[00:00:01] DID YOU HEAR THAT? WE CALLED TO ORDER. GOOD MORNING. WELCOME TO THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SHASTA COUNTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. IT'S MONDAY, JUNE 8TH AND THE TIME IS 835. WE HAVE WELL, NOW WE HAVE FIVE MEMBERS PRESENT, RIGHT. SO WE'RE GOOD. DO YOU WANT TO KNOW OR VICE CHAIR? I DO WANT TO NOTE THAT SUPERVISOR KELSTROM IS SITTING IN FOR SUPERVISOR CRYE AS THE ALTERNATE ON THIS BOARD. PERFECT. THANK YOU. ALONG WITH CEO DAVE RICKERT, COUNTY COUNSEL JOE LARMOUR AND FROM MY, FROM MY STAFF, THE COUNTY CLERK, STEFANY BLANKENSHIP. THANK YOU. STEFANY. YOU'RE AWESOME. THAT WAS SARCASM RIGHT THERE. NO, IT WASN'T. SHE WAS AWESOME. NO, I'M JUST TEASING HER. SHE KNOWS THAT. KRISTIN GULLING-SMITH IS IN THE FOYER. LISA TIERNEY. TO FILL OUT A SPEAKER REQUEST CARD AND SUBMIT IT TO THE CLERK IN THE FOYER. SPEAKER REQUEST CARDS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE CLERK BEFORE PUBLIC COMMENT BEGINS. WITH THAT, MISS BLANKENSHIP, DO WE HAVE ANY REQUEST TO SPEAK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT IN THE OPEN TIME? WE DO NOT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. NICE. FOR 30 MINUTES. I'M GETTING LOTS OF HELP UP HERE, I LOVE IT. OKAY, NOW. SO NOW WE'RE GOING TO GO TO STAFF PRESENTATION. [CONSENT CALENDAR] NO, WE'RE GOING TO GO TO THE CONSENT CALENDAR. IF YOU WANT TO CALL FOR A MOTION IN A SECOND FOR THE CONSENT CALENDAR. DO WE HAVE A MOTION? CAN WE GET A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE. I'LL SECOND. SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY. SUPERVISOR LONG. MEMBER LONG. DO I STILL CALL YOU SUPERVISOR LONG? NO, I CALL HIM MEMBER LONG. AND MEMBER YOU KNOW, WHAT'S YOUR NAME? KELSTROM. KELSTROM. NOW WE'RE OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. OH, YEAH. THERE WE GO. ANY OPPOSED? NO. PASSES 5-0. PASSES 5-0. GOOD JOB. GOOD JOB. MY FIRST 5-0. NOW WE'RE ABLE TO MOVE ON TO THE SCHEDULED HEARINGS OF IT. [R1 Conduct a public hearing and adopt a resolution which: (1) Repeals and supersedes Air Pollution Control Resolution No. 97-6 effective June 8, 2026; (2) increases the AB 2766 Motor Vehicle Fee (“Fee”) from $3.00 to $6.00 per fee-paying registered vehicle effective October 1, 2026; (3) requests the Department of Motor Vehicles to collect and distribute Fees; (4) establishes that the revenues from the Fees collected will be incorporated into the normal budget process and be used solely to reduce air pollution from motor vehicles and for related planning, monitoring, enforcement, and technical studies necessary for the implementation of the California Clean Air Act of 1988; and (5) adopts program delineating activities.] NOW WE'RE OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? WE'LL DO THAT PRESENTATION FIRST. ALL RIGHT, GOOD MORNING BOARD. WE'RE HERE WITH ITEM R1 REGARDING THE DMV MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE. WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY ON THE BUDGET YET. I DON'T HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR THIS ONE. SO THE ITEM THAT WE HAVE BEFORE YOU IS OR. I'M SORRY, LET ME BACK UP. AGAIN, GOOD MORNING. HERE SEAN EWING, AIR POLLUTION CONTROL OFFICER. HERE WITH THIS ITEM TO REQUEST THIS BOARD ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO INCREASE A MOTOR VEHICLE, THE MOTOR VEHICLE