City of Carpinteria
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
Monday, November 14, 2022
Council Chamber, 5775 Carpinteria Avenue
5:30 p.m. Regular Meeting
In-Person and Virtual Participation Options
Attendance/Viewing Options:
• Attend the in-person meeting in City Council Chambers at City Hall (5775 Carpinteria Ave.).
• View the meeting live through the City’s website https://carpinteriaca.gov/cityhall/agendas-meetings/) on your computer, tablet or smartphone. • View the meeting on Government Access Television Channel 21 (broadcast live and rebroadcast on the Wednesday and the Saturday following the meeting at 8:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m., respectively).
• Call 669-900-9128 (and enter Webinar ID 889 0390 2262) to listen to the meeting on your phone.
• Join the City’s Zoom webinar from your computer, tablet, or smartphone by CLICKING HERE. Alternatively, you can join the Zoom webinar by logging on to www.zoom.us, downloading the application, selecting "Join Meeting", and entering Webinar ID 889 0390 2262.
Public Comments
• Provide a live public comment during the in-person meeting in City Council Chambers at City Hall (5775 Carpinteria Ave.). Please note the City has the discretion to limit both the overall and individual speaker time for any meeting or agenda matter. Typically, the Council’s practice has been to limit each speaker to three minutes. • Provide a live comment through the City’s Zoom webinar platform (through the link provided above). To make public comments through this platform please use the “raise your hand” feature to notify staff that you would like to make a public comment during designated public comment times. Once it is your turn to provide a public comment, staff will unmute your microphone and you will be given a designated amount of time to provide your comment (typically, the practice has been up to 3 minutes per speaker on each item). At the end of your comment, staff will once again mute your microphone.
• Submit a written comment (as either a general public comment or on a specific agenda item) to be distributed to Council Members by 12:00 P.M. on the day of the meeting by either submitting your comment via (1) email to [email protected], (PLEASE NOTE NEW PUBLIC COMMENT EMAIL ADDRESS) or (2)
the eComment link on the City's agenda website (https://carpinteriaca.gov/cityhall/agendas-meetings/). Please reference the agenda item to which your comment City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
November 14, 2022
pertains. While written comments become part of the record, they will not be read aloud at the meeting.
Please note that the City will make every effort to make the meeting accessible virtually; however, if one of the above virtual attendance/viewing or public comment options is unavailable due to technological issues, you are invited to take advantage of one of the other participation options outlined above (including attending and providing public comment inperson in the City Council Chambers). Additional options may be made available at the meeting.
Also, please note that Spanish interpretation will be available at the in-person meeting and through the City’s Zoom webinar.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INTRODUCTIONS, PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS: NONE
TEMPORARY ADJOURNMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF HOLDING THE MONTHLY
MEETING OF THE CARPINTERIA LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
RECONVENE THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
PUBLIC INFORMATION REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
This may include updates on law enforcement activity within the City from a Sheriff’s Office representative.
CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
The City Manager will report to the City Council regarding various City and/or community events and/or matters of interest. There will be no City Council discussion except to ask questions or refer matters to staff; and no action will be taken unless listed on a subsequent agenda.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA
This is a time for public comments on matters not otherwise on the agenda but within the subject matter jurisdiction of the City Council. The Public Comment period is limited to 15 minutes and divided among those persons desiring to speak. No person shall speak longer than three minutes; however, the Mayor may establish shorter periods based on the time available and/or the number of persons waiting to speak. Persons wishing to speak on a specific item will be recognized at the time the agenda item is considered. The audio-visual City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
November 14, 2022
system in the Council Chamber is not available for speaker use during the general Public Comment period.
The City and the City Council are not responsible for the content of statements made during the public comment period, or the factual accuracy of any such statements.
AGENDA MODIFICATIONS: The City Council may modify the regular agenda by tabling items, adding urgency items to the agenda, or changing the order in which items are considered. Changes to the Consent Calendar are considered at the time the Consent Calendar is considered.
CONSENT CALENDAR: Items on the consent calendar are considered to be routine and are normally enacted by one unanimous vote of the Council. If you wish to speak on a consent calendar item please do so during the public comment period provided at the beginning of this item.
1. Approve the minutes of the special joint meeting held October 17, 2022 and the regular meeting held October 24, 2022.
2. Receive and file the Expenditures for the period beginning October 15, 2022 and ending November 4, 2022.
3. Adoption of Resolution No. 6173, Authorizing Continued Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Boards, Committees, and Commissions.
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS:
4. Consider canceling the regular City Council meeting of December 26, 2022 and scheduling a special joint meeting of the City Council, Planning Commission, and Architectural Review Board for December 19, 2022.
Recommendation: Authorize the cancelation of the regular City Council meeting of December 26, 2022 and schedule a special joint meeting of the City Council, Planning Commission, and Architectural Review Board for December 19, 2022.
Staff Presenter: Brian C. Barrett, City Clerk
a. Staff Report
b. Public Comment
c. City Council Determination
5. Fiscal Year 2021/22 Year-End Capital Improvements Program Budget Rollover of Unused Funds into Fiscal Year 2022/23, and Additional Appropriations for Capital Improvements Program Budget.
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
November 14, 2022
Recommendation: (1) Authorize the rollover of unused funds from Fiscal Year 2021/22 Capital Improvements Program Budget into Fiscal Year 2022/23 Capital Improvements Program Budget and (2) Approve additional appropriations in the total amount of $1,180,050 for Fiscal Year 2022/23 Capital Improvements Program Budget. (This motion requires a roll call vote.)
Staff Presenter: John L Ilasin, Public Works Director
a. Staff Report
b. Public Comment
c. City Council Determination
6. Amendment No. 3 to Agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for a One-Year Term Extension and Increase to Related Costs to Provide Tree Maintenance Services.
Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for a one-year term extension to provide tree maintenance services in an amount not-to-exceed $156,577 for a total amended agreement amount of $804,756. (This motion requires a roll call vote.) Staff Presenter: John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director
a. Staff Report
b. Public Comment
c. City Council Determination
PUBLIC HEARING: NONE
CONSIDERATION OF ANY ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR AND/OR
OTHER AGENDA ITEMS REQUESTED TO BE ADVANCED
MATTERS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS
OTHER BUSINESS:
7. Approval and adoption of Urgency Ordinance No. 761, amending Ordinance No. 744 and superseding Ordinance Nos. 746, 749 and 754, extending the Temporary COVID19 Outdoor Business Permit Program to June 30, 2023 and notice of exemption findings for said Urgency Ordinance under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Recommendation: Approve and adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 761, extending the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program in order to allow businesses to operate in the City right-of-way and privately-owned outdoor spaces for supporting social distancing and economic recovery during the COVID-19 pandemic. (This motion requires a roll call vote and 4/5th approval.)
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
November 14, 2022
Staff Presenter: John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director
a. Staff Report
b. Public Comment
c. City Council Determination
8. Acceptance of the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan.
Recommendation: Accept the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan.
Staff Presenter: John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director
a. Staff Report
b. Public Comment
c. City Council Determination
9. Adoption of Resolution No. 6175, concerning the formation of the Ad Hoc Civic/Youth Engagement Committee, and appointment of up to two Council members to the Committee.
Recommendation: Receive nominations and appoint two Council members to serve on the Ad Hoc Civic/Youth Engagement Committee to assist staff with developing program recommendations for City Council consideration.
Staff Presenter: Michael Ramirez, Assistant City Manager a. Staff Report
b. Public Comment
c. City Council Determination
10. Informational Report on the City’s Emergency Services Management Program.
Recommendation: Receive and file the report.
Staff Presenter: Olivia Uribe Mutal, Program Manager
a. Staff Report
b. Public Comment
c. City Council Determination
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: The City Council will discuss local, state and/or federal legislation under consideration and decide whether to direct staff to place a matter(s) on a future City Council agenda for consideration.
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
November 14, 2022
PLANNING COMMISSION
COMMITTEE REPORTS, INQUIRIES AND OTHER MATTERS PRESENTED BY
COUNCILMEMBERS
Informational reports from Councilmember representatives on the committees, commissions and organizations listed below. This is also an opportunity for Councilmembers to request information from staff or seek support from fellow Councilmembers for future agenda items.
1. Representatives to Regional Agencies and Committees
a. Beach Erosion Authority for Clean Oceans and Nourishment (BEACON) (Clark/Alt. Carty)
b. California Joint Powers Insurance Authority (CJPIA) (Clark/Alt. Carty) c. Channel Counties Division, League of California Cities (Nomura/Alt. Lee) d. Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG)(Clark/Alt.
Nomura)
e. Santa Barbara County Air Pollution Control District (APCD)(Clark/Alt. Nomura) f. Santa Barbara Joint Affordable Housing Task Group (Carty & Alarcon) g. Santa Barbara County Elected Leaders Forum to Address Homelessness (Clark/Alt. Alarcon)
h. South Coast Youth Safety Partnership (Lee & Alarcon) i. Central Coast Community Energy (3CE) (Nomura/Alt. Goleta) j. Multijurisdictional Solid Waste Task Group (Lee/Alt. Alarcon)
2. Joint and Standing Committees
a. City Council/Economic Vitality Committee (Carty & Lee) b. City Council/Public Safety Committee (Clark & Nomura) c. City Council/School Board Committee (Lee & Alarcon)
d. City Council/Utilities Committee (Lee & Nomura)
e. City Council/First District Supervisor Committee (Lee & Carty) f. City Council Finance/Budget Committee (Carty & Clark) g. Transportation Committee (Lee & Clark)
h. Development Review Committee (Joint Committee membership from City Council, Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board) (CC: Clark & Nomura/Alt. Carty) (PC: Benefield and Callender) (ARB: Reginato and Stein) i. General Plan and Coastal Plan Update Committee (Joint Committee membership from City Council and Planning Commission) (Clark & Lee) (PC: Allen/Callender) j. Public Facility Site Acquisition/Development Committee (Carty & Nomura)
3. Ad Hoc Committees
a. COVID-19 Communications Committee (Clark & Nomura)
b. Harbor Seal Advisory Committee (Clark & Lee)
c. Senior Services Planning Committee (Carty & Lee)
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
November 14, 2022
4. City Representatives on other Committees
a. Community Media Access Center (Gary Dobbins)
b. Santa Barbara Mosquito and Vector Management District (Joe Franken) c. Santa Barbara Metropolitan Transit District (Chuck McQuary) d. County Library Advisory Committee (Gail Marshall)
ATTENDANCE OF COUNCILMEMBERS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS
ADJOURNMENT
The next regular City Council meeting will be held November 28, 2022 at 5:30 p.m.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk's Office at 755-4403 or the California Relay Service at (866) 735-2929. Notification two business days prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements for accessibility to this meeting.
Materials related to an agenda item submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public review at the City Clerk's Office.
This agenda was posted on Wednesday, November 9, 2022, in the City Clerk's Office, on the City Hall Public Notices Board, and on the Internet.
CARPINTERIA LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
5775 Carpinteria Avenue
Carpinteria, CA 93013
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2022
5:30 P.M.
1. Call to order and roll call.
2. Confirmation of legal noticing and procedural requirements of meeting.
3. Public Comment – This is the time for public comments on matters not otherwise on the agenda but within the subject matter of the Carpinteria Library Board of Trustees.
4. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held October 10, 2022.
5. Update on the Library (verbal report).
6. New Business & Discussion.
7. Adjournment.
The Carpinteria Library Board of Trustees agenda and any associated staff reports will be available on Thursday, November 10, 2022 on the City’s Website:
https://carpinteriaca.gov/city-hall/agendas-meetings/. The Carpinteria Library Board of Trustees agenda and staff reports are part of the City Council agenda for its regular meeting of November 14, 2022. Please see “TEMPORARY ADJOURNMENT FOR
THE PURPOSE OF HOLDING THE MONTHLY MEETING OF THE CARPINTERIA LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES.” Details and procedures on how to provide public comment and participate in the meeting through telephonic means are available on the posted City Council agenda at https://carpinteriaca.gov/city-hall/agendas-meetings/.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact Brian Barrett, City Clerk at [email protected] or (805) 755-4446. Notification two business days prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements for accessibility to this meeting. This agenda was posted on Wednesday, November 9, 2022, in the City Clerk’s Office, on the City Hall Public Notices Board, and on the Internet.
CARPINTERIA LIBRARY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
5775 Carpinteria Avenue
Carpinteria, CA 93013
REGULAR MEETING MINUTES
MONDAY, OCTOBER 10, 2022
1. Call to order and roll call.
President Nomura called the meeting to order at 5:58 pm.
Boardmembers present: Boardmember Natalia Alarcon
Boardmember Gregg A. Carty
Boardmember Roy Lee
Vice President Al Clark
President Wade T. Nomura
Staff members present: Dave Durflinger, Chief Executive Officer Jena Shoaf Acos, on behalf of Brownstein
Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP acting as
City Attorney of the City of Carpinteria
Brian C. Barrett, Secretary
Eric Castro, Community Outreach Librarian
2. Confirmation of legal noticing and procedural requirements of meeting.
Secretary Barrett acknowledged that all legal noticing and procedural requirements have been met.
3. Public Comment
There was no public comment.
4. Approval of minutes of the regular meeting held September 12, 2022.
Motion by Boardmember Lee, seconded by Vice President Clark, to approve the minutes of the regular meeting held September 12, 2022. The voice vote was as follows:
AYES: Boardmember Alarcon, Boardmember Carty, Boardmember Lee, Vice President Clark, and President Nomura
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
Library Board of Trustees Regular Meeting Minutes
October 10, 2022
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried unanimously.
5. Update on the Library (verbal report).
Community Outreach Librarian Castro reported on the following:
• Facilities is completing the exterior painting of the Library building. • Still seeking to fill part-time Library Technician position. • Received 3,700 library users last month.
• Issued 240 new library cards last month.
• Completed 52 hours of adult/children library programs and received 522 attendees for these programs during last month.
• Currently have eight active volunteers.
• Library Advisory Commission met for the first time in September, next meeting scheduled for October 27th at 5:30 pm in the Council Chambers.
6. New Business & Discussion.
There was no new business nor discussion.
7. Adjournment.
President Nomura adjourned the meeting at 6:04 p.m.
________________________________
Brian C. Barrett, CMC, CPMC, Secretary
City of Carpinteria
Joint City Council and Planning Commission
Special Meeting Minutes
Monday, October 17, 2022
In-Person and Virtual
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Nomura called the meeting to order at 5:30 pm.
