The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors heard reports and public comment, adopted a remote-access disruption policy, considered a Chumash Tribe land-into-trust application response, and approved changes involving fire fees, parks fees and affordable housing. The transcript also records recognitions and a request for Megan Renshaw to provide transition services for up to 180 days after retirement.

Discussion Points

•A board member asked about hourly rates and the flexibility available under the code.
•A supervisor asked how many applicants may have paid too much; staff estimated fewer than 15.
•A supervisor asked how purchase rights would work and whether resale restrictions limit a homeowner's ability to build equity.
•A supervisor questioned the youth lifeguard program's session pricing and asked staff to clarify the existing two-week rate.
•A supervisor questioned when a proposed planning and pre-application fee would apply; staff discussed its relationship to residential projects involving parks.
•County staff described potential effects on roads, traffic, public safety, emergency response, jurisdiction and property-tax revenue.
•Hallenstein made allegations about the District Attorney's Office during public comment.
•Kenneth Khan said the tribe intends cultural and outdoor uses and stated the property was not intended for gaming.
•Public commenters supported the proposal while asking for clarification and further changes to provider eligibility.
•Renshaw described her service and credited her team.
•Staff explained that Chapter 46A had not received a comprehensive update in more than 10 years and described amendments intended to address nonprofit housing models.
•Staff presented proposed changes to multiple park fees and described the division's revenue sources.
•Staff said the prior code amendment transposed two fee amounts and that the documents and submitted fee amounts were otherwise correct.
•Supervisors discussed how to continue county-tribe communication and recognized that the San Carlos process differs from the Camp 4 process.
•Supervisors questioned the difference between resident and nonresident access and requested data on use and revenue.
•The District Attorney's Office said the victim-services program still had operational details to complete and described coordination among multiple locations and partners.
•The executive director reported claims and benefit totals and described emergency preparedness work.

Decisions

•Approve a comment letter and coordination direction unanimously; do not challenge the application.
•Approve the Chapter 46A recommendations by a 3-0 vote with one abstention.
•Approve the parks fee package with amendments, unanimously.
•The board approved the correction and recommendations unanimously.
•The board approved the request unanimously.

Directions

•Amend the letter to request a designated point of contact and reflect the tribe's request concerning a cultural center.
•Apply the planning fee only to the specified housing-related projects described in the final motion.
•Authorize up to 180 days of post-retirement services to support the transition and successor selection.
•Correct the fee amounts in Chapter 15.
•Refund $575 to qualifying major-certificate applicants in the stated period.
•Report in approximately one year on resident and nonresident use, fee revenue and film-related revenue.
•Take no administrative action for qualifying minor-certificate applicants in the stated period.

Nov

Video

The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors met Nov. 10, 2026, and took action on park fees, affordable housing rules, a proposed tribal land trust application response, fire fees and other matters. The meeting also included a public comment making allegations that were not addressed during the meeting.

Discussion Points

•County staff described an emergency operations tabletop exercise and emergency alert registration.
•County staff identified possible property-tax, land-use, traffic, road, business and public-safety effects.
•Hartman supported using local tools to address housing needs and said further refinement was expected.
•Hauenstein alleged that she was targeted, arrested on charges she called fake and continuously prosecuted by the county District Attorney’s Office.
•Hauenstein said she had experienced domestic violence in 2009 and later sought help from county officials.
•Nelson questioned whether deed restrictions limit appreciation, financing and a homeowner’s ability to build wealth.
•Public commenters asked for clarification for community land trust and limited-equity cooperative projects and a change to Habitat’s provider definition.
•Staff estimated annual additional revenue of about $425,000 and said full cost recovery would be cost prohibitive to the public.
•Staff estimated fewer than 15 applicants had overpaid so far.
•Staff said the amendments address nonprofit providers’ marketing, lottery and resale-covenant requirements.
•Staff said the lot line adjustment would transfer 0.27 acres and address differing zoning and land-use designations.
•Staff said the minor and major fees had been transposed in the code and that the documents presented in May and fees charged at the counter were correct.
•Supervisor Hartman asked whether minor matters could be streamlined.
•Supervisor Lee proposed local/nonlocal venue rates, a veterans’ discount, keeping smaller day-use fees unchanged and leaving film-permit fees unchanged for a year.
•Supervisors discussed the changed federal review process and the importance of county-tribal communication.
•Supervisors praised Maria Gardner’s work and the national search that preceded her appointment.
•The board heard commendation remarks about the honorees; these were recognitions, not policy deliberations.
•The CEO reported claims and benefit totals for 2025 and 2026.
•The chair asked about the hourly rate and flexibility for less-complex cases; Tan cited a $192 hourly rate and said the fire chief could adjust fees under Chapter 15.
•The chair asked for data on resident and nonresident use and raised the lack of an earlier reservation window for county residents.
•The chair questioned the reach of the new planning fee; staff clarified that routine minor permits are not referred to Parks and that the fee concerned housing element-related projects.
•The chair said the project had taken a long time and cited more than $30,000 in fees.
•The tribal chairman said the application was for non-gaming purposes and that the tribe had no current development plans.

Decisions

•Approve administrative agenda items other than A3 and A21 unanimously.
•Approve staff recommendations A1-A5 unanimously.
•Approve staff recommendations A-D, 3-0, with Chair Nelson abstaining.
•Approve the A3 resolution honoring Brooks Firestone and Maria Gardner’s A21 appointment in a unanimous joint vote.
•Approve the amended county comment letter unanimously.
•Approve the amended parks fee recommendations unanimously.
•The board approved recommendations A-D unanimously and advanced the ordinance for a second reading.