FEES CURRENTLY ASSESSED AT $3 PER VEHICLE REGISTERED IN SHASTA COUNTY TO $6 PER VEHICLE. THE MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE IS COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS AB 2766 FEES. THE AB 2766 WAS ENACTED IN 1990 AND WAS INTENDED TO PROVIDE AN ONGOING SOURCE OF FUNDING FOR AIR DISTRICTS TO IMPLEMENT THE CALIFORNIA CLEAN AIR ACT OF 1988, WHICH REQUIRES AIR DISTRICTS TO WORK TOWARDS MEETING CALIFORNIA AIR QUALITY GOALS AND STANDARDS. AB 2766 ORIGINALLY AUTHORIZED UP TO A $2 FEE PER VEHICLE REGISTERED IN MOST AIR DISTRICTS AND MULTIPLE LEGISLATIVE UPDATES HAVE BEEN ENACTED SINCE THEN THAT HAVE AUTHORIZED AN INCREASE IN THIS FEE BEYOND THEIR ORIGINAL $2. THE DISTRICT'S CURRENT $3 MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE WAS ADOPTED IN 1997 AND HAS NOT BEEN ADJUSTED SINCE THAT TIME. THE CURRENT LEGISLATIVE ALLOWANCE FOR MOTOR VEHICLE FEE IS $6 PER VEHICLE REGISTRATION. UP TO $4 OF THIS FEE IS AUTHORIZED TO GO TO THE DISTRICT'S UNRESTRICTED FUND, AND THE REMAINING $2 MUST GO TO A RESTRICTED FUND THAT IS TO BE USED FOR GRANT AND OTHER INCENTIVE PROJECTS THAT HELP TO REDUCE AIR POLLUTION OF MOBILE SOURCES WITHIN SHASTA COUNTY. THE RESTRICTED FUNDS WOULD BE APPLIED TO INCENTIVES FOR PUBLIC OR PRIVATE PROJECTS, SUCH AS INSTALLATION OF ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING INFRASTRUCTURE OR REPLACEMENT OF OLDER AND HIGHER POLLUTING DIESEL POWERED OFF ROAD EQUIPMENT, AGRICULTURAL USE, DIESEL POWERED TRACTORS, DIESEL POWERED SCHOOL BUSSES AND OTHER EQUIPMENT. THE RESTRICTED FUNDS COULD ALSO BE USED AS MATCH FUNDING THAT IS NECESSARY TO MAXIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF GRANT MONEY BROUGHT BACK INTO THE AIR DISTRICT FROM THE STATE FOR AIR POLLUTION [00:05:05] REDUCTION INCENTIVE PROGRAMS. IF ADOPTED, INCREASING THE MOTOR VEHICLE FEE FROM $3 TO $6 PER VEHICLE REGISTRATION WOULD INCREASE FISCAL YEAR 26-27 DISTRICT REVENUE BY APPROXIMATELY 171,000 IN UNRESTRICTED FUNDS, AND ABOUT 342,000 IN RESTRICTED FUNDS. THIS INITIAL INCREASE WOULD BEGIN IN OCTOBER OF 2026. FUTURE FISCAL YEAR REVENUE FROM THIS FEE WOULD BE EXPECTED TO BE HIGHER IN THOSE FOLLOWING YEARS, SINCE THE INCREASED FEE WOULD BE COLLECTED FOR THE FULL YEAR. FOR THE UPCOMING FISCAL YEAR THIS INCREASE IN MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE WOULD BE EXPECTED TO DECREASE THE PER CAPITA ASSESSMENT FOR THE CITY OF REDDING, AND, FROM 61 TO 87,832, AS WELL AS REDUCING THE PER CAPITA ASSESSMENT FOR THE COUNTY FROM 163,710 TO 81,439. WHILE WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT YOU'LL SUPPORT THIS PROPOSAL AND THANK YOU. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. YOU CAN OPEN IT. SO THIS CLOSES THE PRESENTATION. AND NOW WE'RE OPEN FOR PUBLIC HEARING. CORRECT. DO WE HAVE ANY REQUESTS? JUST ONE MOMENT CHAIR. ON ITEM R1 WE DON'T HAVE ANY REQUEST TO SPEAK DURING THIS PUBLIC HEARING. DOES THAT DO THIS? OKAY, WE'RE BRINGING IT BACK TO BOARD DISCUSSION. DO WE HAVE ANY DISCUSSION? TENESSA, THERE YOU GO. GO AHEAD. THANK YOU. IT'S JUST A QUESTION SO, WHAT IS THE. IF WE RAISED IT BY A DOLLAR, DOES THAT, DOES IT HAVE A FIRST TIER OF WHAT IT GOES TO ANY ADDITIONAL. IS THE SECOND AND THE THIRD OR IS IT EVENLY DISTRIBUTED BY A PERCENTAGE. SO CURRENTLY IT'S $3. AND SO THE STATE LAW ALLOWS US THE FIRST $4 TO GO TOWARDS GENERAL OPERATING