[0:22] Good morning, everybody. I'm going to call this meeting in the Son of County Board of Supervisors to order. Madam Clerk, welcome, please.

[0:30] Supervisor James? Supervisor Brown? Yes. Supervisor Williams? Here? Supervisor Vasquez? Here. And Chair Mashwin? Here. If you could all please join me in the pledge allegiance to a moment of silence.

[0:49] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

[0:56] is one nation under God, indivisible, liberty, and justice for all.

[1:19] Thank you all very much.

[1:30] With

[1:43] that Madam Clerk, it brings us to item one.

[1:46] Adopt and present a resolution recognizing August 26th, 2025 as national

[1:50] Women's Equality Day in Solano County.

[1:53] Do I have a motion?

[1:54] I would like

[2:03] to ask my guests to come to the podium please.

[2:07] Are you pardoned?

[2:11] Oh, sorry.

[2:14] Football is in two weeks, so my brain is there.

[2:17] So ordered by the 5-0.

[2:27] Good morning, everyone.

[2:29] And this resolution is an honor of National Women's Equality Day.

[2:34] We're as national women's equality day marks the adoption of the 19th Amendment in 1920

[2:43] which granted women the right to vote.

[2:47] And whereas women of the United States have been treated as second class citizens and

[2:52] have not been entitled the full rights and privileges, public or private, legal, or institutional

[2:59] which are available to male citizens of the United States.

[3:03] And whereas women in the United States have continually worked to gain full rights and

[3:10] privileges, public or private, legal or institutional, as citizens of the United States.

[3:16] And whereas women in every state and every culture and religious group work to secure women's

[3:22] rights to vote, whereas Congress has dedicated August 28th the day, the date, the 19th Amendment

[3:30] was certified as women's equity day.

[3:34] And whereas recognizing national women's equity day as a day of celebration

[3:40] throughout the country, emphasizing the importance of women's work for democracy

[3:47] and demonstrates the importance of the women's suffrage movement and the work to secure and expand equal rights.

[3:56] Now, therefore, be resolved that the Salano County Board of Supervisors hereby recognize August 26th as National Women's Equity Day.

[4:07] Accepting the resolution is the Salano Napa, excuse me, Salano Valley Alumni Chapter of the Delta Sigma Theta Sorority Incorporated.

[4:18] The Sorority is a service organization whose purpose is to provide assistance and support in local communities

[4:26] throughout the world and their major programs focus on economic development, physical and mental health,

[4:36] education, educational development, political awareness and involvement, international awareness

[4:43] and involvement. And representing the sorority is a lot of raspberry who will not only be accepting

[4:51] in the Board of Supervisors Resolution,

[4:54] but also a proclamation from my office as well.

[4:59] So at this time, I'd like to bring Lana Raspberry forward

[5:04] to share some words.

[5:05] Thank you.

[5:06] Thank you.

[5:09] Greetings, Chairman Mashburn and members

[5:11] of the Salano Board of Supervisors,

[5:14] esteemed guests and fellow community leaders.

[5:17] On behalf of the Salano Valley alumni chapter

[5:20] of Delta Sigma Theta sorority,

[5:22] I bring greetings and these remarks from our president, Tamra Moore Ward.

[5:26] My name is Lana Raspberry and I am the social action chair for the chapter.

[5:31] We are honored to accept this award.

[5:34] We are deeply grateful for this recognition of our service and commitment to women and families.

[5:41] Both here in Salano County and abroad.

[5:44] We want to thank you for shining on the light on the work of our chapter and

[5:48] done for and has done for your commitment. From the pin of our president, Delta

[5:54] Sigma Theta was founded in January 1913 on the campus of Howard University in

[6:00] Washington DC. 22 young college women created an organization on the

[6:04] principles of sisterhood scholarship service and social action. We now have

[6:09] over 300,000 members internationally and have remained steadfast in our

[6:15] mission to uplift, empower, and equip women, and young people to thrive.

[6:21] Our local chapter, Solano Valley, alumni was chartered in 1991 and has actively served

[6:28] the communities of Fairfills, Assum, Dixon, and back of Hill.

[6:34] Whether it's through scholarship writing workshops or the hygiene packets that we provide to women

[6:42] in local shelters and foster homes.

[6:45] Our work is grounded in meeting real needs

[6:48] with compassion and action.

[6:50] We made efforts to meet the needs of our kids of color

[6:53] in the juvenile justice system

[6:55] by also providing hair care products

[6:58] specific to their needs.

[7:00] We also partnered with the League of Women Voters

[7:03] to present a civil curriculum designed to equip them

[7:06] with basic tenants of federal and local government.

[7:10] Our chapter also provides two different types of scholarships to young people in

[7:15] Salano County. One is our Sickle Sale Scholarship. The other is our

[7:20] Santhea Warren Scholarship for all young ladies in Salano County who are high

[7:25] school seniors. This scholarship has been offered more than 30 years. This past year

[7:31] we provided over $10,000 to our recipients. We're also proud of our international

[7:38] and outreach supporting women in Haiti

[7:41] with essential supplies like shoes, clothing and hygiene items

[7:46] because we know our impact should extend beyond borders.

[7:51] Our Delta GIMS program will be reintroduced this coming year.

[7:55] This program provides tools to enable girls 14 through 18

[7:59] to sharpen and enhance their skills to achieve high levels of academic success.

[8:04] Yes, every act of giving, every scholarship awarded and every life touched is a reminder

[8:13] that change happens at the grassroots with organizations like ours and communities

[8:20] like this one.

[8:22] Thank you to the Board for not only recognizing our work but valuing it.

[8:28] Your supportive firms that service still matters and that our daughters, our sisters and

[8:34] And our communities deserve our very best efforts.

[8:37] This proclamation is received with humility and renewed dedication.

[8:42] Thank you.

[8:52] So we're starting to go down the takes.

[8:54] Follow.

[9:22] Okay.

[9:25] All right.

[9:46] One.

[9:48] Three.

[10:35] Madam Clerk, next step is item two, please.

[10:37] Adopt

[10:43] and present a resolution recognizing September 2025 as Adult Literacy Awareness Month in Solano County.

[10:49] Do I have a motion?

[11:00] All right, and on this item I do have one card in for public comment and I think it's Mr. Eugene Polito.

[11:08] Do you have a comment?

[11:10] Elaine, I'm sorry, it's really tiny. You write really small.

[11:14] So we'd like since you wanted to do a public comment, we thought you would speak first.

[11:19] I will bring everybody down and do the resolution if that works for you.

[11:23] Okay, Elaine.

[11:24] Thank you and I apologize.

[11:30] I'm Elaine Pledo.

[11:32] I actually work here for Smono County for the District of Tardis Office.

[11:35] And I've also been a volunteer for the adult literacy program for the Smono County Library

[11:40] for almost 19 years.

[11:42] And I will tell you not only do these learners learn reading skills and essential life skills,

[11:48] but the tutors and the volunteers in the program also learn.

[11:52] So they've enriched my life.

[11:55] They, you know, we gain communication skills and empathy through this program.

[11:59] So I just want to thank you for supporting the program and for the literacy program at the slanta county library.

[12:05] Thank you.

[12:06] Thank you, ma'am.

[12:14] Thank you, and make sure you come up with

[12:19] everybody else with the literacy.

[12:21] Launa, don't make me stand here by myself.

[12:24] Come on, I see a few of you, come on.

[12:27] you know who you are I know who you are so

[12:40] even though I taught math I know you

[12:42] have to learn how to read to do those word problems so I appreciate you guys

[12:46] doing what you're doing so this is the resolution of the Salona County Board

[12:50] as supervisors recognizing September 2025 as adult literacy awareness month

[12:56] and I will just go right into who needs to speak which I'm assuming it's you all

[13:02] All right.

[13:06] You can read anything you want, my friend.

[13:09] Thank you.

[13:10] Thank you.

[13:11] OK.

[13:13] All right, this is the, well, first of all,

[13:17] thank you Chair Mitch Mashburn for this opportunity

[13:22] and members of the board on David Lewis

[13:25] and I'm the program manager for the literacy program.

[13:29] So this is Resolution Number 2025-184.

[13:33] Resolution of the Salano County Board of Supervisors recognizing September, 2025 as adult literacy awareness month.

[13:42] Whereas, the need for a highly literate citizenry increases as Salano County and the state of California move toward an increasingly technological future impacting the way that we receive, share and utilize information.

[13:58] And, whereas more than 50% of Salano County adults experience literacy issues that impact

[14:05] their lives and families, their ability to work productively, and their full participation

[14:11] as citizens and residents of Salano County.

[14:15] And whereas the need for adults to be able to read, understand, and share information related

[14:21] to community concerns and activities, including public health, employment, child education,

[14:27] and public safety, benefits, all who live and work in Solano County,

[14:34] and whereas Solano County citizens are encouraged to learn more about the importance of adult literacy

[14:40] and how they can support literacy in our community.

[14:44] Now therefore be it resolved that Solano County Board of Supervisors does hereby recognize September 2025

[14:51] as adult literacy awareness month in Solano County.

[14:56] Dated this 26th day of August, 2025.

[15:09] So,

[15:13] this year in May, we celebrated 30 years of literacy services in Solano County. And so, we had a big celebration at the county event center. And I'm really proud of that. Thank you.

[15:25] It was a good party.

[15:28] If you know anybody who has nothing to do, like, really bored, I have nothing to do.

[15:33] We can use you.

[15:35] And then you get a party.

[15:37] So if you're going to do it, you need to do it for the party, right?

[15:41] Absolutely.

[15:42] Okay, there you go.

[15:42] Absolutely.

[15:43] Yes.

[15:44] And what Elaine reminded us of, you get to learn things and also build some empathy and learn

[15:53] learn more about how to help other people.

[15:56] So I wanted to thank the Board of Supervisors for recognizing September as Adult Literacy

[16:02] Awareness Month in Salano County and for their continued support for the library and

[16:08] the library programs.

[16:09] And I want to acknowledge the hard work of our learners and tutors.

[16:12] We currently have 166 active volunteer tutors in our program.

[16:18] And last year, they provided over 7,200 volunteer hours.

[16:23] The countywide, we have 381 adults enrolled in the program.

[16:29] 163 are matched and actively working with a tutor and

[16:32] another 215 are waiting to be prepared or waiting to be paired.

[16:37] And that's what Monica was alluding to.

[16:40] If you want to volunteer, if you want to do something to help the community then come to the literacy program.

[16:47] I also want to recognize the literacy staff for their tireless efforts.

[16:53] And again, thank you for your support and the recognition.

[16:58] It's because all of us working together that we can make a difference.

[17:01] Thank you.

[17:11] Hi, I'm Jennie Lee, I have, I work with a group of English as a second language learners in English.

[17:22] they represent several countries, several different countries, Chinese, Japanese, they're

[17:29] mostly Mexican, or Spanish speaking, and they need pronunciation and grammar and vocabulary,

[17:41] but more than that, they need help in how to fit into American society.

[17:49] community. They need a small, warm and welcoming group of people to join. And I have thought

[17:58] of book clubs, music clubs, hiking clubs, swimming clubs, bridge clubs, even church groups

[18:06] who are notoriously warm and welcoming. But they don't have a clue how to fit in, how to

[18:14] make friends, or normal, ordinary American friends.

[18:18] Like you, tutors are wonderful.

[18:21] And we definitely need more tutors.

[18:24] But they talk with me several times a week.

[18:27] And that's good.

[18:29] We have a good time.

[18:30] But they need more.

[18:32] They need how to fit into American society.

[18:36] I need help with that.

[18:38] So if anybody has any ideas, please.

[18:41] Please.

[18:48] Anybody else?

[18:49] It's in the audience.

[18:50] Wanna come say something?

[18:52] All right.

[18:53] Thank you.

[18:54] All right.

[18:54] So come on up, guys.

[18:55] We're gonna do pictures.

[18:57] And one

[19:38] of my kids.

[20:05] All right.

[20:05] Madam Clerk, would you bring just to item three, ma'am?

[20:08] Please.

[20:08] Adopt and present.

[20:09] A resolution recognizing September 2025 as workforce development month in Salano County.

[20:15] Do I have a motion?

[20:25] It's sorted by vote of 5-0.

[20:32] All right.

[20:32] I mean, I can do this by myself.

[20:38] Thank

[20:43] you.

[20:46] It's keep coming

[20:50] this is only half the team yeah it takes a lot to stand back up

[21:02] there yeah that's good okay and then we'll go up here for pictures as you guys

[21:06] mean all right so here we go so you have to learn how to read and then you come

[21:13] over here to work for development so I thought this was you know work worked out

[21:17] just perfect on the agenda. So, I'll just read one of the where-as is, whereas the United States

[21:23] Congress approved a bipartisan resolution in September of 2017 that designated September as

[21:31] national workforce development month to promote the American workforce and acknowledge the crucial

[21:37] role workforce development plays in their growing United States economy. And you've got a whole bunch

[21:44] to people back here, and I believe we have somebody in my talk.

[21:49] There we go.

[21:51] Thank you, Monica.

[21:53] Wait a minute.

[21:53] One second.

[21:53] Was that a phone?

[21:55] Did I hear a phone?

[21:57] Okay.

[21:57] I did hear a phone.

[21:59] To the County Board of Supervisors, and on behalf of my team, sorry, I'm tall.

[22:04] So I'll hold this up as I can.

[22:06] Thank you for taking this moment to set up the month of September, it recognizes Workforce

[22:12] Development Month.

[22:13] If we haven't had a chance to meet yet, I've met some of y'all during the interview process.

[22:18] My name is Dave Hubble.

[22:19] I'm the new president and executive director of the workforce development board.

[22:24] I know I have big shoes to fill.

[22:27] My predecessor, you may know Heather Henry did a fabulous job, but I can tell you she's built a strong team.

[22:34] I've been on board for just a couple of weeks and I've taken the opportunity to observe the work that this team does.

[22:42] and I can tell you, I genuinely am absolutely amazed at the hard work and dedication that's been provided by our workforce development specialist, starting with the 30 years of tremendous leadership provided by Mr. Mary and Aiken.

[23:00] I'm just thinking about that for a moment.

[23:02] I can imagine the hundreds, if not thousands, of people who have been affected by the work of this dedicated man.

[23:11] And yeah,

[23:17] and to my front office staff, Lauren Bender and

[23:19] Tam Galatine to help me keep the trains running on time, and keeping fiscal responsibility,

[23:24] making sure that we hire a great talent.

[23:27] They do tremendous work to Tracy White, who I don't believe is here right now.

[23:32] She's out there in the field working, who leads our one stop shop team.

[23:37] They're the face of our organization, they're the folks who receive the folks coming in our doors, right?

[23:42] and ensure that we do the intake, the triage, make sure they get the resources that they need.

[23:48] And they go out to Travis Air Force Base, work with our service members who are transitioning out into the civilian workforce.

[23:55] They reach out to our veterans, I am a veteran, that's very important to me.

[24:00] To Matthew Moon Bailey, who leads our job Secret Services team, who don't just help folks find work.

[24:07] but actually work with some of our most vulnerable members in our community who have hopes, wants, and dreams.

[24:16] And they help provide the training and the resources that they need to get them on a journey that leads to a career path that helps them fulfill their hopes, wants, and dreams.

[24:26] To our business solutions team led by April, I hope I say April's name, last name right.

[24:34] Right, she's on vacation, they'll kill me later.

[24:38] But who is our eyes and ears to the business community, and to our employers, to ensure that our employers receive the talent that they've been looking for.

[24:48] The skill sets that they need to not only succeed as a business but to thrive in our community, right?

[24:55] And then, okay, and then finally, Michael Bessain, a leader of our Small Business Development Center, again, thank you, I know I can go on and on.

[25:02] But thank you for the resources that this board has provided, and we look forward to working with you in the days ahead.

[25:07] Thank you.

[25:08] All right.

[25:09] All right.

[25:12] Oh, and by the way, Tammy is one of my students, too.

[25:17] The world is small, and so on, okay, I'll use.

[25:26] Keep going, guys.

[25:27] Yes.

[25:28] Did

[25:41] you get my anew?

[25:43] I guess you're going to ask your question.

[25:44] So let's get started.

[25:52] Three, one, two, three.

[25:59] Thank you.

[26:07] Oh, it is.

[26:11] I'm sorry.

[26:14] How are you doing?

[26:15] I'm sorry.

[26:16] I'm sorry.

[26:16] How are you doing?

[26:17] I'm sorry.

[26:18] I got to come over.

[26:19] I know.

[26:19] I want to close myself a note.

[26:23] I'll see you soon.

[26:28] Thank you.

[26:44] Thank you.

[26:44] You're welcome.

[26:46] Thank you.

[26:46] Madam Clerk, item 4 please.

[26:47] Please.

[26:55] Adopt and present a resolution recognizing September 2025 as National Preparedness Month.

[27:00] Do I have a mission?

[27:08] So ordered by vote of 5-0.

[27:23] Good morning, everybody.

[27:25] Today, we're going to recognize National Preparedness Month in Solano County.

[27:31] It's held each September.

[27:32] The mission of the Solano County Office of Emergency Services is to protect lives, property, and

[27:38] the environment by preparing for, responding to, recovering from, and mitigating the effects

[27:42] of natural and human cause emergencies.

[27:45] September is National Preparedness Month, which promotes public awareness about the

[27:51] importance of being prepared for a full range of emergencies and to encourage communities

[27:55] to take action to strengthen security and resiliency of our families and businesses.

[28:02] The community of Solano County should join together, join cities, special districts,

[28:08] non-profits, and community-based organizations across the nation to ensure action is taken,

[28:13] including assessing disaster preparedness information readily available to the county website,

[28:20] and to get involved with emergency preparedness and planning.

[28:25] The Solano County Board of Supervisors on behalf of the communities of Solano County.

[28:29] And hereby recognize the month of September, 2025, as National Preparedness Month.

[28:34] With that, Ms. Reigns.

[28:37] Thank you, Chair, Board.

[28:38] Thank you for having me.

[28:39] As always, I'm Robin Reigns, the Emergency Services Manager for Salona, oh yes.

[28:45] September is emergency preparedness month.

[28:48] Every year, I talk about it every day, so I can go on for a long time, but I won't.

[28:54] So let's see, what do we need to do for emergency preparedness month?

[28:57] When we prepare before a disaster, it minimizes what's needed for emergency response

[29:03] and it makes it better and easier for the community to recover after that emergency has passed.

[29:09] So all disasters are emergencies, but not all emergencies are disasters.

[29:13] We generally deal with disasters, but anything that is at a catastrophic level to the community

[29:19] is something that we would be involved in.

[29:22] So that's going to be your earthquakes, wildfires, floods, power outages.

[29:26] But then there's also human-caused instance, cyber security attacks on critical infrastructure,

[29:33] any kind of domestic, violent extremism, those kinds of events as well.

[29:37] We try and be prepared for as much as you can.

[29:39] The human cause or the only ones that can be prevented, natural are only ones that we can prepare for to the best of our ability.

[29:47] So you need to have your plan on what you're going to do.

[29:51] Preparedness starts with a plan.

[29:52] If you don't have a plan, you're not going to be ready.

[29:53] If you're not ready, you're going to need a lot more resources when it happens.

[30:00] So start your emergency plan now, make sure everyone in your family knows your emergency plan, and that they understand that that is also their emergency plan, and that you may or may not be there to enact that emergency plan. We're all here because we have jobs, if we have children or older family at home, they might have to enact that plan without you being there. So that's something that is important, that everybody know, understand, and actually practice implementing.

[30:28] So the other thing that is important to understand and that kind of goes into that planning aspect that we were talking about is that preparedness is a shared responsibility.

[30:39] It is not only the office of emergency services or your local law and fire department that is fully responsible for preparedness response and recovery here.

[30:49] If the community is ready, they can be a lot more effective in saving lives and properties.

[30:55] But if you're not ready, all of their resources go to protecting lives, and it's just, that's not the way you want to go.

[31:03] So make sure that you are doing everything within your power to prepare yourself and your family and your loved ones for a disaster before it happens.

[31:13] So that we have the resources to protect property and the environment as much as we can as well as protecting lives for

[31:24] for those that aren't able to get themselves out safely.

[31:27] So everybody has a role to play.

[31:30] How are you gonna find out about the disaster?

[31:32] We have alert Solano and Solano County.

[31:34] You need to be signed up for alert Solano.

[31:36] You can go to alertsano.com.

[31:38] If you are not signed up already, if you are signed up

[31:41] and you are like, I don't even remember my login,

[31:44] it means that you haven't logged in

[31:46] and a long time and you need to.

[31:48] Because you need to go in and regularly validate

[31:51] the information that's in there.

[31:52] Make sure your phone numbers are still right, that the order that you want to be notified

[31:56] is accurate.

[31:58] You can decide, is it going to email you first, text you first, call you first.

[32:02] Don't make that decision based on what you would want during your work life.

[32:06] Make that decision based on what you would want at home if you were sleeping.

[32:10] Meaning, if you choose to be emailed or texted first, if you're sleeping and that's not going

[32:16] to wake you up, it should probably be a phone call.

[32:18] So make sure that you're being conscious about what those decisions are and how you receive

[32:24] those alerts.

[32:25] If you set your phone on do not disturb at night and you have not saved this phone number

[32:30] that these calls come from in advance to come through during do not disturb, you will not

[32:34] be contacted.

[32:35] If you have opted out of emergency alerts because you got an amber alert once and you didn't

[32:40] like it because it was annoying, you will not get some emergency alerts.

[32:43] not all emergency alerts for that. That's a wireless emergency alert. It's a little bit different.

[32:49] Feel free to call me at any time if you would like to discuss further.

[32:52] There's also information about it on our website that you can look up as well.

[32:56] But there are lots of reasons why somebody may not receive a technology-based emergency alert.

[33:04] And a lot of those factors are on the end of the user that we cannot control.

[33:09] So once we send an alert out, it is on your provider to send that alert to you, which is why if your husband has AT&T and you have a rise in and he gets the alert and you don't or vice versa, it's on their provider to deliver that alert to you.

[33:25] So make sure that everybody in your home is signed up individually, not just one person, because not everyone may get the alert, but also not everyone may be home.

[33:35] The person that's home is the person that needs it.

[33:38] Your children should have those alerts, my daughter's 19.

[33:40] She's been signed up for Alert Solano for a long time, probably longer than most people.

[33:43] But she's been raised on disaster and just discussions, so she's special.

[33:49] But these are important things to understand that you are all each individual.

[33:53] You're not the one person that's the head of your household that's going to receive all the information and

[33:58] the plan and the kit and do all of the things.

[34:01] Everybody needs to be ready and everybody needs to be prepared.

[34:04] And every family has its own unique challenges that need to be thought through and

[34:09] discuss whether that be domesticated animals, large animals, livestock, elderly,

[34:15] people requiring medical devices and backup power.

[34:19] These are all things that need to be considered in your plan.

[34:22] And whether or not you need to shelter in place in your home or

[34:25] whether or not you need to evacuate from your home, because those needs are going to be different.

[34:29] So please understand what that looks like for your home and build that into your plan and into your kit

[34:37] So everyone should have an emergency kit. Mine is a backpack

[34:40] I take it everywhere with me because I am a disaster nerd

[34:43] But also because if I don't have it with me first off, it's not a go kit

[34:47] But secondly, I don't have it when I need it

[34:50] Natural disaster, human cause disaster can happen at any time. If I don't have my kit, there was no point in having one

[34:55] I wasn't ready

[34:56] I also have the things that I need in my home to shelter in place.

[35:00] Because my disaster kit, my backpack, although large and has lots of things in it,

[35:06] not enough to shelter in place in my home for three days, particularly just based on my water needs alone.

[35:11] So, make sure that you have what you need in order to shelter in place in your home for at least three days.

[35:16] But also have your emergency kit that includes your prescription glasses if you wear contacts.

[35:21] because at some point you're gonna want to take those out because whatever is

[35:25] going on in the environment or it's gonna irritate your eyes you're gonna put

[35:28] your glasses on you need your medications like the things that are life

[35:32] safety sustaining for you need to be in your kit so make sure you have a kit make

[35:37] sure everyone in your home has a kit including your animals my dog has a kit my

[35:41] cats have a kit I have an emergency go litter box just saying he pees in the

[35:48] create. I don't like it. I don't know. So we need a layer box. So be prepared for everyone

[35:53] in your home, including all your furry friends. You also need to know your evacuation zone

[35:59] because evacuation zones are largely going to be used during wildfire. Now, are we only

[36:06] going to put out an evacuation zone and say, hey, we're evacuating zone, give me a 1638.

[36:14] No, it will also say where that is, but if you're geographically challenged like I am

[36:19] and I'm a turn left at the 7-11 kind of person, not a head northbound on a whatever road,

[36:24] then when I see my zone number, I know that that includes me.

[36:27] I don't have to pick the geographical area on the map to see if my pinpoint is in the middle.

[36:32] If you know your zone number and your zone number shows up, hey, that's me, I should go.

[36:37] It just makes it faster.

[36:38] So, make sure you know your zone, put it somewhere that you are not going to lose it, put on your refrigerator.

[36:44] We do have magnets, feel free to come and stop by my office anytime. Like I said, we can talk forever.

[36:51] Mine, honestly, is on the, it's my door's metal, it's on my front door. That's my evacuation zone.

[36:57] Again, I'm a disaster nerd, but all people should be disaster nerds. Jenny made me really helpful notes to make sure I stay on track, but I've already gone.

[37:07] Preparedness doesn't have to be complicated.

[37:09] You need an emergency plan, you need your emergency kit, you need to talk to your neighbors.

[37:14] You cannot rely on technology as your only way of communication.

[37:17] The phone tree from the 50s, 60s, 70s, everything before we had the internet is honestly still the best way to get a hold of people.

[37:28] But make sure the information you're sharing is vetted, valid information from a trusted source.

[37:34] So, if you get the alert and your neighbor doesn't get the alert and then you notify

[37:38] your neighbor, guess what, that's a successful alert.

[37:41] An alerting system includes all the ways that people find out about stuff, whether or

[37:46] not that be on social media through the little ticker on the bottom of your TV, through a

[37:51] NOAA weather radio, or a text message, or you knocking on your neighbor's door, or having

[37:57] a family member call you, hey, did you get the alert?

[37:59] because again, I'm signed up for my grandma's house, my mother's house, my father's house, my sister lives in Napa.

[38:08] Like, if she doesn't validate that she's gotten that alert, I'm driving to her house because she lost her home in 2020 in Napa.

[38:16] So, we're all part of the system.

[38:20] Every person plays a role.

[38:22] So, make sure that you are also following important locations for you outside of just your home.

[38:28] Because there may be other reasons why you wouldn't get the alert that somebody else would

[38:34] like your cell phone tower is down because power is out.

[38:37] And maybe somebody can call you and say, hey, we got this alert.

[38:40] Make sure you get it.

[38:42] If you can't call someone, try and text them.

[38:44] Oftentimes, the text will come through when a phone call won't.

[38:48] Do not call 911 and it is asked here unless you have a life safety issue.

[38:51] I started as a 911 dispatcher.

[38:53] That's my soapbox.

[38:55] Talk to your neighbors, follow your local fire and emergency services on social media.

[39:00] A lot of them put out information on social media that is a trusted source that's considered

[39:05] bettered information, that is information you can share.

[39:07] I love the community pages because they have a lot of reach.

[39:10] I hate the community pages because a lot of times false information gets shared, bad information

[39:15] gets shared particularly in comments.

[39:17] If your source of information is from a Facebook post comment on a community post that is not

[39:21] that it or trusted information, unless it's for me because sometimes I post on those

[39:26] things trying to fix it, but in the disaster I'll be busy, I won't be doing that.

[39:30] Anywho, so make sure you're following your emergency responders on social media.

[39:34] They often have multiple platforms and they will be shared across.

[39:38] For sure follow Salona OES on Facebook, we do post information there because we are only

[39:44] going to alert the people that need to take protective action.

[39:48] If you have to evacuate, if you have to shelter in place, if you're getting an evacuation

[39:54] We're not notifying your neighbor across the street who's mad because they didn't get an alert because there's a fire across the street.

[39:59] They don't need to take protective action, we're not notifying them.

[40:02] That's best practice on public alert and warning.

[40:05] How can you get that information?

[40:07] You can go on our Facebook page.

[40:08] You can sign up for a pulse point.

[40:10] You can do other things.

[40:11] You can sign up for watch duty to get information about what's happening in your community.

[40:16] You can also call your neighbor.

[40:17] Hey, what's, what's happening?

[40:19] What did the alerts say and get information some other way?

[40:23] Okay.

[40:25] Encourage others to sign up for alerts.

[40:27] My alerts on a soap box always lives with me.

[40:29] You have to sign up for emergency alerts.

[40:32] If you're not signed up for emergency alerts,

[40:34] guess what?

[40:34] You can't guarantee you're going to get alerted.

[40:36] During the LNU fire, we had lots of people call in,

[40:41] upset that they did not receive emergency alerts.

[40:43] When we looked them up, they were not signed up.

[40:46] So, you need to sign up.

[40:49] We have some ability to force message people, but that's not guaranteed vetted information

[40:56] that you've put in that belongs to you and you know is your information inaccurate.

[41:00] Because we'll get calls from people in Tennessee because they had a vote phone when they used

[41:03] to live in Benisha, and now they're mad because we told them about a tsunami.

[41:08] Potential tsunami did not happen.

[41:10] Anywho.

[41:11] See, I told you, my trains way off the tracks.

[41:14] And I've been talking a long time and keeps looking at me like are you going to wrap it up?

[41:21] The new website is really great.

[41:24] Our website is broken down under the OES Department as prepare, respond, recover.

[41:30] So all of the resources that you need in order to get ready for a disaster, click on prepare.

[41:35] Our primary disaster types have their own page like fire, flooding, or fire, summer, winter.

[41:42] And then additional hazards, that's PSPS, that's power outage, that's, you know, your earthquakes and your drought and all that other stuff.

[41:49] If you have trouble getting information, you have any questions at all, you call our office, we will talk to you and direct you in what you need.

[41:58] If you need help signing up for alerts also, you can call and we can walk you through that process.

[42:03] Please help your older relatives sign up, it is not complicated but it is for them.

[42:07] So, thank you.

[42:09] Be prepared.

[42:09] Have a plan.

[42:10] Have a kid.

[42:10] Sign up for emergency alerts.

[42:12] Call me anytime.

[42:20] You have the resolution.

[42:22] So, we've got to go down front and take a picture.

[42:24] And believe it or not, that was kind of a medium range for her.

[42:26] She can go way longer.

[42:28] Just say it.

[42:57] All

[43:21] right.

[43:22] Madam Clerk, item five, please.

[43:32] Receive a presentation from the Auditor Controller's Office

[43:34] on the selection of Cindy C.C. Queen for Employee of the Month for September 2020.

[43:50] Good morning, Jeanine Harris, auditor controller.

[43:54] I want to take this opportunity to thank the board for allowing us to honor CC today as

[43:59] our employee of the month.

[44:01] I'm excited to introduce CC, our payroll technician for the auditor controller's office.

[44:05] She has been nominated by her peers as the employee of the month for September.

[44:11] She's been with payroll for about four years.

[44:13] She handles a wide variety of payroll tasks, including our payroll tax returns and all of

[44:19] your W-2's. So, very hard work, and I think we all really appreciate all the hard

[44:24] work. She puts in to make sure it's all accurate. CC is hard working, professional,

[44:29] and shows that she really cares when she comes to work every day. She is dedicated and

[44:33] always has a positive attitude. Some of the comments that were made about CC when she was

[44:37] nominated, CC is very dependable and considerate to her fellow co-workers and gets the job

[44:44] done under pressure. CC is always friendly, full of smiles, very helpful, and very

[44:48] responsive even when she is busy during payroll weeks and my personal favorite

[44:53] CC is a payroll rock star so I would like to ask Debbie do a little her

[45:06] Thank you for this opportunity to recognize our payroll rock star, apparently. So as Janine said, CC started with the county and the auditor payroll division as a 50% accounting technician smack in the middle of COVID-19. And it was a parent from the beginning that she possessed the qualities that her peers in the auditor's office have recognized this year that encourage them to nominate her as our employee of the month. Let me tell you a little bit about this.

[45:32] a little bit about what she does in her capacity as payroll technician three.

[45:37] As Jenny said, she processes all the bi-weekly tax payments and that includes all of our special districts,

[45:42] shout out to the special districts and the W-2.

[45:46] She's also as a payroll technician three, she responds to IntelliTime users,

[45:51] supervisor department inquiries and updates and

[45:53] corrects IntelliTime documents, our lovely time cards, prior peer period adjustments,

[45:58] Ms. Lee slips the whole gamut of time card maintenance.

[46:03] She's also the primary for our retro pay processing.

[46:07] And when the auditor payroll HR and

[46:10] do it got together in 2024 to do a lift and shift of our people soft HR system from on premises to the cloud,

[46:19] her collaborative efforts with the system accountant payroll officer,

[46:22] other payroll technicians and staff from HR and

[46:25] do it helped ensure the success of the project.

[46:28] CC is one of those persons that any employer would be proud to have on their staff.

[46:34] We and the auditor controller payroll division feel so lucky that she is working as part of our team.

[46:39] She has proven herself time and time again to have an amazing capacity to learn and grow with a position taking on more responsibility every step of the way.

[46:47] She is diligent, professional, and most importantly, cares about how her work affects our customers.

[46:54] the employees of Salano County and our special districts.

[46:58] Any of which, who, if they interact with CC, will learn firsthand what an outstanding asset she is to the county.

[47:05] Thank you.

[47:12] Thank you for those kind words.

[47:14] Good morning, everyone.

[47:16] First, I would like to thank the board for establishing this program.

[47:20] And to my amazing ACO family for nominating me.

[47:23] This feat would not have been possible without the guidance of our payroll officer,

[47:27] our WDU little and our Deputy Auditor Controller Ray Catefeng.

[47:31] This team is truly an embodiment of our mission statement and principles,

[47:37] who created a pillar of support by offering positivity and motivation in our workplace.

[47:44] I am proud to say that I am part of such a hard working and dedicated group of individuals.

[47:49] And a special thank you to my husband for being here today and to my family who's watching online.

[47:54] I thank you for all the support outside of work so I can bring my best self to the office.

[48:00] I became the person I am today because of all of you.

[48:04] And finally, just a reminder that time cards are due Friday at noon, just for the upcoming

[48:09] holiday.

[48:10] Have an amazing holiday weekend, everyone.

[48:13] Thank you.

[48:22] Thank you.

[48:23] Absolutely.

[48:23] Come on down and get a picture.

[48:25] Everybody.

[48:31] I love that.

[49:08] All

[49:29] right that brings us to items from the public and I do have several cards so let's see here we'll start off with

[49:40] Letitia Guerrero.

[49:53] Good morning, board.

[49:55] I'll just read what I wrote so I don't have to go off track here.

[49:59] But I have the opportunity and I'm blessed to be able to represent the IHSS workers here in Salano County at the negotiations table.

[50:07] I wanted to share with you why it's imperative that the board really consider and take seriously the proposals before them from the Salano County IHSS providers.

[50:16] We know our providers improve the quality of care by keeping people in their own homes where they feel safe and

[50:21] feel some dignity, allowing them to be in their own home that they probably work so hard for.

[50:27] Higher wages are essential to retaining skilled and experienced IHSS workers in Solano County,

[50:32] which directly impacts the quality of life for the clients that they serve.

[50:36] Increased wages will prevent turnover.

[50:39] We know low wages lead to high turnover and unused hours, which is disruptive and

[50:43] and unsettling for seniors and people with disabilities who rely on consistent quality of care.

[50:48] With California's aging population, the demand for IHSS providers is steadily increasing.

[50:54] Fair wages are necessary to attract new workers, not to mention the cost of living and worker property.

[51:00] The current IHSS wage is not a livable wage in Solano County.

[51:03] Forcing many providers who rely on public assistance themselves are having multiple jobs, where they are not spending any time with their family or their children.

[51:11] Raising wages would reduce the need for public aid and allow caregivers to live with dignity.

[51:16] The living wage gap, the MIT living wage calculator reports that a single adult in Solano County needs to earn 28-22 per hour to cover basic living expenses.

[51:27] The current IHSS wage is 1770 per hour, it is far below the standard, and these providers are not asking for $28 an hour, much less actually.

[51:36] Raising wages would allow IHSS workers to spend more in the local economy, which would in turn generate more tax revenue for the county.

[51:43] Higher wages increase the purchasing power of a large group of local workers providing a measurable return on the investment.

[51:48] Not to mention the county shares much less than what's being asked due to the matching funds from the federal and the state.

[51:54] Solano County can reduce long-term healthcare costs investing in IHSS workers that are proactive and cost-effective approach to healthcare.

[52:00] Providing quality in-home care is much cheaper for the county and the state than the alternative.

[52:05] You can avoid costly institutions, investing in home care, keeping seniors and people with disabilities at a more expensive institutions like nursing homes and hospitals.

[52:15] IHSS workers reduce preventable emergencies.

[52:19] Experience caregivers are better able to prevent health care crisis by providing consistent proactive care.

[52:24] This helps avoid expensive emergency room visits and hospital stays, saving taxpayers money.

[52:30] The IHSS workforce is primarily composed of women and people of color.

[52:34] The long-term underpayment of these essential workers is an equity issue that needs to

[52:38] be addressed.

[52:39] Salano County has an opportunity to be a part of ending historical inequities.

[52:43] IHSS workers have historically been excluded from labor protections enjoyed by other American

[52:47] workers.

[52:48] Higher wages can begin to rectify the systemic underinvestment and promote fairer labor

[52:53] standards.

[52:54] There is an urgent need for a raise for your providers that are your constituents in your community.

[53:00] Your people standing unity, we need you to stand in unity with the backbone of your community.

[53:05] Doing the job that no one wants to do, especially for the pay, we anticipate a real response to a real issue.

[53:09] Let's get this contract negotiated quickly.

[53:11] Thank you.

[53:12] Thank you.

[53:18] Lupe Guterres.

[53:34] Good morning chair and members of the board.

[53:36] My name is Lupe Guterres and I also represent the SE logo.

[53:40] I am going to speak out of my heart.

