followed by Dan Revor. Good morning. I would like to speak to represent a group that's not here today, and that's the children of this community. I've lived here for 42 years. My children attended local schools. And when I would drop them off at Los Ranchos, I never saw parents delivering their children by bicycle. Now, fast forward, I have a five-year-old granddaughter at Sincimer School. And when I go to pick her up or go to deliver her, I see scores of parents delivering their children on e-bikes, scooters, and other forms of non-motorized transportation. And it seems to me that the one thing that has not been addressed here is the future. These children deserve a safe corridor. They're parents and they're grandparents. I've driven my granddaughter on a bicycle. I'll tell you, you would much rather be on a safe path than you would be out in traffic. So I hope you will think about the future generation. Decades ago when the Bob Jones Trail was established, we were just marvel at what it added to our quality of life. And now we can extend it. And I plead with you to do it for the next generation. Thank you. Thank you. Dan Revor, followed by Noreen Martin. Chair Arnold Borden, a supervisor's thanks for having us today. I'm here on a personal note. It's been a few minutes since I've been before you. And I want to pick up on the little lead that was brought to you by the prior speaker. I'm coming here because we used to spend some time together on slow cog years ago. My daughter, Viona, was born at that time. And she came to some of the meetings and sat in my lap or would sit, you know, sort of behind the scenes in her little car seat. And she's seven now. My little one, Antonia, she's now four. They're at school today. And I'm here to speak on behalf of the thousands of kids, like them, that can't get out of school this afternoon. And their parents that are busy running around doing errands and aren't able to share their perspective with you. Because I agree. This corridor is the type of corridor that is so important to families and kids in this area. Tony, the little four-year-old, she's on her petal bike now. But up until recently she's been a passenger on the back of our cargo bike that has electric to assist. And while we usually will drive out to the beach or drive to meetings in Avala or other activities, we have ridden our bike together as a family. In fact, our preschool had a whole trip, annual trip to Avala Valley barn for Halloween. And I know a number of families at the school and preschool that would love to go after this type of journey if it were just a little bit safer. Even on the bike with me, my kids as a passenger on the back, this corridor is stressful. There's been fatalities just this last week or two weeks ago, there was a hit and run on Hagarra a little closer to town that resulted in a death. This is the type of process of thinking that we go through every time we make a decision about transportation to get around our community with our kids safely. Those kids now that they're riding are even less able to access places around our community by bike, by healthy means, because of the stresses of distracted driving, drunk driving, and just sort of the tight nature of some of our facilities around the community. So this is the type of project that really does represent the public good in a way that I know you care about. And it's a project that I think will make a huge impact in the lives of so many families throughout San Luis Vizvo County for years and years and years to come. And this is the type of project that if it doesn't go through, we'll be pointing out who on this board didn't have the confidence and leadership to bring us through to the finish line to make this type of amenity that's really woefully Unrepresented here in San Luis Bistbo County a long distance safe corridor to ride a bike to get to a meaningful place like Avila Valley barn or Avila Beach or over to Shell Beach So I really hope that you do the right thing today. Use your leadership position, your opportunity in this political moment, the capital you've got to move this project forward and approve this resolution. Thanks. Thanks. And Noreen Martin, last request to speak. So if anyone else would like to speak on this item, yeah, just you can come up and hand out when you're done. Well, thank you. Nareen Martin, I've been in several businesses throughout the county, but one that is dear to my hardest tourism. This is not just about tourism. This is about transportation. And having a business in Avila, I can see easily people using the bike path to get to work. It's a very simple. It's not a very long bike path. I just talked to John King. He feels the same way at Sycamore mineral springs that they would his employees would use the transportation, use this as transportation also. I believe, and I've said this to this board before I believe in business givebacks. I think eminent domain is of last resort, and from what I've learned about this project, you've tried everything you can possibly do. And for business to give back is a very important piece of making our county healthy. And I see this as a future. I mean, you're going to be looking back 10 years from now and you're going to be patting. You're going to be grateful that you made the decision to extend and to make this project work. And everyone else has said everything I would have said. So I'm not going to belabor anymore. I just really urge you to go forward with this project. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker, Myron Amin, followed by Leah Brooks. Good afternoon, Chair, board members, Myron Ammarine, resident of the city of San Luis Obispo. Historically, I go back to 1975 when I was elected chair of the San Luis Obispo Bike Club. So I've been active in that area for a long time. After graduating Pauly, my wife and I moved north. We lived in the Sacramento area for 23 years. I commuted on the American River Bike Trail from basically Folsom to downtown Sacramento for 23 years. And it never snowed and we rode in the rain. And I'm still alive because I didn't have to write on Fulsome Boulevard. This was a not just a recreational trail. I commuted on this trail. Round trip 42 miles a day, five days a week, year after year after year. Don't tell me these trails are a recreational period. They are multimodal. Everybody's going to use them. The travel I do on my bike now as a retired scientist from the state, I go to all my medical appointments on my bike. Luckily I can still do that. Even after being rear-ended on highway one by a entertaining driver that hit me at 65 miles an hour from the rear. I have a really bad back because of that, the rest of the things kind of work. But don't stop this progress. Eminem domain is a tool that you are available to you to use and you need to use it here. And don't be threatened by legal mumbo jumbo and lawsuits. There's always those out there. The other item I want to mention is fires. We just had one up here on Johnson, probably related to camping, illegal camping, in the brush right along with the creek and other parts of the city. The trail will bring more eyes and safety to the community with more and more people traversing up and down the trail. You'll have more eyes and safety for everybody involved. So please move forward this and let's get this thing built and move on to the next project. This has been in the top five of the County Bikeway Plan for over 15 years now. It hasn't budged. Move it. Thank you. Leah Brooks and Leah will be followed by Whitney Haney. Good afternoon, Chair Arnold and Board Members. I'm Leah Brooks, a resident of San Luis Epispo and Board Member of Friends of the Bob Jones Trail. I'm Leah Brooks, a resident of San Lusipispo and board member of Friends of the Bob Jones Trail. I guess we're going to have to change our name to pathway. We formed our nonprofit 11 years ago to encourage a more timely completion of the Bob Jones pathway. We spent many hours working with stakeholders and county staff to collect safety data for grant applications and were over the moon when the county in 2021 was awarded the 18.25 million dollar active transportation program grant to design and build the 4.5 mile gap between the Ontario Road staging area and the iconic octagon barn. The land conservancy has already constructed the trailhead known as the calf barn. Now it needs the trail. Some of the thousands of Bob Jones pathway supporters are here today hoping that you supervisor Arnold will provide the necessary fourth vote to initiate the eminent domain domain process. The question boils down to public safety or private property rights. This project would provide a choice to Ontario Road described in the staff report this way. Ontario Road, the pedestrian and bike route along the Highway 101 corridor, is shared with motorists as virtually no pedestrian facilities, narrow shoulders, a substandard bridge, and significant conflict points between non-motorists and motorists, including intersections with collision histories and several freeways on and off ramps. Is documented in recent surveys, the vast majority of people avoid traveling by bike or foot along this route due to safety concerns. Slocock's US 101 multi-cord or program application for solutions for a congested quarters grant identifies this project as crucial to the corridor plan requirements by creating a new route that would increase active transportation trips. There's been one fatality I'm aware of of a bicycle commuter and numerous injuries of other cyclists along Ontario Road. Supervisor Arnold, it's up to you. This is a difficult choice, but please vote for public safety. Completing the Bob Jones Trail will save lives and bring great joy to thousands of people who want a bicycle and walk separated from traffic and residents who would greatly appreciate safety from wildfires and a reduction in their fire insurance costs. Please support the staff recommendation. Thank you. Thank you and Whitney. You're hanging. Cheney. Oh, okay. Sorry about that. Cheney. I see you put that way now. Thank you. Good afternoon. I am here on behalf of Visit SlowCal to express our strong support for the completion of the Bob Jones Trail in San Luis Vizpo County. Extending the trail from the city of San Luis Vizpo to South County communities will provide a scenic car free route that meets the daily needs of our residents while also offering visitors an opportunity to experience the diverse diverse beauty of our region. The Bob Jones Trail is critical to our region's active transportation network and supports our shared vision for a bike-friendly future in Slow County. Completing the trail will create a safe designated path, mitigate risks, and encourage people including families to choose cycling as a viable and enjoyable transportation option. In addition to safety, the completed trail will provide added visibility to the idea of a connected county and a unique visitor experience. San Luis County's reputation as an outdoor destination depends on projects like this. Research shows that travelers continue to prioritize natural spaces and outdoor recreation and tend to spend higher than average during their visits here. This in turn directly contributes to the local economy and improves residents' quality of life while further enhancing the county's outdoor offerings and encouraging even more cross-visitation. Without immediate action, this crucial project risks further delays that could jeopardize its completion. the community. We have a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community that is a community and decisive action to make the completed trail a reality. Thank you. Thank you. I don't have any other requests to speak. So if there are any folks out there that want to speak, come forward now. And otherwise, we're going to close public comments and bring it back to the board for deliberations. Chair, I've got a question before we go to deliberations. Sure. I just wanted to confirm with staff how we have worked to address some of the concerns that have been identified by the property owner. I think among the concerns raised, fire risk or the fact that increased use of this path would result in more fire risk. The concerns related to potential trespassing. I know that there are a number of design features like offense that have been discussed to address those concerns. If we could really just take a little bit of time to explain the mitigations that we've offered to the property owner to address those concerns, I appreciate it. Okay, I'll highlight several things that we've done over the years as we've worked with the property owner as we were developing the design of the project. One is the path originally was planned to go down kind of the middle of Clover Ridge and we've separated the path and put it on the far side of Clover Ridge road from the property. So against the freeway we added a eight foot no climb fence to the project through along the extent of the Benel property. we also added the trail underpass at Clover Ridge to address concerns about conflicts between vehicles and bicyclists from the properties from the Smiths and Maillais properties and others that would be that used Clover Ridge. They did not have to worry about bike crossings. The bridge was designed to accommodate ranch vehicles. And then also Slow Clover Ridge was originally planned to have trail parking, and we removed that parking from Clover Ridge to again reduce impacts. And it are worked with parks, who is the owner of the project. They've committed to regular patrols by rangers of the trail alignment to this patrol just the proper use and look for homeless and catmints and other issues along the trail alignment. So a number of things and that is one where there are existing homeless issues throughout our county and certainly the south end of San Luis Luis city and in and in this trail will at this trail with regular use as well as regular patrols by our park's Rangers will help bring that visibility and monitoring to address homeless issues. And I think study show generally speaking that with fencing, increased use we see less Less homeless encampments. Is that correct? I'm not Homeless services expert and not from those studies, but certainly more eyes more visibility would seem to definitely would seem to reduce those encampments Okay, so to summarize, we moved the location of the path. We removed the trail parking. We added an 8 foot tall fence. We added a bridge that accommodates ranch vehicles. We did all those things and none of those things were good enough for the property owner. Well, we've though we were having those discussions as we went into design, but in the last couple years we've and as we've made our compensation offers there's been no there has not been any negotiations or engagement. Okay appreciate those responses and I'll defer to the supervisor the district for kicking off deliberations. Thank you. Oh supervisor T's thank you. Yeah thank. Thank you, Madam Chair. Okay. Well, the thanks everybody for coming and providing your perspective. I really want to thank our staff and the county staff and the county of Slocock. Excuse me, the staff at Slocock. Because the teams have worked so hard to try to address the issues and come up with solutions and have twisted and taken things back and forth and tried to use the Ontario road and tried to find other ways around this roadblock so to speak that we have. So I want to say thank you to you guys because I know you've been working tremendously hard. I also wanna thank the commissioners who have dedicated time and other members of the Friends of the Bob Jones Trail. It's these volunteers who with a team from Cal Poly submitted the application to the California Transportation Commission in their infinite wisdom. Because in their infinite wisdom, they saw the need for the community, for the county, for the businesses, for everyone to be able to have a safe route from the center of the county down to the southern part of the county. So this was for the greater good. That's where that infinite wisdom came from. And as far as transportation, slow cog wouldn't be involved with this. If this didn't have a transportation portion of it, they don't get involved in parks. They get involved in transportation. And this is actually, while we haven't had e-bikes for that long, the data definitely shows that we could easily take off cars off the 101 corridor. It's one of the reasons why the City of Pismo Beach wrote their letter of support because they understood how important it is to get things moving on the 101 corridor. We forecast, so God did some numbers, they forecast an increase of 148% on trips that could be used back and forth whether it's for entertainment to restaurants or for working people. There's certainly an amount that would be taken off of the 101 and anything that we can do to reduce the congestion of the 101. And anything that we can do to reduce the congestion on the 101 is really a great importance. I think that I wanna just note that I had lots of conversations on this, you know, every person that comes up to us that knows and hears understands about the Bob Jones Trail, they're like, you have to do this,, you have to do this. You just have to do this. I mean, it's so important for all of us. I mean, the safety. Recently, we've seen a real hike in speeds and dangerous driving. I don't know what to attribute it to, but we certainly have an increase. But I think that most importantly, one landowner, one major landowner here in San Elizabeth County who will remain unnamed, stated to me, Don, if there was ever a case for an amendment domain, it is this one. And he further said, you know, I don't love eminent domain as a landowner, but there's reasons to utilize it. And this is one of those reasons. In fact, we really shouldn't even have to be asking Supervisor Arnold to have to take this vote. This should not even be happening for that. Mr. Bunnell should understand very clearly about the importance of this route. And I think that staff did a fantastic