[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6668545,"mediaKeyId","2220326-56c5ba9e6ac4f39bdd0ee34903674db9","parentId",2220326,"title","Board approves updates to County Counsel land‑use fee schedule, shifts several fees to flat rates","audioSeconds",161,"startMs",12591000,"endMs",12752000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2220326-56c5ba9e6ac4f39bdd0ee34903674db9&start=12591&end=12752","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2220326-56c5ba9e6ac4f39bdd0ee34903674db9/thumbnail_12591000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6668545/Monterey-County/California/Board-approves-updates-to-County-Counsel-landuse-fee-schedule-shifts-several-fees-to-flat-rates","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6668545-991105f5189e281d39b2d7a7bc36f87b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771199988&Signature=Qq4U6rmDTN9wnbpNva9YIAgc7CRcRgOMTPOfc0AWftezVl852hsLOqUmvlB-4JVsfozRayYQnLLF5yfh21573DKsSGB-fIrT6xc7Ti4qk6r2zRaLUhyK1iDCC3nCGs3AOQw8yR20FHQE3wuR0Zvf8HfppuFinx7OUweD3JgD6qe3r-HiArTGytvg~lO1t0jPlQ1rvbQCx3zvtSj09TtoLKZ1HdGj1p~P3avKxgXcC19RvpeXcrVtvVIvylNm6n1gPbGDH4XFwxGAUMFHqqkrtDnAhi1JzjRxDTw~kpU8t-8v47e1q7kmT2Smoql-acgk8xUB-YOKvQhzQCQwqJPQVQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Monterey County","date","2025-02-05T00:06:49.873Z","article","The Board of Supervisors voted to update County Counsel land‑use related fees at the Feb. 4 meeting, approving a resolution that adjusts hourly billing rates and converts several deposit/time‑and‑materials fee lines to flat fees.

Kelly Donlin of County Counsel introduced the item and said state law allows local governments to charge fees that do not exceed reasonable costs of providing services; County Counsel’s fee schedule had not been comprehensively updated since 2019, Donlin said. Wendy Stremling, who led the fee review, told the board the recommended changes update deputy County Counsel hourly rates to reflect July 2024 step 7 salaries, convert the condition compliance review fee into a flat charge to align with Housing and Community Development’s recent change, and move many County Counsel deposit fees to an up‑front flat fee format to reduce administrative complexity and improve certainty for applicants.

Stremling said the conversion from deposit accounts to flat fees will reduce collection and coordination workload between County Counsel and HCD and produce more predictable billing for applicants. The board heard no public comment and County budget committee had earlier recommended adoption. The Board adopted the resolution unanimously; staff said the update is statutorily exempt from CEQA as a fiscal activity.

The resolution directs County Counsel and HCD to implement the revised fee schedule and to publish the updated fee table in the county fee resolution, article 17. No fee amounts were read into the record at the hearing; County Counsel said the packet contains the proposed schedule and that the changes reflect a mix of increases (hourly rate alignment) and decreases (time adjustments, conversion to flat fees for some items).","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","County of Monterey Board of Supervisors Meeting 2/4/25","oneSentenceSummary","The Board adopted a resolution updating County Counsel’s portion of land‑use fees: hourly rate updates, conversion of some deposit/time‑and‑materials fees to flat fees, and a change to condition‑compliance charges. Staff said changes reduce administrative burden and provide certainty for applicants.","taxTitle","Monterey County, California","taxId",3728,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6668549,"Board adopts coastal‑zone ADU/JDU ordinance; tight size and parking limits for Big Sur, Carmel and other areas",4553,15479000,20032000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2220326-56c5ba9e6ac4f39bdd0ee34903674db9&start=15479&end=20032","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2220326-56c5ba9e6ac4f39bdd0ee34903674db9/thumbnail_15479000.jpg","/articles/6668549/Monterey-County/California/Board-adopts-coastalzone-ADUJDU-ordinance-tight-size-and-parking-limits-for-Big-Sur-Carmel-and-other-areas","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6668549-2e5a1d8a4acb64ce6ff2562c8161e3de/orig.mp4?Expires=1771199988&Signature=lMaRfdMsPibBqGgaj4CDFIld6179XMUTuRfZ8jF0coID~M3mlD4DyMU3Vol3nvETKifn8lulzX8JW~7FGFaUC4trPWn6tAdxxrDvJzi8yXFUkukPih7TkeaMOU8pltYnc2CuQjLFzCZbMAXnDKp82nmN-j-xX0inFywGx-mLpPQDznIlJn79tx2dkyWxriBm1WTPNSda576thjkAzgRD6Ltcm8AYpHCnbDShqPFYrwx~k4osIpAxp8Lj-GcDRSASrISHDT8ohP4n7A3rashWXZdS83qvPVY0avC0SSR6B~FwGJ7~MjLmB5e4B3g1BW8sQ47Zu~y3RTHXzK3O2jyjjA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Monterey County Board of Supervisors voted unanimously on Feb. 4 to adopt a local coastal program amendment and an ordinance updating accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and junior accessory dwelling unit (JDU) regulations for the county’s coastal zones.

