 September 15th 2020 regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors will the court please call the roll. Good morning. Good morning. I'll call roll call. Supervisor Leopold. Here. Friend. Friend. Let's try this one more time. What? We're having audio issues. If you'd give us a second. I can hear now. It was working. Okay thank you for that. We'll try one more time. I'll call roll call. Supervisor Leopold. Here. Friend. Here. Coonerty. Here. McPherson. Here. Chair Caput. Here. If we could have a moment of silence and prayer followed by the pledge of allegiance. The consideration of late additions. Do we have any? Good morning Chair Caput. Yes we have a number of revisions. So on item number 7 on the regular agenda we have additional materials. There's a revised memo packet page 16 with clean and strike through underlying copies. Attachment S planning staff response to PCP 8. There's an insertion after package page 432. On item 8 there's a correction. Attachment B title should read resolution approving application 181 604 CEQA exemption exhibits 1 through 2. On item 10 there are additional materials. There's a revised memo packet pages 499 through 500 with clean and strike out underlying copies on the consent agenda item 16 there's additional materials. Revised attachment G packet page 577 there are clean and strike out underlying copies. We also have an addenda to the consent agenda item 52 is to approve an agreement with bit focused incorporated in the amount of $276,620 to provide software licenses for the clarity homeless management information system and related administrative technical and data support and take related actions is recommended by the county administrative officer. Thank you. Thank you. Do any board members wish to pull a consent item and put it on the regular agenda? I don't hear anything so we'll go to public comment. First Supervisor Coonerty would like to introduce invited testimony regarding suicide prevention awareness month. Supervisor Coonerty. Thank you Mr. Chair. So September is suicide prevention awareness month and I'm proud to do a proclamation and do it in partnership with County Clerk Gail Pellerin and Behavioral Director Eric Herrera who are here today. As many people know while we face these large scale very public crises thousands of people face a private crisis every day considering and attempting suicide. It's the second leading cause of death for those between the ages of 10 and 24. It especially impacts vulnerable communities, LGBT communities and while there are policy actions we can take one of the most important things we can do is people is to reach out to each other check in and make sure that we're giving people the support they need and we're fortunate to have a leader across our county, County Clerk Gail Pellerin here to speak to the side. Thank you. Good morning and thank you board members for the opportunity to speak to you today. I especially want to thank Supervisor Coonerty for proclaiming September as suicide prevention awareness month in Santa Cruz County. My name is Gail Pellerin and I'm the County Clerk but today I'm speaking as a member of our community on a topic that's profoundly personal to me and my children Emily and Jacob. Suicide was not a topic I spent much time thinking or talking about before November 19th 2018 when my husband Tom the father of our children died by suicide. The past 22 months I've learned a lot about suicide. I met many amazing people who have been impacted by suicide and I'm motivated to speak openly and publicly because there's a stigma associated with suicide that has got to end. I'm not an expert on the subject like my colleague Eric and his co-workers along with many other outstanding local and national organizations who are on the front lines of a battle that many still refuse to discuss in public. Suicide and mental illness remain difficult topics about which to speak openly but everyone should understand that throughout life struggles and we all know we've had many in 2020. We all need the occasional reminder that we are all silently fighting our own battles. I no longer use the words committed suicide. You commit crimes. You do not commit an illness. You would not say someone committed cancer. Instead I say died by suicide or took their own life. I also no longer believe suicide is a selfish or cowardice act. Suicide is possible when someone is in a very dark, painful, hopeless place and they lose their fear of death. The statistics are daunting. Supervisor Community spoke of some of them. Suicide is the 10th leading cause of death in the U.S. It's the second leading cause of death for our young people. There is one death by suicide in the U.S. every 12 minutes. We've been here in this room for 12 minutes today. More than 48,000 people died by suicide across the United States in 2018 more than twice the number of homicides. In 2018 1.4 million people attempted suicide. Firearms are the most common method of death by suicide and in Santa Cruz County the suicide rate is 16.4 per 100,000 residents compared to 10.7 statewide. Suicide does not discriminate. It impacts all people of all ages, genders, race, ethnicity, incomes, and sexual orientations. But suicide numbers are higher for white males, active military and veterans, elderly, LGBTQ youth and transgender adults. Depression is a leading cause of suicide. However, 80 to 90 percent of people who seek treatment for depression are treated successfully using therapy and our medication. So we need to talk about mental health a lot more. And we need to make sure people have access to treatment. I've been participating in the local Wings Suicide Support Group for almost a year now. At each meeting we go around the room or around the computer now via Zoom and we introduce ourselves. We say the name of the person we lost and how our loved one died. Listening to their stories is sobering. Our stories. As new people come into the group, my heart aches for their pain and sadness to be a member of a group that no one ever wanted to join. And some have been in this group for years, decades, and when they speak of their loss it feels so recent and so raw. The grief never goes away. You just learn to live with it. You see, when a loved one dies by suicide, a parent, a child, a spouse, a sibling, a family member, a co-worker, a friend, there's a sudden and unexpected hole in your life that leaves you in shock. When someone else kills your loved one, you can direct your anger and pain at that perpetrator. You have an enemy. But when it is the person you love who is in the responsible party for taking their own life much too soon, there is confusion, profound sadness, and loss on how to deal with your emotions. Sometimes friends and family think it's time to get over it, time to move on. But with suicide there's no moving on from the grief. You simply must pick it up and carry it with you. And for me, I have been inspired to put my grief to work, which is why I'm here today. So I have a few things I want to achieve. I want all of us to recognize that suicide is a public health crisis. I would like the county to provide suicide prevention training for our county employees. I urge schools to make sure parents have information about suicide prevention, and I encourage parents to talk to their children often about their mental health. I hope all of us, no matter what line of work we do, will take some time this month to talk to our coworkers, our students, our clients about suicide awareness and prevention. I would like to see the it's okay to ask for help poster and that provides other help hot lines to be posted in public bathrooms. By the way, the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is 1-800-273-TALK, which is 8255. I want to encourage everyone here in this room or listening in to take the time to ask about the well-being of your family, your friends, your neighbors over the next few days, and to genuinely convey your appreciation for their existence by any gesture you seem that you deem appropriate. A simple phone call, a message, a COVID-safe contact can go a long way toward helping someone realize that they can keep on going. So on that note, I want to express my appreciation to each and every one of you here in this room. The County Board of Supervisors, my county co-workers, and the members of the public, thank you for being here. I, for one, am very glad that you exist. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Gail. Good morning. My name is Eric Riera, and I'm the County Behavioral Health Director. I want to thank the Board of Supervisors this morning for supporting this proclamation. And I especially want to thank Ms. Pellerin for sharing the story of both herself and her family's experience, their direct experience with suicide. It's so critical to bring the issue of suicide out of the shadows and into the forefront. We as a community are committed to supporting the residents here in Santa Cruz County. Our behavioral health services remain committed to be available to support the community. And throughout all of the different challenges that we've faced in the last six months, we've remained available to provide support, to provide whatever support is needed to help those who are in crisis. I want to remind the public that they can go to our website, SantaCruzHealth.org. There's contact information on that website about how to get in touch with us. We are available 24 hours a day to provide crisis assessments and support. And I again want to thank the Board for supporting this proclamation. Thank you. Thanks for your work. Hey, good morning. My name is Drew Lewis. I have some good news for you today. The CDC lowers the Corona 19 death count. On September 1, 2020, the CDC Center for Disease Control recently and quietly revised their COVID-19 death count from 161,392 to 9,682 for the U.S. population of 327 million, which is a real mortality rate of 0.000296. The mortality of the seasonal flu for 2017 in the U.S. was 21,000 to 52,000, which is double that of the Corona 19 with a real mortality rate of 0.006%. The entire global economy was locked down, populations forced to wear masks, social distance, stay at home, lose their jobs and businesses, experience spikes in suicides, drug abuse, domestic violence for a disease that has a far lower mortality than the seasonal flu. You might want to think about that for a moment. And another thing to think about is that the federal court recently ruled against these lockdowns. A judge writes, quote, the lockdowns imposed are unprecedented in the history of our country. They have never been used in response to any other disease in our history. They were not recommendations by the Center for Disease Control. They were unheard of by the people of this nation until just this year. It appears as though the imposition of lockdowns in Wuhan and other areas of China, a nation unconstrained by concern for civil liberties and constitutional norms, started a domino effect where one country and state after another imposed draconian and either to untried measures on its citizens. The judge says more and ends with this, quote, the solution to a national crisis can never be permitted to supersede the commitment to individual liberty that stands as the foundation of the American experience experiment. The constitution cannot accept the concept of a quote, new normal unquote, where the basic liberties of the people are subordinated to open-ended emergency mitigation measures. Rather, the constitution sets certain lines that may not be crossed, even an emergency. Actions taken by defendants cross these lines. It is the duty of the court to declare these actions unconstitutional. And you can expect that this is going to come and be presented to you as well for these unconstitutional acts against our liberties. Thank you. Thank you. Let me preface this. Now is the opportunity for the members of the public to address the board regarding topics on today's agenda, consent items, closed session agenda, and topics that are not on the agenda, but within the jurisdiction of the board. Also, if you cannot stay later to speak on the regular agenda item, you may address those items at this time. But you may only speak once on the topic. So thank you. And how many people do we have that want to speak? Okay. If we'll go for, if you have, if you need the whole three minutes, try to let those people go first and then we'll try to limit it to two minutes for somebody who wants to make a brief comment. Okay. Thank you. Hi, my name is Judy Rosella Myers and I've lived in this county for a very long time. I served a whole year on the civil grand jury. And this topic of suicide prevention is really important to me. And I didn't really know what I was going to speak to today until I saw that that was the proclamation for today. And one of the special issues that we did as the civil grand jury that that year was specifically investigating the youth of our county and why there was so much drug usage. And a lot of that had to do with depression and unhappiness within their lives and dissatisfaction. And one of the troubling statistics that I just heard in the last few weeks was that school age children actually 33% because they are not able to tend school are having signs of depression. They are at home. They are not always helped in the ways that they need to be because their parents are not necessarily available all the time, which was exactly the same issue that we found with the overuse of drugs in our community, you know, when I served on the civil grand jury. And I feel like that it's so important to address this issue and nip it in the bud with all the rules and regulations from the COVID-19 lockdown issues, not just for us adults, but for the children of our community that have suffered a great deal because they can't socialize. And it's so important for us to think of creative ways to now deal with where we are right now. And hopefully you all and you know, anybody who's working on this issue can come up with creative ways to help our youth as well as our seniors. I know more seniors who've committed suicide this year than in my entire life. So please, please, please try and help this issue. Liberate us so we can be free to be ourselves. Thank you. Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to address the board of supervisors, Mr. Chairman, and greetings to all the supervisors here or not. My name is Abby Young and I represent, um, I live in Prospect Heights and I represent the first certified firewise group in Santa Cruz County. And I'm now mentoring a group of communities for firewise in the city and county that encompass Prospect Heights, Western Ave, Highland Ave, Paradise Park, Woodland Heights, Redwood Cathedral, Larson, and Arroyo Canyon. This is a very important community effort to protect ourselves from fire, fire preparedness. As a group and as your consist constituents, we would like to bring to your attention the grand jury report on fire risk that was issued July 3rd, 2020, that was prior to the CZU complex fire. We would like to express our deep concern and our finding at the findings in this report and want you to know that we unanimously support its many urgent recommendations to improve fire organization and community safety in the county. The report observes among other things that, quote, the grand jury found little evidence that essential information and data required to effectively manage fire risk in the county was available to operational managers who have the responsibility to minimize the impact of wildfire. It goes on to say no one entity in the county is performing a leadership role in fire hazard mitigation. Thus the lines of authority from leadership to performers are not clearly defined making accountability difficult. The report lists six categories of investigation, all which demonstrate major deficiencies, and it requests response from the counties, the cities, and fire districts within 90 days, and that's coming up in October. The six categories are fire organization, risk and mitigation, emergency response, alerts and evacuation, education, and importantly governance and transparency. The findings and recommendations of the grand jury report are issues of life and death for your constituents and many here today may have experienced those that situation of losing a loved one or a home. We urge you to give these matters your most serious consideration and to find the means to restructure the fire organization of Santa Cruz County as recommended in the grand jury report. And I have a report I'd like to submit along with a chart and letters from my constituents. Thank you. Thank you for your leadership, Abby. Good morning. Good morning. My name is Malia Powell. I'm a supervising staff attorney with senior citizens legal services and I'm going to address line item nine because I can't stay for that agenda item. My professional life is dedicated to helping the seniors in our community remain housed and I am also a resident of last chance. My home recently burned down. This is a unique instance where my professional life and my personal life have converged because my home wasn't the only one to burn down. My mother's farm of 30 years that she has tended also burned down and my neighbors homesteads that they've lovingly built over generations have burned down as well. And many of my neighbors are now low income seniors. They're landowners, but they have a very difficult time rebuilding these homesteads that they've spent their lives on. Generations live on these homesteads and they are utterly beautiful. They were utterly beautiful. I wish I could show you pictures of what we had. I don't have them. So luckily for all of us, as you probably know, the state of California respected communities like ours and passed legislation in the 80s under title 25 California code of regulations article eight that allowed counties like Santa Cruz to support communities, unique communities like last chance. So I hope that you all are ready and willing to work with us so that we can rebuild our very unique part of Santa Cruz. Thank you. Thank you. I've been a resident of this county since 1994. I think I'm usually a pretty good citizen, although probably one of the best compliments I've been given by a young person was how's it going? Who again? So I think humor is really important. I'm going to talk about domestic, national and world terrorism going on right now. So for example, what I'm holding in my hand is a set of straws, but it's actually four pairs of magnets. And if you align them, the south's going together, the north's going together north and south and then south going in the south's going together. It aligns the water in such a way that has many healthful benefits. The biggest benefit that one can notice if they align their water like this is after three or four months, most of your gray hair will go back to its normal color. Now, I have yet to experience this, but I have more gray hair than you can see. I want to be positive and playful and have a sense of positive purposefulness, but putting this configuration together on your water meter will cause the smart meter to turn off. So that could be considered an act of domestic terrorism, but that's not actually what I'm here to talk about. Over the weekend, I had an opportunity to go into the Santa Cruz Mountains to a place that I lived at in 2013 and 2014 up off Alba Road. And I was very pleased that five of the neighbors that I knew, their houses hadn't been burned to the ground, but the house that I lived in, in the other accessory unit, it was burned to the ground. And these kinds of fires are seen all over the world. And it's really kind of sad because there are entities that direct the US Congress when they're in their summer session as to what they're going to vote on and what are of interest to them. And I can say that I can make observations in other public communities where decisions are being made. And I find that quite unfortunate. There's a great deal of information on this. And I suppose I could mention the name of the corporation that was established in 1948 that controls the US military and other militaries. And they completely have captured the US Congress. And it's trickled down to all areas of public leadership. And it's really quite sad. So by my direct observations, and from what I know, these fires are not natural. And when we had the fires that started in the Santa Cruz about a month ago, other storms were going on in the United States. And a week ago, the whole West Coast caught on fire. Right now, there's an unnatural hurricane going on in Florida. And so there's a lot of events going on and I'm here and I'm very glad that I can still speak. Thank you. Good morning. Good morning. My name is Tony Crane. For the past three years or so, I've come here in opposition to the second story program that was implemented in our neighborhood. I think now I'm just going to address dishonesty. So when they put this program in our neighborhood, that was to house hundreds of guests per year who suffer from mental illness and in crisis. So I'm not opposed to helping the mentally ill. In fact, I know we have a severe problem here in Santa Cruz and that we need to do it and we need to do it efficiently. However, when we addressed what was going on, it was very clear that everybody involved was being dishonest. So we had a meeting and at that meeting, they lied to us over and over again. That included Mr. Eric Riera, who was the leader of the implementation of this. And when we knew that they were being dishonest, we went out and got their internal emails between the county and the contractor that was going to run the program. These emails show very clearly that they were intentionally being dishonest from day one and actually months in advance. And they bought this house, didn't tell anybody about it because they knew that if they were honest about what they were doing, it would never have passed through a public hearing and a level five permit review. So they continued to lie. I brought these directly to the board of supervisors. I've read the emails to you guys and it's very clear that they're being dishonest. There's no question about it. Over time, we addressed county council. My opinion, county council also lied. In fact, I know they did. I have emails where they made statements that were deceptive. They were misleading in order to keep the board and everybody else from legal trouble. And then most recently, the planning department was extremely dishonest and refused to receive a legal request from our community. Claiming that they had the right, but they don't have the right. I've read the laws over and over again. So everybody knows. Everybody who's read the emails knows, but you know, being that it's a touchy subject, people tend to fend away from it. But the general idea is that it's dishonest, the whole thing. And many laws were broken over time. If anybody wants to know about it, they can contact me anytime. I've got the emails and with the election coming up, I'm going to reassert myself and let everybody know what's gone on. Thank you. Thanks, Tony. Good morning. Today is actually my first day back from being evacuated out of Brookdale. I can just tell you from driving around and seeing my community, I can only ask that you pull item 19 on your agenda for the benefit of your whole community in the area of accessory structure, maximum height requirements. As a 30 year dedicated professional, co-compliance professional both inside the county as a co-compliance investigator and outside the county as a designer with a license in California real estate. The state of California in the first of the year past law is allowing not only ADUs but JADUs for the first time. Many people are just learning of this ability that they now have to provide more housing. This law, this code that you're trying to change is going to prevent any existing building that's two story from being converted to an ADU or an existing one story detached from having an addition of an additional floor story to provide hope for now the 1,425 residences that have lost their homes. This law is, this code runs against counter to affordable housing, counter to your housing element, counter to your general plan to provide for affordable housing. You have 1,500 new homeless families. I don't know if you can see the accumulation that's beginning to occur, the homeless in camps that are starting. Please provide more hope for these people. Don't take away the ability for those who can help them who have means to add to their properties for these people to take care of their friends like we all want to. Thank you very much for your support of the firefighters and the law enforcement staff that kept us from being looted. Thank you for your support for all the people in this county. But please help us as designers to be able to rebuild for these people. Don't put more hurdles in our way. Don't give us more design challenges. Please don't add to the levels of review. Please think about reducing fees instead of adding to them or eliminating them completely. Thank you so much for your time. I appreciate it completely as we try to rebuild our community that we love and enjoy so much. Thank you. Thank you. Hello again, Monica McGuire. So sorry to hear Claire's empathy being unmet as usual. There's so many people that are in the terrible place that she's talking about. And I know that you do nobody can do everything wrong all the time. And you do help some people sometimes. And that confuses most people in this county into thinking that, well, you know, it's a mix. They can't do everything. But as we know, ignoring the fact that this is now supposedly suicide prevention month and we have been asking since March, what are the numbers of people killing themselves over covid? We got last two weeks ago, we got how many people were killing themselves with overdoses so vastly higher than the number that have died in this county. Four times that number. And those aren't counted as suicide. So we we've been asking for six months and gotten no answer. And no matter where I've turned, including to Mr. Riera as he left, what are the numbers? He said the same politically correct answer that we've received all along. It's so terrible what people are going through in this county. We know. Oh, sorry, we don't want to give the number because we don't want to mislead. We've asked for ballpark numbers. We've asked for any form of care about the people who are on the edge of suicide all these six months because it's obvious that the measures put on this county like the 3,130 or so counties in this country and 3,000 of them have death rates as low as ours 0.0026 percent. Many have even lower and no death rates. Everybody knows if they just think about it logically that the way to handle the 30 counties that actually have high numbers is to work on those counties to work on making sure that people don't leave those counties and create bigger problems for other counties. But you didn't listen to us six months ago. So all the numbers of the collateral deaths have died have risen of death of risen. And you haven't acted as we've asked you to like Placer County did. So Placer County, everybody at home, please look up their September 8th meeting because they did what we've been asking our supervisors who are entirely derelict of their duties with this to do. They actually brought in experts. We offered experts from the moment that this started in in March. We've offered them for six months. All it takes is that you listen to experts think about what's best for this county. Placer County did it and they finally had the guts to say we've done everything we possibly can to see and they're again a very similar size to us. Everything that their ability to help the maximum number in their county depended on their actually studying what was needed for their county listening to the people in their county, which you have entirely not done. You not only have never gone to anyone asking them what they need and want, but you have never used the chance to take input in the supposed town hall meetings that you've held online over and over. The comments are turned off and you don't allow anyone to ask questions. These are derelictions of duty that make no sense. Thank you. The clock started running before I even spoke. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Becky Steinbruner. I'm a resident of rural Aptos. I'm here to talk with you this morning as one of the people in your community leading a fire wise community effort. I really applaud the efforts of Abby Young and she is really encouraging other people to take a grassroots approach and protect ourselves. We saw recently in the CZU that that's really what we have to do. So I am here to ask you as the board of supervisors in your response, this is speaking to consent agenda item 26, where you are delaying your response to the ready aim fire Santa Cruz County in the hot seat grand jury excellent excellent report until October 6th. I am asking you to pay attention to centralized leadership and to coordinate efforts throughout the county. There exists the county emergency count management council. Ask them have them put together a unified system of identifying fire risks and their mitigations. Bring in the fire chiefs association. Their meetings are close to the public. Their website is close to the public but they can certainly join in on the county emergency management council to help our county address these issues that are lacking. I would like to ask that that group create a work plan. Don't just give them a vague assignment and have it disappear. Now is the time to create an actual work plan and hold them to it. Please appoint a county risk manager by the end of this year. Please fund and reinstate Rosemary Anderson's full time position as our county's office of emergency services manager. It was shown when she was not in the county during the CZU fire and the CAO's office was in charge. There were a lot of problems. We need her or someone like her that is fully dedicated to this effort. We need to adopt a consistent data system throughout the county. We need to require quarterly and annual reports from CAL FIRE and county fire. There's a massive million dollar three year project your board just approved but there is zero accountability from county fire for that and they do not recruit volunteers. They do not. I go to the fire department advisory commission meetings. It's brought up every time by the volunteers. CAL FIRE is not doing their fiduciary and contract duty to recruit volunteers. Work with LAFCO to post ISO ratings for all areas of the county to assure that our insurance policies will not be canceled. Those that information is not granular enough and finally please support financially the fire safe council that you created in 2016 and now no longer fund. Those are the people that will do the work. Thank you. I'm one of 25 residents in my small community whose homes were completely destroyed in the fire. Our biggest issue right now is cleanup. It looks like that EPA won't be done with the cleanup of the first phase one until nearly December 1st or well into rainy season. So the problem here is that the remaining toxic ash is going to wash down our mountain and into the San Lorenzo river. We need to greatly speed this up or we're going to have the biggest pollution problem in Santa Cruz history after the biggest disaster in Santa Cruz history. This needs to be sped up. It needs to be sped up fast. There's lots of resources that you can use but you've got to push the county departments to speed this process up. In the future we can address the fees about rebuilding and the standards for rebuilding but right now the immediate need is to clean this mess up. It's not going to hurt me. It's going to hurt everybody downhill from me. Thank you. Thank you. Mark Doring, Senator Pro Temp, New State California. Notice to all Californians. New California is a new state in development exercising its constitutional right to form from the state of California. The process to form New California is authorized and codified in article four section three and section four of the United States Constitution. The order of the day arrest the governor. We the people of the United United Counties of New California will seek removal of California state governor term dictator Gavin Newsom and will pursue every means available to remedy the abuse and usurpation of power and seek restitution for the countless men, women, families and businesses that have been harmed by his actions and the actions of his assigns. The general failure of the state of California to meet its financial obligations under the governor's term of office, the governor's role in exploiting the COVID crisis for his own benefit and the benefit of his party and associates. Additionally the governor is guilty of application of onerous mandates and threats to the people of California state. Since the damages that have been incurred by the citizens is so great rather than pursuing a recall through the petition process, we will be bringing up charges to every authority having jurisdiction. We will avail ourselves of every legal means that is at our disposal, including but not limited to grand jury procedures, appeals for investigations from federal authorities for a commingling of funds, misallocation of funds and financial and judiciary malfeasance with reference to the governor's role in the breach of trust that has occurred in the failure to comply with mandatory financial accounting procedures. Let it be known that we the citizens of new california state will seek all legal remedy both criminal and civil against those under the color of law seek to enforce unconstitutional laws also known as edicts by lawless tyrannical dictator at whatever level of government or office they may occupy as well as seeking legal redress against the same lawless individuals issuing said unconstitutional edicts. The said and illegal unenforceable edicts are in direct conflict with the constitution of the united states specifically the first amendment in which congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof or bridging the freedom of speech or the press or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. The prevention of church services or services operating under owners conditions or gathering of family and friends for funerals and emotional support the gathering of family and friends for means of celebration in weddings and et cetera thank you. Chair could you remind everybody that they have to wear their mask over their nose and their mouth as well. I'm with with mark and i'm just going to read a little more. The fourth amendment the right of the people to be secure in their persons houses papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation and particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized. A person's right to determine if mask wearing is suitable for their and their children's health. Eighth amendment excessive bail shall not be required nor excessive fines imposed nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted in the form of forced wearing of masks and social distancing keeping loved ones away from their family in hospitals or nursing homes. Fourteenth amendment section one all persons born to naturalize in the united states and subject to the jurisdiction thereof are citizens of the united states and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the persons or immunities of citizens of the united states nor shall any state deprive any person of life liberty or property without due process of law nor deny to any person with its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. The above amendments when they're violated by an officer of the law by an official of the state county or city law then those involved in the enforcement are subject to title 18 USC section 242 of the united states department of justice title 18 USC section 242 whoever under color of any law statute ordinance regulation or custom willfully subjects any person in any state territory am i done no we just can't oh willfully subjects any person in any state territory commonwealth possession or district to the deprivation of any rights privileges or immunities secured or protected by the protected by the constitution or laws of the united states shall be fined under this title or imprisonment not more than one year or both and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use attempted use or threatened use of a dangerous weapon am i done yes thank you real quick okay thank you hello my name is holiday smith and i am a member of the community of last chance which as you know on the night of august 18th um nearly every home in my entire community around 70 homes were burned completely in a raging inferno that converged on our community um and i'm here to speak to three points about my community one is um the beauty and value of our community we are a very strong group of people a very diverse group of people we are a community with many backgrounds we are engineers we are teachers were highly educated um we have some things in common too we are very very capable people um and we are not just willing but incredibly eager to rebuild our homes and our lives i was born there my families lived there for nearly 50 years um we are also very environmentally conscious and um yeah i also wanted to speak to the importance of timeliness which is incredibly crucial with the rains coming um we are very concerned about cleanup and having the cleanup happen as quickly as possible we are also concerned that the cleanup might start in places where access is easier and make it so that places where access is more challenging like on our dirt road won't end up being able to happen at all with horrific environmental consequences for our watershed if we wait into the winter and it also will make it incredibly hard for us to rebuild um obviously uh your body has a lot to do with our rebuilding process and we would love any and all support and help we are willing to work with you and that brings me to the final point i wanted to make which is about communication we have felt an absolute void of communication both before and during the fire and certainly after the fire in terms of anyone reaching out to our community we are off the grid we have our own road association and yet it has been incredibly hard to find out anything whatsoever about what is going on right now we know perhaps from a cal fire member of our community who lost his home that no one's even out there doing any work and yet we don't even have any updates about when we might be able to return when our elected road manager might be able to help with that work and we are really eager to work with all of you um and work with the other agencies involved in the cleanup and the rebuilding effort um so any uh efforts that can be made to include our community we are people who are doers would be incredibly appreciated or at least to communicate with us this is our entire lives um and the last 10 seconds as you know we are in an absolute housing crisis and we just lost a huge portion of the actual affordable housing in santa cruz county certain in last chance in a huge part and in other parts of our county and anything that can be done to you know bring that housing back is very very important thank you so much thank you you're welcome good morning well uh my name is gia bachek uh we also lost our home in last chance it's ashes the last chance community is a community of neighbors and friends that help each other and we would like to get through this together and we appreciate any help from the county we would appreciate if the permit expenses were lowered we would appreciate uh inspectors that would uh kind of just like do all of us instead of having everybody an individual inspector and then you have the luck of the draw are they tough or not we'd like to rebuild it would be an asset to the county if we could rebuild the taxes would go back up again I would also just like to say I'm grateful to the county for the the fairgrounds the evacuation center that was set up for us we spent two and a half weeks in a tent there but that meant that it was COVID-19 compliant everyone wore masks the tents were the only places you could take them off everybody was so kind there the staff was wonderful any problem you had they were willing to address the volunteers were like angels they provided us with clothing even as well as meals and so I just wanted to say that that was very well done by the county and very much appreciated and especially by the last chance people that ended up there in in a terrifying situation thank you very much good morning first off I'd like to just commend everyone who's spoken today and everyone else in the community who has come together to help each other we're facing so many different things coming at us from all these different angles and I just really want to commend all of our community members helping each other through the fires and through all the restrictions and things with the lockdown as well and trying to support each other's businesses and families and get through all of this I'd like to speak to something very quickly and that is the fire rings on the beaches we are right now seeing our beaches being ruined by piles of coal and ashes all over the beaches because the fire rings were taken away and not returned it's very clear that your constituents have made their voices heard by their actions which is that humans want to sit around fires humans have been sitting around fires and talking forever and perhaps many more things could get done if we went back to that on a regular basis so please bring the fire rings back this is ridiculous the beaches are being ruined especially Twin Lakes beach is really just becoming horrible okay a few other topics here on September 9th the Placer County Board of Supervisors voted 5 to 0 to end their local health emergency declaring that the anticipated overwhelm of services had not happened sounds familiar to hear yes the projected deaths were vastly overstated and the conditions present at the time of the emergency declaration based on these false projections no longer applied be nice if we could do that here these same conditions are true in Santa Cruz County why are you continuing a fraudulent local emergency that no longer exists in my understanding of the law this is illegal and I'm reading this for a friend on Monday 914 a federal judge ruled that the Pennsylvania lockdown and essential non-essential business rules are unconstitutional the judge wrote the wolf administration's pandemic policies have been overreaching and arbitrary and violated citizens constitutional rights the lockdowns imposed are unprecedented in the history of our country they have never been used in response to any other disease in our history they were not recommendations by the CDC they were unheard of by the people of this nation until just this year it appears as though the imposition of lockdowns in Wuhan and other areas of China a nation unconstrained by concern for civil liberties and constitutional norms started a domino effect where one country and state after another imposed draconian and hitherto untried measures on their citizens the solution to a national crisis can never be permitted to supersede the commitment to individual liberty that stands as the foundation of the American experiment the constitution cannot accept the concept of a new normal where the basic liberties of the people are sub-ordinated to open-ended emergency mitigation measures rather the constitution sets certain lines that may not be crossed even in an emergency actions taken by defendants cross these lines it is the duty of the court to declare these actions unconstitutional we got to think about this people it's time to get back to reality thank you thank you why is the u.s. the sickest country in the developed world why is the u.s. the fifth sickest country in the world we're going to look at Louis Pasteur versus Bouchon Louis Pasteur was a French scientist who came up with the germ theory he himself was a germaphobic he thought that the udders of the cows that they used to milk for milk would contaminate him a lot of things would contaminate him so he tormented animals in his laboratory and he contrived his results he hobnobbed with Francis Rich and famous glorifying these findings until his germ theory was utilized in what we call western medicine then Bouchon another French scientist came along not too much later and he said no the germ theory is not what the problem is it's the terrain it is the environment our internal and external environment it's how we take care of both but real but finally it was realized that money could be made on the germ theory so medicines and vaccines were concocted to try to kill everything off most recently more of the honest scientists and some of the MDs are talking about genomics and genomics is a system of living in harmony with the thousands of viruses bacteria and fungus all around us in fact they make us stronger and healthy we have virus wise 10 10 to the 31 that means 10 with 31 zeros behind it viruses in our air, water, soil all around us at all times viruses are basically not living viruses cannot reproduce they cannot absorb energy they cannot give energy they're basically pockets of information so the biome what we want to do instead of killing everything in our environment and in our bodies with medicines and vaccines is we want to strengthen our biome and our microbiome which means tiny life we want to live in harmony with it viruses and bacteria have been with us for probably the 20 000 years that we have we have been able to find carbon dated skulls I ask you to consider looking at genomics hygiene washing your hands eating organics not using pesticides which destroys the biome and the microbiome dancing with nature eating its herbs and plant foods thank you and reducing radiation vaccines and viruses do not work that's insane we would have to continuously keep killing viruses and they keep mutating and changing to help us strengthen our system respectful to the other people in the room who are looking to support your microbiome thank you thank you I've co-britten Matt's and Britton architects recently I was made aware of a report on hopefully the supervisors received a copy of that report I have requested a copy of that report and have not been given it but it was a county funded report regarding the permit processing my understanding is the permit processing has a 98% rejection rate I think this is something that needs to be shared with the public and discussed by the board I have my understanding is one of the thoughts or reasons that planning is saying there's a 98% rejection rate is because applications aren't complete well I can tell you the application process in the county of Santa Cruz is ridiculous so of course they're not complete yeah but again this is specifically the request that that report be released ask the county CAO's office and the supervisors that it's been definitely acknowledged that it exists I also want to reinforce or support and commend of Ms. Claire Machado regarding item 19 and also the wish for all of us that are trying to build is to do it safely we're liable and we want to do the right thing but the process is onerous I'll talk about two ADUs that I'm working on it took over a year to process one of them was tricky I'll give that but over a year to process for an ADU I'm working on one now should be easy conversion of existing space shouldn't be a big deal by the city of Santa Cruz rules not a problem and you're supposed to do it in 60 days 60 days you're supposed to have a building permit I didn't get a response the final response until one week before that 60 days and there's corrections you know tons of corrections most of them are incorrect we've already got some of them taken off but the board really needs to take a personal interest and really reach out to the professional community and here not through the filter of planning not through the filter of public works that we are trying to help in this housing crisis but it's immensely difficult thank you thank you hi Gary hi I'm Gary Richard I've been accused of misleading I think there's no leading I believe that's what's happening here is following the Panetta machine and lockstep the so-called disease is a fraud across the world it began with lockstep with the Rockefeller Foundation in 2010 the operation is supposedly correcting it does not come from you or our elected representatives in fact Margaret Lopez is being paid by a secret billionaire and for none of you to give that billionaire's name shows collusion and conspiracy against the very people you pretend to represent their secret billionaires that have been trying to substantiate trans substantiate elective government to a Soviet and you know it you've been part of it you've been part of ambag this has been brought up through the billionaire process at the University of Chicago showing that your county administrative officers your city managers are trained by billionaires like Marshall Field and Rockefeller they don't represent you they don't have to live in the community they don't even have to be a citizen their promotion comes not from you but from their next step up from some bigger city or some huge foundation there's a secret society called that started five years before skull and bones of which Charles Munger who's been part of the Panetta machine neutralizing Republicans up and down the state so they never bring up Panetta gate they never bring up Bruce McPherson's receiving $30,000 or this communication director advertises and promotes a separate communist country called Pacifica none of that comes up another part of that secret society was Earl Warren who was involved in the JFK murder another person of that secret society formed in 1847 was Henry Rathbone who was in the booth with Lincoln when Lincoln was assassinated anyway and go on and on Robert Harrison is the Goldman Sachs of course is the head of the Glinton Global Initiative the first head of the California League of Cities is James Fellen a member of Bohemian Grove where they conduct annual cremations of care and burning children in effigy and it was Jim Jones that provided the children for Bohemian Grove for the San Francisco elite and the blackmail of politicians of the state legislature you're destroying the self-government by design by transferring your authority to AmBag and making contracts with ICLEI which is a front for the World Bank in the U.N. Carlos Palacios was the director of the foundation which Margaret Lopez was appointed as dictator now he should be fired immediately as with the rest of the people that support also Minnie Hall and Margaret Lopez belong to conflict of interest organizations Minnie Hall with Johnson & Johnson and Margaret Lopez with Permanente you have no business doing those violations of interest to our representation Hi, Mary Lee, Sam's Wiley again want to report that six months six weeks ago a month ago you all decided to eliminate the road clearing we still have a problem I did speak to someone at the road maintenance they said that yes after this catastrophe was over they were going to try and get higher out to an outside company to take care of the roads and to reduce the fire hazard but time is of the essence to get that done now we just something that needs to get done to prevent more fires that we're going to have also to reduce or no fees to remove invasive trees and the shrubbery around to reduce that fuel reduction so that we can mitigate some of these fires from taking off into being catastrophic Cal Fire has the information chandelier trees clear out the undergrowth and please have please go out and order up online for winter rye also known as annual rye to be thrown out it doesn't need fertilizer you just throw it out there the animals won't eat it the roots will hold the soil to prevent erosion all that ash with the water is going to turn to lying kill off a lot of stuff in the rivers and everything else however if you put out the winter rye you're not going to have these massive landslides that are going to be coming to us in the wintertime appreciate your listening thank you thank you okay we'll we'll go downstairs either good morning your microphone's probably not on okay community room now is your chance hi my name is Christina and I am a resident of a fallen leaf neighborhood and so I'm equate all the statements that the people last chance just made about rebuilding and debris removal and cleanup I've sent me emails to the economy so far and every email is kind of put off like with the right answer I guess we need to fill out some type of reentry form for the cleanup which is not on the website and time is of the essence we need to clean up before the rains come we do not want to have our creeks and rivers polluted and our community polluted so when is information going to come out how is FEMA going to be helping us supporting us is it going to be through the county through the state you know this is time is of the essence and we need to have some answers as soon as possible so I just ask that our supervisor Bruce that you please address this thank you very much Marilyn Garrett am I on the sound yes yes Marilyn we can hear you in chambers okay you open the meeting with suicide prevention awareness month what are some of the major causes of suicide that are not being addressed here one cause we know is anti-depressants a friend of mine's 30-year-old daughter jumped off a clip she was taking depacote if you read the full printout on anti-depressants it states increased suicide rate or something of those words also feeling sad and depressed this doctor in a smock says are you feeling anxious worried about the future feeling isolated and alone you may be suffering from capitalism and listen to these symptoms which have been exacerbated in recent times under the lockdown and disaster capitalism as it's called also the age of surveillance capitalism symptoms may include homelessness unemployment poverty hunger feelings of hopelessness fear apathy boredom cultural decay loss of identity loss of free speech incarceration suicidal or revolutionary thoughts death symptoms of capitalism under this lockdown and restriction of our rights which I do think the evidence shows is unconstitutional we have seen increased illnesses and deaths somebody who elaborates on that is Robert F Kennedy jr and see his website children's health defense he showed how so many he stated a study that showed how many more deaths there are with each increase in unemployment and and any public health policy that harms and causes more death in the population is an illegitimate and you know like a murderous policy you need to lift this these this lockdown and this whole policy under covid thank you so hello my name is robert selenus i am from the fallen leaf community and i lost my house um i hadn't originally planned on speaking today um but after seeing the lady who talked about cal fire you know turning their backs on volunteer strike forces to help to prevent forest fires from spreading and so on um i kind of felt that i i needed to speak because i know a number of people myself included within the community if we could have we would have we could have been allowed we would have stepped up to try and fight and save our homes save our community and so i would like to actually ask the the county to if cal fire is you know isn't going to step up and create a volunteer strike force to help fight these forest fires in our communities when they do start and we are a wooded community so it's going to happen again then why don't we create a county level strike force volunteer force and and and make sure that at least our community our county is is safe if we can't count on the state then we've got to do it ourselves and so i i think it's important for us at the the county and even the city level to take responsibility for the safety of our community and i think this is is one of the steps to it is take ownership don't wait for cal fire don't expect cal fire to be there save the day they don't have the resources and a story so let's create our own resources thank you chair we have a couple web comments the first web comment is from satya orion major lawsuit has been filed against ohio governor and state of ohio for restricting freedom without legitimate justification the case opens in recent months entire states have been imprisoned without due process and with the clear threat to impose such lockdowns again interstate travel has been severely restricted privacy rights have been devastated numerous businesses taking without compensation and many regulations being implemented without statutory process requirements under the guise of a health emergency that is roughly as dangerous as the seasonal influenza outbreak the plaintiffs in the case have all been injured and in various capacities by these unconstitutional actions and without action by the court will be left without redress more terrifying without action by the court the court will be setting future precedent that will allow states to withhold fundamental constitutional rights in violation of us supreme court precedent circumventing the various levels of scrutiny applied to such rights and justify such actions under public health emergency orders without subjecting those orders to any real review just trust the bureaucracy I'm sorry just trust the bureaucrats because they are the experts here is the most important point we humbly ask the court in the case in this case to recognize the political process and operative orders are invalid if based on false or misleading information and recognize the critical the the brutality that ill future emergency orders be based on maintained on clear honest facts particularly when such orders are infringing on constitutional rights in other words a declared state of emergency cannot stand on the mere basis of on the of arbitrary facts facts matter facts matter on arbitrary facts facts matter actual science matters reasons why emergency reasons why an emergency is declared matter people can't be locked down and restrained from earning a living and having contact with other humans simply because the state authority decides to issue such orders your leaders are required now your honesty and integrity it is your legal responsibility to end covid local emergency immediately the second one is from amanda gambin the united way of the santa cruz county would like to invite you to the youth violence prevention network youth led virtual relaunch event reimagining a resilient santa cruz county equity and youth leadership summit on september 30th 2020 from 10 o'clock to 215 via youtube live via youtube live since 2012 youth violence prevention network and our allies have held inclusion equality and racial justice at the center of all our work we strive towards a more equitable and united county where young