COST OF, OF WORKING TOWARDS THE CALIFORNIA CLEAN AIR ACT. SO THE ANSWER IS, IS ONLY ONE ADDITIONAL DOLLAR WOULD GO TO OFFSET THE ASSESSMENTS TO THE MEMBER JURISDICTIONS. AND THEN $2 OF THAT INCREASE WOULD GO TOWARDS RESTRICTED FUNDS. AND BY SO THAT ADDITIONAL $2 WOULD GO TOWARDS THE ELECTRIFICATION TYPE OF THINGS, INFRASTRUCTURE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT OR SCHOOL BUSSES OR. OR THE CARL MOYER WARRIOR PROGRAM SIMILAR THAT YOU, THE BOARD SEES FREQUENTLY AS FAR AS REPLACEMENT OF OFF-ROAD VEHICLES. SO YES, THOSE $2 WOULD GO TOWARDS OTHER PROGRAMS. SO IF WE INCREMENTALLY, IF WE, INSTEAD OF INCREASING IT, DOUBLING THE COST, AND THIS IS FOR EVERYBODY AT THE DMV OR ONLY CERTAIN? EVERYONE WITHIN ALL MOTOR VEHICLES REGISTERED WITHIN SHASTA COUNTY. OKAY. WHAT ABOUT ELECTRIC VEHICLES? IT APPLIES TO ALL VEHICLES REGISTERED THROUGH DMV. OKAY. SO IF WE INCREASE IT BY A DOLLAR INSTEAD OF THE THREE, THAT WOULD BASICALLY GO TOWARDS THE COSTS OF WHAT IT'S AFFECTING NOW, THE ADDITIONAL DOLLARS 1 OR 2 WOULD GO TOWARDS PROGRAMING LIKE OTHER TYPES OF CLEAN AIR TYPE PROGRAMING. YES, THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. LONG. YEAH. IT'S. SEAN, THANK YOU. AND TENESSA JUST ASKED THIS QUESTION. I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE, THE PROPORTION OF THE $3 INCREASE AS TO WHAT EXACTLY IT GOES TO. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU JUST SAID THE FIRST DOLLAR WOULD REDUCE THE CONTRIBUTING AGENCY CONTRIBUTIONS. SO AND THEN THE OTHER TWO WOULD END UP FOR CLEAN ENERGY AND SOME OF THOSE, SOME OF THOSE OTHER PROJECTS. ONE EXAMPLE WOULD BE THE CARL MOYER PROGRAM. IF GENERALLY WHAT, WHAT WE'VE SEEN IN THE PAST IS THE, THE AIR DISTRICT USUALLY GETS AWARDED ABOUT 360,000, BUT ANYTHING YOU TAKE OVER 200,000 THEN HAS MATCH FUNDS. AND SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE HAD TO DO OVER THE PAST YEAR IS TO REDUCE HOW MUCH OF THAT GRANT MONEY WE ACCEPT, BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE MATCH FUNDS. SO THAT'S ONLY ONE EXAMPLE OF WHAT THAT THAT FUND, THAT RESTRICTED FUND COULD BE USED FOR. BUT YES. SO AND WE'VE HAD DISCUSSION IN THE PAST ABOUT DEFICITS AND USE [00:10:02] OF RESTRICTED FUND BALANCES TO TRY TO CATCH UP SOME OF THE PAST SHORTFALLS. WOULD THIS ASSIST WITH THAT AT ALL? NO, NO, NOT NECESSARILY. BECAUSE WHAT WE HAD DONE UNDER THOSE PREVIOUS CONVERSATIONS IS WE REEVALUATED THE TIME ACCOUNTING THAT WENT TO THE AB 2766 CARRYOVER FUNDS. AND WE WERE ABLE TO, TO LEGITIMATELY JUSTIFY USE OF MORE OF THOSE FUNDS OVER THOSE PRIOR FISCAL YEARS. THIS ADDITIONAL $2, IT IS VERY SPECIFIC OF WHAT IT CAN BE USED FOR. SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE TRACKED SEPARATELY. I DON'T FORESEE THAT CHANGING. OKAY, AND THE AND THE LAST QUESTION I HAD IS WHAT, WHAT HAVE OTHER COUNTIES BEEN DOING STATEWIDE? ARE THEY GOING UP TO THE $6 MAXIMUM ALLOWED UNDER LAW, OR DO WE KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH THE INCREASES FOR DMV? I'M SORRY. I ACTUALLY DIDN'T RESEARCH THAT. PAUL, DO YOU OR. YEAH, I'M SORRY, I DON'T DEFINITIVELY KNOW WHAT OTHER DISTRICTS ARE DOING. THE THING THAT I WOULD POINT OUT IS YOU KNOW, WHEN WE LOOK AT FUNDING SOURCES FOR AIR DISTRICTS, YOU BASICALLY YOU HAVE PERMIT FEES, FINES AND PENALTIES, SUBVENTIONS, WHICH IS MONEY THAT COMES FROM THE STATE. IT'S NOT ENOUGH TO COVER