[53:43] I am an ITSS provider for a 91-year-old baby.

[53:47] She is my mother-in-law.

[53:49] I'm sorry, this is very, very, very important to all of us.

[53:55] My mother-in-law has had three trips to the hospital.

[53:59] She has many hours that are unused.

[54:02] They are unused because I cannot be there all those hours.

[54:05] I need to get another job.

[54:06] I actually have two more jobs so that I can meet my rent.

[54:10] I wish that I could be there all those hours.

[54:13] One of the trips that she had was because she fell, she has dementia, she's legally blind.

[54:21] She thinks that she can still go outside and walk, and unfortunately, no one was there to

[54:25] take care of her, so she ended up in the hospital.

[54:28] She also had fluid in her lungs.

[54:31] She forgets that she has to drink water, no one is there to help her and tell her, hey,

[54:35] you got to keep drinking water. She also had vertigo going on. We came home when we found her

[54:45] on the floor. Unfortunately, these hours go on use because I cannot find somebody that go

[54:50] over there and help me with those hours because they'd rather work at Chipotle because they get paid

[54:56] more money there. My mother also has dementia. My daughter also cares for her and my daughter also has

[55:03] to go out and get another job so that she can also feed her kids. So this is really important

[55:09] to me personally because of my family. But I also see other members that have all these

[55:15] unused hours. And there's not enough providers for us to go and help all these people, children,

[55:23] parents. I myself, if one day goes out, has a car accident and I'm unable to work and I need the

[55:32] care. Is there going to be someone there to help me? I'm very hard working. I'm very

[55:37] loving and I would just like to appeal to you guys that this is a beautiful job. It's

[55:42] not because she's my mother or because she's my mother-in-law. It's because I really love

[55:47] the job that I do and I wish I could be there for them and make, you know, things meet in

[55:54] my home so that I can help them with theirs. Thank you.

[55:57] So,

[56:02] thank you, Daphne Dustin.

[56:15] Good morning Chair and our dear board of supervisors here in Solano County.

[56:22] I'm Daphne Dunstan, a proud member leader of SAU 2015, which is our caregiver, Sinyan.

[56:32] I am an IHSS provider of Solano County for almost 10 years.

[56:38] caring for my two special need boys who got autism.

[56:44] I'm here to tell the board that care counts in our community.

[56:50] We are essential workers and we demand fair contract and real investment in home care.

[57:00] We demand quality wages for quality home care.

[57:04] No, IHSS wages put more strain to our families and so we need your help.

[57:18] Board of Supervisors, it's in your hands.

[57:22] Please protect home care and prioritize caregivers.

[57:25] Thank you.

[57:31] I picked up his Joe Barely.

[57:49] Good morning board members.

[57:50] I come here once again to thank you for not having sold out to California forever, yet.

[57:58] I say that because I realize just how insidious those people are, and I expect one of these

[58:04] days to pick up the newspaper and be disappointed at least one of you, but that's just because

[58:12] I'm a realist.

[58:13] One of the things I've noted, first of all, this paper that I have with me, those of you

[58:22] that don't know, this is compiled, this is done by Solano Together, which is the citizens

[58:28] group that opposes California forever.

[58:31] And the information on here is compiled from the county staff report, thank you county staff,

[58:37] that was the whole reason that California forever pulled their initiative from the ballot

[58:42] last year, because all of the amounts of money that California forever will cost Solano

[58:49] County and the cities therein, they haven't been able to refute this, they just want this

[58:55] to die. Because everything, the majority of the cost of building out California forever

[59:02] is going to be borne by county taxpayers. Furthermore, I note that in the Saturday edition of

[59:11] the Vacuvel reporter, there's this big article about, oh,

[59:17] California forever is foundry.

[59:20] Well, the foundry was supposed to be a high tech manufacturing

[59:25] center, but the artist's rendition, if you look at it, seems

[59:31] to be more like a rolling steel mill for steel plate.

[59:36] I know this because I grew up around that stuff.

[59:38] and so their artist bringdition didn't quite catch up to what their so-called

[59:45] intentions are which brings us to the point of just how fantastical California

[59:52] forever's endless promises are. Of course, if I hire some company to do a

[59:58] report on

[1:00:00] What I intend to build, of course, are going to tell us everything that we want to hear, right? One other thing I note is that California forever claims that they're going to build. Now, I've seen this in the paper several times. They claim 5,000 gigawatts of battery storage power that they intend to build. Well, 5,000 gigawatts would be equal to, like, over 3,000

[1:00:28] mass landing size battery operated storage plants which would be an

[1:00:34] impossibility that this is just how insane California forever is while promises

[1:00:39] are.

[1:00:50] Alicia Gutierrez.

[1:01:02] Good morning chair members of the board. Thank you so

[1:01:04] much for having us and hearing us today. This is such an important topic. I am here

[1:01:09] to represent IHSS in our local union as many others here as well. I am an IHSS

[1:01:15] provide myself as well as I've worked with the regional center system serving families with special needs for almost 24 years now.

[1:01:23] I am here to ask you to please look at increasing the wages for our IHSS workers.

[1:01:30] Right now Solano County is actually in a health crisis.

[1:01:34] In the past years you've heard from others alone, there have gone over 286,000 unused IHSS hours that were approved for clients that

[1:01:44] That went completely unused.

[1:01:45] These were hours that doctors and social workers said that people must have in order to safely remain in their homes.

[1:01:52] And yet they went unfulfilled.

[1:01:54] The reason is simple, caregivers cannot afford to work at the current wages.

[1:01:59] Here's another reason to act.

[1:02:01] IHSS actually saves the county money.

[1:02:04] Salano County pays about 15 to 16% of the program costs.

[1:02:08] The state and federal government cover the rest.

[1:02:10] by paying workers more in ensuring the hours get filled,

[1:02:14] you will prevent far more extensive outcomes

[1:02:17] that would be more expensive than what we're currently paying.

[1:02:19] That would result in fewer emergency room visits,

[1:02:23] fewer hospitalizations, reduced medication usage,

[1:02:27] less taxing on our mental health system here

[1:02:29] because patients that are in these care homes

[1:02:31] typically suffer from a lot of other mental health issues

[1:02:35] and tax our system in that area as well,

[1:02:37] which is very under-circuit at this point.

[1:02:41] We also need to look at the program as a whole.

[1:02:46] It is so imperative to pay a livable wage for these workers.

[1:02:51] Loop Bay is actually my sister-in-law, and that's my mother, and

[1:02:53] while she was speaking of as well.

[1:02:55] And we would love to provide more care, but the wages are just not enough to make that happen.

[1:03:01] So I implore you to please look at that.

[1:03:04] There's the bottom line here.

[1:03:05] We need to be fiscally responsible.

[1:03:07] We all understand that, but I am telling you fiscal responsibility is funding this program.

[1:03:13] First hand, I can tell you, working with my regional center clients watching patients

[1:03:18] that can't get care going into homes costs us more money.

[1:03:23] So it is fiscally responsible, and we need to look at those numbers.

[1:03:27] So I'd also like to tell you, why does this matter to you?

[1:03:31] This matters to every single one of you because you can sit here today as members of our board and hear me, but at any minute, walking out of this room, any one of us could face a health crisis.

[1:03:45] This could be us in this situation.

[1:03:47] I currently care for my uncle who is diagnosed with small cell lung cancer that is now spread to his brain.

[1:03:53] We had to move him into our home because we couldn't find anybody to care for him in his own home.

[1:03:58] He suffers from major depression.

[1:04:01] He's lost all of his independence.

[1:04:03] I have a question for you.

[1:04:05] This is probably quite a poignant question and it might be a little offensive, but

[1:04:11] who would you want caring and wiping and taking care of your most vulnerable parts?

[1:04:16] Let alone, what if this is your child?

[1:04:18] Do you want somebody else making that decision for you?

[1:04:20] or do you want to make that decision for yourself?

[1:04:23] This is a dignity issue.

[1:04:25] We deserve to have our patients and our family members cared for.

[1:04:28] This was me in 2020.

[1:04:31] I almost died.

[1:04:32] I was resuscitated three times I had COVID.

[1:04:35] I needed this care.

[1:04:36] So I implore and I ask you guys, please,

[1:04:38] when you're going to these negotiating tables,

[1:04:40] think of this as a personal stake that you have in this matter.

[1:04:44] And this is in your hands and you can make a difference.

[1:04:46] Thank you.

[1:04:47] Thank you.

[1:04:54] Anthony Mitchell.

[1:04:54] Good

[1:05:04] morning, Ward Council, thank you for this opportunity to approach the bench today and speak to you all.

[1:05:09] My name is Anthony Mitchell and I represent a firm which is a Department of Energy Recognizing Credential Energy Services Company.

[1:05:18] We also work with the trade, we are trade professionals for the Public Utility Commission through Pacific Gas Electric Company.

[1:05:25] And I'm here today just to talk about the removal of the federal funds that are affecting all municipalities throughout the state of California.

[1:05:32] My firm, we've met with the sustainability and public works department of the county, and we do represent other funds that are available to the county, for instance, for the EV, electrical vehicle infrastructure upgrades, energy reduction throughout the county, and they've actually outlawed all the fluorescent lighting basically throughout the west of the United States.

[1:05:53] I'm here today because as these financial pressures have been put on municipalities,

[1:05:59] many of the other cities and entities that we've been working with have said we don't have the funds,

[1:06:03] we don't have the budget, we don't have the manpower to help address these areas that we are now having to carry these burdens.

[1:06:09] So I'm here today to represent a fund that is available for renewable energy,

[1:06:14] hydrogen power, as the gentleman that just came up and talked about batteries and what have you.

[1:06:17] There's alternative technologies that are available to the county, and there's well over

[1:06:23] about $4 million per premise that we can actually capture for the county through a program

[1:06:28] that's funded through a Pacific Gas Electric Company.

[1:06:32] There's no money out of pocket to the county.

[1:06:35] The county pays about 10% of every bill that you pay into this fund that we actually get

[1:06:40] to secure and work with on the county for no money out of pocket and no budget impact.

[1:06:44] So I'm here today just to one educate you and two to ask for an information gathering session with

[1:06:49] yourselves and those

[1:06:52] Directors and managers that are involved in these areas for the county

[1:06:56] Because of the administration and the big beautiful bill a lot of these

[1:07:00] Deadlines are coming towards the middle of next year and through

[1:07:06] 2027 so we just wanted to one educate you guys let you know and become aware of what's available to you

[1:07:12] Two, let you know that there is help and air support that is available to help carry some of these financial burdens that you guys are getting hit with.

[1:07:18] And two, just see what we can do to get started to help you guys take advantage of what's available.

[1:07:22] Thank you so much today.

[1:07:29] Next up is Maximina Del Rio.

[1:07:44] Good morning, Boer.

[1:07:45] My name is Maximina Del Rio.

[1:07:47] I have been home care worker since 90s.

[1:07:51] For nearly 30 years, I have provided professional and care for people in a community through

[1:07:55] with a variety of programs including IHSS for the past two and a half years.

[1:08:01] The work of my fellow IHSS workers and I do help ensure that all adults and

[1:08:06] people with disability can live healthy, dignified lives right here in Solano County.

[1:08:13] Right now, I care for my friend who has mobility and mental health issues.

[1:08:18] I cook for her and cling for her, run errands with her and

[1:08:22] and support her with everything that needs to do to stay healthy and independent.

[1:08:29] I do this work because I care about my neighbors and our community.

[1:08:33] And over the past three decades, I have seen how important home care is for our community.

[1:08:39] Despite the vital role my play, our wages don't reflect the value of our work.

[1:08:46] 17, 17 hours is nowhere near enough to provide for ourselves and our family in Solano County.

[1:08:51] Right now I live with my daughter, a adult daughter and a granddaughter because it's the only way we both can assure we keep a roof over our heads and food on our tables.

[1:09:01] I lived in my house for nearly 50 years and I haven't been able to keep up the need maintenance like repairs roof because of the new low wages.

[1:09:11] With the high wages, I will be able to complete the needed repair and ensure my home is safety and healthy for my granddaughter and myself also.

[1:09:19] Our work is critical to health and safety and our community and need it to be compensated as such.

[1:09:26] I urge you to raise wages for our workers and our new next union contract.

[1:09:31] Thank you very much.

[1:09:32] Thank you.

[1:09:37] Michelle Chavez.

[1:09:49] Good morning everyone.

[1:09:51] I'm Michelle Chavez, Susan City.

[1:09:53] I just wanted to give a huge shout out and share my deep appreciation to Supervisor Wanda Williams.

[1:10:01] and also Dishan, Executive Director of Capsulano, JPA.

[1:10:09] We went on a, excuse me, right along in Sussune City,

[1:10:13] and we were able to go over the different encampments in Sussune,

[1:10:17] and so it was very beneficial for all of us to do that right along.

[1:10:22] I also wanted to inform and share with the board

[1:10:27] that as a volunteer for the Sussune clean team that we came upon a group of

[1:10:33] individuals that are camping amongst the trucks that are parked along the

[1:10:39] fence line of the post office. And this is a really busy like thoroughfare with

[1:10:45] vehicles that is behind the Sunset Shopping Center. So my concern is that these

[1:10:52] these individuals could either have a mental health crisis, not be aware, things going on, and they come from behind these tracks and they might possibly be hit by cars.

[1:11:05] So I just wanted to inform you and share that with you.

[1:11:07] I've also spoken with our mayor yesterday, but I also wanted to inform the board and ask for your positive thoughts and prayers for

[1:11:17] Thank you very much.

[1:11:21] Next up is Henry Cohen.

[1:11:36] Hello, Ford.

[1:11:37] My name is Henry Cohen.

[1:11:38] I'm the HSS Director with Salona County.

[1:11:42] I appreciate the Board of Supervisors for letting me introduce Kelly Curtis.

[1:11:46] She's our new assistant director for HSS.

[1:11:49] I had emailed you all about it and I added it in our newsletter.

[1:11:53] But I wanted you to see her in person.

[1:11:56] Kelly is, she was formally our employment eligibility services.

[1:12:00] Services Division Deputy Director,

[1:12:03] and so she comes with years of experience managing

[1:12:05] the CalWORKS or TANF program,

[1:12:08] well for the work, CalFresh or food stamps,

[1:12:11] and medical eligibility, general assistance

[1:12:13] and various housing programs.

[1:12:16] So she has a wealth of knowledge,

[1:12:17] especially right now on the climate

[1:12:19] that we have around medical eligibility concerns,

[1:12:22] and so she comes at the right time to support our division,

[1:12:26] and so we're very excited.

[1:12:27] I'm also, I wanted to share with folks that Kelly started as an EBS worker and eligibility

[1:12:33] worker in Solano County, so she grew up through the ranks and has been here supporting

[1:12:39] our community for some time, so I don't know if you want to share anything.

[1:12:44] Good morning.

[1:12:45] I just want to, first of all, thank Solano County for offering such a great career opportunity

[1:12:50] here.

[1:12:51] As Emily mentioned, I made a career change in 2004 and started as an eligibility worker.

[1:12:57] And I am just both honored and excited to be serving the community and our staff and the board and my new role.

[1:13:04] So thank you very much.

[1:13:06] Thank you.

[1:13:11] All right, last card of the day is Robin Reigns, three minutes, Robin.

[1:13:21] No pressure.

[1:13:26] Okay, I'm here because I don't know that this is going to be posted in the paper.

[1:13:30] But my grandmother, Jean Retledge, passed away on August 1st.

[1:13:34] and she has been in the community for decades

[1:13:36] and has a lot of, she's been around for a long time

[1:13:41] and there may be people that knew her

[1:13:43] and I wanted to make sure that people were aware.

[1:13:46] She was born in 1931 in Colorado.

[1:13:48] She died at 93 years old her.

[1:13:50] We just had her services this past weekend

[1:13:53] but she worked at Mr. Reds.

[1:13:54] She was a waitress, her whole life and career.

[1:13:57] So she worked at Mr. Reds, Rens

[1:13:59] and she went to Baker Square where she retired

[1:14:01] and then she decided that she didn't want to be retired

[1:14:03] And then she waitress set the heritage house cafe into her 80s with my mom, who also worked there for a long time.

[1:14:11] She was also everyone's Avon lady, so she might have been your Avon lady.

[1:14:14] If you ever went into any of those restaurants and saw an Avon book, you probably got something from her.

[1:14:20] Or play Vaca Valley Bingo Wednesday mornings or Sundays or Friday nights or

[1:14:26] any of the numerous days that they used to go and play Bingo.

[1:14:29] There were some of her friends that came up the other Sunday and said,

[1:14:33] I'm playing Bingo with your grandma for 30 years.

[1:14:37] So she's just, she's an amazing lady,

[1:14:40] and I just want to make sure that everybody

[1:14:42] who potentially knew her had an opportunity

[1:14:44] to know that she had passed.

[1:14:46] It's really amazing when your youngest great-grandchild

[1:14:49] is 16, and they've had an opportunity to grow up

[1:14:52] with her more as a grandma than a great-grandma,

[1:14:54] and she actually had an opportunity

[1:14:56] to meet her great-great-grandchildren.

[1:14:58] So, amazing life lived.

[1:15:00] And lost. Thanks. Thank you for sharing her memory with us.

[1:15:07] All right, that brings us to the end of public comment, and we move to additions or deletions from the. Yes, Mr. Chairman, one change. We are recommending that item nine on the consent calendar be pulled, and we'll reschedule that for September 9th.

[1:15:31] All right, with that, I'd be looking for motion on approval of the agenda.

[1:15:35] I

[1:15:38] move that we approve the agenda as amended.

[1:15:41] Thank you.

[1:15:42] The motion.

[1:15:42] Second.

[1:15:53] Soldered by vote of 5-0.

[1:15:55] All right.

[1:15:56] Thank you.

[1:15:56] I do not have any public comment on the consent calendar.

[1:16:02] Do I have any member of the board who would want to pull any item on consent or would like to ask questions on any item on consent?

[1:16:09] I just want to make a statement.

[1:16:10] Yes, ma'am.

[1:16:14] I'm just making a statement on item number 21 for the Macerville Fire Protection District that authorized the interim is a director to approve a $120,000 purchase.

[1:16:26] Personal.

[1:16:27] We're going to do that one.

[1:16:28] We're going to do that separate as the board of the fire district.

[1:16:32] That's another thing.

[1:16:33] That's why I separated like this.

[1:16:35] Yes, ma'am.

[1:16:35] Okay, well I got to wait.

[1:16:37] Yes, ma'am.

[1:16:37] All right, I don't have any more questions or comments at this time.

[1:16:40] Okay.

[1:16:41] I would send my request.

[1:16:42] Okay, then I'd be looking for a motion on that consent calendar.

[1:16:46] I'll move.

[1:16:49] Second on consent.

[1:16:54] All right.

[1:16:55] So ordered by the vet if I'm there.

[1:16:58] Right page here.

[1:17:06] All right, I'm going to temporarily adjourn the Board of the Salonant County Supervisors,

[1:17:11] and I will convene us as the Board of the Vacable Fire Protection District.

[1:17:17] And we will be moving to the consent calendar for that.

[1:17:20] I don't have any speaker cards from the public on consent as the board of the fire district.

[1:17:28] But I apparently have a question or statement from one of the board members on that item.

[1:17:33] Okay, well thank you Chair and thank you for its opportunity.

[1:17:39] I just wanted to make I realize that when we approved their budget originally that we did not.

[1:17:50] I include PPE and coming from Susoon City and have watched a fire department transition.

[1:17:59] It's important that we make sure that there's no hold-ups for PPE going forward.

[1:18:06] I know it wasn't oversight, but if we can make sure that our interim district administrator has the ability to prove things expeditiously.

[1:18:19] especially when we're talking about their protection,

[1:18:26] you know, their personal protection equipment is really important.

[1:18:30] And so that's the only thing I wanted to say and refer to that.

[1:18:34] I want to make sure our interim chief has the capability to do the work.

[1:18:40] That needs to be done to keep everyone under his leadership protected.

[1:18:48] And that's what I just wanted to add.

[1:18:50] Thank you very much.

[1:18:52] All right, is there any other board comments?

[1:18:55] No, then I'd be looking for a motion on consent on this item.

[1:18:58] So moved.

[1:19:14] I thought it's ordered by a vote of five, sir.

[1:19:17] All right, with that, I will adjourn us as the back of the fire protection district and reconvene us as the Solano County Board of Supervisors.

[1:19:26] And that brings us to our regular calendar and Madam Clerk, item 22.

[1:19:34] Conduct the quarterly meeting of the East Valeo Fire Protection District Board of Directors.

[1:19:58] Good morning Chair, members of the Board, Nancy Nelson, senior management analyst with the county administrator's office.

[1:20:04] Here to introduce interim chief Gonzales with the Valeo Fire Departments.

[1:20:10] Good morning Chair, board members.

[1:20:12] Arthur Gonzales, interim fire chief, the Valeo Fire Department overseeing the East Valeo Fire Protection District.

[1:20:17] Here to give a short presentation today on the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2425.

[1:20:22] and calls for service in the Eastville Fire Protection District.

[1:20:25] During that quarter, we responded to 119 total calls,

[1:20:30] 81 of which were EMS-related calls, 38 were fire-related calls.

[1:20:35] In that time, there was two planned reviews.

[1:20:38] One was a new construction of a single family dwelling

[1:20:41] at 312 Gilcrest, and one was an ADU conversion at 1104 Fulton.

[1:20:48] There was also two read-abatement complaints

[1:20:50] or issues brought to us.

[1:20:52] One was a vacant lot at 1197 Benesha Road

[1:20:55] that has since been abated by the owner.

[1:20:57] The other one is the Carcunus Cemetery

[1:20:59] on Benesha Road adjacent to Sedlot.

[1:21:02] That property is owned by the city of Vallejo

[1:21:04] and it's on the list through our public works

[1:21:05] to be abated currently.

[1:21:08] The Vallejo Fire Department's primary mission

[1:21:10] is to safely protect the lives and property

[1:21:12] of our citizens and residents

[1:21:13] of the East Vallejo Fire Protection District.

[1:21:15] We value customer service as the foundation

[1:21:18] of our organization and we thank you

[1:21:19] for letting us serve the district.

[1:21:21] I'm not taking any questions you may have.

[1:21:25] I don't see any questions, Chief.

[1:21:27] Oh yes, I do.

[1:21:30] Should look down, Supervisor Brown.

[1:21:33] When the cemetery gets weeded,

[1:21:37] could you just send an email through Nancy

[1:21:40] and so that I keep track of that?

[1:21:43] So when I get emails, I can respond back.

[1:21:46] Absolutely.

[1:21:46] That would be great, thanks.

[1:21:49] Supervisor Williams.

[1:21:49] I

[1:21:53] wanted to ask a question, so when I've never, and maybe because I need to understand also our role as the Board of Directors for your department district,

[1:22:09] how do you order your PPEs to those come for us to approve, and how does that work for you?

[1:22:16] Our request for PPE comes through our City Council.

[1:22:19] So any funds that I spend on personal protective equipment from my staff is funded through the City of the Land.

[1:22:25] The City of the Land, yes.

[1:22:26] Okay, I just was wondering why I never see your request for PPEs or any those type of need, but it goes through the city.

[1:22:34] All right, it makes sense.

[1:22:36] That was all I wanted to know.

[1:22:37] Thank you.

[1:22:38] You're welcome.

[1:22:38] All right, thank you.

[1:22:40] Thank you.

[1:22:49] All right, Madam Clerk, that brings us Madam 23, ma'am, please.

[1:22:55] received a presentation on potential social safety net program impacts, resulting from HR1 signed July 4th, 2025 and the fiscal year 2526 California State Budget.

[1:23:15] Morning, Debbie Maughan, Assistant County Administrator, and with me is.

[1:23:19] Kelly Curtis, this is the Director of Health and Social Services.

[1:23:21] Okay,

[1:23:32] so today, many of you have asked for us to come for the CAO's office to come back

[1:23:37] with an update on some of the impacts related to federal actions.

[1:23:43] So although the slide is entitled Safety Net Program Impacts, I suspect that you may

[1:23:50] experience some frustration today as we go through these.

[1:23:54] And the reason for that is we're really trying to assess potential impacts at this point.

[1:24:00] There have been some changes that have been made, but we are still missing federal and state guidance.

[1:24:08] We are missing the state's response to federal guidance.

[1:24:12] And so a lot of what we're going to talk today about today are program changes.

[1:24:17] But our guesswork is really close to guesswork on what we think the actual capacity and

[1:24:25] physical impacts and service impacts to constituents might be.

[1:24:34] Okay, so just a quick overview.

[1:24:36] Today we're going to primarily focus on HR1, which was House of Representatives Bill number one that passed on July 4th at the federal level.

[1:24:45] And also a little bit about the California State Budget because the California State Budget also had some program impacts in it.

[1:24:53] So just a quick overview of HR1, it included a number of tax provisions, additional funding

[1:25:00] for immigration and border enforcement, reductions in the eliminations in a whole slew of tax

[1:25:05] credit programs, and programs related to clean energy.

[1:25:09] I heard that come up a bit of public comment.

[1:25:11] And there are significant changes in funding reductions for social safety net programs.

[1:25:16] That's in bold because that's primarily what we're going to focus on today.

[1:25:19] And then the California budget impacted Medi-Cal through some changes that were effectuated

[1:25:27] through the budget process.

[1:25:28] So the one thing that we can tell you is that county residents will be impacted by one

[1:25:34] or more of the changes that have occurred.

[1:25:37] But again today what we're going to focus on are those programs that the county delivers and

[1:25:42] provide services to the social safety net programs.

[1:25:46] So, what we're not covering today, there have been a multitude of executive orders issued

[1:25:53] since January.

[1:25:56] Many of those executive orders are still tied up in legal challenges between the Federal

[1:26:04] Administration and judges and various groups.

[1:26:07] And so, at this point, we are not able to ascertain the impacts of most of them as they still

[1:26:13] will work their way through legal issues.

[1:26:24] So what we're going to try to do today is talk about some of the program changes in the

[1:26:28] larger overarching programs.

[1:26:31] We're just going, Kelly and I are going to hit on some of the big high-level changes.

[1:26:35] We're not going to get into the specific details of them because otherwise we would have to

[1:26:39] keep you here for a couple days, which is probably not on your agenda.

[1:26:46] But if there are questions that come up, we'll do our best to answer those and if you have

[1:26:51] questions that we can't answer. We will make a list of those and we'll get back to you as

[1:26:54] the information is available or if we can find it and we'll send that out to you when it's available.

[1:27:03] And then the other thing I want to say is I keep talking about we're going to talk about the

[1:27:06] overarching programs but one of the things that I want to make sure that everybody in the public

[1:27:12] understands is although we might talk about the high-level programs, those programs specifically

[1:27:18] medically Medi-Cal also determine access and provide access to other programs.

[1:27:24] So you've had a number of speakers come up this morning speaking on behalf of the in-home supportive services,

[1:27:30] which for those people who don't know, that's for in-home care for individuals.

[1:27:35] IHSS is an entitlement program, entitlement meaning if you are a Medi-Cal recipient,

[1:27:42] and you meet certain eligibility requirements, you are entitled to receive IHSS.

[1:27:48] services. If you cannot get medical because there have been changes to the rules around

[1:27:53] medical, you don't just lose your medical which provides you access to primary care mental

[1:27:58] health services, other services, you know, medical is insurance. For people in the public

[1:28:03] who don't know that, it is an insurance program. So if you don't have access to medical, then

[1:28:10] you also cannot access those other programs unless you have a lot of cash.

[1:28:16] So I just want to give that broad overview.

[1:28:20] Okay, and we will start then with the first program that's impacted.

[1:28:24] And the California budget did not impact the supplemental nutrition assistance program.

[1:28:29] You'll hear it called SNAP in California.

[1:28:31] It's called CalFresh.

[1:28:33] It's a food assistance program for low income individuals.

[1:28:37] So the other thing that happened with HR1, I also heard this alluded to earlier today,

[1:28:46] is that various provisions in the act take place at different points in time.

[1:28:53] So we're going to go through those chronologically when we get to Medi-Cal, we'll embed the California

[1:28:57] changes in there as well.

[1:28:59] But HR1, upon enactment, the first thing I want to say is you can see the number there.

[1:29:03] Currently, the county has almost 55,000 people enrolled in CalFresh.

[1:29:08] The state of California says one in five individuals suffer from food insecurity or

[1:29:13] experienced food insecurity.

[1:29:15] So we all know what the population is here.

[1:29:18] And you can see that we've got 55,000 people enrolled to get food benefits.

[1:29:25] So upon enactment is tricky with HR1,

[1:29:30] because an on and upon enactment normally means as soon as that goes into place.

[1:29:35] However, the federal administration has told all the states a wait till we issue federal guidance.

[1:29:41] We've not received that.

[1:29:42] California has received that federal guidance yet.

[1:29:44] And once the state does receive it, they have no idea how quickly the turn around will have to be on these changes.

[1:29:52] So the first change is modification of work requirements.

[1:29:56] California has had a waiver for work requirements under-

[1:30:00] How fresh for many years, and that waiver goes through 2026. The reason I bring that up is for Health and Social Services' eligibility division. This is a new activity for them. Meaning staff have never had to ensure compliance with and monitor work requirements. So, to the degree that that waiver could be removed by the federal guidance, it could possibly require additional staffing in the department.

[1:30:29] and we've made, this is one of our first estimates.

[1:30:32] We have a current case load of individuals of just about 7,000 who would be impacted by the new work requirements.

[1:30:39] And it could take an additional four FTE to ensure compliance and monitoring with that.

[1:30:47] The state estimates that under this new requirement, 303,000 individuals may lose their benefits.

[1:30:55] Again, there's a lot of reasons for that, and it has to do with the nature in how the

[1:31:00] work requirements are monitored, the documentation that has to be provided, the timeliness with

[1:31:06] which a recipient has to provide that documentation.

[1:31:10] So, again, if you have questions, let us know.

[1:31:13] The next change is to non-citizen eligibility.

[1:31:16] And what I want to clarify is that CalFresh has never been available to undocumented individuals,

[1:31:22] but it has been available to legal, permanent residents, refugees, and

[1:31:27] assilies.

[1:31:28] And those are the categories of individuals that are being taken,

[1:31:33] that their eligibility is being removed.

[1:31:35] Now, the legal, permanent residents may still have access to the program,

[1:31:40] but there's a five year waiting period.

[1:31:42] Meaning the first five years, they're not eligible for the program.

[1:31:47] Okay.

[1:31:48] You said five years.

[1:31:49] Five years.

[1:31:50] Does the wait for five years?

[1:31:51] or they can be eligible for food?

[1:31:55] Yes, ma'am.

[1:31:58] Okay.

[1:31:59] I thought I heard you say that, but all right,

[1:32:04] I'll just take it back by that and I thank you.

[1:32:07] Okay, and so the next two are really about how benefits

[1:32:12] are calculated, the standard utility allowance

[1:32:14] and the internet expenses.

[1:32:16] There is a methodology that just basically says,

[1:32:20] Hey, how much does it cost you to have shelter?

[1:32:23] We all know, we can have a place to live,

[1:32:26] but if we want the temperature to be tolerable,

[1:32:28] we have utility expenses.

[1:32:30] So there used to be a credit that accounted for that

[1:32:34] that said, hey, I have to pay utility,

[1:32:38] so I get this allowance, which essentially reduces

[1:32:40] the net income I have to buy food,

[1:32:43] and so my food benefits grow up.

[1:32:45] That utility allowance has been removed.

[1:32:49] Same thing with internet, there was a final rule that said, hey, in this day and age internet

[1:32:54] is a requirement of life and it was going to be able to be allowed to be an allowable

[1:33:02] consideration for shelter expense and that rule will not be implemented.

[1:33:06] So that effectively individuals' benefits were going to increase a little bit because

[1:33:11] of that allowance and now they will no longer increase.

[1:33:17] So, can we just do a math problem on that one so I understand it?

[1:33:21] Maybe.

[1:33:22] Okay.

[1:33:23] Make it very simplistic.

[1:33:24] Let's say, where you're living and you're paying, you know, PG&E, you're paying

[1:33:30] your rent, whatever, let's just make it $100 just to make the math easy.

[1:33:34] So what you're saying is that now I can't deduct what PG&E is, which I used to be able

[1:33:42] to which maybe say it was $20 to make it $80 and maybe another $20 for the Internet.

[1:33:48] So now I'm down to $60 and then that meant that I was going to be probably eligible

[1:33:54] for SNAP because I have less money coming in, correct?

[1:33:58] Is that my understanding all of that correctly?

[1:34:00] Yes, the utility allows us, which are up to a minimum level.

[1:34:05] It's not like every dollar for dollars.

[1:34:06] Yeah, just doing the math easing.

[1:34:07] But easy math, yes, it would increase your benefit amount as well because it would take it off of your income.

[1:34:14] Got it. Okay. Because all of this is based on an income that you receive, however one gets it. Got it. Okay.

[1:34:22] So I just want to make sure I understand that. So now we're talking about people who are not doing so well.

[1:34:28] But I like having AC just last couple of weeks. And occasionally it's nice to eat.

[1:34:35] But now I'm not going to be able to hand all of that.

[1:34:39] I just want to make sure I'm getting this correctly.

[1:34:41] Okay.

[1:34:41] So the one thing I want to clarify and Kelly alluded to this is the allowance is not a dollar

[1:34:46] for dollar.

[1:34:47] If you're peaking, it's a credit amount, it's like a standard credit amount that you get.

[1:34:52] So it doesn't, it never alleviated the full cost of utilities.

[1:34:58] But it was a help at

[1:35:04] least some sort of a deduction so you'd have less so that you could

[1:35:07] you may possibly at the time qualify.

[1:35:10] Okay, I just want to make sure.

[1:35:12] Yes.

[1:35:12] Okay,

[1:35:16] okay, so the first date that comes along

[1:35:19] is October 1st of 2025, rapidly approaching.

[1:35:24] And that will be the elimination of SNAP ed.

[1:35:28] And SNAP ed is a nutrition education program.

[1:35:31] The NAPAS Delano Area Agency on Aging

[1:35:34] will have a direct loss of services of just about $600,000.

[1:35:39] Those services provide nutrition and obesity prevention program for the population served by the AAA in the county.

[1:35:49] Public health also has two FTE that are funded and you see the dollar amount up there that provide healthy living to the broader community at home through their healthy living programs.

[1:36:01] That funding will go away.

[1:36:03] Okay.

[1:36:06] The other thing that, yes ma'am, sorry.

[1:36:09] Does that mean we have to lay off to snap at, I mean, the full time, because the FTE

[1:36:18] is full time employment.

[1:36:19] I mean, those two lose their job or what, what does that mean?

[1:36:23] No.

[1:36:24] So what it means is that those individuals have job classifications that are used elsewhere

[1:36:31] with public health.

[1:36:32] So what public health is doing is looking for, you know, for a transition period, a new program home within public health.

[1:36:42] Okay. That was all. Thank you.

[1:36:44] But it does mean that where there are vacancies in those other programs that those people will fill, we will not be adding to new people.

[1:36:53] So it is an indirect attrition of public health staff. We'll just do it through vacancies and moving people around.

[1:37:02] Okay.

[1:37:03] The other thing that happens on October 1st, there is this thing called the Thrifty Food

[1:37:08] Plan within CalFresh, well, to the federal level.

[1:37:11] And what that Thrifty Food Plan says is, hey, here's what it costs to provide a healthy

[1:37:16] meal for a household.

[1:37:18] And then that calculation is used to identify benefit amounts for different size households.

[1:37:25] One of the changes that's happening in October is that the benefit amounts are reduced for

[1:37:31] a 9 plus member household and they are capped for an 18 member household and the thrifty

[1:37:37] food plan is not allowed to be re-evaluated until 2027 and when it is, it has to be cost

[1:37:45] neutral. So if you have inflationary pressures and it costs more to provide a healthy meal for

[1:37:53] a household, those adjustments will not be made. So over time, what will happen is the value

[1:38:01] a few of the benefits will be reduced because people will be able to purchase less food because the household dollar amount is not allowed to increase.

[1:38:12] Makes sense? Okay, that gets us through 2025. Now we roll on to October 1st of 2026. This is one of the more concrete impacts that we're able to identify.

[1:38:25] So right now the way that CalFresh snap at the federal level is administered, or how it was, is that the federal government paid 50% of the cost share and the state paid 35 and the counties paid 15%.

[1:38:41] So 50 with the state and counties, 50 with the feds.

[1:38:45] The feds change that, the feds will now pay 25% and the cost shift goes 75% to the state.

[1:38:54] In statute in California, that prior split was already in place.

[1:39:00] So the effect of it is that the counties have to absorb a proportion of it.

[1:39:04] So county cost shares will go from 15% to 22.5%.

[1:39:10] For us, as of today, that means an approximate 2.2 to 2.5 million dollars increased in administrative cost for the program.

[1:39:20] And I just want to make sure everyone understands this, the board probably does, but perhaps not the public.

[1:39:27] The county's role in CalFresh is to administer the program.

[1:39:31] We do not, at this point in time, actually pay the benefit dollar amounts.

[1:39:36] What our staff does is they are the ones that take in the applications, determine eligibility,

[1:39:43] make sure all the criteria is met and then re-determine that on an ongoing basis.

[1:39:50] So this is, this 2.2 to 2.5 million dollars is an increased cost to administer the program.

[1:39:58] And the one thing I will say is that counties have been advocating for a very,

[1:40:03] very long time specifically in the CalFresh program to modify the methodology program

[1:40:09] because it already so it does not cover the cost of administering so say that

[1:40:18] last sentence again so there is already a shortfall in the cost because it's

[1:40:24] an allocation comes to every county's to administer the program okay so there's

[1:40:29] already for many many years there's been a shortfall meaning our staffing

[1:40:34] cost our cost to administer the program exceed our allocation.

[1:40:39] That's statewide, that's been a problem.

[1:40:41] And so, the California Welfare Association, Welfare Directors Association, and

[1:40:47] other entities had been advocating for a really long time for a change in methodology.

[1:40:52] There was a little bit of a change, not enough to pay the cost, and now this will be an added burden.

[1:40:58] So I'm emphasizing that point because this is a real cost to the county.

[1:41:02] Yeah, going forward.