people have the opportunity to succeed in it and are engaged in family school and their community we do this by creating connections between community members and system leaders building the capacity of the network members to better meet the needs of the youth and families and sharing resources with the community traditionally we have worked with system with system leaders like you to better meet the needs of four youth and families in our community as we look into the next phase of work we are excited to continue our system level and racial equality work with youth at our table we are committed to listening amplifying and including youth voices in the decision-making process as we believe this will create a brighter safer and more equitable community for all some goals this event will accomplish share the highlight and milestones of project thrive and the yvp end to create a shared commitment for centering youth violence and leadership increase the sense of importance for creating equitable cultural responsive trauma informed system increase the understanding as why better meetings then why better meeting the needs of youth of color increase while being for all in san anguish county inspired commitment to individual and collective actions unveil the next phase of the yvp end we hope you as leaders in our community will join this event to help us continue important work for youth across santa cruz and one last one in punctuation matters this is from gail mcnulty dear supervisors as a mother who is deeply concerned about the future and more and more even and here and now we are creating for our children i recognize that you are leading during the most challenging time our world county state and country have ever faced today's actions have potential to protect our further doom our region and ultimately all of humanity our only hope is to focus on creative nimble out of the box solutions that put people animals and the planet ahead of profit economic growth thank you to supervisor coonerty for making suicide awareness month in our county and to gail for speaking from her heart about her experience with suicide and the importance of removing the stigma and raising awareness about the challenging topic bringing this up today at a time when people are of all ages in our county are likely experiencing an overwhelming sense of hopelessness is particularly important last wednesday's orange skies had many talking about the apocalypse as governor newson and many firefighters have pointed out in regard to the intense lightning storms escalating wildfires we are facing a fast forward of climate crisis although this board has declared a climate emergency some of our community still believes the dangerous misconception that climate crisis is not real as you know the climate crisis is a political myth it's scary reality playing out in real time and getting worse every day getting worse every day as our governments move slowly to our continue full speed ahead in the wrong direction despite governor newson's strong acknowledgement of how the climate crisis is devastating our state he has yet to address the fact that california continues to profit on fossil fuels fracking unstable and harmful industrial agricultural practice unfair and unsafe treatments of farm workers and more as we begin the post-fire rebuilding process while trying to figure out the safest way forward in the pandemic and working to support those in our community we have and will lose jobs and businesses as a result of an economic crisis our county has the opportunity to set a precedent for how to create a compassionate just sustainable and resilient community we are more vulnerable now than we have ever been before please keep in mind that some of us have lost homes in the fires many have already lost their jobs everyone is experiencing extreme stress prior to all of this our county was already unaffordable for many we absolutely must protect the right to affordable housing as part of the rebuilding process while permitting is important to ensure safety building safe building practices especially now that the fires landslides water issues extreme heat lightning high winds and more will get worse as the climate crisis continues we must protect the right of low and middle income people and those who are currently unemployed let's let's not let the current crisis further escalate homelessness and inequity through our county hold one second as some have been coming in and that is it for public comment thank you okay it takes action on the consent agenda do any board members have comments or additional direction for items supervisor leopold good morning chair there's just a couple items i'd like to comment on on item number 24 about the termination of the exclusive negotiation agreement with green valley corporation for the seventh and bromer site i look forward to us working with this site especially in the creation of housing and i i i think this is the next step that we need to take in order to get to that place i'm appreciative of the work this staff put into it on item number 27 i'm this is an item to direct public works to issue encroachment permits for nominated slow streets programs in the in the county i want to thank bike santa cruz county for their work in helping make this happen and i look forward to ways to support neighborhoods so they can slow the traffic in their streets and make it safer for them as they as they and their families recreate outside on item number 32 i want to thank the all involved including the probation office about this prop 47 grant these this grant will provide really great services here in our community and it's a great example of how prop 47 is delivering results for us in the community and i think that's it uh supervisor uh friend thank you chair i have nothing to add uh regarding consent uh supervisor cunty thank you chair i have nothing to add more and supervisor mcpherson thank you mr chair a couple items uh item number 25 on the coronavirus relief funds i thank the staff for the update i appreciate the information on the categories we are funding but i would like to get more specifics on the actual funding allocations and they don't have to answer it now but i would love to have a report back on some more specifics on the funding allocations of our coronavirus relief funds if i could give that direction to the ceo's office or whoever i would appreciate that on item number 46 i am pleased to that's the boulder creek library i am pleased to see us award this contract it'll be more important now than ever to have a renovated library in boulder creek which has been hit hard by the lightning fires that holds center in the valley region the community will need a nice place to visit read and study in the near future we hope originally we only had about a half million dollars to put toward boulder creek but when our measure s funds that voters approved turned out to be healthier than projected we assigned more to boulder creek and it made it an even better project i want to thank the voters for approving measure s i also want to congratulate the friends of the boulder creek library for their efforts to raise additional funds we have seen time and again the impact of community investment and this is going to pay off a huge dividends for the boulder creek community and lastly although it's not part of the consent agenda i just wanted to recognize and offer a special thank you to our park's team for the improvements at highlands park and ben loman on the wi-fi and addressing some of the irrigation issues at highlands park a very popular park in the santa rosa valley and even though all of our departments are pitching in on covet and fire response this is a reminder that other needs still exist and we are addressing them and i just want to thank a big give a big thank you to our parks department for addressing some needs that we have in our existing facilities highlands park is a tremendous facility for the whole center in the valley and the senior community in particular so just thank you for everything that you're doing as we go along with all these crises we are facing it's much appreciated so thank you to the parks department thank you and uh i have nothing to pull uh so we'll go to we'll do a roll call well i wouldn't move the consent agenda i think there was additional direction by uh supervisor mcpherson uh so i would move it as amended thank you and he's second sure yeah okay okay supervisor leopold i coonerty hi friend mcpherson hi and chair cap it hi uh motion passes unanimously and that takes us now to the regular agenda starting with item number seven how you doing good morning consider resolution amending the general plan local coastal program public safety element and conservation and open space element accepting sequa negative declaration consider approval and concept of four ordinances in amending santa cruz county code chapter 16.10 geologic hazard 16.13 floodplain regulations new 16.20 rating regulations and 16.22 erosion control to retune for a second reading and final adoption on october 6 2020 and take related actions as outlined in the memorandum of the planning director thank you thank you chair um david carlsson with the planning department um at the conclusion of the march 10th public hearing on this project the board of supervisors directed the planning department to make several modifications to the proposed amendments uh which we're presenting today except first i wanted to just go over a brief recap of the overall project um the project would amend the safety element of the general plan and the local coastal plan and related county codes provisions of state law require that the county update the safety element to address flood hazards fire hazards climate change and sea level rise and the coastal commission has published a guidance document to assist local jurisdictions to plan for sea level rise public interest in this project has focused on the amendments to the existing policies in the safety element for building on coastal bluffs and beaches that section 6.4 the safety element the overall approach both now and with the amendments for projects at beach level including paharo dunes is that the coastal storm wave hazard is mitigated by constructing elevated homes in compliance with fema regulations for projects on eroding coastal bluffs the primary mitigation for coastal erosion hazards is the geologic setback from the edge of the coastal bluff and armoring shoreline armoring is also a significant issue in both situations the coastal commission guidance for local communities recommends a managed retreat approach which would severely restrict development on many coastal properties compared to the county's existing policies and regulations county staff has recommended a hybrid approach that does adopt many of the coastal commission's recommendations but stops short of the full managed retreat approach and provides more flexibility on bluff setback requirements and shoreline armoring requirements depending on the location of the project the proposed amendments would apply different policy approaches depending on the geographic context in area one between socal point and the capitol of city limits the proposed amendments would would establish a shoreline protection exception area where shoreline armoring would be allowed throughout the area this is an area of tall cliffs and little to no beach area and it's generally accessible only during low tides if you're on the team's call please make sure you're muted thank you in area two between the harbor and socal point and south county urbanized areas the amendments would preserve the existing general approach regarding armoring new armory may be allowed depending on the circumstances and existing armoring could be considered in geologic setback calculations the creation of shoreline management plans would be encouraged in these areas areas three covers beach level development and would limit the elevated height of a structure on the beach and limit the construction of seawalls on the beach area four is all of the rural areas of the county coastline where very little development exists and a managed retreat approach is proposed this means new structures and major remodels of existing structures would have to be set back an adequate distance from a coastal bluff without reliance on any existing or proposed shoreline armoring and no shoreline armoring would be no new shoreline armory would be allowed other key components of this new hybrid approach include a requirement to reevaluate existing shoreline armoring as part of a construction of a new house or reconstruction or rate major remodel of an existing house requirements to repair and maintain existing armoring a mitigation fee program for existing or new shoreline armoring and expanded language on required deed recordations and there's also provisions for setback exceptions that would be added so there are two attachments in your packet j and k which show the changes to the public safety element section 6.4 and the related county code chapter 1610 in response to the board's direction on march 10th most of the changes add or clarify existing policy language and don't really change the intent of the policy amendments however the direction to provide more flexibility in policy 6.4.11 does represent an important change this is the proposed policy that addresses greater than 50 projects in the urban area but outside of the shoreline protection exception area this would be the uh area two that i uh described before the previous policy language would have restricted set restricted such projects to one time only after this update the updated policy language would provide more flexibility there would be no geologic review for smaller projects involving less than 50 percent of the existing house there would be no limit on the number of smaller projects that could occur in the future the geologic setback requirement for the first greater than 50 project after this update would be essentially the same as it is now which allows consideration of existing shoreline armoring in the calculation of the setback however for a second greater than 50 project the calculation of the setback would not consider existing armory and this is the managed retreat approach the policy includes provisions for setback exceptions and would also be reevaluated in 24 the proposed amendments would not become effective until certified by the california coastal commission the coastal commission can and often does modify proposed lcp amendments proposed by local jurisdictions and if modified the board of supervisors is given the opportunity to either accept or reject those modifications our recommendation is that the board of supervisors consider the proposed amendments to this public safety element and the conservation and open space element of the general plan local coastal plan the proposed amendments to chapter 1610 16 20 and 16 22 of the santa cruz county code and the proposed addition of chapter 16 13 to the santa cruz county code adopt the attached resolution adopting the sequent negative declaration and updating and amending the general plan and local coastal plan safety element and conservation and open space element and directing staff to submit the local coastal program amendments to the california coastal commission for certification and to file the sequent negative declaration with the clerk of the board approve and concept the attached implementation ordinances amending the county code and local coastal program as related to chapter 16 10 chapter 16 13 chapter 16 20 and chapter 16 22 and schedule the ordinances for second reading and final adoption on october 6 2020 and direct staff to implement amendments outside of the coastal zone 30 days after adoption and within the coastal zone upon upon final certification by the coastal commission that concludes my presentation and i'd be happy to answer any questions supervisor friend thank you chair and thank you mr carlson i don't really have a lot of questions at this point because i'm interested in hearing the public testimony although i did want to acknowledge your work on this because it's basically a borderline impossible task of trying to strike a balance between two potentially irreconcilable positions between the desires of many within the coastal zone and coastal homeowners and the desires of the coastal commission and the interpretation of the coastal act so i appreciated the fact that you've been willing to meet with constituents hold community meetings and discussions and continue to work on a document that tries to strike a balance i just i recognize that that's been a very tall task and again i'm interested in hearing some of the community comments so we can move toward uh some sort of resolution on this but i just wanted to acknowledge your work thank you supervisor yeah uh supervisor community supervisor i want to hear the public testimony but i i second the the comments by supervisor friend i think this has been a really a challenging a long time process and i really commend david carlson and the planning staff uh getting together with the property owners to try to get to a uh an agreement that everybody can uh or an agreement that everybody can say yes to but uh that's going to be difficult to do but uh thank you everyone for your efforts but i'd like to hear the public comment before i uh have uh any more comments of my own thank you welcome uh supervisor lipo uh no additional questions okay yeah uh the coastal commission has a lot to say on everything we've been trying to do here right yes and we kind of have an understanding of uh how far we can go and how far we can't go uh yes absolutely yes right okay and uh that picture uh on the last frame there were three pictures at the bottom the picture on the far right any idea where that was that was beach drive the last beach beach drive can we go back to that yeah the far right this bottom i kind of recognize the others but uh this one looks really bad mm-hmm the middle one is uh rio del mar and uh one on the left is see any idea where it was taken the picture i believe i believe that was 1982 which is when we experienced a large amount of coastal damage okay thank you uh we'll open it up to the public uh if you'd like to speak on this topic uh how many do we have that are going to speak on this topic three okay all right we'll give you three minutes come on somebody ready uh good morning matt the co-brit and matt the britain architects president of the pacific coast protection association um here's an article cal matters dated april 28 2020 not a right wing organization at all and it states back off the beach in the rising sea no way california cities say the vast majority of california cities are saying no to this we're one natural disaster in southern california away from all of this just being taken away and it's ironic today where we're discussing natural disaster from fire due to climate change and discussing flooding due to climate change and in one instance we're going how do we get these people in their homes how do we get them to protect their homes how do we address this and on the other hand we're saying we're going to make this much harder for you the county see it um retired geologist said it's going to be much harder all the professionals will say it's making it much harder so this is a very big disconnect and again this is important where the board needs to meet with professionals and have unfiltered conversations about what these things mean uh mr carlson has done tremendous amount of work i'm he's i'm certain a good person but this is a ill advised approach and it's mr carlson at one of the community meetings one of the difficulties here too is i get three minutes every time i've gone to the staff gets a talk and talk and talk but the public doesn't get much so anyway this meeting i was talking about beach drive las olas pop belly beach yada yada and so yeah you raise the houses up as femur requires but the problem is is that seawalls that protect access to those homes and according to mr carlson he said well we're not going to let you rebuild the roads and then those houses will be nuisance and you'll have to abandon them and at these houses i know county environmental planning considered at least with the past geologic the county geologists were considered the houses in those seawalls to protect the toe of the bluff of the homes above and i actually got a project approved recently where it says right in the conditions of approval you won't be able to protect this home in the future so i'm like right now wait a second do you all know that do you think the people there understand that okay and then i have a project in opal cliff where supposedly it's in the exception zone but the condition of approval was they'd have to get together with other people to be able to do that thank you thank you hi becky good morning my name is becky steinbrunner morrison of rural aptos um i have looked through out in the convenience copy of all of these code changes i see changes that address geologic riparian watershed erosion grading shoreline flood seismic hazard mitigation nothing about fire risk management am i missing it can you please help me clarify that if i've missed it please let me know where it is but i didn't see it out there and it's it's odd that we're not talking about it if if it is missing um i want to point out what i did see in section 6.11.1 through 6.11.4 addresses electric and magnetic fields and i applaud that the county is trying to address this problem people have been before you many times trying to get uh you to take jurisdiction and sometimes you have ruling against the people of the community who do not want cell towers in their backyards 6.11.2 would require measurement of ambient magnetic fields for all residential land divisions and other new discretionary development you need to enforce that because it's not happening right now and the the um carriers are not required to even measure anything after the towers are installed to uh make a case for cumulative damage with the um possibility of 5g coming we have got to hop on this and really stand up and enforce it for the the health and safety and the well-being of the people i really applaud the county public works for using the um pg&e set aside money 17 million dollars to address underground grounding power lines um to address not aesthetics this time but rather public safety in the rural areas where fire danger is a real problem that needs to continue and you need to require all underground uh all new development to have underground chapter 6.12.4 would require all new development in the santa anza valley to have alternative septic systems is that going to be a requirement for those people who have lost their homes to rebuild if so those are incredibly expensive and we must provide um financial assistance i recognize that um some systems are compromised but if we're going to make that a requirement to rebuild you can't put that on the backs of the property owners or they will not be able to rebuild it's very expensive thank you charlie edie edie consultants i'm working with pahoro dunes the two neighborhood homeowner associations north and south i just wanted to uh echo what's been said of in words of appreciation for the staff the work on that they've done with this we've had a number of meetings and follow-up correspondence and you know we're we're beginning to think we understand it but it is a rather complex set of policies um our letter today says two things it was written by jeff ramundo who's the president of the coastal development regulations study group which is a subcommittee of the homeowners and uh two things one is we understand that there's some various you know cleanup issues uh in terms of language and so forth that have been identified and our group concurs that uh it might be prudent to delay this again one more time just to address some of those uh secondly if you go ahead and approve it or if you delay it we would request that you take the language that we have proposed starting at the end of page two in our letter and add that in as part of your resolution with direction to staff to start with that and refine it we had some correspondence with mr carlson yesterday and i spoke with him this morning and he said that they'd be happy to tweak the language that we put out there uh to uh if he's so directed by your board the reason we want that is because there's so much uh hunting and pecking to find things through the ordinance we just wanted to establish a kind of a clear section that says here's how these things apply to pahero dunes because there are a lot of differences between what pahero dunes faces and what the other areas are dealing with so in the guiding principles you do have a lot of um explanatory language and we thought that would be a good place to put that in so our request would be that you direct staff to uh refine the language which we put out there knowing that it wasn't going to be quite right and include that in your final action thank you morning uh t john connor's uh homeowner here i i just want to start off by saying that um i don't think you guys should go for this plan um it's very complicated and it makes it more difficult for every homeowner to be able to protect their their property and i think the values of these homes are going to go down so i did attend a meeting at the beginning the first quarter of this year i can't remember which one i think it was the march or february what i noticed about the meetings which was uh interesting is that everybody that came up to the podium for these uh planning meetings they want a little car vote for their special lot please help me with my lot and i'm i'm okay what i what i fear is that after we're all gone and this thing is put into place you're going to have little carve outs for people and there's not going to be a uh an overall plan that you can you can you can look at that it's fair for everybody so you're going to go be creating whoever's in charge of these uh approval of plans and the development you're creating somebody that is a very powerful person within the county to make exceptions for this lot the exception for this neighborhood as he this last gentleman says his is very special they want something for his specific plan that's that creates a a huge problem for fairness overall that's the first thing now if i have more time i'd like to share a story with you this is impacting people it's not rich guys that are that are having all these properties on the coast okay we have people seniors i talked to two couples they're as you know most people are trying to have um their house is their the main asset that they have their plan they're in their late 70s their plan is to eventually sell their house and then move into a nice assisted living now their plan is when this passes they won't be able to sell that for the price they can and they're and they're going to go on medicale i mean this this thing is is is changing every aspect of our community top to bottom you you guys think you're affecting some some uh rich people on pleasure point that's not that you guys are really impacting all our seniors and these are the people that if you go up and down the street the owners of these these houses the hairs are all gray they're they're they're 70s plus what's what's going to happen to these people i think you guys really need to think about it and do some more community and talk don't don't vote for this please thank you good morning supervisors my name is michael dobren i do live in the zone there are implications uh within these extended sessions that i feel will harm the county in the long run let's talk about taxes tax base for house if these houses are confiscated or obliterated without recompensation the tax base is gone that's one element secondarily we all know the Santa Cruz thrives on tourism a number of these houses in this region are rental houses i know my wife and i pay rental permits to rent our house the rental permits disappear along with a rental base thereby harming businesses restaurants when they open grocery stores you name it this is a convoluted and very very complicated procedure i understand but this rush to just slam this through i know it's complex i know the issues but it's not well thought out for the economic health of Santa Cruz county thank you thank you anyone uh anyone downstairs we had one gentleman that wanted to speak downstairs but i think he's coming up here so in the meantime i have some web comments that we can read and i'm gonna set the timer the first web comment comes from steve forer my name is steve forer and i am president of coastal property owners association of santa criss county with over 540 members including 12 homeowners associations representing over 1 000 coastal parcels cpoa urges the board of supervisors to delay the vote on proposed amendments to santa criss county local coastal program relating to coastal bluffs and beaches land use plan section 6.4 and geological hazards implementation plan chapter 1610 although the planning department responded to john leopold's motion on march 10th 2020 there are so many flaws and inconsistencies in the document which could lead to misunderstanding and potential lawsuits against the county these documents are not ready to be submitted to the california coastal commission for review and certification we have worked with the we have worked with the county in good faith and have provided thoughtful and reasonable input on