MEETING: Commissioners Meeting at Mon, Sep 16, 09:00 AM

County Sources

Packet Contents

AI Information

JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING SUMMARY

Meeting Logistics and Agenda Changes

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:01:13.000–00:01:36.000
  • Agenda Item: Not Stated
  • Categories: operations

Topic Summary

The meeting of the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners was called to order. A change to the scheduled agenda was announced, moving the executive session originally planned for 1:30 PM to earlier in the morning, specifically from 10:30 AM to 11:00 AM. One additional letter was also walked onto the agenda following the consent agenda.

Key Discussion Points

  • The executive session was rescheduled from 1:30 PM to 10:30 AM–11:00 AM (00:01:23.000).
  • One letter was added to the agenda as a walk-on item immediately following the consent agenda (00:01:36.000).

Public Comments

No public comment on this topic.

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials referenced.

Financials

No financial information discussed.

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Rescheduling of the executive session was the primary change noted.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

The agenda changes were affirmed orally. - Decision: Agenda modified. - Vote: Not applicable (informational/procedural change). - Next Steps: No next steps specified.

Public Comment: Housing Services and Accessibility

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:02:23.000–00:03:41.000
  • Agenda Item: Not Stated
  • Categories: services, operations

Topic Summary

Viola, a staff member from Housing Services, provided an update on the expansion of operating hours and services. The department is now open for walk-ins four days a week, and the high demand is currently resulting in appointments for non-urgent matters being scheduled out until November. Viola also announced an upcoming event focused on engaging and recruiting landlords.

Key Discussion Points

  • Viola reported that the Housing Services office is now open Monday through Thursday, 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM for walk-ins, with appointments available on Fridays (00:02:45.000–00:02:53.000).
  • The detailed documentation required by the Department of Commerce takes about an hour and a half per case, following a 15–20 minute meeting with the client (00:02:53.000).
  • Within an eight-day period, the office saw 90 people walk through the door (00:03:07.000).
  • Scheduled appointments that are not urgent are currently booked out until approximately November (00:03:14.000–00:03:17.000).
  • Housing Services has a dedicated staff member serving as a landlord liaison to support, engage, and recruit landlords (00:03:27.000–00:03:32.000).
  • An informational "meet and greet" event for landlords is planned for October (00:03:37.000–00:03:41.000).

Public Comments

  • Viola: Extended thanks to the Commissioners for support, announced increased office hours for walk-ins (Monday-Thursday, 9-3), and noted serious wait times, with non-urgent appointments booked until November. She also announced a landlord recruitment event for October.

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials referenced.

Financials

No financial information discussed.

Alternatives & Amendments

No alternatives discussed.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

The update was received, with Commissioners expressing appreciation for the increased accessibility and efforts to serve clients (00:12:50.000).

Public Comment: Tourism Coordination Committee (TCC) Funding Change

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:04:11.000–00:08:42.000
  • Agenda Item: Not Stated
  • Categories: budgeting, tourism, operations

Topic Summary

Public comments addressed the recent abrupt changes to Lodging Tax (LTAC) funding, specifically the redirection of a significant percentage of funds away from the Tourism Coordinating Committee (TCC) and towards an emphasis on infrastructure projects like the proposed aquatic center. Both speakers supported the goal of modernization and efficiency but criticized the process, citing a lack of consultation with the TCC and insufficient public outreach for the new use of funds. Commissioners acknowledged the abruptness of the change but defended the motivation as a necessary systemic shift after years of incremental efforts.