Directions

•Add a tribal liaison request and specified recognition of the tribe’s record and sustainability work to the comment letter.
•Continue the hearing to Nov. 17 for a second reading.
•Limit the planning pre-application fee to housing element projects.
•Report back in approximately a year on resident/nonresident use and film activity.
•Return $575 to eligible major certificate applicants for the specified period.
•Take no administrative or financial action on minor applicants for the specified period.
•Vice Chair Hartman to sign the letter.

Nov

Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) - County of Santa Barbara - 11/05/26

The Santa Barbara Local Agency Formation Commission met Nov. 5, 2026, and voted to open the application process for the alternate public member seat (opting not to appoint an ad hoc screening committee). Staff also presented the municipal service review for fire, law enforcement and EMS services and flagged rising call volumes, heavy overtime use and gaps in mental-health response data; the commission agendized the MSR for Dec. 10.

Discussion Points

•Chair reported no final action and continuation to December.
•Closed session items: executive officer performance review (Gov. Code §54957(b)) and conference with labor negotiators (negotiators named).
•Commissioners cited anecdotal evidence of faster responses but asked for further cost/workload analysis to assess fairness across jurisdictions.
•Commissioners expressed differing views on whether to study narrowly (pairwise) or broadly (countywide consolidation).
•Findings: calls up, clearance rates down, heavy reliance on overtime, facilities/equipment need upgrades, lack of consistent mental‑health call tracking.
•MSR addresses 7 determinations under CKH; draft document is lengthy and was published for 30 days.
•Public notice methods and timeline for application, including posting to city/district clerks, newspapers and LAFCO website.
•Recommendation to study possible consolidation of Montecito Fire District and Carpinteria‑Summerland Fire District.
•Regional dispatch now records first‑responder and aid receipt information; staff currently have one year of cost data.
•Staff recommended agencies improve data collection; commission requested additional cost/trend data on regional dispatch.
•Suggestion to analyze a dedicated EMS agency since 80–90% of calls are medical.
•Term length for this appointment will be four years (through 2031).
•Whether ad hoc screening committee should be used or the full commission should interview candidates; concern that prior ad hoc recommendations were sometimes not adopted.

Decisions

•Commission approved opening the process and returning candidate interviews to the full commission; no ad hoc committee appointed.
•MSR agendized for Dec. 10 for adoption and further deliberation.
•No final public action reported; matter continued.
•No fiscal conclusions drawn; monitoring and further data collection directed.
•No formal consolidation action taken; report recommends studies only.

Directions

•Staff recommends outreach and study; agencies to consider next steps based on local governance choices.
•Staff to agendize a one‑month extension of the executive officer contract for the December meeting.
•Staff to continue data requests, incorporate agency comments, and present final MSR and sphere recommendations at Dec. 10 meeting.
•Staff to publish notice and application materials; invite qualified candidates to interview on Dec. 18; place final appointment on January agenda.
•Staff to request and analyze multi‑year dispatch cost and workload data and report back as part of MSR follow up.

Nov

Planning Commission - County of Santa Barbara - 11/04/26

Santa Barbara County Planning Commission held a workshop on the Recreation Master Plan and the proposed Recreation Benefit Project (RBP) program, heard staff presentations on eligibility, development standards and environmental review, received extensive public comment (trails groups, grower-shippers, property owners), and voted to receive and file the report and direct staff to follow up before the Dec. 2 hearing.

Discussion Points

•Appendix J defines eligibility criteria, including need identification, public access, usefulness, permanence, and feasibility.
•Commissioners requested additional meetings with ag stakeholders and advisory committees.
•Commissioners requested additional stakeholder meetings and potential numeric adjustments prior to Dec. 2.
•Commissioners requested further outreach to grower‑shipper groups and advisory committees and asked staff to be prepared to adjust numeric limits at the Dec. 2 hearing.
•Commissioners suggested the program should allow applicants to propose maintenance commitments for existing trails as a public contribution.
•Draft PEIR released; staff expects final PEIR soon.
•Eligibility letters will be issued and will indicate permitting path and may be appealed.
•Examples: campgrounds require 20–60 acre premises and up to 160 overnight sites; country inns have tiered room caps tied to premises size with a 40‑acre minimum in Ag‑1.
•Grower‑shipper association argued the RBP is overly broad and poses food‑safety and notice risks.
•Motion to receive and file recommended actions (slide 26) was proposed and seconded.
•PEIR studied maximum analyzed uses; projects consistent with PEIR may tier off programmatic analysis; site‑specific studies may still be required for infrastructure and other impacts.
•Premises can include multiple parcels and are used to calibrate allowed private uses paired with public recreation contributions.
•Staff cited 200‑ft and 1,000‑ft buffers and noted the draft PEIR is available; Williamson Act contracts supersede participation unless canceled or non‑renewed.
•Staff described RBP concept and toolkit (Appendix J and Chapter 35.35) and the two‑stage review process (eligibility then land‑use permit).
•Staff noted EIR studied these as 'upper limits' and numbers can be adjusted downward during review.
•Staff said easements dedicated to the county would be permanent and identified maintenance agreements or bonds as common mechanisms.
•Staff said the county needs additional parkland and trails (254 acres, 140 miles) and that the program is intended to leverage private investment.
•Trail groups support RBP if it secures permanent public easements and maintenance funding.