ROLL CALL
City Councilmembers present: Councilmember Natalia Alarcon Councilmember Gregg A. Carty
Councilmember Roy Lee
Vice Mayor Al Clark
Mayor Wade T. Nomura
Planning Commissioners present: Commissioner Callender
Vice Chair Glenn LaFevers
Chair Jane Benefield
Planning Commissioners absent: Commissioner David Allen Commissioner John Moyer
Staff members present: Dave Durflinger, City Manager
Jena Shoaf Acos, on behalf of
Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP
acting as City Attorney of the City of
Carpinteria
Mack Carlson, on behalf of Brownstein
Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP acting as City
Attorney of the City of Carpinteria
Brian C. Barrett, City Clerk
Steve Goggia, Community Development
Director
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Nomura led those present in the salute to the flag.
PUBLIC HEARING:
Special Joint City Council and Planning Commission Meeting Agenda October 17, 2022
The City Council and Planning Commission met to discuss the following subject matter:
1. Public Release of the DRAFT 2023-2031 Housing Element Update Recommendation: Receive staff presentation and public testimony, and provide comments as appropriate.
Community Development Director Goggia, Consultant John Douglas with JHD Planning LLC (present via Zoom), and Legal Counsel Carlson presented the staff report and PowerPoint presentation.
During the staff presentation, Councilmember Lee left the Council Chambers at 6:33 pm and returned to the dais at 6:36 pm and left the Council Chambers at 6:47 pm and returned to the dais at 6:50 pm.
Mayor Nomura recessed to a break at 6:54 pm and reconvened the meeting at 6:59 pm.
PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE HEARD CONCERNING ONLY THE AGENDIZED ITEMS
FOR THIS SPECIAL MEETING
Speakers in-person: Mike Wondolowski, Kathy Logue (did not speak), and Bill Medel Speakers via Zoom: Eddie Siegel and Katie Ferrick
Emails distributed: Mike Wondolowski, Eddie Siegel, and Russell Ruiz.
Mayor Nomura opened up comment from the Planning Commission.
Vice Chair LaFevers stated the draft Housing Element was acceptable to move forward with. He commented that he was hesitant with the 20 sites that have been identified for potential rezoning and anticipated that there would be quite a bit of ADU activity in the next eight-year cycle where ADUs could be included in the credit.
Commissioner Callender reported that he made remarks on this process at the Planning Commission. He specified his concern that the Sea Level Vulnerability Assessment was ignored in the draft Housing Element.
Chair Benefield recommended adding a statement on Sea Level Rise and the properties it effects in the draft Housing Element. She noted the draft Housing Element was excellent. She encouraged staff to come back with feedback on the various programs identified in the Housing Element and enlist discussion and provide updates to the Planning Commission.
Mayor Nomura opened up comment from the City Council.
Special Joint City Council and Planning Commission Meeting Agenda October 17, 2022
Councilmember Lee expressed concern with the State telling the City to add more housing. He remarked that the draft Housing Element was good and recommended moving forward with the draft document.
Councilmember Carty was concerned with exceeding 20 units per acre and expanding into the community with mass housing. He suggested sea level rise be mentioned in the draft document and move forward with the draft document.
Councilmember Alarcon expressed concern with where the residential overlay would be placed including larger density housing being built along the City’s boundaries where families would have no direct access to shop and go to school. She was interested in further discussion on capping the number of units per acre and wanted to hear more about the job/housing balance.
Vice Mayor Clark said the job/housing balance is important. He commented that the overlay should be scaled back. He suggested not expanding on the urban/rural boundary, the density should be lower (20 or less units per acre), and work with Peoples Self Help Housing or have the City do a public housing model in order to create more affordable housing.
Mayor Nomura recommended ADUs be included in the project plan to reduce the number of overlay sites, include a job/housing factor, and provide incentives to the privatelyowned parcels included in the overlay to assist the City in that regard. He also suggested looking at other options besides public transportation to connect the City and the workforce to keep the Downtown area vibrant as residential development is moved to the outskirts of the City. He noted the draft Housing Element was a comprehensive document.
Motion by Councilmember Lee, seconded by Councilmember Carty, to authorize staff to submit the draft 2023-2031 Housing Element to HCD for review, including the incorporation of changes, as determined appropriate and directed by the City Council and the Planning Commission, in response to public comment. The roll call vote was as follows:
AYES: Councilmember Alarcon, Councilmember Carty, Councilmember Lee, and Mayor Nomura
NOES: Vice Mayor Clark
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried.
Community Development Director Goggia clarified that staff will put a cap on the number of residential units for the area of the research park sites.
Special Joint City Council and Planning Commission Meeting Agenda October 17, 2022
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Nomura adjourned the meeting at 7:42 pm.
__________________________
Wade T. Nomura, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Brian C. Barrett, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk
City of Carpinteria
City Council Minutes
Regular Meeting
Monday, October 24, 2022
In-Person and Virtual
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Nomura called the meeting to order at 5:33 pm.
ROLL CALL
Councilmembers present: Councilmember Natalia Alarcon
Councilmember Gregg A. Carty
Councilmember Roy Lee
Vice Mayor Al Clark
Mayor Wade T. Nomura
Staff members present: Dave Durflinger, City Manager
Jena Shoaf Acos, on behalf of Brownstein Hyatt Farber
Schreck, LLP acting as City Attorney of the City
of Carpinteria
Brian C. Barrett, City Clerk
Michael Ramirez, Assistant City Manager
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director
Steve Goggia, Community Development Director
Ron Alonzo, Code Compliance Supervisor
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Nomura led those present in the salute to the flag.
INTRODUCTIONS, PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS:
1. Mayoral Recognition to David Griggs, Director/Curator of the Carpinteria Valley Historical Society and Museum of History on His Retirement.
Speakers in-person: David Griggs
Mayor Nomura and the Council presented the Mayoral Recognition to Mr. Griggs.
PUBLIC INFORMATION REPORTS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
October 24, 2022
Lieutenant Butch Arnoldi with the Santa Barbara County Sheriff’s Department provided an update on crime in the City.
CITY MANAGER’S REPORT
City Manager Durflinger encouraged folks to sign up to receive the City Newsletter and announced that a two-sided card in English/Spanish will be sent out to every household in Carpinteria offering incentives to sign up.
PUBLIC COMMENT ON MATTERS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Speakers in-person: Sandy Evans, Henry Newton, Jason Rodriguez, Bob Franco, and Stephen Meade
Speakers via Zoom: Alison Johnson and Lorraine McIntire Emails distributed: Terry Scrivner
In response to Ms. Evans comment, there was consensus amongst the Council to direct staff to look into reducing the Community Pool fees and seek other ways of raising money for the pool and bring back to a future Council meeting.
AGENDA MODIFICATIONS: NONE
CONSENT CALENDAR
There was no public comment.
Motion by Councilmember Lee, seconded by Councilmember Carty, to approve the Consent Calendar Item Nos. 2 through 10. The roll call vote was as follows:
AYES: Councilmember Alarcon, Councilmember Carty, Councilmember Lee, Vice Mayor Clark, and Mayor Nomura
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried unanimously.
2. Approve the minutes of the regular meeting held October 10, 2022.
3. Receive and file the Expenditures for the period beginning October 1, 2022 and ending October 14, 2022.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
October 24, 2022
4. Receive and file the Contracts Executed by the City Manager on behalf of the City for the Period of September 20, 2022 through October 17, 2022.
5. Adoption of Resolution No. 6170, Authorizing Continued Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Boards, Committees, and Commissions.
6. Adoption of Resolution No. 6167, authorizing signers on City bank accounts.
7. Adopt Resolution No. 6168, authorizing certain officers to order the deposit or withdrawal of monies in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF).
8. Receive and file the Monthly City Treasurer’s Report on Compliance with Statement of Safekeeping and Investment of Public Funds for the month of September 2022.
9. Receive and file the Quarterly Review of the Pension Stabilization Trust.
10. Adopt Resolution No. 6172, receiving and filing the annual City Investment Policy.
ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS:
11. Approval of a consultant services agreement between the City and Equity Praxis Group for assistance with the City’s Racial, Equity and Social Justice program in a not-to-exceed amount of $108,202.
Recommendation: Approve a consultant services agreement between the City and Equity Praxis Group for assistance with the City’s Racial, Equity and Social Justice program in a not-to-exceed amount of $108,202. (This motion requires a roll call vote.)
City Manager Durflinger and Jarrod Schwartz, Vincent Avila, René Castro and Brianne O’Donoghue, all representing Equity Praxis Group, presented the staff report. Mr. Castro and Ms. O’Donoghue were present via Zoom.
Speakers in-person: Fred Shaw
In response to Mr. Shaw’s comment, the Council directed staff to return with quarterly reports on the progress of the City’s Racial, Equity and Social Justice Program depending on the program timing.
Motion by Councilmember Alarcon, seconded by Vice Mayor Clark, to authorize the City Manager to sign a consultant services agreement on behalf of the City with Equity Praxis Group for assistance with the Racial, Equity and Social Justice program in a not-toexceed amount of $108,202. The roll call vote was as follows:
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
October 24, 2022
AYES: Councilmember Alarcon, Councilmember Carty, Councilmember Lee, Vice Mayor Clark, and Mayor Nomura
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried unanimously.
12. Authorization for the City Manager to execute an Agreement with Policore to provide Information Technology Management Services to the City of Carpinteria for a three-year not-to-exceed amount of $311,220.00.
Recommendation: Authorize the City Manager to execute an Agreement with Policore to provide Information Technology Management Services for a threeyear not-to-exceed amount of $311,220.00 (This motion requires a roll call vote.) City Manager Durflinger presented the staff report.
Councilmember Lee left the Council Chambers at 6:30 pm and returned to the dais at 6:31 pm.
There was no public comment.
Motion by Councilmember Lee, seconded by Councilmember Alarcon, to authorize the City Manager to execute an Agreement with Policore to provide Information Technology Management Services for a three-year term in a not-to-exceed amount of $311,220.00.
The roll call vote was as follows:
AYES: Councilmember Alarcon, Councilmember Carty, Councilmember Lee, Vice Mayor Clark, and Mayor Nomura
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried unanimously.
13. Award of Contract for Electric Vehicle Charging Stations.
Recommendation: (1) Award a contract to EV Connect for electric vehicle charging stations in an amount of $37,950 and (2) Approve budget adjustments in the Resource Conservation Program to reflect an additional expense of $37,950 and revenues of $13,500. (This motion requires a roll call vote.) Public Works Director Ilasin presented the staff report.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
October 24, 2022
There was no public comment.
Motion by Vice Mayor Clark, seconded by Councilmember Carty, to (1) award the contract to EV Connect for electric vehicle charging stations in an amount of $37,950 and (2) approve budget adjustments in the Resource Conservation Program to reflect an additional expense of $37,950 and revenues of $13,500. The roll call vote was as follows:
AYES: Councilmember Alarcon, Councilmember Carty, Councilmember Lee, Vice Mayor Clark, and Mayor Nomura
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried unanimously.
14. Adopt Resolution No. 6169, Approving Appointments to the Downtown “T” Business Advisory Board.
Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 6169, approving appointments to the Downtown “T” Business Advisory Board.
City Clerk Barrett presented the staff report and PowerPoint presentation.
Speakers via Zoom: Jason Lesh, Lorraine McIntire, and Tina Frontado Motion by Councilmember Lee, seconded by Councilmember Carty, to adopt Resolution No. 6169, as read by title only, approving the appointments of Richard Mancilla and Jason Lesh as assessment-paying members and Lorraine McIntire and Tina Frontado as atlarge members to the Downtown “T” Business Advisory Board. The roll call vote was as follows:
AYES: Councilmember Alarcon, Councilmember Carty, Councilmember Lee, Vice Mayor Clark, and Mayor Nomura
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING:
15. Request of the Carpinteria-Summerland Fire Protection District for the City Council to provide comments regarding the District’s Draft Ordinance adopting City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
October 24, 2022
the 2022 California Fire Code pursuant to California Health and Safety Code §13869.7(b).
Recommendation: Receive the presentation and public testimony regarding the District’s Draft Ordinance adopting the 2022 California Fire Code, and provide direction to City staff, as determined appropriate, for the preparation of written comment pursuant to California Health and Safety Code §13869.7(b).
Councilmember Carty recused himself from this item due to his employment in the local construction and building industry and left the Council Chambers at 6:55 pm.
Community Development Director Goggia and Carpinteria-Summerland Fire Protection District Fire Marshall Mike LoMonaco presented the staff report.
Mayor Nomura opened the public hearing at 7:17 pm.
Speakers in-person: Lisa Guravitz
Mayor Nomura closed the public hearing at 7:18 pm.
The Councilmembers present were in favor of the 50% threshold where a residential structure would be required to be retrofitted with a fire sprinkler system where the total square footage of a remodel is 50% or greater of the structure area.
Motion by Vice Mayor Clark, seconded by Councilmember Alarcon, to authorize staff to provide the Carpinteria-Summerland Fire Protection District written comments concerning the District’s Draft Ordinance adopting the 2022 California Fire Code, as discussed at the meeting. The roll call vote was as follows:
AYES: Councilmember Alarcon, Councilmember Lee, Vice Mayor Clark, and Mayor
Nomura
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmember Carty (recused)
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried.
Councilmember Carty returned to the dais at 7:20 pm.
OTHER BUSINESS:
16. Approval and adoption of Resolution No. 6171, establishing administrative procedures for a Safe Parking Pilot Program, authorizing the City Manager, on behalf of the City, to enter into an operating agreement with New Beginnings City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
October 24, 2022
Counseling Center in a not-to-exceed amount of $94,000, and allocating a FY 2022-23 budget amount of $32,000.
Recommendation: Approve and adopt Resolution No. 6171, establishing administrative procedures for a Safe Parking Pilot Program, authorizing the City Manager, on behalf of the City, to enter into an operating agreement with New Beginnings Counseling Center for a not-to-exceed amount of $94,000, and allocating a FY 2022-23 budget amount of $32,000.
City Manager Durflinger, Code Compliance Supervisor Alonzo, and Kristine Schwarz representing New Beginnings Counseling Center (present via Zoom) presented the staff report.
Speakers in-person: Gail Marshall
Speakers via Zoom: Susan Allen
Motion by Vice Mayor Clark, seconded by Councilmember Alarcon, to (1) approve and adopt Resolution No. 6171, establishing administrative procedures for a Safe Parking Pilot Program and authorizing the City Manager, on behalf of the City, to enter into an operating agreement with New Beginnings Counseling Center; and (2) approve a not-toexceed amount for the operating agreement of $94,000, and amending the FY 2022-23 budget by allocating $32,000 from the Measure X Fund balance to the appropriate Professional Services program line. The roll call vote was as follows:
AYES: Councilmember Alarcon, Councilmember Carty, Vice Mayor Clark, and Mayor
Nomura
NOES: Councilmember Lee
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
The motion carried.