Key Discussion Points

  • Dan Venturi applauded the County’s motivation for modernization, budget trimming, and re-envisioning the use of tourism funds (00:04:47.000–00:05:07.000).
  • Venturi criticized the method of execution, stating the all-volunteer TCC was removed from the ability to provide a formal advisory position prior to the big change in funding (00:05:41.000–00:05:55.000).
  • Venturi would have preferred a data-driven assessment on the lack of Return on Investment (ROI) from TCC funds versus the projected ROI for the aquatic complex (00:06:00.000–00:06:56.000).
  • Michelle Ur (Shelley) questioned if there was any outreach to those who pay the LTAC funds regarding the proposed changes (00:07:30.000–00:07:44.000).
  • Ur called the process a continuation of a lack of transparency, especially concerning the proposed $200,000 to seed the Public Facilities District (PFD) for the pool without much public feedback (00:08:02.000–00:08:33.000).
  • Commissioner Brotherton stated that while the change seemed abrupt, he has been trying to incrementally change the TCC for five years, describing the process as "pushing a rope" (00:09:32.000–00:9:47.000).
  • Brotherton stated he has received "not a single bit" of advice from the TCC in his five years of service, only marketing updates (00:10:23.000–00:10:31.000). He desires the TCC to act as a "work group" analyzing infrastructure or marketing needs (00:10:51.000–00:10:55.000).
  • Brotherton explained that a PFD must be formed first, as that group is responsible for conducting the robust public outreach necessary for the pool project (00:11:40.000–00:12:06.000).
  • Commissioner Dean felt the discussion was the "beginning of this conversation" and noted the difficulty Commissioners face staffing the numerous funding committees (00:13:36.000–00:14:00.000).
  • Commissioner Eisenhour acknowledged the difficulty of the change for those accustomed to the old ways but said she was "most excited about" the shift towards more visibility and exploring an aquatic center that serves locals first while visitors also enjoy it (00:16:16.000–00:16:48.000).

Public Comments

  • Dana Venturi: Applauded the motivation for budget modernization and re-envisioning, but criticized the abrupt method, claiming the volunteer TCC could not offer formal advisory feedback prior to the large funding redirection ($200,000 for the aquatic complex).
  • Michelle Ur (Shelley): Expressed concern about the lack of outreach to LTAC payers, characterizing the process as lacking transparency, particularly regarding the seeding of the proposed PFD for the pool.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • The discussion explicitly refers to the recent motion/memo issued in a prior meeting that changed TCC funding. The Work Realignment and Tourism Promotion Discussion packet summary indicates this involved moving funds and contemplating a new position.

Financials

  • Michelle Ur referenced a specific $200,000 allocated or proposed to "seed the pool" (00:08:18.000–00:08:20.000).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Dan Venturi suggested a preferred alternative process involving a data-driven assessment comparing the ROI of the existing funding structure versus the proposed new allocation (00:06:00.000–00:06:31.000).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

No formal action was taken on this topic, as it was part of the public comment period and Commissioners’ response. Commissioner Brotherton announced a later, more detailed presentation in the day on his tourism promotion strategy (00:09:59.000–00:10:03.000).

Public Comment: Misuse of Public Funds and Contracts

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:18:28.000–00:21:55.000
  • Agenda Item: Not Stated
  • Categories: services, contracts, public safety

Topic Summary

A public commenter, Maggie, raised concerns about the alleged embezzlement and misuse of public funds by contractors, citing specific large-scale financial deceptions related to the American Legion and a youth homeless prevention program funded by the Department of Commerce. She also discussed issues with landlords in the Bayside area not returning original contracts to residents, suggesting possible contractor information trafficking. Commissioners responded by clarifying the distinction between local American Legion post efforts and the corporate financial issues, and strongly condemned the misuse of public funds.

Key Discussion Points

  • Maggie cited a previous comment by Commissioner Brotherton expressing pride in the American Legion and contrasted it with an alleged embezzlement of over half a million dollars by the organization (00:18:32.000–00:18:45.000).
  • Maggie reported that a state Department of Commerce contract for youth homelessness prevention (ages 15-25) awarded $700,000, of which $340,000 was embezzled by a contractor (00:19:01.000–00:19:20.000).
  • Maggie reported that the Department of Commerce attempted to take the contractor to court but the contractor has not yet paid the money back, having missed the payment schedule (00:19:57.000–00:20:07.000).
  • Maggie also discussed the Bayside development, stating original contracts were not given back to residents, which she considers mandatory information, and expressed fear that residents would not ask for them back due to fear of being "targeted" (00:20:29.000–00:20:52.000). She suggested gathering consumer information without providing services could be considered trafficking (00:21:07.000–02:11:14.000).
  • Commissioner Brotherton clarified that his praise was for the local Margin Shields Post of the American Legion, which is an ally generously renting its basement to shelter unhoused people, and that corporate oversight issues are distinct (00:22:17.000–00:22:48.000).
  • Brotherton agreed that profiting off of public money meant to help the marginalized is unconscionable (00:23:28.000–00:23:36.000).
  • Commissioner Eisenhour affirmed that the County is careful about whom they contract with and agreed that misuse of public funds is disgusting (00:24:07.000–00:24:16.000).