Decisions

•Planning Commission received and filed the workshop report; motion passed.
•Receive and file workshop report; staff follow up directed.

Directions

•Staff to be prepared to discuss adjustments to numeric caps at Dec. 2; staff to continue outreach on economic feasibility with potential developers.
•Staff to consider including maintenance agreements and the option to support existing trail maintenance in the RBP toolkit and clarify enforcement mechanisms.
•Staff to meet with grower‑shipper representatives and advisory committees before Dec. 2.
•Staff to meet with grower‑shipper representatives and ag advisory committees and report back before Dec. 2.
•Staff to meet with grower‑shippers and advisory committees and to publish the final PEIR and materials before Dec. 2.
•Staff to post final PEIR and provide commissioners links and materials before the Dec. 2 hearing.
•Staff to refine Appendix J language and answer questions about expiration of eligibility letters before Dec. 2.
•Staff to release and distribute final PEIR when available and provide supplemental materials to commissioners.

Nov

Legislative Program Committee - County of Santa Barbara - 11/02/26

The Santa Barbara County Legislative Program Committee met Nov. 2 to hear public comment on veterans services and housing authorities, receive annual federal and state advocacy reports, approve one-year contract extensions for county legislative advocates, review public-survey results for the 2027 legislative platform, and prioritize candidate federal/state projects for advocacy.

Discussion Points

•Change in ADU accounting allows non-deed-restricted units to be counted as low-income based on point-in-time surveys.
•Committee discussed how to incorporate public input without being bound by a small, nonrepresentative sample.
•Lame-duck deadlines may push action on appropriations; county interests include Continuum of Care protections and the Water Resources Development Act.
•Members praised current advocates and supported continuity while planning an RFP for after 2027.
•Recommendation to disaggregate reporting by deed restriction.
•Resident called for a local veterans hub and for oversight of county housing authorities.
•SB 762 creates local authority to exceed sales-tax cap by 0.5% through Dec. 31, 2031; Board judgment required to place measure on the ballot.
•Shortlist of about 16 candidate critical projects; discussion focused on transport, water and coastal access items.
•Survey of 27 responses prioritized fiscal stability and health and human services.

Decisions

•Recommend Board approve one-year contract extensions.

Directions

•Staff to consider disaggregated reporting and pursue state legislative options if necessary.
•Staff to continue integrating public comments into platform drafts and return in December.
•Staff to continue tracking federal items and update the delegation and Board as needed.
•Staff to include annual reports in January Board packet and begin RFP process next summer.
•Staff to prioritize and present a shorter list in December.

Nov

LIDERA Goleta Academia Comunitaria Bilingüe: Inscripciones abiertas para 2027

The City of Goleta recorded a bilingual announcement inviting applications for a six-week Goleta leadership academy starting in January. The message said materials and interpreters will be available in Spanish, that class space is limited and residents are given application priority.

Discussion Points

•Resident emphasized availability of Spanish-language materials and interpreters.
•Staff member described program format (six weeks) and benefits (knowledge of local government).

Oct

Planning Commission - County of Santa Barbara - 10/28/26

Santa Barbara County Planning Commission met to consider streamlining ordinance amendments, heard public comment on local projects, received a housing production update, and approved two development projects (Sabado Tarde housing in Isla Vista and a Grand Hotel expansion in Los Olivos). Commissioners voted to forward ordinance recommendations on ministerial permitting and subdivision changes to the Board with targeted modifications on noticing and several Montecito-area exceptions.

Discussion Points

•Advanced wastewater treatment system will replace outdated system; EHS to finalize design and permit inspections.
•Applicant outreach and adequacy of community engagement questioned.
•A separate minor lot line adjustment (2 parcels, ≤10% area shift) is proposed that does not require an affordable housing component and will be administrative (director final).
•Clarified that rezone and use‑by‑right lists are limited to parcels rezoned in the 2023 housing element cycle; future rezones could be added through discrete actions.
•Commissioners questioned how 'known or potential historic interest' would be determined and asked for stronger objective standards where design review is reduced.
•Concerns about parking and lease restrictions banning resident cars; staff clarified TDM measures and that parking is waived under AB 2097 near transit.
•Large pending projects include Solomon Hills (≈4,000 units), Glen Annie and Georgie; timing for some approvals is months to years out.
•Lighting in the public right‑of‑way requires Public Works encroachment permitting; applicant and public‑works staff to coordinate for decorative, shielded fixtures.
•Ministerial processing applies to parcel maps up to 4 lots, certain condo maps ≤50 units, and qualifying lot line adjustments tied to an affordable housing component (20% lower‑income).
•MND found cultural resources impacts mitigable with specified measures.
•Narrow roads and emergency vehicle access raised as primary safety concern.
•Project utilizes builder's remedy and density bonus; applicant requests concessions and waivers.
•Public commenters urged retaining notice and design review in sensitive community plan areas, especially Montecito.
•Since 2023 adoption: 3,249 units approved; 978 affordable to very low/low income; 9,906 pending with 1,433 proposed affordable.
•Staff proposed exemptions and an administrative design‑review pathway for qualifying single‑family and small commercial projects.
•Valet‑managed 'valley' parking plan was presented to achieve 50 spaces including four off‑site shared spaces; a professional parking operator will manage operations.