[1:41:05] So I apologize for not knowing these, a CalFresh, that means if I have my EBT card, that's what CalFresh is, right?

[1:41:11] I just want to make sure, so yeah, okay, so obviously, if I'm going to editorialize for a second, we're going to really have to help our food banks to make all of this work.

[1:41:25] Okay, that was it.

[1:41:26] But

[1:41:29] October 1st, 2027, is the next round of changes, and this one is potentially catastrophic

[1:41:43] words, but this is potentially devastating to the state on the CalFresh program.

[1:41:48] So, medium and large counties are required to have a quality assurance program to assure that eligibility is properly determined.

[1:41:57] You know, we're skimming the surface on this program, but kind of like how we talked about the utilities, determining eligibility, our staff go through a six-month training to learn how to do this.

[1:42:07] It is very complicated. There are a lot of details involved. Some of our staff go through the training more than once because there's just so many nuances.

[1:42:17] So it's not, it is, it is not an easy task to learn how to do these things.

[1:42:23] So there's lots of different points in the process where errors can occur.

[1:42:30] I would like to give a shout out to our eligibility team because if you look at the numbers up

[1:42:37] there at the state's overall error rate for 2024 is 10.98%, he improved red my power point

[1:42:45] for me and he circled 0.98%, I think because he thought that number was wrong.

[1:42:53] That's how low the error rate is, so the team that works for it and this is Alicia Jones.

[1:43:01] She's an administrator in and backfilling for Kelly's role right now in employment eligibility.

[1:43:08] That team has done an entire division has done an amazing job to keep the error rate down.

[1:43:13] However, the federal government in 2027 is going to start implementing penalties for states that exceed certain error rates.

[1:43:24] And there's a scale, but the bottom line is that if you're over a 10% error rate as a state,

[1:43:30] the penalty is that that state has to pay 15% of the total benefit amounts.

[1:43:36] That's $2 billion for California.

[1:43:38] Just to give you an example of how much we contribute as a county to that, remember our 55,000 people who receive benefits, we have $121.4 million in benefit dollars going out to CalFresh right now, that's what that $18.2 million of their represents, the state would have to cover for our county, $18.2 million, even though our error rate is 0.98% because it's a $1 million.

[1:44:08] one size fits all for the state.

[1:44:11] This is one of the things we do not know how the state's going to handle it.

[1:44:15] I think that we can all agree that the state is really going to try to get out all the

[1:44:18] counties to get their error risks down.

[1:44:22] But again, it's a complicated process.

[1:44:24] There's lots of touches along the ways.

[1:44:26] There's lots of opportunities for error on both the staff side and on the recipient side.

[1:44:32] And this is complicated.

[1:44:34] There's some timing involved.

[1:44:35] All of the states can choose different periods of time to use as their baseline.

[1:44:39] They can ask for a little longer to try to get the rate improved.

[1:44:43] So there's a lot to be seen on this.

[1:44:45] But when we're thinking about the state budget, you know, the message that I want everyone to remember is this could be a $2 billion hit for one change in one program to the state.

[1:45:00] And we will switch topics. So Medicaid. Medicaid is the insurance program that I was talking about. It's a government insurance program in California. It's called Medi-Cal. Our current enrollment in Medi-Cal is almost 147,000 people. Again, you guys know the population of Salano. So you can see how many of our residents really, really rely on Medi-Cal to get the

[1:45:31] the medical services that they need.

[1:45:35] And again, some of those other services

[1:45:37] like in-home supportive care.

[1:45:40] So, again, upon enactment,

[1:45:45] HR1 made some rules.

[1:45:47] Now, the one thing, for those of you who aren't familiar

[1:45:50] with the Affordable Care Act specifics,

[1:45:52] when the Affordable Care Act was passed,

[1:45:56] it made certain individuals that used to be

[1:45:59] that childless adults were not eligible for medical.

[1:46:03] The Affordable Care Act changed that in individuals ages 19 to 64 with income up to 138 percent

[1:46:11] of the federal poverty level became eligible for medical.

[1:46:19] That is referred to as the expansion population and that's why I'm telling you this because

[1:46:25] There's a lot of these changes in HR1 affect the expansion population.

[1:46:30] So think of it as prior to ACA, we call that traditional Medi-Cal.

[1:46:36] People who are already eligible, post ACA, the population, the new population that became

[1:46:41] eligible, we call that the expansion population.

[1:46:45] So the first thing that HR1 does under Medicaid is it delays until 2035 certain rule changes

[1:46:52] that were previously scheduled.

[1:46:54] So what that means is, you know, there's always these rules that come out.

[1:46:58] And one of them was in 2023 and it related to Medicare.

[1:47:03] So some of these changes around citizenship also impact Medicare.

[1:47:08] County doesn't administer Medicare, but anytime we talk about citizenship, eligibility changes,

[1:47:15] those were also applied to Medicare.

[1:47:16] So, one of the rule changes was to support lower income individuals in their Medicare savings program to help them pay for their Medicare Part A and Part B payments.

[1:47:31] That rule has been halted until 2035.

[1:47:35] The other rule was in 2024, and it was about, it was generally, there were a multitude of factors in it.

[1:47:42] but it was really about streamlining enrollment,

[1:47:46] like different modalities of enrollment,

[1:47:47] online email phone, streaming enrollment

[1:47:51] between programs that had this same eligibility,

[1:47:53] like there's a children's insurance health program

[1:47:55] in MediCal giving a reconsideration period of 90 days.

[1:48:00] Like I said, the programs are all really complicated

[1:48:03] in their eligibility, people make mistakes,

[1:48:05] they don't have their documentation,

[1:48:06] sometimes people get dropped.

[1:48:08] One of those role changes was like a 90-day

[1:48:12] reconsideration before people would drop to allow them to kind of clean up whatever needed

[1:48:17] to be done or repeal.

[1:48:19] So all of that, the goal of those roles was to get people who were eligible enrolled in

[1:48:25] MediCal and to keep them enrolled.

[1:48:27] And those changes will now not be implemented.

[1:48:32] The other thing that happened upon enactment is none, you can read it, essentially this is

[1:48:39] about abortions. Any non-profit organization that provided abortions and received more

[1:48:46] than 800,000 in Medicaid payments in 2023 cannot receive any medical payments for a year.

[1:48:58] Yes, and the county does not fund Planned Parenthood for that purpose, but the county does have

[1:49:05] a contract with Planned Parenthood. So the viability in public health and that's for some other

[1:49:11] work around communicable diseases.

[1:49:16] So this obviously is an impact to some of the nonprofit providers and the viability and

[1:49:22] a sustainability whether or not they can stay open.

[1:49:26] The last thing that happened upon enactment, this one gets complicated.

[1:49:31] States cannot oppose any new provider taxes or increase their whole harmless rates.

[1:49:38] In 2024, you will call that Proposition 35 had what was called an MCO tax, a managed

[1:49:46] care organization tax on the ballot, which California passed.

[1:49:52] This tax, so partnership, is a managed care organization, Kaiser's managed care organization.

[1:50:00] What the state does and what Proposition 35 made permanent is the state taxes.

[1:50:06] those manage care providers, the tax revenue that they get, we used to have a 50-50 match,

[1:50:15] federal government 50%, state 50% for Medi-Cal, the state taxes and Medi-Cal organizations,

[1:50:22] they take that tax and they use it as their matching funds to draw down the federal funding.

[1:50:29] So the state takes in through the MCO tax, $14 billion a year.

[1:50:35] And HR1 says you cannot add any new taxes and then we'll talk about it in a couple slides but in a couple years they also the states also have to reduce the amount they tax.

[1:50:50] So this is a large, we talked about the $2 billion hit on SNAP.

[1:50:54] This is an enormous hit to the state because absent this revenue, the state,

[1:51:01] We'll have to use General Fund or another source to get to draw down matching funds from the federal government

[1:51:08] in order to pay for the medical program in the state.

[1:51:17] Hold on. So if that doesn't happen, then that means there's going to be people who are not going to have insurance.

[1:51:25] They're not going to, you know, they're not going to be able to go to the emergency room with an insurance card.

[1:51:31] Well, the managed care tax

[1:51:34] has to do with the state's ability to pay for Medi-Cal, and again, I told you, I warned you,

[1:51:40] I need to be frustrated.

[1:51:44] I've spent many a time trying to figure out in my head how

[1:51:47] the state is going to address and handle these challenges, and I don't have an answer to

[1:51:53] that. When we get to the end, we'll give you some numbers on what we think the impacts

[1:51:59] might be in terms of people who lose eligibility for Medi-Cal, but as we go through this list

[1:52:07] and my hand it over to Kelly in just a minute, you'll see that there's lots of little ways

[1:52:12] that access to care will be diminished. The tax, I don't know if that's how the state helps pay

[1:52:18] for the program. But aren't we required by law to take care of anybody that goes into an emergency room

[1:52:24] whether they have medical insurance.

[1:52:28] And we will talk about that when we get to the year

[1:52:31] that that takes place.

[1:52:33] I think that's on page seven.

[1:52:35] Oh god, OK.

[1:52:37] All right.

[1:52:38] I know I've been working on this PowerPoint for a week.

[1:52:41] Imagine how depressed I've been.

[1:52:44] And OK.

[1:52:46] So on this slide, the one thing that HR1 does did add

[1:52:53] And it was, it established something called a role health transportation, not transportation,

[1:52:59] don't get excited Matt, toggle.

[1:53:03] Role health transformation grants fun.

[1:53:06] And the idea was to help mitigate the effects of Medicaid reductions.

[1:53:11] And if you watch the news and you heard this, you're all aware that there have been a plethora

[1:53:16] of role hospital closures across the country.

[1:53:19] We've experienced RCRT talks about it a lot because a lot of the Northern California is and some of the Central

[1:53:26] But California counties have been impacted by this.

[1:53:30] So there is recognition that lost to hospitals is only going to exacerbate that problem.

[1:53:36] So this fund was established primarily with the goal of rural hospitals in mind.

[1:53:41] It is $50 billion over a five year period.

[1:53:45] States have to apply. And again, the focus is on rural. I do not have information on how California is applying or what they're trying to accomplish.

[1:53:55] But the goal is to mitigate some of the impacts to the hospital. There's been a lot of estimates that come out that it'll cover on a short-term basis, about 35% of the loss to the hospitals.

[1:54:09] And that's nationwide, so that will just tell you kind of how the funding is spent.

[1:54:19] The first 25 billion is supposed to go equally to all approved states.

[1:54:25] There is no guarantee that every state will be approved.

[1:54:27] The second 25 billion goes out as determined by the setters of Medicaid and

[1:54:34] Medicare, Medicare and Medicaid, excuse me, it's under the Health and Human Services Agency.

[1:54:38] Let me see if the federal government, and again, we don't know what criteria they're

[1:54:41] going to use to do that.

[1:54:43] So how much money will actually come to California is unknown at this point, and now it's the

[1:54:50] Kelly show.

[1:54:54] So before we get into the January change, you probably remember that the state was struggling

[1:55:01] with closing a budget gap, and a significant amount of that budget gap was being driven by

[1:55:06] medical overspending. So the changes I'm about to talk to are specific to addressing the state's

[1:55:15] budget challenge this year. This was before all the HR1 changes. So the first change was that

[1:55:23] effective January 1st, 2026. They would freeze enrollment of undocumented individuals 19 and older.

[1:55:31] So this was under the state's medical for all, first was expanded to children and

[1:55:36] then went to our seniors and then finally to everyone.

[1:55:42] And so this is freezing enrollment for those 19 in order.

[1:55:47] And the state is estimating that 200,000 individuals could lose coverage in the first full year.

[1:55:55] And this is because just normal if you don't redetermine your eligibility.

[1:56:00] ability, you won't be able to, there'll be a short period of submitting your documents

[1:56:06] if you didn't do it timely, but then if you do pass that threshold, you won't be able

[1:56:11] to re-enroll in those services.

[1:56:14] And also, they're going to discontinue dental services, not just for the undocumented population,

[1:56:19] but for those with this new unsatisfactory immigration status.

[1:56:23] and that includes undocumented population,

[1:56:27] but also the other categories that have now been added,

[1:56:32] the Asylees, refugees, trafficking, crime victims,

[1:56:37] and other humanitarian parolees from Afghanistan

[1:56:41] and Ukraine and those temporary protected statuses,

[1:56:45] they will not have access to the dental services

[1:56:48] under this change.

[1:56:49] And then October 1st, 2026, under HR1, those individuals I just mentioned will no longer

[1:57:00] have access to what they used to have access to full scope, medical, the assilies, refugees,

[1:57:08] parolees, all those categories, because they were lawfully here, they were documented, if

[1:57:14] if you will, but they will no longer have eligibility, only legal permanent residents,

[1:57:20] Cuban and Haitian immigrants, and those under the Compact of Free Association countries.

[1:57:26] Those will be the only groups that will have eligibility to Fulscope Medical Services.

[1:57:36] Who will have eligibility?

[1:57:38] Legal permanent residents,

[1:57:43] legal permanent residents, Cuban

[1:57:45] Haitian immigrants, and the

[1:57:47] compact of free association.

[1:57:49] That's the Marshall Islands, and

[1:57:51] there's a couple others I can't

[1:57:52] remember.

[1:57:54] Small island nations.

[1:57:58] Sure.

[1:58:00] And then, and again, with the

[1:58:01] legal permanent residents, this is

[1:58:03] after the five year bar.

[1:58:04] And we don't have, we don't have

[1:58:06] easy access to know how many in

[1:58:08] our county are at that five year bar

[1:58:10] or not, but we do know that there are 16,700 in those other categories.

[1:58:21] Okay, October 1st, 2026 continuing on, those states that did expand under ACA, of course,

[1:58:32] California is one, there will be a restriction on reimbursement for emergency medical care due to immigration status.

[1:58:40] So this is currently reimbursed at 90% and it'll be reducing to 50% and this does include not just emergency hospital services, but ambulance services as well.

[1:58:51] And Sue Resabron earlier you asked a question.

[1:58:54] So yes, states are required to reimburse for emergency care.

[1:58:58] So the big distinction here is that for that expansion population, we talked about the state used to be able to draw down 90% reimbursement, 90%.

[1:59:08] and now they can, that will only be able to draw down 50%.

[1:59:15] Okay, and then, so a significant impact both on our recipients of medical

[1:59:22] and our staff is the change December 31st, 2026.

[1:59:27] We'll be moving to redetermining eligibility for those in this expansion population

[1:59:34] for Solano County, that's 42,450 individuals right now.

[1:59:39] But instead of doing it once a year, we'll have to do it twice a year.

[1:59:43] That's administratively burdensome, obviously both for staff, but also for those that we're serving.

[1:59:49] And we'll undoubtedly learn to have churn as a result of that.

[1:59:55] But also a significant workload impact.

[1:59:58] We're estimating about 14.

[2:00:00] FTEs of workload to be able to do that second processing of eligibility annually. We don't

[2:00:09] know how many will lose benefits as a result of this churn, but the state is estimating

[2:00:13] 400,000 may lose coverage just due to the administrative impacts of this.

[2:00:20] And then right now you can apply for retroactive coverage. If you're eligible for medical, you

[2:00:28] You can also request to have coverage up to three months prior to your application month.

[2:00:34] And this is like, perhaps you had some sort of emergency.

[2:00:39] You didn't have coverage of the time.

[2:00:41] You went to the hospital and then you did not complete an application and later you get

[2:00:46] your bill and you're like, oh, well, right now you can apply up to three months back.

[2:00:50] This changes to, again, the ACA expansion population one month prior and then all the traditional

[2:00:57] medical recipients two months prior, and the state's estimating 86,000 members would be impacted by that.

[2:01:07] And that is the result of that, of course, will be that there's likely to be an increase in unreimbursed expenses.

[2:01:17] Back to Debbie, right?

[2:01:19] Oh, no, sorry, I'm sorry, still me.

[2:01:23] So, Kelly, just because I want to talk to someone, to tie in with to what you got through saying that means we're going to have more people who are going

[2:01:30] to maybe lose their homes because they're not going to be able to pay that hospital bill.

[2:01:34] That's what this is going to happen.

[2:01:36] Yeah, or they don't-

[2:01:37] Or they might not go to the hospital and become more sick and-

[2:01:41] And there were some also some credit changes that now medical bills will still count against you for things.

[2:01:49] So, okay, okay, that's-

[2:01:51] So I was intentionally trying to avoid this slide, this is work requirements for

[2:01:59] Medi-Cal. We've never had this before in California, but this is requiring 80 hours a month or 80 hour equivalent of work, education or community engagement for those who are between the ages of 1964 and don't have certain exemptions.

[2:02:22] So this is not only do you have to do that to be eligible, but you have to approve that

[2:02:28] you were out, you were doing it the month before you applied.

[2:02:33] Our estimate, we don't have an estimate right now because we have to write a whole new

[2:02:37] query to figure out which group will be subject to this.

[2:02:42] They will also have to do six month re-determinations including proving that they still are meeting

[2:02:47] work requirements to retain coverage, we are expecting about a six FTE equivalent of

[2:02:54] work from this estimates based on some guessing, and obviously significant disenrollments will

[2:03:04] be anticipated from this because of the administrative burden and people not being able to meet.

[2:03:09] So, for example, you don't get exemption because you're homeless.

[2:03:17] So you can imagine that that could be challenging.

[2:03:22] There's, let's see, an individual's failure to comply with work requirements for Medi-Cal

[2:03:27] will also make you ineligible for premium tax credits under Covered California.

[2:03:33] We do not know how CMSP might be impacted by health.

[2:03:46] You have any example of work education?

[2:03:49] You could be in college, for example.

[2:03:54] College, certain number of hours in college,

[2:03:56] you could get credit for education and trade.

[2:04:03] What if I'm not working at all?

[2:04:06] Then you are not going to be eligible for medical.

[2:04:12] In community engagement?

[2:04:14] Volunteer someplace?

[2:04:16] You can volunteer.

[2:04:18] You have to either have an equivalent of $590

[2:04:21] dollars worth of income, which is the federal minimum wage equivalent, a month, or you

[2:04:27] can volunteer, or you can be in education and training.

[2:04:33] And we're going to have to follow all that for every individual?

[2:04:35] Yes.

[2:04:36] Documented?

[2:04:37] Yes.

[2:04:37] And we'll have,

[2:04:42] yeah, other states, so it's been tried in other states, and they've had

[2:04:47] people who were eligible, who've dropped off due to the administrative requirements of

[2:04:52] trying to prove.

[2:04:53] this stuff and they've also even adhered stories of people losing their job because of their

[2:05:00] medical. I mean, it just, it becomes a cycle of trying to prove that you're eligible for your

[2:05:06] medical to get your services so that you can retain your employment. So I read estimates of 60 to

[2:05:14] 70% of people could lose their coverage for non-compliance.

[2:05:19] The state will.

[2:05:28] Getting

[2:05:32] close to being done.

[2:05:35] So January 1st, 2027, HR1,

[2:05:38] implements new address verification requirements.

[2:05:42] There's also some death check requirements.

[2:05:44] Implement eligibility does address check verifications already

[2:05:47] and they do death checks already.

[2:05:50] We're assuming that the address verifications

[2:05:52] which are going to specify certain systems that have to be run through, that that will

[2:06:00] be automated, and so therefore that this particular thing is not going to be a big impact

[2:06:06] because we do it already.

[2:06:07] The one thing I didn't say in the beginning that I should have is that there is an assumption

[2:06:12] that all of these program changes will require additional outreach, notifications, document

[2:06:20] updates system changes across the board, especially for these things that have never been done before.

[2:06:27] Our eligibility system, which is called CalSaws, is not set up to do six-month three determinations.

[2:06:34] It's not set up to do some of this compliance and monitoring.

[2:06:38] So there, in addition to the costs and the staffing impacts that we've talked about,

[2:06:43] there are all these behind the scene, if I was in the CAO's office,

[2:06:47] So I'd be talking about our 2000 series, our services and supply and our system upgrades

[2:06:52] costs that will also be happening across the board.

[2:06:56] So address verifications may be one of those in terms of staffing.

[2:06:59] We don't anticipate that it will be a big deal.

[2:07:03] The other thing that happens in January is that any Medicaid section, 1-1-1-5 demonstration

[2:07:09] waivers must be budget neutral to obtain approval.

[2:07:15] The waivers are the agreement between CMS at the federal level and the states as to how

[2:07:22] the states are going to administer Medicaid in their states.

[2:07:26] So in California, we have CalAIM as our waiver and CalAIM expires in 2026.

[2:07:34] CalAIM brought forth a whole bunch of new programs, community supports, just as involved

[2:07:43] initiative which is partial scope medical services in the jail, which we had to do

[2:07:50] medical eligibility in the jail in order to get there.

[2:07:54] Your staff in the Sheriff's Office and probation and in employment eligibility

[2:08:00] have put in thousands of hours getting those programs.

[2:08:04] The first phase of them done, they've been working on the second phase.

[2:08:08] And all of that comes into question in 2026 when California has to renew the Cal-Aim waiver.

[2:08:16] So this is another really big but completely unknown impact at this point because we don't

[2:08:25] know what programs will be allowed to continue, again, everything has to be budget neutral.

[2:08:32] So in the past, the programs had to show that they met certain goals, but not necessarily

[2:08:41] budget neutral, so that's a big one.

[2:08:46] Debbie, just one second.

[2:08:47] So I apologize, budget neutral, does that mean the amount of money coming in must equal

[2:08:54] the amount of money going out, and some people might not get service?

[2:08:57] It means that the state says, hey, this is how we're going to administer Medi-Cal.

[2:09:03] If, and the feds are, say, okay, you're entitled or whatever to this much money, I'm way oversimplifying.

[2:09:10] And the state says, then, well, we want to do this and this and this.

[2:09:15] The feds say, well, no, that's going to cost more than we would otherwise give you.

[2:09:19] So, no, you can't do that unless you cut someplace else.

[2:09:22] So, all of those new programs and initiatives and pilots that were in Cal A, because the goal was to provide continuity of care.

[2:09:35] I mean, in the jails now, we have individuals that come into the jails, they're on medication, they're undercare, they have diabetes, or they have heart issues, Brad could probably share a whole laundry list.

[2:09:47] They want, the goal was to keep those individuals stabilized while they were in, you know, under

[2:09:54] that same care, under the same medication, getting treatment, because then when they're

[2:09:58] released, if they don't, otherwise, you know, they're starting over from scratch, they're

[2:10:04] in the emergency rooms, they have to go through the whole process again.

[2:10:07] So the pilot was, hey, it's better for the community, it's better for the individuals, and it really

[2:10:13] The end is neutral cost neutral because you don't have these big spikes in cost because

[2:10:19] people have fallen off.

[2:10:21] All of those kinds of programs, whether they continue or not, we won't know.

[2:10:26] Community supports in Cal AIM provided for the first time some housing dollars.

[2:10:35] So for people who are transitioning,

[2:10:40] trying to get a concept that you have to get people

[2:10:42] stabilized first before you can treat them and treat their mental health or treat their

[2:10:47] primary care issues. So whether those kinds of programs stay, we'll have to see. But all

[2:10:56] that falls under this agreement between the state and the feds and every state about how they're

[2:11:02] going to administer the Medicaid program and their state.

[2:11:08] I just was hoping there'd be adult

[2:11:10] beverages for a break when we get done with it.

[2:11:14] Seriously because the whole point of working with Prop 1 was to make sure that our folks

[2:11:22] that need help with mental issues with care act and all of that was to get everybody

[2:11:28] stabilized so that everybody can be a productive citizen.

[2:11:32] And now this seems, okay, now I'm going to, I'm

[2:11:41] going to

[2:11:47] say that I did not.

[2:11:49] I don't have any role in writing, authorizing, voting for HR1 or the California State Budget.

[2:11:56] I have just the messenger.

[2:12:01] Okay, the last bullet here is, there's something called State Directed Payment Rates and what HR1 said is those rates can't exceed 100% of the Medicare rate.

[2:12:12] And if they do, states have to start reducing those state directed payments by 10% annually.

[2:12:25] So we talked about the states pay managed care organizations rates that are substantially

[2:12:33] below what the Medicare rate is.

[2:12:36] If that was the only money that hospitals and providers got, they wouldn't make it.

[2:12:43] And you see this, particularly in the provider level, when you hear a lot of talk about,

[2:12:48] hey, there's not enough providers that will sign up, because the medical reimbursement rates are too low, that's this conversation.

[2:12:55] The way the state supports primarily in and outpatient hospitals is they pay them these state directed payments,

[2:13:06] which are really supplemental payments.

[2:13:10] And so the biggest risk here, and those rates are probably the supplemental payments,

[2:13:15] then bring the total rates like the hospitals get in some cases to be well above the Medicare rate.

[2:13:22] And it is how the hospitals continue to serve those populations and to survive.

[2:13:27] So, for example, in the County Clinics, your family health services clinics are, they

[2:13:38] fall under the managed care of partnership.

[2:13:40] We get clients assigned from partnership, medical is our primary client base and our clinics.

[2:13:46] The clinics are eligible for quality incentive payments.

[2:13:52] That's these are supplemental payments.

[2:13:55] So if the clinics meet certain metrics, then they can draw down additional funding.

[2:14:01] So that's an example that impacts the county directly through our services.

[2:14:08] Hospitals are the biggest recipient of this.

[2:14:13] And the effect of lowering the state directed payments to the Medicare rate will be hundreds of millions of dollars of losses.

[2:14:22] in revenue to hospitals and currently the rate is 6%, it has to be reduced by 2032 I think

[2:14:32] to 3.5%. So

[2:14:38] the other thing I wanted to say about this is this is also likely Kelly talked

[2:14:43] about emergency care in the emergency room with ambulance services. We're not entirely certain

[2:14:50] certain, but I've made inquiries to Paragon into other associations and we also believe that this will impact

[2:15:00] Public providers of ambulance services. Right now, those providers receive, they can get these supplemental rates that pay many times what the normal medical rate is, and do exceed Medicare. And this will put a cap on it to the Medicare rate, too, because they're still considered supplemental payments. So, across the board.

[2:15:29] Okay. January 1st, 2027,

[2:15:32] Again, this is one of the areas that we talked about access.

[2:15:36] So California implemented with the state budget that individuals 19 over with unsatisfactory immigration status.

[2:15:44] And again, that's based on the budget pass before the feds, but the state knew what was coming.

[2:15:52] So those individuals will have to pay a monthly premium of $30 a month for medical.

[2:15:57] out.

[2:16:00] We haven't had to do that before. We don't know what the MCAPX will be, but

[2:16:03] medical serves low-income individuals. So, if you have a household for and they each have

[2:16:09] to pay, you have to pay a premium for each of them. We anticipate that there will be a number

[2:16:13] of households that will not be able to afford the cost of this. October 1st of 2027, this

[2:16:20] This is related to what I was just talking about the managed care tax going down from

[2:16:27] 6% to 3.5%.

[2:16:29] So this is just letting you know the timing of it.

[2:16:32] October 1st of 2028, the expansion population is going to be assessed.

[2:16:39] Remember, this is, we've got almost 43,000 people in this population.

[2:16:44] They will be assessed, what is this, what we would, you know, those of us on commercial

[2:16:48] insurance would call a copay for every service that they receive and it's we don't again we don't

[2:16:55] have guidance we don't know how it's going to roll out but it's somewhere between between zero

[2:16:59] and $35 per service. So there are some exceptions to certain services pregnancy, pregnancy services

[2:17:11] I don't remember what all of them are but there are some exceptions.

[2:17:19] Just a question because I know

[2:17:21] So there's like Magi, the non-magi medical and for those just going back to the 19 plus because that's a big plus.

[2:17:30] When it is still 62 and over for non-magi because you already have to pay some form of co-pay with the non-magi medical.

[2:17:41] Like if you're in the LTC or SNF or anything like that skilled nursing facility long term care facility.

[2:17:48] So generally in Medi-Cal it's a share of costs as opposed to a copay, so this is actually introducing copays for services, if you had a share of costs, that would be on top of that.

[2:18:03] So share of costs, you have to spend and pay up to your share of costs before you become eligible for compensated care, and then it would be on top of that.

[2:18:13] If you did, but you have to meet that every single month,

[2:18:16] if you have that share of cost.

[2:18:23] That's an emphasis on how complicated the program is.

[2:18:27] OK, so I wasn't going to talk about this,

[2:18:32] but I think in the overall picture of insurance,

[2:18:36] so I kind of snuck this in.

[2:18:37] It's not in the staff report.

[2:18:39] But I wanted to also talk about some of the things

[2:18:44] that HR1 does just real quickly with covered California.

[2:18:48] So, right now, individuals who are eligible for covered California, they get a tax credit.

[2:18:58] And it is that tax credit for a lot of individuals that makes accessing those insurance plans affordable.

[2:19:07] There exists right now a premium tax credit under the Inflation Reduction Act and a prior act.

[2:19:14] And I can't remember what it was.

[2:19:17] HR1 did not extend that tax credit.

[2:19:20] It goes through December 2025 so they could still do it

[2:19:23] if they wanted to.

[2:19:24] If they do not, then everyone under covered California

[2:19:29] will see approximately a 66% in their premium

[2:19:33] for the California covered plans.

[2:19:36] And the state estimates that about 400,000 individuals

[2:19:40] will lose coverage.

[2:19:41] The Congressional Budget Office, overall, you've probably all read this, estimates that the combined changes to medical and covered California will leave 10 million people uninsured by 2034.

[2:19:59] So, this summary,

[2:20:05] so it is primarily health and social services, we'll see the most significant financial and capacity impacts in terms of service delivery.

[2:20:15] Obviously the critical thing is how many of county residents will see a lack of eligibility

[2:20:24] and lack of access to services but from a county perspective but then other departments

[2:20:30] like we talked about like the Sheriff's Office and probation who are also administering programs

[2:20:35] under CalAIM and are also likely to see impacts.

[2:20:39] Our total fiscal impacts remain unknown, pending the guidance.

[2:20:44] That story we started with and we're sticking through it until we get more information.

[2:20:49] Under CalFresh, we use the state's estimates to estimate what our impact might be.

[2:20:57] So the state estimates, almost 400,000 will lose benefits.

[2:21:00] If we apply that to our percentage of the statewide enrollment, it means about 38.

[2:21:06] It's between 38 and 39 individuals may lose food benefits locally.

[2:21:12] Medi-Cal and Roly, the state estimates 3.4 million.

[2:21:16] For us, proportionately, that would be 33,500 individuals would lose Medi-Cal coverage.

[2:21:27] That's what we know about HR1 today.

[2:21:30] Like I said, as we get more concrete updates, probably not every time we get them because

[2:21:36] are going to start flying in, I imagine, quickly, but if the board wants we can come back

[2:21:44] occasionally with updates and kind of tell you where we are based on some of these different

[2:21:48] timelines.

[2:21:52] Definitely, yes, because I always press on that.

[2:21:56] Because they have to have the budget passed by September 30th at the Fed level, unless they

[2:22:02] keep doing the CRs, like they'd like doing, and I don't think we've signed off on our budget

[2:22:08] yet in California. So yes, I would like it periodically because I know you guys get this was a lot of work. I understand that and I'm not too terribly depressed because football is going to be starting soon. So I'll be okay.

[2:22:24] But it's a lot but but Debbie as we go through not only bargaining, but as we go through letting our constituents know what will be available or not available.

[2:22:33] And what can we do as a Sloan or county society to mitigate whatever we can do to help personally.

[2:22:41] I think it's important that we keep on top of what we can keep on top of.

[2:22:47] That's my thought anyway.

[2:22:50] What a good.

[2:22:51] Yeah, I just wanted to concur that I definitely would like more updates as we learn more information.

[2:22:59] and I'm just taking a back.

[2:23:05] I mean, I've heard it before,

[2:23:07] but hearing it again with more information included,

[2:23:11] it's just heartening to know that so many individuals

[2:23:17] may lose their coverage.

[2:23:20] And I know people are concerned about homelessness now,

[2:23:25] but they haven't seen homelessness like they're going to see

[2:23:29] Once these things go into place, people can't pay the rent because they have to choose to take care of their child, their grandmother, their mother, or themselves.

[2:23:42] So, yeah, it's not a pretty picture, thank you.

[2:23:47] All right, so I don't see any other questions, I do have a couple myself though.

[2:23:51] Are there any clear definitions in the legislation or in the regulation that's been put out by the government?

[2:23:59] government so far about what constitutes a volunteer service or program and what

[2:24:06] constitutes an educational program?

[2:24:10] Not yet.

[2:24:12] And the state, well, I'm certain look to see if they can invest in sort of programs to try to assist.

[2:24:20] That's what I was thinking, you know, if we had a county volunteer program and a county education program.

[2:24:25] And as we're signing people up for some of these services, we can put them in the program.

[2:24:29] You know, here's your homework for the week, you know, something like that so that we can assure that they're meeting the requirement but can qualify for the program and anything we can do to help keep folks served.

[2:24:43] And then the other thing that I wanted to ask, I wanted to ask of my peers on the board.

[2:24:50] I met, and I know that a couple other board members have met with the CIOs, CIOs of the local hospital, Kaiser and with North Bay, to discuss this very issue.

[2:25:04] And in meeting with them, one of the things that came up is that they would like to, I suggested that we work with them as a county to try and find those places where we can pool resources.

[2:25:17] are we can consolidate resources in order to assure that there are some of these gaps

[2:25:21] maybe closed and we may be able to still help people and can lessen the impact on those hospitals.

[2:25:28] So to that end, I would probably bring back next week if that's okay, the formation

[2:25:32] of an ad hoc committee of two supervisors to be able to work with the directors of those hospitals

[2:25:40] and their CAOs to be able to work on that safety net.

[2:25:43] And that's going to require some staff time for that to happen and some input from health and

[2:25:50] justice services.

[2:25:51] And I haven't even had a chance to talk to Emory.

[2:25:53] I'm throwing her under the bus right now doing this, but she's giving me a thumbs up.

[2:25:57] So I would just, I would need to have the nodding heads of the board in order to be able to authorize

[2:26:04] and use staff for that purpose.

[2:26:07] So, would there be support on the board for that?

[2:26:16] Okay, all right. Thank you very much for that. All right. With that Supervisor Brown.

[2:26:25] Talked about that people could go to school and get their GRE, and I know the libraries

[2:26:30] do offer a free program to get your GRE. So that might be, I'm just throwing out places

[2:26:37] where you can go get education that was relatively inexpensive. And the other thing with

[2:26:42] anything with education if you know we might want to look and see what might be out there

[2:26:48] in terms of the community college and or workforce development. I see them in the package

[2:26:53] to help to people could improve what they need to do, but they also can count that as time.

[2:27:02] Yeah and we have reached out to workforce development board and it will be engaging with

[2:27:06] Yeah, nonprofits. Right. Yeah, the key though is not to duplicate and the key is to have one person who kind of knows what's going on.

[2:27:16] So that we can direct traffic to go what needs to be done. So you don't waste any time because the other thing would be is travel going to be part of those eight hours a day.

[2:27:26] I mean, I don't know and how are you going to get there? So whatever we can do zoom wise.

[2:27:31] So, I see this as a not only a challenge, but how do I sleep at night figuring out what we can do to make this all happen?

[2:27:43] And so, but yeah, I guess one could say that this is what happens when people vote.

[2:27:53] I'll let it go that way.

[2:27:56] All right. Supervisor James.

[2:28:00] I'm just back to your point in regards to the hospital council if it can also include

[2:28:06] Torrell University as they offer so yeah they're part of the hospital council the

[2:28:13] setter, advances, Kaiser and North Bay but including Torrell University in that conversation

[2:28:20] as well.

[2:28:21] And then just going back to the ABOD exemptions, the ABOD exemptions that includes like folks

[2:28:28] with children under it was waived, were folks with children under 14 or is it 18? I'm sorry.

[2:28:34] 14, 14 now. 14 and also waived like the veteran, veteran exemption or those are still.

[2:28:41] Those assumptions were removed for homeless veterans and those coming out of foster care. So those

[2:28:47] will not be exemptions moving forward. But we will still have the parents of caregivers of children

[2:28:55] and under 14 and also they're over 64, okay, because they used to be 55, right, okay, thank you.

[2:29:05] All right, I see no more questions on that item.

[2:29:09] Thank you for a lot of hard work putting this together.

[2:29:12] Oh, yes.

[2:29:13] Do we do have a potential online comment from the public?

[2:29:19] Caller on the line.

[2:29:19] If you're wishing to speak on agenda item number 23, will you please press star three to raise your hand?

[2:29:25] Caller on the line with the number ending in 1-1 if you wish to speak on agenda item number 23, please raise your hand.

[2:29:35] Give me a little more.

[2:29:39] Just out of curiosity. Caller on the line, if you wish to speak on agenda item number 26, please press star 3 to raise your hand.

[2:29:51] Okay, when we are at agenda item 26, we will call you.

[2:29:55] Thank you very much. We're going to go ahead and have you lower your hand.

[2:29:58] And a lot of folks want to talk.

[2:30:04] All right, with that, Madam Clerk, we're on item 24.

[2:30:15] Conducted public hearing required by the Taxant Equity Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, Tefra, and consider adopting a resolution of proving the issuance of revenue bonds by the California Municipal Finance Authority. In an amount not to exceed $20 million for the purpose of financing and or refinancing certain costs of the acquisition, construction, expansion, remodeling, renovation, furnishing, equipping, and or improvement.

[2:30:41] of the health facilities, including real estate, owned and operated by Health Corps 2460,

[2:30:47] Hillborne Fairfield LLC, Health Corps 2458, Hillborne Fairfield LLC,

[2:30:52] and Health Corps Rheavista LLC, collectively the borrowers and

[2:30:56] least to North Bay Group and or North Bay Corporation located within Salano County.

[2:31:02] Good morning, Chair and members of the board.

[2:31:06] My name is Denise Dicks, I am the Assistant Treasurer Tax Collector, County Clerk.

[2:31:10] We are here today to conduct a public hearing in accordance with the Tax and Equity Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 or Tefra.

[2:31:20] And also to seek your approval for the issuance of a $20 million in tax exempt bonds.

[2:31:27] To clarify Salano County is not issuing these bonds, the bonds will be issued by California Municipal Finance Authority, CMFA.