17. Code Compliance Quarterly Report.
Recommendation: Receive and file quarterly report.
Code Compliance Supervisor Alonzo presented the staff report and PowerPoint presentation.
Speakers in-person: Fred Shaw
Councilmember Carty noted concerns about the 20-minute parking for food pickup at restaurants in the Downtown.
City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
October 24, 2022
Councilmember Alarcon requested more detail on zoning violations be included in the next quarterly report.
The report was received and filed.
LEGISLATIVE UPDATE: NONE
COMMITTEE REPORTS, INQUIRIES AND OTHER MATTERS PRESENTED BY
COUNCILMEMBERS
Councilmember Lee requested an update from Caltrans on the freeway work between Carpinteria and Ventura.
ATTENDANCE OF COUNCILMEMBERS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS
All Councilmembers are expected to be in attendance at the next regular Council meeting on November 14th.
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Nomura adjourned the meeting at 8:30 pm.
__________________________
Wade T. Nomura, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Brian C. Barrett, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk
City of Carpinteria
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
November 14, 2022
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Adoption of Resolution No. 6173, Authorizing Continued Remote Teleconference Meetings of the City Council and Boards, Committees, and Commissions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 6173, authorizing continued remote teleconference meetings of the City Council and Boards, Committees, and Commissions for a period of 30 days.
Sample Motion: I move to adopt Resolution No. 6173, as read by title only.
BACKGROUND
From the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 through June 2021, the City Council and subordinate boards, committees, and commissions held their respective meetings solely by remote teleconference (i.e. Zoom webinar/meeting) under the Governor's Executive Orders N-29-20 and N-08-21. Since July 2021, hybrid meetings have been held, where the public may participate in person or virtually.
On September 16, 2021, the Governor signed into law Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361), which allows public agencies to continue using teleconferencing without complying with certain Brown Act provisions. The Brown Act ordinarily requires, among other things, that public officials attending a meeting from a remote location post the agenda in the location they are participating from; allow members of the public to attend the meeting from that space; identify in the notice and agenda for the meeting each teleconference location; and that at least a quorum of the legislative body participate from locations within the City.
The purpose of this agenda matter is for the Council to consider making certain findings necessary in order to authorize continued teleconference meetings of the City Council and Boards, Committees, and Commissions.
AB 361 Findings - Remote Teleconference Meetings
November 14, 2022
DISCUSSION
Under AB 361, the City may employ teleconferencing as long as there is a gubernatorial "proclaimed state of emergency," and either (1) state or local officials imposing or recommending measures that promote social distancing or (2) the legislative body finding that meeting in person would present an imminent safety risk to attendees.
In addition, every 30 days, the City Council must make the following findings by majority vote in order to continue the teleconferencing option: (1) the agency has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency; and (2) it either continues to directly impact the ability of members to meet safely in person, or state or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.
Even though the case positivity rate has lowered during the past month, staff recommends the Council reconsider the safety and procedural issues involved in holding teleconferenced meetings pursuant to AB 361 and adopt Resolution No. 6173, authorizing virtual or hybrid attendance of meetings through December 14, 2022.
Through November 3, 2022, the community risk level in the county is ranked as "low," as defined by the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention and the Santa Barbara County Public Health Department reports a continued decrease in virus transmission in the community. The total number of new weekly reported cases per 100,000 people in the county through November 3, 2022 is 42.11, compared to 57.56 on October 13, 2022. The Santa Barbara County Public Health Department recommends utilizing teleconferencing options for public meetings as an effective social distancing measure to facilitate participation in public affairs and encourages participants to protect themselves and others from the COVI D-19 disease 1.
AB 361, which amended Government Code Section 54953, will sunset on January 1, 2024. On September 13, 2022, the Governor signed into law Assembly Bill 2449 (AB 2449) which amends the Brown Act to allow members of a legislative body to teleconference under specified circumstances. AB 2449 is effective January 1, 2023 to January 1, 2026. Under AB 2449, if a quorum of the legislative body participates inperson from a single open and public location that is identified on the agenda, the other members may participate remotely for "just cause" or in "emergency circumstances" without having to comply with the traditional Brown Act teleconferencing rules. "Just cause" is identified as any of the following: (i) providing childcare or caregiving of a child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, sibling, spouse, or domestic partner that requires them to participate remotely; (ii) a contagious illness that prevents a member from attending in-person; (iii) a need related to a physical or mental disability as defined by statute; or (iv) travel while on official business of the legislative body. Teleconferencing for the "just cause" reason may not be used more than two meetings per calendar year. 1 Health Officials AB 361 Social Distance Recommendation Issued on September 1, 2022 by the Santa Barbara County Public Health Department (See Exhibit 1 of attached Resolution No. 6173).
G:\FIDELA\CITY COUNCIL\STAFF REPORT\2022\11-14-22\AB 361 Findings\Remote Meetings SR.docx AB 361 Findings - Remote Teleconference Meetings
November 14, 2022
"Emergency circumstances" is defined as a physical or family medical emergency that prevents a member from attending in-person. The teleconferencing member must make a request that the legislative body approve an "emergency circumstances" reason for attending the meeting remotely, which must be agendized and approved by a majority vote.
Regardless of which reason is raised, teleconferencing members must participate through both audio and visual technology and they must publicly disclose at the meeting before any action is taken, whether any other individuals 18 years or older are present in the room at the remote location with the member, and the general nature of the member's relationship with any such individuals. In addition, if there is a disruption that prevents the broadcasting of the meeting to members of the public using a call-in option or internet-based service option, the meeting must be paused until the meeting is broadcast again. Teleconferencing may not be used for a period of more than three consecutive months or 20 percent of the regular meetings for the local agency within a calendar year.
The City Council adopted Resolution No. 6142 on June 27, 2022, Resolution No. 6149 on July 25, 2022, Resolution No. 6155 on August 15, 2022, Resolution No. 6159 on September 12, 2022, Resolution No. 6163 on October 10, 2022, and Resolution No. 6170 on October 24, 2022, finding the requisite conditions exist for the council and subordinate boards, committees and commissions to conduct teleconference meetings under California Government Code Section 54953(e).
City staff recommends the City Council adopt the attached Resolution to authorize the continued use of remote teleconference meetings of the City Council and Boards, Committees, and Commissions.
POLICY CONSISTENCY
Review of this matter and direction to staff would align with the City's strategic goal of good governance.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
The City has established a business Zoom account for the use of remote teleconferencing of public meetings and the cost is already included in the current fiscal year budget.
LEGAL AND RISK MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
Failing to adopt Resolution No. 6173 would require meetings to be held only in person under traditional Brown Act parameters. Adopting the Resolution would give the City flexibility as it moves forward with meetings over the next 30 days.
G:\FIDELA\CITY COUNCIL\STAFF REPORT\2022\11-14-22\AB 361 Findings\Remote Meetings SR.docx AB 361 Findings - Remote Teleconference Meetings
November 14, 2022
Page4
OPTIONS
1. Adopt Resolution No. 6173, authorizing remote teleconference meetings of the City Council and Boards, Committees, and Commissions.
2. Decline to adopt Resolution No. 6173 and switch to fully in-person meetings under traditional Brown Act rules.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
There are no principal parties expected at the meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Resolution No. 6173
Staff contact: Brian C. Barrett, City Clerk
(805) 755-4403; [email protected]
Reviewed by: Dave Durflinger, City Manager
(805) 755-4400, [email protected]
G:\FIDELA\CITY COUNCIL\STAFF REPORT\2022\11-14-22\AB 361 Findings\Remote Meetings SR.docx AB 361 Findings - Remote Teleconference Meetings
November 14, 2022
ATTACHMENT A
Resolution No. 6173
G:\FIDELA\CITY COUNCIL\STAFF REPORT\2022\11-14-22\AB 361 Findings\Remote Meetings SR.docx AB 361 Findings - Remote Teleconference Meetings
November 14, 2022
Page6
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
G:\FIDELA\CITY COUNCIL\STAFF REPORT\2022\11-14-22\AB 361 Findings\Remote Meetings SR.docx RESOLUTION NO. 6173
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARPINTERIA RENEWING AUTHORIZATION FOR CONTINUED
TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS
WHEREAS, the City of Carpinteria is committed to preserving and nurturing public access and participation in meetings of the City Council; and WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom issued a Proclamation of State of Emergency in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which Proclamation remains in effect; and
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N29-20, modifying the teleconferencing rules set forth in the Brown Act, Government Code Sections 54950 et. seq., subject to compliance with certain requirements; and WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08- 21, providing that the modifications to the teleconferencing rules under the Brown Act would remain in place through September 30, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed Assembly Bill 361 (AB 361), which modified the Brown Act to provide that a legislative body may continue to meet under modified teleconferencing rules if the meeting occurs during a proclaimed state of emergency and state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; and
WHEREAS, COVID-19 continues to threaten the health and lives of Carpinteria residents notwithstanding the County's vaccination rates, with Santa Barbara County considered to have low community risk level as of November 3, 2022, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; and
WHEREAS, on September 28, 2021, the Santa Barbara County Public Health Department recommended utilizing teleconferencing options for public meetings as an effective social distancing measure; and
WHEREAS, on September 1, 2022, the Santa Barbara County Public Health Department continued to recommend utilizing teleconferencing options for public Resolution No. 6173
meetings as an effective social distancing measure as set forth in a document entitled "Health Officials AB 361 Social Distance Recommendation", attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 6142 on June 27, 2022, Resolution No. 6149 on July 25, 2022, Resolution No. 6155 on August 15, 2022, Resolution No. 6159 on September 12, 2022, Resolution No. 6163 on October 10, 2022, and Resolution No. 6170 on October 24, 2022, authorizing remote teleconference meetings of the City Council and Boards, Committees, and Commissions; and WHEREAS, in the interest of public health and safety, and in response to the local recommendation for measures to promote social distancing, the City Council finds it necessary to invoke the provisions of Government Code Section 54953 related to teleconferencing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the State of Emergency declared by Governor Newsom and finds that the State of Emergency continues to warrant the option of teleconferencing for the City Council and Boards, Committees, and Commissions.
WHEREAS, The State of Emergency continues to directly impact the ability of City officials and the public to meet safely in person, in part due to the small size and enclosed nature of the City Council chambers, which function to limit the available space for effective social distancing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED as follows:
SECTION 1. The above recitals are true and correct and are adopted as findings in support of this Resolution.
SECTION 2. Based on current conditions that are the basis for the above findings, conduct of all meetings of the City Council, City Council Committees, and City Boards, Commissions, and Committees pursuant to the modified teleconference procedures of Government Code Section 54953, is authorized.
SECTION 3. Staff is directed to return to the City Council no later than thirty (30) days after the adoption of this Resolution, or at the next meeting of the City Council if later than thirty (30) days after the adoption of this Resolution, for the City Council to reconsider whether to again make the findings required to meet under the modified teleconference procedures of Government Code Section 54953.
SECTION 4. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon adoption.
Resolution No. 6173
SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and shall cause a certified copy to be filed in the book of original resolutions.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on the 14th day of November, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
NOES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
Mayor, City of Carpinteria
ATTEST:
Brian C. Barrett, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk, City of Carpinteria
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carpinteria held on November 14, 2022.
Brian C. Barrett, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk, City of Carpinteria
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jena Shoaf Acos, on behalf of Brownstein
Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP acting as
City Attorney of the City of Carpinteria
Resolution No. 6173
Page4
EXHIBIT 1 TO RESOLUTION NO. 6173
Santa Barbara County
PusucHealth
DEPARTMENT
Public Health Administration
300 North San Antonio Road • Santa Barbara, CA 93110-1316 805/681-5100 • FAX 805/681-5191
Daniel L 8. Nlelacn, MPA Interim Director
Suzanna Jaeebscn, CPA Chief Flnancfal Officer
Paige Batson, MA, PHN, RN Deputy Director
Darrin Eisenbarth Deputy Director
Dana Gamble, LCSW Deputy Director
Henning An10rg, MD Health Officer
September 1, 2022
HEAL TH OFFICIALS AB 361 SOCIAL DISTANCE
RECOMMENDATION
COVID-19 disease prevention measures, endorsed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, include vaccinations, facial coverings, increased indoor ventilation, handwashing, and physical distancing (particularly indoors).
Since March 2020, local legislative bodies-such as commissions, committees, boards, and councils- have successfully held public meetings with teleconferencing as authorized by Executive Orders issued by the Governor. Using technology to allow for virtual participation in public meetings is a social distancing measure that may help control transmission of the SARS- Co V-2 virus.
Public meetings bring together many individuals (both vaccinated and potentially unvaccinated), from multiple households, in a single indoor space for an extended time. For those at increased risk for infection, or subject to an isolation or quarantine order, teleconferencing allows for full participation in public meetings, while protecting themselves and others from the COVID-19 virus.
Utilizing teleconferencing options for public meetings is an effective and recommended social distancing measure to facilitate participation in public affairs and encourage participants to protect themselves and others from the COVID-19 disease. This recommendation is further intended to satisfy the requirement of the Brown Act (specifically Gov't Code Section 54953(e)( I )(A)), which allows local legislative bodies in the County of Santa Barbara to use certain available teleconferencing options set forth in the Brown Act.
Henning Ansor
Public Health O r
County of Santa Barbara
~a,,,.,,.,._/le;,l,5,a ' ('f',4
~ oani!Nielsbn,MPA
Public Health Interim Director
County of Santa Barbara
Healthy people, healthy community, healthy environment.
City of Carpinteria
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
November 14, 2022
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Consider canceling the regular City Council meeting of December 26, 2022 and scheduling a special joint meeting of the City Council, Planning Commission, and Architectural Review Board for December 19, 2022.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the cancelation of the regular City Council meeting of December 26, 2022 and schedule a special joint meeting of the City Council, Planning Commission, and Architectural Review Board for December 19, 2022.
Sample Motion: · 1 move to authorize the cancelation of the regular City Council meeting of December 26, 2022 and schedule a special joint meeting of the City Council, Planning Commission, and Architectural Review Board for December 19, 2022.
BACKGROUND
The City Council holds its regular meeting on the second and fourth Mondays of every month.
The exception is when the meeting date lands on a City observed holiday then the meeting is held the following day. The City Council has the authority to establish meeting dates and times and to reschedule or cancel such meetings with proper and timely public notice (CMC 2.04.010, GC §54954). Traditionally, the City Council has canceled the second regular City Council meeting in December due to a light agenda and/or vacation schedules associated with the Christmas and New Year's holidays. ·
In addition to Christmas Day and New Year's Day, the City observes the day before or after Christmas Day and the day before or after New Year's Day as legal holidays. Consistent with past practices, the following holiday schedule will be implemented.