Decisions

•Commission approved project, adopted MND and mitigation monitoring program, and approved project subject to conditions.
•Commission approved the project and made CEQA §15183-based findings.
•Commission voted 4–0 to recommend the ordinance package to the Board with the specified revisions.
•Commission voted 5–0 to recommend the proposed amendments to the Board.
•No formal commission action during public comment.

Directions

•Applicant to present valet parking operations and hold community meeting to explain 'Tetris'/valet flow to neighbors.
•Applicant to work with EHS to finalize system design and undergo required inspections; applicant to secure encroachment permit and agree fixture details with Public Works.
•Commission requested staff retain mailed notice for planning permits and to keep the development plan requirement for the CS zone.
•Forward ordinance and Land Division chapter revisions to the Board with staff recommended findings and CEQA §15265 exemption.
•Staff to draft Board transmittal reflecting Montecito exceptions and notice language.
•Staff to finalize project conditions including mitigation and TDM plan details; applicant to work with staff on lease language following counsel advice.
•Staff to present additional housing‑element implementation amendments in coming months.

Oct

Planning Commission - County of Santa Barbara - 10/21/26

Santa Barbara County Planning Commission held a public hearing on proposed Phase 3 zoning and permitting amendments aimed at streamlining ministerial reviews and design-review exemptions; public commenters raised safety, environmental and CEQA concerns and the commission continued the item to Oct. 28 to review a staff-prepared comparison chart and requested limited edits (including excluding CS zone).

Discussion Points

•Commissioners requested a concise crosswalk showing which projects would move to zoning clearance vs. retained as land‑use permits or design‑review.
•Commissioners requested staff consider Montecito carve-outs, CS‑zone exclusions and historic‑resource wording changes.
•GrowerShipper requested CS-zone carve-out around Santa Maria due to contamination/food-safety and proximity to agriculture.
•Neighbors said a single ingress/egress (Winchester Canyon Road) could create serious evacuation bottlenecks if the camp hosts large events.
•Package components: planning-permit exemptions, revised use tables, design-review changes, administrative design review, ministerial/nonappealable permit paths.
•Public urged an initial CEQA study of the ordinance amendments; speakers listed potential significant impacts tied to exemptions (pools on slopes, battery storage, wastewater systems, accessory structures).
•Speakers raised concerns about noise, water supply and parking for events that could host up to 400 attendees.
•Staff argued objective criteria and triggers will shift projects into discretionary review when CEQA or other policies require it.
•Whether administrative design review should include public notice and how to preserve a public backstop when projects affect historic or environmental resources.
•Which community-plan areas should be excluded from design-review exemptions (Montecito, Gaviota Coast, view corridors, ridgeline/hillside zones were emphasized).

Decisions

•Continue to Oct. 28, 2023

Directions

•Staff reiterated that projects triggering CEQA or sensitive-area policies will be elevated to discretionary review.
•Staff said carving out the CS zone is feasible and will consider GrowerShipper's recommendation; staff to prepare the comparison spreadsheet for Oct. 28.
•Staff to consider edits requested by commissioners (e.g., CS zone carve-out, historic-resource language).
•Staff to prepare a clear comparison table/spreadsheet between current and proposed review paths for commissioners and public.
•Staff to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project and provide further public-review opportunities.
•Staff to prepare a spreadsheet/matrix that compares current review requirements to the proposed pathways; staff to consider edits (historic-resource language, CS-zone carve-out, notice provisions).
•Staff to provide a spreadsheet and suggested wording by Oct. 27 to support the Oct. 28 continuation.

Oct

Montecito Planning Commission - 10/19/26 - Special Hearing

The Montecito Planning Commission reviewed proposed countywide ministerial permitting and ordinance amendments aimed at streamlining permits for small residential and some commercial development; commissioners recommended changes (including keeping many design-review protections) and voted 5-0 to forward revised recommendations on case 26ORD14 and 26ORD15 to the County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors.

Discussion Points

•Commissioners debated exemptions (single‑story 2,500 sq ft, accessory structures, pools) and options to tie eligibility to FAR, lot size, or historic status.
•Commissioners debated FAR triggers, ADU‑sized cutoffs, and whether to remove the exemption entirely.
•Commissioners favored stronger guardrails and applicant notification changes rather than broad exemptions.
•Commissioners worried about commercial redevelopment pressures and the small scale of Montecito’s commercial parcels.
•Many commenters asked for more time, clearer district coordination and preservation safeguards.
•Public commenters urged preserving design review, expanding triggers to include eligible/known historic resources, and defining special‑district coordination.
•Public commenters warned exempting homes up to 2,500 sq ft would threaten undesignated historic cottages and the Montecito character.
•Some consultants and planners supported streamlining with objective standards and guardrails; preservationists warned of losses to undesignated historic resources.
•Staff had proposed countywide thresholds that would have allowed many CN/CV projects to be administratively cleared.
•Staff proposed larger accessory and pool exemptions; public and special‑district commenters expressed concern about easement conflicts and loss of notice and design input.
•Staff summarized third phase of streamlining focused on single‑family and limited commercial development and clarified posted corrections to draft amendments (Mister Tuttle).