change which are needed to clarify the documents we asked the attorney derrick oliver for additional legal review of the red line changes since march 10th to the local coastal program relating to coastal bluffs and beaches land use plan section 6.4 and geological hazards implementation plan chapter 16.10 which were provided with the board of supervisors agenda packet for today's meeting the attached documents annotated by derrick oliver provides detailed comments regarding the internal inconsistencies ambiguities and apparent potential limitations which exceed those required by the coastal act if the board of supervisors chooses not to delay the vote on proposed amendments the santa cruz county local coastal program relating to coastal bluffs and beaches and geological hazards we ask for the following amendments to be made one replace our repaired structures due to damage by coastal process shall be approved if they meet uh l up policies 6.4 0.11 and 6.4 0.12 0.2 the first major redevelopment replacement project shall be approved will be allowed to take into consideration any existing shoreline protection and will not be required to have a geological hazard assessment three property owners with currently less than a 25 foot bluff setback shall be given permission to proceed with a vertical seawall or repair existing seawalls consistent with the planned uniform seawall within the spea 4 within the spea number 4 the term of condition for pre-existing permits for shoreline armoring shall not be altered the requirements for geological hazard assessment and new monitoring maintenance and repair plan should not be applied to pre-existing permits prior to the adoption of the pros of the proposed lcp and code amendments number 5 there shall be no new limitations on the next comment if we have is ali webster commenting on behalf of the surf rider foundation santa cruz i hope you have all had time to read over the comments and suggestions sent to you by the coastal commission staff we would like to express our agreement with the commission suggestions and encourage continued work on the lcp amendments i must echo our concerns for the past year that private land owners have been the primary stakeholder heard in the process of developing these lcp amendments and that it shows through quite clearly in the language of the document the vocal minority of property owners has put very one-sided pressure on the planning department to recognize the needs of these property owners needs which may seem more tangible and urgent and in this moment than the long-term rights of the community as a whole and the protection of our sandy beaches i urge you more strongly consider the future of our beaches and the tens of thousands community members who do not own coastal property people who have an equal right to the beaches for both recreation and economic stability we encourage the county to narrow the exception area which defines some of our most valuable coastal area as urban posing great risk to those beaches we would also like to see the one-time rebuild considered as it ensures the property owners who will go overboard with both remodels and armoring work in order to maximize their one chance if we are going to allow our coastlines to change by the as they need to we must start now as the county's amendments will be sent to the coastal commission staff for review i hope that in the light of their comments and suggestions you will choose to continue revising the lcp and send only the most thoughtful and formal possible please remember that 90 of bluff top homes in santa cruz county are second homes and vacation rentals please remember that these beaches belong to everyone and that the cost of continued shoreline armoring should not fall on the shoulders of the general public thank you for your time and i have two more but if you want to take the comments for the people here we could do that almost good afternoon um i moved to this county in 94 and lived in a rural area oakridge road from 94 to 2014 um it's my understanding that at that time let's say 20 years ago the county of santa cruz had the largest building department in the state even though it's the smallest physical county i think it's only 420 square miles my point is i've probably had 150 inspections in this county since then and having a relationship with you know there are only 13 houses on oakridge road um some places were chicken coops one building you know the owner said that he admittedly had over 900 cement trucks to complete his house my point is i looked at the over 900 page binder yesterday for as much time as i could i spent a little bit of time here but are these regulations actually making it easier for the homeowners to actually do business and thrive are they actually making it easier that's it thank you for your time good morning hello again my name is claire michado i'm building designer consultant real estate licensed and a design professional co-compliance person for over 30 years um prior to his death last year on october 1st after being taken from his home and murdered mr tushar atre lived at 30 34 pleasure point drive i was working for mr atre he had hired me to take a look at adding a second story to a structure in doing so i researched the history of the property and found that there was actually an emergency coastal permit that was issued to armor the bank of that house 20 years ago a permit that was never followed up or inspected there were recommendations at the time to do a simple shot crete on that property that property is one of the few and probably only properties with a stairway down the back directly to the beach it's actually next to a very nice home designed by mr cove britain and company these are very difficult issues when we bring these up and we go back to the county and say hey this was an emergency permit 20 years ago it's still standing but nobody did anything so what do we do about it today is it an emergency today is it not an emergency today what is it and right now the property is in probate so what the hell excuse me what's going to happen when there's no ability to address these new codes there's no real true understanding about what it is going to affect and cost in the future to these residents to try to maintain these beautiful existing properties let alone try to do redesign reconstruction rearmament to whatever standard we need to to please the state to please coastal to please you and to try to do it in a manner that's financially possible for an owner so please i recommend we do what cove was asking meet with your design professionals on a one-in-one open meeting basis your geologists your engineers your civil engineers their design professionals in this community that have such a knowledge base to help you help them please i urge you do not pass this today thank you well that concludes a public comment no i'm sorry i'm sorry chair that we still have some web comments i'll bring it back to the board no there's a couple more comments sure oh there is yes thank you okay this one is from mark massara i am an attorney and work with california coastal property owners non-profit and local governments on the coastal protection issues i support the lcp amendment and urge you to approve it i want to commend your staff for their work and property with property owners and the board broader community to devise a progressive strategy suitable for the unique Santa Cruz Monterey Bay area that allows property owners to continue to construct and repair seawalls and clarifies their right to remodel and redevelopment there and redevelopment their properties while ensuring significant new and permanent public benefits associated with those projects make no mistake this is not ideal it does not include unlimited rights for property owners nor does it go as far as ccc would like it removing coastal bluff development however if approved it will be the most progressive lcp in california go no further than half moon bay up coast to see how dramatically adverse new lcps can be to property owners as they consider policies much worse than how santa cruz much worse than santa cruz right now or the seawall wars in san diego that pit property owners against the community and the light of santa cruz is in that light santa cruz is a breath of fresh air and compromise and compromise that will allow projects to move forward with very significant privately funded public benefit something that our community and future residents can enjoy for decades to come without cost to taxpayers imagine publicly usable seawalls with walkways and public stairs that would allow anyone and not just surfers to enjoy shoreline pedestrian access along pleasure point drive in opal cliffs it is a first step if it works programs can be extended beyond the exception area regarding the request for delay i oppose further delay staff has worked for the on this for years our focus now should be working with coastal staff in the coastal commission members to obtain their support for our initiatives further delay won't help us as this needs to be considered and approved by the coastal commission to help landowners and the community now last thought remember that if the ccc rewrites the lcp or pulls the rug out from under the county as has occurred with respect to our community's efforts to update the lcps santa cruz county is free to object disregard and deny the ccc modification and simply walk away from the lcp if it is modified in any way that this board objects to in the future in that case you would be left with the same lcp you have now certainly not ideal but no worse off with that in mind let's give it our best shot at improving the lcp if we succeed we will dramatically improve standing of both property owners and visitors okay the next one is from gale mcnulty i am concerned that wildfire components of the proposed amendments are based on the 2009 lockheed fire and a wildlife assessment that seems to be predate the current one which has already raised many locations in the county to severe wildfire threat please consider tabling this amendment and updating it based on the current wildfire or committing to revisit the climate crisis threat once we better understand the extent of damage incurred in recent fires additionally extreme weather and erosion events that may occur the next one hello i am a retired sign language interpreter from last chance road i worked for the state of california for 21 years and was looking forward to my retirement in the woods my husband and i would very much like to rebuild we appreciate all of the messages signals we have seen from county officials expressing the desire to streamline the rebuilding process including provisions for previously unpermitted homes the sentiments are much appreciated in order to achieve the goals of maintaining adequate housing stock in santa cruz county getting local local residents back in their homes and recognizing the dire circumstances being faced by rural members of santa cruz county several provisions should be considered we need a permitting process that is alternative i think that's for the next item it's it is and i was directed that i need to read them as they come in okay but if you would like i can move on i want the person to be heard i just thought it would be better on the item that they should be heard on and then that would be it okay all ready you're ready to take it back to the board any comments uh chair is there any more i apologize one just came in my name is robin bolster grant local land use attorney and former planning department employee i absolutely respect the amount of time staff and resources devoted to this effort my concern continues to be the limit of outreach and notice that have been provided to all property owners who property rights will be substantially impacted by these changes there are still many property owners that have no clear understanding of how these changes will impact their ability to use repair the cell refinance the or refinance their property the county has a duty to ensure that all members of the community are well informed about the implications of the amendments in order to give them a voice in this process thank you for your time that is it okay thank you okay uh let's go with uh yeah supervisor leopold thank you chair uh thank you for the testimony today and thank you for the work on the staff uh on this item you know uh since april i've been meeting regularly uh as a representative of the seasack coastal counties uh group uh as a group with seasack and the league of california cities with the coastal commission staff and commissioners to look at what could be responses to the need to update lcps with regard to sea level rise as people know the guidance from the commission seemed to be focused on one strategy which was managed retreat and that may work in some areas but it did not take into consideration lots of voter approved land use policies many impacts on critical infrastructure and so this group has been it actually started meeting in july of 2019 but in april we started meeting uh almost every other week uh at least twice a month uh to try to to try to look at innovative strategies that might be able to be models for communities up and down the california coastline in my conversations with the coastal commission staff the league of california cities and the california state association of counties i am convinced that the policies we have before us are the most far-reaching plans in the state they balance the interest of property owners the community and the environment and they tried to look at the actual circumstances of the geology of our coastline and identify strategies that respond to local conditions this plan these policies accepts the science of climate change and works to create a plan of action that we can address the issue in our community the news that we heard this week about the crumbling ice shelves suggests that preparing for sea level rise is not just an exercise but it's a requirement we need to be prepared our county has been debating these policies for nearly two years there have been numerous public hearings at the board of supervisors and the planning commission there have been community meetings there have been stakeholder meetings um there have been letters uh shot around by lawyers uh and letters from nonprofit organizations we've received those and we have modified um these policies as part of that dialogue i've appreciated that dialogues and i think that they have improved the policies these policies uh support in my opinion good coastal access even as the ocean rises and the beaches uh get smaller and disappear items like shoreline management plans provide us new opportunities to create incentives to increase the sandy beach area that we have right now it allows this these policies allows a section of coastline to be designated a shoreline protection exception area that would allow the maintenance of seawalls and encourage the creation of an assessment district to help neighbors work together on shoreline structures that increase coastal access there's a lot in these policies and i understand the the that we could all find parts of it that we would change that we would modify that we would like language for our particular neighborhood or organization but we're out here in front we are on the vanguard in the state of trying to create a set of uh policies that actually reflect the needs of our community and i think uh after this nearly two-year process it's time for us to get more input from coastal staff uh uh to find out if we're moving in the right direction i will be continuing to work with the seasack league of cities group and the coastal commission and we may be in front of the coastal commission to talk about these concepts in general not the specifics of the language i know that that the the commission is interested in looking at these strategies and in the presentation of the elements of this plan to coastal staff and commissioners to date we've gotten a good response so i'm prepared to move these policies and the recommended actions uh today and look forward to the information we receive from coastal staff um and i encourage the support of my colleagues okay are there any other comments from board members all second okay so we we have a moment second but any other comments yeah chair i'll briefly speak to uh this is supervisor friend again um i i agree with with all that supervisor leopold just said and i and i as i started the conversation uh in regards to the work of mr carlson you know the county has been trying to strike this balance uh between these legitimate issues of sea level rise and climate change and also the the coastal commission's request for a full managed retreat and many property owners understandable concerns about what this would mean uh for them moving forward and i think over the last couple of years we have made a better set of policies than or proposed policies than were initially presented we also recognize though based on the letter we received from the coastal commission that that they don't believe they believe that this uh goes too far toward the side of the homeowners the homeowners based on the comments today and letters we've received believe that it doesn't go far enough which to me is actually the definition of balance right there but it should go to coastal for more formal comments so that uh we will have an additional uh process to continue this discussion it's clear that coastal wants to provide formal input uh that we can continue uh to work with and it is possible too and this has been debated across the state as supervisor leopold noted it it's it's possible that the interests are so disparate of coastal homeowners and coastal property owners that the individual desires may be irreconcilable with what coastal the coastal commission is seeking and what they believe to be consistent with the coastal act is across the state it may be very difficult to create a document that has universal consensus or buy-in i do think that this is further than a starting point toward that and i also believe that receiving the coastal feedback will allow us to continue that discussion to see if we can create a model across the state that can be used that i know other communities are going to be looking for us to us uh as a guiding document which is why i support moving this forward today and and i'm and i'm willing to second this motion okay thank you i'll make a quick comment uh it's uh over 400 pages uh on this topic and uh i'm sure there's a lot of ramifications in it and i i looked at it and uh i i want to commend you on doing a good job but it would be it would be better if somehow we could you know instead of having 400 something pages to go through if we could have a more condensed version also especially for the public uh to look at so maybe the 400 something pages and then have a condensed version if somebody wanted to read a short version we we did that that's yeah the actual policies are there's a lot of supporting documentation and that's no i mean for the public but the actual policies are are pretty skinny it's kind of like when we have the when you have the budget that we have a shorter versions uh to read through yeah there was a uh briefing book published on this along with the initial study and some of the original staff reports so yes we did that and yeah those areas it's not uh if something's going to happen it's when something's going to happen especially with uh uh king tides and also storms and everything else so okay thank you and we have a motion and a second Mr. Chair uh this is Supervisor McPherson I just wanted to make some comments if I could please I just want to lie on okay yes we can yeah okay thank you I just wanted to make a couple comments I I do agree with Supervisors Leopold and and friend about their general comments and the planning staff coastal commission and the property owners for really getting together and in good faith to advocate for their positions I think they've been heard I don't know that the ultimate choice or decision is going to please everyone everybody on all sides but there's some some differences of opinion but I really applaud the planning staff under and with uh David Carlson in particular and the staff for navigating these negotiations between the property owners and our county and I I do want to say how much I appreciate as also a member of the California State Association of Counties Mr. Leopold we we are talking about our Santa Cruz County and its impact but believe me the California State Association of Counties or CSAC is looking at this as a statewide alternative and some of the proposals from other counties have been rejected by the commission and so we're trying to I think in the best efforts we can to see how we can make this work so we can come to some agreement on that I do support this staff recommendation and moving it forward to the coastal commission just to be clear though Mr. Carlson if when this goes to the coastal commission and they presumably make a decision on what they're going to accept or not accept will this come back to the county our county and all the counties along the coast or is the process that the coastal commission will make its decision and that's that how does that work will it be coming back to us again after the coastal commission action if the coastal commission makes significant modifications to the what we submit to them then yes it comes back to the board for either acceptance or rejection of those modifications okay thank you well I again I want to applaud all all sides of this issue I understand it's a very very emotional one but I think that we have over the last six months from our March 10th public hearing have had several sessions with the property owners and the planning staff and the other counties throughout California on the coast line so I I do approve this recommendation and I thank you again for your hard work and trying to come to an agreement that most of us can say well this is a good proposal moving to the coastal commission so thank you very much key supervisor okay any other comments one more this is a Ryan Coonerty just a brief comment so I just I too want to add my appreciation to David Carlson and the plan department for the good work having to do it over again I'm not sure Santa Cruz County should have placed itself between property owners and the coastal commission as we try to map the difficult course of the impacts of climate change as we're seeing across the county I'm very supportive of moving this forward and getting comments from coastal commission and I and I also want to say I mean this is also a matter of resources we've been working on this held multiple many many hearings many many public outreach sessions over the course of two years we now have 925 people in Santa Cruz County have lost their homes and fire we had a housing crisis before this and we need planning staff to be working on that housing crisis this is of tremendous impact to property owners in the coastal zone but as was mentioned these are primarily second homes and we really need to spend our time and energy and effort focusing on the residents of Santa Cruz County and I'm so supportive of moving this forward and then and getting the getting the comments or bringing it back so that we can spend time and energy on the other housing matters that are so pressing to our county right now thank you thank you we have a motion by supervisor leopold and a second by supervisor friend okay clerk please conduct the roll call supervisor leopold hi friend hi koonerty hi mcverson hi chair cap it hi motion passes unanimously we will uh let's take a short break 10 minutes we'll be right back and we'll uh item number eight is the public hearing an eight one six oh four uh proposal for permanent room housing at uh one zero one one zero soquel drive an aptos requiring rezoning and a commercial development permit determined that the proposal is exempt from further environmental review under the california environmental quality act and take related actions as outlined in the memorandum of the planning director good morning uh yes still morning good morning daisy allen planning department thank you chair cap it supervisors the purpose of this public hearing is to consider an application to add the permanent room housing combining district to one zero one one zero soquel drive this property is approximately 0.71 acres located in aptos near to the junction of soquel drive and freedom boulevard the parcel is developed with a restaurant currently sid smokehouse and a two-story 10 room former motel the motel and restaurant were constructed in 1949 the area was uh called rod broy junction and the hotel itself was called the rio del mar motel and cafe and was later changed to the arabian um nine of the 10 rooms on this property have since been converted to studio apartments over time the 10th room is used as storage by the restaurant and is not included in the prh application the nine studios range in size from 225 to 260 square feet each unit has a full bathroom refrigerator hot plate wall heater and cabinet space the units do not have kitchen sinks but the property owner would be installing kitchen sinks as a condition of approval for the development permit units all have at least one dedicated parking space the site has a general plan designation of c s service commercial and is zoned c four residential is not a conforming use on service commercial properties except for in the prh combining district there is no permit history recognizing the former motel as a legal non-conforming residential use therefore the residential use on this property has not previously been legalized there is no recent police activity on this property there is one code enforcement case from 2003 which was resolved when a re-roof permit was obtained we do look into police records and code enforcement records for prh applications um the proposed project would legalize the residential use by adding this property to the prh combining district and would classify the nine units as prh units a zoning plan amendment is needed to change the property zoning to c four prh and a commercial development permit is required to approve and define the parameters of the prh use staff has made the findings for the required approvals detailed findings are provided in the resolution and the ordinance in your packet but to summarize the project provides a community related use which is housing that is affordable by design the units were originally built as motel rooms which are not subject to density limits and conversion of these rooms to residential units was not anticipated when the motel was first constructed the site has been in residential use for some time and as such has low potential to function again in its original use as visitor accommodation in fact visitor accommodation is not even in allowed use in the c four zone district the rezoning allows for the existing mixed residential and restaurant use of this property to continue and is in the best interests of public health safety and welfare also the proposed prh density is compatible with the general plan and can be accommodated by available utilities and community services any intensification of use on this parcel such as the creation of additional prh units would require an amendment to the development permit staff has prepared conditions of approval for prh use on this property conditions would include a building inspection building permits for new kitchen sinks and also for any other upgrades as needed to meet the health and safety requirements conditions also include submittal of rental information and a five-year review the criteria for the revocation of the permit would also be included in the conditions of approval staff recommends that the board hold a public hearing and adopt the rezoning ordinance and resolution approving application 181 604 and direct staff to file the CEQA notice of exemption with the clerk of the board looking over that uh well any questions uh any questions from board members on this item uh let's go with uh supervisor coonity i have none thank you mr chair okay uh supervisor mcpherson supervisor friend supervisor leopold friend supervisor friend you might want to repeat your comments because it was very garbled okay sorry thank you supervisor leopold no i don't have any questions i do have a brief comment which is just that we have received some uh public input in regards to this but with questions about uh or i would say a misunderstanding of these as hotels and i do believe that this was briefly covered but i think that it's it's worth noting out that the properties like this one that we're considering these aren't currently operating as motels that aren't doing well as a visitor serving accommodation which is what a lot of the outreach we'd received are that these are these are the hotels or motels that haven't been operating as such in some case in decades that have been serving as an affordable housing option that we're just formalizing as such and i think it's an important distinction that uh people be aware of but thank you and i have no questions uh chair uh the location it's it's fairly close to aptos high school right uh yes i believe so and i i saw on there it it basically will be converted to one or two persons occupancy per unit correct is it possible for a family or something to uh have a larger unit or anything like that um these units are studio units a maximum is 260 square feet so it wouldn't really be feasible for a