[2:31:35] The project is the sole responsibility of the borrowers and the county will bear no financial, legal, moral obligation, liability, or responsibility for either the project or the repayment of the bonds.

[2:31:49] The purpose of this tougher hearing is to provide an opportunity for the public to comment regarding the issuance of the tax exempt funds for the project undertaken by a 501-C3 nonprofit organization.

[2:32:04] The borrowing entity is the health core foundation which will use the bond proceeds to finance

[2:32:11] the acquisition of four buildings. Three of them are located in Solano County, one

[2:32:16] is in City of Winters. These facilities will be leased to North

[2:32:21] Bay Corp for the use of primary care and urgent care centers as well as a cardiac center.

[2:32:27] The properties in Solano County include 2458 Hillborne in Fairfield, 2460 Hillborne in Fairfield, and 327 Main Street in Real Vista.

[2:32:41] At this time, I respectfully request that the board conduct the public hearing and approve the issuance of these bonds.

[2:32:48] I also have representatives from North Bay and CMFA if you have additional questions.

[2:32:53] All right, thank you before I open the public hearing to the board of any questions.

[2:33:00] All right, so that I will open the public hearing and then they can come down and speak.

[2:33:06] So I'll officially open that public hearing.

[2:33:08] I'll let them come down and speak and then I have one speaker card for Chris Matthews.

[2:33:12] Oh, one of the representatives is my speaker.

[2:33:22] Good afternoon.

[2:33:23] My name is Chris Matthews.

[2:33:25] I'm a system vice president for real estate and government affairs, and if it's all right just based on the last presentation, I wanted to make just a couple quick comments about North Bay.

[2:33:44] 76% of our patients are either medical, Medicare, Medicaid, and we appreciate that.

[2:33:57] We're lucky, our aspiration this year is to be about 2% above our cost.

[2:34:05] So a slight variation in all these reimbursements that you've just heard about makes a big impact

[2:34:13] on our bottom line.

[2:34:15] And this initiative, what we're trying to do is to expand our ambulatory service network

[2:34:24] work so that we're within 15 minutes of every patient base in Solano County for urgent care.

[2:34:34] And we're also expanding our cardiac treatment, which is an area of emphasis for us.

[2:34:42] And then just one other quick comment, if I might make, there were several questions and

[2:34:48] comments about the emergency care and especially how that might relate to undocumented patients.

[2:34:58] So as I think you all understand, but just to re-emphasize to the public as well,

[2:35:05] whenever anyone presents to the emergency room, we provide expert care without regard to whether they compare or not.

[2:35:16] And we, you know, currently for those covered, that had been covered, undocumented, and otherwise we receive a reimbursement that is below our cost to provide that care.

[2:35:34] The change that will happen now with these new regulations are that instead of receiving a modicum of that cost,

[2:35:46] We'll receive nothing at all, and so it will be an increasing burden on us as an health

[2:35:53] system.

[2:35:54] So sorry to belabor that point, but I wanted to just bring it up given the last presentation.

[2:36:00] Are there any other questions that I might address with regards to the issue at hand on this

[2:36:08] moment?

[2:36:08] We

[2:36:11] can do the question after the public hearing and I know I know I now have one other card on this from Ms. Cully.

[2:36:20] Well, this gentleman right here, yes, I have one more.

[2:36:25] Oh, okay, we've got one more person, I've already, I didn't have a card for him.

[2:36:28] Oh, no, I'm a representative from the bond issuer, the California Municipal Finance Authority.

[2:36:33] He should have just had a dollar sign on.

[2:36:38] Just brief intro, my name is Jared Suzuki.

[2:36:42] The key, the California Municipal Finance Authority or CMFA is a joint powers authority that was formed in 2004 to assist local governments, businesses and nonprofit organizations with the issuance of both taxable and tax exempt debt to fund projects such as these, and I would just like to reiterate the debt that the CMFA is issuing is not a responsibility of the county and that the county has no obligation financially in the repayment of this debt.

[2:37:12] And, yeah, I will be available for any questions.

[2:37:17] Seeing none.

[2:37:19] Yes?

[2:37:19] Well, I'm not okay for stuff, but I'm not sure are we going to wait till we have the public.

[2:37:24] We're in the middle of the public.

[2:37:25] Okay, okay, all right, so here's my question.

[2:37:28] A certain entity that somebody talked about today, did they not help you with something

[2:37:34] that was happening in Reavista to put a urgent care?

[2:37:38] Councillor?

[2:37:39] California forever bought both winters and real vista buildings.

[2:37:46] We have been improving those at a substantial cost, the one in real vista, basically had

[2:37:53] to be completely rebuilt because of structural issues.

[2:37:58] And this is paying off the amount that California forever purchased the buildings for, and our cost to improve them.

[2:38:13] So, we were paying rent to California forever under a normal lease agreement.

[2:38:21] And that lease agreement provided a provision for us to buy them out.

[2:38:28] and we're able to do that and lower our cost of occupancy.

[2:38:33] Are there finger prints going to be involved in what the transaction that we're dealing with possibly today?

[2:38:43] By finger prints, I'm not sure.

[2:38:46] Well, they, I mean, okay, how far can I go County Council on?

[2:38:52] Today's action is about the Tefra.

[2:38:54] I mean, if you have issues with the use of the funds, you can proceed with that.

[2:38:59] Okay, okay, I do because these guys are billionaires, and so I'm just kind of curious

[2:39:04] as to why they're not picking up the tab, and if it's not the, I mean, so let me see if I

[2:39:11] understand this correctly.

[2:39:12] The county is like the loan agent?

[2:39:15] No, so why are they coming to us?

[2:39:18] I apologize, I'm not sure.

[2:39:21] Okay,

[2:39:28] I believe the financing authority can answer your question.

[2:39:33] Okay, thank you.

[2:39:34] Yes, per the Tefer Act, whenever there is a proposed tax exempt financing, a public hearing is held in the jurisdiction where the financing, the proposed financing takes place.

[2:39:46] So today we are here to hold the public hearing and approve the resolution,

[2:39:52] approving the financing, the issuing of the bonds.

[2:39:55] Okay, so we're just giving the people blessing that they can get it as a tax write-off.

[2:40:00] The tax exempt status of the bonds, correct?

[2:40:04] Well, yeah, but okay, but it sounds like okay, all right, okay, okay.

[2:40:11] There's no taxes to write off, but that, but because if we agree, then there's no

[2:40:15] taxes to write off.

[2:40:16] If we disagreed, then they would have to get the funding somewhere else and might

[2:40:19] up to pay taxes.

[2:40:20] Yes, no?

[2:40:22] I'm very.

[2:40:23] The result would be our cost of capital would go up because the bondholders are the ones

[2:40:31] that enjoy the tax benefits of a tax-exempt bond.

[2:40:39] Okay.

[2:40:40] You can tell I don't have enough money as a retired teacher to even figure this all out.

[2:40:44] If they get the bond issued to them, North Bay gets to buy the buildings from California

[2:40:52] forever, so then they own them instead of California forever.

[2:40:55] And then they get to pay off all the improvements that were made on the building.

[2:41:00] That's what those bonds do.

[2:41:02] Okay, so the people that you worked with could give you all the money that you needed,

[2:41:13] but apparently they chose not to.

[2:41:15] So that's why we're doing this.

[2:41:18] That's why they're doing this.

[2:41:19] That's why North Bay is doing this.

[2:41:21] We're doing a scene they can.

[2:41:22] Okay, we're giving the people a blessing.

[2:41:23] Okay.

[2:41:24] I just was trying to figure out when you're a billionaire why you're not helping more to the

[2:41:29] community.

[2:41:29] Sorry, thank you for letting me park in your parking lot the other day, but you know, that's that it was not really clear with all the nomenclature here and I could read it till the cows come home and still wouldn't get it.

[2:41:42] All right, I just want to follow up with another question. So the issuance of the funds would allow you to become have full autonomy of the

[2:41:59] buildings, which when I'm trying to say is once you issue the bonds, then there's a pay off to,

[2:42:11] I guess, California forever.

[2:42:13] And then North Bay now is free and clear in a full ownership of the facilities.

[2:42:24] Mostly right, so there are three buildings with three different owners, one of which is California forever in Rio Vista.

[2:42:35] They get paid back the amount that they paid to buy the building.

[2:42:42] The other two owners were buying, but we're entering into what's called a structural lease program.

[2:42:53] where there's a third party that's a tax exempt of 503C foundation in Colorado that will be the owner of the building and will be the tenant.

[2:43:06] However, we have the rights to buy it back at the termination of the lease.

[2:43:14] So it's like buying it with debt only we're using this structure to lower our cost of capital,

[2:43:22] to help us have more resources in order to do what you just heard, the last half hour, we'll have to do.

[2:43:31] Four times in a head step away, so I missed some of the conversation, but okay, all right, so I get to say there's three different entities, you're just trying to, we're just here to say, yes, they can get the bonds.

[2:43:50] So that's all to the general public. How does that work?

[2:43:54] The FMA is going to fund those bonds.

[2:44:00] Yeah, this has nothing to do with the county at all.

[2:44:03] Okay. We're just, yeah, exactly.

[2:44:09] The tax exemption is for North Bay, right?

[2:44:13] Bond holders.

[2:44:14] With the bond holders.

[2:44:18] I'm going to say what would you want?

[2:44:21] What?

[2:44:22] They don't have to pay taxes on the interest money they get back.

[2:44:30] Okay, I have clear understanding now.

[2:44:34] All right, with that, I have no more comments from the board.

[2:44:41] We get to hear from the actual public.

[2:44:43] And so Miss Colley.

[2:44:45] Board

[2:44:55] Chair, nice to see you.

[2:44:57] I'm actually very concerned.

[2:45:00] I'm concerned about this more than I thought. I didn't really understand based on the agenda that I read. It feels and it smells a little bit like money funneling through these bonds. Through this 501C3 in Colorado. I feel like the public needs to understand before you give a tax exemption to these bond holders.

[2:45:29] and this 501-C3 corporation, we need to know a little bit more about these bond holders and 501-C3 organization that's out of state.

[2:45:40] Thank you.

[2:45:45] If I can clarify again, so California and the financing authority was created as a JPA to allow for and to structure this, to encourage that there would be certain facilities that could be funded.

[2:45:59] that if the board recalls, you did this to Tepper Herring,

[2:46:02] I reckon if I'm wrong, and Denise,

[2:46:03] the last one was with regards to ecology.

[2:46:06] So these come before you often in terms of

[2:46:09] a corporation that is located or situated here

[2:46:12] wants to build a facility in this area.

[2:46:17] We did it something different, but a very similar situation

[2:46:20] is that the county issued bonds, tax exempt bonds,

[2:46:24] through a separate entity, the Solano County facilities

[2:46:29] corporation of which this board is the board of that. The facility corporation owns the

[2:46:34] building and then issues the bonds. You then pay them rent under this structure that

[2:46:40] is a tax exempt bond that allowed us to issue, to receive the capital, to construct it at

[2:46:46] a lower cost. The exact same thing here. You have no jurisdiction. You do not have say over

[2:46:52] how North Bay says, I want to structure my buildings. You're saying that it is a public

[2:46:57] benefit associated with what they're going to be doing in this environment, in this county,

[2:47:02] and by your action you are giving the people blessing to allow them to move forward with the

[2:47:06] financing authority to issue those bonds. Otherwise, we have a partner here, which you just

[2:47:12] took action to bring back with regards to their health care service. They are trying to improve

[2:47:18] their buildings. Yes, it happens that California forever happened to buy the one in Reavista,

[2:47:24] And I believe in Winters as well, and North Bay is trying to structure their operations to buy their building and stop paying rent, right?

[2:47:34] So that's what they're trying to do, whether or not you like the entity or not, that is irrelevant for what they're trying to do for purposes of their own finances.

[2:47:43] I hope that answers the question.

[2:47:51] I'm sorry, I just thought that they had gifted them the buildings and the

[2:47:58] revision winters because that's what I'm saying is that they could and they

[2:48:07] wouldn't even have to borrow whatever I can to remember the amount of money at

[2:48:10] this stage in the game. That was I was trying to walk that fine line because

[2:48:15] everybody kind of knows where I feel about those folks but I just you know but I

[2:48:19] I understand now what the premises it didn't make sense to me before, but I've never understood why if you're a 501c3, whatever that nonprofit is in Colorado, why you need another tax status status.

[2:48:34] But you know what, thank you, you're right, I have no say over how the toilet being built, it does not all make the smell test as far as I'm concerned, but it is what it is.

[2:48:45] So I have no more public comment. I will close the public hearing on this take it back in the hands of the board and

[2:49:01] Right as you were closing the public hearing we did have. Oh, nope, they hung up never mind. Thank you, sir

[2:49:07] All right, so go ahead supervisor. I'm sorry. You were in a row. Yes,

[2:49:13] it's too approved

[2:49:15] Approved the issuance of the bonds

[2:49:18] Anything else in that action

[2:49:21] And yes,

[2:49:24] it was to approve the issuance of the bonds and conduct the public hearing.

[2:49:30] We're going to end up to a resolution.

[2:49:32] That's my motion.

[2:49:34] All right, so we have a motion. Do we have a second?

[2:49:36] Second.

[2:49:37] You have a motion in a second, please vote.

[2:49:44] It's ordered by a vote of 5-0.

[2:49:49] Thank you very much.

[2:49:49] Thank you for coming on.

[2:49:51] Thanks for being patient while you explained it.

[2:50:01] I did, too.

[2:50:02] All

[2:50:07] right, with that, Madam Clerk, item 25, please.

[2:50:09] Please.

[2:50:10] In that notice, public hearing to consider approving minor subdivision application, MS-2501,

[2:50:17] by Darlene Foon-Lum, trustee of the Darlene F-Lum trust dated April 3rd, 2024, and Charles

[2:50:25] F-Lum family limited partnership to subdivide a 41.17 acre property under land conservation contract

[2:50:32] number 1199 into two parcels of 21.15 and 20.02 acres.

[2:50:39] Located along Rockville Road, one mile west of the city of Fairfield, within the Sassoon Valley Agriculture AS320 Zoning District, APN's 0-0-0-2-7-0-0-3-0-1-5-0, and 0-0-0-2-7-2-5-1-2-8-0.

[2:50:54] So, the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, pursuant to Section 15061B3 of the Sequel Guidelines because it has been determined that the proposed project will not have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment.

[2:51:12] Good morning, James B is the Director of Resource Management, with me is Eric Goldberg, he's a Senior Planner, and he'll be walking you through the presentation.

[2:51:19] Before I get started, I'll try to question the reason it's before us, because it's a Williamson Act contract.

[2:51:23] Correct.

[2:51:24] Had it not had the contract on it, this would have been handled as the planning commission.

[2:51:28] Correct.

[2:51:29] Okay.

[2:51:31] All right.

[2:51:32] Good morning, Eric Wilberg, Senior Planner with Department of Resource Management.

[2:51:36] So I just have a quick slideshow of this project.

[2:51:38] It's a minor subdivision, a two lot split for property located along Rockfield Road about

[2:51:45] a mile just outside of Fairfield.

[2:51:49] It's a 41-acre parcel being split into a 21 and a 20-acre lot.

[2:51:56] Just some past board actions that occurred recently, oh, here's a summary, sorry, skip

[2:52:02] ahead.

[2:52:03] Yes, a 41.17-acre lot currently under Ag production.

[2:52:08] It's going to result in a 21.15-acre and a 20.02-acre parcels for state planning purposes

[2:52:16] for the LUM family, and the reason the items before the board today is because there's an existing Williamson Act contract, number 1199,

[2:52:26] after if the subdivision would be approved today, that contract remains in place as is currently.

[2:52:36] So just some past actions, there's a approved view from it on the southern portion of the property.

[2:52:42] It's a large custom-crushed winery for E&C winery.

[2:52:47] Development of the winery is not commenced yet, but that use permit remains in place.

[2:52:54] There's also recently June of last year this board approved a lot-line adjustment between

[2:53:00] the LUM property and the neighboring property owner.

[2:53:04] That approval was valid for the one-year term, but on June 4th of this year, that approval

[2:53:10] will expire, do the lack of the certificate of compliance being recorded, which would

[2:53:17] have finalized that lot line adjustment.

[2:53:24] Right, so a certificate of compliance would be the next step after a lot line adjustment

[2:53:31] is approved, and that gets recorded on the property, and that kind of memorializes that lot

[2:53:37] line approval, and that failed to record, so that action is now null and void.

[2:53:42] I

[2:53:46] believe that property owner was here this morning.

[2:53:48] I don't know if he's stuck around, but I think there is some issue with it, with the sale of that lot, or that acreage is my understanding.

[2:53:59] Okay.

[2:54:04] Here's just a look at the existing Williamson Act contract.

[2:54:07] Again, it's not the contract 1199 is not changing.

[2:54:11] It covers the entire loan property and it would cover the two proposed lots.

[2:54:21] It's kind of hard to see at this scale, but this is the tentative parcel map.

[2:54:25] Basically two lots half of the acreage north of Rockville Road and the other half south of the road.

[2:54:31] The two lots have frontage along Rockville and direct access to the county road.

[2:54:38] Both parcels are undeveloped at this time.

[2:54:42] At the time of development should it occur in the future, on-site domestic water wells.

[2:54:47] and private septic systems will be installed and currently the property in both

[2:54:55] proposed lots would be serviced by Slano irrigation district for ag water

[2:54:59] purposes.

[2:55:03] In terms of consistency, the properties general plan designation is

[2:55:08] agriculture. It's also under the Sassoon Valley Ag region which is a 20 acre minimum

[2:55:13] parcel size. The property is zoned ASV-20 Sassoon Valley agriculture with the

[2:55:18] the 20 acre minimum, both proposed lots exceed those minimum acreages, there's a minimum

[2:55:25] 10 acre requirement for prime farmland for any lots under contract, both proposed lots

[2:55:31] exceed that 10 acre minimum, and in terms of environmental review or CEQA, there's no proposed

[2:55:38] physical changes to the environment with this project. The property would remain in agricultural

[2:55:44] cultural production and qualifies for the CEQA guideline exemption 15061.

[2:55:55] So staff's recommendation is to, after conduct of the public hearing, it will be to adopt

[2:56:00] the resolution effectively approving minor subdivision application, MS-25-01.

[2:56:09] Monica, do you want to speak before or after public hearing?

[2:56:12] No, just a real quick question, because when I was looking this over, I thought we had already

[2:56:16] done this. So it sounds like because something didn't get, since there wasn't the time

[2:56:23] issue of a compliance, something along those lines didn't happen. So we're just

[2:56:28] redoing basically kind of like a name, because we already voted on this, right?

[2:56:32] When we divided it.

[2:56:33] So this action is a little different. The prior was a lot land adjustment, which wasn't

[2:56:37] going to create a new lot, but it was going to allow the 20 acre to merge with, I believe

[2:56:42] Is the Vane's property?

[2:56:43] Yeah.

[2:56:44] This action would create a new, stand alone, buildable lot.

[2:56:48] So not much of a difference, really, in my mind, anyway.

[2:56:52] Okay, all right, just parties have changed.

[2:56:54] I think the previous day, they were trying to make an agreement,

[2:56:56] fell through, so now they're re-structuring what they're doing

[2:57:00] for state planning purposes, and they're doing this method now.

[2:57:03] Okay.

[2:57:03] All right.

[2:57:05] So you know the questions from the board, so I'll open the public hearing.

[2:57:08] I have no comment cards on this item.

[2:57:11] Anybody online for this item?

[2:57:32] All right, so seeing none, I will close the public hearing.

[2:57:35] Take it back in the hands of the board, and I would be looking for a motion on this item.

[2:57:40] I'll make the motion.

[2:57:42] I'll make the motion.

[2:57:43] We got a motion in a second.

[2:57:56] So ordered by lit of 5-0.

[2:57:58] Thank you.

[2:58:02] Thank you.

[2:58:04] And so before we start on item 26, it has reached noon o'clock, and this is going to be quite an item.

[2:58:13] I think I'm going to ask for, wait, 10 minute, 15 minute, 15 minute recess for everybody.

[2:58:25] You are bad.

[2:58:50] Hold a notice of the caring to consider and

[2:58:52] then ending interim ordinance number 2024, 1852, UE,

[2:58:57] limiting new commercial battery energy storage systems within the unincorporated territory of the county of Salano.

[2:59:03] Forfisfo is required.

[2:59:05] The proposed amendment is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act.

[2:59:08] to pursuant section 15060C2 and exempt under sections 15061B315307 and 1508 of the SQL guidelines.

[2:59:28] We're good.

[2:59:30] Good afternoon, James Music, Director of Resource Management with me is our associate planner,

[2:59:35] Eric Haxtram, and before I turn it over to him to go through this, we're considering the work with

[2:59:42] regards to the interim urgency ordinance.

[2:59:44] We took, we met with you last meeting, we took a lot of input and what we wanted to do is get back and

[2:59:51] bring forth provisions that allow where we got consensus on where we can allow these types of uses.

[2:59:57] And so today is about bringing that forward.

[3:00:00] So we can continue to make progress. It doesn't preclude what we're going to be doing as far as the ultimate ordinance. We'll continue to work on that. This is just a step with the interim to bring forth things that areas where we feel that they can be allowed and go from there. So with that, I'm going to turn to Eric and take the presentation. Thank you, James. Hello, supervisors. Hello, chair. Hello, my name is Eric Hygstrom. I'm an associate planner with resource management. So to give a summary of how we got today, today, where we are with battery energy storage, the county first received

[3:00:29] an application from next era to build the Corby Project in December of 2023.

[3:00:35] After a reading of our zoning code, we identified that these facilities would be classified as

[3:00:40] utilities infrastructure outside the right of way with not many standards that address the public

[3:00:45] health and safety risks associated with these systems. The board then approved an interim ordinance

[3:00:51] placing a moratorium on the approval of new front of the meter battery energy storage systems.

[3:00:55] that was initially approved in January of 2024,

[3:00:58] and then extended in February of 2024.

[3:01:03] Since then, the California Energy Commission

[3:01:06] has received an application from the Corby Project

[3:01:09] to develop those 40 acres of prime farm land

[3:01:12] into a 300 megawatt battery energy storage system.

[3:01:16] Their project application has not yet been deemed complete,

[3:01:21] but we're awaiting that.

[3:01:23] Next slide, please.

[3:01:25] Since the approval of the moratorium on new battery energy storage systems, staff have put together a technical working group, including stakeholders representing first responders, emergency services, agriculture, the industry has met in a member of the public.

[3:01:43] They provided insights on best practices and safety standards to include in our draft

[3:01:49] ordinance.

[3:01:50] Most recently, staff presented to the board on the status of that ordinance and received

[3:01:55] input and feedback on citing criteria, setbacks, and safety requirements, as well as agricultural

[3:02:00] land protections, and the risks of certain battery chemistry technologies.

[3:02:07] So what we have in front of you today is an amendment to the ordinance that put the moratorium

[3:02:12] in place that would allow battery energy storage systems with safeguards on industrial and manufacturing districts only.

[3:02:21] The ordinance would still maintain the moratorium on battery energy storage in all other zones.

[3:02:26] As we require additional time to establish regulations to adequately address threats to human health and safety in those areas.

[3:02:32] I just

[3:02:37] wanted to understand it says the industrial and

[3:02:40] manual factoring zones, but where are those located?

[3:02:45] Because I couldn't find them.

[3:02:49] I didn't know.

[3:02:50] And I wasn't sure then I went and pulled the general plan

[3:02:55] and I pulled the opportunity sites where it says commercial

[3:02:59] industrial destination.

[3:03:01] So I was wondering is the commercial being interchange when manufacturing or where is this located?

[3:03:10] So at the end of the pack we added a map to showing the locations obviously there's 44 parcels that we've identified.

[3:03:17] There's small green dots and we'll show a map on the big screen here in a second.

[3:03:22] Well I guess my question should be where in the general plan if I was I know you have it in here.

[3:03:31] But where would I look up in industrial and manufacturing districts because I did try to look for it.

[3:03:40] I just couldn't identify so I didn't know where to look.

[3:03:45] Supervisor Evie on the land use designation map and the county administrator is pulling up the page in the general plan.

[3:03:52] I did go in that section, which is quite lengthy.

[3:03:56] So what would pay just some for my reference?

[3:04:00] It's still flipping, it's the land use, believe it, it's, it's the first land use map in the land use chapter of the general land use map.

[3:04:12] It's figure LU-1.

[3:04:18] Okay, thank you.

[3:04:39] So

[3:04:44] the item that you have in front of you today would amend the interim ordinance 2024 1852 U.E.

[3:04:53] to lift the moratorium on new front-of-the-meter battery energy storage projects in these specific zones,

[3:04:59] ML, MG-1-half, MG-3, IWD, and IAS.

[3:05:06] This amendment would apply interim safety, siding, and operational standards until a permanent ordinance is adopted.

[3:05:13] These standards address a lot of the concerns that we've heard from the community and the board in regards to the threat of thermal runaway

[3:05:18] and impacts to nearby residents, agriculture, and businesses.

[3:05:24] We would maintain the moratorium on front of the meter battery energy storage in all

[3:05:28] other zones, and we would return to the board with the final ordinance.

[3:05:38] So this would maintain the moratorium on front of the meter battery energy storage in

[3:05:42] all other zones, and we would return to the board with a final ordinance before the interim

[3:05:48] ordinance expires in January of next year.

[3:05:53] Then here's the map that we had added to the packet.

[3:05:56] The green parcels are the ones that met the match the zonies that we are allowing these

[3:06:03] on.

[3:06:04] Erick did a quick calculation, there's 44 parcels that are currently identified that would

[3:06:08] allow it.

[3:06:11] Yep, thank you.

[3:06:12] And those exclude any very high fire hazard zones.

[3:06:15] Correct.

[3:06:15] So

[3:06:20] the next steps are for staff to finalize a permanent battery energy storage ordinance.

[3:06:27] And we are planning for introduction and adoption in this fall.

[3:06:31] We will continue coordinating with local first responders and emergency response agencies,

[3:06:36] as well as stakeholders, utility agencies, and state agencies and members of the public.

[3:06:42] And we will continue to monitor emerging best practices, safety standards, and include

[3:06:47] those in the ordinance that we bring before the board at this fall.

[3:06:53] So that brings us.

[3:06:54] Sure, thank you.

[3:06:59] So in reference to the Lambie, because this is the Lambie in Collinsville, the only two locations

[3:07:06] that can be identified in this old county, nevertheless, I know that that's particular.

[3:07:14] How far away is that property from the base?

[3:07:18] the distance and land be identified area for battery storage.

[3:07:24] And I ask this because of several reasons.

[3:07:27] We've received the Sassoon City, their economic development strategic plan,

[3:07:36] have housing, then California forever's plan, also had housing.

[3:07:42] And the whole goal was to keep this away from housing.

[3:07:46] And if they're planning to build housing, quote-unquote is approved, I'm just throwing it out here because we've seen all these different, what's the word I'm looking for, demonstrations of that's not the word I want but iterations of how housing could take place in that space.

[3:08:10] So if we're saying we didn't want it near housing in Vacaville,

[3:08:14] So then are we saying now we if California ever gets approved or

[3:08:20] so soon city annexed that area are we saying now it's okay for the

[3:08:25] being around housing. I'm confused. I just want to understand that.

[3:08:29] And then down here by Collinsville, there's a little division of homes there.

[3:08:37] I just I just try to understand the process.

[3:08:40] So our ordinance would be trying to match where there is existing housing, not where proposed or unapproved housing is.

[3:08:52] So we're trying to find locations that are in more open areas and specifically industrial.

[3:08:59] Those industrial uses are, there is anticipation in those areas that you're going to have these types of facilities, including refineries, other things that can happen in that area.

[3:09:08] Yeah, so we're trying to target it into those areas.

[3:09:11] If something were to happen down in that area related to housing, then obviously that would be a consideration for when the housing is put together, but it wouldn't preclude them from place in that area because there's no housing there currently for the Collinsville.

[3:09:24] So let me make sure I understand so because there are no housing there, then when it comes to that time, because we already said we don't want it by housing.

[3:09:37] I just don't see us backtracking.

[3:09:41] Later down the road to say we want housing then.

[3:09:45] Yeah, since this is already a zone for industrial.

[3:09:48] Anyone that builds houses around, it should have the anticipation that there could be some industrial uses, not just battery storage, but

[3:09:54] other very impactful uses that can happen on those sites.

[3:10:00] I guess I asked that because in the first

[3:10:05] California forever rendering because they own they own all the land around

[3:10:09] there. They had indicated they wanted to do battery storage. I don't know if

[3:10:14] that was to power their proposed city or not. I know that these are the areas that

[3:10:22] that we're already identified in their renderings, not against it, I'm just trying to understand

[3:10:31] what we're doing.

[3:10:32] Sure.

[3:10:33] There are some instances, though, even in the final ordinance that we're seeking, that

[3:10:37] there are potentials for battery technologies that are compatible in the sense that we wouldn't

[3:10:42] have as high of a restriction or concern around housing.

[3:10:45] And so as we go through that process, those will also get identified.

[3:10:48] and so just say we someone choose this location how many miles is it between that

[3:10:56] particular industrial I identify property and to the air base runway how

[3:11:07] many miles three miles and so I guess I'm trying to ask is if it's three

[3:11:17] miles it can and if it catch on fire just say if they don't choose to use the

[3:11:23] I remember Eric you said they can choose a different type of product where

[3:11:29] it's just going to the groundwater and then pollute all the water but hey

[3:11:36] I'll just keep it real so I just trying to understand how are we the county that

[3:11:43] It says we protect Travis Air Force base, how we protecting them if the sketch is on fire.

[3:11:51] So it's part of the ordinance language that we have been drafting part of the requirements

[3:11:56] that we're looking for, plume models that the any proposal would have to pull together.

[3:12:01] And those plume models would study air flow patterns, smoke patterns and how they could and potentially

[3:12:06] are would impact Travis.

[3:12:08] And so that would be one of the consideration points of placement of anywhere within the county.

[3:12:12] That type of model would need to be studied and we'd have that information to make some decisions upon well

[3:12:17] Okay, so I'm asking these questions because the soon city is one of the most diverse

[3:12:21] cities in this county outside of the city of Vallejo and

[3:12:26] So we have a quite a different population

[3:12:30] That's beautiful. I love diversity. I don't even know some

[3:12:36] Administration's may not but nevertheless

[3:12:41] There's already going to be a lot of trucks and I just don't know in reference to the environmental impacts and the health of the individuals leaving Esersu City or

[3:12:55] of VISTA which are more mature population, how is this going to impact their health outcomes?

[3:13:04] Because I'm not just looking at location which is very important but we also have to take

[3:13:10] into account people's health, we have a high asthma rate, when if that does catch on fire

[3:13:17] how is it going to impact those individuals living in that area?

[3:13:23] And there is a history, not in, I'm not saying it's long county, but historically there's

[3:13:30] history where in neighborhoods that are predominantly people of color are impacted the most.

[3:13:40] That's where most of the manufacturing is built.

[3:13:42] That's where most of the pollution or pollutants are done.

[3:13:48] I came from Richmond.

[3:13:49] I remember when Chevron caught on fire I didn't even know where near Chevron but I remember

[3:13:57] all that ash falling on me, falling on my car, falling on my house and so I need us to

[3:14:06] be as we go through this process and I know it's not easy.

[3:14:11] I don't doubt it for one second that making these decisions aren't easy but if we can

[3:14:18] continuing to find location that's even further away from people would be in my opinion most been official even though when you look

[3:14:29] at this it does seem like oh there's a great location right until I start thinking about the individuals and the people that could

[3:14:38] be impacted the most and then as we go back to our communities of color we need to protect them too. All right thank you.

[3:14:48] I just wanted to put that out there but right now let you can continue your presentation so

[3:14:58] the next steps for staff are

[3:15:07] We're going to continue coordinating with the local stakeholders, members of the public, representatives of first-response agencies, as well as the industry, to continue to update the best practices and safety standards that we include in that ordinance.

[3:15:24] So the recommendation before you today is to read the proposed ordinance by title only and waive further reading.

[3:15:31] Conduct a notice public hearing to consider amending interim ordinance number

[3:15:36] 2024-1852UE limiting new commercial battery energy storage systems within

[3:15:42] unincorporated Solano County and adopt ordinance number 2024-1852UE amendment

[3:15:49] number one for this review required. All right and with that are there any more

[3:15:56] questions from the board before I open the public hearing?

[3:15:58] I just want to remind the board and for members of the public what we're doing today is a zoning ordinance.

[3:16:06] So what we're doing is we're currently, as of right now, we have a complete ban, right?

[3:16:12] We came back last meeting, we talked to you, we heard a lot of feedback, we heard your direction.

[3:16:17] We agreed that we thought we could bring this forward to make a slight tweak in the moratorium to allow

[3:16:23] Now in just those locations that were on the board, which the supervisor Williams, you saw that there's no population around them, whether or not that there will ever be population around them, we don't know that's another process, another entity is currently going through in terms of their analysis, but we identified that these areas met the criteria that we were bringing forward in the draft resolution, I mean the draft ordinance along with the direction that you had given us, so we're here today, there's still a lot more work to be done, but we wanted to at least kind of take our foot off

[3:16:53] off the break a little bit on the moratorium and say these particular areas match the direction that you had given us.

[3:17:01] There's still more to go as Eric has talked about.

[3:17:04] We have to get to the planning commission, we have to get to the airport land use commission.

[3:17:07] So there's a lot more work to be done.

[3:17:09] But for this and today's action only is just on those little green down in Collinsville,

[3:17:15] down in Lambie and up in the way north in the Dixon area.

[3:17:19] Yeah, just to give some opportunity should somebody want to come in.

[3:17:24] In addition in this ordinance is definitions, they're standards.

[3:17:29] It's not an automatic yes, there's a whole process associated with it.

[3:17:33] So remember, today is about zoning and about allowing them with certain approval processes

[3:17:40] associated with them in those green highlighted areas.

[3:17:43] And the balance that we're trying to strike is that we know that we have a broad range of input, both extremes, allow them, absolutely ban them.

[3:17:55] We know the reality is that if we absolutely ban them, that they will go around through the state process and they could show up anywhere in the county.

[3:18:02] And so we're trying to strike a balance that we can utilize when we meet with the CEC to discuss these projects, to have some basis with which to provide provisions to protect the public as much as possible.

[3:18:16] Okay.

[3:18:19] And I just wanted to say that I do appreciate that and that staff understood what we were talking about because we can't be the county of no because if we are, then the state is going to cram it down or throw, right?

[3:18:33] And the place that right now we're talking about where they're talking about cramming it, there are people living, there's a city right there, there's a leisure town, there's all those things over there in my district that would be impacted by this.

[3:18:44] No, I'm talking about right here, I'm talking about the best plant that they want to put right?

[3:18:48] Oh, I don't think it's that.

[3:18:49] That's what this ordinance.

[3:18:51] Now what's this one right here that's one of the little spots that's an industrial spot?

[3:18:59] And so that's why he said there's like 40 lots, so it's not just Lambie and it's not just

[3:19:04] column bill.

[3:19:04] There are 40 little lots somewhere in the county, there's somewhere in the county that are

[3:19:10] are eligible for that type of plan and their location relative to cities and people and everything else, you know, matters.

[3:19:20] And so those plume studies, the potential for development down the road, all those things are factors that go into that.

[3:19:32] But right now, the greatest threat is what's being proposed by what I'm assuming we're going to hear

[3:19:40] from public comment.

[3:19:41] The great threat is that best plant right next to Vacaville.

[3:19:46] And so this ordinance gives us the ability to work with the state to try and say we have other locations, use those instead.

[3:20:02] But-

[3:20:02] to your fact, I agree with that. I guess my main concern is that when the plume studies and stuff

[3:20:11] are done, that we look at how it can drift towards the cities of Reavista, or so soon. That's really

[3:20:21] my main. Absolutely. I would both of those are in my district, too. And let me not just save my district

[3:20:28] going even anywhere else yeah absolutely I agree any people in our county our

[3:20:34] residents exactly yeah part of the advantage today too is not only identifying

[3:20:39] sites where these can go but it is the provisions that we're providing the

[3:20:42] conditions that we also want to see because we can utilize those with the CEC in

[3:20:46] the review of the current projects we can say these are the things that are critical

[3:20:49] to us this is what our board has taken action on this with the public is set and so

[3:20:52] the process today sets that up till we have some information to take to the CEC

[3:20:56] for these projects and say, these are concerns.

[3:21:00] And I just want to add one more thing, is that, again, this is a zoning ordinance.

[3:21:04] The process would be to allow, should an applicant come in, I'm not saying any applicant has come in,

[3:21:10] should an applicant come in, there is a use permit application process.

[3:21:14] Ultimately, per this ordinance, that use permit would be approved by this board.

[3:21:19] So all the conditions associated with it, that use permit would first go to planning commission,

[3:21:23] and then ultimately come to this board.

[3:21:25] So, the action today is just saying, here's the potential sighting locations, as well as we've got a process in the code, or what should the Board adopt the ordinance today, that would allow for us to then analyze that application, place conditions on them, get the studies that you're talking about, and then bring them forward to, because there's going to have to be environmental review, bring it to the Planning Commission, and then again, ultimately to this Board for approval of the use permit, at which point in time you would then be able to

[3:21:55] to say, no, I have concerns.

[3:21:57] It is too close to population.

[3:21:58] No, I don't think that that study adequately addresses it.

[3:22:01] But so the process today is to set up where there's the potential for

[3:22:07] them to go right now based on what we know.

[3:22:10] We are going to continue on for the rest of the portion of the moratorium and

[3:22:15] bring that to planning commission, as I said to the ALUQ, for

[3:22:19] a final adoption of an ordinance and we can address more of your concerns as we go through that process.

[3:22:23] Yes.

[3:22:34] Well, I was just going to say this is not a new process to Sloan County.

[3:22:37] We did it with the dairies, we did it with the windmills, we did it with solar.

[3:22:43] So identifying locations that given all the comments that have been given to us by the

[3:22:49] public and board comments themselves, this interim ordinance, because it does deal with the zoning

[3:22:55] part of it, does it give us the flexibility into the supervisor Mashman's point we're not

[3:23:00] not the county of no, which someone could use against us when they go speak to the state.