Decisions

•Commission incorporated many public concerns into recommended redlines before forwarding to the County Planning Commission.
•Commission recommended against exempting 2,500‑sq‑ft homes from design review and forwarded that recommendation in the package to county bodies.
•Commission recommended not exempting pools and reducing accessory exemption size; directed staff to codify district coordination measures in application materials.
•Commission voted to forward these adjusted thresholds as part of its recommendation package.
•Forward revised recommendations on cases 26ORD14 and 26ORD15 to the County Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors; motion passed 5–0.

Directions

•Adjust exemptions: accessory structures 500 sq ft max (match style/materials), nonresidential additions limited to 10% up to 1,000 sq ft; do not exempt pools from planning permits.
•Eliminate the fully administrative zoning‑clearance tier for CN/CV in Montecito; use noticed land‑use permits up to 2,500 sq ft (appealable) and allow the director to review development plans up to 5,000 sq ft in CN; retain MPC review for larger projects.
•Include public comment letters in the transmittal package to county bodies; staff to craft language expanding historic triggers and clarifying district coordination.
•Retain BAR design review for new or remodeled single‑family dwellings in Montecito; limit addition exemption to 10% or up to 500 sq ft and only for structures not designated/listed or eligible to be listed.
•Set detached accessory exemption at 500 sq ft (not 800) and require matching style/materials; do not exempt pools from planning permits; staff to adapt application/checklist to ensure special districts receive plans early.
•Staff to expand historic‑trigger language (include eligible or known historic interest) and to clarify special‑district notification process via building‑permit circulation and application language.
•Staff to widen historic triggers to include properties eligible for listing or of known historic interest.

Oct

Board of Supervisors - County of Santa Barbara - 10/20/26

Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors heard a range of items Oct. 20, 2026, including a report on correctional health care, a multi-hour debate and public comment on the proposed Orcutt (Orchid) Library and Oasis senior center with the board directing staff to include financing options in the county five‑year forecast (4–1, 1 abstention), approval of an updated oil‑spill contingency plan, and schematic design approval and continued oversight of the Northern Branch Jail expansion.

Discussion Points

•Advocates urged pausing two pods and demanded an up‑to‑date needs assessment and classification breakdown required by state guidance (Title 24).
•Board asked staff to include operating cost estimates and alternative forecasts.
•Drills and operator notification processes are emphasized to ensure 24/7 reporting and shorten response delays.
•EMR scheduling windows misaligned with contract timeframes; an update has been implemented to schedule appointments earlier than contract windows to improve metrics.
•Fire department designated as local government on‑scene coordinator to fill immediate response gap before unified command.
•Monitoring report showed improved staffing (93% hours filled) and reduced safety‑cell utilization; the safety‑cell audit method is 'all‑or‑nothing'.
•Plan updated for OSPR format; ADA review completed with minor resubmission expected.
•Public commenters emphasized donor and grant risk if the county does not sponsor the project.
•Retention requested to bridge while recruitment proceeds.
•Schematic design integrates medical, interview and program space directly into pods to improve service access and reduce escorts.
•South County has limited provider capacity; Jacobson supports a panel of ~120 patients.
•Staff identified two options (approx. $28.5M and $44M) and existing funding of just over $2M plus HUD grant eligibility.
•Staff warned that pausing/reconfiguring at schematic stage would increase costs and disrupt schedule and economies of scale.

Decisions

•Board accepted schematic design and directed continued focus on programming and behavioral‑health alternatives during implementation and budgeting.
•Board approved the OSCP and CEQA exemption finding unanimously.
•Board received and filed the report; no additional direction beyond monitoring and corrective action tracking.
•Board voted to include Orcutt Library options in the five‑year forecast and authorized staff to proceed as described (4–0, 1 abstention).
•Motion passed unanimously to grant the waiver.

Directions

•Fire chief authorized to make minor immaterial changes; staff to post the plan and continue OSPR coordination.
•Grant waiver for up to 10 months and proceed with recruitment.
•If full funding is authorized, pursue CMAR delivery and return with necessary contract amendments.
•Include both financing options in FY27–32 five‑year forecast; analyze operating/capital tradeoffs; prepare financing strategies including debt scenarios.
•Proceed with schematic design implementation and return with subsequent updates; prepare main jail decommissioning plan and forensic step‑down coordination.
•Report back with recruitment status as needed.
•Staff to provide more granular breakdown (missed vs. late checks) in future audits and to continue collaborative corrective action plans with Wellpath and BEWell.

Oct

Video

Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors met Oct. 20, 2026; the board approved several administrative items, heard a county health correctional healthcare monitoring report, considered a major Orcutt Library/OASIS funding decision (board directed staff to include both financing options in the 5-year forecast; motion passed 4–0 with 1 abstention), approved an updated oil-spill contingency plan, and advanced the Northern Branch Jail schematic design.

Discussion Points

•Activation thresholds, drills and contact updates emphasized.
•Advocates urged pausing two pods to preserve treatment flexibility; staff warned of cost/schedule penalties.
•All-or-nothing scoring leads to failures even for late checks; staff propose refining metrics and continuing corrective actions.
•Daniel Nielsen honored on retirement; deputies and supervisors provided remarks.
•Design integrates medical/interview/program space into pods to support services and reduce movement.
•Improvements noted in MAT, staffing and care coordination.
•Option A ($44M unconstrained) vs Option B ($28.5M reduced); debt service estimates ($3.0M/yr vs $1.8M/yr).
•Plan updates align with OSPR and clarify fire department role as local on‑scene coordinator.
•Public commenters emphasized donor momentum and partnership with OASIS; risk of losing grants if project removed from county sponsorship.
•State change expands CalFresh student eligibility; county outreach planned.