family um i only thought of that because it's close to the high school and let's say you have a mom and dad and a high school age student they can walk to the school okay anyway uh i will now open up the public hearing on item number eight uh you have three minutes how many people do we have to speak i don't see any but uh we have one hi mary lee sams widely have concern you said the it was originally built in 1944 1949 1949 so current electrical standards all of that stuff is that corded electrical wire that's in there the old-fashioned is it going to be completely rewire brought up to current standards because when you're adding on all kinds of new electrical and whatever else they've got in there it's going to create an overload over heat um i don't know if it has the current electrical boxes or the old um those other things that are used that are not allowed anymore so it should be brought up to current code standards including the covered soffits the covered everything to make it um less fire stuff because people do smoke up there i've seen it and such and i'm you know i wish them well that it's a affordable unit but it does need to be safe at current code standards since they're now going to legalize it to switch it over in my opinion along with all of the whatever else that needs to be done to bring it up to current healthy standards thank you thank you anybody else would like to speak on item number eight uh i see not in here any we have we have one web comment and it is from a user called mercury minor hello the agenda material provided prior comments provide prior comments thank you for directing staff to create prh and thanks to the commission planning and everyone who has worked over the last two years to make the prh overlay reality this will be useful going forward for additional conversions of obsolete multi-occupant short-stay facilities badly needed for affordable by design housing sincerely michael cox listener properties so cal california that will be it okay um public hearing is now closed and i'll bring it back to the board any discussion or action i'll move the recommended actions second we have first by supervisor friend second by supervisor leopold and if we can have a uh roll call vote supervisor leopold hi friend hi coonerty hi big person hi chair cap it hi the motion passes unanimously next we have item number nine consider strategies to support rebuilding after the csu zz u lightning complex fire disaster and direct staff to return october 6 2020 with an updated information and take related actions as outlined in the memorandum of the planning director i think you need to um good morning chair cap it members of the board and um citizens and members from all of the different agencies and departments that are here today to um be available to you i'm kathy maloy i'm the planning director and um while i'm delivering the presentation i did want to emphasize that it reflects the collaboration input and information from a number of divisions in planning from environmental health from department of public works from fire districts and many others the agenda for today um will go through the extent of the damage the key rebuilding steps both prior to submitting an application for a building permit and what happens during that process well you your board on september 1st also gave us certain specific directives in terms of information that you wanted to be made available today um in a fairly detailed way that the staff report is very detailed and per your request this presentation will also contain quite a bit of information regarding the opportunities for temporary housing um information about the website the resource recovery center the streamlining um activities that we are working on and the opportunity for some reduced permit fees for reconstruction we're also going to talk through some of the the special challenges the extent of damage the location the nature of the the area um is indeed going to present some special challenges going forward so first the extent of damage um you would ask that that be broken out specifically by supervisorial district which the damage occurred in district 3 and district 5 there have been a total of about 911 destroyed homes that number may go up um somewhat the the visual inspections and posting of structures has occurred but there's refinement um of the database that's currently ongoing in addition to the 911 destroyed homes there was about 500 other types of structures destroyed and about 90 damaged homes so the key key rebuilding steps many of people who suffered damage have already begun these steps at the resource recovery center online and through other means there's the filing of the claims with insurance companies there's registering with FEMA um to receive assistance and there may be some some other options uh beginning to gather information um to prepare for rebuilding steps is is next and so filing a calamity application with the assessor that can be done electronically and that results in uh the owner being emailed the assessor's data on the the site itself the planning department all also has a records room and there's a special email address that's been set up so that you could electronically request records and archives regarding your property from the planning department the um the environmental health is in the lead on uh cleanup activities obviously public works and others are also involved i i think most people know that phase one is the hazardous materials cleanup and the us epa is going to be coming in and doing that that will be at no cost to the owner and we they need some time to stage and set up etc but that's expected to begin september 28th after properties have had the hazardous materials removed um those properties you know as they get cleaned they can move on to a phase two cleanup we don't yet have formal word that cal recycle the state agency will be carrying out phase two in santa criss county but i think um we're all sort of hoping and expecting that that will be the case if so then that uh phase two cleanup will also occur at no cost to the private owners they will uh private owners do have the option to uh go forward privately but if they do pursue phase two privately then they will need to be paying fees uh keep going backwards all right um again more pre application steps in terms of getting ready to rebuild some of the the areas are going to be more straightforward than others um any site will need to have potable water be hooked up to to sewer or have a functioning septic system and be connected to pgne power and we know that there's a lot of structures that have been not red tag that are not yellow tag that they're green and so they can move forward with getting pgne to hook up their power and we at the building division may need to get involved in authorizing that through either stickers or communications with pgne and that's kind of a stage that we're at right now if there's need to improve say your septic system then you will need to work on how to figure that out and get that done before you could submit a building permit application we're also strongly advising that property owners do what they can to install erosion control and stabilize the site because we are coming up on a rainy season and there's um all the ash and materials that can can themselves create a hazard in that area so coordinating with the county geologist we're trying to put together a screening tool to let people know whether they have to worry about that or not in terms of geologic hazards and also some of the area some of the damage has occurred in areas with roads that are not up to current standards and so the fire district officials are also coordinating and trying to provide some guidance for what to do in that type of a situation and so that will be another type of coordination that should occur so tentatively you know if you're not in a an area that's a fairly straightforward site which is going to tend to be more in the bonny dune area that's going to tend to be a little easier than in the far north coast and in some areas of san lorenzo valley and if you're at a more complex site you may need clearances from environmental health regarding your septic you may need a clearance from fire district regarding your road access you may need um not only to check in with county geologists to uh to learn whether or not you might have a hazard you may need to retain a private consultant to do a geologic assessment or investigation any site that's going to rebuild um is going to need a soils and geotechnical report that's a standard part of of the building code and it should be realized recognize that even though some foundations you can still see them on the sites the the extreme heat of the fire does change the properties of some of that concrete and so it's really uh generally not reusable for a new home most of the sites um are not going to need any sort of zoning or discretionary permits most of the sites had already had homes and it will be just a building permit the staff report details certain instances where you might be in a coastal zone or in a special environmental area where you might need what we call a level three or just an administrative staff level zoning type of a permit that can be pursued concurrently with the building permit application in most instances um so the you know once you pull together your plans um you'll be submitting them along with the soils and geotechnical report any other technical reports through the what we the e-plan which is an electronic portal uh for for submitting the plans and those are routed to reviewing agencies um electronically and once the plan check occurs then you pull the building permit and start construction yikes all right um so the the board asked us to specifically concentrate on these topics here so um we'll go ahead and go through those temporary housing we have created uh we have a temporary permit process we've created some specific guidance for temporary housing for people displaced by the fires as well as an application form and that's currently available online we do want to emphasize that the temporary housing permit can be obtained not only for the fire damage site but for any site within the county that allows a residential use so in some instances um it might be safest and fastest to to locate a temporary accommodation at a friend or family member's site outside of the burn area and that's going to be in the situations where there are these complex challenges with regard to septic geology fire road access and such but we are um very open to to any kind of of habitable um temporary housing including RVs trailers tiny homes uh someone may want to get started with an ad u before building a major home and those are all possibilities the temporary permit will be issued um by the zoning section it's a $500 permit and as long as you've got the clearances on a safe site and utilities set up then it should be a pretty straightforward uh the public information resources um have been made available as you know the resource recovery center was set up at the at the arena it's been operating uh from 11 a.m to 7 p.m which will continue through this week however to be closed this sunday and then next week it'll be open from 11 till 5 monday through saturday um initially we were going to close it on sunday september 27th that's now been changed to wednesday september 30th there's a website that uh contains um quite a bit of information it has the damage assessment map it has detailed information on rebuilding debris removal wells water links to other agencies such as fema links to resource conservation district information about the effects of wildfire on your property erosion control etc so there's a lot of information that's already on this website and more information continues to be added as it's developed in terms of the streamline permit process i mentioned that that is if you are reconstructing a home that's um um had on a site that had a legal home on it before and if you don't exceed the size of that home by about 10 percent and you're in roughly the same location that's going to be the most straightforward pathway to a reconstruction however it is possible to go ahead and propose a larger than 10 percent um size and um and some a somewhat different location on your site it's just that that's probably going to be a little bit less streamlined um but it should still be building permit only the the um order of magnitude in terms of the the type of and location of damage we thought people might be interested you know if you say let's say there's about a thousand homes that have been lost rough numbers about 50 percent of those about 500 should be this relatively straightforward reconstruction type of house the other 50 percent located in more challenging areas of San Lorenzo Valley and in the remote remote look north coast about half of those are probably going to require the most more focused geologic investigation or identification of other mitigations to address challenges you uh the board asked for information about fees and potential to reduce fees not all fees can be waived because we are bringing on a consultant to deal with the volume of the the numbers of permit applications that we expect so we do need to pay that consultant and staff costs related to the building plan review and issuance as well as inspections of the the houses once they're under construction but since we can anticipate where these homes are and there's a certain volume of activity going on we have uh decided that some of the normal routings and the flat fees charged by reviewing agencies will not be necessary so the column on the right sort of goes through about $6,000 in fees that are normally charged which we will not be charging for reconstruction projects it's also a recommendation that the board authorize us to collect the building plan check fee at the time of building permit issuance rather than right up front when somebody submits so there would be some fees that we would take in up front and in this example it's a the example of fees is given for a 2,000 square foot house in bonny dune so a fairly straightforward house that does not involve redoing a septic or special geologic challenges and things of that nature so that would be about $4,000 in fees due at the time you submit the application and then once it was all planned checked and ready to issue it would be about another 7,000 in fees charged since it's a reconstruction project there would be no impact fees that would be charged so um that's the information on the fees so the we are anticipating that most of the reconstructed homes would use the same access road and driveways and generally you know as I said before that in some areas that that's okay in some areas those roads don't actually meet current code and maybe they've shrunken over time or deteriorated or never met code in the first place so the fire protection officials in particular are are meeting and um deciding what sort of processes will be available to homeowners that live in those type of challenging access situations and that that's an ongoing discussion there's potentially some some programmatic mitigation or in-loop fees that can create a fund to carry out some road improvements to the benefit of a group of of homeowners that's the type of thing that that's under discussion the um we've already mentioned that any septic system has to meet current state standards um there there's not an option to not meet current state standards with septic systems so in some locations there will need to be an alternate or enhanced septic system installed regarding the um the geologic hazards there is um unfortunately um another another threat that is developing this slide illustrates the effect of fire on soil profiles and how fire creates a new level of hazard i know we're all weary of threats to our safety and security in this year 2020 that has already presented us with unprecedented levels of challenge but now we have a different and increased hazard that's a result of the fire activity the slide at the left illustrates a pre-fire normal condition with vegetation bugs leaf litter topsoil a condition where rainfall is absorbed the middle slide shows what happens when the fire occurs it destroys all the carbon rich trees and vegetation essentially cooks the material both above and below ground leaves ash and it leaves a condition which is shown at the far right where the soil dirt has lost its porosity it's lost its ability to absorb and hold water and rainfall even on the order of a quarter inch in a 15 minute time interval can in some locations create runoff in larger volumes than had occurred in before the fire so that means that ash loose soil rocks other material can flow downslope at a high velocity and impact things in its path including structures so this hazard exists in some areas within the burn area and even in some areas nearby outside of the burn area there was a watershed emergency response team called work that's a multi-agency post-fire hazard assessment team that includes cal fire both the us and california geological survey and other professionals and they've completed a preliminary report which the county geologists and others are further refining in order to characterize this debris flow landslide hazard and that's this this increased level of hazard is one of the reasons for why in some areas we are going to require that rebuild sites checking with the county county geologists and screening information to get the status of their site with regard to this hazard the other challenge that we're all aware of is that in in the burn area there were a number of sites where structures never did get a permit sometimes the sites themselves were never permitted and sometimes they were and so that is our most complex adaptive challenge is how to address unpermitted structures as part of this rebuilding process we don't have all all the answers yet but we've collectively identified a couple of options for your consideration we need to work more on those options but option one would be to treat structures built prior to 1986 just as legal non-conforming structures this is the way we currently treat structures that exist before 1956 because the county never had a building code it didn't have codes and so we we just accept we grandfather and everything as legal if it's prior to 1956 potentially we could adopt a different threshold and say that things built prior to 1986 where before we have you know we have a little less than perfect record keeping in some instances and we could just deem all of the 1986 pre-86 structures to be legal non-conforming that might help quite a few sites but then again the new construction is still going to need to meet current codes some of those sites are still going to have some of the challenges related to geology septic and and fire road access under option two that was something we're calling the fire area improvement reconstruction program tentatively that would be where where it wasn't a pre-86 construction site it could be of any age but it was unpermitted and and under this option we're basically we know that they can't meet road access or there's a really really challenging situation that is not going to enable that site to fully comply with the codes even though they would be able to build a new a home that complies with the building code there are other codes that affect the rebuilding and and under option two we're basically we know that there's it's going to be very challenging so the thing to explore there with fire districts and other agency partners is the potential for a programmatic type of a mitigation maybe you would set up an in lieu fee program and take you know money from from similarly situated sites put them in a kitty and use that collection of funds to make improvements say to a road turnouts or retaining wall widening here and there what what have you so that is a very early thought and has not been further developed and we're recommending that the agencies continue to talk over the next couple months and report back to you on on november 17th so in summary the current this is what's currently going on then as we are completing refining the the data related to the damage assessment the hazardous material and debris removal those programs are coming together and we'll start soon we're interviewing consultants to hire assistants with the building permit processing and we expect to have a contract back to the board by october 6th we're examining the unified fee schedule and whether there need to be any changes made to facilitate reconstruction to reflect these waived or reduced costs one thing that's happening in terms of the streamlining um as i said we've decided that we don't necessarily have to route to all of the normal agency that you were out to and one of the reasons why we feel like we can do that is um we knowing where these sites are we can predetermine some of these specifications and protocols that need to be incorporated into the project plans so the environmental plan specifications dpw protocols and specifications we hope to we're developing documents and hope to get them on the website so that they'd be available for downloading and incorporating into building permit plans and that will streamline um compliance reviews and and allow not having to route um plans to some agencies we're looking at the the code um as well to see whether there's any additional amendments that might be needed to best accommodate the reconstruction activity i've already talked about the environmental health fire and permitting agencies trying to think through some of the more global challenges that are going to exist in some areas so the the you know those challenges are some of the more difficult policy and implementation considerations and uh the next near term challenge that's somewhat related to rebuilding but exists even if someone's not rebuilding or may live outside of the burn area is this increased geologic hazard that we're all becoming um more much more aware of because of the the changes to the burn area the loss of vegetation etc etc there is a higher risk of debris flow landslides that that risk is elevated by rain even at modest levels there's there's some erosion control and some things that can be done to reduce the extent of it but really um in the first couple of winters at least from what we're hearing from from other jurisdictions is that it can't be fully mitigated ahead of time that that the strategy includes evacuating people during in these areas at risk so this is a big new issue um and we're not it's not the intention of this item today to to go into detail on it um we are preparing a presentation of the work report and the you know water and geology and public safety aspects of this and we'll be scheduling a presentation for the special meeting of of september 29th of the board it's going to be necessary to educate inform prepare property owners for this winter and so there'll there'll be other follow-up meetings needed as well um that concludes my report and again i just wanted to to um emphasize that this report is the result of effort from staff from many departments many agencies many divisions and um a lot of that those staff and expertise is available to you either remotely or in this room should you have any questions so the recommended actions are we're on page one of the staff report and um not sure if you want me to read all those off or that now or that we can do that after any discussion or or public comment that whichever you prefer okay great we want to maybe ask Supervisor Coonerty or McPherson to speak first i think this is thank you this is Supervisor Coonerty uh first i want to thank uh both Miss Malloy and all the relevant department heads for putting this together so quickly and comprehensively and showing your commitment to helping people rebuild in a timely manner i thought i thought i thought the work was really professional and took lessons from other communities that have experienced similar events and um and so hopefully we aren't we aren't reinventing the wheel and in fact we'll have a better wheel for people as they rebuild i did have a couple questions first in the staff report it seemed to indicate that the county would be paying for the geotechnical work but then in your comments it sounded like people needed to retain their own geotechnical consultant can you clarify that yes um what what i put in in the staff report is you know we have a county geologist Jeff Nolan and who's we're extremely fortunate to have on staff he is a wealth of experience in this area decades worth of experience and what i what we're proposing is that he not need to bill out his time you know on any particular applications we think that the geologic hazard is a is um a broader hazard it's a somewhat diffuse hazard it's not necessarily just site specific and so his expertise in in terms of informing uh the character of the hazard and and assisting people to to try to address it we don't want to have to charge for his time um however you know once he has gotten to the point of determining that there is more work that there is an elevated hazard on a particular site and that we do need a geologic study or investigation site specific at that point um the property owner will need to hire their own professional and and likewise with the soils and geotechnical report that's a standard part of of pretty much any new house um application it's and so soils and geotechnical reports that's where you do the site specific study of the location you want to build and they come up with the design um parameters for the foundation and for the the uh the home so that is a very specific report specific to the home that's proposed to be reconstructed and that would be need to be paid for by the private property owner and um I guess there's two follow-up questions to that the first is uh I mean do we this sort of two-step process do we have the capacity to move quickly from our side and is there also the local capacity uh in the in the private sector consultant sector to be able to get these reports in a timely way to to homeowners looking to rebuild um I I do know that local uh geotechnical professionals are also meeting and trying to get ready for the demand that may be placed on them uh what we're doing at the county is that we uh and this may be a code amendment that we bring back it is that we would not be doing our peer reviews of the soils and geotechnical reports normally we do peer review we do in-house peer review and in this instance as long as the soils geotechnical report was stamped by a professional we would not do the peer review so that saves time and money um we we again we're exploring the consultant services contract and should we identify um further need um there's that option to maybe bring it on through the consultant contract and um and in the staff report it also mentions the possibility of a of a sort of a neighborhood-based assessment um is that it's what what could we look at there in terms of you know for instance in the Pine Ridge neighborhood in in Bonnie Doone doing a geotechnical report for that for that whole area well I I'm not a geotechnical engineer myself so there are probably better people that can answer this question than me however um I do know that you know it's going to rely on the the professionals feeling that they do there's enough similarly situated conditions predictable soil um and and geology conditions that the design solution is going to be similar for a batch of similarly situated similarly located areas maybe that will occur in some of the Bonnie Doone areas I think that we we pretty much do not expect that to occur in the San Lorenzo Valley because there's a lot of variation from from property to property um and so a site specific uh report it it's not all that expensive and it will define the specific engineering considerations that need to be taken on that site to to support the new home okay um the another question is um the timeline so so the requirement that everyone have a up-to-code septic system uh some people may have functioning septic systems but not up to code is there a way that if we can allow them to rebuild and then then give them three to five years to to bring their septic system uh up to code uh or up to current standards is that is that a possibility um I think Marilyn Underwood of Environmental Health is is participating in this call and she would probably be the best person to answer that question um as far as septic systems um again we're talking about permitted septic folks I'm getting some feedback yes we'll try to correct that okay um good afternoon I think it's afternoon already um as far as septic systems so again we're talking with a permitted septic system and distinguishing it from those properties where it's not permitted we'll we'll talk about that separately so if the septic system and doing a replacement home they would like to essentially build the same size home with the same number of bedrooms then and it met current standards meaning 83 to 2018 then they would be able to rebuild and use that septic system again making sure that it wasn't damaged and and bring it up to current code if they wanted to expand and upgrade or it wasn't meeting current code they would need to be bring up to current code standards um I hope that helps explain it yes and can you while while we have you can you uh I asked this Maloy about the capacity of staff um can you talk about your capacity for the septic and well