OPERATING COSTS. AND THEN YOU HAVE VARIOUS PROGRAMS LIKE CARL MOYER AND SUCH THAT YOU CAN APPLY TOWARDS PROJECT AND GET SOME ADMIN COSTS. ASIDE FROM THIS DMV MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE, THE ONLY ADDITIONAL THE ONLY WAY TO FUND THE DISTRICT IS THROUGH ASSESSMENTS. SO THIS IS, THIS IS ONE OF HER FEW OPPORTUNITIES. A FEW OPPORTUNITIES, OKAY. AND CAN YOU LAST QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU? I'M CURIOUS ABOUT WE TALKED ABOUT A LITTLE BIT OF WHAT THE EXTRA $2 WOULD GO TO EV AND SOME OF THOSE TYPES OF ISSUES. WHAT PORTION OF THIS $2 WOULD GO TO AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT AND HOW WOULD WE DO THAT? SO THAT ADDITIONAL $2 WOULD GO INTO A RESTRICTED FUND. AND THEN AT THAT POINT THE AIR DISTRICT WOULD BE LOOKING AT WHAT TYPE OF PROGRAMS IT WANTS TO INVEST IN. AND SO THOSE ARE ITEMS THAT WOULD COME TO THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION. SO IN SHORT, WE COULD POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, DO A REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS, SEE IF ANYONE HAS ANY PROJECTS THEY WANT TO PROPOSE OR IF WE WANT TO SOLICIT FOR ANY PROJECTS, THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE DECIDED AT A LATER POINT. GOT IT. THANK YOU. BUT IT WOULD BE VERY, VERY STRICT ON HOW THAT COULD BE SPENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE LAW. OKAY. THANK YOU. CHAIR. MUNNS, AS WE SPOKE EARLIER, DID I MISUNDERSTAND PART OF THAT FIRST DOLLAR IS GOING TO GO TO, BECAUSE WE AS I ADD IT UP AND WE'RE AT A MINOR DEFICIT IN OUR BUDGET. SO THAT WOULD COVER PART OF THAT DEFICIT, THAT FIRST DOLLAR. YES, THAT FIRST DOLLAR WOULD GO TO REDUCE THE ASSESSMENTS TO THE CITY AND TO THE COUNTY. I THINK THE DEFICIT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT IS I THINK IT'S LIKE $7,000. THAT'LL BE IN MY NEXT PRESENTATION THAT'S BEING USED. THAT'S BEING COVERED BY RESTRICTED FUNDS, NOT THIS RESTRICTED FUND. SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENT THING. GOTCHA. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO NOW WE NEED TO GO TO. I DID, IT'S RED. IT'S NOT SHOWING. YOU GOTTA HIT THE RED SO YOU CAN'T COME OUT. OH, I SEE IF IT'S BLUE. IT'S ON. OH, OKAY. SORRY, SORRY. SO I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE INCREASE IT BY A DOLLAR. AND WHAT I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE NEXT TIME IF YOU NEXT YEAR OR WHENEVER THIS COMES UP AGAIN, IF YOU COULD BRING US A LIST OF THE THINGS THAT THAT ADDITIONAL DOLLAR OR $2 WOULD ACTUALLY BE USED FOR, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ENTERTAIN IT IN LIGHT OF WHAT EXACTLY THE PROJECTS MAYBE ARE BEFORE YOU OR YOU SAID MATCHING FUNDS, MAYBE THERE WAS A GRANT WE MISSED OUT ON OR SOMETHING IN THE WORKS THAT THAT MONEY WOULD ACTUALLY BE USED FOR. SO I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE INCREASE IT BY A DOLLAR. I'LL ASK ANOTHER QUESTION, IF I MAY. HOW CRITICAL ARE THOSE OTHER $2? A VERY REAL EXAMPLE IS THE CARL MOYER PROGRAM. I THINK MEMBER MUNNS, YOU REACHED OUT TO ME REGARDING A QUESTION ABOUT THE REDUCTION IN SOME OF THE MONEY THAT GOT SENT BACK TO THE STATE. IT ACTUALLY GOT SENT TO ANOTHER AIR DISTRICT. THAT WAS A GOOD EXAMPLE, IS WE TOOK MORE MONEY THAN WHAT WE HAD AVAILABLE FOR MATCH FUNDS. [00:15:02] AND SO WE HAD TO REALLOCATE IT TO A DIFFERENT