Project planner Edgar Sanchez told the Board the ordinance aligns the county with recent state ADU laws while preserving Coastal Act protections for scenic and biological resources. The measure makes ADUs and JDUs allowable in all zoning districts that permit single‑family and multi‑family uses and sets size, parking and permit pathways to reduce coastal impacts while complying with state law.

Key provisions adopted by the Board include:

- Size caps: Newly constructed attached and detached ADUs and conversions are generally capped at 1,200 square feet across most planning areas; in the Big Sur land use plan and in areas subject to the B‑8 combining district overlay (where resource constraints are known), the cap is 1,000 square feet. JDUs are limited to 500 square feet; converted space within the main dwelling may not exceed 50% of the main residence’s living area.

- Unit counts: Parcels with a single‑family dwelling may have one ADU and one JDU. Existing multifamily parcels were clarified under a recent correction: up to eight detached ADUs may be allowed on parcels with multifamily buildings but the number of detached ADUs cannot exceed the number of existing units on the parcel; ADUs and JDUs do not count toward general plan density limits.

- Short‑term rental restriction: ADUs and JDUs are intended for long‑term occupancy; the ordinance incorporates a minimum rental period of 31 days where specified to prevent use as short‑term vacation rentals.

- Permit tiers and design review: The ordinance creates a three‑tiered review: certain small or converted ADUs (those meeting CCC criteria) may be exempt from a coastal permit; many newly detached ADUs will require a Coastal Administrative Permit; projects that trigger other code sections will still require a full Coastal Development Permit. Objective design standards must guide approval decisions in areas with design overlays such as Del Monte Forest and Carmel Area.

- Parking and coastal access safeguards: County staff and Coastal Commission staff mapped sections of Carmel Point and near Carmel River State Beach where visitor demand and scenic road constraints require off‑street parking for ADUs; parcels outside the mapped areas will not be required to provide additional off‑street parking for ADUs.

Supervisor Wendy Church moved adoption; Supervisor Fernando Alejo seconded. The Board voted unanimously, with the chair calling for aye votes and the motion carrying.

Sanchez told the Board staff will submit the draft local coastal program amendments to the California Department of Housing and Community Development for review within 60 days of adoption, after which the county will forward the materials to the California Coastal Commission for certification. The county also circulated an updated \"errata\" memorandum at the meeting clarifying multifamily limits adopted in January 2025 state changes.

Board members and staff said they want to continue monitoring implementation, housing impacts and any Coastal Commission comments through the certification process. No appeals or litigation were cited at the time of adoption.","The Board unanimously adopted a local coastal program amendment and ordinance updating accessory dwelling unit (ADU) and junior ADU (JDU) rules for Monterey County’s coastal zone to conform with state law while protecting coastal resources; staff will submit the draft to HCD and the California Coastal Commission for certification.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6668554,"Registrar presents post-election review: Monterey County tallied second-highest turnout in history",1014,10843000,11857000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2220326-56c5ba9e6ac4f39bdd0ee34903674db9&start=10843&end=11857","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2220326-56c5ba9e6ac4f39bdd0ee34903674db9/thumbnail_10843000.jpg","/articles/6668554/Monterey-County/California/Registrar-presents-post-election-review-Monterey-County-tallied-second-highest-turnout-in-history","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6668554-b6face185d241eacf25804f887f2140b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771199988&Signature=TT8WjGGQlMR4KwxH6wIsPsNg8IgYfwbz3uhT-veZkTFxnLoPZ8l~c3D~45tqUIsr29Ozo8jixpM2OMS3KGkIWVo55aAT~MuqAW8w1MnAZat3iDnHjG7gYAOkCNmhJNjLOSZiy7xn7GsJE9luGOPkIEW8dv5U3MViuIDgxRugoxCAO1JJSkee-MOvXkQr6DlhnVYRob0hDIgBPBQidsoNrnGNVF3hgzFl8k36yXrDv5sbgqV3a8o5c-SUn0YGuJ09dJscC81zTCLsLNSvsQ0LsUgDKsOtwUecH4MhVrvCvHe1F1CkOtm4UWG7xXN7tNp7qI9AHKa2N~AyFpv6pUkqyA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Monterey County Registrar of Voters Gina Martinez and staff presented a post‑election report to the Board of Supervisors on Feb. 4, reviewing operations and results from the Nov. 5, 2024 presidential general election and steps taken to handle high turnout and improve processing.