City Council Meeting Cancelation
November 14, 2022
Page2
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 12/18/2022 12/19/2022 12/20/2022 12/21/2022 12/22/2022 12/23/2022 12/24/2022 ' Day before
..
City Hall open as usual
Christmas Day before
~ Holiday Christmas
,, " Observed
!
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 12/25/2022 12/26/2022 12/27/2022 12/28/2022 12/29/2022 12/30/2022 12/31/2022 Christmas
Christmas New Year's
New Year's
Holiday
Holiday City Hall open as usual Eve Holiday
Eve
Observed Observed
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1/1/2023 1/2/2023 1/3/2023 1/4/2023 1/5/2023 1/6/2023 1/7/2023 New Year's ~ New Year's
Day
1 Day City Hall open as usual ~
Holiday
Holiday
~ Observed I'!
'
The purpose of this agenda matter is for the Council to consider cancelling the second City Council meeting in December (December 26, 2022) and schedule a special joint meeting of the City Council, Planning Commission, and Architectural Review Board for December 19, 2022.
DISCUSSION
This year, the regularly scheduled December 26
th Council meeting falls on the observed
Christmas Day holiday. Per CMC 2.04.010, when the day for any regular meeting of the Council falls on a legal holiday, the meeting shall be held at the same hour and place on the next succeeding day thereafter which is not a holiday. However, due to the holiday schedule and allowing Council and staff to spend time with their families, staff is recommending canceling the December 26
th Council meeting and instead schedule a special joint meeting of the City Council, Planning Commission, and Architectural Review Board on Monday, December 19 th at 5:30 pm
in the Council Chambers. The special joint meeting will allow the Council, Planning Commission, and Architectural Review Board to review the conceptual plans for proposed development at the former Sun Coast Rentals property located at 4745 Carpinteria Avenue.
LEGAL
Should the City Council cancel the scheduled meeting, staff will ensure that the required posting and proper noticing are met.
C:\Users\Lorena\AppData\Local\Mlcrosoft\Windows\lNetCache\Content.Outlook\0W55K929\Staff Report.docx City Council Meeting Cancelation
November 14, 2022
OPTIONS
1. Approve the cancelation of the December 26, 2022 City Council meeting. (Staff recommendation)
2. The City Council could choose not to approve staff recommendation and provide further direction to staff.
Staff contact:
Brian C. Barrett, City Clerk
(805) 755-4403; [email protected]
Reviewed by: Dave Durflinger, City Manager
C:\Users\Lorena\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\lNetCache\Content.Oullook\0W55K929\Staff Report.docx CORRECTED 11/16/2022
City of Carpinteria
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
November 14, 2022
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Fiscal Year 2021/22 Year-End Capital Improvements Program Budget Rollover of Unused Funds into Fiscal Year 2022/23, and Additional Appropriations for Capital Improvements Program Budget.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
1. Authorize the rollover of unused funds from Fiscal Year 2021/22 Capital Improvements Program Budget into Fiscal Year 2022/23 Capital Improvements Program Budget.
2. Approve additional appropriations in the total amount of $780,050 $1,180,050 for Fiscal Year 2022/23 Capital Improvements Program Budget.
Sample Motion: I move to:
1. Authorize the rollover of unused funds from Fiscal Year 2021/22 Capital Improvements Program Budget into Fiscal Year 2022/23 Capital Improvements Program Budget.
2. Approve additional appropriations in the total amount of $780,050 $1,180,050 for Fiscal Year 2022/23 Capital Improvements Program Budget. (This motion requires a roll call vote.)
BACKGROUND
On June 27, 2022, the City Council adopted the Fiscal Year 2022/23 Budget, which also included the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Budget. The CIP consists of capital projects greater than $10,000 in value and are funded by special funds such as Measure A, Development Impact Fees, and grant funding. The passage by Carpinteria voters for Measure X in April 2018 also allowed for a greater amount of discretionary revenue to be dedicated to capital projects. The CIP Budget represents a continuation of the City’s recent aggressive effort to address capital improvement needs and deferred maintenance.
FY 2021/22 Year-End CIP Budget Rollover into FY 2022/23 CIP Budget & Additional Appropriations November 14, 2022
The CIP Budget’s annual funding is based on the adopted 2022 Capital Improvement Plan, which was approved by the City Council on August 8, 2022 (Resolution No. 6153).
The 2022 Capital Improvement Plan is a five-year period from Fiscal Year 2022/2023 through Fiscal Year 2026/2027 and identifies capital projects in the following categories:
CIP Categories
• Alternative Transportation (AT)
• General Facilities (GF)
• Highway Interchanges and Bridges (HI)
• Parking Facilities (P)
• Parks and Recreation Facilities (PR)
• Storm Drain Facilities (SD)
• Streets and Thoroughfares (ST)
• Traffic Control Facilities (TC)
Alternative Transportation (AT) capital projects generally include pedestrian and bicycle improvements. General Facilities (GF) capital projects generally include building and site improvements. Highway Interchanges and Bridges (HI) capital projects generally include highway interchange, vehicular bridge, pedestrian bridge, and overcrossing improvements. Parking Facilities (P) capital projects generally include on-street and offstreet parking improvements. Parks and Recreation Facilities (PR) capital projects generally include park and recreation facility improvements. Storm Drain Facilities (SD) capital projects generally include drainage and stormwater quality improvements.
Streets and Thoroughfares (ST) capital projects generally include street and roadway improvements. Traffic Control Facilities (TC) capital projects generally include traffic control device improvements.
The purpose of this agenda matter is for the City Council to authorize the rollover of unused funds from Fiscal Year 2021/22 Capital Improvements Program Budget into Fiscal Year 2022/23 Capital Improvements Program Budget and approve additional appropriations for Fiscal Year 2022/23 Capital Improvements Program Budget.
DISCUSSION
Rollover:
Table 1 below shows the unused fund amounts in the Fiscal Year 2021/22 CIP Budget as being proposed for rollover appropriation in the Fiscal Year 2022/23 CIP Budget.
FY 2021/22 Year-End CIP Budget Rollover into FY 2022/23 CIP Budget & Additional Appropriations November 14, 2022
Table 1 – Summary of Fiscal Year 2021/22 CIP Budget Rollover by Project Project # Project Name
Fiscal Year 2021/22
Budget Rollover Funding Source
PK-19-002 Concha Park Project $6,350 Park DIF
PK-19-002 Concha Park Project $23,600 Measure X
PK-19-003 Carpinteria Skate Park Project $79,450 Private Grants PK-20-002 Bluffs Two Trail Project $15,000 Measure X
PK-20-005
Dune and Shoreline Management
Plan $4,150 Tidelands Trust
PK-21-001
Heath Ranch Park Playground
Replacement Project $26,750 General Reserve
PW-20-001
City Hall Solar Energy Generation
and Storage Project $50 Measure X
TR-21-002
Carpinteria Avenue and Palm Avenue
Intersection Improvements Project $45,000 Measure A
WM-21-001 East Via Stormwater Project $6,750 Measure A
WM-21-001 East Via Stormwater Project $20,250 Federal Grants NC-21-001 2021 Pavement Maintenance Project $900 Measure X NC-22-002
Former Venoco Oil Pipeline #0470
Abandonment Project $20,700 State Grants
-
Highway 101 Fire Incident Emergency
Repair Project $400,000
Major Asset
Replacement
Reserve
TOTAL $648,950.00
Additional Appropriations:
Additional appropriation of funds are proposed for the following capital projects and amounts:
Carpinteria Skate Park Project
The additional $245,050 is for extra work to 1) change skating design features including earthwork grading and concrete formwork; 2) modify electrical system; 3) modify stormwater retention chambers; and 4) modify parking lot, sidewalks, and walls.
FY 2021/22 Year-End CIP Budget Rollover into FY 2022/23 CIP Budget & Additional Appropriations November 14, 2022
City Hall Campus Improvements Project
The additional $240,000 appropriation is for advancing the design and construction phases of the emergency replacement of the sanitary sewer lateral between the City Hall building and Dump Road.
Carpinteria Library Improvements Project
The additional $40,000 appropriation is for advancing the design phase of the building improvements for conformance with Americans with Disabilities Act standards.
Monte Vista Park Playground Equipment Replacement Project The additional $125,000 appropriation is for purchasing resilient surfacing technology in conformance with Americans with Disabilities Act standards and to be consistent with other City playgrounds.
Santa Claus Lane Bike Path Project
The additional $30,000 appropriation is for consulting staff augmentation services of monitoring the Conditional Use Permit/Coastal Development Permit (CUP/CDP) conditions of approval. Expenses are reimbursable by the permittee in accordance with the CUP/CDP conditions of approval.
Coastal Vista Trail – Interim Linden Avenue to Holly Avenue The additional $50,000 appropriation is for advancing the construction phase from what was originally programmed in the 2022 Capital Improvement Plan.
Linden Avenue Beach-End Beautification Project
The $50,000 appropriation is for advancing the design phase from what was originally programmed in the 2022 Capital Improvement Plan. The project was recently awarded state grant funding.
Table 2 below summarizes the Fiscal Year 2022/23 CIP Budget for the proposed additional appropriations.
Table 2 – Summary of Fiscal Year 2022/23 CIP Budget Additional Appropriation by Project Project # Project Name
Fiscal Year 2022/23
Additional Budget
Appropriation Funding Source
PK-19-003 Carpinteria Skate Park Project $209,050 Measure X PK-19-003 Carpinteria Skate Park Project $36,000 Private Grants PW-21-001
City Hall Campus Improvements
Project $240,000 Measure X
PW-23-001
Carpinteria Library Improvements
Project $40,000 Measure X
PK-23-002
Monte Vista Park Playground
Equipment Replacement Project $125,000 Measure X
FY 2021/22 Year-End CIP Budget Rollover into FY 2022/23 CIP Budget & Additional Appropriations November 14, 2022
PK-23-003 Santa Claus Lane Bike Path Project $30,000 Measure A PK-23-004
Coastal Vista Trail- Interim Linden
Avenue to Holly Avenue Project $50,000 General Reserve
PK-23-005
Linden Avenue Beach-End
Beautification Project $50,000 State Grants
TOTAL $780,050
A CIP Budget Request Form of each project for the proposed appropriations are shown in Attachment A. Each form shows the proposed rollover amounts from Fiscal Year 2021/22 into Fiscal Year 2022/23 for those projects as shown in Table 1 and the additional appropriations for those projects as shown in Table 2.
POLICY CONSISTENCY
The rollover of CIP Budget funds is consistent with the City’s current financial policies.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
Table 3 below summarizes the Fiscal Year 2022/23 appropriation by funding source and compares it to the unaudited available fund balance. Funds that would be involved include Measure X, Measure A, Major Asset Replacement (General Fund), and General Reserve (General Fund). There are also sufficient funds to accommodate the proposed additional appropriations.
Table 3 – Summary of Fiscal Year 2022/23 CIP Budget Appropriation by Fund Funding Source
Fiscal Year 2022/23
Appropriation
Available Fund Balance
(Un-Audited)
Measure X $614,050 $2,646,942
Measure A $30,000 $385,638
General Reserve $50,000 $1,004,917
State Grants $50,000 N/A
Private Grants $36,000 N/A
TOTAL $780,050
LEGAL AND RISK MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
There are no legal or risk management considerations presented with this report.
OPTIONS
1. Authorize the rollover of unused funds from Fiscal Year 2021/22 Capital Improvements Program Budget into Fiscal Year 2022/23 Capital Improvements FY 2021/22 Year-End CIP Budget Rollover into FY 2022/23 CIP Budget & Additional Appropriations November 14, 2022
Program Budget and approve additional appropriations in the total amount of $780,050 1,180,050 for Fiscal Year 2022/23 Capital Improvements Program Budget. (Staff recommendation)