Decisions

•Adopted the 2026 OSCP and CEQA finding.
•Board approved including Orcutt Library project in forecast (direction to staff).
•Board received and filed the monitoring report.
•Schematic design approved; project continues on schedule.

Directions

•Include both options in 5-year forecast; develop financing strategy including operating costs and potential one‑time funding offsets.
•Post plan online; fire chief authorized to make immaterial edits; resubmit ADA review if necessary.
•Proceed with schematic design and continue design‑build delivery; staff to return with main jail decommissioning plan and further updates.
•Staff to continue audits and corrective action plans; no new direction given.

Oct

Board of Supervisors Español - 10/20/26

Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors met Oct. 20, 2026; topics included expansion of CalFresh student eligibility, retirement recognition for a long-serving social services director, a contentious vote to include the Orcutt library project in the five-year capital forecast, updates to jail medical/mental-health services and the North Branch jail schematic design, and approval of an oil-spill contingency plan.

Discussion Points

•Board asked about operator contacts, notification timelines and 24/7 availability for initial notifications.
•Department highlighted staff stability and outreach partnerships to implement changes.
•Design includes spaces for medical exams, interviewing, visitation and programming intended to improve conditions versus older facilities.
•Design is complete and staff recommend CMR delivery if fully funded; options A and B present different capital and operating impacts.
•Plan revisions include updated contact lists, revised activation criteria and alignment with federal/state plans.
•Public commenters urged pausing activation of two housing units and increasing community mental-health capacity; staff warned schedule/cost impacts of design changes.
•Public speakers emphasized risk of losing grants and the community value of an integrated Oasis/library campus.
•Staff reported reduced use and shorter durations in separation cells, improved staff stability, and added supervisory daily checks.
•State CalFresh change will expand student eligibility; local enrollment projected to grow.
•Supervisors asked about the "all-or-nothing" scoring method for checks and whether late checks should count as failures.

Decisions

•Board adopted schematic directions and asked for follow-up analyses.
•Board approved the plan unanimously.
•Board received and filed the report; no policy change adopted.
•Project included in the five‑year forecast (4–1, 1 abstention).

Directions

•Publish updated plan on the department website and maintain review cadence; fire chief authorized to make ministerial corrections.
•Staff to continue outreach to UC Santa Barbara, local colleges and community centers to register students for CalFresh benefits.
•Staff to prepare financing strategies for both full and reduced project options and return with operational-cost estimates for inclusion in the fiscal forecast.
•Staff to provide more qualitative context for scoring and follow-up corrective plans where checks failed.
•Staff to return with classification analyses, updated population projections and a quantified cost/schedule impact assessment if unit counts are changed.

Oct

Air Pollution Control District (APCD) - County of Santa Barbara - 10/15/26

The Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District Board met Oct. 15, 2026; after a closed session in which the board unanimously authorized county counsel to initiate two civil cases, the board received a director's report, heard a staff presentation on the 2026 ozone plan, and adopted the plan by unanimous vote.

Discussion Points

•Cannabis permitting moved to cost-reimbursement; CAC asked follow-ups and later recommended the measure.
•Cannabis represents ~2–5% of district permit workload and revenue.
•Closed-session items included anticipated litigation, APCO performance evaluation, and conference with labor negotiators.
•Plan chapters overview, emission inventory findings, emission-reduction estimates, and CARB waiver/legal challenges affecting mobile-source regulations.
•Program event held Aug. 2; distribution date Oct. 2; requirement of proof of residence.
•Recognition and appreciation for departing board members.
•Staff saw methane-monitoring satellite; will coordinate with CARB on community engagement.

Decisions

•Adopt the 2026 ozone plan and CEQA findings; authorize APCO to transmit to CARB.
•Authorize county counsel to initiate civil litigation in two matters (vote unanimous)

Directions

•Staff to transmit adopted plan to CARB and perform actions necessary for approval.

Oct

Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) - 10/15/26

At its Oct. 15 meeting, the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments celebrated its 60th anniversary, approved appointments to a State Route 135 stakeholder advisory committee and heard public comments urging improvements to coastal access and safety concerns on Highway 166; staff and partners highlighted major funding milestones for Highway 101.

Discussion Points

•60th anniversary highlighted Measure D/Measure A and the agency's role in leveraging state/federal funds.
•Calls for interagency coordination on coastal-access stairs and for safety/operational review on Highway 166.
•Caltrans closed applications for the Sustainable Transportation Grant Program with 20 proposals district-wide; awards expected spring 2027.
•Final $134M from California Transportation Commission secures construction funding for Highway 101 corridor.
•LOSSAN approved a one-year Amtrak Amtrak operating contract (~$73M) through Sept. 2027; coastal erosion and Ortega siding study updates were provided.
•Subregional committee recommended 12 members after receiving 51 applicants.

Decisions

•Appointments approved unanimously.

Oct

Legislative Program Committee - County of Santa Barbara - 10/05/26

Committee reviewed federal and state legislative outlooks, began updating the countys 2027 legislative platform (including climate, housing, transportation and critical capital projects), heard public comment urging protection of roadless areas, and moved to open a public comment period on the draft platform.