Public Comments

  • Maggie: Questioned local support for the American Legion in light of embezzlement, specifically cited a $340,000 contractor embezzlement from state youth homelessness funds, and alleged that Bayside landlords are improperly withholding original contracts from tenants.

Supporting Materials Referenced

No supporting materials referenced.

Financials

  • American Legion embezzlement mentioned as "over half a million dollars" (00:18:43.000).
  • Youth homeless prevention grant was $700,000; $340,000 was allegedly embezzled (00:19:01.000–00:19:20.000).

Alternatives & Amendments

No alternatives discussed.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

No action was taken. Commissioners provided clarification on the American Legion topic and thanked the speaker for their ongoing advocacy (00:24:28.000).

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:24:33.000–00:29:57.000
  • Agenda Item: Consent Agenda
  • Categories: budgeting, contracts, public safety, personnel, land use

Topic Summary

The Board reviewed and subsequently approved the consent agenda, which included a motion to affirm the Behavioral Health funding allocations (Item 8). Commissioner Dean provided an in-depth explanation on Item 8, noting the extreme difficulty in allocating the $990,000 available, as requests totaled nearly twice that amount. Decisions prioritized programs solely dependent on public funding and those delivering essential services like therapeutic courts and school mental health.

Key Discussion Points

  • Consent Agenda Item 8: Motion to affirm the behavioral health funding allocations (00:24:44.000).
  • Commissioner Dean explained that $990,000 was available for funding, but requests were roughly twice that amount (00:25:00.000–00:25:06.000).
  • The funding prioritization focused on covering programs almost solely dependent on public funding, such as OESD mental health services for schools, county programs (juvenile health, family court), and the Nurse Family Partnership (00:25:16.000–00:25:35.000).
  • Dean described the allocation as "heartbreaking work," noting the widespread disappointment and stating the resulting gaps are "unfathomable" (00:25:43.000–00:26:01.000).
  • Dean noted that the Gateway to Freedom Projects and the Discovery Behavioral Health/OlyCAP Housing proposal (which received zero funding) would likely qualify for opioid funds, offering a potential supplemental revenue source (00:26:14.000–00:26:29.000).
  • Commissioner Eisenhour noted the allocation of $200,000 for therapeutic courts, emphasizing these are a priority due to the unmitigated benefit to the community and a lack of other dedicated revenue sources (00:28:22.000–00:28:33.000).
  • Supporting Material Analysis (BH Funding): The packet confirms that total requests for 2025 were $1.717 million against the $990,000 cap. The largest single allocation was $200,000 for the Combined Therapeutic Court in both 2025 and 2026. Two major requests—Gateway to Freedom BIR and Discovery Behavioral Healthcare/OlyCAP Housing (totaling $102,850 and $108,000, respectively, per year)—received $0.00 award for both years.

Public Comments

No public comment on this topic.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Behavioral Health 1/10th of 1% Funding Requests (2025-2026): Confirmed available funding ($990,000), total requested amounts, and key allocations/cuts, including the full defunding of the Gateway to Freedom BIR and Discovery Housing proposals.
  • Approved Consent Agenda Items from September 9, 2024 Meeting: Item 8 on the consent agenda affirms the BHAC recommendations. Also included was the appointment of Shannon Daugherty to LEPC, acceptance of Crystie Kisler/Amanda Grace resignations, and Stephen Chappuis reappointment to SWAC.

Financials

  • Total available behavioral health funding (per year): $990,000 (00:25:00.000).
  • The Combined Therapeutic Court received $200,000 for both 2025 and 2026.

Alternatives & Amendments

  • No alternatives discussed; item affirmation approved the BHAC's recommendations for allocation of the limited funds.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Motion to approve the consent agenda for September 2024.
  • Vote: Unanimous (00:29:45.000).
  • Next Steps: No next steps specified.