2. Direct changes to the proposed rollover and/or appropriation amounts.
3. Decline to approve the recommendation and further direct staff as determined appropriate.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
There are no principal parties expected at the meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: CIP Budget Request Forms
Staff contact:
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director /s/
(805) 880-3402; [email protected] Signature
Reviewed by:
Licette Maldonado, Administrative Services Director /s/ (805) 755-4448; [email protected] Signature
Reviewed by:
Dave Durflinger, City Manager /s/
(805) 755-4400; [email protected] Signature
ATTACHMENT A
CIP Budget Request Forms
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ 29,950 $ 29,950 301-999-4918 From Measure X 104 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover (23,600) (23,600) 104-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover 23,600 23,600 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 29,950 $ 29,950
Department Head Review and Approval
Matt Roberts, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Director x449 REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Concha Park Project PK-19-002
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ 79,450 $ 79,450 301-403-4390 Private Grants FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ (79,450) $ (79,450) 301-999-4918 From Measure X 104 FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation (209,050) (209,050) 104-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation 209,050 209,050 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ - $ -
Department Head Review and Approval
Matt Roberts, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Director x449 REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Carpinteria Skate Park Project PK-19-003
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ 15,000 $ 15,000 301-999-4918 From Measure X 104 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover (15,000) (15,000) 104-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover 15,000 15,000 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 15,000 $ 15,000
Department Head Review and Approval
Matt Roberts, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Director x449 REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Bluffs Two Trail Project PK-20-002
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ 4,150 $ 4,150 301-999-4907 From Tidelands Trust Fund 207 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover (4,150) (4,150) 207-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover 4,150 4,150 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 4,150 $ 4,150
Department Head Review and Approval
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director x402
REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Dune and Shoreline Management Plan PK-20-005
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ 26,750 $ 26,750 301-999-4917 From General Reserves 102 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover (26,750) (26,750) 102-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover 26,750 26,750 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 26,750 $ 26,750
Department Head Review and Approval
Matt Roberts, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Director x449 REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Heath Ranch Park Playground Replacement Project PK-21-001
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ 14,900 $ 14,900 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 14,900 $ 14,900
Department Head Review and Approval
Matt Roberts, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Director x449 REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Carpinteria Creekside Parcel Acquisitions Project PK-21-003
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ 50 $ 50 301-999-4918 From Measure X 104 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover (50) (50) 104-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover 50 50 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 50 $ 50
Department Head Review and Approval
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director x402
REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
City Hall Solar Energy Generation and Storage Project PW-20-001
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation $ 240,000 $ 240,000 301-999-4918 From Measure X 104 FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation (240,000) (240,000) 104-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation 240,000 240,000 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 240,000 $ 240,000
Department Head Review and Approval
Name Number
REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
City Hall Campus Improvements Project
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director
PW-21-001
x402
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ 45,000 $ 45,000 301-999-4906 From Measure A Fund 215 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover (45,000) (45,000) 215-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover 45,000 45,000 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 45,000 $ 45,000
Department Head Review and Approval
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director x402
REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Carpinteria Avenue and Palm Avenue Intersection Improvements Project TR-21-002
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ 27,000 $ 27,000 301-403-4370 Federal Grants FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover (20,250) (20,250) 301-999-4906 From Measure A Fund 215 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover (6,750) (6,750) 215-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover 6,750 6,750 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 6,750 $ 6,750
Department Head Review and Approval
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director x402
REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
East Via Real Stormwater Project WM-21-001
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ 900 $ 900 301-999-4918 From Measure X 104 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover (900) (900) 104-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover 900 900 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 900 $ 900
Department Head Review and Approval
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director x402
REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
2021 Pavement Maintenance Project NC-21-001
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ 20,700 $ 20,700 301-403-4360 State Grants FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover (20,700) (20,700) -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ - $ -
Department Head Review and Approval
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director x402
REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Former Venoco Oil Pipeline #0470 Abandonment Project NC-22-002
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation $ 40,000 $ 40,000 301-999-4918 From Measure X 104 FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation (40,000) (40,000) 104-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation 40,000 40,000 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 40,000 $ 40,000
Department Head Review and Approval
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director x402
REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Carpinteria Library Improvements Project PW-23-001
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation $ 30,000 $ 30,000 301-999-4906 From Measure A Fund 215 FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation (30,000) (30,000) 215-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation 30,000 30,000 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 30,000 $ 30,000
Department Head Review and Approval
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director x402
REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Santa Claus Lane Bike Path Project PK-23-003
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover $ 400,000 $ 400,000 301-999-4902 From Major Asset Replacement 103 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover (400,000) (400,000) 103-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2021-22 Project Budget Rollover 400,000 400,000 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 400,000 $ 400,000
Department Head Review and Approval
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director x402
REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Highway 101 Fire Incident Emergency Repair Project WM-23-001
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 102-502-5764 Improvements
FY 2021-22 Reduction in Expense Account &
Shift to CIP Project for FY 2022-23 $ (43,950) $ (43,950) 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation 50,000 50,000 301-999-4917 From General Reserves 102 FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation (50,000) (50,000) 102-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation 50,000 50,000 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 6,050 $ 6,050
Department Head Review and Approval
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director x402
REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Coastal Vista Trail - Interim Linden Avenue to Holly Avenue Project PK-23-004
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation $ 50,000 $ 50,000 301-403-4360 State Grants FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation (50,000) (50,000) -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ - $ -
Department Head Review and Approval
Matt Roberts, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Director x449 REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Linden Avenue Beach-End Beautification Project PK-23-005
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
REQUEST FOR ROLLOVER BUDGET AMENDMENT
FOR FISCAL YEAR: 2022-23
PROJECT
Fund/Department/Division/Revenue
Contact Name & Extension
Account Account Justification/Explanation Current Amount of New Number Name of Increase/Decrease Budget Amount Increase (Decrease) Budget Amount 301-403-5780 Major Capital Projects FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation $ 125,000 $ 125,000 301-999-4918 From Measure X 104 FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation (125,000) $ (125,000) 104-999-5911 To Capital Improvement 301 FY 2022-23 Project Budget Appropriation 125,000 125,000 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Total for this Page $ - $ 125,000 $ 125,000
Department Head Review and Approval
Matt Roberts, Parks, Recreation & Facilities Director x449 REMINDER: Use this form to make a midyear request for an adjustment to an account with a project number. Do not combine revenue and expenditures on the same form. Also, do not combine different funds on the same form.
Name Number
Monte Vista Park Playground Equipment Replacement Project PK-23-002 City of Carpinteria
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
November 14, 2022
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Amendment No. 3 to Agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for a One-Year Term Extension and Increase to Related Costs to Provide Tree Maintenance Services.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for a one-year term extension to provide tree maintenance services in an amount not-to-exceed $156,577 for a total amended agreement amount of $804,756.
Sample Motion: I move to authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for a one-year term extension to provide tree maintenance services in an amount not-to-exceed $156,577 for a total amended agreement amount of $804,756.
(This motion requires a roll call vote.)
BACKGROUND
The Public Works Department's Right-of-Way Maintenance Program provides for the maintenance of all City rights-of-way including curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street landscaping, benches, trash receptacles, bicycle racks, tree trimming, removal of hazardous or dead trees, planting of new trees, and graffiti removal. Tree trimming is performed by the Public Works Department Street Maintenance Division as well as through the City's tree maintenance contract service provider, West Coast Arborists.
In 2015, the City solicited proposals through a Request for Proposal (RFP) process for tree maintenance services. The City received only one proposal from the RFP process, which was from West Coast Arborists, Inc. On November 23, 2015, the City Council approved a five-year term agreement (Agreement) with West Coast Arborists, Inc. that includes the option to extend the agreement for three, one-year term periods, not to exceed a total of eight years. On November 23, 2020, the City Council authorized the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement, extending the term for Amendment No. 3 to Agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc.
November 14, 2022
one year through November 23, 2021. On December 13, 2021, the City Council authorized the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 2, extending the term for one year through November 23, 2022.
The purpose of this agenda matter is to authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 3 to the Agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for a one-year term extension to provide tree maintenance services in an amount not-to-exceed $156,577 for a total amended agreement amount of $804,756. If approved, this will be the final year of the contract, expiring on November 23, 2023.
DISCUSSION
Amendment No. 3 proposes for West Coast Arborists, Inc. to continue tree maintenance services, including arborist and emergency response tree services. For example, the milestone of which West Coast Arborists, Inc. assisted the City with arborist services was the preparation of the update to the Street Tree Management Plan and Special Conditions Streets Management Plan, respectively. On July 12, 2021, the City Council adopted both the Street Tree Management Plan and Special Conditions Streets Management Plan.
In accordance with the Agreement, the City has the option to exercise three, one-year term periods and not to exceed a total of eight years. West Coast Arborists, Inc. has requested for City approval of the final one-year term extension to the Agreement and an increase of unit prices.
The proposed unit prices by West Coast Arborists, Inc. reflect a cost adjustment of 8.3- percent based on the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) in the West Region - Size Class B/C. The unit prices, upon approval, would become effective from November 23, 2022 to November 22, 2023. The following table illustrates the price increase from Amendment No. 3:
Agreement Term Amount CPI-U Adjusted
Adjustment Amount
Original Agreement $364,049 N/A N/A
(Five-Year Term)
Amendment No. 1 $121,350 15% $139,553
(One-Year Extension)
Amendment No. 2 $139,553 3.6% $144,577
(One-Year Extension)
Amendment No. 3 $144,577 8.3% $156,577
(One-Year Extension)
Staff evaluated the performance of West Coast Arborists, Inc. and determined it to be satisfactory. Staff further evaluated the proposed unit prices, and found it to be consistent with the changes in the price level of the Consumer Price Index (CPI). (The Amendment No. 3 to Agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc.
November 14, 2022
CPI is a nationally accepted measure of the average change over time in the prices paid by urban consumers for a market basket of consumer goods and services.) Should the City Council approve staff's recommendation, Amendment No. 3 will be the final one-year term extension. A successor agreement for tree maintenance services will be competitively selected through a request for proposal process.
POLICY CONSISTENCY
The provision of tree maintenance services is supportive of Carpinteria Municipal Code Chapter 12.28 (Street Trees, Shrubs and Plants) which establishes rules and regulations relating to the planting, care, maintenance and removal of trees, shrubs and any other plantings in public areas, rights-of-way and easements, and relating to certain activities on private property. The contract services may also be found consistent with the City's Street Tree Management Plan. Finally, the recommendation can be found consistent with the City's risk management program.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
The City's Adopted Fiscal Year 2022-23 Budget includes an allocation of Measure A Funds sufficient to cover the cost of Amendment No. 3. In addition to Measure A Funds, there is also $150,000 of Measure X Funds in the Adopted Fiscal Year 2022-23 Budget to address trees in special condition streets.
LEGAL AND RISK MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
The recommendation is in accordance with the terms of the current agreement with West Coasts Arborists, Inc. The agreement was reviewed as to form by the City Attorney's Office at the time of initial approval.
OPTIONS
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 3 to Agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc. for a One-Year Term Extension and Related Increase in Costs to Provide Tree Maintenance Services. (Staff recommendation)
2. The City Council could choose not to authorize the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 3 of the Agreement and provide further direction to staff as appropriate.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
There are no principal parties expected at the meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Amendment No. 3 to Agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc.
Amendment No. 3 to Agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc.
November 14, 2022
Page4
Staff contact:
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director
(805) 880-3402; [email protected]
Reviewed by:
Dave Durflinger, City Manager
(805) 755-4400; [email protected]
ATTACHMENT A
Amendment No. 3 to Agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc.
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT FOR TREE MAINTENANCE SERVICES This Third Amendment ("Amendment") is made this 14th day of November, 2022 to an agreement for tree maintenance services between the City of Carpinteria ("City") and West Coast Arborists, Inc. ("Contractor") dated the 23rd day ofNovember, 2015 ("Agreement").
The Agreement between City and Contractor currently provides under Section 3 (Term.), the ability for the City to extend the Agreement on the same terms for three (3) additional one (1) year periods, at the City's option; and
The City exercises its option to extend the Agreement by one (1) additional year until November 23, 2023 ("Option Period") and to increase the annual agreement cost by eight and 3/10 percent (8.3%) as requested by Contractor in Exhibit A for an amount not-to-exceed $156,577 for a total amended Agreement amount of $804,756; and
The Contractor agree to complete Basic Work consistent with Section 1.1 (Basic Work) and complete said basic work during the Option Period; and
The City and Contractor agree that except as expressly modified by this Amendment, all other provisions, terms and conditions of the Agreement remain unchanged and in full force and effect; and The City Council, on this 14th day of November, 2022, approves this Amendment and authorizes the City Manager to execute this Amendment.
Now therefore the City and Contractor agree as follows that Agreement be, and hereby is, amended consistent with the foregoing.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement at the place and as of the date first written above.
"CITY"
City of Carpinteria
"CONSULT ANT"
West Coast Arborists, Inc.
By: _
David Durflinger, City Manager
By:_--'""-',...__,_ _
Patric
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City of Carpinteria
By: _
Jena S. Acos, on behalf of Brownstein
Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP acting as
City Attorney of the City of Carpinteria
EXHIBIT A
West Coast Arborists, Inc. Extension Letter and Price Sheet for FY 2022-23 2 Tree Care Professionals Serving Communities Who Care About Trees www.WCAINC.com August 30, 2022
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
ATTN: JOHN /LASIN
5775 CARPINTERIA AVENUE
CARPINTERIA, CA 93013
RE: Tree Maintenance Services performed by WCA, Inc.
Dear Mr. Ilasin,
As we approach the end of the current contract year, West Coast Arborists, Inc. would like to take this opportunity to convey our sincere gratitude to you and your staff for another successful year. Together, we have worked diligently to maintain the integrity, health and preservation of the community's urban forest.
The purpose of this letter is to express our interest in continuing with the agreement for an additional year with a slight adjustment in cost. The adjustment is a result of Consumer Price Index (CPI) changes and increased labor costs as determined by the California Department of Industrial Relations. We respectfully request a cost adjustment based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the area from the previous calendar year, as published by the Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics:
Effective Date:
CPI Adjustment Requested:
Region Area:
November 23, 2022
8.30%
West - Class 8/C
We appreciate your consideration in this matter and look forward to continuing our successful business relationship. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate to email me at [email protected] or call me at (800) 521-3714.
Sincerely,
Victor M. Gonzalez
Vice President, Business Development
RECEIVED
SEP- 0 2 2022
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
West Coast Arborists, Inc.
2200 E. Viet Burton · Anoheim, California 92806 · 714.991.1900 · 800.521.3714 · Fax 714.956.3745
CITY OF CARPINTERIA
Schedule of Compensation for Vear 2022 - 2023
Tree Maintenance Services performed by WCA, Inc.
Item Description Unit Proposed Prices
1 Grid/Annual/Park Prune Each $87.50
2 Service Request Prune Each $161.35
3 Biennial Chinese Elm Prune Each $161.35
4 Grid Palm Prune Each $87.50
5 Crown Reduction/Restoration Each $354.50
6 Palm Skinning Foot $21.65
7 Water Sprout/Sucker Removal Each $96.40
8 Tree & Stump Removal 0-6 DSH Each $258.00
9 Tree & Stump Removal 7-12 DSH Each $516.00
10 Tree & Stump Removal 13-18 DSH Each $774.00
11 Tree & Stump Removal 19-24 DSH Each $1,032.00
12 Tree & Stump Removal >24 DSH Each $1,547.60
13 Stump Only Removal 12-24 DSH Each $309.75
14 Stump Only Removal 25-36 DSH Each $509.00
15 Stump Only Removal > 36 DSH Each $638.00
16 Plant 24" Box Tree - city furnished Each $322.50
17 Plant 36" Box Tree - city furnished Each $1,032.00
18 Crew Rental - per worker Man Hour $87.50
19 Emergency Response Services - per man Man Hour $116.00 20 Arborist Services Man Hour $161.00
21 Tree Watering - per man Man Hour $80.80
22 Specialty Equipment Rental Hour $161.00
The proposed rates reflect a cost increase of 8.3% based on the Consumer Price Index for the West region for the previous 12 months. Upon approval by the City, the prices will be effective 11/23/22 and valid through 11/22/23.
Printed on: 8/30/2022 10-s~ 28 AM Page 2 of 2
City of Carpinteria
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
November 14, 2022
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Approval and adoption of Urgency Ordinance No. 761, amending Ordinance No. 744 and superseding Ordinance Nos. 746, 749 and 754, extending the Temporary COVID19 Outdoor Business Permit Program to June 30, 2023 and notice of exemption findings for said Urgency Ordinance under the California Environmental Quality Act.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Approve and adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 761, extending the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program in order to allow businesses to operate in the City right-of-way and privately-owned outdoor spaces for supporting social distancing and economic recovery during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Sample Motion: I move to approve and adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 761, as read by title only. (Requires a roll-call vote and 415th approval)
BACKGROUND
On May 21, 2020, the COVID-19 Recovery Committee recommended for the City Council to enact temporary permit regulations order that allowed for essential and lower-risk businesses to use their private property outdoor spaces and the City right-ofway for limited business operations in a manner consistent with the health orders of the County of Santa Barbara Health Officer in order to support the businesses during the COVID-19 pandemic. On May 26, 2020, the City Council approved urgency Ordinance No. 744, which established the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program for allowing limited business operations in the City right-of-way and privatelyowned outdoor spaces as well as waiving the related City fees for the permits.