job of showing how the yellow line runs right along the 101 of his 146 acres that he has here in San Luis Vistil County while he doesn't live there or have any interest here necessarily. He's had many interests here over the years and one of them has been hotels and he understands the importance of tourism. This is why so many people that he has worked with over the years have talked to him time and time again about the critical nature of this trail being connected. And so, you know, the visit slow-cow said it very well. They said, you know, the ability to have a trail like what Napa just opened this weekend, an eight mile plus trail for their visitors and for their workers. This is what is the modern world. This is what's happening. And I can only imagine the activity with the increase of electric bikes. I think that the tourism and the hotel owners and the workforce and all of that are really important. But really the most important part of the Bob Jones Trail is the public safety aspect. The public safety aspect cannot be denied, whether it's fire and the part of the fact that, right now there's tons of homeless tucked into those woods. And the fact is that your greatest ignition start is the 101. That's exactly what happened in 2021, when that fire started and threatened that whole area and why Baron Canyon is so interested in having a secondary route of access. This is what's important. And the data does show that opening up these wooded areas actually reduces homeless encampments because they don't want to be bothered. They want to have places to tuck away when we're able to open up. Like we did in the, like we have in the other portions of the Bob Jones Trail, and where we don't have homeless activity. If we do, we move them out. It's done very quickly, it stayed clean. We've been able to demonstrate that time and time again. And then the human safety. I mean, I love the comments about the children. You know, we commented this past week about losing a constituent of mindset Goldberg, which is a very sad day. We lost the doctor, young doctor whose sons are being raised without him. We've had a number of times of fatalities. We shouldn't be needing to talk anybody into this. We're the amount of land and the fact that there's easements on there already. So I just gonna start off the conversation with that. I think that our staff, I think that my colleagues have done a very good job. I feel bad that Supervisor Arnold has to make this kind of decision because it is a no-brainer. I don't think it should be called a resolution of necessity. I think it's called a resolution of stupidity that anybody could have the gall to try to take from the better good of the entire county for self-interest. I'm not exactly sure. When you don't even live in the state, I'm not sure good of the entire county for self interest. I'm not exactly sure. When you don't even live in the state, I'm not really sure. But it's really just, you know, infuriating, it's sad. And I just, you know, I'll close my comments there and let everybody else join in now. To the provides for public. Thank you, Chair. Well said, supervisor Ortiz League. I'm gonna focus my comments a little bit more on the legal elements of the action that's before us today. Before I do that, I want to thank all of the advocates for the project, the friends of the Bob Jones Trail. Everybody who's been working on this for years, literally putting years of your time into this important project. And then of course to our county public work staff, our parks and recreation staff and other departments who have collaborated to get this project to the finish line because we are quite close to the finish line. And in fact, this this action before us today would would get us there at least very close to being there. This action is of last resort. And in my opinion, when we talk about eminent domain, it's a matter that should not be taken lightly. And I do not take it lightly. And I don't think my colleagues take it lightly. The elements of the action before us require answers to the following questions. Does the public interest and necessity require the proposed project? Is the project compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury? Is the property necessary for the project? Has an offer been made to the owners required under law? So I want to start with the component or the element of that about the greatest public good and least private injury. The public good in my, the public good element of the law is met in the sense that this is a transportation route from Avila Beach to slow for pedestrians and cyclists, including those riding e-bikes. And we've seen the proliferation of e-bikes. We heard testimony today during public comment. About that, we know future generations will continue to use those. And because of the additional distance that e-bikes afford, I think we can expect this route to be heavily utilized. So not just the project doesn't just provide recreational benefit or additional opportunities, it provides a safe route for pedestrians and cyclists to commute from South County to San Luis Obispo. We heard testimony as the provider Ortiz Lig mentioned that at least two cyclists have been hit and killed killed writing the current unsafe rat. So there is a safety benefit. And of course, it's a recreational opportunity. We know based on the current use of the existing Bob Jones trail that this will be heavily utilized. Every time I'm out there riding my bike or walking my dog on the existing Bob Jones trail, it is busy. We need more facilities, transportation corridors, recreational opportunities like this. It really is an important link for those purposes and to promote tourism and the associated economic benefits of connecting Pismo and Ava with Salem, Subispo. So evidence of how successful this path will be, how successful it will be has been established in public testimony and all the different letters we've received from the public. So I think the public interest element here is met. It's quite substantial and to use the terms in the law, the project is compatible with the greatest public good. Now shifting to the other prong about the least private injury, I think we should focus on the fact that the project acquires an easement over a stretch of private land adjacent to Highway 1. And our staff has made every effort to work with the property owner to address their concerns to no avail. Those concessions were articulated by our staff earlier and included moving the alignment of the pathway, removing a parking lot, adding an 8-foot tall fence, adding a bridge that accommodates ranch vehicles for the property owner, all of these concessions unfortunately were met with ideological resistance. With this action, the property owner is being compensated based on the fair market value of the easement, which has been estimated to be $207,500. So we're not simply acquiring an easement without providing just compensation under the law. We are offering that compensation. It is important to note that the project area to be acquired is already encumbered. As staff noted, 80% of the pathway area is currently encumbered with existing permanent easements for gas, water, and drainage. We are not running a pathway through the middle of an agricultural operation. We're completing a pathway along Highway 101 to tie into the existing Bob Jones Trail connecting Avila Beach to slow. Therefore, in my opinion, this project causes minimal harm. So in conclusion, here today we're faced with the prospect of approving an action that will complete an important project with regional benefit will allow us to utilize an 18.2 million dollar grant leveraged with $7 million that our San Francisco Council of Governments voted almost unanimously, which again is comprised of all seven cities in the county just last week to allocate to this project to complete and deliver this project for the community. And if we can't do this, the entire project is at risk of being jeopardized, the funding being jeopardized, the funding being jeopardized, and the project dying. So given this important balancing test, right, that we have before us, public good versus private harm, I think the public good absolutely outweighs the private arm. And it's incumbent upon us to provide leadership and approve this action. Those are my comments. Thank you. Professor Gibson. Thank you, Madam Chair. Following my two colleagues here, as I listened, I realized you both together have really covered all the angles of importance in this project, both from the social importance of this of this project, the practical importance of this project, and the legal basis upon which we come to take this action today, consider this action today. I'll add my thanks to staff for a really solid analysis and preparation of the resolution of the necessity that's before us. So with that, I really don't have a lot of detailed comments to add at this time. I think the frame here is whether this board this afternoon is prepared to act in the public interest or for some other sets of a sets of motivation and we'll see it by public comments that are Easily accessible on the record it comes down to supervisor Arnold I'd be interested to hear her comments Should this action fail? I think this board does need to take up what Should this action fail, I think this board does need to take up what desperation actions we might direct our staff to take because we act today. We have essentially 100% chance of getting this project completed. We fail to act today and the chance goes down to maybe 1%, maybe 5%, I'll pick a number. It's not good. It's really not good and there's a number of number of consequences to our should we fail today? So with that I'll yield the floor look forward to hearing from our chair look forward to a motion and We'll take a vote All right well I do have a vote. All right. Well, I do have a few things to say. I'm going to start first by one of the speakers asked me to explain why I have voted to use eminent domain in the past and I seem resistant to do it now. And the question on the question she was asking particularly about was Dover Canyon Road Bridge, which I brought the staff report for that meeting. It was February 28th of last year, 2023. Dover Canyon Road Bridge was a 100, as a matter of fact, replacement of a current wooden deck steel truss, one-lane bridge, necessary and in the public interest over 100 years old, suffering from damage, et cetera. I won't read it all to be replaced. And so I did vote along with my colleagues reluctantly ever to use imminent domain on private property owners, but I voted along with my colleagues to replace the bridge. I think it's a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a little bit of a new technology to what the property line is supposed to be and etc. And also, I didn't look this up for this meeting, but I kind of recalling that I might have voted to in favor of using eminent domain on the bridge replacement at El Camino in South of Tascadero as well because there needed to be, there was no room for the the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the road to the what you're all waiting for me to say. And I will say I won't be supporting this today. I have talked to staff. There are other pathways. This isn't the end of the road. But I will tell you I've been disappointed. And the domain to me is more important, maybe than any project we could think of, or any road we could even have. Property rights is, to me me the cornerstone of our republic. I mean everything you work for your life's work is probably been invested in your home or your property. And for all different reasons, some of you fall in love with the property because it has a view. Some of you fall in love with the property because of the neighborhood vibes and some of you fall in love with it because it has good schools down the street for your children to it down whatever the reason property rights has been imported this kind of reminds me of a time in this county since I've been a supervisor when there was kind of a push for the use of eminent domain to go across people that own beach front property, go be able to go across their property to access the beach. And we heard a lot of the same words, public interest could evolve versus one landowner being able to own this property. But no matter what it is, the reason I'm so, I'm so I think supervisor Gibson, one of his publications said something about being stubborn with my ideology is just because I think, and even the children, we talked about that today too, the core case of property ownership needs to be protected or a lot of things will change in our society. I supported the Bob Jones Trail for many years, the two and a half miles of the original Bob Jones Trail in every way, and then supported the Octagon Barn as well when the Conservancy started the project to preserve the octagon barn. As these things progress, these are extensions and there's a couple of things. One, there are many people in this county that would put imminent the use of the county, basically county seizing property against an owner's will in front of any transportation quarter, whether it be for cars or bike trails or anything in between or any combination thereof, that property rights is really important to them and governments, these are property against and owners will, it would override anything. In this room, I understand and I'm not be, I'm not saying who's right and who's wrong. A lot of you feel like this is really outweighs or the importance of extending this trail or creating more of the trail is most important. But I do want to say it was brought up and I appreciate Bruce Hilton bringing it up because I was around then too when the discussions first started when the county first started to show an interest in creating trail networks. And I brought down with me today the Parks and Rec element part of our general plan. Eminent domain will not be used for trail establishment and when it talks about trails, it talks about only from a willing seller or a donor. I wanna remind everyone in this county, we've been blessed with a lot. And I mean, compared to a lot of counties and a lot of places, the more, we have a lot of protected open space, hundreds of thousands of acres if you're counting the national monument the Forest Service land the state parks and then even the local parks and county parks and Lopez Lake Santa Margarita Lake all those places we have a Lot of open space and public trails and I've supported Probably 99% of all of that, but I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I think that's why I So that's me. You can make the motion if you want anyone can. We need to make the motion because we need to finish through this process in order. It's my understanding. I may be saying this a little bit wrong to not to be able to continue trying to find alternatives. And also it's not a foregone conclusion that we're responsible for any of the money that's been, any of the grant money that's been so far, but moving through the process is important. So I'm ready to send some motion and we need to do that. Yeah, I don't have the language in front of me, but I move to make a motion to support the resolution of necessity for staff's report. Check it. Okay. Under discussion, I want to briefly discuss the nature of the harm, right? We're balancing the public good and the private harm. And the private harm in this case is not a situation where we're using a minute domain to take somebody's property, their home, their business from them. The harm is that we're acquiring an easement over existing easements on a sliver of land at the perimeter of the property for maximum public good. And the fact that that can't be reconciled with the sure ideology maybe isn't the best term but the principled stance around taking a private property rights in the sense that this truly is minimal private harm to this property owner and maximum public good and that was established in the record. And so I just, I don't know if I'm trying to make a compelling argument to make you reconsider a supervisor, Arnold, but I thought that that would be worth highlighting. Well, sure. I appreciate it because I see that you don't, I mean, you do honestly see that the use of eminent domain to seize property against someone's will is justified in some cases. First of all, I don't see underground public utility easements as being anywhere near the same thing as public trail or transportation corridor. I'm trying to be sensitive. I'm trying to show people that I understand where you're coming from, that things are changing and that we're not just talking about a recreational trail, but a transportation corridor. There's a couple of things that come to mind as well. You know, aside from even going forward with this project or not going forward with this project, it's an expensive project. And I've been struggling for the last couple of years. And you all know this because we have these discussions on the diase here frequently. But we have been neglecting a lot of established roads. And I know even a lot of the folks that enjoy, I know it wouldn't be your transportation corridor to work, but a lot of folks enjoy that out back Just the roads because they're less traveled and it gives you chance to go into scenic areas With bicycles or other modes of transportation, but a lot of the roads in this county are becoming very unsafe We all know that we know that our pavement index are the safety index is getting worse every year We cannot afford or do not spend our money in those places. And so that even, that's a way secondary. The reason I've supported this project all along because I thought it was a great project. I was really happy when the project finished the original Bob Jones Trail, then continued as I said to support the Arctic environment. But at some point we're going to have a discussion on the property owners. And so we're going to have a discussion on the property owners. And so we're going to have a discussion on the property owners. And so we're