Letter of Support: Juvenile Assistance Grant for Child Advocacy Center

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:29:57.000–00:32:45.000
  • Agenda Item: Walk-on Item
  • Categories: public safety, services, contracts

Topic Summary

The Board considered and approved a walk-on letter of support for Jefferson Healthcare's application for the Juvenile Assistance Grant Innovation Fund. The funding will be used to establish forensic exams and care for children under the age of 13, enhancing the capabilities of the Child Advocacy Center.

Key Discussion Points

  • The letter supports Jefferson Healthcare’s application for the Juvenile Assistance Grant Innovation Fund (00:30:13.000–00:30:22.000).
  • The funds would be utilized to provide forensic exams and care specifically for children under the age of 13 (00:30:22.000).
  • This service parallels the established Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) program, but specifically for children (00:30:45.000–00:30:53.000).
  • The work is deemed important, with one Commissioner noting that recent forensics interviewing efforts supported by the multi-disciplinary team led to 19 cases being brought against an offender for child sexual abuse just last week (00:31:40.000–00:31:53.000).

Public Comments

No public comment on this topic.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • The Board reviewed the draft letter of support on screen (00:30:08.000).

Financials

  • The letter supports a grant application (specific amount not mentioned).

Alternatives & Amendments

No alternatives discussed.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Motion to approve the letter of support for Jefferson Healthcare’s grant application.
  • Vote: Unanimous ("Aye") (00:32:42.000).
  • Next Steps: The signed letter will be submitted immediately to ensure the application is timely (00:32:51.000–00:32:54.000).

Assessor and Treasurer Workshop: Special Assessment Fees

Metadata

  • Time Range: 00:46:01.000–01:33:47.000
  • Agenda Item: Workshop
  • Categories: budgeting, ordinances, land use

Topic Summary

The County Assessor, Jeff Chapman, and the Treasurer, Mark McCauley, conducted a workshop detailing the process for managing the seven benefit assessment fees that are collected through the annual property tax system. The discussion covered the complexities of tracking these assessments (which are tied to ever-changing land use), exemptions (such as for senior citizens or properties connected to sewer), and the technical challenges of using audit reports and proprietary software (PAX) to ensure correct charges are applied to thousands of parcels. Both officials emphasized the importance of their automated, centralized system, which reduces overhead and manages complexity.

Key Discussion Points

  • Assessor Jeff Chapman explained that since the tax limit changed from 6% to 1%, many necessary administrative functions are funded via these benefit assessments or "fees" rather than general property taxes (00:49:02.000–00:49:49.000).
  • The fees covered are: Clean Water, On Site Septic, Noxious Weed, Conservation District, Port Ludlow Drainage District, Fire Protection (DNR), and Landowners Contingency (DNR) (00:47:54.000–00:50:30.000).
  • Clean Water Assessment: Exempts properties connected to Port Townsend or Port Hadlock sewer systems. The initial ordinance exempted all tax-exempt properties (public and private), unlike newer assessments (00:51:04.000–00:51:16.000).
  • Port Hadlock Sewer: The ordinance must be amended to exempt properties that hook into the new Port Hadlock sewer system, a process currently underway (00:53:57.000–00:54:32.000).
  • Senior Exemptions: Conservation District and On Site Septic exempt properties that have a "senior citizen tax break," but the exemption applies only if the entire property parcel is exempt (00:56:06.000–00:56:40.000).
  • Federal Government Collections: Treasurer McCauley noted his office has difficulty collecting small fees (e.g., $42) from Federal entities, leading to questions over whether the board should write these off or continue collection attempts (01:01:18.000–01:01:51.000).
  • DNR Assessments (Fire Protection/Contingency): The DNR fire patrol assessment is inexpensive. The Assessor noted that DNR struggled to track parcel eligibility based on land cover, forcing the Assessor's office to manually handle the mapping; no one has ever complained about the fees due to low cost and high need (01:12:16.000–01:13:21.000). DNR had been aggressive in billing for multiple small parcels until the system was updated to aggregate the charge to a single parcel, avoiding unnecessary refunds (01:07:06.000–01:07:31.000).
  • The Assessor's office uses custom code and Crystal Reports to run internal audits across all seven assessments simultaneously, which streamlines the process (01:15:39.000–01:16:13.000).
  • Maximum Payers: Rainer Timber is the biggest payer for DNR fire patrol (01:31:37.000); Jefferson Land Trust is the second biggest clean water payer (01:31:07.000), and the Port Ludlow Drainage District Association is the biggest payer for the drainage district fee (01:31:26.000–01:31:31.000).