At its meeting of May 10, 2021, the City Council approved urgency Ordinance No. 746, which amended urgency Ordinance No. 7 44 as the first extension of time for the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program. At its meeting of November 22, 2021, the City Council approved urgency Ordinance No. 749 amending urgency Ordinance No. 7 44 as the second extension of time. At its meeting of April 25, 2022, the City Council approved urgency Ordinance No. 754 amending urgency Ordinance No.
Ordinance No. 761, Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program Extension November 14, 2022
744 as the third extension of the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program until December 31, 2022.
Since the beginning of the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program, ten (10) permits were issued for business operations in the City right-of-way. TwentyOne (21) permits were issued for business operations in privately-owned outdoor spaces.
The purpose of this agenda matter is for the City Council to consider and act on a fourth Urgency Ordinance No. 761, extending the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program to June 30, 2023.
DISCUSSION
Under the provisions of Ordinance 744, as amended most recently by Ordinance No. 754, the term of the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program sunsets pursuant to the following provision:
Section 11. Effective Date and Termination. This Urgency Ordinance shall become effective immediately and shall remain in effect until 11 :59 pm on December 31, 2022, or it is terminated by the City Council." The purpose of the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program is to enable the public to engage in business activity while practicing effective social distancing. Although COVID-19 cases continue to decline within the County 1 and
mandatory COVI D-19 restrictions such as masking mandates and restrictions on events and public gatherings have been lifted statewide, the unpredictable nature of the COVID-19 virus and anticipated increases in travel, including holiday travel, and events raises concerns about the spread of COVI D-19. Recognizing the improving conditions surrounding COVID-19 while acknowledging ongoing risks, the Governor recently announced the intention of ending the COVID-19 State of Emergency on February 28, 2023, following a potential increase in cases this winter. 2 Extending the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program would continue to promote minimizing the risk of spreading COVID-19 and to facilitate additional economic activity by allowing businesses to operate outdoors. Further, it is recognized that commercial activity and businesses are essential to a vibrant and healthy community, and this Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program provides flexibility to local businesses to re-open and remain open while protecting the health, 1 As of November 8, 2022, the community transmission level of COVI D-19 in Santa Barbara County is categorized as "low" based on the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) indicators and statewide declining COVID-19 cases and hospitalizations. The current COVID-19 pandemic status follows a major surge and peak in the COVID-19 case rate countywide that was observed between December 2021 and February 2022 due to the emergence of a new, highly transmissible Omicron variant of COVID19 as well as subsequent surges in response to other COVID-19 variants. 2 Office of Governor Newson, Governor Newsom to End the COVID-19 State of Emergency (Oct. 17, 2022) https://www.gov.ca.gov/2022/10/17 /governor-newsom-to-end-the-covid-19-state-of-emergency/ Ordinance No. 761, Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program Extension November 14, 2022
safety, and welfare of members of the public during and following the COVID-19 pandemic.
If adopted by the City Council, Ordinance No. 761, as shown in Attachment A, would amend Section 11 of Ordinance No. 744 to read as follows:
Section 11. Effective Date and Termination. This Urgency Ordinance shall become effective immediately and shall remain in effect until 11 :59 pm on June 30, 2023, unless earlier terminated by action of the City Council.
Ordinance Nos. 746, 749, and 754 would be superseded by Ordinance No. 761.
Ordinance No. 761 also makes a clarifying change to the definition of the "Director of Emergency Services" in order to clarify that the City Manager, or his/her designee, will continue to administer the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program following the termination of the Proclamation of Local Emergency for the COVID-19 Pandemic. Ordinance No. 761 includes findings in support of the program extension and the basis for adoption as an urgency matter.
Downtown "T" Parklet Regulations:
On November 22, 2021, the City Council authorized staff to initiate the drafting of an ordinance concerning a permanent Downtown 'T' Parklet regulations for allowing "parklet" style outdoor seating areas within the City right-of-way. Drafting of the regulations is in progress. In brief, the following major public outreach milestones are completed to date:
March 2022- Public workshop for the Downtown "T" businesses June 2022- Public Facility Site Acquisition/Development Committee Meeting July 2022- Architectural Review Board Meeting
October 2022- Public Facility Site Acquisition/Development Committee Meeting It is anticipated for the Planning Commission as the next major public outreach milestone to be completed in December 2022.
Extending the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program would allow additional time for to finalize the Downtown "T" Parklet regulations for the City Council's consideration, which is anticipated for January 2023. Should the Downtown "T" Parklet regulations be approved by the City Council before the expiration of the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program, staff could begin processing encroachment permit applications for parklets. In the meantime, extension of the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program would allow permittees to continue with their temporary outdoor business in the City's right-of-way or private property.
Extending the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program to the end of this fiscal year (i.e. June 30, 2023) is based on (1) the expectation that economic recovery needs of local businesses will continue during the COVID-19 pandemic and Ordinance No. 761, Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program Extension November 14, 2022
Page4
extend beyond the end of the pandemic-related local and state emergency declarations; (2) input from permit holders concerning customer needs and expectations; (3) the desire to provide the City Council and Planning Commission additional time to consider the proposed Downtown 'T' Parklet regulations; and (4) the need for sufficient time for the proposed Downtown "T" Parklet regulations to be implemented, if approved,) in order to allow time for a business to obtain a permit for a parklet.
POLICY CONSISTENCY
The establishment of regulations necessary to address risks to public health and safety are an inherent part of the City's police powers as well as a fundamental part of the City's authority for operating during the current disaster/emergency and recovery concerning the COVI D-19 pandemic.
FINANCIAL CON SI DE RATIONS
The City Council waived the fees of the Temporary COVID- 19 Outdoor Business Permit Program. Should the City Council approve and adopt urgency Ordinance No. 761, the waiver of fees would continue. Staff would also continue to administer the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program with no additional cost.
LEGAL AND RISK MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
The City is authorized to adopt rules and regulations to protect public health and safety during a state of emergency, including but not limited to, Government Code Sections 8558 and 8630, et seq., Health and Safety Code Section 101080, Vehicle Code Section 22507, and Chapter 2.40 of the Carpinteria Municipal Code.
This Ordinance is proposed to be adopted as an urgency ordinance pursuant to Government Code Section 36937. An ordinance adopted under Government Code Section 36837 takes effect immediately when it is related to preservation of public peace, health, safety, or containing a declaration of facts constituting the urgency and is passed by a four-fifth (415th) vote of the City Council.
OPTIONS
1. Approve and adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 761. (Staff recommendation)
2. Approve with amendment(s) and adopt Urgency Ordinance No. 761.
3. The City Council could choose to not approve the recommendation and direct staff as determined appropriate.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
None.
Ordinance No. 761, Temporary COVI D-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program Extension November 14, 2022
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Ordinance No. 761
Staff contact:
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director
(805) 880-3402; [email protected]
Reviewed by:
Dave Durflinger, City Manager
(805) 755-4400; [email protected]
ATTACHMENT A
Ordinance No. 761
ORDINANCE NO. 761
AN URGENCY ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CARPINTERIA AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 744, AS AMENDED BY ORDINANCE NOS. 746, 749, AND 754 TO EXTEND THE TEMPORARY COVID-19 OUTDOOR BUSINESS PERMIT PROGRAM
TO ALLOW BUSINESSES TO OPERATE IN THE CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY AND OTHER
PRIVATELY-OWNED OUTDOOR SPACES TO ENCOURAGE SOCIAL DISTANCING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY FROM THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND SETTING
FORTH THE FACTS CONSTITUTING SUCH URGENCY
WHEREAS, Government Code Sections 8558 and 8630, et seq., Health and Safety Code Section 101080, and Chapter 2.40 of the Carpinteria Municipal Code ("CMC"), empower the City of Carpinteria ("City") Director of Emergency Services to make and issue rules and regulations on matters reasonably related to the protection of life and property during proclaimed local emergencies; and WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom declared a state of emergency to make additional resources available, to formalize emergency actions already underway, and to help prepare the effects of the Novel Coronavirus ("COVID19") pandemic; and WHEREAS, on March 11, 2020, Governor Newsom and California Department of Public Health ("CDPH") officials recommended that non-essential gatherings should be postponed or cancelled statewide until the end of March in order to implement social distancing guidelines intended to protect all individuals, particularly those who are at high risk of severe illness from the COVI D-19 virus, and to slow further spread thereof; and
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2020, the County of Santa Barbara ("County") Health Officer declared a local health emergency exists countywide due to an imminent and proximate threat to public health, within the meaning of Health and Safety Code Section 101080, by the introduction of the COVID-19 virus and directed cities countywide to implement Governor Newsom's social distancing guidelines; and WHEREAS, on March 16, 2020, Governor Newsom declared in Executive Order N-28-20 that the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have been significant and could threaten to undermine Californians' housing security and the stability of California businesses; and
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, the CDPH and County Public Health Department directed all bars, nightclubs, pubs, breweries, and wineries to close immediately as well as restaurants and other food facilities offering onsite dining should immediately transition to only offering delivery or take-out service as part of the public health effort to slow the spread of the COVID-19 virus; and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, the City Director of Emergency Services issued a Proclamation of Local Emergency by the Director of Emergency Services for the COVID-19 pandemic ("Proclamation"); and
Ordinance No. 761
WHEREAS, the City's Proclamation was found necessary and ratified by the City Council at its regular meetings on March 23, 2020, via adoption of Resolution No. 5954, and re-ratified by the City Council on April 13, 2020, via adoption of Resolution No. 5954, May 13, 2020, via adoption of Resolution No. 5969, June 8, 2020, via adoption of Resolution No. 5980, June 22, 2020, via adoption of Resolution No. 5985, and July 13, 2020, via adoption of Resolution No. 5989, in order to utilize all resources necessary to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic and receive any state and/or federal funds that may be available; and
WHEREAS, the Proclamation invokes in the City all powers and mechanisms set forth in the California Emergency Services Act (Government Code sections 8550, et seq.), City ordinances and resolutions, and all other applicable state and federal laws to be used by authorized City personnel; and
WHEREAS, on March 19, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N33-20 for all individuals living in the State of California ("State") to stay home or at their place of residence, except as needed to maintain continuity of operation of federal critical infrastructure sectors and additional sectors as the State Public Health Officer may designate as critical to protect health and well-being of all Californians (hereinafter called "essential businesses"); and
WHEREAS, many events countywide were and continue to be canceled, postponed, or implement social distancing due to the orders and recommendations at all levels of government to restrict large gatherings amid concerns over the spread of the COVID-19 virus, and these cancellations, postponements and social distancing cause a loss in revenue for the associated vendors, organizations and businesses, loss of income for the people who would have staffed the events, as well as lost revenue for surrounding local businesses that rely on such events to bring patrons to their businesses; and
WHEREAS, many businesses citywide were either not permitted to remain open or required to severely restrict activities, causing significant adverse financial impacts.
Also, State and County heath orders and guidance calling on residents to stay at home and implement social distancing continues to result in a severe decline in consumer spending and tourism, which has had significant negative impacts on revenue for most small businesses in Carpinteria; and
WHEREAS, on May 4, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-60- 20, which is incorporated herein by reference, to allow re-opening of lower-risk business and spaces (hereinafter called "lower-risk businesses") in Stage Two of the State's Resilience Roadmap subject to certain limitations. On May 8, 2020, the County Health Officer issued County Health Officer Order 2020-8.1, which further clarified the lowerrisk businesses eligible to be open for limited operations countywide; and WHEREAS, on May 18, 2020, the City Council enacted Resolution No. 5977 establishing requirements for wearing face coverings at certain places and in certain circumstances as an additional health protection measure in response to the COVID-19 Ordinance No. 761
pandemic in order to protect the public health and safety of members of the public; and WHEREAS, on May 21, 2020, the County Health Officer issued County Health Officer Order 2020-8.2, which allowed essential businesses and lower-risk business that may remain open with modified operations and social distancing to open or open more fully with self-certification. Although the State and County entered Stage Two of the State's Resiliency Roadmap, which loosened some public health and safety restrictions and allowed essential and lower-risk businesses to re-open with certain protections in place, these businesses remained severely restricted and experienced corresponding significant adverse financial impacts; and
WHEREAS, on May 26, 2020, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 744, enacting the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program ("Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program") to allow business to operate in the City's right-of-way and in other privately-owned outdoor spaces to encourage social distancing and economic activity during the COVID-19 pandemic; and WHEREAS, on August 28, 2020, Governor Newsom announced the Blueprint for a Safer Economy Plan, which replaced the State's Resilience Roadmap and established new guidelines for business operations to encourage social distancing and economic activity during the COVID-19 pandemic; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program, adopted via Ordinance No. 744, has assisted businesses to continue economic activity during the COVI D-19 pandemic; and WHEREAS, on May 10, 2021, the City Council approved and adopted urgency Ordinance No. 746, amending Ordinance No. 744, extending the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit to remain in effect until 11 :59 pm on December 31, 2021; and WHEREAS, on November 10, 2021, the City Council approved and adopted urgency Ordinance No. 749, amending Ordinance No. 744 and superseding Ordinance No. 746, extending the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit to remain in effect until 11 :59 pm on June 31, 2022; and
WHEREAS, on January 10, 2022, a peak in the community case rate of COVID19, was observed in the County due to the spread of a the significantly more transmissible SARS-CoV-1 B.1.1.529 "Omicron" variant of COVID-19; and WHEREAS, on February 7, 2022, the California Department of Public Health updated their guidance for the Use of Face Masks to take effect on February 16, 2022, requiring unvaccinated person to wear masks in all indoor public settings, requiring universal masking in only specified settings, and recommending continued indoor masking when the risk may be high; and
WHEREAS, on February 16, 2022, the County Health Officer issued County Health Officer Order 2022-10.1 Superseding and Replacing Health Officer Order No.