going to have a discussion on the property owners. And so we're going to have a But the point is we all, that's why I was sharing, we all buy our property for different reasons and property ownership and the protection of it and knowing that for some reason, some are five, 10 years down the road, the government won't decide it's important to take. That's really where I'm coming from on this. Well, seeing that my efforts to persuade are a few tile, I'd call the question. Well, I've got comments. Mr. Yeah. You're very generous, supervisor, Pauling. You know, one of our public commenters noted we had the discretion, and more importantly, we had the obligation to act in the public interest. You know, property owner can come and assert their self-interest. That's absolutely appropriate. But a county supervisor is supposed to act in the public interest. And it's pretty clear that we're going to see this board fail because one county supervisor chooses not to act in the public interest in absolute contradiction to the aspects of the public interest in the public interest in absolute contradiction to the aspects of the public interest that have been presented this afternoon and over many months. Nearly $7 million of effort already expanded the risk to $18 million of funding that the county has received. The consequences to the county reputation should this project fail and maybe there's a path forward but we have a certain path forward that's been planned for decades that has been under active consideration by this board for decades and we're putting that at risk that is not acting in the public interest and one supervisor clearly chooses that path. Ignores the extensive efforts to accommodate the concerns of the property owner in the public interest. We'll not admit that the policy she's fond of quoting does not apply in this case because we're talking about a transportation project. Ignores the safety elements that have been brought forward in terms of safety of bikers and nor is the interest of the city of Pizmo Beach. Ignores the interests of our visitor serving economy. And so I feel as we, you know, we're going to have to get this done. I hope after this vote is taken and turned to the supervisor of the district for next steps to see if out of this mess we can, you know, we can try another path forward. I'm not highly optimistic, but I feel, it's my duty to an extend an apology to and my sympathy to the public for having to watch your Board of Supervisors not act in the public interest as we are sworn to do. So with that, I'm happy to call the question. No, I'm the chairman and I'll call for the question. But what I want to say to that is what you think you're supposed to do is enacting Supervisor, we just may have different opinions on that because I believe that I am here and I was elected for and I'm supposed to protect my constituents from or protect their property rights. And I think that what I'm trying to say is I think at a higher level, that is more important than any roadway, any bike pathway, any project that we could be working on is just the fundamental right of property owners and for the government to be using eminent domain on these projects, I'm not agreeing and that's my right, not agree, but for you to suggest that I'm not a green and that's my right, I'm not a green. But for you to suggest that I'm not considering my constituents, that's very wrong. And then I wanna say, from the beginning, I've supported this. So I have been wanting to vote to use tax dollars, your public tax dollars on this project, let alone the original Bob Jones Trail or the Oxicombaarn, but I will say that maybe we should have been paying more attention when we realize that there were property owners that just were unwilling to sell and that could be on us. These letters of opposition from several landowners, but now we've little to down, have been coming along for years. And we just haven't been able to get through that. But throughout all of these documents, all of these years, it talks about many alternatives. And maybe it's time to go pursue another alternative to try to get a project done. It might not be the exact project that Supervisor Gibson envisions, but it to get a project done. It might not be the exact, exact project that supervisor Gibson envisioned, but it might be a part. Mine, I only comment that aside from the extraneous, extraneous things you mentioned here, you've eloquently made your point. You are siding with the interests of one property owner over the interests of the public here. And I yield the floor. You are missing my point and I'll keep at this as long as you want to go at it. I care and feel like core property rights. That's a, I said it before, a corpillar of our republic and I have never gone off that mark. So I was elected with those kinds, making these kinds of comments and I assume then that people When I was elected and times might change I also cared about that that they would have Someone represented them at the government level at the county government level that would respect their property rights and Not want to use aminat domain on to create new projects. Oh if I may keep going we can I just want to use eminent domain on to create new projects. Oh, if I may keep going, we can. I just want to state that interestingly enough, Mr. Bunele is none of our constituents. So he doesn't even living here. And that, unfortunately, because the monies have had to be spent, to work around this for so long, to try to figure out all the alternatives. Because if there was another alternative, we would be doing it. There's no doubt about that. But the money that we allotted last week at Slocock, that could have gone to North County. But instead, we have to spend it because we have this situation. So this was wasted and when we could have been straight through on this thing and taken the 18 million and just getting it done. But no, we're didn't. So anyway, I think we've killed this thing over and over again. But once again, for me, this isn't about this project, or any other project I'd be seeing the same thing. The use of imminent domain to me violates the property rights, a pillar of the property rights element that I just won't be interested in supporting. So we'll call for the question. Supervisor Teesley? Yes. Supervisor Gibson? Yes. Supervisor Paul Dean? Yes. Chairperson Arnold? No. Okay. With that, then we're going to move on. I want to make another motion, please, Madam Chair. And that is that I'd like to make a motion to direct staff to see how to find another path forward and to come back to us with any other suggestions that they may have in regards to the completion of the Bob Jones trail. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. on our agenda and we'll have planning and building give them a moment to get situated and go forward. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I'm going to start calling the committee. The time limit of tax across been. Thank you. you We're going to get going here and we're moving on to item number 36 and we'll look to our planning department for To start the presentation please Item number 36 a hearing to consider an appeal by Daniel Perez of the planning commissions approval a request by John Muscle For a conditional use permit to construct 72 multifamily residential apartment units on a single parcel and the staff of the community. The staff of the community will use permit to construct 72 multifamily residential apartment units on a single parcel, totaling 2.57 acres as a plan development in accordance with state density bonus law of the 72 apartment units, 71 will be de-restricted and one unit and managers unit. The proposed project is within the commercial retail and and office professional land use categories and is located at 170 magenta lane in the Nupomo Central Business District and within the West Tafcord or Design Plan area. Also to be considered is the determination that this project is exempt from seek plan. Hello and good afternoon Madam Chair and members of the board. My name is Lane Sutherland, project planner. The project before you is an appeal APPL 2024-00004 of a conditional use permit. The conditional use permit was approved by the planning commission on March 14, 2024. The appeal was filed by Daniel Perez on March 25th, 2024. Sure. I thank you. I forgot something. Do any of my colleagues have exparte communications to report? Yes, thank you. I had one meeting with the applicant and one meeting with the appellate. Thank you. Okay. No, no, no, no. Okay, perfect. Thank you. Okay. No. No, no, no. Okay, perfect. Thank you. I'm sorry to interrupt. I forgot that little. It's key. How's keeping chore? All right. So the proposed project is requested by John himself for a conditional use permit to allow for the construction of three three story multifamily buildings and one community amenity facility as a part of a plan development on a single parcel totaling 2.57 acres. The project will consist of 72 multifamily housing units. 71 will be deed restricted lower income affordable housing units and one will be utilized as a manager's unit. Additionally, the project has been designed to provide vehicle parking spaces and compliance with the state density bonus law. Here is the vicinity map showing the project parcel outlined with a red border. The project site is located just west of Highway 101 near the Highway 101 and Test Street interchange. Access is taken directly from Magenta Lane. Here we can see the Land Use category map. Approximately two-thirds of the project site are within the office professional Land Use category, with the remaining portion of the site located in the commercial retail Land Use category. The entirety of the site is located within the Nipomo Urban Reserve Line and the community of Nipomo Central Business District. Here we have an aerial image of the project site and surrounding area. As you can see, the site is located off Magenta Lane. Directly adjacent to the project site is tracked 2558, a small lot single family residential track supporting 15 lots recorded in 2019. To the south of the project site is a Pulsulse Services Office located at 630 Tep Street. Surrounding uses to the north and east are currently vacant lots. Here we have the site plan is provided by the applicant. There are three residential buildings proposed. Building A is on the southern portion of the site and includes an attached community room referenced here as common area. Building B is located near the rear property line in the central portion of the site, and building C is located at the northern portion of the property. Each building will support 24 residential units, including three one bedroom units, nine two bedroom units, and 12 three bedroom units. Each unit will have approximately 55 square feet of private outdoor balcony space and the maximum building height will be 42 feet. As you can see the site will be accessible via a single driveway located off of Magenta Lane, which is located, which will be located directly adjacent to Oak Terrace Lane. The project frontage will be complete with curb gutter and sidewalks as conditioned by the public works department. Street trees, landscaping, and several stormwater treatment areas will provide a buffer and function as visible screening between magenta lane and the proposed off-street parking design. The applicant has proposed car ports with mounted solar panels covering a majority of the 104 proposed parking spaces. the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the plans have been designed to be consistent with the county's general landscaping standards, as well as the Nipomo Mesa Water Conservation Area Landscape Standards. Here we have the building elevations. First are the elevations for Building A. And here are the project building elevations for Building B and C, which share a common design. The appeal form and letters present issues in three main categories, which are traffic parking and safety. The traffic issues will be discussed in more depth as six specific issues raised in the appellance letter. This aerial image is here to show the existing roadways of concern to be discussed. As you can see, Tef Street runs left to right at the bottom of the image, and Magenta Lane, the primary access road for this project, runs perpendicular to Tef Street. For reference, the post office to be discussed is at the northeast corner of Tef Street, and Magenta Lane just below the project site. I'll start with the traffic discussion, traffic issue one. The appeal letter states that there is one ingress in egress, allowing entrance and exit via magenta lane, and that there is no fire exit or emergency exit. Staff would like to respond that the County Fire Division of San Luis Obispo County provided an official project referral response indicating that the San Luis Obispo County provided an official project referral response, indicating that the San Luis Biscoe County Fire Marshal's office has reviewed the submittal package for the proposed project and that the Fire Marshal approves the project as submitted. The Fire Marshal's response letter did not identify a need for secondary or emergency access to the project's site or neighboring residential areas. Additionally, the Transportation Analysis Report concluded that there are no issues with the emergency access to and from the site as proposed. Traffic issue 2, the appeal letter states that there are potential issues due to increased AM and PM peak hour demand at the intersection of Teft Street and Magenta Lane. Staff would like to respond that as a part of the traffic study provided, turning movement counts were collected during the peak hours at the intersection of Tef Street and Magenta Lane from 7am to 9am and from 4pm to 6pm on Thursday, January 12th, 2023, by central coast transportation consulting. In addition to the physical counts, the study intersection of Magenta Lane and Tef Street was analyzed using Synchro 11 and the highway capacity manual 6th edition methodology. The traffic report concluded that with the addition of project traffic, this project does not meet peak hour traffic signal warrants and that additional traffic control or turn lanes at the intersection of Teft Street and magenta lane due to AM and PM peak hour demand are not warranted or recommended. Traffic issue three, the appellant forces potential issues with queuing of residents vehicles on Magenta Lane as they wait to turn from Magenta Lane either east or west onto Tef Street. Staff would like to respond that the study intersection peak hour queues were observed in May 2024 by central coast transportation consulting. The longest observed queue on magenta lane was two vehicles. The distance from the intersection of magenta lane at Tef Street to the intersection of Oak Terrace lane at magenta lane is approximately 275 feet. This distance would accommodate queuing of approximately 13 vehicles. Magenta lane has an existing baseline of three queued vehicles. The traffic study projected an existing baseline of three cute vehicles. The traffic study projected an increase in five cute vehicles resulting in an expected total of eight cute vehicles during morning and afternoon peak hours. For the San Luis Obispo County Standards, right turn channelization shall be provided wherever forecast, right turning traffic volume will be 100 vehicles per hour, whereas required by the department. Right turn lanes must also be considered when there is a history of rear end collisions, with all pending and approved projects in the vicinity, the Southbound Right Turning Volume on Magenta Lane is expected to be below 15 vehicles per hour. For these reasons, additional traffic control or turn lanes to address queuing on Magenta Lane are not warranted or recommended. Traffic issue four, the appeal letter states that there are existing right-of-way obstructions on magenta lane due to activities of the U.S. Postal Services vehicles and employees. Planning staff understands that the operations conducted by the U.S. PS facility are intermittently causing an obstruction near the magenta lane entrance and exit for employee vehicles. USPS activities currently taking place in the county right of way, beyond ingress or egress, via the loud access point, such as loading or unloading, parking on the red curb, et cetera, are not in allowed use of the roadway. And while the county does not have jurisdiction over the private property of the US Postal Services, the county does reserve jurisdictional authority over the use of the county maintained public right of way. As stated previously by public work staff obstructions that are blocking the roadway are a traffic concern and the CHPR sheriff should be notified of the violations. In addition to these measures, the updated transportation analysis recommends modifying the existing no parking ordinance on magenta lane to restrict parking on both sides of the road. The report also recommends installing red curbs for approximately 225 feet along the project side of magenta lane up to the proposed driveway in order to discourage illegal parking or the loading activities at the USPS facility. This recommendation has been provided as a condition in the conditions of approval and with this condition of approval there is a plan to address the existing issues and provide a solution to the issues raised by the appellant. Traffic issue five, the appellant reports there are accidents at the intersection of magenta lane and teft street almost weekly from people making new turns using the middle lane, entering and exiting the post office, or making wrong turns into their neighborhood. Staff would like to respond that as outlined in the revised transportation and outspraport, traffic collision data was obtained from the statewide integrated traffic record system for the intersection of Teft Street and magenta lane. Between 2018 and 2022, two total collisions occurred within the first 80 feet of intersection of Tess Street and Magenta Lane near the project site. Both were property damage only without