Discussion Points

•Congress will reconvene Nov. 9 for a possible lame-duck session; appropriations and defense bills are priorities.
•County should prepare transition materials and educate incoming staff about county service-delivery responsibilities.
•Enforcement and funding are major obstacles to local age-based restrictions.
•Governor issued El Nio preparedness and AI safety executive orders; task forces will report before December.
•Opportunities to group projects into two buckets: legislative priorities and grant-ready projects.
•Pilot programs exist in other counties restricting e-bike use by age.
•Policy riders and administration actions could complicate appropriations; OMB grant guidance is a concern.
•Public commenters cited letters from state and federal legislators opposing rescission of the roadless rule.
•Specific substantive edits suggested for housing, climate, and workforce retraining.
•Supervisors debated the platform language and where to place roadless protections within climate/biodiversity sections.
•Whether to keep projects that already have identified funding on the critical projects list.

Decisions

•Committee accepted draft for public comment.
•Committee voted to receive and file the federal report.
•Committee voted to receive and file the state report.

Directions

•Staff to open two-week public comment period and to prepare packaging/prioritization options for November meeting.
•Staff to produce briefing materials and white papers for transition team.
•Staff to refine language and examine enforcement options and legal constraints.
•Staff to retain and refine biodiversity/roadless language and incorporate public comments.
•Staff will continue to monitor federal appropriations and report back to the committee.

Oct

Video

Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors met Oct. 6, 2026; the board adopted proclamations (Domestic Violence Awareness Month, Cybersecurity Month, Arts & Humanities Month, Fire Prevention Week, National Immigrants Day among others), approved several administrative contracts and agreements, discussed sidewalk vending and the county library system, heard public comment on ballot measures and local sanitary/effluent projects, and directed staff to pursue options to address abandoned and derelict vessels on county beaches.

Discussion Points

•Assembly office noted SAVE grants at state level but small relative to local need
•Board supportive of continuing partnerships and monitoring
•Environmental and CEQA advocates pressed the board to oppose Prop 45 to preserve local review and public input
•Environmental Health confiscated contaminated items and will respond to complaints
•Heal the Ocean described funding and operational shortfalls and requested county support
•Housing advocates urged county support for Prop 1 citing state matching funds and local project leverage
•One supervisor expressed hesitation about symbolic proclamations but supported the resolution
•Public testimony described recent ICE arrests and due‑process concerns
•Speakers highlighted need for culturally competent outreach to Indigenous language communities
•Staff explained MICOP is an approved CDEP with strict protocols and contract monitoring
•Staff presentation: 31 wrecks reported since 2021; typical removal $5,000–$15,000 or more; hazardous materials and access issues
•Staff warned Prop 45 could constrain public comment periods, restrict alternatives and risk litigation
•Supervisor Capps and others noted external ratings like Charity Navigator as possible checks
•Supervisor raised concern about nonprofit political activity while receiving county funds
•Task force outreach and CHP partnerships reduced unpermitted vending

Decisions

•Board directed staff to prepare options and cost estimates; motion passed unanimously
•Contract approved unanimously; staff to monitor and report back as needed
•Motion to support Prop 1 failed (2–2); board adopted resolution opposing Prop 45 (4–0)
•Resolution adopted; supervisor abstained once on roll call
•Staff recommendation approved unanimously

Directions

•CEO's office to identify timing and coordinate follow‑up
•Continue contract monitoring and consider board policy options to clarify restrictions on political activity by county contractors
•Continue current enforcement and outreach; return to board if activity increases
•Staff to assess implications for county permitting if Prop 45 passes and report back
•Staff to continue partnerships with community organizations and provide resources to affected families as appropriate
•Staff to review county code, enforcement gaps, cost‑recovery tools, nuisance abatement procedures, and possible ordinance amendments

Oct

Board of Supervisors - County of Santa Barbara - 10/06/26

Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors met Oct. 6, 2026. The board approved routine minutes and multiple proclamations (Domestic Violence Awareness Month, Cybersecurity Month, Arts & Humanities Month, Fire Prevention Week, Great Shakeout participation, AIA Appreciation, employee recognition), took up several administrative contracts (including a behavioral health services agreement and county library system agreement), heard public comment and agenda items on Proposition 1 (housing bond) and Proposition 45 (CEQA-related initiative), and directed staff to study options to address abandoned and derelict vessels on county beaches.

Discussion Points

•Board acknowledged the testimony and adopted the proclamation.
•Board members warned of increased statewide costs, litigation risk, and reduced local discretion.
•CEO presented statewide ranking and local housing counts (5,543 applications; 1,949 approvals; 611 affordable units).
•Chair Nelson and others raised questions about nonprofit political activity and safeguards.
•County staff highlighted process improvements since the 2023 housing element.
•Environmental advocates and county staff outlined concerns about scope and administrative burden of Prop 45.
•Heal the Ocean described cleanup experience and funding shortfalls; state grant programs offer partial relief but are insufficient alone.
•Public commenters urged county support for Prop 1 to secure state matching funds for local affordable projects.
•Some supervisors supported the resolution; others had fiscal reservations about bonds.
•Staff described monitoring and the contract's designation as a Community-Defined Evidence Practice.
•Staff presented vessel-count estimates (>=31 since 2021) and typical removal cost range ($5,000–$15,000).
•Survivor testimony on DVS services and the 24-hour crisis line.