Ordinance No. 761
Page4
2022-10, which requires unvaccinated person to wear masks in all indoor public settings, requires universal masking only in specified settings and recommends continued indoor masking when risk may be high consistent with CDPH guidance; and WHEREAS, as of April 15, 2022, the COVID-19 case and hospitalization rates in the County have declined and community transmission was categorized as "Low" based on the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's ("CDC") indicators; and WHEREAS, on April 25, 2022, the City Council approved and adopted urgency Ordinance No. 754, amending Ordinance No. 744 and superseding Ordinance Nos. 746 and 749 extending the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit to remain in effect until 11 :59 pm on December 31, 2022; and
WHEREAS, as of November 8, 2022, the COVID-19 case and hospitalization rates in the County have declined and community transmission was categorized as "Low" based on the CDC indicators;
WHEREAS, COVID-19 case and hospitalization rates the County may rise at any time, especially given the anticipated increase in travel and events during the winter season, that may require further social distancing measures and impact local businesses; and
WHEREAS, on Governor Newsom announced that the COVID-19 State of Emergency will end on February 28, 2023 to give the health care system flexibility to handle any potential surge in cases occurring after holidays; and WHEREAS, the City retains authority under its policy powers and Vehicle Code Section 22507 to continue implementation of the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit program to promote economic development and social distancing after the end of the Governor's proclaimed COVI D-19 State of Emergency; and WHEREAS, the continuation of the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program remains necessary to provide businesses with opportunities to encourage social distancing and to promote economic recovery from the negative impacts resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and its variants that may extend beyond the Governor's State of Emergency; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has initiated the development of a proposed permanent permit program to allow for "parklet" style outdoor seating areas in the City right-of-way; and
WHEREAS, the continuation of the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program would allow the Planning Commission and City Council additional time to consider the proposed permanent "parklet" program and receive public input about said permanent "parklet" program; and
WHEREAS, if the proposed permanent permit "parklet" program is approved, the Ordinance No. 761
City and businesses will need sufficient time to implement the permanent permit program to allow businesses to obtain permits and construct "parklets" under the permanent "parklet" program prior to dismantling their current temporary outdoor spaces; and
WHEREAS, the continuation of the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program provides the opportunity for the City to consider development of the proposed permanent program and businesses to continue to operate in outdoor areas under the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program until the City can consider approval of the permanent program and, if approved, implement the permanent program within the City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council recognizes that the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program must be flexible and responsive to changing conditions associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, the state of emergency, or governmental response, including modifications to public health and safety directives, social distancing guidance, and business operation conditions, in order to effectively achieve the dual public health and safety and economic goals of the City during and following the COVID-19 pandemic.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARPINTERIA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Incorporation of Recitals. All the recitals set forth above are true, correct, and valid, and are hereby incorporated and adopted as findings of the City Council as though fully set forth herein.
Section 2. Findings. The Council hereby finds, determines and declares that this Urgency Ordinance adoption pursuant to Government Code Section 36937 is necessary because:
A. Commercial activity and businesses are essential to a vibrant and healthy community, and this Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program provides flexibility to local businesses to re-open and remain open while protecting the health, safety, and welfare of members of the public during and following the COVID-19 pandemic; and
B. Without the amendment and extension of the Urgency Ordinance, there is an increased risk of a substantial impact to local businesses, causing further disruption by delaying local economic recovery, and imperiling the lives or property of inhabitants of the City; and
C. The Downtown 'T' Encroachment Permit Program was established for local businesses within the Downtown "T" in order to apply for a permit to conduct certain business operations within the City right-of-way, which provided a framework for the portion of the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program applicable to the City right-of-way and other privately-owned property, but requires certain Ordinance No. 761
modifications to streamline the approval and implementation of permits with all due speed during and following the COVID-19 pandemic; and
D. CMG Chapter 14.64 establishes a temporary use permit to allow businesses to engage in temporary uses on privately-owned property that provides a framework for the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program applicable to privately-owned property, but requires certain modifications to streamline the approval and implementation of permits with all due speed during and following the COVID-19 pandemic; and
E. The City Council recognizes the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program may continue to require that certain temporary exceptions to the requirements of CMG Chapter 12.02, the Downtown ''T'' Encroachment Permit Program, and CMG Chapter 14.64 may be necessary, as determined by the Director of Emergency Services and City Manager through, additional rules and regulations, as described in Section 6 herein; and
F. For the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety, the Council finds that it is necessary to adopt this Urgency Ordinance amending Ordinance No. 744, as amended by Ordinance Nos. 746, 749, and 754 that established the Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program, for all of the reasons set forth in the recitals above, which and are incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3. Urgency Need. Based on the foregoing recitals and findings, all of which are deemed true and correct, this Urgency Ordinance is needed for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety. This Urgency Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption in accordance with the provisions set forth in Government Code Section 36937.
Section 4. Amendment.
A. This Urgency Ordinance hereby amends and supersede Section 4.A to read as follows:
"A. "Director of Emergency Services" has the same meaning as specified in CMG Chapter 2.40, including his/her designee(s), and refers to the City Manager, including his/her designee(s), following the termination of the Proclamation of Local Emergency for the COVID-19 Pandemic.
B. This Urgency Ordinance hereby amends and supersedes Section 11 of Ordinance No. 7 44 to read as follows:
"Section 11. Effective Date and Termination. This Urgency Ordinance shall become effective immediately and shall remain in effect until 11 :59 pm on June 30, 2023, or it is terminated by the City Council."
This Urgency Ordinance hereby also supersedes and replaces urgency Ordinance Nos.
Ordinance No. 761
746, 749 and 754 with respect to Section 11 of Ordinance No. 744.
Section 5. Scope. Except as expressly amended and superseded by this Urgency Ordinance, all other sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases or words of Ordinance No. 744 remain in full force and effect.
Section 6. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this Urgency Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid and/or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Urgency Ordinance or Ordinance No. 744.
Section 7. Effective Date. This Urgency Ordinance shall become effective immediately.
Section 8. Environmental Determination. The City Council finds that the adoption and implementation of this urgency Ordinance are exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") under CEQA Guideline Section 15061 (b)(3) in that the City Council finds there is no possibility that the implementation of this resolution may have significant effects on the environment. The urgency Ordinance would amend Ordinance No. 744, that established a Temporary COVID-19 Outdoor Business Permit Program, similar to existing permit processes, which is solely an administrative process resulting in no change to the environment.
SECTION 9. Publication. The City Clerk is directed to cause this urgency Ordinance to be published in the manner required by law.
Ordinance No. 761
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED on November 14, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
NOES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
Mayor, City of Carpinteria
ATTEST:
Brian C. Barrett, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk, City of Carpinteria
I hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carpinteria held on November 14, 2022.
Brian C. Barrett, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk, City of Carpinteria
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Jena S. Acos, on behalf of Brownstein
Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP acting as
City Attorney of the City of Carpinteria
City of Carpinteria
COUNCIL AGENDA STAFF REPORT
November 14, 2022
ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
Acceptance of the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Accept the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan.
Sample Motion: I move to accept the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan.
BACKGROUND
Consistent with federal, state, and local public health recommendations for curbing the spread of the COVID-19 virus in 2020, many people relied on broadband services in order to telework, participate in school, and socialize with friends and family while remaining socially distant. The COVID-19 pandemic made the digital divide in unserved and underserved communities more apparent as work, commerce, health, and other services have moved online. Those in unserved and underserved communities were struggling to participate in the digital landscape as broadband services are unavailable to them due to lack of affordability or infrastructure. Further, the state identified a need for improving broadband infrastructure in order to:
1. Encourage new broadband service providers to enter the marketplace in order to improve competition
2. Build redundancy of connection for improved resiliency and disaster recovery
3. Increase overall capacity for local broadband service in support of economic development and enhanced telework infrastructure.
In order to address these needs, a broadband infrastructure was identified as an essential service. In July 2021, the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) formed the Broadband Ad-hoc Committee, which comprises of SBCAG board members Nelson and Hartman (County), Osborne (Lompoc), Patino (Santa Maria) and Perotte (Goleta). The Broadband Ad-hoc Committee formed the basis of SBCAG Board of Directors' support and encouragement to formalize a collaborative, regional approach to developing a broadband strategic plan between SBCAG, County of Santa Barbara and the eight incorporated cities.
Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan
November 14, 2022
On October 21, 2021, the SBCAG Board of Directors authorized its Executive Director to request for participation from the eight cities, including the City of Carpinteria, in the preparation of the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan. In October 2021, the County of Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors also committed $200,000 from the County of Santa Barbara's share of the America Rescue Plan Act.
The SBCAG Board of Directors proposed dividing the remaining cost among the eight cities based on the 2021 California Department of Finance population estimate to the cities' collective population of 307,821. See Table 1 below for the jurisdiction contributions based on population.
Buellton
---------
Carpinteria 13,196 _ 4.29% $8,573.81
--------- ----------j
Goleta 32,339 10.51% $21,011.56
-- - --~-ou_ma:_:-;-=-p_e~-- :
9 :
3,o
::
ss
3 -1
~;
0.2 ~~
3%
~ ~~ :
$6
~~
0 ~
_,~
~
60.46 I
107,445 34.91% $69,810.05 1
5,512 1.79% $3,581.30
$200_,000.00 ----
5,435 1.77% _ _g,_§311]___ _
Santa Barbara
Santa Maria
Solvang
County 1
Total 307,821
Footnote:
1. In October 2021, the County of Santa Barbara Board of Supervisors committed $200,000 from the County of Santa Barbara's share of the America Rescue Plan Act funds. ---
----~j0Q,000.00 -
The City Council approved and authorized the City Manager to execute a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with SBCAG; County of Santa Barbara; and the other seven cities in the county for preparing the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan, as well as approved an appropriation of $8,600 for the City's financial co ntri b utio n.
1 The purpose of this agenda matter is for the City Council to accept the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan.
DISCUSSION
Public Outreach:
1 On November 8, 2021, the City Council approved the $8,600 appropriation. On July 25, 2022, the City Council approved and authorized the City Manager to execute a revised MOU with SBCAG; County of Santa Barbara; and the other seven cities.
Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan
November 14, 2022
Broadband Consortium Pacific Coast
2 , which is separately contracted with SBCAG to
prepare the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan in accordance with the MOU, conducted a public outreach campaign among the individual communities regionwide including with the Carpinteria community. For the Carpinteria community, a public forum was held in the auditorium of Carpinteria Children's Project on June 1, 2022. The public forum was moderated by Supervisor Das Williams, and the panelists were from Carpinteria Children's Project, Carpinteria Unified School District (CUSD), and The Zumaya Group. The following table is a summary of the public forum.
Carpinteria Children's Project Public Forum Summary (June 1, 2022) Challenges ► High cost of service ► Lack of awareness of affordability programs ► Multi-family homes: inability to access service per individual or family
► Inadequate training resources/lack of awareness of training resources
► Gap is caused by lack of access to modern technology
► Need training
► 65% of students qualify for reduced/free lunches
Opportunities ► CUSD installed Wi-Fi on school busses/vans ► Partnerships with providers (Connect to Compete)
► Digital Navigators and workshops
► Outreach opportunities
► Promotoras Network and digital navigators
Barriers ► Disproportionately impacts low-income neighborhoods ► Everything relies on the internet; Connectivity is required for quality of life
Recommended Strategies:
Based on input from the individual communities as well as the local agencies, a draft of the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan, as shown in Attachment A, was prepared by Broadband Consortium Pacific Coast. According to the plan, the common identifier in the Carpinteria community was affordability and access as the most significant barriers to broadband adoption. The plan identified the following strategies as recommendations in order to overcome such barriers:
1. Access (Capacity and Connectivity)
a. Continue development and availability of community Wi-Fi maintained by the City or in partnership with education and community centers. 2 Formed in 2014, Broadband Consortium Pacific Coast serves as an advocate for broadband deployment and adoption in the tri-county area of Ventura, Santa Barbara, and San Louis Obispo.
Broadband Consortium Pacific Coast is funded by the Rural and Urban Regional Broadband Consortia Grant Account of the California Advanced Services Fund, a program administered by the California Public Utilities Commission.
Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan
November 14, 2022
b. Seek grant funding to increase staffing capacity within City departments to work on broadband priorities.
2. Affordability and Adoption
a. A community Wi-Fi system would benefit those unable to connect due to cost. b. Support partnerships with the Digital Equity Coalition to expand awareness of the Affordable Connectivity Program.
3. Requirements for Redundancy and Resiliency
a. Continue to partner with SBCAG in regional coordination of the Golden State Connect Network and last-mile planning and implementation. b. Consolidate and create a complete asset inventory that could be utilized for broadband infrastructure deployment.
c. Prioritize smart city planning in the General Plan and develop necessary and corresponding policies.
On November 9, 2022, Broadband Consortium Pacific Coast presented the draft Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan to the Utilities Committee (Members Nomura and Lee). The Utilities Committee recommended for the City Council to accept the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan.
Next Steps:
The next steps of the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan would be as follows within the respective tentative time frames:
2023 Quarter 1
1. Determine feasibility of recommendations
2. Develop priorities and approach
3. Meet with internet service providers (ISPs) in order to gain insight into current infrastructure and planned future infrastructure
4. Participate in and support regional model of a Broadband Joint Powers Authority 2023 Quarter 3
1. Determine priorities
2. Determine grant opportunities for infrastructure
POLICY CONSISTENCY
The proposed City Council actions in support of a Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan can be found consistent with policies of the City's General Plan and Sustainable Community Policy, as described below.
Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan
November 14, 2022
General Plan
Public Facilities Element Objective PF-5: To provide a high quality and broad range of public services, facilities and utilities to meet the needs of all present and future residents of the Carpinteria Planning Area.
Implementation Policy PF-5d. Detailed master plans will be prepared for major facilities and service systems.
Implementation Policy PF-5e. The City will improve and extend services and facilities to the extent possible, within the limits of available funding.
Implementation Policy PF-5i. The City will maintain liaison with the agencies providing public services within the Planning Area.
Sustainable Community Policy
GOALS
Initiate and lead collaborative sustainability initiatives and communicate efforts to residents and business owners and operators, becoming a resource to the community.
ECONOMIC VITALITY
Promote a diversified and resilient local economy that reflects the unique attributes of the region and provides necessary and desirable products and services for both residents and visitors.
COMMUNITY HEAL TH, SAFETY AND WELLNESS
Improve the quality of life of all members of the community through education, services and accessibility to resources.
Implement programs which promote interactions and communication between neighbors, including internet-based social programs and local community groups.
Promote social equity which addresses the fair distribution of benefits and costs among different social and cultural groups, recognizing that these groups have different needs, interests, rights to and responsibilities over resources, and that they experience different impacts of development interventions which must be considered to build a solid base for sustainability and socio-environmental equity.
Cultivate inter-agency programs and regulations to support sustainable goals and objectives of this policy throughout the community.
Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan
November 14, 2022
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS
On November 8, 2021, the City Council approved an appropriation of $8,600 for the City's financial contribution in the preparation of the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan. There is no cost with accepting the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan.