injuries. One of the collisions was due to an unsafe lane change along Tess Street and the other reported collision was due to an unsafe starting or backing and involved one vehicle hitting an object on magenta lane. As a result, the transportation analysis concluded that no collision patterns were observable at the intersection and no improvements are recommended. Traffic issue 6. As a part of the appeal letter, the appellant has provided a proposed solution for traffic issues on magenta lane. The appeal letter states that widening magenta to three or four lanes will alleviate some of the stress that this new development will cause. The appellant believes that providing one lane for the USPS, one lane for entrance, and two lanes for exit, a left turn, and a right turn lane would be the only way to make this development work. Staff would like to respond that road improvements and offsite conditions that the county requires of a developer must be justified by substantial evidence. In order to require the proposed changes suggested by the appellant, such as one lane for the USPS, one lane for entrance, and two lanes for exit, a traffic engineer or other qualified professional would have to recommend these changes based on the existing and projected conditions of the intersection and roadway. As outlined in the multiple transportation analysis reports conducted by central coast transportation consulting, the project circumstances do not warrant additional traffic measures or improvements to the existing roadway, such as those proposed by the appellate. Appeal issued two parking. The appeal letter states that the county planning department failed to parking, the appeal letter states that the County Planning Department failed to accurately address the amount of parking that will be required as a result of the proposed development. Staff would like to respond that California Density Bonus Law establishes parking requirements specific to affordable housing projects and prohibits local jurisdictions from requiring more than the specified amounts as shown on this table below. Based on the calculations, the project is required to have 103 parking spaces with 104 proposed by the applicant. And appeal issue three. The appeal letter states that the Sheriff's Department is incapable of guaranteeing safety based on the referral response from Chief Deputy Nate Paul. Staff would like to respond on the referral response from Chief Deputy Nate Paul. Staff would like to respond that the referral response from Chief Deputy Nate Paul states, law enforcement services for an Oppomo are currently adequate with a .75% anticipated increase in calls for service. This project is one of several that combined will create demand for services beyond that which the Sheriff's Office currently provides. Additionally, NAPOMO has already grown to the point that construction of a NAPOMO Sheriff's substation has been identified as part of the county's infrastructure and facilities capital improvement plan. As a result, the proposed NAPOMO substation must be constructed to support the combined law enforcement needs of NAPOMO as this project moves forward. The NAPOMO Sheriff's Substation will be located in Old Town, NAPOMO. $1.2 million has been allocated toward the design process and direction has been given to the Public Works Department and Auditor's Office to pursue additional funding to fund the construction of the new Sheriff's Substation. While the Substation may not be fully complete prior to establishment of the proposed housing project, the process. The process will be fully complete prior to the proposed housing project. The substation and the additional resources will be available to the sheriff's office and those residences in the affected areas in the near future. We will accommodate the increase in calls for partially offsets the department's cost to process the appeal per board direction the remaining cost to process the appeals covered by government or excuse me general fund support included in the annual budget for the Department of Planning and Building. It is recommended that the board adopt the resolution to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the planning commissions approval of conditional use permit and dashed ERC 2023-00006 based on the findings. And that they find this project to be categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to section 21159.2. That concludes staff's presentation. Staff is available for any questions. Also available today are the applicants agents, Tom, Jess, and Tim, Flush. Okay, questions of the board. Questions? I'm gonna reserve my questions till after hearing the appellants. Thanks. Then we're gonna move to the appellant and the appellant will have 10 minutes for presentation. I'd like to start by saying thank you so much for your time. I can only imagine how busy all of you are. So I wanted to say thank you. My name is Daniel Perez. I represent Oak Taylor, as well as all 15 members of our small little community. We understand that we cannot stop the development that certainly wasn't our purpose or the goal of this appeal. These types of developments are necessary in California. We understand why these types of projects are getting approved. It's becoming increasingly expensive to call California home and more specifically San Lesbispo County. The purpose of this appeal is for another reason altogether as we stated by staff's presentation, we're simply fighting for infrastructure improvements. Before the development is completed, this has nothing to do with the affordable housing or counties growing need for more units or speculation about what type of people will be living in affordable units. This appeal has nothing to do with a not-in-my-backyard argument as well. More pro-growth, pro-expansion, and pro-development. We understand that all of this surrounding acres will soon be getting developed as well. We feel that our arguments weren't heard in the first hearing, so with the conditions approved for passing, we'll, by their own admission do nothing to solve any of our concerns. We thought that we were needed to file the appeal. It's not simply just more housing at any cost, but more importantly, more good housing. And we feel that good housing requires more substantial parking as well as looking at the traffic concerns with not as they are currently or what they were from 2018 to 2022 But what they will be when we add a 104 vehicles I would also like to add that in 2018 to 2022 our development wasn't completed so those acres were empty as well as the 10 acres north of us the five acres west of us The five acres east of us and the other five acres north east of us Which is why I would imagine those numbers are pretty low when they did those studies. Annex, total stories about single moms and struggling parents not being able to afford housing are real. They're genuine and they're sincere. Anyone overcoming adversity and not being able to plant generational roots in our beautiful county is a true success story. This isn't about affordable housing, it's about transformative housing for those individuals and we understand that. RPL has nothing to do with neglecting a population or people who are withholding housing from those in need. It has to do with the fact that our neighborhood is not suited for this type of density as the current development stands. We need serious infrastructure improvements for this job to make sense on our particular landlock plot. As it stated, our three primary concerns are traffic parking and safety. As it seems sitting here the last afternoon, or the majority of the afternoon, it seems like that's an align with what you guys feel is significantly important in our county as well. Traffic safety. We're two of the largest that we heard with regards to the Bob Jones pathway and it seemed significantly important for us as well as we now live there. And the first planning commission meeting, as I said, we didn't feel that we were heard. And I understand that you guys can't be everywhere at once and you have challenging jobs, but the people voting on our neighborhood had never been there and unfamiliar with the particular challenges of being next to the post office. The amount of traffic required and the amount of people coming in and out of our street. I'm glad that public works took the time to do their traffic study on one day in January. There may have been a little bit more time that could have put into an effort. If the 15 of the homes see a significant increase in traffic or feel that safety is potentially a hazard, maybe we could spend potentially, I don't know, a second or third day taking some time to do this. We spoke to 14 companies, or I did specifically, with regards to traffic engineering and traffic studies. Three of them said they didn't want to get involved. They didn't want to go against the city. I was looking at the traffic. I was looking at the traffic and I was looking at the traffic and I was looking at the traffic and I was looking at the traffic and I was looking at the traffic and I was looking at the traffic and I was looking at the traffic and I was looking at the traffic and I was looking at the traffic and I was looking at the traffic and I was All of the information that I had proposed in the appeal wasn't presented in our presentation by staff. And so those were the concerns that we had. We didn't happen to see or understand or realize that a traffic thing was taking place. And from the people I spoke to, they said that it takes a significant amount of time. It's not a one day process to make an exemption about the year, the amount of people that are there, three people could have been on vacation and so that's why those numbers were low. We're not worried about what traffic is today or tomorrow. We're worried about what it will be in three years when the project is completed. That's our overwhelming concern is by adding at a minimum of 104 vehicles. We're not worried about how many parking spots that they're planning on building for their development. We're worried about the amount of parking that they'll be using on the street. I'm glad that they feel that they provided adequate parking for their development and that's good for them on building that. We're worried about the amount of cars that could potentially be over a hundred and four, where they'll be parking and how they'll be exiting magenta lane on the Teft. Those are our significant concerns. Concerns. and the gentle lane on the tough. Those are our significant concerns. It appears that the majority of my appeal, staff took care of and acknowledged some of those things. We've provided quite a few pictures. I apologize, I have a few notes and I took for their presentation. Calling CHP or the sheriff's seems insignificant when we're trying to limit the amount of calls to the sheriff's department right now while that new substation isn't built. So it feels like calling them to Taddle Tail about parking isn't a good idea. I'd rather you use those phone calls for people in need as opposed to wondering where who's parking on our street. I can appreciate that money has been allocated to a budget towards planning. I'm not sure how long from planning it takes to build a sheriff's substation, but I imagine it probably won't be completed by the time of this development. So again, log jamming the CHP or our local sheriffs complaining about who's parking on a curb doesn't seem like a good idea in my opinion. Those accidents recorded from 2018 to 2022 don't represent our entire population which had just started to move in. So I would imagine those figures aren't up to date as well. I who does live there was also hit there and we do see accidents pretty regularly and consistently whether or not they're reported to whatever reporting agency gathered that data isn't up to me but Those numbers have changed I would assume in the last couple years in the last year Between the affordable housing projects as well as Dana Reserve and the other construction projects approved in a pomo almost 2,000 units of housing have been approved, which would equate to roughly 4,000 people. Our current population sits at 18,000, so we're looking at a 20% plus increase in our population. So again, I think it may be safe to unfortunately assume, and I know that's a bad idea, but I don't have those figures. But to assume that there may be more traffic on the one main road we have in our town associated with shops and storefronts. Again, I don't have that data, but we're not talking about what things, how things are today. We're talking about what things will look like at the completion of this. As I said, the two most important things that we've spoken about earlier that we sat down and listened to with the Bob Jones pathway was traffic and safety. Madam Chair Debbie Arnold also spoke about owner's rights as well as property rights. We currently own the rights to those roads. We pay for maintenance of those roads, and that was part of our escrow when we purchased those accounts or purchased those homes. As you said, our rights, it's great. We have them, and we're proud of them, but we were told that the road would be taken away and be taken into county possession. We weren't told if it was all of magenta, part of magenta, or if it would also be oak taris lane. And so we had some questions about that. Again, the substation, we all look forward to, and I think it's been on the docket for the last 10 years with Nupomo. So assuming that that would be taken care of before the completion of this project, I know would be a little silly. United States Postal Service doesn't allow left hand turns out of their parking lot, which is 12 feet, or excuse me, 25 feet away from where we would be making these left hand turns. I find it strange that they're not allowed to make them, but we would be. So there's clearly a traffic concern by some agency. So I'm not sure why the amounts of data collected by the builder and or staff seem to think that it's okay yet the United States Postal Service doesn't allow them to turn out of that parking lot. That was all. I think that was the basis of the appeal. We didn't feel that we were heard and we just wanted to get more eyes and ears on it. We wanted to have a traffic study because we realized it wasn't required at the time because of the EIR. And so we're glad that one was conducted. Again, I think the scope of one day of looking at our intersection may be incomplete and unfair to assume that by adding 175 hundred and five vehicles at a minimum. We think that we'll only increase waiting at a stop sign by five vehicles. Seems a bit inconclusive in my opinion. Again, it's a humble one. So in closing, I appreciate your time and thank you very much. Board members, have any questions? Thank you, Chair. Mr. Perez, maybe, or they have for Mr. Perez. Actually, my questions are for staff. I'm going to go to the committee. I'm going to go to the committee. Board members have any questions? Thank you, chair. Mr. Perez, maybe. Or they have for Mr. Perez. Actually, my questions are for staff. Sorry. Maybe some of the supervisors will have questions for you. But it sounds like for the staff. Questions you brought up. So yeah. Thank you, chair. Yeah, just I'm going to kind of piggyback off of a couple of the things that were raised by the appellant and asked for clarification. One of the things that he just asked was whether magenta lane is ultimately going to end up in the county road system. So if somebody could clarify that. I think we have a lot of things to do with the work. Yeah, so the main part of magenta lane will be. I don't think it has been yet. We have accepted it for. We've accepted the constructed improvements, meaning it meets county standard in terms of that there their subdivision their development not not in terms of the frontage improvements that are associated with the project before you today. So we have accepted the former improvements that were made associated with their subdivision, but it has not been formally brought into the county maintained road system. Right now, that ends just beyond the post office, I believe. So when the side of the street that would be constructed with this project before you today, when that's done, then we'll accept the whole thing. I do not believe it was the county's intent to accept the cul-de-sex however. Okay, appreciate that clarification. And if we can pull up the aerial, I think that'll help. The slide that was the state's aerial on it. Yeah, that one. Perfect. Noting that the left hand turn onto TAFT is a big, you know, it's an existing problem. And it's also going to be a problem for the new residents there. Is there a plan given the fact that we have a lot of vacant property here? And I've had discussions with developers that own some of these properties and I'm hearing other things. There's a lot of action happening, let's be honest. And I believe all of these properties are probably going to be developed in the next three to five years or at least go through the process if they haven't already filed an application and acknowledging that given that level of development and state density bonus law that we saw or that we see being utilized here to increase the density and unfortunately in your case minimize the amount of parking available. We want to make sure that we have internal traffic and circulation kind of nailed down, right? It's not a master plan. It's not like a Dana Reserve project where we see collectors going in a lot of planning. This is going to be inherently piecemeal. And that's one of the challenges in DiPOMOs. We have so much one off piecemeal, kind of health or skeleton development with a lack of good planning. And that's the story of NAPOMO in many ways. And what I deal with, my legislative assistant, who fields all of the concerns from the constituents deals with on a regular basis. In light of that, my question is, is there a plan to either punch magenta through from TFT all the way to Juniper, which is shown at the top of the screen? That's the collector there. Or