Martinez said Monterey County had 214,883 registered voters for the presidential election, with turnout of 69.3% and 88.4% of ballots cast by mail. County staff reported a total of 48,916 ballots counted in the post‑election period and described the vote‑processing timeline, signature‑verification procedures and statutory deadlines that affected certification of results.

Assistant Registrar Jessica Sidio and Deputy Registrar Greta Arevalo walked supervisors through the office’s operational changes, including the move to the Schilling Place campus, which the department said improved workflow, allowed simultaneous processing activities and accommodated a new vote‑by‑mail sorting system. Sidio emphasized that rigorous checks — signature comparison, provisional ballot research and cross‑county coordination — require time and that assembly bill 3184 required counties with outstanding signature challenges to wait until Dec. 3, 2024 for certification in that election.

Officials described post‑election work flows that paused vote‑by‑mail processing while polling‑place rosters were reconciled, then resumed to verify remaining mail and provisional ballots. The registrar’s team said the county processed a larger than usual number of provisional ballots and same‑day conditional voter registration cases, and that provisional ballot handling adds extra time because each must be researched to ensure eligibility.

Martinez said the county ran the election with 10–11 full‑time staff (the office is budgeted for 12), more than 200 temporary employees during processing and over 800 volunteers on standby across polling locations. Board members complimented the new facility and staff performance and asked about release timing for tabulation reports; the registrar’s office said larger, more complete updates require time to compile and that electronic poll books at more sites would shorten roster processing delays in future contests.

The presentation listed continued priorities: expanding electronic poll books at more polling places, refining facility layout to handle growth, improving recruitment/retention of seasonal staff and preparing for changes to state law around certification timelines. The Board did not take a formal vote; staff said they would continue to brief supervisors as the elections office pursues technical and staffing improvements.","Elections staff briefed the Board of Supervisors on administration and results from the Nov. 5, 2024 presidential general election, noting 214,883 registered voters, 69.3% turnout and operational improvements at the new Schilling Place facility.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6668559,"Monterey County staff outline CARE Court rollout, warn of heavy court and housing workload",797,7883000,8680000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2220326-56c5ba9e6ac4f39bdd0ee34903674db9&start=7883&end=8680","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2220326-56c5ba9e6ac4f39bdd0ee34903674db9/thumbnail_7883000.jpg","/articles/6668559/Monterey-County/California/Monterey-County-staff-outline-CARE-Court-rollout-warn-of-heavy-court-and-housing-workload","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6668559-f93f347ddc2d9281dc288dd233199613/orig.mp4?Expires=1771199988&Signature=PL75uqeCh-hMzbe9-YZnSWBzGE9FtXsaEiSltYwOq2Be4q-BM2ezv9lxC57ZCVY0m-HFjfa0wWmbqiy7uuVfvTfuBvTuvKoflSZUZP0x8DHp84DVshnsSU7Fp6DX57PUXhsVPFaDR41ewfax7aLm58lNhq-5QpKesDzvHt4d5ALdoIrK390i38BhPI8g3VQvLGB-XG0V~M-RlD-eNUk2dlcD2~XJG4lip~M1kzFia-J9rD8CCfinxUhojUyeaQBpJsI9I-j-Hz0bJotBqZDtYl~M2dZRAr9GYPP7rlDYosNAoYI9oEi3AHJ83xM6E2ulzLaPU9bzFxC3bE32A-xfrg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Monterey County officials outlined plans for implementing California's Community Assistance, Recovery and Empowerment (CARE) Act during a Board of Supervisors meeting on Feb. 4, describing the new court-supervised pathway for people with schizophrenia spectrum and other psychotic disorders and the county's preparations since the program launched statewide.