[3:23:06] We still providing opportunity to should someone want to someone's or some entity want to establish.

[3:23:13] Then there's a process, but the end of the day, it still comes with the board of supervisors for ultimate approval.

[3:23:19] Should the board decide to approve it?

[3:23:25] Absolutely, and with that, I will open the public hearing and I have a lot of public to hear from.

[3:23:31] I think I have a card from everybody in the room except the two reporters in the back.

[3:23:40] I will remind everybody we got about three minutes a piece so otherwise we aren't going

[3:23:44] to get through this this afternoon.

[3:23:47] So with that, Karen Bell, the lecture on New Year's, and did I open the public hearing?

[3:23:55] Yeah, I did.

[3:23:55] Okay.

[3:23:55] Just making sure it is open.

[3:23:58] Thank you for listening, thank you for being here, but I'll make it short.

[3:24:06] I live less than three miles away from the proposed plant, and I want to keep, I live

[3:24:15] on a ranch, family ranch.

[3:24:17] I want to keep it that way for our grandchildren and their grandchildren.

[3:24:22] So that's all I wanted to say.

[3:24:25] I support a new ordinance, whatever the verbiage is,

[3:24:33] but no best near our home.

[3:24:36] Thank you.

[3:24:38] Thank you.

[3:24:38] It sounds like a good protest song.

[3:24:42] Next up is Miss Collie.

[3:24:54] Chair board, I gave you a very rudimentary map

[3:24:58] that I hand drew.

[3:24:59] that kind of drew the geographical location.

[3:25:03] I asked for a minute extra so that you could take a look at that map and ask questions

[3:25:07] of me if you had questions.

[3:25:10] My name is Gaul.

[3:25:11] I'm a realtor here in Solano County.

[3:25:14] In my profession, I care deeply about not only the improvements that strengthen the community

[3:25:21] but also about protecting the health, safety, and well bearing of our county's residents.

[3:25:26] And that's why I'm here today to support the proposed revisions to the battery energy storage stations moratorium as a beginning step.

[3:25:36] I'm concerned about identifying the specific map areas, but the description and the details to the actual use permit is what I am specifically stating.

[3:25:48] The site being considered across interstate 80 from the Vaca Bill Dixon sub station is dangerously close to our neighborhoods.

[3:25:57] Agricultural lands and sensitive community areas.

[3:26:01] It is very close proximity to Kaiser Permanente Vaca Bill Medical Center, the primary regional hospital for Solano County in the north.

[3:26:10] And just off interstate 505, where a coming soon large truck stop at Midway Road,

[3:26:17] a hub of constant heavy truck activity.

[3:26:21] This location also sits directly across from along the main North South Transportation

[3:26:27] corridor for trucks traveling from Seattle to San Diego.

[3:26:31] And Interstate 80 right at this site is the primary east-west roadway leading to California's

[3:26:38] state capital.

[3:26:39] Any incident here would not only endanger our community, but also threaten critical interstate

[3:26:44] commerce and emergency access.

[3:26:47] Equally concerning, this proposed site is surrounded by prime farm land, which is as the board knows, our county's largest economic driver at $1.6 billion annually.

[3:26:59] To allow a battery energy station facility here would put at risk the land, livelihoods, and economy that define Solano County.

[3:27:07] It is important restricting battery energy storage stations and ensuring that they're

[3:27:13] not placed in residential, agricultural, or commercial areas requiring safety setbacks

[3:27:19] from homes, schools, hospitals, and other sensitive locations is significant.

[3:27:24] These are common sense protections that balance the need for renewable energy storage within

[3:27:30] in the safety of our residents, farmland, and businesses.

[3:27:34] Fires, explosions, and toxic releases from these sites have been documented across the country.

[3:27:41] And our county cannot afford to play such risks next to people we live,

[3:27:46] heal, farm, and work, or along major state and national transportation route.

[3:27:52] As both a realtor and a resident, I urge you to move forward today conservatively.

[3:27:58] And ultimately, adopt some sort of provision, protective provision, keep the moratorium as much as you can in place until you have these provisions and understandings.

[3:28:11] Thank you, ma'am.

[3:28:15] Mr. Cruxel, Paul, Paul Cruxel?

[3:28:31] Good afternoon, members of the board and staff.

[3:28:34] I'm one of the residents of Vacaville that lives on the southeast side of Vacaville not very far from one of these proposed sites.

[3:28:40] I just want to thank the board for being so diligent about trying to learn about this storage system.

[3:28:50] I do appreciate your efforts and what you're trying to do to try to slow this up a little bit so we can think about it.

[3:28:56] What I don't understand is why we're talking about storage.

[3:29:00] We all know that our need for energy is going to just explode here in the very near future,

[3:29:07] or especially with this AI thing that seems to be running wildly now.

[3:29:13] We already have technology that will do that.

[3:29:17] Diesel-powered generators are clean nowadays.

[3:29:20] Natural gas turbines, generators are clean.

[3:29:24] And best of all are small modular reactors.

[3:29:28] Nuclear power can produce more power, clean power,

[3:29:33] and doesn't take up near as much space or catch on fire and kill people and destroy land

[3:29:40] and property. I really would like to encourage the board to look in that direction more than

[3:29:47] battery storage systems that we know burn. Moss landing didn't burn one time and that

[3:29:56] land down there is permanently destroyed now.

[3:30:00] So, this is a money grab. The way I see it, there's money out there and there's people that want that money. The jobs are not going to be created here in Solano County. The people that come to build these facilities are going to come from other counties and other states. And as far as these plants operating after they're built, they're not going to create very many jobs. So I don't see much there. I think the focus should be on long-term solutions and the long-term solution technology is already here.

[3:30:30] We're just turning a blind eye to it.

[3:30:33] So thank you to the Board of Supervisors for doing the work that you're doing.

[3:30:37] But please take a look at in another directions for solutions to the problem long-term and much cheaper.

[3:30:44] Thank you.

[3:30:45] Thank you.

[3:30:47] Next up is Kathy Moore.

[3:31:02] Hi, I'm going to make it short, sweet, and to the point.

[3:31:05] I appreciate what all of you do.

[3:31:07] I would not want your job.

[3:31:09] Let me just say that.

[3:31:11] I've lived in Vacaville since 1971, I'm a retired nurse, I am a grandma and a mom,

[3:31:21] my children are raised here, it's my home.

[3:31:25] And I think it's really sad and I think it's all about the money too.

[3:31:30] I think it's sad to get rid of agricultural land, this song kept going in my head.

[3:31:37] They got rid of paradise. They put in a parking lot. That's what I kept thinking in the shower this morning. I thought that's stupid, but it's an old song.

[3:31:47] But it's true. Let's not give our agricultural land away. I don't want California to become nothing but all just concrete.

[3:31:59] This is a beautiful county. And hey, I don't care for a no county. I want to be that.

[3:32:04] I think they should put these facilities somewhere out in the desert where there's no people, you know?

[3:32:12] That's just my thought.

[3:32:13] Anyway, please give this a lot of thought before you approve it.

[3:32:17] Thank you.

[3:32:23] And next up is Heidi Wooden.

[3:32:35] Thank you for listening to us today.

[3:32:38] I'm a retired school teacher, taught at Cooper.

[3:32:42] That's very close to the proposed site.

[3:32:44] And I want to say I am in support of the changes to the best auditorium.

[3:32:51] It makes it stricter guidelines.

[3:32:53] Thank you.

[3:32:54] Thank you.

[3:32:57] Dan Bousos.

[3:33:04] Hello, I'm Dan Bousos and I live and grow almonds just like one parcel over from where they're proposing to do this project.

[3:33:15] I have a bunch of information here that clearly states all the bad things about best.

[3:33:22] I think everybody in this room knows what those things are, I don't really want to repeat

[3:33:26] them.

[3:33:27] I can tell you that as an almond farmer, I'm really concerned about contamination.

[3:33:36] As an almond farmer, we have to be careful when we fertilize and all the things that go

[3:33:42] into the soil.

[3:33:43] and we got to make sure that that's all done right and there's a lot of regulation and we love to comply with this stuff because it's important that the environment be protected.

[3:33:51] This project far outweighs any possible benefit that it can provide. It's just bad, bad, bad. There's nothing really good about it at all.

[3:34:04] They claim that they need these battery storage facilities to accumulate excess solar energy

[3:34:15] or excess wind energy, and it's supposed to go to these batteries and be stored and

[3:34:21] then released when the city of San Francisco needs it.

[3:34:25] Well, on Burns Road, there is no windmills, and there is no big solar farms.

[3:34:32] So it's really basically taking power from the grid to charge these batteries and then send it to San Francisco.

[3:34:41] Well, there's no point in it. I mean, it's absolutely, it's only good for four hours. It's absolutely useless because it doesn't do what they propose it to do.

[3:34:53] It does not store excess energy. It simply is charged from the grid and then distributed back into the grid.

[3:35:01] It's just so stupid, it's beyond belief, as far as I'm concerned.

[3:35:05] And I am so happy to see staff and this board do the right thing.

[3:35:15] Yeah, we need to have a little place for them, just to protect us from the state.

[3:35:19] And I support you guys 100%.

[3:35:22] Thank you, thank you, thank you.

[3:35:24] Thank you.

[3:35:31] Rosie's stable?

[3:35:34] State bill?

[3:35:35] State bill?

[3:35:36] I'll get it in a minute.

[3:35:37] Good afternoon, board members.

[3:35:38] Thank you for allowing our voices to be heard and for sharing our same concerns.

[3:35:43] We all know about the volatile fires that are caused by these batteries, the health issues

[3:35:48] that are caused by the toxic gases, and the contamination of a soil that occurs as seen

[3:35:53] at the moss landing site.

[3:35:54] We all have a basic human right to health and safety.

[3:35:59] The energy companies are violating our rights by insisting on placing these battery sites

[3:36:04] next to our schools, our homes, our hospitals, etc.

[3:36:08] Their focus is on maximizing their profits with total disregard to the safety of the people

[3:36:13] in the communities.

[3:36:14] We need to have clear guidelines and restrictions in place to preserve and protect the health

[3:36:19] of ourselves, our parents, our grandchildren, our great-grates, and all of our future generations

[3:36:24] to come as well as preserving our agricultural land.

[3:36:28] I'm asking that you please modify the modatorium and adopt it as our final ordinance to ensure

[3:36:34] no best on our agricultural land or our commercial zones.

[3:36:38] These energy companies need to prioritize the safety of the people over profits.

[3:36:42] And now with respect to the distance from the Lambie property to our air base, three miles, that is not far enough.

[3:36:52] As we saw at Moss Landing, the estuary, which was five miles away from that site, was contaminated.

[3:37:01] So it's still not safe, unfortunately.

[3:37:04] And thank you so much for listening and for doing all of the work that you got to do and to protect us, thank you.

[3:37:09] Thank you.

[3:37:10] Neil Sir.

[3:37:18] Good afternoon.

[3:37:18] I just like to say I'm in support of the proposed amendment and I want to thank everybody

[3:37:23] in advance for passing this unanimously today and keep working in the future for a more

[3:37:31] permanent solution.

[3:37:33] I have a lot of numbers for tonight.

[3:37:35] All right.

[3:37:36] Thank you very much.

[3:37:37] Thank you.

[3:37:38] Victoria Sir.

[3:37:45] Good afternoon and I live in the community where the best property where they're proposed

[3:37:51] to put their site and my community is here today and I'm just so proud of us for coming

[3:37:56] together and also for the board we've all learned so much about these types of facilities but

[3:38:03] yet there's so much more to know we only know the immediate.

[3:38:06] We don't know 10 years down the line 20 years down the line so putting something in place

[3:38:11] that makes sense from what we do know far away from people and to keep Vacaville safe.

[3:38:18] I think that makes the most sense, and again, I thank you.

[3:38:22] Thank you.

[3:38:26] Michael Geller.

[3:38:35] Something a little different.

[3:38:36] I'm going to read a letter I got from you 35 years ago.

[3:38:42] Solano County is an agricultural county with many areas

[3:38:45] as zone for agricultural operations.

[3:38:48] The presence of farms and ranches yield significant

[3:38:52] aesthetic and economic benefits to the residents

[3:38:54] of the county.

[3:38:56] Thus, the county's agriculture must be protected,

[3:39:00] including in areas where it is near residential development.

[3:39:05] To do this, Solano County has enacted chapter 2A

[3:39:09] of its county code which provides

[3:39:11] that properly conducted agricultural operations

[3:39:14] will not be deemed a nuisance.

[3:39:18] The ordinance further requires the county to give notice of the ordinance and its provisions

[3:39:23] to buyers of real property, Moa, located in Solano County.

[3:39:28] Accordingly, you are hereby notified that if the property you are purchasing is located

[3:39:33] close to agricultural lands or operations, you may be subject to inconvenience or discomfort

[3:39:39] from the following agricultural operations, I won't go into that.

[3:39:44] If you live near an agricultural area, you should be prepared to accept any inconveniences or discomfort as a normal and necessary aspect of living in a county with a strong rural character and healthy agricultural sector.

[3:40:02] I want to remind you this has been your policy all along and no reason to change it now.

[3:40:08] We have to protect our ag lands and I want to thank the board for everything you've done from the bottom of my heart

[3:40:16] We really appreciate it and I

[3:40:19] fully support the proposed changes to the ordinance

[3:40:22] Thank you. Thank you for the record. You probably got that from John

[3:40:32] Alicia reminded me that we have some collars on the line

[3:40:35] And so we'll let them break in here, and then I'll go back to the cards real quick.

[3:40:40] Collars on the line, if you wish to speak on agenda item number 26, please press star three to raise your hand.

[3:40:54] Collar with fund number ending in 11, go ahead and press star six to unmute yourself.

[3:41:00] State your name if you wish, and a reminder to those on the phone.

[3:41:04] It is a three minute time limit, and if you are watching the meeting online,

[3:41:08] there's a 30-second delay between the live feed and the broadcast. Call it with

[3:41:13] funding remaining in 1-1. Go ahead.

[3:41:17] Hi, can you hear me? Yes, we can. Great. Thank

[3:41:21] you so much. My name is Elise Dominion. I'm a resident of Vactville. Thank you

[3:41:26] Board of Supervisors and the staff for revising the ordinance to exclude

[3:41:33] agricultural land. I had written a letter to you over the weekend and I want to

[3:41:38] I'll highlight some of the key events that have occurred over the last 75 years that

[3:41:45] were highlighted in the 2024 San Juan County's proper board.

[3:41:49] And so starting back in 1980, the Board of Supervisors adopted the first comprehensive

[3:41:54] general plan, emphasizing farm land protection.

[3:41:58] In 1984, the voters of San Juan County approved measure A, reaffirming these general plan

[3:42:04] policies for protecting farmland 1994 measure A was extended through its orderly growth

[3:42:10] initiative that through 2010 and then in 2008 measure T which again is created to protect

[3:42:20] our ag land was voted in a protected through 2028 so I'd like to take this opportunity to

[3:42:26] request the board to place a measure on the ballot in 2026 to extend these agricultural

[3:42:33] cultural farmland protection that are currently incorporated in our general plan.

[3:42:38] Number two, the ordinance addresses financial assurance, including insurance requirements

[3:42:47] and also requirements in connection with letters of credit.

[3:42:52] And I'd like to, as stated in my email, I want to make sure that any litigation disputes

[3:43:00] and connection with insurance and a letter to spread it, that you include a provision

[3:43:05] and mandating any litigation occurring in the state of California to your digital system.

[3:43:09] I also want to make sure that the banks back in the letter credit are federally insured

[3:43:15] and that they receive investment grade ratings of A or better, including for the insurance

[3:43:19] companies as well.

[3:43:21] A or better from the top three tier rating agencies such as Moody's, S&P, AMBets, an addition

[3:43:30] I think you need to consult with an insurance expert in the best industry to make sure that

[3:43:35] the insurance covers all types of claims that may be needed with a thermal runaway or

[3:43:42] any other type of disaster.

[3:43:46] And then additionally, you know, next era, which is in connection with the Corbure Project

[3:43:51] VISTA since their first time where they attempted to put a best on farmland.

[3:43:56] And I specifically cited a county in the state of Washington who also adopted an ordinance

[3:44:03] that prohibited best projects on farm and land because like in our county, this particular

[3:44:12] county as stated in the resolution, they indicated that agricultural land was a cornerstone

[3:44:20] to their economy and culture and history, just like here.

[3:44:23] and then I also tried it on the 8th law. Okay thank you. Thank you Alicia.

[3:44:31] Have any more online?

[3:44:32] We do, we have two more. Okay, let's call her with phone number ending in 1-9. Please press star 6

[3:44:38] to unmute yourself and state your name if you wish.

[3:44:47] Hello my name is Wendy Brecken. I'm a resident

[3:44:50] of Vacaville and I also sent an email to county boarder supervisors. I don't remember I think it was

[3:44:59] Friday.

[3:45:00] And what I'm saying is that consistent with orderly growth initiative and measure key that gives you pretty much a duty to protect

[3:45:12] ask for culture land, parks and recreation, marshes and water bodies and courses. Your, your attempting as best you can to protect these areas.

[3:45:25] And it's my understanding that with the, I guess it's a conditional use process, as people apply,

[3:45:35] you'll be taking a closer look at each of these duties to protect these areas of land or water.

[3:45:45] The ordinance is a reasonable use of zoning police powers in state and federal constitutions.

[3:45:53] Due to all the risks already discussed in the record, there are examples of best ordinances

[3:45:59] and other jurisdictions that also provide similar protections.

[3:46:07] They were upheld as being reasonably valid.

[3:46:12] In addition, when the CEC reviews the poor beside, for example, and has to take a look at

[3:46:22] the local laws, including Measure T, the state statute that reportedly gives the CEC

[3:46:29] authority to preempt or disregard local law, cannot be used on Measure T. A local voter

[3:46:35] initiative, excuse me, holds the same weight as a state initiative, court guard voter initiatives

[3:46:42] against the legislature's attempt to undermine them. There's multiple examples of how

[3:46:52] a Corby site, for example, would be inconsistent with the general plan because, as Ms. Minion was saying,

[3:47:02] the Lana County uniquely relies on our agricultural economy, which feeds the world and is responsible

[3:47:08] for a large portion of the county's annual income. Thus, there are strict limitations on development

[3:47:14] and lands designated as agriculture and re-designating the land for best facilities is completely

[3:47:22] entirely inconsistent with the general plan. Agriculture land may only be

[3:47:27] re-designated pursuant to the general plan with certain sections P32 and

[3:47:34] AgP36. I thank you again for all your hard work on this

[3:47:37] and trying to thread this needle to do the best that you can to protect our people

[3:47:43] and our resources. Thank you.

[3:47:50] All are with fund number ending in

[3:47:51] and two, two, please press star six to unmute yourself

[3:47:55] and state your name if you wish.

[3:48:01] Yes, we can.

[3:48:03] Thank you.

[3:48:05] Good afternoon, and thank you to the board

[3:48:06] of supervisors and staff.

[3:48:08] My name is Dee Cole, and I'm a resident

[3:48:10] on the corner of Kilkenny Road

[3:48:12] that's directly adjacent to the proposed next-era

[3:48:15] Corby project at Kilkenny and Burns Road

[3:48:17] in back of those one county that we're all familiar with.

[3:48:21] I apologize that I couldn't make it there today

[3:48:23] in person.

[3:48:23] I'm walking online and it's amazing

[3:48:25] to see my neighbors and community there to support this today.

[3:48:29] I won't take much of your time because you've heard my voice previously.

[3:48:32] I'd just like to reiterate my concern for projects like this being brought into our community

[3:48:37] and let you know that I fully support the changes to the moratorium that will add protection

[3:48:41] for our community.

[3:48:42] I pray that this gets a five out of five vote today and that we can work towards bringing

[3:48:46] the decisions on what comes into our county back into the hands of our county.

[3:48:52] I sincerely thank you again for your time and dedication to this matter.

[3:48:55] I want to continue to grow my non-contaminated tomatoes.

[3:49:00] I hope you all have a great day, so thank you so much for everything.

[3:49:07] All right, so then we'll go back to our cards here.

[3:49:10] Jeff Jaigle.

[3:49:17] Hello.

[3:49:18] Property owner within a mile of this mess, whatever.

[3:49:24] Yeah, I support it, the ordinance so you want to see your backyard.

[3:49:30] forstime you basically. Thank you.

[3:49:35] Robin.

[3:49:43] My name is Robin and we live less than a mile from this proposed site that they plan on using.

[3:49:51] I've been online for months now looking up information regarding these facilities

[3:49:56] and I haven't seen anything that's good for us at all.

[3:49:59] There is no benefit to us in this city.

[3:50:03] And I am city, where I live is city, it's right there on the border.

[3:50:07] And I support what you're trying to do with this ordinance, with the updates that you've done.

[3:50:12] Thanks.

[3:50:13] Thank you, ma'am.

[3:50:14] Next up is Dr. Carmen Martinez-Coldaro.

[3:50:21] Good afternoon, Chair, members of the board.

[3:50:23] Thank you for the opportunity, again, to speak before you on this particular topic.

[3:50:27] I am here today to support the amendments proposed to this ordinance.

[3:50:33] And more importantly, I urge you to adopt it as a permanent ordinance moving forward.

[3:50:39] Because as we know, this is not an issue that is going to go away overnight.

[3:50:43] And I can't thank you enough for taking action to not only protect the residents who live near these areas, but

[3:50:52] most importantly also to protect our egglands.

[3:50:54] So as somebody who would live three doors down from this proposed next era project,

[3:50:59] Again, I urge you to please adopt this today and to adopt it moving forward permanently.

[3:51:05] Thank you.

[3:51:08] Next up is Sarah Dunne.

[3:51:15] Hello, board and chair.

[3:51:18] Thanks for bringing this item up today and having this opportunity to review the proposed changes to the moratorium.

[3:51:25] I think this is a really good plan going forward.

[3:51:29] It gives some ability for developers to pursue a local permit.

[3:51:34] And it also shows our state that we're willing to have designated areas for them in our county.

[3:51:40] But the most importantly, it fixed a loophole that existed in our county code before that was allowing these facilities to apply as a utility.

[3:51:48] And that would be close, that loophole would be close today.

[3:51:51] So projects that would be proposed on Agland would be kicked back to Measure T and have to go to the ballot.

[3:51:58] And that's very important because as I'm learning in our general plan,

[3:52:03] And this is a decades-long effort to protect our Ag Land.

[3:52:07] And it's very important between all I've learned about our county,

[3:52:11] the different developments coming in.

[3:52:13] You have California, FRE, FFRE, you have Dixon having a lot of development,

[3:52:16] you have these battery storage facilities coming in.

[3:52:19] And soon we're going to lose what our county is all about.

[3:52:22] If these things all get built in a crazy layout of where they want it and

[3:52:28] or doesn't make sense for our county, it's gonna be detrimental.

[3:52:33] So, this ordinance amendment is crucial, I feel honestly, no place is gonna be 100% safe to have these facilities.

[3:52:44] Unfortunately, the lithium ion does have really bad risks and they have a history of catching fire and we all know that.

[3:52:50] So, there's nowhere that is 100% safe.

[3:52:52] But if I had to pick a zone to designate them in the industrial zones totally makes sense as it was stated earlier there is other

[3:53:00] types of projects there that have risks as well and that's not changing anything on our

[3:53:06] County general plan they already we already have these designated areas. So

[3:53:11] having that kind of ability for

[3:53:14] Developers to do a local permit process would really help us and

[3:53:19] And also, you still have the stopgap of having the final say whether the project gets approved.

[3:53:24] And a lot of work has gone into this ordinance process.

[3:53:28] There's a lot of different criteria that would have to be met for them to be approved.

[3:53:32] And I feel it's a good plan.

[3:53:35] So I want to express my support.

[3:53:37] And I also want to urge you to adopt this as a permanent ordinance as well.

[3:53:41] Thank you.

[3:53:42] Oh, one more thing.

[3:53:43] I'm not done with my time.

[3:53:45] I almost forgot.

[3:53:45] Yeah, so we last meeting there was in the ordinance draft it did have commercial services and I spoke about this last time I feel that commercial services zones are not appropriate for lithium ion technology because of the risks and the commercial services zones are typically near our freeways and businesses and we don't want to have them financially impacted if they have to evacuate for a fire at these such facilities so one compromise would be to allow safer technologies to exist in those

[3:54:15] zones because I'm assuming the feedback you're going to get is that there's not enough

[3:54:19] areas to build these and that's not fair. There's not enough industrial zones in our county

[3:54:25] but opening up those commercial zones with different technologies that don't pose the

[3:54:29] same risk might be a good compromise. Additionally, the technologies that I'm talking about,

[3:54:34] some of them are available as soon as 18 months. So it's not far off. And there's a bunch

[3:54:38] of them, probably six or seven different technologies that could be viable and do the same thing

[3:54:44] is a lithium and they are much safer, so that would be a compromise I'd recommend.

[3:54:50] Thank you, ma'am.

[3:54:53] Supervisor Vesca, sir.

[3:54:55] Okay.

[3:54:55] All right.

[3:54:56] So with that, I don't have any more public comment cards.

[3:54:58] I don't have anybody else online.

[3:55:00] I'll close the public hearing and take it back in the hands of the board.

[3:55:03] Supervisor Vesca, sir.

[3:55:06] I'd like to make a motion to adopt and accept staff's recommendations.

[3:55:11] I'd like to second that.

[3:55:12] that? Is there any other questions on the board before we take a vote on this item?

[3:55:18] Yes, ma'am.

[3:55:23] And I've heard everyone's voice and of course last meeting, I voted for this to come back

[3:55:29] for us because I do care about all the cities. Not just my district, I care for all the

[3:55:36] districts and I want everyone to feel safe. But as we move forward, I want to make sure

[3:55:45] that we definitely are paying very close attention.

[3:55:48] And I want to meet with staff to go over what these plumes would look like and how detrimental

[3:55:56] is it to people's health and that's going to be important for me going forward as we look

[3:56:03] at this because like someone said no place is a great place but if we can get it as far away

[3:56:10] from where people live is better and I really don't want it to catch on fire

[3:56:18] Travis Air Force lathe. Three miles is nothing. So I just wanted to, did you say

[3:56:26] something? Oh, I just wanted to add those comments as we get ready to take this

[3:56:31] fall. Thank you.

[3:56:43] So ordered by a vote of 5-0. Thank you.

[3:56:58] Thank you.

[3:57:23] All right,

[3:57:24] All right, I'm going to call this meeting back to order kind of

[3:57:30] Salano County Board of Supervisor

[3:57:33] Madam Clerk item 27 please

[3:57:39] The Department of Resource Management recommends that the Board of Supervisors receive a presentation from staff on continued discussion on scope and issues

[3:57:47] Identification for the county's general plan update provide feedback and direction to staff on next steps

[3:57:55] All right, I'm going to go ahead and start it. Oh

[3:57:59] All right, sorry, I just wanted to make a couple of preliminary comments here as we get into this.

[3:58:08] As the board knows, we first started talking about the general plan update, came before in March.

[3:58:14] And it was sort of the broad discussion about what a general plan is under California state law and a little bit of detail about our plan.

[3:58:22] And then part of that was that there was a direction for us to approach the cities about

[3:58:29] participating in a summit, because it's part of an early kick-in and evaluation of how

[3:58:35] cities and their growth plans might relate to our general plan update.

[3:58:40] So we did go to the four Cs, we actually got okay from them and moved forward with the summit

[3:58:45] in participation from the cities.

[3:58:48] And we had planned for that originally to be in August, August 19th was the date we were targeting.

[3:58:54] We did get a letter from the city managers asking for additional time.

[3:58:59] And so we agreed to push it off and we'll continue to work with them on coming up with the time to come before the board on a summit.

[3:59:08] And in lieu of that, though, did have a discussion with the chair and the vice chair about, well we want to continue to have some dialogue about the general plan update.

[3:59:15] It takes time, so we have a lot of steps to it.

[3:59:18] So we thought we'd come back and sort of maybe go from a general plan, one A session to a general plan, one B session, which is in this case.

[3:59:27] But what we're talking about is getting beyond sort of the state statutory requirements and things like that.

[3:59:32] And talking a little bit about our 2020, excuse me, the 2008 general plan talking about our priorities that have emerged over the last couple of years before the board.

[3:59:44] and then sort of looking at those relative to the general plan and the general plan policies from 2008

[3:59:49] start looking at how we can move forward. The board has given us direction previously that we're probably going to do more of a targeted update to the general plan rather than a complete rewrite.

[4:00:00] I've been going through this thing. It's a lot of fun reading. It's a lot there, but there's a lot of good material in our current general plan. I think John and others who've been around know that there was a lot of work that went into it. Don't think we have to throw it all out. You know, I think there's a lot of relevance still in there. But we do identify some areas, and that's part of what we're going to try to do today is start talking about some of the areas where perhaps we should be looking at making some changes to policy and things like that. Some of it relates to just changing times.

[4:00:29] You know, it's been 20 years or so, things have changed and we've seen that happen in real time whether it was dealing with the wind energy issues that we've had to deal with subsequent to the 2008 general plan issues with Travis Air Force based radar, solar energy and now we're talking battery storage and all those things have happened.

[4:00:47] The retail world has changed a lot of things and so there are areas, you know, particularly if you like you look in the general plan from 2008.

[4:00:56] There's an economic development section, but it's pretty short and really focused it may be broader than just the

[4:01:02] Unincorporary area but also the cities. I think based on our priorities, we probably want to take a look at adding some policy that deals with the

[4:01:09] Unincorporated areas and what our opportunities are there. So with that, I'm going to go ahead and turn it over. This is just another

[4:01:16] discussion, you know, we'll keep moving forward, but we thought it was important to keep some of the men ongoing towards an ultimate update.

[4:01:23] And ultimately, we will bring in a consultant team to help with this, as the board

[4:01:26] knows that's pretty typical.

[4:01:27] But we're trying to make sure that before we do that, we start to frame the issues

[4:01:30] as tight as we can, because consultants are only as good as the information they're

[4:01:34] getting from the entity that they're working for.

[4:01:37] So, James, I'm going to tear it up to you guys.

[4:01:41] Thanks.

[4:01:42] James' music director resource management with me is JT Lee, he's with our plan department

[4:01:46] and our division, and we have staff in the audience as well as questions come up.

[4:01:50] So, it's bill indicated, he sort of covered the slide, so I'll jump from that and get into sort of some of the information that we want to present today.

[4:01:59] We pulled this, I was talking about bill, and he thought it important that we bring forward and show the preamble, the vision preamble that's part of the 2008 general plan.

[4:02:07] It's a couple pages long, and so we wanted just to focus everyone to the vision that was established in 2008.

[4:02:14] And the vision for Stalin County is found on the principles of the environment, the economy, and social equity.

[4:02:19] Those are sort of the guiding principles that were utilized to develop the chapters.

[4:02:22] It fits into what sort of the elements are required from the state, and it's sort of the backbone for the structure of the document.

[4:02:30] That vision for the county as a whole is recognizing that Stalin County must work collaboratively with the cities and

[4:02:35] other public agencies to achieve this vision.

[4:02:37] And so we want to continue that dialogue and continue moving forward.

[4:02:39] forward. So again, this is just a point back to where we were and just give some general

[4:02:45] information about what is our plan is. It's the comprehensive policy document. We look

[4:02:49] for it to provide the vision as I had stated. And it's got a 20-year, 20-30-year-life time

[4:02:55] frame span that it works. We've last brought forward in 2008 and we're coming up on that sort

[4:03:00] of 20-year milestone. It's required to understate planning law for every city and county in California.

[4:03:05] And it serves as our constitution for development.

[4:03:08] So it's our agency's legal document relating to growth, development, and resource management.

[4:03:13] And it can span a broad range of topics, as you can see from all the chapters that we have.

[4:03:17] All development related regulations, zoning, subdivision ordinance, they must be consistent with the general plan.

[4:03:23] And when we go through the process of reviewing projects and dealing with applications, we seek consistency.

[4:03:29] And I think that that's what we try to bring to the board so you can understand the consistency with that document to help inform the decisions that you make to.

[4:03:35] to move this forward. And if I'm going too fast, tell me to slow it down.

[4:03:40] We have a lot of slides. So, as I mentioned, you know, our general plan is broken into chapters

[4:03:47] which relate to the elements. I'm not going to go through the whole list, but these are the

[4:03:50] chapters that our general plan has founded on. And we handle a lot of information within that.

[4:03:55] We solve a lot of problems, and we sort of set and done great things in the past 20 years

[4:04:00] with these guidelines.

[4:04:04] From a history standpoint, actually it was a very interesting one of the collars for the best item.

[4:04:10] I don't know, I don't think she saw the slide, but she pretty much nailed it.

[4:04:14] So, in 1980, we sort of brought forward the first comprehensive general plan for the county.

[4:04:20] And then in 1984, Proposition A came forward.

[4:04:24] And that was reaffirming the general plan's policies of city-centered growth,

[4:04:27] required ballot measures for approval for any re-designation of a general plan agricultural land.

[4:04:33] It was the sort of first instances of the early orderly growth initiative.

[4:04:39] And as you can see in 1994, orderly growth initiative was brought forward.

[4:04:43] The voters proposed and the Board of Supervisors approved this.

[4:04:45] It was an extension of Proposition 8, and it was good until December 31, 2010.

[4:04:51] Preemptive of that, the, in 2008, it's part of our comprehensive update of the general plan.

[4:04:55] The order with orderly growth initiative was extended to December of 2028 with a passage of

[4:05:01] measure T and that coincided with the planning time frame of the general plan.

[4:05:05] So measure T is one of our critical documents or critical guiding principles that sort of inform our general plan.

[4:05:14] This is sort of a typical general plan update flow chart.

[4:05:18] It's not necessarily meant to be comprehensive, but it does indicate and

[4:05:22] And it focuses on the importance of significant community outreach.

[4:05:26] It requires extensive data analysis as Bill had indicated.

[4:05:30] We're going to be looking for consultants, plural, to assist us with this process.

[4:05:34] And it's not only looking into the past, but it's trying to look to the future.

[4:05:39] It's not an exact linear process.

[4:05:41] So as you can see from the jumble of arrows, there's a lot of process that it goes through.

[4:05:46] And it can go around, it can sort of go back and forth within that to make sure you're really hitting the topics that you need to hit.

[4:05:52] And then, we are looking for a targeted versus a complete update to sort of keep that process on the 2028 track, and not to throw the baby out with the bath water.

[4:06:03] I think we have a lot of strong bones with the 2008 journal plan, and I think that through the discussion with this board and the public, we can have very targeted updates that will have meaningful effect.

[4:06:18] So on the screen are some examples, some of the items that we've implemented since 2008, it's a pretty broad list.

[4:06:25] We brought most of these forward at the March meeting, and unless you want me to go through all of them,

[4:06:32] we've done some good work.

[4:06:33] I'd like to say that some of it was anticipated this part of the general plan, like Middlegreen Valley and

[4:06:37] Sassoon Valley, but some of it came at the, or as an extension of it.

[4:06:43] And so, you know, we've done some part of the market route investments.

[4:06:47] We've done shoulder widening.

[4:06:48] Some of those things are not necessarily generally identified in the general plan,

[4:06:53] but they can happen as part of the natural processes.

[4:06:55] We go through the different aspects of what we do on a day-to-day basis.

[4:06:58] James, on that one, I just wanted to say, so these are things that came out of the general plan.

[4:07:01] But I was thinking about that period of time, and so there's some of you remember some of these things,

[4:07:05] but it goes to show you how things change, right?

[4:07:07] So we had, you know, the cannabis discussion which took quite some time,

[4:07:12] never really was addressed in the general plan.

[4:07:15] We had industrial hemp was another one that came up.

[4:07:18] Short-term vacation rentals, there's just been a lot

[4:07:21] of things that have come up.

[4:07:24] There is, you know, you do the best you can to plan for everything,

[4:07:31] but there are things in the world spinning fast.

[4:07:34] So we can anticipate that we'll be continuing the case,

[4:07:37] but this is a good assessment of things that actually did come

[4:07:41] I'm out of the general plan update that we have been working on or completed.

[4:07:45] Great, thanks Bill.

[4:07:46] So, to transition and pivot into sort of the discussion for today, we're going to start with the board priorities that were identified by this board on multiple occasions, we went through and sort of talked to them and we're trying to seek some form of alignment, maybe some areas where there is coverage in the general plan and some of the areas that we may need to look at through the any updates to further reinforce the board's priorities.

[4:08:11] What we have on screen is, you know, there are more priorities in that list that aren't

[4:08:19] included on this list because we wanted to focus it more on the general plan and the

[4:08:22] resource management world.

[4:08:24] Obviously, the rest of the priorities are important and they do have some nexus.

[4:08:28] But for this discussion, we want to focus on the economic development, the housing, and

[4:08:32] the agricultural priorities that you identified through the multiple sessions that we held.

[4:08:37] What you see on screen is each of the priorities, E1 through E4, H2, H1, H2, A1, 3, A3.

[4:08:44] And on the end, we've got the designation and the general plan that we saw as a very

[4:08:49] close relation to the particular priority.

[4:08:55] And on the next slide, you'll see we'll break these out so we provide more definition.

[4:08:58] I believe that we handed the board sort of a cheat sheet and we put it in the back.

[4:09:04] It's a little bit more further detail in each of these priorities and

[4:09:09] their relation to the general plan policies and goals that we've identified.

[4:09:16] So to lead it off, we're going to start with the board priority of economic development, E1.

[4:09:22] And the E1 priority was focused on engaging stakeholders on economic development.

[4:09:29] The closest next as we saw in the general plan is the land use policy one.

[4:09:33] And it's to collaborate with cities to guide development to the county's urban centers and

[4:09:36] and promotes sustainable development patterns.

[4:09:39] That aligns with measure T and that's sort of the goal

[4:09:41] that we have had with the focus of everything in the city.

[4:09:45] When we start focusing more on economic development

[4:09:48] and the interest of incorporating economic development

[4:09:52] into more into the unincorporated area,

[4:09:54] there is a little bit of a fracture

[4:09:56] that we would have to discuss and figure out

[4:09:58] how we incorporate into any updates to the general plan.