at least take magenta and create a perpendicular road that would go basically to the east there and connect with Mary to then enable the residents of this future project and existing residents of Magenta Lane to make that right and go back to Mary, which is a collector, and which I understand is to be upgraded actually with some of the future development. And then utilize that main traffic corridor as opposed to having to make that left. I know that was a big question, but we've been having lots of discussions about this and we just talked about this. I'm ready. I could share a little bit on what the thinking is. I'd be appreciative. Sure. So Punching Magenta through was in the community plan, the general plan, the local component of the general plan. That was done some time ago. That was done a while ago. The reason why we are not recommending that punching that through at this today is because of what tough to become. So if we do punch magenta, magenta lane through, if it were physically actually possible to do that and build the street that we know it would need to function as, it will make all of these problems much, much worse for these residents. And that is just gonna serve a dump of all that traffic straight down to the staff. What we're trying to do is spread the traffic out a little bit in the POMO so that there are other areas to get to 101 and other ways to distribute traffic. That gets us into the conversation about the frontage extension, gonna reserve and all that, you know, the collector A as it's called and trying to push traffic up toward Willow and get people out that way, as opposed to funneling everything into Teft. Right now, all the Teft is, all of us, the level of service F. And so that's why that is not recommended. Now, to get to your... Could I jump in on that just to question with the supervisors indulgence. Is there not a full circulation plan mapped out in the existing area plan for Nupomo? I mean, I would think that a whole grid of streets if these properties are zone residential, expected, even if they weren't, even their zone commercial, that as part of the area plan as it exists today, and I know the community plan needs updating, there should be, you know, we would be looking to exact rights of way to make a proper grid here. Is that not part of that plan at this point? Maybe that's what I was referring to, the community plan or area plan for Nupomo. But to be clear, but that's different. Yeah, they're different from the circulation study. Right, and understood the study, clear but that's different from the circulation study. Right. And understood the study. But when we map out an area plan, typically we say, look, we're planning residential development on this vacant land or whatever development we're planning. We have an idea of traffic and we say, look, we will expect to, if it's appropriate, extend magenta lane. And that becomes an extraction from the development to go on presumably between those two parcels that sort of share that proper. Correct. And that did exist. Okay. But we're saying that there has been such a large amount of time, when whoever made that original vision. And what has come to fruition today, we're not recommending. And I understand Nexus and proportionality on the exactions. Just to chime in though, one of the interesting timing components of this is when Mr. Grim mentioned the study, he wasn't talking about the studies related to this project. We're in the middle of a traffic and circulation study process for the entire South County area, which includes Nippomo. And those data points are yet to bear on this conversation. the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the number of cars that will stack at magenta waiting to get onto Tef during peak hours is going to go from three to I think it was eight or ten cars, which doesn't seem too much. And in fact, I think it was 1.5 minutes of maximum delays what you would told me when we met. That's based on the analysis that was done for this project. We are again undertaking a traffic and circulation study for the whole area. That is separate from the NAPOMO Community Plan update, which won't kick off till next summer. That's looking at obviously land use transportation all of it together. So we're not fully jiving in terms of data points for decision makers. And that's why it's true. We do have a community plan on the books that shows punching through a staff determination based on current analysis without all those data points that says we shouldn't. And that's where I'm thinking just instead of punching through it would be basically connecting that existing road that the L, the top of the L, I guess, on magenta there over to Mary. And I didn't get any indication from you Mr. Graham on whether that could be contemplated. Yeah, so I can get to that. Thank you. To add one last thing though on the community plan topic, the general plan, I.E. community plan that is a very big picture and when we're updating the general plan, we're not doing it with all of the nitty gritty traffic data points that we're referring to. Those feed into the circulation studies, the fee nexus studies that we do periodically, and on a much more regular basis. So we do have good data. It's just, it's in the specific fee study circulation documents and not in a 20-year-old general plan. And we also have the data reserve project approval, pending litigation, but if it continues to move forward, that's a massive new data point in terms of the mix of traffic and circulation. So yeah, to get back on to the other question. So we have been approached by all of the owners of the empty parcels that are visible there, at least most of them. And so the ones to the north east, those three parcels, including two parcels, on the other side of the project, it is possible that we use an existing easement on this subject property to provide some kind of an emergency or secondary egress through there, but we wouldn't see this as a county road, county maintained road for a regular through connection. So it would be more of an emergency access kind of situation. But again, if you're driving north on magenta and then make a right to get over there is that contemplate? Yeah we wouldn't well we wouldn't want that to be a through connection for the public. It would I think if anything it would be more of an emergency access connection. More emergency access. Correct. And we talked to fire about that. Now we with any kind of development on those large properties that the hospital owns currently, we definitely will have widening on Mary and an additional turn lines as necessary for their own access. Take that increase the volume. Correct. One of the things that didn't get brought up by the appellant, but I'm just going to ask is about public transit and access to bus stops given the fact that this is a low income housing project. I know that the only current stop for the South County for transit, the regional transit authority is on the other side of 101 in the old town area. And I don't know what was our opinion on that in terms of adding a route or a bus stop here. I just know that looking at this area and the potential for quite a lot of housing development, that we need to be planning for public transit. And the, you know, whereas before the planning assumptions that went into the 1994 plan, by the way, we haven't mentioned that. We're working with a 30-year-old community plan. Indicate these properties as being a combination of office professional and commercial retail. This was envisioned as the commercial core. Now that developers are able to utilize state density bonus law to work around that to build affordable housing, which makes sense, given the demand and the very high need for affordable housing, you know, it's important that we relook at the infrastructure that goes with that and that that was a point made by the appellant. So what are the metrics that we're looking at in terms of public transit? Because for these for these families who are going to live in these homes, what ICA is a plan without any public transit available? Slow RTA is proactive on where they want bus stops. We go to them. We ask them or we ask developers to meet with them and get their feedback. So for example, when we reviewed the end reserve application, when we put an info hold on that application, said you got to do all these things. One of those was show us evidence that you've talked with RTA and that they've reviewed the plan and that you see that one is needed. For smaller projects like this, we wouldn't necessarily stop a project, but it is a dynamic conversation with RTA. But it's there, it's something that they need to put forward. And then public works works with the RTA on the specific bus stop location, the specific placement. Okay. Appreciate that and just for the public here, for your benefit, I have met, in fact all five of us serve on the San Luis Visible Transit Authority Board and I have met with the executive director to talk about this project and future needs in the POMO. I think one of the big trigger points is the Dana Reserve project and how that changes traffic and circulation and that is contemplated to have new bus routes. And so bringing a route back around to serve this whole larger development is certainly contemplated in that conversation. But it does go to the concern related to parking, as some folks will use public transit, if it's available and accessible of which initially it won't be, which is unfortunate. I really wanna, I guess just thank staff for working on the post office issue. Constructively, I'm not sure if that was done during the Planning Commission hearing or if that came afterward, but I think the proposal to red stripe or red curb excuse me, however many feet a hundred feet maybe if you could pull up that slide. Two hundred and about 250 feet is going to be important but I know that there's probably some skepticism on enforcement coming from the public. And so if you could just kind of lay out what the plan is, that's an existing problem that we're dealing with, right? So everybody, the post office, whether they instruct or their employees or whether it just happens, we have an existing concern that my office has fielded related to a lot of parking occurring there. And that's an operational issue with the post office that we need to address, but I think that red curbing really will help resolve that if it's enforced. So if you could talk about the timeline for that. So if your board approves the project or approves the resolution, when the developer is ready to move forward with their projects to start pulling permits, one of the permits will be an encroachment permit. And that encroachment permit will be to basically do everything that is outlined on this specific sheet here in these recommendations. So that is adding about 250 feet in total of RedCurb additional no parking signage. Also construction of curb-meter sidewalk on their frontage, additional no parking signage. Also, construction of curb-bedter sidewalk on their frontage and then also filling in some gaps inside work so that we have pedestrian connectivity all the way down to theft on that side of the street. And all of that work would be encapsulated in an encroachment permit. Once that's done and we go out there and we accept the work, we say it's good, then at a later time, public works comes back to your board and for approval of a men the local vehicle code. That way these segments of no parking are in the vehicle code, in county code, and then it's enforceable. It enforcement is like everywhere else. It just, it depends, it comes down to individuals, you know, making, making the call, you know. The CHP, that's making, yeah, making the call a CHP and having them, and that's, they shouldn't be shy about doing that, that's their job, and that's what they're there for. So, one, my office is committed to fielding those, those responses as well, if you don't hear back from CHP, I would encourage members of the public to contact my office as well, as long as I'm in office I guess. Thank you for clarifying that. And I'm also committed to working with the post office and elevating that to the necessary levels at the state, federal level, working with our representatives as necessary to make sure that their operation isn't negatively impacting your neighborhood. Those are my questions for now. Thank you. I had a quick question. On this photo, I got to get re-oriented about Magenta Lane and then curves around to the left there. Was that subdivision, did they have to, was that a Road improvement fee or whatever did they did the subdivision pay for the Street whatever the name of the street the developer the developer would have been required to construct The improvements including the roads there and I And I did get confirmation upon completion of both sides, the county will accept magenta, lane, and then primrose, which is the top. Not the coldest sack, however. That's about primrose, yeah. So they would have been required. The developer would have been required to construct those roads like any other subdivision. Yeah. So was that a road improvement fee that was sounds like based on the or you wouldn't. Those are two different things. So construction of access improvements for subdivisions that the developer always needs to pay for that. Okay. The road improvement fee that is something that is paid as as as individual homes are constructed which may or may not be done by the developer it could be done by somebody else. That road improvement fee, that would be the South County Road Improvement fee, and that's to pay for the share of other improvements that are needed for all the growth, you had offset growth in general. So there's two different things. Okay. Thank you. Sure. Any other questions? I think it's a good opportunity to address that right now. Thank you. Any other questions? There were other items raised in the appeal. I can address all those at your pleasure. Okay. Did anybody have any of these? Either now or later. It doesn't matter. Yeah. I think it sounds to me like the biggest object or the appeal. Really revolved around the traffic flow and the parking. Yeah, and maybe it's a good opportunity to just address that right now. So the traffic counts were taken in 2023 for this project. And it did include all of our traffic studies that we require. They do need to absolutely start with the existing conditions and then, okay, what is it gonna look like with your project and everything else? So that's just the standard procedure for traffic studies. They submitted their first study to us. We looked at that, we had a lot of feedback and we had some changes for them to make that revise that. And then we route these also to our internal traffic engineers in another division, not my division and not the one. So it's a lot of sets of eyes are on the traffic studies. The, like I said before, traffic on theft, during peak times, it's poor. It is very poor as we all know. That being said, this project did not trigger the criteria that we would use for doing at any signal at magenta and theft or doing any kind of like a left turn, right turn channelization. The Q-length was observed as three vehicles during the peak time, during the worst time of traffic on-t. Which equates to around 30 seconds, half a minute or so, a wait time. That would increase potentially up to eight cars a wait time, which is maybe about a minute and a half, a little bit more. While that, we do see that as a definitely an inconvenience and a change, especially if you're in the imminent neighborhood where there's not a lot of people currently, that is an impact and that is a inconvenience. However, it doesn't come close to meeting the criteria for installing an expensive signal or or something else. Now, when the church property, if the church property ever comes in for redevelopment, that is an additional opportunity then to complete, again, complete that side of the street. And this kind of gives you a window of how development happens incrementally. At that time, we would ask for additional right of way on that side. And that's when we would ask for additional right of way on that side. And that's when we would look at maybe doing some right turn channelization, because depending on what the use would be proposed. But at a minimum, any redevelopment on the church property will have completion of Craguerre sidewalk and widening on that side. Okay. But it was not, it did not meet the signal warrants or right turn channelization warrants for this property at this time. Okay. Any other questions? No lights on? Okay. Thank you very much. You're welcome. So let's see. We'll have the, we'll hear from, we'll have the questions. We'll hear from the applicant. And it looks like Tom Jess. We'll be representing the applicant and it looks like Tom Jess. Will be representing the applicant for 10 minutes. Good afternoon. I'm Tom Jess with Harris Studio Architects. I'm here representing the applicant for the project. I obviously want to start off by thanking staff. This has been a long process. Mr. Sutherland's been great to work with. I'm not just saying that because I coached him in youth baseball. But no, he really has been great. Having the appeal elevated to the board of supervisors, obviously puts you in a tough spot, where you're asked to weigh the concerns of the immediate homeowners and the residents of Slow County and the future residents of this project trying to weigh all those together is a tough task. And I know the state has come down clearly on the side of future homeowners and community in general, but even though your hands are somewhat tied by the state, we truly want this to be a great project. We want to be a good neighbor. We've want this project to be a positive contribution to the community. With that, when we first started the project, we initially started it by designing the buildings a little closer to the street. We thought about it having a three-story building right near the single or one and two-story single family