DISTRICT. SO THAT WOULD BE THE FIRST THING THAT WE WOULD BE MISSING OUT ON, IS WE WOULD BE REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF GRANT FUNDS THAT WE RECEIVE FROM THE STATE. AND I WOULD, AND THEN I WOULD ADD, I WOULD ALSO ADD, AS FAR AS THE TYPE OF PROGRAMS OR PROJECTS, I PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE A SPECIFIC LIST, BUT I COULD HAVE A MORE DETAILED LIST OF TYPE OF PROGRAMS OR PROJECTS. MR. LONG. SEAN, MY QUESTION IS, YOU MENTIONED I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY, WHAT, THAT THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY AT THIS TIME. WHAT DID YOU MEAN BY THAT? DID I HEAR THAT RIGHT? SO BY GETTING THIS $3 INCREASE RIGHT NOW, IT'S TIMELY. THERE ISN'T ANY REASON WHY WE, I VERY MUCH HOPE THAT THE BOARD WILL APPROVE AT LEAST THE $1 INCREASE IF WE COME BACK AT A AT A LATER TIME FOR THE $2 INCREASE, THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO. AND IT'S NOT A IT'S NOT AN URGENT MATTER. I THINK THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT WE'RE FACING RIGHT NOW IS TRYING TO REDUCE THE ASSESSMENTS TO THE MEMBER JURISDICTIONS. THEN THE OTHER PART, THE IMMEDIATE ISSUE OR A DOWNSIDE TO NOT APPROVING THE ADDITIONAL $2 IS JUST HAVING TO REDUCE HOW MUCH GRANT FUNDS THAT WE'RE ABLE TO PULL BACK INTO THE COUNTY. SO BY THE TIME THIS WOULD COME BACK. WHEN WOULD THIS COME BACK BEFORE THIS BOARD TO DECIDE THE PROPOSALS POTENTIALLY, AND THE $2 INCREASE? AND WHAT GRANT FUNDS WOULD WE LOSE OUT ON IN THE MEANTIME? I'M NOT SURE HOW THE TIMING FALLS WITH THE CARL MOYER PROGRAM, SO I REALLY CAN'T GIVE YOU A DEFINITIVE ANSWER. I KNOW MOST OF THE, I BELIEVE WE'VE MADE REQUESTS FOR THE THREE YEARS. AND, AND WE'VE REDUCED WHAT WAS REQUESTED THERE. I'M NOT SURE WHEN THE NEXT ONE WOULD COME UP. SO WE COULD BRING THIS BACK TO THE BOARD PRETTY MUCH AT ANY TIME AND SEE WHAT THE BOARD'S INTEREST IN THOSE ADDITIONAL $2 WOULD BE. OKAY, THANK YOU. SO TO KIND OF ANSWER, I THINK TENESSA'S QUESTION, WHAT WERE THE OTHER DOLLAR GOES? YOU, YOU SAID THAT THAT MATCHING DOLLAR, THAT DOLLAR GOES TO MATCHING FUNDS AND YOU'VE HAD TO TURN DOWN GRANT MONEY BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T HAVE MORE MATCHING FUNDS TO ACCEPT MORE GRANT MONEY. DID I NOT HEAR YOU SAY THAT CORRECTLY? I'LL CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT. $1 WILL GO TOWARDS REDUCING THE ASSESSMENTS. THE OTHER $2 WOULD GO, WOULD IMMEDIATELY, MOST LIKELY GO TOWARDS MATCH FUNDS THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO. RECEIVE GRANTS. RECEIVE MORE GRANTS, YES. SO THAT'S WHERE. WHICH GRANTS IS MY QUESTION. AT THIS POINT IT'S CARL MOYER. IT'S THE PROGRAM THAT IS USED TO REPLACE MOBILE EMISSION SOURCES SPECIFICALLY TRACTORS AND SUCH THAT ARE AGING AND LESS EFFICIENT. SO IT'S A STATE PROGRAM TO REPLACE SOME OF THOSE AGING EQUIPMENT AND GET CLEANER EQUIPMENT OUT THERE IN THE FIELDS. AND SO RIGHT NOW, IF WE DON'T HAVE THE MATCHING FUNDS, WE CAN ONLY ACCEPT THE AMOUNT OF GRANT MONEY TO. 200,000 IS ALL WE'RE ABLE TO ACCEPT. OKAY, THANKS. THIS WILL ALLOW US TO GO BEYOND 200,000? YES. GENERALLY, I BELIEVE IT'S AROUND 350,000 IS WHAT THE COUNTY THE AIR DISTRICTS AWARDED. AND SO WE'LL BE BASICALLY LEAVING ABOUT 150 ON THE TABLE TO KEEP IT AT 200,000. SO MRS. AUDETTE HAS A MOTION ON THE TABLE STILL. YEAH. I MEAN, IF YOU'RE ONLY YOU'RE SAYING THAT FOR