[4:10:02] The italicized bullets are just some of the things

[4:10:04] that we, when we're looking through the general plan and relating it to the priorities,

[4:10:10] these are some of the questions that we think may be discussed and just a starting point.

[4:10:14] And on every one of the slides, I have other board input.

[4:10:18] And the idea is here is that the bullets that are shown are not exhaustive, and they are just

[4:10:24] meant to be a starting point.

[4:10:25] So in our discussions, the current general plan broadly addresses economic development at

[4:10:30] a regional scale, but it does not focus on the unincorporated areas.

[4:10:34] And so, to expand the economic development into those areas, we would need to discuss

[4:10:38] how that is incorporated into the general plan.

[4:10:42] We think that as part of that process, we explore holding the summit to convene stakeholders

[4:10:46] in relation to discuss the topic of engaging the stakeholders in economic development, and

[4:10:51] we would explore community outreach during the general plan update to include the community.

[4:10:54] So, the goal here would be to take the priority that the board has for economic development, discuss with the public on how that is integrated into the general plan and come back and use that as a process of developing it.

[4:11:07] When I say other board input, if you want to talk about it now or if you want to think about it later and discuss it, want to be this more of a discussion that we can gather information.

[4:11:15] So, if you want to pause here on that, yes.

[4:11:21] Every time I drive down where Budweiser is, and I know that the baseball field does not ours for anything like that, but there's that big green spot in front of them, whatever that street is that I take.

[4:11:35] Okay, and there's also where Highway 12 goes over Chadborne.

[4:11:40] Okay, so my thought is I don't know who owns that, but if we were able to put in some sort of a motel because in Cordelia.

[4:11:50] on central way they're putting in two new hotels and they're cramming them in next to where you

[4:11:57] can go play miniature golf right there as well as over where the Starbucks is. I mean you have

[4:12:02] to have your priorities anyway but if we could do something along those lines and I was just I don't

[4:12:08] know who owns that land so that we could get some TOT. I apologize I have a cough drop in my mouth here

[4:12:14] but that's what I'm looking at and so in the land that's in front of Budweiser does Budweiser own

[4:12:19] all of that. And if so, what is their game plan? Because we could maybe work with Budweiser

[4:12:25] as to what it is because manufacturing. I'm just trying to come up with some things

[4:12:30] that what we could be able to do to have jobs locally. But maybe they don't want that

[4:12:35] baseball field anymore. Maybe we could put in some, you know, two or three story nice condos

[4:12:42] or something like that so that people could buy and own and still maybe find some sort

[4:12:49] So anyway, those are my thoughts, which is what happens when you have me in the car driving

[4:12:53] home.

[4:12:54] And with those, that's the important thing about what we're doing today.

[4:12:57] It's an introduction to some of the, to start thinking about some of those concepts,

[4:13:01] understanding them as priorities and how we integrate into the general plan.

[4:13:05] What you're describing is very difficult right now to do with our current general plan,

[4:13:08] simply because of the provision of utilities that you need for hotels and things like that.

[4:13:12] So it's a discussion that-

[4:13:14] Well, the Walmart over there belongs to whom,

[4:13:17] and it hasn't been used in what, 10 or 12 years,

[4:13:20] or something like that.

[4:13:21] So I don't know who owns it,

[4:13:22] so when you talk about utilities and water and stuff that,

[4:13:26] that's right.

[4:13:26] And Chad Morns, not that far away,

[4:13:28] you've got the hospital there.

[4:13:31] I don't use that hospital.

[4:13:32] But those are in the city of Fairfell though.

[4:13:34] Those are all still in the city.

[4:13:35] They're all in the city.

[4:13:36] They're still in the city.

[4:13:37] Okay.

[4:13:38] But that's what I think we need to talk about,

[4:13:41] is that what is it that we want? First off, I don't want anybody growing anything on my pumpkins, okay?

[4:13:48] So that's just tomatoes or later pumpkins right now. So, but we need to figure out what is it that we need?

[4:13:54] What is it that we see ourselves looking like in 10 or 15 years? And what is it that we can develop so that we get the income here?

[4:14:03] I think this is nice that we, you know, to include the outreach with the cities, but the cities get the friggin taxes.

[4:14:11] And that's not going to help us.

[4:14:12] We just had a PowerPoint today that tells us we need to have more money coming into the county.

[4:14:20] I'm sure.

[4:14:20] Okay.

[4:14:21] Those are my thoughts.

[4:14:22] And that's part of what we're, for example, looking at with freeway interchange studies and things like that, where we are looking at areas that are unincorporated.

[4:14:30] Some of them are already on the general plan.

[4:14:31] I think we've talked about potential expansion of some of those as part of the general plan.

[4:14:35] And so those are, as we dig in further, things will be looking.

[4:14:40] John has a great idea that's not, so I'm hoping that comes to fruition.

[4:14:44] But we need to look and ask ourselves in the empty space that we have.

[4:14:49] If that's for us to have, but it's not being used for food,

[4:14:52] what is it that we can do to generate income for the county as well as some of the other issues that we have?

[4:15:00] Housing, I'm just trying to, my feeling is all of this should just be, let's just throw it out and see what this, where this spaghetti hits on the, on the side of the wall, but we need to have conversations and stuff because John came up with that idea, I love that idea, let's see where, but even that little space that I'm talking about right there on Chadborne, there's things that can happen guys, but we need to figure it out. All right, Supervisor Williams has a question.

[4:15:28] Well, I just wanted to discussion,

[4:15:35] especially the priorities and reference to economic development.

[4:15:39] I remember coming on to the board in 2023, and we talked about during the priority

[4:15:45] session of having someone that we hire or come so, who has a background in economic development.

[4:15:54] We're now in 2025 getting ready to go into 2026.

[4:15:58] That has not come to fruition, and I appreciate all the hard work staff does putting this together.

[4:16:05] But it would be really to our benefit as a county, especially if we're looking at economic development.

[4:16:12] And then we have this unique law measure T that's also incorporated that it is to our benefit to bring someone

[4:16:22] on who has the expertise and that's a subject matter expert in that to help us develop this out

[4:16:31] so that we really can one create opportunities for economic development and get more funding

[4:16:39] that we need so that we can service our community. Another thought is someone mentioned to me

[4:16:51] And I thought it was a great idea was having a task force put together when we bring

[4:16:57] those different stakeholders that actually know and have a strong background in economic

[4:17:03] development.

[4:17:04] And we can put something together or just a task force in general to help us develop

[4:17:10] about our next steps in this general plan.

[4:17:14] For me, this is going to be my very first general plan.

[4:17:18] So, I'm super cautious because I know this is what 20 to 30 years out.

[4:17:25] That is going to really impact a lot of people, so I just want us to do, and I know you're

[4:17:30] doing all you can and you're doing a great job, you all are.

[4:17:34] But I just think at this point, there comes a point in the time that we have to say, okay,

[4:17:39] when we're going to bring that person on to help us move forward.

[4:17:43] Thank you.

[4:17:44] All right, I don't see any other questions yet from the board, although I do have one I'd like to.

[4:17:48] On this particular slide, where we talk about collaboration with cities to guide development,

[4:17:55] that's exactly what the counties working on right now, it's what we intended with the summit.

[4:17:59] So that is very clear, we already headed that direction.

[4:18:03] That's what's currently identified in our general plan.

[4:18:05] Correct.

[4:18:06] But we are already doing what we said we were going to do.

[4:18:08] So I'm just pointing it out.

[4:18:10] The other piece is that, where it speaks to the current general plan, that it broadly

[4:18:15] addresses economic development at a regional scale and does not focus on unincorporated

[4:18:19] areas.

[4:18:20] And I think as we move forward, we need to bring a greater level of focus on the unincorporated

[4:18:25] areas through the general plan, and it needs to speak to that, not just in broad terms,

[4:18:30] but truly speak to some focused development in some areas of the unincorporated

[4:18:36] area that are for the purposes of economic development.

[4:18:41] And then I would absolutely agree with the convention of stakeholders and

[4:18:46] the outreach to the community, that's all very important.

[4:18:49] I think that one of the issues that we need to be looked at and

[4:18:54] Supervisor Vaska has been asking for that since I got on the board that I can remember is that overarching study of infrastructure.

[4:19:00] because we can't do any of this, whether it's regional and general or county and specific.

[4:19:09] We can't do either one without knowing what utilities are needed and where,

[4:19:14] what their availability is and what the plans are in the future of our utility providers to be able to facilitate that for us.

[4:19:23] So anyway, enough on that slide.

[4:19:27] Great.

[4:19:29] E2, board prior to E2, is identified potential sites for academic development.

[4:19:33] So it's a continuation of discussion of economic development.

[4:19:36] In our current general plan, we have economic development goal number one, and it's maintaining

[4:19:41] improve the county's strong, diversified economic base, and provide for a wide range of employment

[4:19:46] opportunities and support services such as job training and childcare.

[4:19:50] And the land use goal number three was to create sustainable communities with areas for employment,

[4:19:55] shopping, housing, public facilities, and services, and recreation and close proximity to each other.

[4:20:01] So those are the goals that we saw in the general plan that relate directly to this.

[4:20:05] Some thoughts that we want to bring forward and start the discussion with our update the general plan to expand areas in supportive development on the I-80 corridor.

[4:20:15] And we currently have a study going on that, so that will come before you to give you an update on that.

[4:20:19] But we have identified some areas that are currently within the general plan, and we'll have to slide on that later.

[4:20:26] But there are opportunities, the question will be is that as you had pointed out on the last slide,

[4:20:30] where do we expand those into the endocorporate, are there other areas of focus, are there other areas of interest that the board would have to look for economic development in other regions, and how do we make that happen in the general plan.

[4:20:42] And then update the general plan to expand the northeast,

[4:20:45] the ethics and agricultural service area.

[4:20:47] So we have a very identified area that is off the highway.

[4:20:51] It's on a critical infrastructure network, and it needs other infrastructure to make it happen.

[4:20:57] But it's an opportunity area with its proximity to UC Davis and

[4:21:01] the highways for further expansion that could benefit the county and in the unacorporated area.

[4:21:08] And then obviously other board input to open it up for questions and comments.

[4:21:12] It's just a couple of other quick things on that in terms of looking at the economic development section of the general plan.

[4:21:17] The areas that we do mention in the plan right now are the interior valleys, which would include Susan Valley, Pleasant Valley.

[4:21:24] Likun Valley was the other one that was mentioned in the general plan.

[4:21:27] Collinsville is mentioned in the general plan, Old Town, Cordelia, North Vacaville, and

[4:21:33] the Lamby Road industrial area.

[4:21:36] So those are ones that we did highlight in the general plan.

[4:21:39] There's like a paragraph on each of those in the plan, but once again, I think it's

[4:21:43] building on some of that that we need to do in any update, as well as if we really

[4:21:48] isn't a mention of the interchanges, and that's something that we're already starting on.

[4:21:51] So.

[4:21:53] All right.

[4:21:54] Well, I think that when we talk about that, you know, we've already, when I say we, I mean,

[4:22:00] the board I wasn't here.

[4:22:01] Thank you, John.

[4:22:02] I already worked on a Su-Soon specific plan, and so Su-Soon Valley has already went down that road, it's already been developed there, but to look in the future, those other areas and those other valleys as potentials for that type of economic development, just like Su-Soon, where we have the potential to collect some TOT and some other things, as long as we have that stakeholder buy-in, and we have the potential to collect some TOT and some other things, as long as we have that stakeholder buy-in, and we have

[4:22:32] The residents who feel that that is the direction that they want to go in those areas, I think we should

[4:22:39] absolutely still be looking at that. It wasn't a bad idea then. It's not a bad idea now.

[4:22:46] I think that we absolutely still have to move forward with the areas in the I-80 corridor that we're looking at right now.

[4:22:53] As you heard earlier, with the potential for a truck stop going in,

[4:22:58] the fact that we have a county where all of these various transportation hubs come together.

[4:23:07] All these arterials of transportation and goods come together in one spot.

[4:23:14] We should be able to take advantage of that and we should be able to benefit from that as a county.

[4:23:21] and our residents should be able to benefit from that.

[4:23:24] When we talked earlier about the effects of legislation at the federal level and the impacts on the county,

[4:23:31] all those impacts were incredibly large and financial.

[4:23:36] And until the county has the ability to start offsetting that with some revenues from taxation and funds from development,

[4:23:48] we're going to be in a hard way.

[4:23:49] Okay, so that's absolutely something we need to continue looking at.

[4:23:55] Anybody else on the board want to park in?

[4:23:59] Thanks.

[4:24:00] It's filled it up.

[4:24:01] All right.

[4:24:02] So the Board of Priority E3, which is initiated Utility Mass Ban, as I've asked, was mentioned.

[4:24:09] So the nexus within the general plan is public facilities goal one.

[4:24:14] It's provide adequate public services and facilities to accommodate the level of development planned by the county.

[4:24:20] And then land use goal number three is to create sustainable communities within areas for employment,

[4:24:26] shopping, housing, public facilities, and services, and recreation, and close proximity to each other.

[4:24:32] This goal is very similar to the last one, there are similar goals that are the same goal that relates to the both topics.

[4:24:38] So from staff standpoint, we've started, we want to build on the one-water framework and

[4:24:43] the sole grant infrastructure effort and continue expand study of infrastructure needs county-wide.

[4:24:47] And that points to the point that you made in the last slide is that, you know, we need to continue those efforts.

[4:24:53] We want to support and explore requests from providers such as FSSD to study sewer in the Sun Valley.

[4:24:59] It's a request that we have and want to understand how we can be responsive to that.

[4:25:04] And then obviously other thoughts that you guys have related to utilities and a master plan for those.

[4:25:13] I don't see any other questions, and I already said my piece on that one, James.

[4:25:16] I mean, I just wanted to add, I mean, if you look at the current general plan,

[4:25:20] there is a reference to infrastructure planning in the 2008 plan.

[4:25:23] It mainly focuses on Lambie and Collinsville area, but not a, it's not totally

[4:25:29] exclusive to those, but it's pretty much focused on those areas.

[4:25:32] If you read the language in here, I think we could expand this section of the general

[4:25:37] plan, not change, you know, throw it out, but basically span on it to kind of address

[4:25:41] the issues that we're talking about today.

[4:25:43] I think we do, and I think we need to, but I think the key stakeholder in that is going to be our utility providers because we have to have them at the table, they have to be willing to put in that infrastructure, or we can make all the plans in the world and they're all for not, so.

[4:26:00] So,

[4:26:04] Board Priority E4 support parks, recreation and cultural amenities.

[4:26:08] Within the general plan, there's the park's objective number one.

[4:26:11] It's to coordinate the planning and development of regional recreational facilities between federal, state, and local agencies within Salona County.

[4:26:18] And then land use goal number four is to encourage land use development patterns and circulation and transportation systems that promote health and wellness and minimize adverse effects on agricultural and natural resources.

[4:26:29] energy consumption and air quality.

[4:26:31] So that's the foundation of how we, you know, look at how we support our parks.

[4:26:35] Since the general plan, we've brought on new land, new day use areas.

[4:26:40] We've expanded some of the park system and provided great amenities to the public.

[4:26:43] It's been a great start.

[4:26:45] Want to know how the board feels and what they want to do to expand that.

[4:26:48] So the bullet we have is continue to work with entities such as the Solana Land Trust,

[4:26:53] to acquire lands and expand programs for recreational opportunities.

[4:26:56] And then, you know, other thoughts that you guys have?

[4:26:59] My mind, I don't see any lights on the board yet.

[4:27:02] I'm supposed to do, I wait, wait, okay, I'm coming.

[4:27:04] I thought we were just going through it.

[4:27:06] You want us to give you feedback each area.

[4:27:10] That's why I haven't been doing anything.

[4:27:13] So, I'm asking the chair.

[4:27:14] Oh, yeah.

[4:27:16] Well, what do we, I mean, yeah, they're just wanting,

[4:27:19] they want us to put on each slide, so they want to.

[4:27:22] But we can take full any other board input down at the bottom,

[4:27:24] I'm wondering if they want anything.

[4:27:26] I missed this last bullet point here.

[4:27:29] Oh, OK.

[4:27:30] I was like, what?

[4:27:31] Do you want to go?

[4:27:32] I'm just trying to run a show.

[4:27:34] I'm just having a good old time over here.

[4:27:35] No, I'm just doing as requested.

[4:27:37] I don't realize that.

[4:27:38] OK, thank you.

[4:27:39] I think there's opportunities for real time as we're going

[4:27:41] through the slides.

[4:27:42] Or as I'm mowing over all the information we provide to you today

[4:27:45] at the end, you could provide further comments for questions.

[4:27:48] There are 38 slides.

[4:27:49] So for me to hold it till the end would just be not good.

[4:27:53] So I got to get it out now.

[4:27:58] I'll be good, I'll make it short.

[4:27:59] On this one here I just want to mention that I think the other part that we didn't put in a bullet here was

[4:28:04] the amount of funds we've been able to use from the ARPA dollars to do some investments in our park infrastructure that we do have.

[4:28:11] You know I'm talking Sandy Beach, Lake Salano, Lynch Canyon, we've been able to do some significant.

[4:28:17] Some of it's not all that visible like it's the water systems of the wastewater, how we're handling wastewater.

[4:28:22] Those have made significant improvements to our recreational facilities.

[4:28:27] So we have made progress.

[4:28:28] I think we have opportunities to further expand our system, because I think this county,

[4:28:33] we've done a great job with open space, we need to take advantage of it.

[4:28:36] It can be a major amenity, and it can be an economic development tool.

[4:28:39] I think so, and to that end, what I was going to add is that I think one of the things we need to look at besides

[4:28:47] working with entities like Salano Land Trust is to look at public private partnerships

[4:28:51] for the purposes of parks and lands.

[4:28:55] When I say that what I mean is there are private entities, public entities that are

[4:29:02] agriculturally based, where they're maybe able to have public access.

[4:29:07] And those types of things where we can help and we can be partners in that would be significant, would make a difference.

[4:29:14] And then there's also privately held lands.

[4:29:17] And I would use something like my old hunting club for an example, right?

[4:29:23] You only use that during certain months of the year in certain seasons, but

[4:29:26] there are a lot of times during the year when bird watchers and

[4:29:28] people who want to go out and see nature would love to be able to get out and

[4:29:32] access that property.

[4:29:33] And so be able to have a public private partnership to have that public access on that.

[4:29:38] Through a park system would be wonderful and to work something like that into our general plan would be great.

[4:29:44] It's in language like that would be to encourage public-private partnerships that expand these types of things.

[4:29:50] I'll have a comment.

[4:29:52] Yes, ma'am.

[4:29:53] Let her in.

[4:29:54] I forgot to press the number.

[4:29:55] Then a little light.

[4:29:57] I know it is formal.

[4:30:00] We're going to go back to E3. And so where's the LUG-3 housing?

[4:30:11] Where's the housing would be identified?

[4:30:15] Okay, because it creates sustainable communities with areas for employment, shopping, housing, public facilities and services and recreation.

[4:30:25] and close proximity to each other.

[4:30:28] I don't remember in the priority,

[4:30:32] is this for supported housing like for farm worker?

[4:30:37] Housing, what kind of housing you're referencing?

[4:30:40] So the, that LUG-3 is the actual language

[4:30:45] from the general plan that discusses.

[4:30:47] It's very broad.

[4:30:49] It's very broad.

[4:30:50] I mean, example of housing in the general plan

[4:30:52] would be Wood Creek.

[4:30:53] That area was identified

[4:30:54] as a more dense utilization, it was identified in the general plan and it's a potential for housing close to the proximity of other resources and things like that.

[4:31:05] But it requires infrastructure.

[4:31:07] And so related to the goal of the priority of the board to initiate a utility master plan study, that's to look at areas that those types of development like hotels, large, large event centers, things like that,

[4:31:22] that can't sort of self-sustained on the property that they currently have.

[4:31:26] We're going to need other resources to solve whether it's package treatment plans

[4:31:29] or it's some connection to a utility service.

[4:31:32] So utilizing or continuing the utility master plan that's currently underway,

[4:31:36] which is the board of priority, figured out ways in the general plan to strategize

[4:31:42] on where those areas are that we want to look at and how we frame those studies

[4:31:46] so that we can identify what the utility needs are that best serve those needs.

[4:31:50] I'm going to just say that because just listening to what you just explained and solidifies for

[4:31:57] me even more that a task force is truly going to be important because one of the things

[4:32:04] that I don't want to see happening is that the fear into the unincorporated areas that

[4:32:14] But we are bringing in tons of housing and, you know, it could be misconstrued.

[4:32:20] So even though I understand it's broadly mentioned here, but these are just some of the things

[4:32:27] all of us have to deal with when it comes to our public, right?

[4:32:33] With the face of the county.

[4:32:36] And so with that being said, I think it's in our best interest, again, to have a task force

[4:32:43] where we're bringing the different stakeholders to the table when we're making these type of

[4:32:50] decisions.

[4:32:51] That way, the community cannot say that we didn't do everything in our power to make

[4:32:57] sure that their voices were heard.

[4:33:00] I would concur with that.

[4:33:01] I would say that I think on that policy, it wasn't necessarily limited to the unincorporated

[4:33:07] area.

[4:33:07] In other words, I think it was a broader community vision statement policy that it would

[4:33:12] applied to the county and the cities in terms of just the kind of community that we

[4:33:17] want to create as a broader community.

[4:33:19] So I think that when you read that language, it's not just unincorporated.

[4:33:23] So I wasn't hearing in 2008, so I guess my question is, and maybe John you can answer, I don't

[4:33:32] know who can answer this question.

[4:33:33] So when you said in the beginning in 2008 was there a task force where you worked with

[4:33:40] all the cities and is that how that worked when this happened?

[4:33:48] There was a general plan committee of about 15 members and it was each board member got

[4:33:54] to select three but it was a diverse group from all kinds of different sections.

[4:34:00] So it was and there was a number of community meetings.

[4:34:03] Remember the process took about two years for us to get through it and we had, you know,

[4:34:10] They were led on their own, they discussed all the issues that came before that committee in regards to what should the general plan look like.

[4:34:20] And the language is very broad in the general plan.

[4:34:24] I think what we're looking for in this go around is a little more specific to identify areas where we can work together.

[4:34:31] Whether it's on the edge of the city limits where some housing cities just don't want to do.

[4:34:39] You know, and you've gotten into districts now, everybody wants affordable housing.

[4:34:44] Nobody wants it next to them.

[4:34:48] That's true.

[4:34:49] We don't want those people.

[4:34:50] Put it bluntly.

[4:34:53] And everybody needs a place to start.

[4:34:56] Bring it a valid point.

[4:34:59] And from the discussion that we've had and the goals for this, and setting up the RFP for

[4:35:03] the general plan, consultants modeled on that same process, the expectation of the task

[4:35:09] fours, working groups, lots of interaction, and that's a framework that's identified that we would be looking at doing over the next three years to get to the point where we could bring something forward in 2028.

[4:35:25] Does there any additions to four, E4?

[4:35:28] I don't see any, no.

[4:35:32] Okay, we'll jump to the housing priorities, the board priorities for housing.

[4:35:36] So, the priority H1 is to partner with cities on regional, on a regional housing strategy.

[4:35:42] So, the closest thing in the general plan is the housing objective, E, work and system of Salona County's local smart growth for the loss fee to direct most development to the cities.

[4:35:53] Minimized constraints on the production of housing within the unincorporated areas of the county were limited residential development as appropriate.

[4:36:00] And then land your school number one is preserved and protect the current development pattern of district of distinct and identify cities and communities.

[4:36:06] So that is in the general plan of where housing was focused, and would be focused, except for the one-offs, like Wood Creek, things like that that happened in the unincorporated area.

[4:36:18] So staff, the thoughts here are part of the summit, encourage cities to incorporate inclusionary housing ordinances as part of their housing programs.

[4:36:27] I think only one city currently has an inclusionary housing program identified.

[4:36:32] And so, you know, I think the dialogue should be to try to encourage that kind to the point where there's some housing that some areas don't want to do.

[4:36:39] But if we understand it's a broader concern that that's what the focus needs to be, we can try to infect that through some language in the general plan.

[4:36:47] And then explore opportunities in an incorporated area for workforce housing.

[4:36:51] And so we don't go to much detail in the general plan from 2008.

[4:36:56] It's a question for the board, is that that's something the board wants to explore.

[4:37:00] How strategies for that, they'll be able to work with the consultant to incorporate into some form of language.

[4:37:04] And then obviously whatever.

[4:37:07] I don't see any lights on it, so I'm going to jump in real quick, if everybody

[4:37:10] chance to ponder on that.

[4:37:14] Supervisor Vesquiz already really spoke to that when he said, everybody wants to talk about affordable housing, but nobody wants it in their backyard.

[4:37:20] And then you added to that, when you said, we only have one city, they've had 20 years to work on that.

[4:37:26] And we've only had one city that has that inclusionary policy in there.

[4:37:31] I'm checking with Walsh.

[4:37:32] In there.

[4:37:32] One, right?

[4:37:34] Maybe two.

[4:37:35] One, maybe two.

[4:37:36] And a second working on it.

[4:37:37] And a second working on it.

[4:37:38] But until such a time as that comes to fruition with all of our counties, all over the city that we have seven of them, right?

[4:37:47] There needs to be something done with immediacy, there's a problem in our state.

[4:37:51] And I think we're hearing a willingness on the board to look at those opportunities.

[4:37:58] And so we need somebody to be able to share with us how we navigate that.

[4:38:02] Because with current regulation in Lathco and

[4:38:08] Lathco law and current regulation at the state level,

[4:38:12] our ability to partner with cities and other areas to

[4:38:15] to develop and provide the infrastructure needs for that type of development in the county is really limited.

[4:38:23] And so we need to help find, we need somebody to help us find ways to navigate that and help facilitate that.

[4:38:29] Because if the cities don't want to do it and they would prefer the county do it,

[4:38:32] then get out of the way and let us, or at least be a partner and help us, right?

[4:38:38] And provide some utility for us, Supervisor.

[4:38:42] Thank you, in regards to, I believe it is only two cities and we only have one city that's a pro housing city, but as a county overall how do we become a pro housing county because it increase our points in order to get more money coming from the state and also what language are we using to match the state language right now the state is using transit oriented housing is the same as sustainable communities, where we're building housing.

[4:39:11] housing next to what Chair Mashman said, we are at Transportation Hub.

[4:39:15] So how are we building out communities based on our Transportation Hub?

[4:39:19] Again, it comes with dollars from the state as we're kind of marrying their language,

[4:39:25] but also just to look internally at our own housing infrastructure.

[4:39:29] Right now, we have housing dollars that are in different departments.

[4:39:33] And it's so hard to coordinate sometimes with those departments to even have a streamlined housing ladder.

[4:39:39] So, how are we internally looking at infrastructure as a part of our general plan to really ensure that we do look at housing with the full lens of

[4:39:51] and I know people like to use the term affordable housing and I hate that term because it stigmatized.

[4:39:57] Housing but more or less housing around our AMI and ensuring that we reach all income levels within the county.

[4:40:07] So, right now, as it currently stands as a general plan, as we sort of state, it's really, we focus it on the cities, it's responsibility of the cities, growth patterns, accessibility infrastructure, the ability to subdivide and generate that type of housing in the unincorporated is kind of limited.

[4:40:24] I think part of the discussion here is to understand what the board's goals are with attaining those realizations and how the board wants to see that brought in to the general plan going forward.

[4:40:36] We've been waiting on the cities for 20 years, and we ain't there.

[4:40:40] We don't have another 20.

[4:40:45] I think you'll see in some subsequent slides that there's a lot of housing units being approved by the cities.

[4:40:54] But very few of them fall within what we're talking about here.

[4:40:58] In other words, if you go up and down our corridor and look what new homes are selling for right now, they're being produced, they're not affordable.

[4:41:06] All right.

[4:41:16] Supervisor Williams has a question to thank supervisor James for just

[4:41:26] say the terminology housing around AMI. I really like that so I just wanted to share

[4:41:31] that with you. I just wanted to ask in reference oh I lost my question go ahead.

[4:41:47] And just to go back, again, because I'm a hone in on the internal infrastructure and I don't know if this can be a part of the general plan conversation, but again, it's really honing in on where the housing dollars live at within the county, and I know that we have the capsule on JPA and housing and homelessness are two different topics.

[4:42:09] However, again, when we're talking about somebody coordinating with our county overall, there is a disconnect between the city and the county when we're trying to get somebody housed into, again, mixed use or housing based off of the area medium income, whether it's 50% or below.

[4:42:35] So, but if we can just hone in on that fact, of like the internal infrastructure on how we are producing housing.

[4:42:49] All right, let her in.

[4:42:52] I really forgot.

[4:42:54] So the question is since we were talking about working with our cities, do we have a date certain for when we're going to have our convening with them because we try to do it this month,

[4:43:07] but I know they ask for an extension.

[4:43:09] Yeah, no, we do not have a date yet.

[4:43:11] Well, we're going to be talking with them tomorrow.

[4:43:13] I think we'll get a better sense of it.

[4:43:15] OK, so you'll bring something back to us,

[4:43:17] I think.

[4:43:18] All right, that's what I wanted to know.

[4:43:20] And as we look at this prime act will be excluded

[4:43:27] right from these discussions around the possibility

[4:43:34] and what housing could or may look like.

[4:43:39] I mean, as it stands now, the general plan is very limited areas where we've shown,

[4:43:43] I keep falling back to Wood Creek because that's really the only one that really shows an area that was anticipated for

[4:43:48] a conversion of any large land into segmented areas for like a subdivision.

[4:43:55] So as it stands now, we don't currently have methodologies to bring subdivisions of any scale in the

[4:44:02] incorporated based upon our current zoning and the general planning requirements.

[4:44:05] Well, I was just concerned about that because I mean the lagoon valley, it was this open space

[4:44:13] and it's a whole lot of homes and there and now.

[4:44:17] As we'll show in some of the later slides, we do identify that the, I would say for the past 60 years,

[4:44:24] the methodology for the county and the city is housing growth has been through annexations

[4:44:30] by the cities. So in an off way, it's, it is a conversion of ag land to housing,

[4:44:36] but it doesn't happen in an incorporated area. Those areas get annexed into a city.

[4:44:40] The city utilizes them to develop the housing that sort of serves the entire region.

[4:44:45] And so that's the methodology that has been up to this date.

[4:44:48] We'll have some slides we can talk further about that and provide more information.

[4:44:51] Thank you.

[4:44:52] That's what I wanted to get down to. James, you took my thunder, but I wanted to say,

[4:44:56] That's all right man, you said it much more eloquently than I was gonna

[4:45:00] Let's say, but for the last decade or two, we have been soaking up our prime ag land around the cities as they annex that land, and then they convert it into homes. The county, through city-centered growth, doesn't really have much say in that. When the city wants to do an annexation, they go through a process. There's a whole process to it. They annex the land. And then that prime ag land is then incorporated into

[4:45:29] And it's not city land and it's not county land.

[4:45:33] So our general plan has no, just don't say over what happens to that prime ag land at that point.

[4:45:40] Yes ma'am, that's why we wanted to have the cities at the table because we want to know what their plans are into the future.

[4:45:47] And do their plans include the annexation of a lot of our prime ag land for

[4:45:54] the purposes of that type of development because we need to know that.

[4:45:57] But the public needs to know that, everybody needs to know that.

[4:46:01] And then we need to plan accordingly for those other lands that are further out.

[4:46:05] The problem that we have is that our lot of our prime ag land sits directly around a city where they have utility, where they have the ability to provide water and power and all those things.

[4:46:17] And those lands that are less than a prime in our county sit so far out that there's not an ability to provide utility for those.

[4:46:26] So, how do you develop housing on those land?

[4:46:29] And the discussion, you know, that we're trying to be forward here and for the board to discuss as we go forward, is that, as it's going now as the current definition in the general plan, the board sees the different methodology or a different way that they want to do that.

[4:46:41] Then that's where the discussion begins. We go through the public process of discussing and trying to come to some form of consensus, so we can relate into the any updates to the general plan.

[4:46:52] So if the board doesn't necessarily like when we are right now, then it's your opportunity to make those changes or at least discuss those changes and find a path forward.

[4:47:04] Oh, yeah, John, I'm sorry, you may be starting, you want to maybe start thinking about when we're talking about housing as far as the cities, I mean, it's development's all incurred in the cities.

[4:47:20] So every piece of unincorporated is one annexation away from becoming something else and a

[4:47:26] piece of prime aglan is one annexation away from being something else.

[4:47:31] I was hoping that through the process we started to find some areas that are just off limits

[4:47:36] completely.

[4:47:38] I mean, you take up and around the Dixon Ridge area, less than 10% of the ground in California

[4:47:44] is as good as that.

[4:47:45] Is that something where we should focus in and say, the priority is this is going to stay

[4:47:50] the act forever, or as long as forever is forever.

[4:47:55] Because forever doesn't really mean forever.

[4:47:58] Forever word.

[4:48:00] Yeah, forever.

[4:48:01] Oh, it is.

[4:48:02] Mm-hmm.

[4:48:05] Yeah.

[4:48:06] Ha-ha-ha.

[4:48:07] It's all right.

[4:48:08] It's so good.

[4:48:09] It's all right.

[4:48:09] It's so good.

[4:48:09] I was thinking you need to.

[4:48:11] Are you guys cheating ahead on our slides?

[4:48:13] Because I'm getting a game.

[4:48:13] Well, you know, the thought came to me because of the housing

[4:48:17] thing.

[4:48:18] If we don't put some pressure back on the communities to create a little more density, I'm sure everybody wants a quarter acre land and a house 3,000 square foot and a white picket fence, but that's not true.

[4:48:37] We need the density, we need the cities to participate in that density and maybe that's how we get to the housing that housing for the people that we serve.

[4:48:47] Yeah, one-third of the population and we serve and they're all in need or else we wouldn't be serving them.

[4:48:56] Anyway.

[4:48:58] Didn't mean to get ahead.

[4:48:59] Go ahead.

[4:49:00] Didn't mean to get ahead, but it just was the thought came in my head at that point.

[4:49:04] I think we have a policy coming up where it talks about in the current general plan,

[4:49:07] even that in terms of city growth, focusing on more density as well as infill,

[4:49:14] Well, before they continue to eat up more of the prime aglan, so I think we touched on that a little bit further so.

[4:49:23] We do. All right, so H2,

[4:49:28] okay, H2.

[4:49:29] So the poor priority H2 is to improve housing resource efficiency.

[4:49:34] Within the general plan, we have a housing objective E work consistent with Solano County's local smart growth philosophy to direct most development of the city's minimize constraints to the production of housing.

[4:49:44] within the incorporated area of the county where limited residential development is important, appropriate.

[4:49:50] And then land use goal three is create sustainable communities with areas for employment, shopping, housing, public facilities and services and recreation and close proximity to the other.

[4:49:59] So these are very consistent general concepts of how to achieve these goals or these priorities.

[4:50:05] You know, one of our takeaways were to identify ways to encourage more workforce housing in the unincorporate areas to support agriculture and then continue to find ways to support development of accessory dwelling units, 80 use in other housing options.

[4:50:18] We have some sort of restrictions, current restrictions that don't necessarily meet the current goals of the state's goals of ADA's.

[4:50:24] And those are the limitations that could be resolved through some updates to the general plan.

[4:50:30] And then obviously we're looking for some more input.

[4:50:32] So we're all going to update the measure T.

[4:50:40] I'm like, I'm in school.

[4:50:42] Way the main.

[4:50:43] Sure.

[4:50:44] Go ahead.

[4:50:45] Just I wanted to circle back to what.

[4:50:49] Mr. Emblem said about measure T.

[4:50:53] So does.

[4:50:56] Do we are we going to be working with?

[4:50:59] Or do we grow?

[4:51:01] We're going to build some type of.

[4:51:05] and meeting with them to, because at the end of the day,

[4:51:10] we don't simply grow like the third of watch dogs or, you know,

[4:51:18] make sure that we stay compliant.

[4:51:21] So we're making recommendations or the goal is to have like a workshop

[4:51:25] with them to work through these processes.

[4:51:29] Yeah, I'm absolutely we will have discussions with them, and I think it's going to be embedded because the reality is that

[4:51:36] Our general plan is in intricately tied with

[4:51:39] Measure T in many ways and in you know our general plan says it's the 20 30 general plan

[4:51:45] But in reality measure T ends in 2028 and so much of the key provisions of the general plan are kind of tied to it

[4:51:51] So we're going to as part of the stakeholder process and everything else absolutely would be talking order

[4:51:57] We often talk in other groups as well.

[4:51:59] We understand, and when I mentioned like Measure T,

[4:52:03] there's like provisions for only a certain number of dwellings

[4:52:06] on an agricultural property as an example of something

[4:52:09] we may want to look at again in terms of,

[4:52:12] because we have families sometimes who come to us

[4:52:14] and say we'd like to have more homes on the land.

[4:52:18] And there probably could be some minor

[4:52:20] and I'm talking minor adjustments in that context

[4:52:22] to address that issue.

[4:52:24] But there's other things that we need to look at as well

[4:52:26] in terms of land use map, to try to figure out ways to meet all the different priorities that we have.

[4:52:34] I think it, you know, times change, we have to make those adjustments.

[4:52:36] So, but yes, absolutely, order growth, order growth, we want the groups that we're working with.

[4:52:41] I think what Bill brought up with regards to the ADUs is that currently with Measure T,

[4:52:47] we can only have one primary and one secondary.

[4:52:50] That's all that's allowed through the provisions of Measure T.

[4:52:52] The state, obviously, through a lot of the goals that they have, and it's more urban in some instances, but they're pushing for multiple ADUs.

[4:53:02] Some other counties in the unincorporated areas, if you're allowing an ADU that's up to, say, 2,000 square feet, they allow if you can do two of them 1,000 square feet,

[4:53:12] you stay under the 2000, then you can have two ADUs, and that provides additional housing within the

[4:53:17] unacorporated area. Currently, provisions of that measure, you don't allow for that.

[4:53:20] And so it's a limitation that if the interest is in expanding housing in the way that we

[4:53:25] solve for our wiener in the unacorporated area, it is through the ADUs.