wasn't a great idea so we pushed them to the back you saw in the site plan They're pushed up against the post office and the two vacant parcels the parkings in the front there with the solar panels But it's completely screened from the street We worked with public works to get the driveway lined up with their with the existing cold-assac road there to ease the traffic We've made those modifications. We've gone out and got another traffic study to make sure, or traffic memo, to make sure that what we're doing is appropriate, the red curbing came out of that. So we really do want this to be a good project. And one thing I wanna say is that working through this process, we've come up with a project that complies with the county code, the old town Nipomo plan, the West Tef corridor plan. It was reviewed by, and you can see in here, countless different agencies from public works to the South County Advisory Body. We went to twice and had two hearings there on and on and on and on and it's been through the whole process. The whole time we've made all the adjustments and accommodations that have been asked of us. The project is always a little bit challenging. It's to design multifamily, near single family. And I think that while I'm sympathetic to the concerns of the neighbors and we did everything we can to accommodate those concerns and will continue to do so. I mean, that's really our goal is to be a good neighbor. We also have to consider the needs of the residents that are going to be moving in there and the needs of housing in this community. And I think the appellan even commented that we need good housing and we feel strongly that what we're proposing here is good housing, it's environmentally sensitively designed, it's all electric, we're not using natural gas, we're using solar panels, we're meeting all the parking requirements on and on and on. So with that I'm going to keep it brief and just simply ask that you support this project, support the application to provide housing that's desperately needed and not just housing, but deed restricted affordable housing that's going to serve the most people we can on this site. And this site's a good site for this and it's a good project and we hope that you'll find the way to support it. Thank you. Hey, do we have forward questions for the applicant? Okay, thank you very much. We'll open this item to public comment. Open public comment. I don't have any requests to speak. Did I miss someone? I can't. Okay. Go ahead and speak. And then afterwards we'll ask you to fill out a slip which you can find red or against the wall and just state your name please. David Szilvera, I live at 680 Oak Terrace Lane there at the end of the cul-de-sac. So I just had a couple things that in a way I want to say that I'm not against the project in any way. I just feel like there are some things that are a little bit of overreaching, mainly when it comes to the safety and just the size. One of the questions I have been burned with for a few months now is in these reports, it's got everything listed and it has this magical 1.5 cars. I'm trying to figure out what car dealership sells half a car. A family, you know, if you're single, you got one car, one adult, you got some kids. If you're a couple, you usually have two cars. And these traffic studies don't account for a lot of things. Grubhub, pizza delivery drivers, UPS drivers, FedEx, the mail serves themselves delivered to the door. One of the other questions is the entrance is right where our postbox is. Now, where's that going to go? No one's even fraught that up yet. I don't even know if that's in the plans. But the driveway is literally where our mailbox is, where we go every day to get our mail. No one's talked about where that's going to go. So is that going to go in somebody else's front yard in our division? You know, down the street on the corner because it can't be there. Physically, you can't occupy the same space. So this 104 car rule, honestly, all of this would go away if the development was made with just smaller houses, less quantity. Why does it need to be this big? To me, that's the money grab. Just trying to pack in as many people as we possibly can into the square footage. Why is that the best option? Why can't it just be half the size? And then everybody has a parking space and then maybe getting in and out isn't such a big deal. But that amount isn't enough room. The other part about this is when the county's actually gonna take the road and take possession of it. Right now we are all under agreement when we bought our houses that we are financially responsible for those roads. If they break down, potholes, whatever needs to get done, we have to hire somebody and it all gets split up between everybody that owns a house in that subdivision. So if the county is not gonna take the road till two or three years later, and we're gonna have two, three years worth of construction trucks and extra traffic and construction workers, who's gonna pay for that wear and tear? Who's responsible for that? If we neglect it, then it falls on you guys to have to fix it after the fact. So there's nine entrances right there that you can see on the map if that could be pulled up in and out just around magenta between all of the different areas. And I don't think that's been taken into effect. CVS, the post office, and the other items across the street, the bank. So just kind of look at the physical nature of the area and I'll probably give you insight on what actually is going on. Thank you. Thanks. Okay. Oh, and be sure and get a speaker slip in for the clerk. Yes. Sorry about that. Any other request to speak? I don't see, I don't think we have any. Then we're going to go ahead and close public comment and the applicant, someone else wish to speak. Okay. You can either grab a slip from the back or slip up here and come ahead and speak and maybe you can just fill out your speaker slip at the end and to go to the next floor. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Post office is located on the, I guess the south east corner of the street. And the entrance to the loading docks are as off of magenta lane. And when the trucks come, they stop on magenta lane. They have to back up. Mm. And the FedEx goes there, the United Parcel goes there, the mail trucks that make the deliveries, they all park in the rear. They all need access, ingress and egress to that parking area. And when they stop, they have to back in. Now if there's traffic on that street and they're trying to access Teft Street those trucks are going to be impeding the access and the egress for the people who live in that neighborhood. It's also going gonna make it dangerous for people because these aren't small trucks, some of the regular post office, some of these are significant in size. Plus when the trucks break down, they use magenta lane to load their, the vehicles, when they need service, the postal vehicles, they're load up and this happens at least once a week. I'm not watching them all the time. So I think that the issue with traffic on magenta lane, they also have to take into consideration the fact that the post office uses that area for loading and unloading packages and mail. The front, the access to the post office for the patrons of the post office is from Teft Street, but the actual workers and the vehicles is off magenta lane. And I don't know if that's been taken into consideration, but that does affect the traffic on our street. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, did we end up with? No other requests to speak. And we're going to go back to the applicant for five minutes followed by the appellant for another five minutes of closing. But first the applicant five minutes of closing statements. If you have anything else to add or address. It was me. Thank you. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. Five minutes of closing statements. If you have anything else to add or address. Thank you. I don't really have much more to add other than just trying to keep the future residents in mind when we when we make these considerations the request. To simply even though we have a totally approval project that has been approved that houses 72. to make a request that we only house 36 because it might be inconvenient for them. It would be really hard for me to go tell 36 people and this is a family project with two and three bedroom homes that they can't have a place to live and it really does come down to that. And I was really trying hard to stay above the fray and not like go down into this. But I'll be honest with you, this cuts really close to home because I do know what government cheese tastes like. I did grow up in an unstable housing situation. So I take this very personally and I know that they gave lip service to the idea that this incident about low income housing. Housing is one of the essential needs of anybody. And to provide this type of housing here is a good solution, a good option, and I really do hope that you'll find a way to support it. Thank you very much. Thank you. And are a pellant? If you have any, any, um, if you'd like to make closing remarks, you have five minutes. Thank you. Also to the builder, I also grew up on welfare so I can appreciate the situation you were in. It wasn't anecdotal stories, but I also know what that she's tastes like. So thank you. It speaks to the volume of working hard to get somewhere and we weren't talking about the caliber or quality of those people. We were talking about the project and the traffic. I'm speaking to you, sir. Thank you. He also wouldn't be telling 36 families anything. Currently right now if you did look at traffic figure one there are zero school bus drop-offs because we're too close to the school. So for those families that didn't have cars I would be challenging for them to get to the local nearby schools. There also aren't bus pickups. We also have zero sidewalks around our neighborhood. So to get to the park as well, there's zero sidewalks. We were told by the Planning Commission it's progress, not perfection, and that's absolutely reasonable. Perfection should never be the goal out of the gate. We completely agree with that. We simply wanted things to be looked at. Once the county acquires these streets, they'll be financially liable for these improvements. So we simply wanted them to take a look at the improvements before. We have no problems with some of the elements of this building proposed. It simply has to do at the infrastructure of how we enter our house. Those are all, I appreciate your time. Thank you so much. Thank you. So we're back to board comments and deliberations. Supervisor Pauling. Thank you, Chair. Well, first I want to just thank everybody who came showed up to the meeting today to share your thoughts and concerns. I'm gonna take your representatives, I guess, words at face value when you said that the intent here was not to appeal the project based on wanting to kill the project but was to make the project better. That's constructive and I certainly appreciate that. When we look at a project like this, there are so many different factors in play. For example, the parking concerns raised, at least in terms of the number of spaces provided, is a matter of state law, in the sense that our board is restricted in our ability to require, for example, that more parking spaces are provided because of the applicant's use of state density bonus law. We also have other factors in play like what we discussed earlier during the Q&A session as it relates to larger planning efforts that aren't currently underway in DiPomo. We will be undertaking, as I mentioned, the DiPomo Community Plan update process, which is scheduled to kick off next summer, which will update the 1994 plan and establish a vision, a new vision for DiPomo over the course of the next 20 years. And that's critical because we do see quite a lot of development in NEPOMO. The Dana Reserve Project adds about 1400 units. We've got another 2000 units that I estimate coming through the pipeline in general. That means a population ultimately within the next 10 years of if you include Black Lake, Trilogy, Cyprus, over 30,000 people in the community to Pomo. That's a big community. And it is in a city. So you don't have the benefits of being incorporated, having your own police department, your own parks and rec department, everything that goes along with the city. But we do our best here. And I think when we look at this project, the traffic concerns are based on the, where I guess the response to the concerns by staff are based on the analysis that has been conducted, the studies that have been done and don't provide evidence or substantial evidence that would trigger us as decision-makers adding additional improvements to this particular project. I would like to see as projects are approved in this vicinity given the fact that we have quite a lot of vacant land adjacent, that we are looking holistically that our planning commission is looking at all the development, not just piecemeal as one comes before the planning commission and then the next one after that, but looking holistically about the traffic and circulation, the walkability, bikeability, active transportation, public transportation. And so that's really just a message to our planning commission and to our planning staff, to as these projects come before those bodies that these factors are holistically considered. I do appreciate the concession made on the parking space issue with the post office. I think the red curve is really a good solution. And as I mentioned earlier, my office is committed to fielding those, if we see continued parking and CHP isn't responding, contact my office. And I will elevate that issue with the contacts I have at CHP and make sure that that parking enforcement occurs. I think that will reduce the impacts to your neighborhood. You know, talking about the big picture of NAPOMO, I think is critical. I know this is just one project, but the point was made that there aren't sidewalks that connect this development or the future development to occur in this area to the Dana Elementary School or to NAPOMO Community Park. We've got basically massive gaps in the sidewalk network and I feel those concerns from constituents all the time and people ask why why why is that the case? Well as I came to learn very quickly as a as a new supervisor coming into office in January of last year, you know, in unincorporated areas, it's the development that pays to install the sidewalks. We don't have a funded policy of putting in sidewalks, curbs, and gutters. Now, having said that, there are alternatives. For example, in the NEPOMO Community Plan update process, I hope to bring to the community the idea or something like it of a central business improvement district that would fund sidewalks, curbs, gutters, landscaping to make the whole theft court or something that it could be, much safer facility, that would also add value to the business community. And so that's one of the benefits of undertaking that community plan update process. I know that doesn't address the issues that you've identified today. And that obviously will be a multi-year process. But we will talk about public transit. We will talk about public safety and the sheriff's substation. And I think there was a concern raised about timeline there. It is going to take time to get through the design process to ultimately construct that facility. We did take action earlier today on our consent agenda to go out for RFP for the request for proposal for the design build contractor, which we're going gonna use a design competition to then select that entity, so they will design and build that facility. And this board did commit, you know, $1.2 million last year to that design process and we're working on a financing plan to complete the project. And I'm confident that we will deliver on that. In general, I think traffic and circulation is a big issue in diploma. We have the traffic and circulation study currently underway. I would welcome members of the public to attend the South County Advisory Council meeting where we will discuss that with their traffic and circulation committee. And that is something I'll announce in my newsletter that I publish every month, feel free to get in touch with my office so you know to get on that list or follow the South County Advisory Council on their website. Because we're talking about that study, we're talking about the future of Nopomo, all these relevant conversations. I guess having said that, I support this project because it really does add housing that we need in our community. It provides 72 multi-family residential apartment units in three-story multi-family buildings that are 24 units each. And the project is conserved 100% affordable. So, you know, I'm interested to hear where the board is on this, but looking forward to hear, you know, support for this important project. Thank you. Could I get a motion go pass five? Somebody make a motion go pass five, not me. So moved. Second, all in favor. Hi. No. Hi. Majority of the board. I'm sorry, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. emergency secondary emergency egress via an easement across undeveloped land. In terms of the fire safety analysis, was there an analysis of the necessity of doing that or is magenta lane not long enough to require that? And I'm going with that is that that from a informed layman standpoint looks like a good condition to impose on this project. David Graham Public Works. I was looking for Kevin, but he's got. So when we reviewed the project, a fire safety related egress was not warranted for what's there right now. However, there is an easement on their property. And so I think there is an existing easement to allow emergency egress. Would the applicant's agent confirm that? There is a utility easement across the public. So, the public is able to confirm that. There is a utility easement across the bottom. It's not necessarily an access easement at this point. However, when in our