County Interim Behavioral Health Bureau Chief Melanie Rhodes told the board that Monterey County went live on Dec. 1, 2024 as part of cohort 2 and that the CARE process uses a civil-court petition to create a court-supervised, voluntary treatment pathway intended to stabilize people in the community with wraparound services, medication and housing.

Rhodes said the county convened multiagency planning teams led by Judge Culver with participation from the public defender, district attorney, court self-help center, public guardian and behavioral health staff, and won “start-up” funding for planning tasks. She warned, however, that CARE requires an extensive, ongoing workload for county behavioral health: preparing lengthy written reports before hearings, serving notices and reports personally, and providing wraparound services for the life of a case. \"There is a total of 18 hearings for each case from start to finish,\" Rhodes said. \"Each case can last almost three years from date of filing.\" She added that behavioral health must prepare reports before almost every hearing and personally serve respondents, which is staff-intensive.

Rhodes and staff described two primary ways a petition can be filed: a licensed clinician may provide a medical declaration that meets eligibility criteria; or petitioners can submit evidence that a respondent has had qualifying recent hospitalizations (e.g., two involuntary holds with a recent one within 60 days). Behavioral Health will attempt voluntary outreach and engagement for every referral and is the petitioner of record after an initial court intake hearing filed by another party.

Supervisors questioned procedures, funding and enforceability. Supervisor Lando called CARE an \"expensive program\" with many gray areas and urged careful monitoring; Supervisor Church and others said they supported the goal of keeping people stabilized in the community but pressed for clarity on costs and resources. County Chief Executive Officer Sonia Dela Rosa said the county received a one-time planning allocation of $348,000; the governor has proposed larger statewide funding but county allocations and ongoing funding levels remain to be determined.

Behavioral Health staff said initial statewide cohort data shows families filed the majority of petitions, with significant dismissal and diversion rates: of 557 petitions in the cohort data cited, about 39% were dismissed and another 362 people were voluntarily engaged and diverted prior to petition filing; around 100 care agreements were recorded in the dataset. Rhodes emphasized there are significant reporting requirements for counties and that data collection and IT work are already consuming staff time.

Officials acknowledged housing as a primary bottleneck. Rhodes said CARE requires behavioral health to prioritize housing for people with care agreements and that counties must take care recipients into account when allocating scarce housing slots; she noted differences in level-of-care needs across participants and that some existing county bridge housing may not meet the needs of people requiring more staffed, congregate settings.

Board members pressed a range of issues the county must address, including: how quickly CARE petitions proceed (Behavioral Health said the judge's prima facie review occurs in days, but Behavioral Health then has up to 30 days to prepare a report and a typical time from filing to an initial hearing can be about two months); who may file petitions; personal-service safety risks for staff; the potential liability and fines for failing to provide required services; and whether CARE will function as advocates advertised — staff cautioned CARE cannot compel people into treatment in the same way a conservatorship does.

Rhodes summarized the county posture: Monterey County has started two CARE petitions internally (one filed by a hospital, one by family members) and is building processes to handle outreach, the high volume of hearings, and the staffing/reporting burden. She said the county will submit required CARE implementation information and that Behavioral Health will continue cross‑system coordination with court partners and providers.

The Board did not vote on a new policy at the meeting; supervisors asked staff to continue reporting back with implementation details, funding updates and operational metrics as CARE cases move forward.","Behavioral Health presented the Community Assistance, Recovery and Empowerment (CARE) Act implementation plan and operational needs; board voiced concern about staffing, timeline and housing scarcity. County has two active petitions and no guaranteed state construction grants for care-era facilities.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Board approves updates to County Counsel land‑use fee schedule, shifts several fees to flat rates

Board adopts coastal‑zone ADU/JDU ordinance; tight size and parking limits for Big Sur, Carmel and other areas

Registrar presents post-election review: Monterey County tallied second-highest turnout in history

Monterey County staff outline CARE Court rollout, warn of heavy court and housing workload