Public Comments

No public comment on this topic.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Workshop on Special Assessment Fees via Property Tax System: Provided data on fees, rates (e.g., Clean Water $25.00/parcel; On Site Septic $42.00/system), exemptions, and future proposals (amending Clean Water to exempt Port Hadlock Sewer; amending Noxious Weed to allow a CPI).
  • A table summarizing the seven benefit assessments (01:04:33.000).

Financials

  • On Site Septic Rate (2024 taxes): $42.00 per septic system (01:00:08.000).
  • Clean Water Rate: $25.00 per parcel (01:00:08.000).
  • Total collected for Clean Water is about $500,000 annually, and On Site Septic is $470,000 (01:11:06.000).
  • Proposals for future consideration include allowing a Consumer Price Index (CPI) adjustment for the Noxious Weed Ordinance (01:32:56.000).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Future Considerations: The Assessor suggested the Board discuss future changes, including amending the Clean Water and Noxious Weed ordinances (01:32:51.000–01:33:04.000).

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

No formal action taken. The item was informational, but it laid the groundwork for future action on clean water and noxious weed ordinances (01:32:56.000–01:33:04.000).

Action on Response to Tribal Letter (Pleasant Harbor Master Plan Resort)

Metadata

  • Time Range: 01:35:37.000–01:48:05.000
  • Agenda Item: Consideration of Action from Executive Session
  • Categories: land use, planning, ordinances

Topic Summary

Following an executive session, the Board considered and approved a response letter to the Point Treaty Council and the Chairs of the Port Gamble and Jamestown S'Klallam tribes. The letter was in response to tribal concerns regarding the ongoing Pleasant Harbor Master Plan Resort process. The County's response proposes engaging in government-to-government consultation after October 15 to discuss the issues raised.

Key Discussion Points

  • The communication responds to an August 15 letter from the Point Treaty Council and the tribal chairs, which registered concerns about the Pleasant Harbor Master plan resort process (01:36:54.000–01:37:05.000).
  • The County's response suggests government-to-government consultation to take place sometime after October 15 (01:37:44.000).
  • During public comment, Tom Tears asked if the original August 15 th letter was publicly available to allow for informed comment (01:39:37.000).
  • Shelley asked for a basic idea of what the tribes want (01:40:47.000–01:41:01.000).
  • DCD Director Josh Peters explained that the letter reiterates concerns the tribes have held for years regarding the project, stemming from the comprehensive plan amendments, the development agreement, and the current preliminary plat application (01:41:58.000–01:42:43.000).
  • Peters noted that a public hearing, to be scheduled with the Hearing Examiner for preliminary plat approval, will also provide an opportunity for the tribes and public to participate (01:43:55.000).

Public Comments

  • Tom Tears: Asked for public access to the original tribal letter (August 15th) to enable informed responses to the County's draft (01:39:37.000).
  • Shelley: Requested clarification on the basic needs and expectations of the tribes outlined in their letter (01:40:47.000–01:41:06.000).

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • The draft response letter was displayed on the screen (01:36:34.000).
  • The original tribal letter (August 15th) was also projected on screen for context (01:40:23.000–01:44:07.000).

Financials

No financial information discussed.

Alternatives & Amendments

No alternatives discussed; the letter proposing consultation was adopted as drafted.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: Motion to approve the signing and sending of the draft letter.
  • Vote: Unanimous ("Aye") (01:47:58.000).
  • Next Steps: Melissa (staff) was instructed to get the letter signed and sent off as quickly as possible (01:48:04.000).

Commissioner Briefing: Tourism Strategy Workshop

Metadata

  • Time Range: 02:32:55.000–03:03:10.000
  • Agenda Item: Commissioner Briefing/Workshop (Tourism)
  • Categories: tourism, planning, infrastructure, services, ordinances

Topic Summary

Commissioner Brotherton delivered a comprehensive, self-developed workshop summarizing his rationale for redirecting Lodging Tax (LTAC) strategy away from pure destination marketing ("fireworks") towards destination development ("systems and structures"). His presentation included a SWOT analysis and proposals for prioritizing LTAC funds for tourism-related capital projects, overhauling visitor information services using digital technology and AI, and exploring the use of LTAC funding for workforce housing development. He stressed that TCC should focus on "Destination Development" and acknowledged that the abrupt changes have damaged some relationships.