negotiations with or back and forth with public works, we reconfigured our parking to allow vehicular access across to Mary if the property next to us is developed. And so we did we did reconfigure it so you could go across the the bill. So we do we did reconfigure it so you could go across the property if it's developed if the adjacent property is developed and just for reference the threshold for requiring two means of fire apparatus is 200 apartments and we're at seven to apartments so we're well below that. Okay. There's maybe a slight tweak that might be useful here. But at first of all, I want to thank you, Mr. Grim. I want to say that the appeal here and the proposed project really gets at some of the more challenging issues that we face, namely housing and its impacts. The affordability of said housing and the necessity to provide certain features. The impacts of an individual project versus the eventual impacts of cumulative development in the area, especially as we change. And, you know, while I don't think of 30 years as old, just for the record, I understand that in planning years, that's a long time. So that is a sensitive. I agree with Supervisor Paul Ding that we need a comprehensive plan. As I walk through the various conditions and the analyses that have been done here, I conclude that we have properly analyzed the existing project on the against the requirements that we have in place right now. I understand the balance concerns about those things. I think that we have done what we can to emeliorate those concerns. I wonder if we could add a condition that would assure that the developed project provides for secondary emergency access with the development of the property to the east. That not that we establish that now because apparently the analysis doesn't warrant that as it sits right now and we have nexus and proportionality concerns that we have to do. Apparently the analysis doesn't warrant that as it sits right now and we have nexus and proportionality concerns that we have to deal. But if we want to be sure, I mean, just a quick, is there a place where we could add something to be sure that this project is designed and it will be constructed in a way that residents of this development can use emergency secondary access through the parcel adjacent to it at the point that that parcel develops. I would ask for five minutes. Well, let me first of all, is that, you know, me asked the developer's agent, is that, do you know me ask the developers agent? Is that you indicated that the project is properly designed at this point? I mean, is designed to accommodate that? Could you just give us a confirmation that the project is designed for that? You can bring up the site. And I just need to know that it is, that's fine. I would suggest that let's get all the, if there are any other concerns of the board here as to modifications to the conditions of approval, let's get that out and then the five minutes to figure that out would be appropriate. I'm done. I supported as it is understanding the concerns that have been raised. Yeah. Okay, my turn, I'll try to be quick here. I think that one, I wanna say thank you. I think that the way that you came in and approached this was really important and well received as far as as supervisor Gibson talked about that the housing piece is important impacts. We have to deal with in that you recognize that you're not opposed to the housing. You just want to make sure that there is the safety aspect. that we have to deal with in that you recognize that you're not opposed to the housing. You just want to make sure that there is the safety aspect. And, you know, as Supervisor Pauling noted that this week in my area of unincorporated Avala, they asked for some traffic improvements and things because they're impacted by their school and all of this. And again, it didn't warrant the volume at this point to be able to do anything. It is one of the challenges that we have. I also want to say thank you to the applicant and your approach as well and wanting to do a good project for everybody. I am willing to work on the RTA. I think it's really important that we have, you know, we do have a regional transport authority. I want to see it being able to be utilized in a way, particularly in a housing place like this. So I want to work with you, Supervisor Paul Dingan, getting that addressed in a much more proactive way of advocacy for this neighborhood of Nipomo in particular, because of the amount of growth. And then lastly, the conditions that need to be put on future developments. and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public and the public a little bit more advanced to be able to discuss on solutions. And I think that's something that we want to talk about on when we have affordable projects like this that have a lot of paths to do as much as they possibly can, which we want them to do, but that we really need to be working with the neighbors in a more closely and advanced way. So we can try to find some solutions on these items. So I want to apologize for to do that in a way that we're going to be in an advanced way so we can try to find some solutions on these items. So I want to apologize for that that it didn't happen in that manner. But as to I support the housing going forward, we just need it so badly and but we want to work to try to make things better for you on the safety aspect and your traffic impacts. And lastly, comment, but it's a question, David. We just won't let you rest back there. But did you give us a, did I miss a more concrete timeline for when the the appellants were concerned about the or some of the speakers in the other neighborhood were concerned about the or some of the speakers in the other neighborhood were concerned about the responsibility for the road maintenance. And when did you think that the county would accept the road maintenance? I'm sorry I can't provide you a specific date on one except well I can I can say what needs to happen first and that's completion of magenta lane and then primrose on the top. So, and then after once that, the road is completed, so both sides of full road section, then we come and accept it. So it's contingent on how fast they as they go up and go. And then we have another project that, I'm not sure if they're going to do that. I'm not sure if they're going to do that. I'm not sure if they're going to do that. I'm not sure if they're going to do that. I'm not sure if they're going to do that. I'm not sure if they're going to do that. I'm not sure if they're going to do that. I'm not sure if they're going to do that. for sure, but it'll be a couple of years. Out. Does it go to the discusses any? Yeah, okay. Okay. All right, thank you for answering that question. Okay, anything else here? Anybody ready to make a motion? I'd be happy to make a motion. I just wanted to check in with staff on the addition that supervisor Gibson asked for, the emergency egress condition. Do we have language for that? Yeah, I would just ask for about five minutes to or with planning staff and write and put something with more clarity. Just want to confirm that it is feasible to write a condition of approval the approved development shell, you know, contained. I would need to confirm with the applicant and plan. Let's do that. Fine. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. We're back and we'll go ahead and hear from the planning department. Good afternoon. If you could pull up my screen, Madam Clerk, please. So public work staff and planning and the applicant conferred and we've added this condition here 14J installation of an emergency access gate along the Easterly property boundary with a califier approved lock for emergency egress for residents And I think David might then I'll just add that so we don't need we don't need an easement. I'll just add that so we don't need, we don't need an easement. I'll just add that this allows us an opportunity then to condition the other property, the adjacent property when that comes in for development to line it up and make sure that we have an emergency access route. And again, this would not be a public connectivity. This is for emergency access. Okay, with that, I'd be happy to make a motion. So I will move that our board adopt the resolution to deny the appeal and uphold the decision of the planning commission's approval of conditional use permit NDRC 202-3-0-0-0-0-0-6 based on the findings and find this project to be categorically exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to section 21159.2, with the modification that was just identified by staff adding paragraph 14J. Second. Okay. We'll motion a second. We'll call for the question. Please recall some real call vote please. We're trying to say Supervisor Paul Dean. Yes. Supervisor, Paul Dean. Yes. Supervisor Gibson. Yes. Supervisor Teesleg. Yes. And Chairperson Arnold. Yes. Okay. We're moving on now to item 37 on our agenda and we'll ask the clerk to ask item. Please. A hearing to consider an appeal by Patrick McKibney of the Lososos sustainability group of the planning Department hearing officers approval of a request by Shailene and Erlie for a minor use permit, coastal development permit, to allow for a 1,995 square foot addition and 72 square foot permeable deck extension to an existing 1,362 square foot single family residence and 85 square foot deck. The project is located in the foot single family residence in 85 square foot deck. The project is located in the residential single family land use category at 363 Mitchell Drive and Los Osos also to be considered as the determination that the project is exempt from sequel. Thank you. Board members, any expert communications? None, none. Planning, thank you. Thank you, Madam Clerk, good afternoon chair person Arnold and members of the board. My name is Andy Knightton, project manager with the county. The item before the board for reconsideration is the appeal by Mr. McKibney of the associate sustainability group of the request by Shilin and early for my news permit and coastal development permit for the addition to our existing single-family residents. The applicant requests approval of the use permit to allow the addition to an existing one-story single-family residence. The site would continue to be served by Golden State Water and the Loso Sos Waste Water Recycling Facility who both issued a will serve letter for this project. This project was approved by the Planning Department Hearing Officer on April 5th, 2024 and also so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so supervisors and members of the public context for the request. Shown here are the vicinity area on land use maps. The site is located within the residential single family land use category highlighted in yellow on the land use map. And is located on the south side of Mitchell Drive in the community of Los Osos within the Estero planning area. The applicant has provided the following site plan showing the proposed scope of work. The white outline indicates the layout of the existing residents and the shaded area indicates the new additions, which includes an office, then music room, two bedrooms, bathroom, and an extended master bedroom. The project at Build Out will total four bedrooms and two bathrooms. So that's the shaded area right there. Moving on to the appeal request that appellant raises the following appeal issues stating that the project is incompatible with the local with the local coastal program. The project violates the coastal zone land used ordinance, county code title 23. And the project will affect water resources of the overdrafted Los Ososos groundwater basin, and will serves do not indicate sustainability of a water basin. To address appeal issue one, the appellant expresses concern that the project violates the county's local coastal program, specifically public works policies 1, 6, and 10. expresses concern that the project violates the county's local coastal program, specifically public works policies 1, 6, and 10. To address this concern, public works policy 1 requires new development, demonstrate that adequate water service capacities are available to serve the proposed development. The project would include an addition to an existing one-story single-family residence and associated site improvements. The project site is located within the Lososos Urban Reserve line and the Urban Services line. Does not involve the subdivision of land and does not require any water service extension. Under such circumstances, the sufficiency of service capacities is usually satisfied by evidence of a will-s serve letter or continue to serve letter, verifying service capacity from the service providers as required by Title 19. The proposed project is currently served by community of water facilities in which Golden State Mutual Water Company is the purveyor and community sewer service services in which low-sauce waste watersose waste water recycling facility is the per bear. Our current wheel-serve letter was provided for both water and sewer services. The project is not considered a standalone new water-using development, but rather a minor improvement to an existing residence. The repose edition is not anticipated to result in an increase in water use on site because the existing single family residents is intended to be occupied by a single family and the existing water use will be distributed through the existing fixtures. Moving on to public works policy six the proposed project would not preclude the development of any part uses uses in Lososos therefore the proposed project is not conflict with this policy. And moving on to public works policy 10, which requires new urban development be located within the USL of coastal communities. The project is located within the USL of Lososos, therefore this policy supports approval of the proposed project. To address a Puele issue 2, the appellant expresses concern that the project violates section 2304-430 availability of water supply and sewage disposal services. The intent of this section is to give priority to infill development within the USL over development between the USL and the URL. The project site is not located between a USL and a URL and is located between the boundaries of both lines and therefore this section does not apply. To address the Pule issue three, the appellant expresses concern that the project will affect water resources of the overdrafted Lososos groundwater basin. To address this concern, the project site is located within the Lososos area sub-basin-so-so-ground water basin. To address this concern, the project site is located within the low-soso-so-so-area sub-basin of the low-soso-so-so-spec valley groundwater basin. The low-soso-so-so-so-so-ground water basin is found to be not an overdraft. Nevertheless, to ensure the proposed development has neutral to positive effects this infill development, including its required water offsets without significantly affecting water resources, and the applicant has obtained a will serve letter from Golden State Water. To address appeal issue four, the applicant expresses concern that will serve letters do not indicate sustainability of a water basin. To address this concern, public works policy one requires the county to make a finding of sufficient service capacities, which again gives priority to in filling development within the USL over development proposed between the USL and the URL. The proposed project is located within the USL and does not require any water service extension. Therefore, sufficiency of service capacities is satisfied by evidence of a wool servile from golden state water as a subject matter expert on the system service capacity and as required by Title 19. The applicant has obtained their wool serv letter for this project. In summary of the project, as condition meets and exceeds all development standards is consistent with county plans and policies. There are no waivers, modifications or variances as required as any component of this project. Staff believes that the appeal issues have been adequately addressed. Additionally, staff recommends for board consideration the addition of indemnification condition number 33 as shown on the slide. Therefore, staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors affirm the decision of the Planning Department Hearing Officer to adopt the environmental determination that the project qualifies for general rule or common sense exemption pursuant to CEQA and adopt the resolution to deny the appeal and uphold the planning department hearing officers approval of the project subject to the findings in exhibit A and revised conditions of approval and exhibit B which includes condition 33 of indemnification. That concludes staff's presentation, both the applicant as well as the appellant are here to present for this appeal hearing and are available to respond to any questions the board has, thank you. Thank you. Board questions. Board questions. All right. Then we're going to start with the appellant and it'll be 10 minutes. Mr. McGibney. Thank you. I am Patrick McGibney chair of the Losos sustainability group and it's late and I appreciate you guys being here. I apologize I do have a lot to say though. Ten minutes. I would like to start off though. You were talking about supporting property rights and doing work in the public interest, approving the Los Social's Community Plan without hard day to showing a sustainable water supply puts all the current residents and property owners of Los Social's and jeopardy of losing their properties due to a lack of water. This is not in the best interest of public of the public and of the 15,000 residents that live here. But it is in the interest of the public, and of the 15,000 residents that live here. But it is in the interest of the county, possibly to collect more property taxes, and for a few developers and several hundred non-residents. You do not have hard data showing that Louis Holtz's water basin is sustainable and can accommodate an increase in use. To be clear, the sustainability