THOSE IS ARE THOSE MATCHING GRANTS AUTOMATIC IF WE HAVE THE MONEY. SO THEY WILL GIVE US AN ADDITIONAL 150,000 IF WE HAVE 150,000 MORE? IT WOULD BE BASED OFF THE TIME OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE GRANT. SO IT WOULD BE THE NEXT CYCLE. IF WE HAD MATCH FUNDS AVAILABLE, WE WOULD REQUEST THE FULL AMOUNT. IT WOULD ONLY BE $150,000 DIFFERENCE? IT, THAT'S CORRECT. IT WOULD BE A QUARTER. APPROXIMATELY 150,000 MORE. SO WE COULD ADD A $1.25 ADDITIONAL. AND, FOR THE FEE AND THAT WOULD COVER THAT. WE DON'T NEED TO ADD A FULL $2. WHATEVER THE BOARD DECIDES TO GO WITH WOULD POTENTIALLY BE ABLE TO GO TOWARDS THAT MATCH FUND, ASSUMING IT'S ENOUGH. I JUST, YOU KNOW, WE NICKEL AND DIME PEOPLE IN CALIFORNIA TO DEATH. AND SO IF WE DON'T HAVE TO DO THAT, OR IF WE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SHAPE IT TOWARDS WHAT THE ACTUAL NEED IS. SO IF IT'S 150,000 MORE THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING TO DO BY NECESSITY. SO ARE YOU, ARE YOU? I'LL ADD A QUARTER. YOU STILL HAVE YOUR MOTION ON. [00:20:01] I'LL ADDRESS MY MOTION TO A DOLLAR AND A QUARTER. DOLLAR AND A QUARTER. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? BEFORE I SECOND THAT? DO YOU THINK THAT QUARTER WOULD GET US TO THE OTHER 150? I MEAN, WE'RE GETTING 200 NOW. SO WOULD THAT TAKE $2 TO GET TO THE EXTRA 150? I'M, I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE THE MATH RIGHT HERE. I MEAN, IT WOULD GET US A STEP CLOSER. IS IT ENOUGH? I DON'T DEFINITIVELY KNOW. I WOULD HAVE TO HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT. IT'S PROBABLY CUTTING IT A LITTLE BIT CLOSE, BUT I BELIEVE THE MATCH FUNDS WERE GENERALLY AROUND 50 TO $60,000 EACH GRANT CYCLE. AND SO THIS WOULD ONLY GO TOWARDS THE CARL MOYER PROGRAM. OKAY. I'LL GO IN SECOND THE MOTION THEN. OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY MISS AUDETTE AND A SECOND BY MR. BLANK. MR. KELSTROM. DOES THIS GO TO A ROLL CALL VOTE? NO, YOU CAN JUST SAY ALL THOSE. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? AYE. PASSES 4-1. PASSES 4-1. WE NEEDED A 4 OR 5. SO WE'RE GOOD. WITH THAT VICE CHAIR, WE ACTUALLY DO HAVE SUPERVISOR CRYE HERE, SO HE WILL BE COMING TO SIT IN. THANK YOU. ALTERNATE KELSTROM, AND SUPERVISOR HARMON, YOU'RE FREE TO GIVE UP THAT CHAIR SEAT. AND I SAID, I DON'T WANT TO DO IT, BUT. I HAVE THE FUNNIEST STORY. THANKS SUPERVISOR KELSTROM. THAT WAS R1. SO MOVING ON TO R2, THIS IS THE PUBLIC HEARING? CORRECT. PERFECT. SO IT DID NOT PASS. IT DID OR IT DIDN'T? IT DID. OH I THOUGHT THEY SAID IT HAD BEFORE. IT COULD HAVE BEEN 4-1 BECAUSE THERE WAS. OH THAT'S RIGHT. YEAH. YEAH. IT WAS A 4/5 VOTE. SO WE HAD FOUR VOTES. OKAY. SO IT DID PASS. YES. GOT IT. PERFECT. MOVE ON TO R2, CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND REVIEW THE PROPOSED SHASTA COUNTY AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT [R2 Conduct a public hearing and review the proposed Shasta County Air Quality Management District Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget.] DISTRICT FISCAL YEAR BUDGET 26-27. WHO'S COMING UP FOR THAT? SEAN, IS THAT YOU AGAIN? YEP. IT SHOULD BE UP ANY SECOND. ALL RIGHT. AGAIN, GOOD MORNING, CHAIR CRYE, MEMBERS OF THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. SEAN EWING, AIR POLLUTION CONTROL OFFICER HERE TO PRESENT YOU WITH THE REQUESTED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 