Key Discussion Points

  • LTAC Allowable Uses: State law (RCW 67.28) allows LTAC for tourism marketing, events/festivals, operations/capital of tourism-related facilities (including PFDs), and housing (02:35:04.000–02:35.38.000, 02:44:23.000).
  • Critique of Current Strategy: Brotherton argued that destination marketing is difficult to measure (ROI is unclear) and believes tourism success is mostly attributable to the Olympic Peninsula being a great place to visit (02:38:41.000–02:39:04.000).
  • Structural Weaknesses (SWOT): Weaknesses include lack of adequate tourist rooms (contributing to Festival issues), a short tourism season, low seasonal wages, and the "amenity trap" (tourism negatively impacting the quality of life for locals) (02:40:01.000–02:42:35.000).
  • Proposed LTAC Prioritization: Brotherton recommended reversing the de facto order of priority: 1) Support operations/capital of tourism facilities (including PFDs); 2) Marketing/operations for special events/festivals; 3) General tourism marketing (02:44:37.000).
  • Visitor Information Center (VIC) Overhaul: Proposed phasing out physical VICs (calling them a "20th century solution") and replacing them with Visitor Information Services (VIS) leveraging technology (02:47:36.000).
    • VIS would use a centralized app (e.g., "Jefferson County Gateway") providing consistent, digital communication to visitors before, during, and after their stay (02:47:57.000–02:48:22.000).
    • Digital kiosk stations/QR codes could offer real-time staff or AI concierge video calls (02:57:11.000).
    • Suggested stopping printing $50,000 worth of maps and pamphlets, arguing people prefer digital for sustainability and accessibility (02:48:52.000–02:49:12.000).
  • Gateway Visitor Center Vision: Proposed developing the current location into a "pivotal piece" of modern infrastructure, phased over several years, including paving, septic/infrastructure, prefab bathrooms (Porta-bathrooms), food/coffee trucks, electric car charging, and integrated Wi-Fi (02:55:21.000–02:58:20.000).
  • LTAC for Workforce Housing: Proposed exploring RCW 67.28.160, which allows LTAC to fund housing for people at 80% AMI and below. He calculated that $130,000 from LTAC could be used as a bond or down payment for a $650,000 house to be used as a permanent rental for four people earning $23/hr (02:58:50.000–03:00:31.000).
  • Legal Clarification: Brotherton asked for Board permission to waive attorney-client privilege and share a written legal opinion (received from County Counsel) with the TCC Chair, affirming that the County has the authority to direct the TCC (02:45:17.000–02:45:43.000).

Public Comments

No public comment on this topic.

Supporting Materials Referenced

  • Commissioner Brotherton used a slide deck featuring AI-generated images, a SWOT analysis, and RCW references (02:33:00.000).

Financials

  • Annual estimated spending on maps/pamphlets: $50,000 (02:48:52.000).
  • Housing proposal: Using $130,000 of LTAC funds to aid acquisition of a $650,000 house (02:59:07.000).
  • The current $200,000 transfer to the PFD budget for the pool was an initial step in prioritizing capital facilities (02:54:26.000).

Alternatives & Amendments

  • Alternatives to Destination Marketing: Focusing funds on Destination Development and infrastructure projects that benefit locals (e.g., campgrounds, aquatic center).
  • Alternatives to VICs: Digital, app-based Visitor Information Services (VIS) using AI and video calls/kiosks.

Outcome, Vote, and Next Steps

  • Decision: No formal vote taken on the recommendations; item was informational.
  • Vote: Commissioners collectively granted permission to waive attorney-client privilege to share the legal opinion on BOCC authority over TCC (02:45:43.000).
  • Next Steps: Commissioner Brotherton will draft a memo formalizing these recommendations for the next agenda. Commissioner Dean assumed the assignment for the LTAC funding cycle RPF (02:47:14.000). The tight deadline for LTAC application submission (September 27th) was noted, necessitating quick action next week (03:03:26.000).