[4:53:30] We have a limitation built in as a result of that. So dialogue with measure T,

[4:53:33] an orderly growth to figure out ways to be responsible and responsive to the needs that the state has identified,

[4:53:39] the public is identified, but still keep the character and consistent use of the unincorporated

[4:53:45] area for agriculture, but still provides some additional housing to meet those needs

[4:53:49] is critical.

[4:53:53] Well, to that end, I want to kick in a little bit and say that I just don't think that

[4:54:03] ADUs are going to get us there.

[4:54:06] So, we have to add an element or two to this that is going to be able to look at things like what supervisor James brought up, which is a denser development around some of our transportation and our transportation hubs and the ability to institute some of those things and we need to look at ways to incorporate maybe some other types of housing in areas where it's appropriate, you know, be that a

[4:54:34] a trailer park, for example, or some of the smaller denser home communities where they have the homes that are under a thousand square feet, right?

[4:54:45] And they can be sustained on their own utility on the development properties, those types of things in order to get enough of the housing in place because as we've heard so many times just today,

[4:55:02] the state's more than willing to cramp something down our throat.

[4:55:05] And if we don't take some action to try and develop these types of housing in our general plan and in our community,

[4:55:14] the state's going to take that local land use authority away from us and they're going to do it.

[4:55:18] And then what will we end up with?

[4:55:20] So I think it's going to take, as we go through this process, it's going to take a deep dive into our land use map.

[4:55:27] And look for opportunities for sites that can address things like housing or

[4:55:33] economic development without, and I think there's plenty of opportunity out there without

[4:55:37] detracting from the overarching goals of what measure T today and the order of the growth.

[4:55:44] Historically, we think we can do both and maintain the character of the county.

[4:55:50] So I want to do, I don't want to give the state the opportunity to take that character away.

[4:55:54] But I also think we need to look at the thousand square feet because I run into a lot of seniors who the rents keep going up, but once you retire, your retirement does not, and we talk about we're going to have a lot of folks that are going to be homeless, it's going to be a lot of seniors.

[4:56:11] You need to build what people, 11,000, let me sorry, 1200 square feet, two bedroom, one bath, whatever it might be, so that you have your feet in the community.

[4:56:26] Because many of us live on courts that every month there seems to be somebody new coming into rent because maybe they didn't make the payment whatever it is.

[4:56:36] But however we do the general plan, we need to look at that housing is available for all incomes.

[4:56:44] I know you guys are saying the different language alphabet soup, but I think we need to have

[4:56:49] a strategy where that we want to be a county where that not only is it affordable, that you

[4:56:54] can buy and be part of the community.

[4:56:58] Because everybody in here eventually is going to retire.

[4:57:02] And not everybody is going to have a retirement system.

[4:57:04] and that's a big worry I have down the road, so.

[4:57:08] Great, so we're ready to wait.

[4:57:11] And I agree with my colleagues

[4:57:16] that we definitely look at tiny homes.

[4:57:20] But there is actually some tiny home communities

[4:57:24] developed that actually have community centers in the middle.

[4:57:31] But their homes are like 300, 400 square feet

[4:57:35] and it's just the way their bill gives them the appearance of more space but it

[4:57:41] allows for more inexpensive way of home ownership and then they have larger

[4:57:47] ones that are like 630 throughout Atlanta, Georgia and then they'll have an

[4:57:52] outside space that may be 800 square feet so it's more of an indoor outdoor type of

[4:57:59] living experience, and so those are some ways we can look at density.

[4:58:07] Yeah, those are great examples of getting those types of units in.

[4:58:12] The issue for us, obviously, is that when you're only allowed to units on a property, you can't do a tiny house village or a tiny house group of structures.

[4:58:20] So it's finding that balance between what we want to do with regards to densifications and doing it smartly through the general plan process.

[4:58:31] Certainly something that wasn't thought about in 2008, really.

[4:58:33] I mean, that's how quickly the things have changed, right?

[4:58:35] That's something and we need to look at that opportunity.

[4:58:39] Okay,

[4:58:42] we're going to transition to agriculture as one of the, you know,

[4:58:46] primary, one of the board priorities that has an access to the general plan.

[4:58:51] You know, first and foremost is A1 and we have the ad commissioner in the audience.

[4:58:54] I will try, if we need him, I won't phone a friend unless I need to.

[4:58:59] So I'll try and take this through.

[4:59:02] So A1 is, the board priority was to strengthen the right to farm.

[4:59:06] We're very strong, we're accounting it's very strong in the provision of the right to farm.

[4:59:11] Our general plan, the agricultural goal number one is to recognize, value, and

[4:59:16] support the critical roles of all agricultural lands in the stability and

[4:59:20] economic well-being of the county.

[4:59:22] And then land use goal number one is to preserve and protect the current development

[4:59:26] the pattern of distinct and identifiable cities and communities.

[4:59:30] And so that's how we sort of respond to the importance of right to farm,

[4:59:33] the importance of ag.

[4:59:35] It's sort of in the basis of measure T and it sort of breeze through our entire general plan.

[4:59:41] So one of the thoughts we had is to expand on the right to farm ordinance policy language

[4:59:44] to ensure that agricultural and urban interfaces are compatible.

[4:59:48] And so that's to supervisor Vazquez's point that the cities begin to expand more.

[4:59:53] we have to define specific areas where they can't go, or strategically think of areas

[4:59:58] is a ways to compute.

[5:00:00] We define that area so that we can maintain what is important for the agricultural community, but still provide the opportunity for the county to grow. And to that end, I think, I'm just going to jump in. To that, to that end, I think that that's one of the, another one of the reasons we want to have the cities at the table. Because it doesn't do, it doesn't serve all of us well if it's just us adding something to our policy that encourages this type of interface, right?

[5:00:29] We need the cities as they develop their general plans to incorporate that into their general plans as well because they have to have the understanding that they do a but agriculture, they do a but the country and they need to assure that the developments that go forward under their general plan align with that instead of us just requiring it on our side, it needs to be integrated and it needs to be both.

[5:00:58] So we need to have them at the table to be able to make sure that it is a well-rounded policy that takes all of that into consideration.

[5:01:05] Yeah, I mean, this is quite a dialogue that, you know, for Bill and for the team to take to the city managers when we meet because we didn't have the summit.

[5:01:15] This is a great opportunity to further expand upon what the board's expectations are and to show that it is intended to be cooperative and really fact seeking.

[5:01:25] And so it's a good opportunity for us to take that to the, to the city's end of the

[5:01:29] discussion to say, hey, this is really what the board is talking about here.

[5:01:31] How do we get on the same page?

[5:01:32] And then here's the other one.

[5:01:34] I'm sorry, go ahead.

[5:01:34] Oh, that's okay.

[5:01:35] I'm just going to say they've done, heard me say it now.

[5:01:36] I've put it on record.

[5:01:38] I was just going to add on that the other piece of that is the right to farm.

[5:01:41] And then there's ag mitigation ordinance because remember, we adopted a pretty strong

[5:01:45] one, but if they aren't adopted by the cities, when they annex, and now granted

[5:01:48] Lafgo can put something on them as well.

[5:01:50] Well, but our ordinance is really applies only on incorporated and an annexation that doesn't apply.

[5:01:57] We want to make sure that I think it would be best if every jurisdiction had a similar provision.

[5:02:02] That would help protect the higher go channel.

[5:02:06] Go ahead one.

[5:02:07] Okay, and that just made me think about why it is so important that we do meet with them.

[5:02:12] Because if they don't understand that by building those homes or

[5:02:18] or putting businesses on top of prime ag land,

[5:02:22] we can't get that back.

[5:02:23] It's just gone.

[5:02:25] And that really needs to be driven home with them.

[5:02:30] So that's why it's important, we have to meet with them.

[5:02:33] So they can get it.

[5:02:34] And hopefully we can get them to incorporate some of this

[5:02:38] into their own ordinances and plans.

[5:02:42] Because this is just my thoughts.

[5:02:45] it feels like the county is just the bank of land and you just come get

[5:02:52] whatever you want and we don't know what you want to do or are the needs of

[5:02:57] the county that have to be fulfilled is just you're the land bank and we're just

[5:03:03] come to get a land okay I think that was just my dog thought no that was good

[5:03:09] okay all

[5:03:16] right you're good there no more lights all right eight two so

[5:03:20] So, Board Priority A2 is to support Ag Workforce Housing, and in the Housing Objective D it's provide,

[5:03:27] I'll just put my page, a provide housing to meet the special needs of the elderly disabled,

[5:03:31] including the event developmentally disabled, large family, single female headed homeless military and farm workers.

[5:03:40] So that was from the General Plan 2008, and then the agricultural goal number four is enable the development of housing opportunities for

[5:03:47] the farm families and farm workers to ensure the continued competitiveness of Solano County agriculture.

[5:03:52] So it's basis which is in the general plan.

[5:03:56] And then some of the points we wanted to bring forward and start the discussion to support projects like the Dixon Pilot,

[5:04:02] ARPA Project to support the construction of agricultural worker housing.

[5:04:06] Support programs and zoning that provide for the construction of units such as ADU using the unincorporated area of the county.

[5:04:11] Sort of harkens back to the previous slide, but it's more dialogue on the ways that we can start to structure policy within

[5:04:16] then the general plan to bring these forward.

[5:04:19] And then I'm opening it up to the board.

[5:04:21] Supervisor Brown has a question.

[5:04:23] Oh, it's not a question, it's a comment.

[5:04:25] First paragraph, second line.

[5:04:28] Single female headed.

[5:04:30] Now we need to change that because there are men

[5:04:32] who also have custody of their children.

[5:04:34] So however you, or just large family, or yeah,

[5:04:39] so that needs to be fixed.

[5:04:41] I'm giving you guys credit because a lot of you guys

[5:04:44] It's like taking care of your children, so that needs to change.

[5:04:50] It's changed since 2008.

[5:04:52] I think to that end, you could almost incorporate all of those into Supervisor James's suggestion of a certain level of AMI.

[5:05:02] We're going with that term.

[5:05:05] All right,

[5:05:10] we have one more Ag, priority A3, and it's to create an ag economic development program.

[5:05:18] In the general plan, agricultural goal number one was to recognize value and support the critical roles of all agricultural lands in the stability and economic well-being of the county.

[5:05:28] And then the economic development goal number six is to preserve and expand the county's agricultural base by allowing for a wide range of economic activities that support local agriculture.

[5:05:39] That's where we start from, you know, the planning process is underway under the salt grant effort and may require

[5:05:45] revisions to zoning for more allowable uses by right.

[5:05:48] So the salt is ongoing right now.

[5:05:50] Can you be used to inform the dialogue that we have on the general plan?

[5:05:54] We have a slide on the salt as well so we can talk about that.

[5:05:56] But that's just one thing to think about, obviously, when you want to hear what you think or want to add.

[5:06:04] I don't see any light, so again, I'm going to jump right in and I think that the salt program is a great starting point for that.

[5:06:12] That program, thank you, Ed, is truly a combined effort of all the stakeholders.

[5:06:20] Literally, I'll come in together at the table to give us some of that information.

[5:06:25] And then to refine that, then having professionals refine that information so

[5:06:28] that it's usable data for us in the development of this general plan.

[5:06:32] So that is a great thing.

[5:06:34] I'm very glad that our ag commissioner brought that grant forward and then we're moving forward that way, but once that's done

[5:06:42] Then we need to have an element in here that

[5:06:44] That utilizes it and it speaks to the utilization of the salt grant data for the development of

[5:06:53] Ag priorities around

[5:06:56] Economic well-being of the county and of agriculture as an industry in our county

[5:07:02] I'm

[5:07:06] interested.

[5:07:06] I get it all.

[5:07:07] You did?

[5:07:08] Okay.

[5:07:08] And so I popped up a slide.

[5:07:09] I mean, so the, you're just a refresher on the salt grant agriculture.

[5:07:13] The, the, the salt grant program is currently underway.

[5:07:17] It's led by the Ag Department to create a plan to, to support agricultural viability in the Solano County.

[5:07:22] And it's funded through a Department of Conservation Grant.

[5:07:25] It's a $500,000 planning grant awarded to study ways to enhance the county's land use, infrastructure, and economic development policies in support of the viability of the agricultural industry.

[5:07:34] Three focus areas are currently be studied, and recommendations are meant to inform the general

[5:07:39] plan update, especially the agriculture chapter, to your point.

[5:07:42] Thank you.

[5:07:43] Yes.

[5:07:43] The grant's not going to get pulled from the system.

[5:07:46] No, no, we don't.

[5:07:47] We took the money.

[5:07:48] I just, and the check in advance.

[5:07:50] No, we took it in a rant.

[5:07:51] We just got a reward of the CDB grant that you guys approved, let's go for.

[5:07:55] So that, that didn't get pulled together, so that's good news.

[5:07:58] Good.

[5:08:01] Yeah, supervisor Williams got it.

[5:08:03] To the chair.

[5:08:04] And in reference to the economic development, when we were discussing earlier today, not this meeting, but her first meeting, we talked about industrial areas, some of the industrial areas that we have, and I do recall when we were having the priority setting, then we were talking about ag innovation, and I was just thinking maybe those are some areas that we can identify where, you know,

[5:08:34] So they're doing ag robotics or different things that they can do that kind of work without

[5:08:39] taking up land, but still be a part of the ag economic development plan.

[5:08:46] Highlight locations where these ag innovations can take place.

[5:08:52] And identifying those types of uses that we may not have envisioned in the 2000 HR plan forming them into the

[5:08:59] the updates to expand it.

[5:09:01] Yes.

[5:09:02] Okay, great.

[5:09:03] Ellis, I'll thank you.

[5:09:03] That's if I could, to one this point, you know, even if it's,

[5:09:08] if you do ag innovation on ag land, producing the robot there,

[5:09:13] the robot's going to go out and pick in that field.

[5:09:16] I had a robot company that was looking to come to Sloan County,

[5:09:21] they were developing robots to pick grapes,

[5:09:24] but they needed a field in order to next to their facility,

[5:09:27] you know, a test field to be able to roll the robot out in the pick.

[5:09:31] So it's not that it has to be either or, but it can be both where you allow for some research

[5:09:39] or development on a piece of ag property in which they're going to then test their new robot

[5:09:45] or whatever it is, their new machine for harvesting or picking out in the field in a test field.

[5:09:53] So kind of like we do with, or it's kind of like some of the agricultural tourism piece where they have to have a certain amount of agriculture, you know, 70% of the land has to be agriculture in 25% of the land could be utilized for a research purpose or just like with the tourism piece where they get to build a structure.

[5:10:25] Yeah, we have all these UC graduates coming out of school, you know, and when they're in school, they have the use of the labs and all of that. But once they come out, you know, where do they go next? Well, they're going to go someplace that's got the facilities or go work for someone that's got the facilities where they're going to develop their own, but still they need, they need that those areas. So

[5:10:46] So more things to think about.

[5:10:53] In our proximity to UC Davis is something that I don't think we've really fully tapped

[5:10:57] into yet.

[5:10:58] And I think there are definitely areas in the county where we could do a lot more in

[5:11:02] that front.

[5:11:04] Great.

[5:11:05] All right.

[5:11:05] Halfway point.

[5:11:09] All right.

[5:11:10] So we're going to transition from the priorities and then start talking about some of the elements

[5:11:15] It's within the general plan that sort of identify it, frame it, we're going to go through some of that as we talked about.

[5:11:22] There's a lot more information here that's a little bit more in depth as to specific topics.

[5:11:26] So as we transition, so we're going to look at the high level general plan considerations.

[5:11:30] Obviously, a measure T is critical that we understand that and work with that.

[5:11:35] We want to talk about some of the annexations in the city expansions.

[5:11:38] we've sort of hinted to that as it relates to conversion of Ag Land provision of housing

[5:11:43] and things like that.

[5:11:45] We've talked quite a bit about utility provision and infrastructure, how that currently sits

[5:11:49] in what the limitations are for us to do stuff in the anticorporated area and how it does focus

[5:11:54] growth into the cities.

[5:11:56] Energy development, we talked earlier the day about about Bess's, but there's also solar,

[5:12:00] there's other method upwind, there's a lot of energy development and a lot of it wants

[5:12:04] to be here in Solano County for some reason.

[5:12:06] Housing, we're going to touch more on the housing and just sort of the nuance of how the housing

[5:12:11] is focused in cities, if the board wants some other consideration of that, how do we

[5:12:16] achieve that through the general plan, and then we'll finish up sort of with the statutory

[5:12:19] requirements.

[5:12:20] We touched on it in the last meeting in March, but it's really to identify some of the new

[5:12:24] things that have come since 2008 from the state level, and that you and the public

[5:12:29] needs to consider as we start to update the general plan.

[5:12:31] So let's go jump right in.

[5:12:34] All right, so general planning situation measure T.

[5:12:36] And these are very strong ties to board priorities E2A1 and A3

[5:12:41] as we've talked earlier.

[5:12:43] As we mentioned, measure T is really integrated

[5:12:46] into the general plan.

[5:12:48] Land designated it as aqua hulture

[5:12:50] and the general plan requires a vote to alter.

[5:12:52] This is critical, it's a very key aspect

[5:12:56] of how we protect ag and how we focus growth

[5:13:00] into the cities. It establishes minimum lot sizes based on agricultural region.

[5:13:05] That's its methodology. Obviously, the board has to consider, and the public needs to consider that needs to change,

[5:13:10] or if that's a good basis to continue with. Agricultural lands may be re-designated per policies in the agricultural section policy number 32 through P-36,

[5:13:21] and I don't know if I have to cheat you on that, but we can get you that.

[5:13:24] It's based on required findings or state housing law compliance. So, there are ways to re-designate.

[5:13:29] Yeah, I think that's the, is that the 50-acre rule?

[5:13:31] Yeah, and so there are ways to be designated, land for housing specifically.

[5:13:36] They have a lot of loopholes for them, but there's identification of how that happens.

[5:13:40] As we mentioned earlier, the, the measure T currently allows only two residences per legal parcel designated as agriculture.

[5:13:48] And it doesn't apply to city annexations.

[5:13:50] And so once that, once a parcel is converted, or something's converted to annexation, it no longer has the requirements of measure T on it.

[5:13:58] and it moves into the city realm.

[5:14:00] It measured key limits development opportunities

[5:14:03] in certain unincorporated areas,

[5:14:04] and that's by its definition of orderly growth.

[5:14:07] Measure T requirements in effect until December 31st of 2028,

[5:14:11] unless repealed or amended by the voters.

[5:14:13] So that's just a little history on the measure T.

[5:14:15] If there's any questions or comments on that,

[5:14:18] jump through.

[5:14:19] Oh, it's any late.

[5:14:20] Okay.

[5:14:21] As we referenced earlier in the earlier presentation,

[5:14:24] this is the land use diagram LU-1.

[5:14:26] It really is that the working document from the general plan that identified all the land

[5:14:31] uses that were anticipated or determined through the general plan quite a bit on there.

[5:14:38] But as you can see, predominantly, it's focused on agriculture in the unincorporated

[5:14:44] areas with very, very distinct and focused city-centered growth.

[5:14:51] This slide is from the general plan, it's the opportunity sites.

[5:14:56] We've talked a little bit about that in multiple presentations today.

[5:15:00] But as you can see, there are commercial and industrial designations.

[5:15:07] The two big ones you see are down in Collinsville and the Lambie we talked about during the best process. But there are some others in the north part of the county, indics is the IAS area. The question, obviously, as we go forward, are these meet in the needs of the board in the community for how we want to continue forward, or are there expanded areas that we want to consider?

[5:15:29] As part of our process, we have looked at the opportunities along the corridor for economic development opportunities within the unincorporated area but related to the highway corridor, and that study is currently underway, obviously we'll bring forward more information, but there's opportunities currently, we've identified eight sites that with the current provisions of measure T and the current conditions of the general plan and zoning,

[5:16:00] I mean, these are opportunity sites where economic development could happen, and so as we go through that study process and bring it forward, we can identify some uses and differing levels of uses based upon what's available on site for services, what's adjacent in the cities that would have to be negotiated or other opportunities.

[5:16:18] So it's an important consideration for us as we go forward.

[5:16:21] It's a starting point for this general plan and this question if we, whether we, we think this is the best methodology for us to get unincorporated economic development, or if there's expansion into other areas.

[5:16:37] Sorry, that would mean it's okay to an early discussion, a discussion point, green belts, green belts are identified in the general plan on the screen.

[5:16:47] You can see the green one's pretty well, but there are some sort of muddy brown and light-brown areas down in between Valeo and Benesha.

[5:16:58] But the idea with the green belts is that there are a mechanism to manage growth that directs urban development away from certain areas through the definition of the green belt.

[5:17:08] It preserves identity by maintaining clear separations between cities and communities that's fallen apart somewhat through annexations over the past 20 years.

[5:17:16] Some areas there is very little distinction between the areas, but the intention and

[5:17:20] the opportunity with these green belts is to start to either reestablish those or

[5:17:24] continue to enforce those.

[5:17:26] The goal really is to protect agriculture and it tends to preserve farmland that

[5:17:29] really is its primary goal, and it has a byproduct of safeguard in the environment.

[5:17:35] These areas can be used to conserve open space, habitats, and natural resources.

[5:17:41] Looking to sacrifice our vases.

[5:17:42] Yeah, I was looking to not do for Greenbelts, John.

[5:17:45] Did you want to chime in on that real quick, or do you want me to do it?

[5:17:50] I know.

[5:17:51] Chase the Brown ones, the green ones.

[5:17:53] I just, I think that we need to have a greater level of focus on the Greenbelts

[5:17:58] and on their preservation in particular, and expansion to some degree, and how they're managed.

[5:18:05] I'm just giving our part to help.

[5:18:06] Yeah, we should be doing our part to help as accounting with that, because when you look

[5:18:11] Look at some of the annexation that have taken place, and I'll just use an example in my district,

[5:18:15] where Fairfield and Vacaville literally touch now.

[5:18:19] If you look up Bannon Road, right, you go right up from the One Lake Project,

[5:18:23] and there, you pass one sign that says, City of Fairfield, and then you're in City of Vacaville.

[5:18:30] It's like that quick.

[5:18:32] So we need to make sure that somebody's got their finger on the pulse, and

[5:18:36] that were making sure that those lands are protected and expanded in all of those things.

[5:18:42] Well, and that's this is one where I think a future discussion probably, but conservation

[5:18:47] easements, to me, if you're going to use conservation easements, those are the places

[5:18:51] we ought to be focused on them, not in some of the other areas that have received

[5:18:55] conservation easements.

[5:18:56] I would agree with that.

[5:18:58] Monica, you wanted to.

[5:18:59] Well, yeah, I'm assuming maybe conservation is what I'm thinking of.

[5:19:03] But I think Greenbelts should be available so that you can ride your bike that you can,

[5:19:10] you know, have swim sets and you'll be taking your money away when you've been waiting

[5:19:14] for seven years to build a park.

[5:19:17] But those kinds of things, it even put in a swimming pool because we do not have swimming

[5:19:22] pools in Sloan County for regular residents to go and learn how to swim.

[5:19:27] So I think there's things that we could do, but it would look separate rather than just

[5:19:34] build a tree or something because in 20 years someone's going to forget.

[5:19:38] Why didn't we put trees right here?

[5:19:40] That doesn't make any sense.

[5:19:41] We can cut them down and put in some homes.

[5:19:43] But I agree with you.

[5:19:44] There needs to be this separation.

[5:19:47] And a lot of water, so they don't catch on fire.

[5:19:53] I agree with my colleagues who said we definitely need to preserve our open spaces and those

[5:20:01] green belts.

[5:20:03] John and I sit on a green belt and then I sit on open space and I've been working

[5:20:13] I mean, we're watching the team while burning out there.

[5:20:20] Just making sure that we're doing everything we can to preserve those places that we have identified.

[5:20:27] So I just wanted to add that.

[5:20:30] Thank you.

[5:20:32] Okay, great.

[5:20:33] All right, ready, go you.

[5:20:35] All right, next slide.

[5:20:36] All right, so annexations and city expansions that are related to our housing and our cultural priorities.

[5:20:45] So, you know, Measure T allows Ag conversion through city annexations.

[5:20:48] That's the only way that Ag can be converted under Measure T is through an annexation.

[5:20:53] Cities grow by establishing spheres of influence and annexations must occur within those spheres of influence.

[5:20:59] State housing policy, including SB 330, encourages infill development and reuse of underutilized

[5:21:04] parcels to meet housing needs before consuming valuable agricultural lands.

[5:21:08] I think it's a point that this board has conveyed to us and that we want to have the discussion

[5:21:13] with the cities on, the first methodologies shouldn't be to just annex.

[5:21:18] It should be to re-utilize areas within your cities to intensify development, intensify densities, and look there before looking to annex an area or to set up a new sphere of influence.

[5:21:30] And then Solana County general plan goals is to maintain existing communities, develop vacant lands within existing communities presently, and develop lands immediately adjacent to existing communities where services can be provided.

[5:21:42] We

[5:21:51] don't plan to meet with adjacent to existing communities where services can be easily

[5:21:55] planned.

[5:21:56] That's not what I want.

[5:21:58] That's what's in the current general plan so yeah that's when the current does not

[5:22:01] what we're proposing is what the current general plan.

[5:22:03] Okay.

[5:22:04] Okay.

[5:22:05] Those are those are the current goals.

[5:22:07] Those are the current goals.

[5:22:08] Sorry.

[5:22:09] I wasn't very clear when.

[5:22:15] Well and I think that part of what that one was getting it was to avoid leapfrogs

[5:22:31] So, as we continue to the discussion, recent proposals from City show potential for significant expansion, so we've seen some of the proposals that have come forward.

[5:22:39] Speculative expansion of spheres of influence and areas of interest can place additional pressure to convert agricultural lands.

[5:22:45] Targeted General Plan update should explore agricultural spheres of influence

[5:22:49] for protections of key agricultural lands near cities and similar to the Green Belt concept,

[5:22:53] but you're identifying agricultural spheres of influence that should stay and remain.

[5:22:58] It's a concept that it was, you know, if you're interested, we could discuss through the process.

[5:23:03] I think we really need to explore ways to establish some sense of permanence to agriculture.

[5:23:08] Otherwise, there's going to be ongoing expectation and eventually it will erode to the point

[5:23:14] where agriculture won't be viable in the county.

[5:23:16] So it's something that I think we need to really focus on as part of the general plan update.

[5:23:26] Okay, on screen, we're showing as part of the annexations and city expansion discussion.

[5:23:31] The map on the screen, there are outline areas reds and blues and greens and light blues.

[5:23:37] Those outline areas are the current adopted spheres of influence that the cities currently have.

[5:23:44] the around the areas of the cities, and those are the areas that are currently adopted.

[5:23:48] The table we show is that in the 2008 general plan there were about 81,678 acres of

[5:23:58] incorporated area. When we came to the board and did the MSA amendments in 2023, the city

[5:24:06] areas were up to 98,458 acres. So it was quite a bit of an increase over the, you know, those 15

[5:24:12] years, and then in addition to those areas, the 31,361 acres is currently sitting in adopted

[5:24:21] spheres of influence, and those are those areas that are outlined on the map.

[5:24:26] To be clear, though, and it goes to say that all the adopted spheres of influence, it

[5:24:33] does not necessarily mean that that acreage is designated for development.

[5:24:37] Some of the areas were, you know, would be annexed into the city for other purposes other

[5:24:41] than development.

[5:24:42] So we're not implying that all 31,000 acres will be converted from whatever their use is to to some form of development.

[5:24:48] But as it stands right now, there's about 31,000 acres that are just sitting there waiting for annexation to be converted.

[5:24:56] The shaded area is the blue and the sort of mustard, I guess mustard color.

[5:25:04] The light blew up the top is the information that we received from Dixon on their NOP for the areas of interest and their sphere of influence of expansions.

[5:25:15] And then the mustard area is the, is this a soon plan for California forever?

[5:25:21] And those acres are almost 28,000 additional acres on top of the 31,000 that are currently in spheres of influence.

[5:25:28] So as those go through the process, if those are incorporated into the spheres of interest that that wouldn't that would more than almost double the current spheres of interest for that are in the county.

[5:25:41] Meaning that they would almost double the size of our incorporated cities, overall.

[5:25:46] Potentially, yeah.

[5:25:48] Yeah, 150%.

[5:25:51] All right.

[5:25:55] So this map is a comparison of the 1962 city boundaries and the current boundaries.

[5:26:02] We work in GIS, 1962 was picked because that was really the first sort of mass recordation

[5:26:09] of all the city outlines.

[5:26:10] It's the most comprehensive look that we have of where the cities were at a point in time.

[5:26:16] So the red areas are the cities as they were in 1962, and then the green hatched areas are

[5:26:23] where the cities are now to show sort of a level of annexation that's happened over the

[5:26:27] in the past, roughly 60 years, and the growth that has happened in those areas in conversion.

[5:26:33] How many acres is that, do you know, the hashtag?

[5:26:38] No, I'll see if you have to take it for that.

[5:26:40] Now, since it's more display purposes, because the source of the map was a map from 1962,

[5:26:45] so the projections usually don't line up, so we don't really have a clear number on that right now.

[5:26:50] I just be curious to know, given our previous discussion, curious to know how much of

[5:26:55] that because most of what I'm looking at here was prime or close to prime

[5:27:00] Aglan, how much of that prime Aglan did we lose in that 60 years?

[5:27:04] That looks pretty significant.

[5:27:06] We can work on, obviously, it's data we can work on.

[5:27:08] You've got a lot of other stuff you've got to do, I'm just, I'm just pointing that out.

[5:27:12] Man, you know, I'm just, I'm not saying that city center growth wasn't a good idea.

[5:27:18] I'm just saying it didn't, it looks like it didn't help and do what it was supposed to do

[5:27:23] because we developed on all of this private land right here.

[5:27:27] We might have kept it all in one spot, but we still covered up a whole bunch of

[5:27:31] egg.

[5:27:33] And then this slide, it's just showing the new proposed annexations in areas of interest

[5:27:38] for the Sassoon expansion plan and the Dixon-NOP.

[5:27:43] So it's a representation of what we know potentially is coming forward to the process.

[5:27:51] We're still doing a deep dive on some of this data and looking at things like what historical absorption rates are and things like that.

[5:27:58] I think that's all going to be relevant as we get further into this and really start looking at the true impacts and what the opportunities are as well.

[5:28:10] So to somewhat to your point, but not as not.

[5:28:13] Oh no, it is, it's more that I'm just was thinking which I know it's always scary is that as we have climate change.

[5:28:22] There's a lot of areas around the world that are not going to be able to grow food.

[5:28:27] And to me, that is something when we talk about keeping egg, egg, is that we need to keep

[5:28:33] what's happening here so that we can grow.

[5:28:37] And Ed, I know we sent, I mean, I remember that map that you have where a lot of our food

[5:28:42] goes around the world, but a lot of people, there's issues, a lot of people, if we talk about

[5:28:48] I'm not hungry here, based on this morning's conversation.

[5:28:52] It's not going to get any better around the world, and we need to keep our ag as pristine as possible because we grow food here.

[5:29:00] That's what we do.

[5:29:03] Absolutely.

[5:29:04] So that was my editorial and my head.

[5:29:08] Great.

[5:29:10] This table, so it's sort of in line with what we were asking for, but it's from a specific point in time.

[5:29:15] We worked with the ad commissioner on looking at the conversion of ag lands from 1984, which was the sort of the start of Prop A.

[5:29:24] In 1984, we had identified a hundred and basically 181,000 acres of important front farm land, that includes prime farm land.

[5:29:33] We also had about 220,000 acres of grazing land for a total of 401,000 acres of these specific types of land.

[5:29:41] In 1920, the important farmland had gone down to 147,500 acres and grazing has gone down to 205.

[5:29:49] So it's a nexus of about 50,000 acres that have been converted since 1984 from Ag Land into.

[5:30:00] Development.

[5:30:07] Let's transition to utility provision and infrastructure. So development is historically limited in the anticorporated areas we've discussed. The general plan principle of what is urban, shall be municipal, and that means that municipal services must be negotiated with the cities and expansion in the anticorporated areas is typically not happening. Increased demand for utilities will lead increased public service capacity constraints. We've already heard that from any of the utility groups.

[5:30:36] groups, that there are constraints and concerns.

[5:30:39] Well and septic can limit size and scope of developments and there's a state process we

[5:30:44] currently go through for water systems which also is really the main mechanism for us to

[5:30:49] do any development in the under-corporated area.

[5:30:52] It's very time, it takes a lot of time, there's a lot of restrictions and it's very restrictive.

[5:30:56] Package plants and other systems require additional research but we are looking into those solutions

[5:31:02] from some form of municipal services, but, you know, through all these process in the infrastructure studies and things like that, we can identify the different methodologies and understand what they do and can do for the county.

[5:31:14] And then agri-terrism may require exploration of policies that focus infrastructure to certain agricultural regions.

[5:31:21] And that's to say, with agri-terrism, we're looking at, you know, we're looking at what we call resort hotels, things like that.

[5:31:28] Those have a much higher service need, may not be feasibly done with some of these systems,

[5:31:32] and may need to look at if there is any focus of revisions that allow for

[5:31:38] infrastructure in the unincorporated area.

[5:31:41] Maybe that's where those are focused to be an open dialogue to try to concentrate those,

[5:31:45] to limit the growth into those areas, which you've already identified.

[5:31:50] I agree.

[5:31:51] Okay, energy.

[5:31:54] So this is one of the E3 priorities of the board.

[5:31:58] So, energy demands in California makes a lot of attractive.

[5:32:01] We've seen that from all the discussions we've had recently on a lot of stuff.

[5:32:05] It impacts open space, wind resource area, and transmission lines,

[5:32:09] transmission overhead and under with pipelines and electrical conduits, everything.

[5:32:14] All the transmission lines, we have a lot of lines that go through the county.

[5:32:17] They go through the county, I mean, just to state that they don't stay here, they don't benefit us.

[5:32:23] And there are critical resources that a lot of people have eyes on.

[5:32:26] The best is, you know, we are looking at the Pending AB 205 applications, we're going through that process, we took action this morning to provide some more clarity and we'll continue to work either through the CEC process to provide meaningful comments and provisions to help protect the public or finalize the ordinance that really directs it how that's going to go forward.

[5:32:52] wind turbines still remain we keep getting what we still have inquiries about

[5:32:57] expansion or replacement of some of those they are we've sort of had a limit on

[5:33:02] those recently but they're still out there it's another form of energy that

[5:33:05] that has an interest in Sloan County because of our wind patterns we have a very

[5:33:09] unique wind system that goes to the county that makes it very attractive for wind

[5:33:13] turbines natural gas wells they're on they seem to be on a cycle we've had a spike

[5:33:17] Like recently in the reestablishment of natural gas wells, we're finding that in the currently

[5:33:24] for data centers, and there's a big proliferation of needs for data centers, data centers need

[5:33:30] natural gas as much as they need solar and battery storage.

[5:33:35] Natural gas is the preferred methodology for backup generation.

[5:33:39] It's something that most of them require, and so we've seen a rise in the re initiation

[5:33:46] of natural gas wells in the Dixon area, we have a large field out there.

[5:33:51] It seems to be on a 10-year cycle, they open the well, they process it, and

[5:33:55] then they go dark for a while, and it rebuilds up, and then they reopen the well.

[5:34:01] But that's a natural resource within our county that's kind of valuable.

[5:34:05] And then solar, so we currently have a prohibition on ag land.

[5:34:08] But many inquiries to build come forward.

[5:34:10] There's a lot of interest in us looking at the moratorium on those solar.

[5:34:16] There's new technologies that, you know, happy sheep, I think, is the terminology.

[5:34:21] So there's opportunities for us if we want to look at the provision of solar in the county to sort of meet some of the needs that the state is identified and the public is identified, but still keep it consistent with our need to preserve ag.

[5:34:35] There's opportunities there.

[5:34:36] And then the general plan policy allows solar energy generation projects and open space areas working system with other uses and values.

[5:34:43] That's a current general plan policy.

[5:34:47] It's sort of contradicted by the more torn or the ordinance we have on solar, on ag.

[5:34:53] So it's something that we would have to have discussion to resolve and to understand how we want to go forward with those types of projects.

[5:34:59] So I don't have a problem having those discussions.

[5:35:02] I just want to make sure as we move forward in those discussions that we are doing so with the best interest of our residents in mind.

[5:35:09] because just like the best proposal that was brought forward this morning that benefits

[5:35:14] the city of San Francisco, where the windmills out here on the ridge that are owned

[5:35:18] by smud to produce electricity for smud, right?

[5:35:23] We have had a history of these energy provision companies coming here and pillaging our resources.

[5:35:31] I'll use that term pillaging them.

[5:35:34] And taking them to other areas and none of that is of benefit to our residents, right?

[5:35:39] They see the results, but there's no enhancement of our economic development.

[5:35:46] There's no enhancement of our open space that's provided by any of those takes that occur

[5:35:54] with regard to energy or land to produce it.

[5:35:58] So when we look at the solar, if there is new technology out there that makes it possible

[5:36:04] to have a solar panel and still graze sheep under it, or still do some type

[5:36:09] of agriculture there so that the farmer has the ability to augment their agricultural income,

[5:36:15] then maybe it's something we should be able to look at. The other piece of that, though,

[5:36:20] is that until just recently, I was told that that was a detriment to the pilots out of Travis.

[5:36:27] And so, but I was told technology is changing and it may be that they can put that in now and it

[5:36:32] doesn't produce a glare and it's not a problem anymore.

[5:36:35] That's, we've heard the same thing with regards to the employer.

[5:36:37] But I'm a show me guy, right?

[5:36:40] So somebody's got to show me that technology and let me know that it works and

[5:36:43] I got to have Travis and the folks out there sign off on it and say, yeah, that's legit.

[5:36:49] Before I would ever think we would even consider that.

[5:36:51] So, anyway, that's my two cents on energy.

[5:36:55] It sounds like a flyover.

[5:36:56] Yeah, it sounds like.

[5:36:58] All right, thank you, sir.

[5:37:01] Oh, supervisor Brown.

[5:37:02] Well, just two things. One, the group that does the, um, grows all the vegetables and stuff in the greenhouse is that is, yes, which was a, is that anything we need to even think about?