inspections um in order and in order to to manage this process and whether we need an outside consultant as we are planning with the the permitting process sure um we would welcome the assistance I think um you know we too do not see this what we anticipate the volume of folks coming forward to uh need our review um so that is part of the consultants that we're looking at I will say at this point we'll be chatting with them about their capacity to provide that they're not typically those kind of uh they're typically tend to be consultants more on the planning side that rather than the septic but I do know there um that is something we're interested in them trying to help us with great thank you and then uh back to miss Maloy uh two other questions one is the idea of um for temporary housing only allowing one additional person per property um you could imagine that there are communities that have worked collaboratively and they may want more than one and if the septic or and other systems allow it would we would we be okay with that I think that that we we would take the board's direction on that you know tentatively we've said that you know if there were was one home there before then you can put a temporary one temporary there um we've also said that you do need to be connected to you the utility system so power um septic or sewer um the other one anyway um you know if if if the systems can handle it then then if that's your direction that you'd like us to entertain evaluating the system and seeing whether more than one temporary accommodation can be located on one site then we can certainly explore that probably the the septic is probably going to be the the most tricky item there yeah I appreciate that I think it is worth exploring if it can all be done safely my last question has to do with the power I understand being hooked up to utilities but that puts a lot of takes a lot of control out of for people to sort of get back on their site there are alternatives to just a generator solar and battery storage or others other ways that people could could provide power are we open to to that if it's going to take a long time for them to get the power utility restored yeah I think that the building official could probably speak to that I um in general you know we don't we want to strongly discourage the use of generators for a longer term established residential occupancy of a site you know generators are really supposed to be for emergency generators you know the short periods of time um there it can also create hazards if you haven't transferred the power and if you're feeding back into the grid that can be a hazardous situation so I think you know the building official is open to alternate power sources and can can have a dialogue with the property owners and evaluate their proposals but yes solar battery storage um take it case by case in general though I think PG&E is is pretty well getting pretty well established to restore power and will be able to release and and allow for power to be dropped back onto the sites great thank thank you supervisor McPherson yes um thank you right I just can't overstate um the work represented in this comprehensive report um is really astonishing and and I can't express my enough of my appreciation to the planning public works and environmental health agencies and the county for their hard work and getting this to this point as quickly as possible um I think we're just at the starting point of this and we we know it's going to be some time so I first of all none of us can recognize the well the hopelessness or just the emptiness of these people the the 900 plus people who have lost their homes so I just want to make sure that you know that we are trying to work as quickly as we can we understand the the potential hazards if we go too quickly and don't do it correctly when we rebuild so I really uh want to thank planning and the other departments public works and environmental health for getting these uh these proposals to us as quickly as possible the complexity and the urgency of it combined is well we're not going to make it overwhelming we're just trying to have to try to get to it as best we can and is encouraging to let people know that through their first phase of the cleanup that there would be no cost to the property owners because of the EPA the environmental protection agency and then in phase two with the calorie cycle helping to help at no cost as well so I hope that it's of some comfort to some of the the homeowners for the basic cleanup that will have to be done is and one of the most promising aspect is acknowledgement that the turnaround time for permits to site temporary housing quickly and then rebuild in the same footprint is foremost on the minds of the survivors they want to get their lives back of course and to do that they need a clear path that is predictable affordable and feasible um the this report demonstrates clearly that the county recognizes your concerns and so I just want to let people generally know that I think mine and I think I know all the rest of the board's concerns are that the county will be guided by the principles of process that is predictable in terms of time frame and cost and the fees charged by the county are they are they reasonable and are they affordable are the permit requirements feasible given the extensive challenges especially the rules around the two most difficult problem areas we face involving the septic systems as has been mentioned and the fire access or the roads to some of these dwellings I think the key that we're establishing in these protocols for when the soils and geological work will be required and to what level of detail realistically I've heard that we could probably do about 50 to 100 of these per week is that a good guess we have 900 homes that are plus that are down but I'm just trying to get a realistic outlook of how quickly we can go on this with the agencies that are coming in to review the geological impacts the potential geological impacts as we go through the rebuilding process do you have any estimate of how quickly we can do this I mean in number of parcels is it about 50 to 100 a week realistically well realistically um that the sometimes the less predictable time that it takes for reconstruction is on the side of the private property owner you know gathering resources getting a designer getting the clearances figuring out your septic system making seeing whether you need that geology do technical report getting that done so once and we will we're here to help you know we'll have a lot of information and resources and hopefully some um a lot of guidance available to help but there is a lot that the property owner will need to do once that's all together and submitted to the county then that's what we're gearing up for to get sufficient consultant assistance and the protocols established that we can process them very quickly in Sonoma County for instance once someone gets all that together and submits a complete application then they were getting a permit within a week you know five to seven working days and that's what we are going to try to replicate here in Santa Cruz County but I do need to emphasize that that there are challenges that um are going to take some time on the property owner side of things and you know as as has been mentioned you know securing the consultant getting the study done getting the designer for getting your finances together all of that is is we know um quite a daunting test some people are better at building than others and so we're here ready to help but that's really probably the most uncertainty is is how long it takes people to be ready to submit I don't know that we would anticipate getting a hundred applications ready all at once in that same week right I understand and I really do commend the public work stormwater staff developing a checklist that eliminates the need to route or permit applications to them for review so I really think it's uh that checklist is important and people should have access or make access to it I still have some questions um I'm concerned about the deceptic standards which I think are the biggest stumbling block in this whole rebuild recovery process especially if enhanced treatment is frequently required and the regional water quality control board must approve the permit um what can the county do to push back if the regional board makes these requirements to honor us uh and secondly does FEMA or insurance cover the cost of rebuilding septic systems or help with the cost of upgrading those systems I think that's a question for Marilyn Underwood I think so yeah um as far as the cost of upgrading I I am not aware of uh funds that could be used for that certainly um if folks have insurance uh insurance often covers upgrades to meet current codes uh for those that don't have that coverage I'm not aware of any funding um certainly something I think it would be worthwhile pursuing uh with you and the board but I'm not aware of any okay um and we talked about the the trope uh the trope point and applications is going to be the number of staff that are available and I think you've already answered some of that um the fire access is a big issue um and many of the non-conforming roads were used successfully by fire personnel during this incident so it seems that flexibility in the standards is needed um what influence does the county have in advocating for flexible fire road access uh with Cal Fire and the community fire districts do we need to get there okay uh under those circumstances or is the department of well who uh who will we need to uh address outside of the county to help us answer that question as quickly as possible if those roads can be you know actually used Cal Fire is the county's fire department there are four three other fire districts um with independent authority and decision making um that are located in areas of the burn so I do know that uh Chief Ian Larkin is here and had planned to address you so um he think he was planning on coming up during public comment and speaking a bit about about this issue I can't see I don't think I can wait for that we could we could have him come up okay yeah that's fine good afternoon Chair Caput members of the board uh Supervisor McPherson the direct answer to your question is um we're going to have to look at those very uh specifics on each of the properties uh and how it relates to that road access um though I'm empathetic to everybody's uh uh concerns in the loss of their structures um a lot of these roads are not built to any standards and in order for us to move forward from this we do need to make sure that we improve any accesses that we possibly can uh through this process of uh of the rebuilding phase um so uh a lot of those are going to have to be a uh one-on-one uh circumstance for each of those uh given properties uh so to speak to them in a general term I think it's going to have to be a larger discussion that we have as we move through this uh rebuilding uh phase all right um there um my understanding from the uh the survivors that um there's a scarcity of critical building materials uh and uh one one discovered that replacement sheds are back ordered and there's already a two-month waiting period do you have any general thoughts on that I don't know who might be able to say that what's going on the private sector because there's been so many fires throughout the state but I'm I'm concerned about the scarcity of materials that's not our responsibility so to speak but uh that's going to be a big issue I just want to let people know we recognize that and uh so we'll try to do what we can to get our uh fair share and through um the private enterprise uh throughout the state of California about the need here uh because I my understanding is that I I don't know I can't remember the exact last count that we have in our daily updates I think there's some more than four thousand structures that were destroyed this is uh residential buildings and we have over 900 of more it's clearly about 20 almost 25 a quarter of them so uh we're in uh great need and so I think we will do what we can through the avenues that are available to see that we can get the materials that are needed for the great number of structures that were destroyed in our county um you know one other thing I have about 20 properties that I know of to date and that sandhills habitat that is likely to be present are we going to charge them fees to rebuild or how do those fees how will those uh fees be used for the public good rather than enrich the the land bank um I'm concerned about that it's it's a small number of the total number of structures destroyed to my knowledge at this point but uh it is a huge concern so uh for those 20 about 20 structures located in the sandhills habitat if they go back um and locate on the previously disturbed area that had already been disturbed and there are reconstruction and they're not really going to be disturbing any new areas of habitat then then no they wouldn't need to pay any mitigation fees if the property owner has a desire to expand the footprint that's where the participation in the habitat bank would be um would come up and I think the current fees are about seven dollars a square foot it is a private bank um they a private entity established it and administers it and and decides what the amount of the fee is right okay um and I appreciate the streamline process to um site temporary residences like RVs or tiny homes but what if a larger family needs to be accommodated can they site more than one unit for temporary housing on their parcel again at at the direction of the board if that's something you would like us to explore we can do that um obviously the bottom line is going to be that the appropriate water power and and septic um and and safety considerations are are met at the site but if that's a direction that you'd like us to incur that you know in terms of an emergency disaster response in a temporary situation then that's something that we can look into again I just want to say thank you to a very comprehensive report that uh I think answers many of the questions there might be some special circumstances of course but what you have done and put together to try to skip trying to get back uh on on our feet or that those who lost their homes as quickly as possible is truly impressive and I can't overstate how um how pleased I am with the public works environmental health and planning departments and putting this package together we all know and I want the public you know we know times of the essence who knows what this winter's going to bring and we need to get there as quickly as possible and when I wait up have gone up to look at the damage to the trees there's not hundreds there's thousands and they're trying to chop those up and so we can get some cover for the for the the hill sides and the Santa Rosa Valley we have some special circumstances with the geological situation that we have there it's going to be very challenging but we're going to go as quickly and compassionately as we can to get you back on your feet and uh and what the work that you have done is going to help us get there so thank you very much uh Supervisor Friend thank you chair I think that Supervisor Coonerty and Supervisor McPherson have covered it and thank you Ms. Malloy for your continued work on this uh chair I just uh I appreciate the work that's gone on and I appreciate the comments and actually leadership for my colleagues Supervisor McPherson and Coonerty to give us this direction um about what the county should be doing in relation to a question that Supervisor Coonerty asked about geotech and the investigations in the and the you know the the the concern that there may not be enough folks would it be in our interest to contract with a drilling company that could do the borings and have the local local consultants review the information I mean just sort of getting those borings seem to be incredibly important is that something to take a look at I just offer that as a suggestion I think it's worthwhile and um when in my conversations with uh planning and public work staff I have heard a deep sense of commitment to helping people out as best as possible I'm confident the women and men in those in in our departments and environmental health as well to be able to to to meet this moment and help these people get back in their house as quickly as possible there's great skill that we have in these offices and and I'm sure that if we are committed to figuring out a way to how to get to the yes rather than figuring how to get to a no we can make this happen thank you okay uh I I have just a couple questions you don't have to you know elaborate on them but uh homeowners hazard insurance and life insurance are kind of similar in the sense you pay for it and you hope you never have to use it so with some people with the pandemic and maybe they lost their job or whatever it's a what if question what if they didn't pay their current homeowners insurance I know we couldn't evict people if they couldn't pay the rent I wonder with some people who weren't able to pay their homeowners hazard insurance uh the insurance company is not going to be able to say hey you paid for 10 20 years but you were uh four months late it's time and we cancelled your yeah I really don't know the answer to that question but I will say that at the resource recovery center there is an agency um a non-profit agency that specifically um provides information about the insurance type of questions and so that's a resource for people that'll be something state will be involved with probably and I'm sure some of you know it affects some not just in our county but maybe in the other counties in California chair cabinet if I could make a comment this is Nicole hi so I just wanted to add you know FEMA has the application open right now for disaster assistance it's going to be open until October 21st so anyone who requires assistance we encourage them to go either to the resource recovery center or go online I believe the website is through FEMA it's disaster assistance dot gov and folks can apply both for rental assistance and assistance for their their home repairs so if people are insured or underinsured you know they should go take a look at that and apply for the assistance yeah okay and then I guess with FEMA the other thing would be uh if you're under insured this FEMA is gonna are they gonna help out and let's you know some people don't want too much insurance so they might maybe don't have full coverage correct so during the application process FEMA is going to ask for homeowners insurance and so they'll look at you know what you're insured at and take into consideration if you're insured or under insured so that's part of the process and then uh I guess the tough question is uh uh of the let's say 950 homes uh after all of them have been you know discovered uh or how many would or we're not gonna permit to rebuild because of potential landslides or whatever there are some it's really way too early to try to to guess on on whether and how many sites will be able to rebuild we certainly we just don't have that information yeah you're gonna go step by step right okay and current code changes will that affect some of the people being able to rebuild no what do you mean by current code changes the ones we did earlier this morning you know if we if we have a code change were you know building code yeah okay well the last cycle of the building code was just went into effect um the beginning of this year so the same building code is going to be in effect for the next three years two and two and a half years so um thank you we'll open up Mr. Vice Chair I just this is Supervisor McPherson again I I think there's a lot of things that are on our plate and do we have to look at but I'd like to if when we come to a motion do uh and there's a lot of directions that are that are proposed uh but we that staff investigate um hiring a soils sample consultant to do the majority of the field work and the possibility of citing additional temporary housing for larger families uh I just uh would like to mention that I think that we're gonna need some additional help here and I think it would be a good thing to uh for an additional direction to see if we can hire a soils uh consultant and then just get a sense of how much that would be and for how long okay and uh we'll open up the uh uh with the hearing uh to the public public comments good afternoon my name is James Julian Whitman I've been a resident here for since 94 and planted earth since 1967 I don't pertain to know much of anything specialized I have a minor in geology and in physical and cultural anthropology and several degrees in underwater basket weaving I do legal research I do legal writing I listen to what was going on here and I don't want to deliver a corporate shit sandwich I wish I had three hours to do so I could um what's not being addressed in the eight items that I wrote down um what is FEMA really gonna do for us FEMA's been in control of the United States to my knowledge since March 13th 2020 um what's gonna happen with the property owners that never had a legal residence but they did win a lawsuit against the county of Santa Cruz about 40 years ago I'm particularly talking about the lost chance area um and what's gonna happen when there's exposure about how these storms have really happened I'm not really just addressing Santa Cruz County Santa Cruz County it's about 900,000 residents planet earth 700,000 residents planet earth has about seven billion so we're just one in 10,000 so I'm kind of more addressing what happened last week and that is the fires on the west coast and what's going on in other counties with weather damage um so if these things are all determined to be directed energy weapons Lloyd's London is the largest insurance company in the world they do not cover wireless frequency damages so I'm hoping that this conversation and conversations like this are going to be happening in counties all over the west coast and all over the United States because what happened almost a month ago in Santa Cruz County unfortunately was caused by those who are in control of the U.S. military and that's a corporation that's in control of the whole U.S. Congress and that filters down to even this county in all counties and that is the Rand Corporation and the Rand Corporation its mother and father are the Rothschilds and the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds have been funding both sides of the war for more than 200 years Rothschilds own PG&E so at some point the citizens should get together and really work with each other to figure out the long-term plans for the future unborn children thank you very much good afternoon so I and I'm sure many others find it rather reprehensible the idea that the county would actually be trying to profit off of all the loss that so many families have just incurred so I would like to propose that all permit fees are completely waived for all the survivors of these fires why on earth would we even consider charging them to rebuild their homes considering the extent of this disaster I'd further like to propose that the county use some of the $500 million that is revenue from property taxes every year over $500 million to help fund not only the inspection process but also any sort of other designers or other type of soil testing or anything else that's needed to help these homeowners out and again anyone who had any sort of structure at all everyone should be able to rebuild anything that they had unless it was actually causing some sort of danger true bodily harm or danger to to someone else which obviously is in the case or would have been a case in and of itself before the fires so the idea that we're going to use these fires as an opportunity to um take things away from families take away their their you know little structure they had in the backyard or whatever else that it was that wasn't permitted is really pretty ridiculous so I think pretty much as long as they can show that there was a structure there they should be able to rebuild and have all assistance necessary to rebuild as good if not better than it was originally and again all permits should be all permit fees should be waived and any assistance that's needed soil testing designers all that should be covered should be taken out of the 500 million plus dollars that's taken as brought in as revenue to this county every year in property tax and especially since the schools are doing distance learning right now the the percentage of that property tax that is supposed to go towards schools which covers utilities and property maintenance and all those other things seemed like it could very easily be used to help out these homeowners and their families thank you thank you I believe the insurance companies would pay for the the permit fees and everything and and all that right that's included it it depends on the policy I mean it's it's not the the person who lost the home that has to come up out of their savings hi i'm hearing sam's wiley i can attest to your last statement it depends on the policy you purchased i had a great one with travelers 100 plus 50 all code upgrades came out of a separate kitty okay so it just depends on what you purchased that's why we need to upgrade so my thing is if it would be helpful to have a preliminary checklist punch list requirements for each area because the county is does not want to take liability for doing all the soil samples because if they make a boo boo the county is going to be liable but if the geologist report was rather recent for the area a group possibility for group report and then overlay the different properties on top of it to help make it a little bit less expensive for the homeowners because it's their responsibility unfortunately now speaking to the rural areas they're more off the grid cal fire which i flew under the the got mine in before it got upgraded they're paved road to the rural areas has to be 18 to 20 feet wide before permits you get a permit issued to put up a stick of wood that's what i was told i got lucky um and the required 10 000 gallons of water to 5 000 gallon tanks a wharf hydrant with placement determined by um cal fire has to be done also those are expensive and that's a lot of stuff that needs to get done and many of these places with the um higher up the mountain or last chance or whatever it's not going to support those wider roads and some of those unfortunately people may not be able to rebuild unless they get creative and work together move their house site a little closer together to make it a little less painful in the pocketbook but then again that's a stipulation that now they're moving away from their housing original house site to move someplace else and that'll open up another can of worms um the septic rebuild cost and repayment again depends on your insurance company what you paid for and if you have an extra if you have two kitchens in the house instead of one each kitchen has to have a separate septic tank you can't put it into one it's just not allowed with the permits and there may have been some more code upgrades since then but it would be helpful for cal fire to go to each site and let the person know or put it in the report which areas are going to need what so the person can make a better determination am i going to be able to rebuild and if they're not able to rebuild because of cost is that site buildable at all because all of a sudden they went from having a nice nest egg to having nothing just my opinion thank you thank you good afternoon i'm glenn gruner with cfh construction i just want to say that it's amazing what our firemen did they told us 20 000 structures are going to burn i'm sorry that we had 980 burn they did amazing job our sheriff's done amazing jobs i just wanted to say that our construction company we build tiny houses we built ad use i've been talking with um chips and drywall i've been talking usg i've been talking golden state limber we have the ability to help these people in the short term get in the longer term down the road we can help so our company i've been talking with uh david reid i've sent uh mcpherson um uh uh it's up to everybody to all those supervisors i send tiny house so we can build tiny houses fast we can build them on our property so i'm just here today that we're here to help we're trying to beat down the prices for these people we're trying to make costs lower we've got our windows we got doors we got window i mean everything we got metal metal studs we got roofers available we got our framers available so with all that said that's what i'm here for i'm not here to market my company i'm here to help these people so that's what cfhe ink is everybody's got my information we're here to help we can start tomorrow thank you and later later down the road we can help on the septic tanks and everything else okay so thank you to the fireman good afternoon this is i'm becky steinbrunner thank you sir for that i also want to bring up that there are tough sheds also available you see them at home depot those could also be a very quick and affordable temporary shelter supervisor mcpherson i'd like to thank you for pulling together your townhome meeting i got that notice and i really applaud you for your excellent outreach and information to your constituents i'm concerned that um there will be many bottlenecks in all of this i'm happy to hear that the epa is going to come in and help the