26-27. THIS SLIDE PROVIDES A BASIC OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT. ULTIMATELY, THE DISTRICT IS LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA CLEAN AIR ACT OF 1988 AND COMPLIANCE WITH THE FEDERAL CLEAN AIR ACT. THE DISTRICT FUNCTIONS AS PROFESSIONAL STAFF TO THE AIR POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD REGARDING RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND POTENTIAL INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. LAST FISCAL YEAR, DISTRICT STAFFING LEVELS WERE REDUCED TO FIVE POSITIONS. NO CHANGES ARE REQUESTED FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR AND ALL POSITIONS ARE CURRENTLY FILLED. WE CURRENTLY HAVE A DISTRICT MANAGER, TWO AIR POLLUTION, SENIOR AIR POLLUTION CONTROL INSPECTORS, TWO AIR POLLUTION INSPECTORS, AND AN ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY. THIS FISCAL YEAR, THERE HAVE BEEN 437 BURN PERMITS ISSUED, 62 NOTICE OF VIOLATION ISSUED, 41 NOTICE TO COMPLY ISSUED, FIVE WOOD SMOKE REDUCTION VOUCHERS ISSUED WORTH APPROXIMATELY 25,000. AN ESTIMATED 577 INSPECTIONS PERFORMED, 213 PRESCRIBED BURN REQUEST PROCESS, TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 6,511 ACRES AUTHORIZED TO BURN. STAFF HAVE BEEN WORKING TO UPDATE DISTRICT AIR MONITORING EQUIPMENT UTILIZING THE EPA IRA GRANT FUNDS, AND THIS EFFORT WILL CONTINUE INTO FISCAL YEAR 26-27. THE UPDATE TO THE NORTHERN SACRAMENTO VALLEY TRIENNIAL ATTAINMENT PLAN WAS SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED. THE GOALS FOR FISCAL YEAR 26-27 ARE TO CONTINUE THE EFFORTS TO REPLACE THE AGING AMBIENT AIR MONITORING EQUIPMENT THROUGH THE USE OF THE EPA IRA GRANT, AND TO CONTINUE THE IMPLEMENTATION OF GRANT PROGRAMS TO IMPROVE THE AIR QUALITY IN SHASTA COUNTY FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE COMMUNITY. THERE ARE NO ANTICIPATED PROGRAM CHANGES FOR FISCAL YEAR 26-27. THIS CHART DEPICTS THE REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES OF THE DISTRICT SHOWN AS A TOTAL, AS WELL AS BROKEN OUT BY OBJECT CODE. THE SLIGHT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES IS MADE UP BY THE ANTICIPATED USE OF RESTRICTED FUNDS. THESE CHARTS WILL DEPICT THE ENDING FUND BALANCES OF THE DISTRICT BASED ON ACTUALS FOR PRIOR FISCAL YEARS. PROJECTIONS FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR AND THE REQUESTED FOR FISCAL YEAR 26-27. SHOWN ON THIS SLIDE ARE THE FUND BALANCES FOR THE AB 2766 MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE, AS WELL AS THE FUND BALANCE FOR THE CARL MOYER PROGRAM. [00:25:09] THE WOOD SMOKE PROGRAM WAS A LIMITED DURATION, GRANT FUNDED PROGRAM THAT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING TO FULLY EXPEND THE FUNDS AND CLOSE OUT. WE EXPECT THESE FUNDS TO BE FULLY EXPENDED BY THE END OF THIS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR. THE EPA IRA GRANT WAS AWARDED TO THE DISTRICT TO BE USED TO HELP REPLACE AGING AMBIENT AIR MONITORING EQUIPMENT. THESE FUNDS WILL CONTINUE TO BE UTILIZED UNTIL FULLY EXPENDED. THE GENERAL PURPOSE RESTRICTED FUND IS ESSENTIALLY THE GENERAL FUND FOR THE AIR DISTRICT. THERE WERE MULTIPLE PRESENTATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS THIS PREVIOUS YEAR REGARDING THE FINANCIAL STATUS OF THE AIR DISTRICT AND THE INCREASED USAGE OF THE AB 2766 MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FUND BALANCE. THIS CURRENT CHART DEPICTS THE CORRECTION THAT OCCURRED BETWEEN FISCAL YEAR 24-25 AND 25-26. IT'S UNLIKELY FOR THE GENERAL PURPOSE RESTRICTED FUND TO GROW, SINCE AVAILABLE REVENUE SOURCES DO NOT EXCEED EXPENDITURES AND THE DISTRICT IS RECEIVING FUNDING FROM THE COUNTY AND THE CITY. EXPENDITURES OF THE DISTRICT HAVE HISTORICALLY EXCEEDED REVENUE, REQUIRING THE USE OF GENERAL PURPOSE RESTRICTED FUND TO COVER THE DIFFERENCE. FISCAL YEAR 25-26 WAS THE FIRST YEAR THAT THE GENERAL PURPOSE RESTRICTED FUND WAS NO LONGER AVAILABLE TO COVER THIS SHORTFALL, IN TURN REQUIRING PER CAPITA ASSESSMENTS TO THE CITY AND COUNTY. THE REQUESTED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 26-27 WOULD REQUIRE A SIMILAR PER CAPITA ASSESSMENT AS THE PRIOR FISCAL YEAR, UNLESS THE AB 2766 MOTOR VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE WAS, IS INCREASED AS PROPOSED. FORTUNATELY, IT WAS. WITH THE AB 2766 FEE INCREASE, THE PER CAPITA ASSESSMENT TO THE CITY OF REDDING IS REDUCED TO 87,832 AND THE COUNTY OF SHASTA TO 81,439, FOR A TOTAL OF 169,271. EFFORTS TO REDUCE ASSESSMENTS TO THE CITY AND COUNTY HAVE CONTINUED TO BE A PRIORITY FOR DISTRICT STAFF. THESE EFFORTS INCLUDE REDUCING EXPENDITURES, CUTTING NONMANDATORY UNFUNDED PROGRAMS, IMPROVING EFFICIENCY OF SERVICES AND IMPROVING GRANT MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT TO MAXIMIZE REIMBURSEMENT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS. STAFF HAVE MADE EFFORTS TO PUSH BACK ON THE STATE TO CLARIFY ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES FOR VARIOUS TASKS THAT OTHERWISE SHOULD BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STATE. THIS APPROACH HAS HELPED US TO BECOME MORE EFFICIENT AND MAINTAIN THE LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT IS EXPECTED. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION ON THE REQUESTED BUDGET FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. MEMBER MUNNS. THAT WAS LEFT OVER. NICE WORK. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE? I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. MISS BLANKENSHIP IS ALL CORRESPONDENCE ON FILE WITH THE CLERK OF THE BOARD. MICROPHONE. YES, CHAIR IT IS. AND THERE ARE NO SPEAKERS FOR ITEM R2. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. BRING IT BACK FOR BOARD DISCUSSION. I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION IF ANYBODY HAS ONE. OR WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO SAY ANYTHING? I'D LIKE TO MAKE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. I DID HAVE AN APPEAL ON FILE REGARDING THE CAO RECOMMENDATIONS. THAT APPEAL WAS BASED OFF OF THE UNKNOWN OF THE INCREASE OF THE AB 2766 FUNDS. SINCE THE BOARD DID APPROVE THAT, THEN I'LL WITHDRAW MY APPEAL. OKAY. NOTED. ANYBODY? I'LL MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE. SECOND. WE HAVE A SECOND BY MEMBER MUNNS. YOU SURE? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. PASSES 5-0. AND THE CROWD ERUPTS. ALL RIGHT, MISS BLANKENSHIP, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ON THE AGENDA OR ANY OTHER ITEMS YOU'D LIKE TO ADDRESS WITH THE CURRENT BOARD AT THIS TIME? NO CHAIR. NO. MR. RIGGERT, YOU GOOD? ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, WE ARE ADJOURNED. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.