Decisions

•Approved staff recommendation to enter contract
•No county position adopted on Oct. 6; continuation scheduled.
•Proclamation adopted
•Resolution opposing Prop 45 adopted (4–0).
•Staff to return with options; motion passed unanimously.

Directions

•Adopted resolution opposing Prop 45 and requested coordination on next steps.
•Direct staff to review county code, enforcement gaps, cost-recovery mechanisms, nuisance abatement procedures, and partnership options; return with recommendations and cost estimates.
•Item continued to Oct. 20 for further board consideration.
•Staff to continue contract monitoring and report back as needed; board requested potential future policy work to clarify rules regarding political activity by county contractors.

Oct

Board of Supervisors Español - 10/06/26

Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors meeting on 2026-10-06 covered multiple proclamations, public comments on ballot measures (Prop 1 and Prop 45), a presentation on abandoned boats and a staff request to study a contract with Mixteco/indigenous community services; several resolutions were adopted and the board held a closed session.

Discussion Points

•DBS described emergency shelter, 24/7 hotline and counseling; survivor recounted near-fatal domestic violence and credited DBS with life-saving support.
•Nonprofits and residents urged funding and state coordination; staff and supervisors discussed insurance and state models for seller liability.
•Public commenters argued Prop 45 would limit public participation and favor corporate interests.
•Public commenters emphasized need for funding for low-income family housing and veterans’ housing.
•Public health staff reported declines in unpermitted vending and described enforcement partnerships.
•Several supervisors stated personal support but abstained from a formal county endorsement, citing budget priorities or other concerns.
•Staff described number of vessel wrecks, types of contaminants and high removal costs.
•Staff emphasized translation and partnership roles and existing oversight mechanisms.
•Staff outlined administrative, fiscal and legal concerns, including potential for litigation and broad project definitions.
•Supervisors commended interagency work and asked for continued monitoring.
•Supervisors raised concerns about the risk of county funds supporting political activities by partners; staff said the program is evidence-based and monitored.
•Supervisors thanked DBS and noted need for continued community investment.

Decisions

•Adopt advisory opposition resolution
•Adopt resolution recognizing October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month
•Adopt staff recommendation
•Approve contract and continue oversight
•Direct staff to prepare options and estimates
•No formal county endorsement adopted due to insufficient votes

Directions

•Return with progress report
•Staff to provide transparency and monitoring details to supervisors.
•Staff to research legal authorities, funding sources and cost estimates and return with recommendations.

Oct

Your County, Your Services: Behind the Scenes of Ballot Processing in Santa Barbara County

A county video explained how returned ballots are collected, signature-verified, anonymized and tabulated, emphasized equipment security and post-election audits, and directed voters to sbcvote.com and the state ballot-tracking system for status updates.

Discussion Points

•Ballots and materials are retained for post-election audits and verification.
•Ballots are separated from envelopes to maintain anonymity and then prepared for tabulation.
•Signature verification against voter records is the first processing step; voters will be contacted to correct missing/unclear signatures by the required deadline.
•Tabulation systems are not connected to the internet to reduce cybersecurity exposure.
•Teams of two collect ballots from drop boxes and bring them to the Elections Office for verification.
•Voters can track their ballot through the state\u0002s tracking system; the presenter directed viewers to sbcvote.com for county information.
•Voters were instructed to use secure drop boxes across the county to return ballots.
•Voting equipment is tested before and after elections to verify proper functioning and accuracy.

Oct

Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) - County of Santa Barbara - 10/01/26

The Santa Barbara Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) met Oct. 1, 2026, approved minutes and consent items, heard a public comment from a CALAFCO candidate, authorized its voting delegate to support a CALAFCO bylaw change about associate-member eligibility, approved travel reimbursements for a land-use conference, reviewed CALAFCO conference logistics and legislative proposals, and received updates on six pending annexation applications.

Discussion Points

•Announcements of two new SB LAFCO petition-style applications and their intended service districts.
•Commissioners asked clarifying questions about the definition of associate members and eligibility.
•Commissioners discussed conference value, CLE credit and logistics.
•Public comment to announce candidacy for CALAFCO board seat and request commission support.
•Registration deadlines and hotel availability for CALAFCO annual conference.
•Staff assigned voting delegate and encouraged registration.
•Staff explained the substance of the bylaw change and who would be affected (associate-member firms vs. executive officers).
•Staff outlined recommended reimbursable expenses and the need for post-event expense forms.
•Staff will continue monitoring and provide updates.
•Status categories for six pending applications: 30‑day review, informational hold awaiting missing items, and extensions pending final legal maps.
•The committee recommended three proposals: petition-expiration language (365 days); explicit 'rev 99' tax-waiver for some special districts; and updating legacy principal acts to reference current law.

Decisions

•Informational; no motion required.
•Motion passed unanimously.
•Motion to authorize delegate passed unanimously.
•No commission motion required; informational item.
•No formal motion; informational direction only.

Directions

•Authorize reimbursement and allow staff to coordinate registrations and travel plans for attending commissioners.
•Authorize the executive officer (voting delegate) to vote at the CALAFCO board meeting in favor of the bylaw changes unless otherwise directed.
•Staff to bring legislative updates to future meetings as bills are developed.
•Staff to circulate completed application materials and bring items forward for hearing when ready.
•Staff to coordinate registration and distribute member-portal credentials.

Loading meetings…