environmental health with the um phase one hazardous materials evaluations but what about the uh cow fires bottleneck if they have to approve all the roads their resources are very limited and i asked that you bring up chief larkin and maybe um um chris walters to address that issue that's a big one if we're going to require that all roads be improved to current standards how would the drainage be affected in these uh fragile areas by paved roads that will now have a lot more drainage i think the geotechnical report is a big hurdle for a lot of people to get over and having done a lot of work on my road that required geotech they're also in short supply they always have been and now it'll be even worse so i'd like to ask that instead of having a brand new geotech report if you've got one that's been done and approved and nothing has majorly changed with the site just get it looked at and not have to go through all of those borings that's going to be a huge bottleneck and a huge expense for people we learned a lot in the summit fire from core ledos why are we not applying that here now uh we learned what happens in those mountainous soils when the rains come you heard many people this morning from last chance they were off the grid to begin with so why are they being required to hook up to PG&E now they've got their own independent system they're tough people and they're ready to go they should not have to meet the same uh requirements that a more urban area would have to do um i i really take offense that people cannot use generators as emergency power because that is this is an emergency and people are not on the grid anyway so there's no danger of that feeding back in i am aware of the possibility of incinerating toilets many tiny homes use them so let's allow people to use them now in these emergency times and maybe if their septic system it does not meet the current code i want to know what santa cru city water department is saying here this is their watershed what are we doing to prevent erosion um let's work with resource conservation and do some seeding to prevent erosion going into this the entire region's water supply um and i also heard this morning on ksco dr underwood talking that the soils would have to be trucked to san mattel county why can't they be taken to hollister john smith is a class two or i don't know the class number but hazardous materials go there it's a lot closer than san mattel county thank you good afternoon chair cappett supervisor zian larkin cal fire county fire chief i just wanted to thank miss moly for her report um this is a very sensitive topic um a lot of homes have been destroyed in a lot of areas of the county that have very um trouble uh areas where they're on steep slopes or have very uh questionable road systems that move into there so this is a very very um uh serious topic that we have to address and i think first and foremost we have to look at the safety of our communities when we're dealing with this um as it was mentioned in the report we have the potential for debris flows in many areas of the fire due to our steep drain drainages in our mountainous terrain that we have along with our geological uh anomalies we have here we have many faults that run through the county and that uh trouble you know that adds to the trouble of the um uh potential for debris flows so um you know i think the temporary uh allowing of homes uh or tiny homes or temporary homes in some of these areas is going to be very questionable and we have to look out for that safety a debris flow is something that you really can't plan for the only planning you can do for it is to get people out of its way it's not something you can stop it's not something that you can temper it's going to happen and when it does happen it's uh instantaneous and it's dangerous uh example is uh in monocito after the thomas fire uh in 2019 that had no warning they planned the best they could for it they tried to get people out of its way but it still was destructive and it killed a lot of people so i just want to say that uh our approach to this is uh for the safety of the communities um and i think i can't speak for all my fire partners in the county but i know from my perspective uh our immediate concern is for the safety and concern of the citizens of the county so when we look at these approaches we're looking at from that aspect first uh and we are as i said before looking at the potential for uh individual concerns related to certain roads and uh the statement of roads having to be 20 foot wide and paved is not the case um they actually have to uh meet a certain standard and it's based on a slope of what kind of surface it has to have on it so uh those will all be discussed as we move forward in our discussions with planning and building throughout the county so i just wanted to reiterate our first and foremost concerns of the safety of the citizens thank you thank you thank you chief wow this is a triple today uh claire machado resident of brookdale and um building designer california realtor and uh co-compliance professional for the last 30 years i worked with cities of fremont center fell your own county for nine and a half years as your lead investigator i've also helped people after big surfire recently and my main concern right now is debris and hazardous debris flow we have a huge need for erosion control for training money available to help property owners supplies to stabilize slopes with hay bales straw bottles seed and rye barley mixture many of your county employees when you adopted the erosion control ordinance including myself were trained in how to apply that ordinance to properties you have people that can train as well as rcd on your staff please consider classes immediate classes and assistance for owners also the e-plan e-permit system currently as um has been identified has a problem and uh we're getting our plans returned about after 10 days in complete notices and that takes a lot of time to recover from get back to a client get their things changed try to um resubmit and it requires uh some efficiency in adobe acrobat so having someone available to help owners with adobe acrobat submittals might be helpful record keeping your record keeping front permitted or even permitted structures has about a five to eight percent error rate in your building and planning department records that is known after we scan the records to microfilm just know that and people are going to have trouble um issuance of temporary power poles i have a question about that um especially for properties who have existing possibly non permitted structures that could be upgraded into second units and we can get them into a permit process relatively quickly with buildings we just need a temporary power pole to get them in that structure and work with the building official to do so hopefully bridges helping um owners show h2 h20 standards on bridges is important having a process to do that on some of the mountainous roads also i have questions on the temporary occupancy permit for structures on other properties offsite um and structures that could qualify that we can identify for safe housing again with the chief building official with the temporary occupancy permit i'm hoping that's available also we have a need um for um more generators and also if we can use the um geotechnical records that we do have to use with environmental health so we don't have to um dig a 14 foot excavation hole for a new septic system when we're designing also you mentioned hiring a consultant for your processes i haven't seen any type of rfp for that and what's the fair process for that as well as an appeal for any disagreement we might have with our comments thank you good afternoon co-britain mattes and britain architects um i was encouraged by a lot of things i heard i also appreciate um there's some recognition that um a dpw drainage is problematic it's quite often one of the longest processes we have to deal with and redundant on um lots of record uh same thing with e p environmental planning tends to be one of the longest ones and again redundant uh in many instances and this actually goes back to chapter 16 in this morning which is geologic hazards and erosion and drainage we often have for multiple corrections from different departments on the same issues and under state housing a lot that is all supposed to be under the building department um the reason that was passed that way and the intense state legislation was so it was uniform throughout the state um because it makes it more cost effective to to build because everybody knows they're using the same code um so there's a reason for that and the county still has a fatal flaw um in its code and yeah that was part of this morning but another thing is really important is appeals an appeals board um so that you have licensed professionals that people can come to when there is a disagreement you have that prior it was problematic there was a lot of hostility from the planning department at that time towards the appeals board um but it's still really vital to have that and have it as a quick process um another suggestion is septic septics are really takes months and months and months you know and that's not necessarily a county's fault in the sense that the state's involved now but one of the things that would help is that once you have your septic consultant determined yeah this looks like this is gonna work allow it to be concurrent with the building process because the the building permit process there's some risk involved there but there's a lot of time used while you're waiting for the state on the septic and I think that would really help thank you thank you any other public comment downstairs or online um we have eight public comments online so we have eight we have eight of them so can they they're gonna take you have to you have to read them yeah so all right first one is from um Susie I would like to stress the waiting until PG&E establishes power for temporary residents i.e. trailers during reconstruction effectively shuts all out all of the off-grid residents in the county if we didn't have PG&E before and won't likely have it in the future it is important to understand how people living off-grid use generators we had a bank of solar powers an inverter a battery and a battery bank bank we probably used our generator three to three hours per week please make sure people in remote areas are allowed to use power sources that are that are an alternative to PG&E next one is from Jacob Pollock in regard to the item 9f and permitted structures I would like to see residents of the affected communities be included as an integral part of the process where staff will pursue the implement implementation of options one and two in particularly I would like to see community members of representatives included in all phases of the implement implementation process from intent intention of ideas through review and revision of the final product this is essential because our many unique human situations and environmental conditions that will require nuanced consideration and specific expectations in general every consideration should be given with regard to variances and exceptions but the county by the county to allow residents to return to their formal living situation thank you Jacob Pollock next one is from Devinport dear supervisors the staff proposal is a good start but I encourage you to take a deeper dive the planning director's list of damage structures doesn't even scratch the surface of the ancillary damage that will face after the return home smoke damage utility problems fire trucks driving over wells and damaging septic systems etc many of the residents in the affected area are low income many are bringing their children back to a scary environment with unstable water don't burden our constituents by voting for more fees fines and red tape let these families focus on their children instead of government bureaucracy next one is doesn't have a name oh this actually so this is the one I started reading I am a retired sign language interpreter from last chance I worked for the state of California for 21 years and was looking for my retirement in the woods my husband and I would very much like to rebuild we appreciate all of the messages signals we have seen from the county officials expressing the desire to streamline the rebuilding process including provisions for for previously unpermitted homes the sentiments are much appreciated in order to achieve the goals of maintaining adequate housing stock in Santa Cruz County getting local residents back in their home and recognizing the dire circumstances being faced by rural members of Santa Cruz County several provisions should be considered we need a permitting process that is alternative and commensurate and commensurate with rural properties alternative power sources and alternative water sources we also would appreciate reduced our zero cost permits for rebuilding as most of us have lost everything and are facing a steep uphill path to rebuilding we are ready we are eager we are determined we would appreciate some help with making the rebuilding process fit our situation and circumstances finally prioritizing hazardous material cleanup prior to the winter rains would be imperative next one is from Rodney Robinson as a member of the last chance community we are willing to work with you to get us back to our properties we are eager to get back to the place of our heart and our home this is time for a creative collaboration please implement ways to make permitting for rural communities affordable and more effective our excuses are excuse it for rural communities that meet environmental consideration this helps with housing crisis in our county keeping skilled and hardworking people in the area consider alternative house styles communication trans communicate transparently and provide information for cleanup this one is from forest martinez mckinney dear board supervisors i am writing to you as a north coast resident of the last chance community i am also a staff research associate at the university of california santa cruise to which i have been in service for over 16 years my family has lived on the north coast since 1973 i was raised in the community of last chance a wonderful community of land stewart who have lived in peace in our private community for decades we are a strong diverse group of resilient people eager to return to our land eager to return to our land it is with sadness that my home my father's home my uncle's home my mother's home and each of my dear friends and community members lost their homes august 18th in the cz u lightning complex fire without shelter security or certainty of our future i write you to express that the two options laid out by planning staff for unpermitted situations are insufficient solutions for the rural community to which they pertain we the community would like to work with the county to establish another way that would facilitate rebuilding in rural communities by owners that allow for the continued use of our existing infrastructure such as our water system waste management system and power system we are eager to collaborate on creative solutions with your agency to rebuild while maintaining basic health and safety standards we request that your staff work with community members to develop a process for rural communities that reflect the condition and the needs of of rural communities in the county timeliness is crucial to the cleanup process as we hope you will prioritize communities such as ours which will likely see adverse access conditions this winter if if precipitation falls on the land prior to cleanup we risk severe contamination of our soil waterways drinking water source we implore you to prioritize our community for the hazardous material cleanup and debris cleanup process on a final note we have been impressed by the county's responsiveness to wildfire victims by way of providing temporary shelter food and resources such as the kaiser arena at the emeline warehouse and and at the emeline warehouse we hope the same level of care will continue with the cleanup of rebuilding two more this is from Sharon carpenter how do we start the cleanup process of our last chance property we realize that using fema is the best we have we have is the best way to have it certified what is the quickest way to start the process before it starts raining the last one is from Jessica peters the proposed strategies for building recovery do not go far enough where is the advocacy for the citizens it appears that much of the red tape still remains i urge you to go deeper and develop a process that others can look to in the future and that is the end of public comment uh bring it back uh yeah Mr. Chair yes Mr. Chair i don't there's an echo there um i have a all um question for environmental health um many times there's a winter water table test requirement to confirm the need for alternative treatment systems uh how will they how will you address that um is there a plan of attack at this point hi there yeah so again if we have data that we can utilize which oftentimes we do we don't necessarily require it certainly so it'd be a case by case basis but again uh if we have some data that we can fall back on we use that okay thank you okay uh any more uh comments for the board or i think uh Supervisor Coonerty has a comment yeah uh Mr. Chair this is uh Supervisor Coonerty i thought i'd uh put a motion on the table and see if we can get support so i'd move the recommended actions i'd included and with an appreciation to staff for a really comprehensive effort and um their commitment to working to streamline the process and reduce costs for folks um i and then actually let me just say uh there was some comments about the county profiting off this um that is absolutely not true our first of all our permits uh are just cost recovery second is um in order to allow uh to bring in additional consultants to speed up this process we do need some uh revenue sources because that's what these consultants will be paid from so by having reduced but not eliminated fees we're able to speed the process for people to get back into their homes so it's a it's a trade-off but i appreciate the efforts to reduce fees coming back to the the motion i'd move the recommended action with the additional resources the additional direction that we look at more resources for environmental health for both well and septic reports that we allow more than one temporary structure per property that we try to create a timeline to allow people to bring functioning septic systems but that may not that may be out of compliance up to code that we explore per supervisor leopold and macpherson's direction drilling in order to facilitate geotechnical testing and five that we direct environmental health and the planning staff to meet with rural community members to look at alternative water and power options for those communities i'll second requirements i'll second that so there's been a motion and a second is that all any other comments okay i'll call for a vote the supervisor leopold hi friend hi dinner tea hi macpherson hi and chair cap it hi the motion passes unanimously what we'll do now is we're going to go to a closed session and that is uh and then we'll come back chair cap it so i would recommend that's going to take up probably at least 30 minutes to 45 minutes so if we could return at 215 or 230 for the scheduled item that's what i would recommend that so the i mean item number uh 10 no right so we're gonna scheduled an item at 130 we have a scheduled item at 130 so we'll come back and do that item and then we'll take up the other items on the regular agenda that we didn't get to this morning okay all right thank you so we're breaking so we're gonna break until 230 is that uh we're not gonna come back in oh you're right it's 130 right now and that's when we're supposed to do the appeal we will do the appeal at 230 okay okay is that all right we can do that okay for 14 we're gonna do item number 10 later when we're done with item number 14 which is a jurisdictional hearing to consider whether to take jurisdiction of an appeal of the planning commission's denial of application 181024 a proposal for a coastal development permit and variances for demolition of an existing single family dwelling and construction of a new single family dwelling on property located on the east side of beach drive an aptos planning area assessors parcel number 0 4 3 0 9 5 1 4 and take related actions as outlined in the memorandum of the planning director how you doing good afternoon name McBeth planning department okay this is a jurisdictional hearing to consider the appeal of the planning commission's denial of application 181024 the jurisdictional process places the burden of proof on the applicant to convince your board to take jurisdiction for one or more reasons criteria outlined in county code those criteria include a finding that there was an error or abuse of discretion on part of the planning commission zoning administrator or other officer there was a lack of fair or impartial hearing there was a the decision being appealed was not supported by facts presented there was a significant new evidence that was not presented at the hearing where there was an error abuse of discretion or some other factor that renders the act or determination made unjust or inappropriate this is the location of the proposed development it's on the beach drive just south of beach flats i'm sorry um real tomorrow flats in the aptos planning area a close up of the site a row of homes situated along beach drive this is a proposal to demolish an existing single family dwelling shown here in yellow existing site conditions and construction of a new single family dwelling three stories to grade approximately 120 cubic yards at the base of the coastal bluff and install slope stability features including a 9 and 11 foot retaining wall and a 10 foot high mesh debris fence located about midway up that bluff behind the home requires a coastal development permit and variances uh acceptance of the geologic and geotechnical reports is critical uh to determining the feasibility siding and design of the homes in this area that are subject to geologic hazards geotechnical and geologic reports were submitted as part of the application process but have not been accepted by planning staff county code requires that acceptance of these reports be done prior to a project being approved this is a map of the flood plain affecting the site the ve flood zone is subject to high velocity wave inundation and coastal flooding it's also subject to coastal erosion and liquefaction this is a show of the topography and slope behind the home this hope the slope is approximately 120 feet in height and relatively flat at the bottom this application was first heard by the zoning administrator on april 17th and denied or essentially for uh non acceptance of the soils and geology reports that decision was appealed to the planning commission and um and heard by the planning commission on july 8th the planning commission denied the appeal denied the appeal based on the attached findings revised findings for denial contained in your packet the applicant has appealed the planning commission's denial to your board the applicant submitted a letter raising a number of issues for grounds for your board to take jurisdiction a response to each of these issues is contained in the attached memo based on the applicant's letter and administrative record for application 181024 staff believes the appellant has not applicant has not shown that there's grounds to support an appeal before your board there's no indication of bias or evidence of impartiality in the record public hearing provided the applicant due process consistent with the protocols during a public health emergency no new evidence has been submitted the applicant has not shown that there are grounds to support the appeal before your board and therefore staff recommends that your board conduct a jurisdictional hearing to consider the appeal of coastal development permit and variances application 181024 and decline to take jurisdiction of the appeal application 181024 i concludes my presentation i'm happy to answer any questions chair i don't have any questions well yeah they no i don't have any questions maybe you want to check with the others okay anybody no questions okay then i think you want to give 10 minutes to the appellant yes and then the other okay uh i'll know now open the hearing for comments from the appellant the appellant will have 10 minutes to present evidence as to why the board should take jurisdiction of this matter at the end of 10 minutes the opposition will now then would have a total of 10 minutes thank you chair uh board good afternoon uh rodin bolster grant i am the attorney for the property owners jim and sue vaudanya i picked the wrong mask to talk through hopefully you can hear me um this is obviously an extraordinarily difficult time for the county of santa cruz uh i have nothing to compare it with uh during my 20 years as a resident nor my 17 years as a county employee county faces unparalleled challenges in terms of dealing with the confluence of disasters covid the budget crisis and now the indescribable damage and loss caused by wildfire i believe that every challenge presents an opportunity and the opportunity here is to reevaluate portions of the planning process in the county and how we might make that process work better for our community the project that is the subject of this appeal is a case in point the project team of engineers spent months and months in communication with the county's engineers trying to explain their methodology and come to agreement about how to address the geologic issues on this site the position taken by the planning staff and embraced by the zoning administrator and the planning commission is simply that the county's engineers have spoken and there is no seemingly no room for questioning their analysis the county's evaluation of the geologic issues at the site is not one grounded specifically in the code it is subject to industry standards of practice and based on professional experience and expertise contrary to the assertions made in the planning department memo to your board the methodology used by the project engineers does not contain factual errors again it is simply based on a different approach than that used by the county environmental planning staff and the team of project engineers architect and geologist are equally qualified in their fields each team has decades of experience evaluating and mitigating geologic issues all along our postline and as we have said numerous times the problem again the nut of the issue is simply a professional disagreement about how to evaluate these issues at this particular location the project team is more than familiar with this specific site having evaluated and prepared mitigations for the upper part of the bluff their work was accepted permitted inspected and finaled by the county and explicably that prior experience and body of work is no longer considered by the county to be adequate or relevant to this project I don't understand that more to the point of this afternoon's hearing the county response to our appeal simply does not address the most salient points neither the zoning administrator nor the planning commission based their denial on the facts presented several of the commissioners admitted that they did not understand the technical issues at hand yet not a single commissioner nor the zea for that matter made any attempt to flush out the discussion by asking questions during the proceeding the engineers were present to explain and support their methodology and recommendations this seems extraordinary to me if the decision makers did not understand the root of the conflict why not ask the principles involved who are all available to answer questions a review before your board acting as the building and fire code appeals board may have well accomplished the clarification needed but that opportunity was never provided the revised findings authored by commissioner goof are instructive he went to lengths to state that the county geologists and environmental planning staff acted within their authority well of course they have the authority that is not in dispute the issue is that there is wide variability within the industry about how to assess geologic and geotechnical issues a comment was also made during the planning commission hearing to the effect that the county bears higher degree of liability than engineers hired by the project applicant but of course that is not the case the project engineers and the entire team have all state their professional reputation and state license on their analysis and recommendations in response to the stalemate between the respective teams of engineers the appellate hired a neutral third party reviewer to analyze the methodology used by the project engineers this reviewer allen crop has decades of experience performing peer reviews up and down the state including on behalf of a number of public agencies in a letter provided to the zoning administrator the county makes what i find to be an extraordinary assertion that the third party review should be discounted because the reviewer was paid by the project proponents not only is this somewhat insulting to the reputation of mr crop it makes no sense given that virtually every project applicant pays for the services of one or more