[5:37:16] I'm just throwing this out in terms of Ag. Do, you know, that, because that's going to, that takes energy, that takes water, that takes the set or the other.

[5:37:25] I'm just because that's how you're going to expand growing food for the for the world basically so just something to think about and the other is what how are we on internet?

[5:37:36] Broadband?

[5:37:37] Yeah, in other words, I have no idea what kind of what kind of energy it takes to make that happen.

[5:37:42] But if you want to have broadband band and based on that map that we saw with what John wants to do on the different quarters of our quarters.

[5:37:52] and then the I-80 corridor, you're going to have to have some sort of internet and I have no idea if I mean, you know, Tim can probably come and tell us something but I have no idea what kind of energy it takes and if you want to expand and people can work at home, you're going to have to have.

[5:38:11] So when I'm aware of my brain right now, computers, internet, there we go.

[5:38:16] Yeah.

[5:38:17] I'm tired.

[5:38:18] Sorry.

[5:38:19] I'll get to do it.

[5:38:20] I mean, obviously, that fits more into the infrastructure dialogue, and as part of the

[5:38:25] general plan process, the provision of that can be discussed as either policy or a goal

[5:38:31] to work towards.

[5:38:38] Right at the end.

[5:38:40] Luckily, there's a recording of this.

[5:38:43] I can look on the internet and hear it.

[5:38:46] Okay.

[5:38:47] Transitioning.

[5:38:48] We're going to jump to housing.

[5:38:49] And so housing cost pressures are felt statewide and locally.

[5:38:55] Cities and counties have housing obligations from the state, and

[5:38:57] I'm referring really to Reena, and the Board of Priority Address Housing Affordability.

[5:39:02] The Board has stated that in multiple instances that there's a priority to address it.

[5:39:07] On screen is the current Reena, where there are current housing elements in the 2023 to

[5:39:12] 2031 year range, and this is just a breakout of how it's been broken out, and

[5:39:18] In the expectations for each of the categories, as we go forward over the next, well, now we're down to six years.

[5:39:24] But the target is 10,992 units county-wide.

[5:39:28] We have a structure that's sort of unique in the state where we have a subgroup that works with the cities to handle the counties, and it's sort of a symbiotic relationship, which I think is kind of fascinating.

[5:39:40] And we're seeing how that's working out, but it has created the opportunity to, again,

[5:39:45] and balance the goals of our 2000 HR plan

[5:39:48] and focus development and housing

[5:39:50] into the cities as opposed to the incorporated area.

[5:39:56] Okay?

[5:39:57] Continuing with the discussion on the housing.

[5:40:01] So currently, there are 13,000 housing units

[5:40:05] countywide likely to be built within

[5:40:07] the current rena cycle.

[5:40:09] And I know that's going to be somewhat of a shock

[5:40:11] to the board that there are,

[5:40:13] from a proof for construction projects within the cities,

[5:40:16] There's an additional 13,000 units excellently come online in the next five to eight years.

[5:40:21] Now when we say approved, those have gone through the entitlement process and they're ready to go.

[5:40:26] We're going to talk about some of the others that are part of some other plans and things like that.

[5:40:29] But it's critical for, I think for this Board and the public to understand is that in the next five to eight years,

[5:40:35] we should expect 34,000 new residents within the county, the ability for those.

[5:40:41] Go ahead, finish it up.

[5:40:43] Sure. So, you know, our current population as of 2024 was 455,000 people. We're very closely

[5:40:51] get into the 489,000 level when those houses come online and using the 2.6, you know,

[5:40:57] residents per unit. We're getting very close to the 500,000 threshold. Now, those are

[5:41:05] approved and entitled projects. We also have applications received and when I say we,

[5:41:10] I mean, countywide, the cities have received these projects applications to go forward.

[5:41:15] There are 26,210 units considered within those projects as well.

[5:41:21] That means there's a total of almost 40,000 projects anticipated in the cities to be built

[5:41:27] over probably the next 15 to 20 years.

[5:41:30] That takes us up to 557,000 people.

[5:41:33] That includes some of the projects that we've seen on the previous maps and some of the annexation

[5:41:38] areas. It does not include this as soon, California forever project, which the goal for that is

[5:41:45] obviously 400,000 over the next 40 years. So I think it was important for the board to understand

[5:41:51] that when we start talking about housing, there is a lot of housing development anticipated for the

[5:41:58] county granted most of it's going to be market rate. I was just going to ask that. My question,

[5:42:02] you knew I was going to ask that. How many of these fit into the category that we want to see?

[5:42:07] Right?

[5:42:08] Out of 39,000, almost 40,000 units, how many of those are at the AMI that we're talking

[5:42:15] about?

[5:42:17] I mean, we don't have that.

[5:42:19] If they've submitted the projects, the data's out there somewhere, right?

[5:42:22] We get to kind of know.

[5:42:24] The data set is very large for what we have to just kind of present this individual look

[5:42:29] at going.

[5:42:31] I'm asking a lot.

[5:42:32] Right?

[5:42:33] Yeah.

[5:42:33] You can say it.

[5:42:34] I won't.

[5:42:35] Well, we have to say, I mean, obviously we have the same questions, right, because we're trying to balance the importance of housing and the need for housing that the board is expressed to know that we have green and numbers that we have to meet, and there's some pretty hard numbers in the very low and moderate areas that aren't going to be met, the units that we see coming forward from the city are a large number of them, but we absolutely expect that they won't hit the low,

[5:43:04] So very low or moderate range, they might be in the moderate to above moderate range and

[5:43:09] try and get to our meet and numbers.

[5:43:11] And the cities are very engaged in hitting those meet and numbers.

[5:43:15] So these projects should meet that point.

[5:43:17] But I think we look at this and there's an opportunity for more, right?

[5:43:20] There's more opportunity to meet that lower end as opposed to just strictly converting

[5:43:26] a headland for at scale or market housing.

[5:43:32] in terms of affordable units, what I think we will see in terms of affordable units to get built,

[5:43:37] I've got to be built, primarily, because of the opera money that either we use,

[5:43:41] and we actually provided it to cities to help buy down some of their projects,

[5:43:45] as well as some of the cities I think did some of it as well.

[5:43:47] So once those funds are expended, which is in the next year or two,

[5:43:52] going forward into the distant future, there's going to have to be new tools,

[5:43:56] because there's not going to be our promoting in the future.

[5:43:57] And we want to make sure that there's continuation of affordable housing built.

[5:44:02] We're going to have to find other ways to do it.

[5:44:08] I just want to make sure I'm understanding that.

[5:44:11] I mean, it says approved for construction, so they've gone through whatever, and

[5:44:16] they're just waiting there for money to show up.

[5:44:18] And part of this number includes some units that are currently being constructed.

[5:44:22] Maybe the project's not fully built out yet, so maybe I only built 20% of it.

[5:44:27] But they're still going right now, they've just been approved.

[5:44:31] It's various stages like what James was saying.

[5:44:33] They're entitled, maybe they haven't dug in the dirt yet, because they're still taking care of it.

[5:44:37] Yeah, you've got the final map process, you've got the building permit processes, those all take time.

[5:44:44] So there's lag between when the entitlement is first issued to when they actually get built.

[5:44:48] But a proof of construction is a pretty significant point.

[5:44:50] These aren't vapor houses or these are houses that are going to happen groups have gone through the process.

[5:45:00] To get the entitlements, developers are looking to do these projects. So they are more real than they aren't. The next grouping, obviously, the 26,000 units for applications receive. Those have a much broader process. They have to go through to become reality, but they are on the horizon. I mean, they are actively interested parties with cities working to make those happen. And then for reference, we put up the 2010 Total Housing Units in Islamic County. We're at 150, just under 153,000.

[5:45:29] in housing units, by 2020 we're up to 162,000 so that was sort of a net of 9,500 over a 10 year period in the next 10 to 15 years.

[5:45:40] So we're looking at, we could be looking at 40,000 so that's a 4x sort of growth.

[5:45:46] And again, that doesn't include if California forever comes on board, and things expand in some of those other areas, so it's a reference point.

[5:45:55] All right, so that's really the bulk of the discussion we wanted to have on the board priorities in relation to the general plan.

[5:46:05] We sort of talked about this at the last meeting, so I won't be labored too much.

[5:46:09] There are statutory requirements.

[5:46:10] The state law encourages general plan elements to address a environmental justice climate adaption while fire hazard and resilience.

[5:46:19] Those, we would look to integrate those into the housing chapter based upon public input and

[5:46:24] in absolute requirements that we've balanced the absolute requirements versus what's the interest of the board and the community that include in that process would go through the general plan process.

[5:46:36] Any questions?

[5:46:37] Just a question.

[5:46:40] Yeah, question.

[5:46:41] Under climate adaptation.

[5:46:44] Is that a clue to the little rise?

[5:46:46] I think it's part of that.

[5:46:48] We can get further clarification on.

[5:46:51] But yeah, it's in, it's maybe an extension of, you know, the climate action plans and things like that that were done as part of the previous general plan, did you know?

[5:46:59] Now, just some aspects of climate change readiness needs to be included. I think we hit a lot of this with our public health and safety element up or chapter update, but we would still want to take a look to make sure we're still today on this.

[5:47:11] When you want to chapter on C little rise.

[5:47:15] the climate action plan includes a aspect of sea level rise.

[5:47:19] And I know some, we've been looking at as a group with some of Misty's projects.

[5:47:25] But the incorporation of, we don't want to project that we have the answer right now.

[5:47:31] And we want to, we would look at whatever the statutory requirements going forward to figure out how we incorporate those requirements.

[5:47:36] And any other requirements that the board wants to go beyond or

[5:47:39] or in tandem with the statutory requirements

[5:47:42] and incorporate it into the next round.

[5:47:44] So if you're saying that do we need to do sea level rise,

[5:47:49] we have to verify that is a must versus a want.

[5:47:55] And if it's something that's of interest to the board.

[5:47:56] Well, it's a need, I'll tell you that.

[5:47:58] It's a need.

[5:47:59] Yes, right.

[5:48:01] And so, you know, from a statutory standpoint,

[5:48:03] these are guidelines that they're like the minimum.

[5:48:05] seven cities five of them are going to be affected. I see level rise. Yes, based on studies. I guess you're hearing it's a want from the board. Sure, even if it ain't a need.

[5:48:14] Yeah, that and the other was misty. Oh, you know saltwater intrusion. Yes.

[5:48:21] Could could occur quicker if if we're over pumping the groundwater.

[5:48:44] water. I'm working on that. I'm working on that.

[5:48:54] I believe it's updated. It would be

[5:48:57] it was done as a regional basis so generally those regional plans what

[5:49:03] once they've been set those are kind of the documents they are until there's

[5:49:07] another need for a regional look at it. I know we did we did the plan. Robyn you

[5:49:14] have an answer. All right. Oh yes.

[5:49:20] Robyn you have a short answer. Yes we saw

[5:49:23] a federal grant to our update because the plan has to be updated every five

[5:49:27] five years we were approved for that we're in the process.

[5:49:30] It'll be done regionally, it is a multigerestictional, local hazard mitigation plan.

[5:49:37] And it included, you're going to get me now, I don't think it was all seven cities.

[5:49:42] But it was the majority of the county including some of the special districts and

[5:49:46] they will all be included in the next update as well.

[5:49:48] The SID, the water agency, I think the city of LAO, water also was included, yeah.

[5:49:53] But I guess what does it show up, you know, here we have this document, it's pretty important.

[5:49:59] They're supposed to be consistent, so-

[5:50:01] Not so much so, where does it show up?

[5:50:05] Should it be part of our-

[5:50:06] As in, is it referenced within the general plan, or is it as they're two separate plans both adopted by the board, so they should be consistent with each other, but one doesn't necessarily supersede.

[5:50:21] Not so much to have a health influence or decision-making.

[5:50:27] Okay, I see, maybe I don't know that I see what you're saying, John.

[5:50:31] But I think-

[5:50:32] For real, I-

[5:50:33] It's been a long day.

[5:50:36] For real.

[5:50:37] Yeah.

[5:50:38] So, I mean, currently in the public health and safety chapter,

[5:50:41] it may incorporate environmental justice climate change and

[5:50:44] resiliency plan in the update.

[5:50:47] The last update of that section in 2024.

[5:50:48] So it would, we would anticipate that it would sit within that chapter, but if there's another chapter, no, I would just want to word it.

[5:50:56] I think currently it sits within that chapter.

[5:50:58] Okay.

[5:50:59] Yeah, I would do a lot of studies.

[5:51:02] We don't implement much.

[5:51:04] Well, we're trying.

[5:51:06] No, I would hope that's one of the focuses here.

[5:51:10] Yes, some of the hazards that are identified that need to be addressed within particularly the climate change, including sea level rise, which is in that SV

[5:51:18] 3.79 as a requirement, so those are identified within the hazard mitigation plan as hazards in the county that have to be addressed and therefore addressed within the public health and safety section of the general plan. I think that answered your question.

[5:51:32] Okay.

[5:51:40] We're on direction.

[5:51:41] Oh, yeah.

[5:51:43] That's good.

[5:51:43] Bring it on.

[5:51:45] Thirty-seven.

[5:51:47] Yes.

[5:51:48] Thirty-seven.

[5:51:49] Directions and next steps.

[5:51:51] So, you know, we will continue to work on the request for proposals for the targeted

[5:51:55] update of the general plan.

[5:51:57] We would select it.

[5:51:58] Selected consultants would provide a comprehensive review of existing general plan

[5:52:01] and extent of targeted update.

[5:52:04] And that's the definition of what the RFP would do in the process.

[5:52:08] We would also part of that would be to develop the plan for public outreach.

[5:52:11] As we discussed earlier, we would continue to work with the cities on the county wide summit bringing that back to us.

[5:52:17] Something that Bill, you want to talk maybe a little bit about this, the ad hoc?

[5:52:22] Yeah, I think we're not suggesting you do anything today because we didn't put in the agenda.

[5:52:28] But as we go along, I found that it's good to have an ad hoc committee from the board to kind of help us on certain issues.

[5:52:37] like maybe it's the RFP final language or the discussions with the consultant regarding

[5:52:43] public outreach, having a board ad hoc committee, probably represented by, you know, say the

[5:52:49] west and east side of the county or the urban versus the more rural part. Somehow we get a good

[5:52:54] representation on the boards that we have that sort of feedback loop as we're going into it. So

[5:52:59] we can bring that back in the future, but we wanted to at least throw that out there as a possibility.

[5:53:04] I've seen it done in other jurisdictions as well, it's helpful, that way staff is getting

[5:53:09] good input from your level as well.

[5:53:13] So that's what that's about.

[5:53:15] And I would, I did want to reiterate a comment I made earlier, even though we may be a little

[5:53:21] bit before we actually get a consultant on board, I want to continue to have these kind of discussions

[5:53:24] because these things and the feedback that we're getting here is information that we can feed

[5:53:28] to a consultant team early on so that we're not wasting a bunch of time, a bunch of time

[5:53:32] with a consultant team where they don't have some baseline parameters that are important

[5:53:37] to the board want to make sure they're able to hear those as early as we can in the process.

[5:53:41] So as we suggest here, maybe the next working session of this type, if you guys can go through

[5:53:47] this one more time or two, would be on economic development and really do a harder look at

[5:53:51] economic development and what that might look like in this county, given the parameters that

[5:53:56] we have to work with and really start to look at, you know, what would generate revenue

[5:54:01] in more detail, you know, what things that we think we can do in that context as well

[5:54:08] as talking about how the cooperation with the cities could work as well for a mutual benefit

[5:54:14] of economic development.

[5:54:15] So that's kind of what we're at right now, sort of continue to have a session like this

[5:54:19] periodically and then we'll come back if the board's interested in doing an ad hoc and

[5:54:24] And then we can have those discussions as well as kind of gearing up for the full process.

[5:54:29] But I think like today, from my perspective, this has been really helpful just hearing

[5:54:34] that initial feedback from the board on some of these issues.

[5:54:36] You know, this was challenging to even pull this together because there's a lot, right?

[5:54:40] There's a lot in the general plan.

[5:54:41] We could have touched on a lot of things.

[5:54:42] We kind of tried to go with things that we've heard previously that we thought were important,

[5:54:46] tried to put them in a new context now in the relative of this.

[5:54:49] I do want to thank J.T. who yesterday and the day before as we were going through the

[5:54:55] PowerPoint and he did a lot of the research for a lot of these things and then he had

[5:55:00] to put up with us telling him what to do a lot and criticizing his spelling periodically.

[5:55:06] So I want to appreciate him as well as James and you know because I do know he had the best

[5:55:13] as well today so it was a lot on the plate but I think this turned out to be I think from

[5:55:18] From my perspective, a useful input from the board, and that's what our recommendations are for today.

[5:55:25] And then from, you know, I want to ask about the, I want to make sure I hurt you right before you said about the Mr.

[5:55:35] Emblem in reference to the board ad hoc committee, is it to help to create an RFP, or once the consultant has been hired to work with the consultant.

[5:55:49] I got a little confused.

[5:55:51] Okay, yeah, basically what I'm suggesting is we're developing a draft right now.

[5:55:55] Once it's a little further along we want to be able to run it by something like an

[5:56:00] out-how committee to give us some feedback so we can finalize it.

[5:56:03] A draft RFP?

[5:56:04] Yeah.

[5:56:07] Get involved in some of the early discussions with consultant on public process and other things.

[5:56:14] All right, I just wanted to understand that process.

[5:56:16] and I'm asking because for me being my very first general plan update that I get to participate in,

[5:56:28] I want to, you know, want to make sure we're all getting opportunity to be involved in the process, you know.

[5:56:34] So, I know we're doing it like this, but I really would prefer like a workshop so that we can,

[5:56:42] And I mean, the acts and don't get me wrong, I know this is my job to answer these questions.

[5:56:50] But I would like it, especially, and I'm talking for myself, I'm not gonna put anyone

[5:56:56] else in there, but I'm just gonna assume, I'm guessing, the supervisor James is your first

[5:57:02] general plan, or I mean, you came from Sacramento, I mean from San Francisco, with this kind of

[5:57:08] So this is my very first anywhere in her first with this county and I just feel like

[5:57:18] so that we can be, I want to be fully engaged and that would full understanding of everything

[5:57:25] that we're doing and instead of stopping you all the time and wearing you out with questions like

[5:57:31] that I would like a more in-depth workshop so that I really can grasp the work that we're

[5:57:41] doing because this is going to impact people for 20 years. I don't want to, I mean I know

[5:57:48] we're not perfect but I want to make good decisions and want to make informed decisions and I want

[5:58:01] like workshop is going forward.

[5:58:03] I hope my colleagues will agree to have a workshop.

[5:58:08] I would prefer.

[5:58:09] Well, I'd like to mention earlier.

[5:58:10] I mean, I think once again, if you can tolerate this,

[5:58:12] we could do a number of these.

[5:58:13] Like I said, I'd like to do one on economic development.

[5:58:15] There's other, there's natural resources.

[5:58:18] Yeah.

[5:58:19] Yeah, so we're breaking it back and pieces now.

[5:58:22] This is sort of the broad kind of look.

[5:58:25] And I know it was a lot.

[5:58:27] But I think it was important for sort of putting things

[5:58:30] in the context. So, once again, the ad hoc committee wouldn't necessarily be

[5:58:35] contrary to that. It would just help staff in various key points to get feedback

[5:58:40] as we bring things back to the board.

[5:58:42] Anything that that ad hoc committee was working on is going to come back to this

[5:58:46] full board in a presentation like this.

[5:58:50] So, we'll come back to the side on that. Okay, that's good and all. Thank you.

[5:58:57] Great. Thank you. And then just, you know, just rehash in their recommendations. You receive the presentation of your staff and we've taken a lot of feedback and just want to make sure there's nothing else.

[5:59:06] No, just don't feedback you want to give.

[5:59:10] I don't see any likes, but I got a lot of feedback in my hand right here from the public.

[5:59:15] So you're getting your writing hand limbered up.

[5:59:19] You know, I'm going to rely on the recording for a lot of this.

[5:59:21] Yeah. There you go. All right. So with that, I'll open public comment on this item.

[5:59:28] And the first person I have up to the mic is Ms. Dunn.

[5:59:37] Okay, thank you, Board of Supervisors for hearing our comments.

[5:59:43] I just wanted to reiterate what I heard in the presentation, things that I kind of honed in, that that were good ideas.

[5:59:50] I like the public-private partnership for parks idea.

[5:59:54] I like what Supervisor Vazquez said about protecting certain lands and building that into the general plan.

[6:00:00] And developing sites along Interstate 80 for economic development that just makes sense. And we have a really busy corridor there. And also using conservation easements to protect the green belts. I thought that was a great idea. But my main point of coming up here to make a comment is I wanted to ask the board to please consider putting measure T back on the ballot. It's going to expire in 2028. And we only have two election cycles before that.

[6:00:29] So we could potentially do this year, it's too late.

[6:00:32] So next year would be 2026 and 2027 is really cutting it close to the expiration.

[6:00:37] So please consider putting that back on the ballot to keep our ag land protected and

[6:00:45] keep that measure going. Thank you.

[6:00:47] Thank you. Next up is Marilyn Farley.

[6:01:01] Good afternoon, board. A very nice collegial discussion.

[6:01:06] I really enjoyed listening to it and enjoyed listening to the staff report.

[6:01:12] I think this kind of discussion really will help move you forward in thinking about how

[6:01:21] to craft a plan for the next 20 years.

[6:01:24] And as Wanda says, it's daunting because you want to get it right.

[6:01:28] I want to say that Solano has actually a really good record of meeting our housing needs.

[6:01:36] In terms of growth, we outpace both the state and the Bay Area in terms of the number

[6:01:41] of housing units built.

[6:01:43] So when people look at us and say, we're not doing our fair share, that's really not true.

[6:01:48] We have done very well and in fact, we've done too well in a sense because a lot of the

[6:01:55] Barry wants to live here because they can afford to.

[6:01:59] And so our challenge is those families that are at that lower end,

[6:02:05] if you drive around Fairfield for example, you will see many,

[6:02:08] many cars on many, many streets where maybe there used to be one car per

[6:02:14] household.

[6:02:15] Now there might be five.

[6:02:17] And that is an indication to me of overcrowding and

[6:02:22] and that people in the lower income levels of our community are really struggling.

[6:02:28] I think our former back of Hill Council member, Nolan Sullivan, was really a big advocate

[6:02:36] of small houses for young families who were trying to get their foot in the door.

[6:02:42] And I would really like to see the county collaborate with the cities to craft policies like

[6:02:49] like that, that address that lower income segment of the population. And I have at least

[6:02:58] one idea about how you might go about doing that. Your housing authority can issue bonds.

[6:03:06] And if you were to issue bonds for all the cities and the county that would subsidize some

[6:03:14] Some of the housing that's getting built, you could perhaps lower the cost, and you could

[6:03:19] perhaps put on it a requirement that there's priority to people who have been residents

[6:03:25] of Solano County for some time period.

[6:03:28] That might be a way to stimulate some of the kind of housing that we need, and you would

[6:03:34] get an efficiency of scale by doing it that way, by not having each individual housing authority

[6:03:40] in the cities having to do it, but the county itself could do it.

[6:03:45] And if I have time left quickly, food security, Monica's issue, that's a big issue for me.

[6:03:53] I think that looking at climate change, we should really be looking at our capacity to produce food for the world.

[6:04:01] Given climate change and how we can partner with UC Davis, for example,

[6:04:09] with the Farm Bureau, with our local farmers to make that happy.

[6:04:13] And then quickly, timing of the renewal of Major T.

[6:04:18] That's a big issue.

[6:04:19] I didn't hear a discussion of that, but I did come in late.

[6:04:22] Thank you.

[6:04:23] Thank you, ma'am.

[6:04:24] Next up is the former supervisor, Crom.

[6:04:38] Thanks.

[6:04:39] Doing Crom City Fairfield, early growth committee, as you all know.

[6:04:44] Like Marilyn said, I thought you had a very good discussion today,

[6:04:47] and I think you'll find it fruitful.

[6:04:49] So I had a couple of notes.

[6:04:51] One about the suggestion for an ad hoc committee.

[6:04:54] I mean, sitting with the Cliff Howard sitting just in front of me.

[6:04:58] It made me think that a couple of other voices might be good

[6:05:00] on that ad hoc committee to just get rapid feedback.

[6:05:04] Farm Bureau, Cliff, environmental community,

[6:05:07] somebody from the economic community.

[6:05:08] It may be one city rep,

[6:05:10] just to get a little bit of a broader base

[6:05:12] than just the county focus.

[6:05:14] So just a thought, just a suggestion.

[6:05:17] The discussion about the county looking at particularly nodes along I-80 corridor and looking to bring in more revenue for the county.

[6:05:26] It may be think about what the county is looking at doing when cities talk about wanting to annex having a property tax sharing agreement.

[6:05:34] It strikes me that the combination of TOT income, property tax income, sales tax income, everybody's looking to get their piece of the pie.

[6:05:44] And I mean, it's in many ways a zero-sum game.

[6:05:47] When you have a zero-sum game, everybody wants their peace,

[6:05:50] and begrudgingly gives up a peace to somebody else.

[6:05:54] But it strikes me that something like the tax,

[6:05:56] the property tax sharing agreement,

[6:05:58] might be broadened to include sales tax and TOT,

[6:06:01] and then bringing the cities and the county together

[6:06:03] to figure out, how do we do this in a balanced way

[6:06:06] that it may be pie in the sky hope

[6:06:09] to find a way to benefit all entities?

[6:06:12] and not battle for you know I mean if I'm if I'm the city of Dixon for example and I'm seeing the county looking at

[6:06:20] Trying to do development at the transportation nodes on the north side of 80. I'm going to be a little tect off

[6:06:26] I'm going to be wanting to say that's my let that's right next to me

[6:06:29] I want that and it's still in the county to the county is going to want it so

[6:06:33] Coming to coming to balance negotiations of agreement. I think it's pretty much always a difficult thing to do and like Sarah has said

[6:06:41] and Maryland has said, we need tea renewed

[6:06:43] and we need to make sure we don't let tea slide by

[6:06:46] or all hell could break loose.

[6:06:48] So let's find a way to make sure we can get that done.

[6:06:51] And I'm going to assume the general plan's

[6:06:53] going to take longer than anticipated,

[6:06:55] because I've been through a few of these

[6:06:57] and they always do, they never get done on time.

[6:07:00] So thanks.

[6:07:02] Thank you, sir.

[6:07:04] Mr. Burman.

[6:07:15] Thank you.

[6:07:16] Again, a good discussion.

[6:07:18] I don't want to focus on two issues here quickly.

[6:07:23] There's been a couple of mentions already about the need to renew, measure T.

[6:07:29] And I think there is commitment here.

[6:07:32] One of my concerns is that the last time to put it on the ballot would be November of 2021.

[6:07:39] The deadline to put that on your back it up.

[6:07:42] It's probably July, things always take longer.

[6:07:46] So I think the board should consider a short-term extension of measure T in case we don't get it on to the we're not done in time to get it on to the

[6:07:59] 2028 ballot. It's my understanding the board without making any changes to the measure could provide a short term maybe a three-year extension of measure T with no changes.

[6:08:14] Since there would be no changes, there would be no, I don't think there would be any requirements for the California Environmental Quality Act or anything like that.

[6:08:22] I think it's within your jurisdiction.

[6:08:24] So you ought to look at that type of short term extension.

[6:08:28] The other issue is the growth management issue.

[6:08:31] We talked a lot today about how much growth we're looking at.

[6:08:35] I mean, clearly the Sloaner County, we knew years ago,

[6:08:42] the Sloaner County we knew today is not the Sloaner County we're going to see in the future.

[6:08:49] We know the development pressures.

[6:08:51] City of Dixon is working on an EIR that would change designations for 8,000 acres.

[6:08:58] They had the harvest project proposal, which is 9,000 housing units.

[6:09:03] We know about Susan and City, we know about California forever potential population of 400,000.

[6:09:13] So I do think we need to study and evaluate mechanisms to establish some type of county-wide growth management.

[6:09:25] It's going to be difficult.

[6:09:27] And I think as the chairman has already said, basically development within the cities is up to

[6:09:33] the cities, but we need to look at that. And I think to do that, obviously it's not

[6:09:41] just the county, it's Lafgo, local agency formation commission, Solano County Transportation

[6:09:47] Authority, the water agencies, the airport land use commission. So again, I urge you to

[6:09:55] kind of broaden out your view in terms of what we can do in terms of growth management.

[6:10:00] And a center is when the going through the slides there was mention it reminded me of

[6:10:10] the Tri-City and County plan.

[6:10:12] That was a plan that was put together, Solano County, Benesha, Fairfield, Vallejo, protect

[6:10:20] the open space between those four, those three communities in the county.

[6:10:25] That has worked.

[6:10:26] That's been, see, Matt's gone already here.

[6:10:29] But I think we did that about 20 years ago, and I don't think there's been one

[6:10:34] incursion into that area that was set aside in that tri-city area.

[6:10:40] So it is possible to do that.

[6:10:42] And let me just wrap up one thing that's close and

[6:10:46] due to my heart, discussion of policy E4 talks about parks and open space.

[6:10:52] There was no mention of the need for a countywide park district.

[6:10:56] and I have promised that I'm not going away any place until we get that county

[6:11:01] wide park district. All right, let's move on it. Thank you.

[6:11:08] Mayor Patten.

[6:11:19] Thank you very much, Chair. And this is 19th celebration. And I'm

[6:11:24] happy to be here. It was a good presentation. I, I, uh, itchy with the fact that I've

[6:11:30] done a lot of general plans and I would love to participate in some future

[6:11:34] things but today I'm here to as vice chair of the Sacramento San

[6:11:39] Rican Rivers Delta National Heritage Area and there is a short

[6:11:43] away of saying it as the vice chair for the advisory committee because I'm

[6:11:49] asking you that you incorporate the map that has been certified by the department

[6:11:53] of interior in the National Park Service that includes the parts of Salano County.

[6:11:59] This, so what is a national heritage area?

[6:12:02] A, it's the first one in California, and there are 62 in the United States, Congress

[6:12:11] member Garamende helped marshal this through, took about 11 years, I believe, there is funding

[6:12:18] that comes with that, tier one, it's 150,000 for us and tier two, it will be 500,000, and

[6:12:25] And we are staffed by the Delta Protection Commission.

[6:12:28] It's a little unique, a lot of the heritage areas don't have that.

[6:12:32] We have a great state of California participating in this heritage area.

[6:12:37] And so what does it do?

[6:12:39] It's like a national park, only without ownership and without regulations.

[6:12:45] And so when you are designated as a national heritage area, you are on a national map and

[6:12:51] And people actually make their vacation plans and their visiting plans around the fact

[6:12:56] that they can go get other passports stamped in a national heritage area.

[6:13:02] We are prime for attracting that kind of visiting.

[6:13:06] That to me is the economic development of the future.

[6:13:10] If you think about the tourism and the money that comes in with that, think about Europe,

[6:13:18] overcrowded, and think about our opportunities here in California.

[6:13:22] As I said, we're pretty unique, and in fact, as we aren't pretty unique, we are unique.

[6:13:27] We have the most diverse topography, the greatest number of soils, the most interesting

[6:13:33] water and a Mediterranean climate.

[6:13:35] So these are the kinds of things that we celebrate.

[6:13:38] In our heritage area, we are celebrating through a management plan, which is also certified

[6:13:44] and approved by the Department of Interior, National Park Service,

[6:13:48] it are several goals, and they include culture, history,

[6:13:52] natural resources, tourism, and visiting, and I haven't memorized all of them.

[6:13:59] So, it boils down to being a partnership

[6:14:03] for us to be successful. We have to partner with local government, businesses,

[6:14:08] wineries if you will, libraries, and we're in the process of doing that.

[6:14:14] The one, make sure I hit all the things.

[6:14:18] So, for instance, with the Delta Protection Commission staff as supporting us with,

[6:14:25] they also bring in the state parks, our state parks, recreation, other agencies,

[6:14:32] other agencies, I used to put the gabbled down.

[6:14:37] I'm trying to make sure all the public gets heard with everything you need to say about

[6:14:41] the general plan.

[6:14:42] I don't want anybody to be able to say they didn't have their say.

[6:14:45] Right.

[6:14:46] So, I would be happy to make a presentation in the future of maybe a workshop or maybe you

[6:14:52] could establish a steering committee that as John Vasquez was talking about earlier, where

[6:14:59] Thank you very much.

[6:15:00] However you would like that presentation, just let me know either I or the staff and the Delta Protection Commission can do that. Thank you. Thank you. President Howard, sir.

[6:15:11] You're welcome.

[6:15:19] Hello, Cliff Howard, Salana County Farm Bureau. Thank you for allowing us to be here and speak. Thank you for the great discussion. I was not planning to be here, but my wife tells me what to do. So she said get down there.

[6:15:36] And she said they're having a pretty big discussion.

[6:15:39] I didn't realize having not seen the program beforehand that there was going to be so much ag talked about.

[6:15:47] So I'm really proud and happy that you guys have such an ag focus on all of these issues.

[6:15:55] I don't really have a lot to say against anything other than you know talk about all the time.

[6:16:02] Please reach out, I don't know that I should be volunteering for any more things to do, but obviously like

[6:16:09] with so much focus on Ag and

[6:16:11] Representing such a large portion of the Ag members of this community. It's important that we're here

[6:16:17] It's important that you guys understand what the future of Ag looks like

[6:16:22] Obviously that's going to change quite a bit as family farms switch hands and property taxes increase at time of death and all of these things

[6:16:31] We're going to have to focus on to keep AG in AG as we say.

[6:16:36] One of the things that's a little, a lot scary is the potential sewer into Sassoon Valley.

[6:16:44] I think that the property tax increases a little daunting to a lot of farmers.

[6:16:49] So I think a little back of the napkin math could get us in a general range of what that's potentially to look at if property increases and

[6:16:58] and how much money that would cost the county, connection fees, and then how would you even measure that?

[6:17:05] Does that mean we have to hook up well monitors and things like this now to make sure that you can measure the water actually going in there?

[6:17:14] I think it's a huge discussion that obviously sewer generally speaks to neighborhoods and more growth.

[6:17:25] So, understanding all of that, I think that also understanding what

[6:17:31] Sassoon Valley vendors and growers is looking at as what a

[6:17:35] hotel or a resort would look like up there and understanding their needs and if that could happen on

[6:17:41] on their own land and a package plant would be good.

[6:17:47] When you're making these decisions obviously they're more than just words on paper and they affect real humans so

[6:17:55] Obviously, always take that into account and another thing that might be discussed for

[6:18:03] TOT options is short-term vacation rentals on Williams and act lands, which is currently

[6:18:08] not allowed, so that might be able to open up some TOT dollars pretty quickly if you just

[6:18:14] allowed that.

[6:18:16] And again, happy to be here to be a part of whatever conversations you guys would like

[6:18:21] I'd like to have, as always, we keep it pretty civil.

[6:18:25] Thank you.

[6:18:26] Thank you.

[6:18:27] And then do we have any callers online, man?

[6:18:30] No callers online, all right.

[6:18:31] So we closed public comment.

[6:18:34] We made it through.

[6:18:35] Thank you both very much for that presentation.

[6:18:38] That was very informative.

[6:18:39] I'm appreciative of that.

[6:18:40] And thank you to the board.

[6:18:42] Everybody was very participating, even as the public pointed out,

[6:18:45] very collegial about all of that.

[6:18:47] So thank you.

[6:18:49] With that, that brings us to the end of our agenda.

[6:18:55] So before we adjourn, I'm going to ask for board comments.

[6:19:01] Mr. Reser, James, do you have any?

[6:19:04] Yes, there is going to be a community listening session tomorrow in North

[6:19:12] Vallejo due to the ongoing shootings and shots fired.

[6:19:15] our gun violence in the area, the lack of response, and also the two recent

[6:19:21] homicides that occurred last Monday.

[6:19:24] And secondly, I do want to close the meeting in honor of one of the victims,

[6:19:28] Sean White, who tragically lost his life to gun violence last Monday.

[6:19:33] He was born and raised in Vallejo, a father of three, a union instruction worker,

[6:19:37] and a dedicated volunteer with one of the local nonprofits.

[6:19:42] Profits, so may his memory be a blessing and thank you.

[6:19:51] I'd like to adjourn in memory of Honoree Marquell Hatton.

[6:19:57] I've never always got her name right, but she died on July 31st.

[6:20:04] She's going to be honored in the Amprice Theater in October.

[6:20:08] And when I get that date, I'll put it in my newsletter.

[6:20:10] So people who would like to come will have a feel for that.

[6:20:15] She was many things, strong, brilliant, kind, fearless, but above all was unforgettable.

[6:20:22] And that came from Josette Lacey, and if you might remember her, she worked for Aaron

[6:20:28] Hanigan.

[6:20:30] So she was a force of nature with a heart of gold.

[6:20:34] And I do have several pictures here, if you're interested, after the board meeting to come

[6:20:39] and watch.

[6:20:40] If you would like to sign the paper, let me know, we'll make sure we add your name and we'll pass it around through my aid for everybody to sign and we'll make sure that our family gets the adjournment.

[6:20:53] So thank you.

[6:20:57] Yes, I'd like to just announce that on October 2nd in the evening when I say 530 I'll be

[6:21:06] hosting town hall meeting to have a discussion about the feasibility study for the sewer feasibility

[6:21:18] study about the system valley. So invitations will be going out and it will be also in my

[6:21:27] newsletters, you know, it will be at the CEC by here building. Am I pointing the right

[6:21:36] direction that way? Okay, it'll be there. So please, if you're not getting my newsletter,

[6:21:44] please sign up because it will list not only my first town hall but all my community meetings

[6:21:49] that I'll be hosting as well. I think yeah and that's all I wanted to share at this time

[6:21:56] from District 3 thank you. Thank you and I don't have anything to share so I will adjourn

[6:22:03] this meeting to the next Board of Supervisors meeting on September 9th at 9 a.m. in these

[6:22:07] chambers. Thanks for sticking. It was a long waiting

[6:22:35] for others to join.

Board of Supervisors on 2025-08-26 9:00 AM

Agenda

Transcript