group, myself, and the community in general are not against development. We're concerned about losing our only water supply. We have no other. We are different than other coastal communities that can accommodate more growth and development and we do need housing. Cayucas has Will Rock Reservoir. Moro Bay has state water. Los Osos only has the depleted water basin, and I hope you actually listen to the data that I present. The issue is intensification of water use of the overdrafted water basin of Los Ososos, and data-driven information indicates that basin is indeed in overdraft challenging the planning staff's assessment. That challenge is reinforced by the latest Water Basins annual report, where it states that by the Department of Water Resources, that they classify the Los Ososos water basin to be in critical overdraft. Not just overdraft, but critically overdrafted. Planning staff through the direction of one of your board members has this assessment wrong, and I'll explain why. According to the California Department of Water Resources, overdraft is a principle is principally caused by sea water intrusion. An indication of sea water intrusion is high. Chloride levels are high and increasing into the four monitoring wells. It seems supporting data does show the basin is experiencing sea water intrusion and is indeed in overdraft condition. In public works policy, one it says the basin is experiencing sea water intrusion and is indeed in overdraft condition. In Public Works Policy 1, it says, New Development shall demonstrate that adequate service capacities are available such as water. A will-serve letter does not demonstrate adequate water is available. It only shows water will be provided. As you are aware, Golden State Water Company, a for-profit company, and the per is the per-veer of this project, is required to issue a will-serve letter regardless of the adequacy of the resource. Land Use Ordinance 23.04.430 says new development that requires water shall not be approved unless applicable proving body determines that there is adequate water available end of quote. Well, it appears that the county has determined there is adequate water, but let's look at the data behind that determination. According to recent staff report from the Coastal Commission, the one where they erroneously approve the Los Osos Community Plan with modifications. It says the county is now using an estimated sustainable yield of 2380 acre feet yearly, an estimated sustainable yield, not fact driven but estimated, and a production rate of 1650 acre feet yearly, another estimate and not fact driven. Almost half of the production from this basin is unmetered, making total production an estimate and unreliable. With these two estimates you've been given the Basin Yield metric of 69, which if you believe that, shows the basin in the county's judgment is not an overdraft and is therefore sustainable. The best management practices outlined in the Department of Water Resources Sustainable Groundwater Management Act, the state's guide to determining water sustainability, mandates sigma not incorporate sustainable yield estimates directly into sustainable management criteria. Basinwide pumping within the sustainable yield estimate is neither a measurement of nor proof of sustainability, only, which is only demonstrated by the absence of undesirable results when operating within its sustainable yield end of quote. Undesirable results include seawater intrusion in increasing chloride levels, as mentioned Lososos water basin suffers from both. It must be stressed that the sustainable yield metric is only an estimate as is the production rate of 1,650 acre fee yearly. That estimate this time is skewed by one important contributing factor. That of a remarkable good rain year that Los Social's community enjoyed in 2022-3, which reduced the need for outdoor watering for both residential and ag use. So estimated extraction rates aren't as high as in previous years, but this year is forecast to be a dry year, followed by more drought years. But it's the private and agricultural water use that presents the real uncertainty. As stated in the Los Osos Basin Management Plan on page 137, it says, and I quote, while reporting of groundwater production by pervairs is necessary, the Basin Management Committee and parties will face significant challenges to successful management of the Basin without the collection and data use of non-pervairs. In particularly with over 40% of the Basin production based on estimates, the Basin Management Committee and parties may not be able to accurately predict or measure the effects of their actions to stop seawater and shear's trusion using the Basin yield metric and other metrics. Because there is a substantial lag time between potential over extraction from the basin as calculated through the basin yield metric and measurements of actual impacts on the basin in the water yield metric and the water level metric and chloride metric, any errors resulting from use of estimates rather than actual production figures may not be known for as long as 15 years, when it will be too late to correct. It is vitally important for the basin yield metric to be as accurate as possible in order to ensure that proper actions are being taken to stop sea water intrusion as early as possible. The failure of this basin plan to stop sea water intrusion would harm the public interest in use of the basin as a sustainable source of water for all the purposes, including residential commercial, institutional and agricultural use end of quote. It's been eight years of base and management for our basin and at this time the BMC has more specifically the county has prevented the metering of all ag and private wells that are using our overdrafted water basin under the pretext that this board would not never pass an ordinance requiring it. Without metering, accurate monitoring is not possible. Without accurate monitoring, correct actions to stop seawater intrusion will not has not happened. Sea water intrusion is still with us. Sustainability is not yet a reality, which brings us to this project at hand. The intensification of water use and Dan Carl's letter to the county of April 19, 2022, which it is still relevant. You know, the one where the Coastal Commission doubted that there was enough water for the current population. I think that adding back it thinks the Coastal Commission that adding bathrooms and bedrooms to a structure could intensify water use because doing so can accommodate a traditional persons. In this case, presently there are only four people in the household. And the reasoning is that they need another bathroom and two bedrooms to comfortably accommodate aging parents and a son and his partner. But what is in factored in is that there already exists an outside structure that could comfortably accommodate their son and partner, but it's being used as an illegal vacation rental, which adds more people than intensifies water use. In conversations with the county planning, this unattached surface or structure was permitted as a guest house, which the county's coastal land use ordinance says as a guest house, she'll not be used for residential occupancy, independent from the principal residence or as a dwelling unit for retail. While it is being used as a retail, as a rental, independent from the principal residence. the council's proposal to make sure that the council is not going to be able to receive a council's proposal. The council is going to receive a council's proposal to receive a council's proposal to receive a council to receive a council's proposal to receive a council to receive a council's proposal to receive a council to receive a council's proposal to receive a council to receive a council's proposal to receive a council to receive a council's the next day, shall be established only in an existing single famed dwelling, meaning it has to be part of the main house. The successory dwelling unit is a separate structure, and I will finish my comments on my five minutes at the end. Thank you. Board questions of the appellant. Okay. The applicant, Charlene and Erlie, you have 10 minutes to make any remarks. Of course, yeah. I'm Charlene and Erlie. This is my husband, Chris and Erlie. And we're the aging people. We are very grateful to be on our property. The owner helped us buy our property in getting our little cottage permitted, which we did. The home state is approved. Yeah, we got it permitted. Yeah, so I'm 2020. We were permitted from you guys. And we even went to hearing at that point. And so that's wonderful and that helps us pay for our mortgages and then we give two people at a time that come to our beautiful place and we give them peace and so it's a win-win and it's very quiet and we have four people in our home and our home, my son and his future wife, they're not going anywhere, they're gonna stay with us. And he said for brain surgeries, but they're just gonna stay with us and help us with our property. We're on a half-acre, so we have plenty of room and we love them and we like living together and we have one bathroom, little beach bungalow, run into each other, little kitchen, little everything which is fine. We can deal with that, we take turns. But the bathroom is an issue and so no extra use and water at all. It's gonna be four people now. It's gonna be four people when we build. We're musicians, we're have music rooms, and a studio, and thank you very much. Thank you. Any questions of the applicant? No, okay, thank you. Open public comment. I don't have any requests to speak. Anyone? We're gonna close public comment and bring it back. I should have told you this before you set down, but you have five more minutes to make any closing remarks that you wanna make. If you want to use the five minutes to say anything else, it's your turn. Where are we? Oh, yeah. She could probably do part. We agree with planning and everything that they're proposing and we're very grateful. We had a pre-planning meeting before we even brought our application and so we did everything we had it with, what, 12 people, you know, public works and everything. So we accomplished every single one of their goals before we even brought into the application. And so when we brought in the application, we had everything completed. Thank you. Thank you. And five minutes for the appellant. Mr. McKibney. Thank you. Ordnance 2308265 also says, physical expansion of a residence to specifically accommodate homestay facility or operations shall not be allowed. When questioned about this, County Planning Staff responded in an email dated 9-11-23, saying, the guest house, and this is a quote, is already permitted as a homestay. It is my understanding that the home stay is an important part of the NRELs. NRELs. NRELs. Thank you. Income. So losing the guest house as a home stay is not a viable option. Because the guest house does not have a kitchen laundry facility, it is considered an accessory dwelling to the primary residents and is not considered a vacation rental. It is up to the NRELs to do what they would like to do. A homestay has to be internally attached. It is being used as an illegal vacation rental. Being an important part of their income is unfortunate. But the fact is that it adds more people to the equation and intensifies water use. This is the issue. Ordinance 23 also says physical expansion of the residents specifically accommodate home state facility or operations is not allowed. On the other hand, this vacation rental may be needed to finance the construction of the additions, which is specifically to accommodate the home state. Either way, approving the project would be in a violation of several county land use ordinances and would create an intensification of water use to an overdrafted water basin further straining the only source of drinking water the community of Lososos has. As stated in the Basin Management Plan, there are two ways to balance the Basin yield metric. One way is to increase sustainable yield, which has been done in the past, and the second is to reduce production. The lower production rate of 1650 acre feet is a byproduct of increased precipitation, not conservation, making long-term decisions on short-term gains as foolish and best at best catastrophic. Catastroph catastrophic at worst. It is an actual production rate is sought than the actual conservation plan should be needed. In permitting a Los Osos wastewater water project, the county was required to provide $5 million to fund towards water conservation programs for indoor water conservation and to coordinate with purveyors to the maximum to the maximum scent possible to integrate this conservation program with purveyors implemented outdoor water use reduction measures. Anyway, none of this stuff has ever happened. We don't have a conservation plan or conservation plan for the community. We've never spent the five5 million for the community to be adding conservation measures. And one thing that you don't have is you don't have an accurate measurement of what Ag production is. This last year you said it was 600 acre fee to year. It has been 800 acre fee, but that's all an estimate because it isn't metered. And in the in the Basin Management Plan, it gives you that option to create an ordinance where all metering is required. And that's the only way you're going to be able to get an accurate measurement of how much water is being reduced or taken from our water basin. That's the only way you're going to get a real sustainable yield. Now, a sustainable yield, one of the indications that it's not sustainable, as I said, is you don't have any, you don't have seawater intrusion. We do have seawater intrusion and we've had it for over 40 years and you know that. Therefore, the sustainable yield has never been sustainable and that's probably due to the fact that we have more ag water to be taken out than you ever thought it was. So please, let's stop the building in Los Osos. Building that adds water production, which everything seems like that I'm coming up to you does, until you know that we do have a sustainable basin. We are losing that water, and this is the only water we have. We don't have will rock or state water. So we need some help from this board here. Nice people, they probably deserve it, but it's still gonna be more water use. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, we're comments and deliberations. Madam Chair, unless my colleagues have questions, I'll make a couple comments and we'll get straight to a motion here. The assertions made by the appellants have been presented in various forums before. They, particularly the Basin Management Committee, they are not based in fact, and they have been rebutted multiple times. As he appears before us today, he didn't provide any new information, much less data, and it's really not worth our time, especially at this late hour, to go through the points that he has tried to assert on a point by point basis. I will point out that the one new thing that is particular to this project that he has brought forward is something to do with the homestay that is already permitted. It is existing. This project is not about expanding a single family house to accommodate that home state. So that is a relevant topic in this matter. The actual appeal issues that he has raised and not for the first time have been accurately, expertly and thoroughly analyzed in our staff report and provide ample basis for us to deny this appeal. And so I will make a motion that we deny the appeal, uphold the decision of the planning department hearing officer with the revised conditions of approval and the revised findings that exist in exhibits B and A, respectively, and to approve, to find that this project qualifies for a general rural exemption under sequa. A second, and just note that I always wanna say that I hope that your building and everything works out for you and that you did all the things that you were told to do and I was think staff on that so that's it and to clarify you or both of you or the your motion is all of the recommended action yes Okay, let's we have a motion a second. Let's call for a roll call vote. Please supervisor Gibson. Yes Supervisor T's leg. Yes, supervisor Paul Leigh? Yes. Supervisor Paul D? Yes. Interpreter Mono? Yes. We'll move to item number 38 on our agenda and item number 38 in a supervisor can ask a question for clarification, make an announcement or report briefly. On here's our activities. In addition, supervisors may request staff to report back to the board in a subsequent meeting concerning any matter may request staff place the matter of business or and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and additional services and I just wanted to request in September, we're going to have an offshore wind update. I wanted to expand that to include a 3CE update, and I think the administrative office has got thumbs up. So just wanted to make sure that we could provide the community with an update on all of our energy items. Thank you. Okay. Any other discussion? Is that direction works? Okay, great. So we'll open this item to public comment. Everyone's rushing. No, no requests to speak. Close public comment. And so we don't have any motions. Everybody done. Do you have something to say? I was at the career fair in Oceano, at the Oceano Airport. I know the Bruce was there, I'm not sure if you were able to stop by, too, but it was a great event. And I saw plenty of folks from the community really enjoying it and learning a lot about aviation. And so it's a really important step in the direction of utilizing that asset. And like you mentioned earlier, Supervisor Ortiz, like we've got to get through the permitting process in order to be able to improve it. So I just wanted to clarify that to the community, anybody watching at home and thank our airport director and all the different folks from the industry that showed up to make that happen. Great. Okay. No other lights on. We're going to join the meeting next meeting to stay September 10th. 9 a.m.