consultants we can't believe that they're all paid shills and i don't believe anyone in the county truly believes that in their memo to your board the county revises their position on the peer review now stating that it is irrelevant because the reports being reviewed are in error as i stated there's no evidence that the reports contain factual errors only that they follow a different methodology than that used by the county but this is also a circular argument mr croc was brought in to assess conformance of these reports with widely accepted industry standards yet his review is ignored to a certain extent because the reports have errors the whole point of a peer review would be to identify errors a peer review of technical reports is widely used by many jurisdictions throughout the state and the country in the attachments to my appeal letter to your board i provided information about that peer review process and guidelines developed by the california geotechnical engineers association that explain the need and the benefits of this process if i may read from the guidelines quote the geotechnical reviewers should recognize that geotechnical engineering is characterized by diverse opinions among the various geotechnical professionals oftentimes no singular valid opinion or interpretation is possible given the diversity of experience and background of the professionals involved these are not my words these come from the association this completely contradicts the notion put forward by the county that the technical reports are in error again they simply reflect a different professional interpretation it's worth pointing out that in the previous session your board raised the possibility of hiring outside geotechnical engineers and other professionals to help the county navigate the tremendous need for such professionals in addressing the efforts to rebuild and repair hundreds of homes throughout the county so it is obviously not out of the realm of possibility for the county to reach out to private consultants for technical assistance the memo to your board also refutes our assertion that the planning commission based their denial in part on a number of variances that are included in the proposal however the final comments made by several planning commissioners reveal that their decision was based in large part on variances and other design issues having to do with height one commissioner stated that the entire project represents quote a huge overreach it wasn't made clear what that comment referred to but i can only assume that it had to do with the number of variances requested of course these types of variances are routinely requested and approved up and down that part of our coastline design issues were not raised during the project review and were not the subject of the findings for denial the appellants were never given a chance to respond to the question of variances or height or any other design considerations i also want to briefly touch on the issue where is regarding the failure to adhere to the permit streamlining act the board memo states that this issue is moot because the county responded to the applicant's completeness appeal by deeming the project complete because the issue has been arising with more frequency on other projects i do think it's important to just say simply deeming a project complete rather than holding a formal appeal hearing before your board does nothing to address the underlying issue what was the basis for finding the project incomplete in the first instance this is a problem with the process that cannot be fixed without a full impartial hearing an incomplete determination made in error can add months to permit processing time which serves no one a number of other issues raised in our appeal letter did not receive a response including our contention that the planning commission hearing was not impartial i believe anyone listening to the recorded proceeding will find that the comments made by the commission indicate otherwise again referring to the project as a whole as a huge overreach or we know what happens with that bluff again the basis for these comments was not made explicit there was no discussion or opportunity to refute or clarify what that meant clearly though that these assertions were based for at least one commissioner denial without being supported by the facts presented we ask that your board take jurisdiction and allow for a thorough fair and impartial hearing on this project including the efficacy of using third party reviewers as many other california jurisdictions do we ask that if questions are to be raised concerning design issues that the discussion provides the appellant and their architect a chance to respond to these concerns simply deferring to planning staff recommendations without fleshing out the underlying conflict begs the question why have an appeal process i don't want to finally say that i hate being here i hate being in this position i know the planning department staff really well and i truly respect their dedication to protecting the public health and welfare but i believe the planning process broke down in several respects in this case and i hope that you will give us the opportunity to get this project back on track we've offered to have the county bring in yet another third party reviewer we maintain that that would be the best for all involved thank you so much for your time thank you is there another side council so now we would either take questions or we would uh uh take testimony yes you could open it up for public comment at this point or ask for questions from the board any questions from the board we are going to have the opposition speak though right there's no opposition to this project uh uh as far as we're aware at the moment um at least for purposes of this hearing um so you would ask for public comment next if i have a question now i'll ask it that would be great that would be great all right i just didn't want to jump in front of somebody uh in one was refresh my memory one was one was the uh the home that's there now uh originally built i will lose at night early 1960s 1960s i believe so yes okay and it survived the big storms that we had in the 1970s at some time where the high tide came in yeah storms of 82 early 1980s yeah um yeah as far as i'm aware it survived don't have a damage assessment from that time and would a home now be allowed to be built uh with the current restrictions that we have now on uh beach homes um could you say it was an empty lot would would somebody be able to build there now uh yes i believe so yeah there's just several other vacant lots along that stretch that have been recently developed in the last 10 years that's only because of the current uh well i i know with the coastal commission they're much more strict now on on homes on the beach so if it wasn't being built on the current site the coastal commission is not allowing homes to be built like they were in the 1960s correct there's a number of um constraints that are now affecting the site mapping for these uh for instance the flood mapping has been updated so the base flood elevation has risen over time and regulations pertaining development in those areas has become more restrictive yeah and i guess uh with the backyard back area uh it's uh it's so steep there it's really it goes basically uh at a very high angle uh is that is that soil uh stable back there do we know that uh because i know in storms a lot of land like that will shear off yeah i mean i would have to defer that question to um either county staff geologist or maybe the applicants representative to determine the stability of that but it is an area of frequent uh slope instability and then a high tide comes how close uh during uh a king tide i guess during the winter how does it come right up to the doorstep do a large storm event could come up to the doorstep of this home yes okay uh any other comments questions from the board if not we can give another five minutes to well you want to see if there's public comment at this point you would take public comment um there won't be a need for a five-minute reply because there was no opposition are there any members of the public who wish it uh to address the board on this item each person will have three minutes to speak please keep your comments to the question of whether the board should take jurisdiction of this matter anyone downstairs anyone online okay uh that concludes the public hearing on item number 14 the public hearing is now closed i will bring it back to the board for discussion and action uh and whether or not there's a motion and a second and it's open now we'll go with uh supervisor McPherson you want to go first i have no comments on it thank you about supervisor friend thank you chair you know i i appreciate the information from staff as well as the information from his bolster grant you know in order for us to take jurisdiction there are very specific findings that need to be made i don't believe that uh in this case any of those are warranted so i believe that the board shouldn't take jurisdiction and i do support the staff recommendation and supervisor Coonerty supervisor leopold i agree with a supervisor friend okay so if we have um if we open it up for a motion on the second right now i i guess we already had the motion in second or did we did i didn't hear about the motion it happens uh i would second it all right spoken by supervisor leopold on item number 14 and if the clerk will conduct a roll call vote call for the vote supervisor leopold i friend all right Coonerty hi McPherson hi and chair cap it hi uh the motion passes unanimously that brings us to the end of today's no we we have we have we have to go back to item 10 we have to go back we'll uh start back up with item nice try okay this is item 10 which is consider adoption of an urgency ordinance to provide protection for price gouging and good service and property rentals as a result of the cz u august lightning complex fires as well as future emergencies as recommended by supervisors Coonerty and McPherson there's an urgency ordinance and amendments to the county code maybe either uh supervisor supervisor's presentation i don't know whether supervisor McPherson or supervisor Coonerty want to introduce well i don't know i ryan might but uh you know we need to uh we really need to protect the community and these circumstances from those who would uh profit so to speak from misfortune and i think next to looting which i think we've had about a dozen cases of this is probably the lowest that you can go um i i think that we should pass this ordinance to it's a matter of public protection and uh to let let those who wouldn't want to take advantage of some others uh under distress that we're not going to stand for it so um that's my statement and i would be glad to make the motion to approve that but uh you might want to get public comment first please but i'll i'll be glad to second that i i thought of this uh uh about three or four weeks ago and um at the time there may have been some that were gouging i'm not sure if they're still trying to do that but uh yeah this uh sad situation uh chair i just had one question for counsel does this cover contracting services it covers contracting services as mentioned in here so if it's for purposes of rebuilding uh cleanup uh specific things related to that it covers that okay yes thank you any other uh questions of board members on this item i call i will call for well you want to see if there's members of the public want to say yeah okay i will now call for the public comment on this item hey good to see you again that looks like my pen um i was here several weeks ago and this was brought up for consideration i it seems great to hold people accountable um i'll be brief i just think that's good i guess i want to personally thank everybody who's in the room mr mcpearson mcpearson you said some really constructive stuff oh my gosh i've got a lot of my mind but i just appreciate a lot that you share today and you too mr leopold so i'll be brief thank you i'm going to lunch see you guys again hey thanks a lot man okay anybody else uh would like to speak anyone downstairs or online no there's nobody downstairs and there are no web comments okay all right uh somebody coming in no no i think okay that concludes public comment on item number four or item number 10 bring it back to the board for your motion and uh supervisor mcpearson okay i'll second that also okay there was a there was a motion that we couldn't hear from so he was on mute so supervisor mcpearson could you please take yourself off mute and then maybe restate your motion yes sir excuse me i didn't think you wanted to hear everything i had to say okay so you have the motion i have the second i'll call for the vote now supervisor leopold hi friend hi koonertie hi mcpearson hi and chair cap it hi the motion passes unanimously now we're jumping right away we're moving here to number 11 consider resolution authorizing hotel stays longer than 30 days in response to the local emergency created by the cz u august lightning complex fires as outlined in the memorandum of the county administrative officer oh good afternoon chair cap it and members of the board so as you know in the middle of august we had the cz u lightning complex fires breakout and thousands of santa cruz county residents were forced to evacuate their homes as a result of the fires we've been able to repopulate a number of areas but we still have about 2 000 people in our county who are staying in hotels either in this county or outside our county we also because of the emergency have had a large number of first responders who've been having to stay in hotels in our county to the extent these individuals are currently residing in hotels the item before you is an effort to ensure that they may remain staying in their current location without violating zoning regulations or use permit restrictions limiting the length of stays so the the resolution before you is an emergency regulation regulation that would allow many hotels and other short-term lodging businesses and developments to allow stays longer than 13 days so if you have any questions me or county council are happy to answer them okay are there any questions from board members Mr. Chair Supervisor McPherson I just wanted to thank the CAO for bringing this to our attention the shelters operated by the county and the Red Cross in the immediate aftermath of the fires have been truly outstanding and our own Jillian Ritter our executive secretary the county board of supervisors office has been at the lead this and she and so many others have helped in this implementation of this and I want to just really I think we need to really highlight and be thankful for our our lodging community being a critical partner in our recovery process here in Santa Cruz county as was mentioned I think there's just about 2000 people now being housed in hotel and motel rooms throughout the county really a phenomenal effort and offering by the hotel our hotel partners for really helping those in need and prior prioritizing them above guests from out of town when possible so this this industry has been hard hit by COVID-19 itself but they're just taking another step forward and I really appreciate their sense of public health protection um also offered and I want to mention this about a campaign that they are are um leading now it's called let's cruise safely and it is very very uh focused on if visitors come here they want to say this is what we we are doing we are prioritizing safety measures uh face masks social distancing and so forth uh they are really making it a point that when you come here that's what you're going to have to follow in our county and I can't say enough member of the board of the Visit Santa Cruz county they really thought about this very deeply and I think it's important that we continue to have them and as partners and let them survive as best possible into the circumstances but first and foremost I want to thank them for providing or allowing us to use so many of their hotel motel rooms and then for really offering a really responsible let's cruise safely program that's very well done and I really want to say thank you in more ways than one to the lodging industry for their help in this situation that we're in today and I would like to make the motion that we pass this emergency regulation authorizing longer stay term stays and hotel stays in our community in our county all second and I'll add to Mr. Chair and there may be people in the community that want to address this on this item too and I appreciate Supervisor McPherson's comments as well as his service on on that board but the the local lodging industry did reach out to us because they do have some individuals that are looking that are fire evacuees as well some public safety first responders as Ms. Coburn said that intend to stay longer than 30 days we recognize that that we want to make it as smooth as possible for people that are trying that are dealing with this remarkably difficult time and this should help provide at least a continuity of a location through the end of the year that I think would be very important so I appreciate the quickness by which county staff turned this around any other board comments I support this effort as well okay I'll just say personally when you look at this it's an example of how close all of us are to being homeless and most of us are not the typical homeless case most of us have a home we have a place I know with my family I have friends that would maybe take my myself and my wife and maybe one kid or something in but if I showed up with my whole family and also occasionally when my mother was with us I don't know even any of my friends who could take all eight of us so we'd have to go to a hotel I understand that totally or I'd have to go to the fairgrounds and it's a real tough situation and we need this in order to get through thank you okay well you want to see if there's any public comment yeah any any public comment and we have no web comments either so if you'd like I can call for the vote thank you supervisor leopold I friend Coonerty McPherson I and chair cap it I motion passes unanimously takes us to item number 12 consider approval of the measure D five-year plan for 2020 and 2021 fiscal year and take related actions as outlined in the memorandum of the deputy CAO director and the director of public works good after D any questions from the board well why don't we give him what here the presentation yes good afternoon chair I know I know it's been a long marathon day for y'all okay um so yeah good afternoon chair and the rest of the board members listening in CAO and county council and members of the public my name is Steve Wiesner on the assistant director of public works in the transportation division here today with me is Casey Carlson Casey is a senior civil engineer he's in charge of our pavement management program for the unincorporated area of the county and today I'm going to be giving hopefully a very brief update to our measure D program this is our five-year program and we do this every year so I mean as you are all are very aware the county our voters passed a half a cent sales tax measure in november 2016 and that gave us a 30-year funding source for various transportation needs countywide counties the county's share annual share of that is estimated right now to be approximately 2.3 million now it's a fairly considerable drop from what we've been estimating around 3 million a year before the impacts of COVID so we're seeing revenues drop and that is factored into this new five-year plan and this part of the five-year plan the annual requirements include the county producing a five-year plan that's approved in a public hearing so that's why we're here today when we went right after the sales tax measure was passed we did a polling of various communities within the unincorporated areas of our county and the top three priorities they continue to be maintaining our county roadways and specifically in neighborhoods so we've been working on that quite a bit there we go okay all right so what I'm going to do is just go through just a little smattering very quickly of some of the work this is our third year of implementing projects utilizing measure defunds and so over the last couple years we're able to get quite a bit of work done various areas around the county so you're just going to see a few little before and after pictures of some of the projects we've completed in district one supervisor leopold's district we some work up on miller hill some work down in the live oak neighborhood a district two we're able to complete some some good projects in the la selva area and in the real del mar area in district three we've been focusing on martin road for the first couple years of the program and in district four um uh supervisor cap it and this is your district the first couple years of funding we used to repair a critical bridge on casserly road which i know you're aware of and then we're working towards other projects in your district as well lake view being one of them and last but not least never least is district five and we've been able to complete some really good projects in the downtown boulder creek core area and also in the ben loman downtown core area and so what we've actually been working on this year just going to go over a few of the projects that we have going this year in district one we're able to start working on thurber area now you're going to see some of these before as we haven't taken any afters but a lot of these neighborhoods actually are looking pretty good um we because of the fire we had a little bit of a standstill on some of the contracting work countywide um but you probably see in most of these neighbors it actually already been paved over and district two um we're able to get quite a bit of a downtown sea cliff area district three we're actually reserving a couple years worth of funds so that we can do a significant project out on swanton road and in district four we've been working on lake view and again last but not least uh we've been able to complete quite a bit of work in the downtown felton area um and so what this plan what this this year's update is a little bit different from years past um because we are seeing a loss in revenue um that we can expect probably for the next several years at least that's what we're hearing from the rtc um what we've done now is we've looked at the concert current construction costs and we've looked at what um our revenues are expected for the next several years and we've determined that basically we can complete um the existing five-year plan in the next four years um and so the existing list of roads that you've seen that have been ongoing on this list for the last few years um but we think we can get done through 2024 and so what we've done is we've taken the current numbers and we've looked at what we think we can do um for the next five years after that and we've given the existing construction costs um and what we think our revenues are going to be we've worked basically with every district very closely um with both the supervisors and your aides to to look at what the priorities are in each district and we've come up with what we think is a good list of roads that'll be for an additional five years and so what this in essence will do will take us through to 2029 now we know that construction costs vary from year to year as do revenues and so we try to only project out in the in the plan what we can do for the next year and so you'll see it's it's attached to to your your board memo um our actual plan and then there's a list of roads and you should recognize those roads because we worked very very closely with your with your teams to identify these roads what you see highlighted in green is what we think we're going to be able to do the next year um what you see in black is is what was part of the original plan that we think we can get done in the next four years and then what you'll see in blue and italicized is is the additional five years worth of roadways um now we like putting more roads on this list than less because it gives us an opportunity should other funding sources become available um we can capture that opportunity and roads that we've already vetted through looked at our pavement management system and decided these really need to be done all right so that's my presentation um the recommended recommended actions you have before you are to adopt the attached measure d five year plan for this fiscal year the 2021 fiscal year and authorized public works to submit a copy of the approved approved board package to the regional transportation commission and so with that and in the spirit of brevity we're happy to answer any questions you might have but we're also ready to just go home so thanks a lot see that share i would just uh say uh due to the wisdom of the voters they supported measure d and it now gives us a very clear uh map uh about what's going to be done these five year plans that we do annually um really do help uh constituency what's coming up in terms of uh road repair and when we look about the additional uh miles that we're able to do as we set out in our strategic plan uh i think to get 12 miles done a year in the county um that's a big increase from what we had just five years ago and so um in public investment works we're working to get more work done and as the revenues from measure d continue to increase uh we'll get more work done but right now uh we have to scale back our expectations why the sales tax numbers are low but i really appreciate the work and i appreciate the way that you work with our staff uh in my office i'm sure all of our offices to make sure that we're picking up the roads that are in most greatest need so thank you thank you okay any other board members have questions mr mr chair this is supervisor McPherson i just can't let a road um related um uh something go by without thanking the voters in november of 2016 to more than two-thirds of them improving this half-cent sales tax for 30 years uh i think as much as anything people appreciate the improvements they have witnessed in the last few years uh on our roads and we have i think about 600 miles of county um roadways in our in our county and for the fifth district in particular thanks for the attention you've played uh taken of to boulder creek ben loman and felton um we we need to recognize the um damage caused by the lightning complex fire uh i i think to our roadways it wasn't as serious as i feared but i don't know what anybody was thinking it might be but uh uh unfortunately with the covid that has a dampening effect on revenue projections that we might have had prior to uh this last spring with the covid pandemic uh we're not going to be able to do as much as we might have thought about a year ago but uh we're still going to move ahead and i i think if we get as we get um further into the rebuilding process we may need to revise this measure d list of projects to accommodate a local the local match for uh fiery fire damaged roads but um thank you to mr weissner the public works department uh everybody they really worked hard and they're they're continuing their work uh even in some of these crises that we're facing from covid to fires uh we're getting some road work done and so their credit and i think this roadmap literally uh excuse the pun to where we're going and what we're headed and why we're going there for some of the more heavily tabbed travel roads is really really a convenient proposal that the the general public can see uh what's been done and what is coming so thank you very much to the public works department thank you any other board comments if none i'll just uh also say thank you i know it's a really trying time it's really difficult uh we'd all like to have more money for our districts but uh thank you for what you're doing for my district and everybody else there are areas right now especially in the fire area uh mr chair i'd like to add um appreciation to the roads crew for being out there and the impacted areas for placing bridges and culverts um i really appreciate their efforts to to make it safe for uh areas that are already damaged okay uh we'll open it up now for public comment anybody anywhere no there's no public comment chair i would move the recommended actions second got a first and second by supervisor leopold and second by mcpherson um go ahead uh and call for the roll call supervisor leopold hi friend hi coonerty hi mcpherson hi and chair caput hi the motion passes unanimously thank you and then now we'll go to number 13 consider a final appointment of laura segura to the commission on justice and gender as an at-large representative of monarch services for a term to expire uh april one 2020 and the nomination was accepted september first uh this year uh i want to welcome her hopefully uh we'll all vote for her and i would move uh approval thank you we have a first i'll second i'll go ahead and second okay she's uh my appointment actually and would you like me to call for the vote well maybe just see if there's anybody out there who wants to make any comments seeing none maybe we call the vote supervisor leopold hi friend hi coonerty hi mcpherson hi and chair caput hi the motion passes unanimously and that brings us to the end of today's agenda the meeting will be adjourned our next special meeting of the board of supervisors will be 9 a.m. tuesday september 29th thank you