The cost of implementing the recommendations of the broadband strategies is undetermined at this time. As one of the next regional steps, though, for implementation of the broadband strategies, is studying the financial feasibility. Other than the City Council's initial appropriation of $8,600, there is no other funding in the Fiscal Year 2022/23 Budget for further expenditures toward implementing the recommendations of the broadband strategies. However, funding for improving high-speed internet access across the nation was approved through the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and in California through legislation supporting the California Broadband Council's Broadband for All action plan. The Santa Barbara County Broadband Strategic Plan makes each community as grant-ready for federal and state funding.
LEGAL AND RISK MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS
The deliverable of the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan is in accordance with the MOU.
OPTIONS
1. Accept the Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan. (Staff recommendation)
2. The City Council could choose not to consider the recommendation and provide further direction to staff.
PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING
Broadband Consortium Pacific Coast
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan Staff contact:
John L. Ilasin, Public Works Director
(805) 880-3402; [email protected]
Reviewed by:
Dave Durflinger, City Manager
(805) 755-4400; [email protected]
ATTACHMENT A
Santa Barbara County Regional Broadband Strategic Plan
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Santa Barbara County Broadband Strategic Plan
FINAL DRAFT
1 List of Figures................................................................................................................................................ 4 List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................. 6 Glossary of Terms.......................................................................................................................................... 7 Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 9 Section 1: Introduction............................................................................................................................. 11 Section 2: Project Scope and Approach...................................................................................................... 13 Stakeholder Summary................................................................................................................................. 13 Methodology for Outreach and Data Collection ........................................................................................ 14 Crowdsourced data............................................................................................................................. 14 In-person community engagement .................................................................................................... 16 Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping tool data collection .................................................16 Section 3: Overview of Technologies.......................................................................................................... 18 The Broadband Concept & Architecture..................................................................................................... 18 Broadband Network Architecture....................................................................................................... 19 Transmission Mediums....................................................................................................................... 21 Broadband Technologies Overview ............................................................................................................ 22 Digital Subscriber Line (DSL) ............................................................................................................... 22 Data Over Cable Service Interface Specifications (DOCSIS)................................................................ 23 Fiber To The Home (FTTH) .................................................................................................................. 23 Fixed Wireless Access (FWA) .............................................................................................................. 24 Satellite ............................................................................................................................................... 25 Section 4: Current Status and Findings of Broadband in Santa Barbara County ........................................27 Santa Barbara Countywide Broadband Profile ........................................................................................... 27 County Overview................................................................................................................................. 27 Broadband Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................... 28 Santa Barbara County Unincorporated Area: Broadband Community Profile ...........................................33 Policy and Planning ............................................................................................................................. 38 Broadband Infrastructure ................................................................................................................... 39 Community Services Districts (CSDs) .................................................................................................. 40 Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) ...........................................42 Buellton: Broadband Community Profile.................................................................................................... 42 Community Overview ......................................................................................................................... 43 Broadband Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................... 44 2 Policy and Planning ............................................................................................................................. 46 Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) ...........................................47 Carpinteria: Broadband Community Profile ............................................................................................... 47 Community Overview ......................................................................................................................... 48 Broadband Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................... 48 Policy and Planning ............................................................................................................................. 50 Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) ...........................................51 Goleta: Broadband Community Profile....................................................................................................... 52 Community Overview ......................................................................................................................... 52 Broadband Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................... 53 Policy and Planning ............................................................................................................................. 55 Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) ...........................................56 Guadalupe: Broadband Community Profile................................................................................................ 57 Community Overview ......................................................................................................................... 57 Broadband Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................... 58 Policy and Planning ............................................................................................................................. 61 Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) ...........................................63 Lompoc: Broadband Community Profile..................................................................................................... 64 Community Overview ......................................................................................................................... 64 Broadband Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................... 65 Policy and Planning ............................................................................................................................. 67 Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) ...........................................68 Santa Barbara: Broadband Community Profile........................................................................................... 69 Community Overview ......................................................................................................................... 69 Broadband Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................... 71 Policy and Planning ............................................................................................................................. 73 Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) ...........................................74 Santa Maria: Broadband Community Profile.............................................................................................. 74 Community Overview ......................................................................................................................... 75 Broadband Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................... 76 Policy and Planning ............................................................................................................................. 78 Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) ...........................................81 Solvang: Broadband Community Profile..................................................................................................... 82 3 Community Overview ......................................................................................................................... 82 Broadband Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................... 83 Policy and Planning ............................................................................................................................. 85 Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) ...........................................86 Section 5: Assessment of Broadband Provider Landscape......................................................................... 87 Broadband Provider Landscape in SBC ....................................................................................................... 87 Changing Roles............................................................................................................................................ 89 Challenges in the Permitting Process.......................................................................................................... 89 Section 6: Regional GIS Map Data Portal.................................................................................................... 90 Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 90 Data Library and Map Development................................................................................................... 91 Recommendation: Maintain and Expand Usage of the Map Data Portal................................................... 92 Section 7: Strategic Priorities and Actions.................................................................................................. 92 Achieving Access Through Improved Broadband Infrastructure................................................................ 93 Characterize Broadband Network Needs ........................................................................................... 93 Broadband Operating Scenario........................................................................................................... 97 Accelerate Outcomes........................................................................................................................ 101 Achieving Affordability and Adoption....................................................................................................... 101 Support the Santa Barbara County Digital Equity Coalition .............................................................102 Leverage Federal and State Programs to Increase Adoption Rates..................................................103 Conduct a Last-Mile Pilot.................................................................................................................. 104 Achieving Redundancy and Resiliency ...................................................................................................... 105 Create a Regional Organization ........................................................................................................ 105 Identify and Prioritize Funding Opportunities.................................................................................. 107 Maintain Collaborative GIS Capability .............................................................................................. 107 Section 8: Opportunities and Benefits...................................................................................................... 108 Improve Safety and Security ..................................................................................................................... 108 Economic Development............................................................................................................................ 109 Achieving Digital Equity ............................................................................................................................ 111 Smart City Planning................................................................................................................................... 112 Aspects of a Smart City ..................................................................................................................... 112 Health, Safety, and the Economy...................................................................................................... 112 Smart City Vision............................................................................................................................... 113 4 Conclusion................................................................................................................................................. 113 Appendices................................................................................................................................................ 114 List of Figures
Figure 1: Hub and Spoke Model.................................................................................................................. 14 Figure 2: Santa Barbara County CPUC Broadband Map ............................................................................. 18 Figure 3: High-level overview of a Broadband Network............................................................................. 20 Figure 4: Evaluation of different transmission mediums for broadband networks ...................................22 Figure 5: DSL high-level architecture .......................................................................................................... 23 Figure 6: DOCSIS high-level architecture .................................................................................................... 23 Figure 7: FTTH high-level architecture........................................................................................................ 24 Figure 8: FWA high-level architecture ........................................................................................................ 25 Figure 9: Satellite system high-level architecture....................................................................................... 26 Figure 10: Broadband service availability in the County of Santa Barbara (CPUC Data)............................30 Figure 11: Population and Housing units Distribution (CPUC Data)........................................................... 30 Figure 12: Speed Tests across Santa Barbara County ................................................................................. 31 Figure 13: Speed Test results across Santa Barbara County....................................................................... 31 Figure 14: Age distribution of Survey Respondents.................................................................................... 32 Figure 15: Speed Test results across Cuyama Joint Unified School District................................................33 Figure 16: Speed Test results across College Elementary School District................................................... 34 Figure 17: Speed Test results across Los Olivos Elementary School District ..............................................34 Figure 18: Speed Test results across Los Alamos........................................................................................ 35 Figure 19: Speed Test results across Orcutt Union Elementary School District .........................................35 Figure 20: Broadband service availability in the City of Buellton ............................................................... 44 Figure 21: City of Buellton Speed Test results............................................................................................ 45 Figure 22: Broadband service availability in City of Carpinteria................................................................. 49 Figure 23: Speed Test results across the City of Carpinteria ...................................................................... 49 Figure 24: Broadband availability in the City of Goleta .............................................................................. 54 Figure 25: Speed Test results across the City of Goleta.............................................................................. 54 Figure 26: Broadband availability in City of Guadalupe.............................................................................. 59 Figure 27: Speed Test results across the City of Guadalupe....................................................................... 59 Figure 28: Charter Communications Fiber Map for City of Guadalupe ...................................................... 62 Figure 29: Caltrans Projects for City of Guadalupe..................................................................................... 63 Figure 30: Broadband service availability in the City of Lompoc................................................................ 66 Figure 31: Speed Test results across the City of Lompoc............................................................................ 66 Figure 32: Broadband service availability in the City of Santa Barbara...................................................... 71 Figure 33: Speed Test results across the City of Santa Barbara.................................................................. 72 Figure 34: Broadband service availability in the City of Santa Maria ......................................................... 77 Figure 35: Astound fiber network (shown in purple) ................................................................................. 79 Figure 36: Santa Maria Fiber Network........................................................................................................ 81 Figure 37: Broadband availability in City of Solvang................................................................................... 84 Figure 38: Speed Test results across the City of Solvang............................................................................ 84 5 Figure 39: ISP concentration map in Santa Barbara County (CPUC Data) .................................................. 89 Figure 40: Map Portal Tool showing suite of interactive tools................................................................... 92 Figure 41: Santa Barbara County Middle-Mile Vision................................................................................. 94 Figure 42: State of California Middle-Mile Broadband Initiative Planning .................................................95 Figure 43: Middle-Mile Broadband Delta Analysis ..................................................................................... 96 Figure 44: Last-Mile Broadband Delta Analysis (CPUC Data)...................................................................... 97 Figure 45: Ownership Model ...................................................................................................................... 99 Figure 46: Operating Model...................................................................................................................... 100 Figure 47: Hub and Spoke Model of governance and participation.........................................................107 Figure 48: Needs Assessment Results to the question, "Do you own a business?" .................................110 Figure 49: Needs Assessment Results to the question, "What impact would gigabit internet service have on your business?".................................................................................................................................... 110 6 List of Tables
Table 1: Broadband Service Definitions...................................................................................................... 12 Table 2: Number of Needs Assessment Surveys Sorted by Age Group ...................................................... 15 Table 3: Minimum Bandwidth For Typical Online Activities (FCC) ............................................................. 19 Table 4: Pros and Cons comparison of Last-Mile Technologies.................................................................. 26 Table 5: CPUC Broadband Service Definition.............................................................................................. 29 Table 6: Santa Ynez Community Services District Office Public Forum Themes.........................................36 Table 7: Los Alamos Men’s Club Public Forum Themes.............................................................................. 36 Table 8: Lakeview Jr. High School Public Forum Themes ........................................................................... 37 Table 9: Santa Barbara County Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment.............................................39 Table 10: Community Services District Assessment Questionnaire ........................................................... 41 Table 11: Oak Valley Elementary School Public Forum Summary .............................................................. 45 Table 12: City of Buellton Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment..................................................... 46 Table 13: Carpinteria Children’s Project Public Forum Summary............................................................... 50 Table 14: City of Carpinteria Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment ................................................51 Table 15: Goleta City Council Chamber Public Forum Summary................................................................ 55 Table 16: City of Goleta Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment........................................................ 56 Table 17: Guadalupe City Hall Public Forum Summary .............................................................................. 60 Table 18: City of Guadalupe Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment.................................................61 Table 19: Lompoc Adult School and Career Center Public Forum Summary..............................................67 Table 20: City of Lompoc Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment...................................................... 68 Table 21: Affordable Connectivity Program Eligibility and Enrollment Rates for City of Santa Barbara, sorted by Zip Code ...................................................................................................................................... 70 Table 22: La Casa de la Raza Public Forum Summary ................................................................................. 73 Table 23: City of Santa Barbara Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment............................................74 Table 24: City of Santa Maria Speed Test Results....................................................................................... 77 Table 25: City of Santa Maria Public Library (Downtown Branch) Public Forum Summary .......................78 Table 26: City of Santa Maria Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment...............................................79 Table 27: Solvang City Council Chambers Public Forum Summary............................................................. 85 Table 28: City of Solvang Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment...................................................... 86 Table 29: Santa Barbara County Residential Internet Service Providers.................................................... 88 Table 30: Last-mile deployment priorities in Santa Barbara County ........................................................ 97 Table 31: Broadband Scenarios Responsibilities Matrix........................................................................... 100 7 Glossary of Terms
Bandwidth: Capacity of a broadband connection, often a synonym for data transfer speed.
Broadband Service: The term “broadband service” means any technology identified by the Secretary (Secretary of Agriculture) as having the capacity to transmit data to enable a subscriber to the service to originate and receive high-quality voice, data, graphics, and video. (7 USC § 950bb(b)(1))
Broadband over Powerlines (BPL): Delivery of broadband over existing low and medium voltage electric power distribution network, with speeds comparable to DSL and cable modem.
Cable Modem: Provides broadband through same coaxial cables delivering television.
Community Anchor Institution: A public school, a public or multi-family housing authority, a library, a medial or healthcare provider, a community college or other institution of higher education, a State library agency, and any other nonprofit or governmental community support organization. (47 USC § 1721(6))
Connection speeds:
• Kilobit/Kilobyte: Kilobits per second (Kbps) is a measure of dial-up speed, where one Kb = 125 bytes. Kilobyte (KB) means 1,000 bytes and is a measure of storage capacity or data size. • Megabit/Megabyte: Megabits per sec (Mbps or Mb) is a measure of transmission speed, with a 1Mb connection being able to transfer 1MB (megabyte/MB) of data in 8 seconds. Megabyte is a measure of the size of computer files or capacity. 1MB = 1,000 KB. • Gigabit/Gigabyte: Gigabit is a unit describing data transfer speed, usually per second (Gbps).
Gigabyte describes the size of computer files and capacity. 1GB = 1,000 MB (megabytes) Dark fiber: “Unlit” or unused optical fiber available for use in fiber optic communication.
Devices that Connect to the Internet:
• Computer
• Tablet
• Smart phone
• Gaming consoles
• Smart televisions and appliances ie Alexa, Google Nest, Ring etc. • Point of sale devices
• Smart city applications ie water meters, traffic cameras, air quality sensors etc.
DSL: Wireless transmission technology transmitting over traditional copper phone lines already installed in homes/ businesses. Provides speeds from several hundred kilobytes per sec (Kbps) to million bits per second (Mbps). Availability/speed dependent upon distance from nearest phone company facility.
Fiber: Fiber optic technology converts signals carrying data to light and sends light through miniscule glass fibers. Far exceeds speeds of DSL or cable modem.
Incumbent service provider: The term “incumbent service provider”, with respect to an application submitted under this section, (for Federal grant funding), means an entity that, as of 8 the date of submission of the application, is providing broadband service to not less than 5 percent of the households in the service territory in the proposed application. (7 USC § 950bb(2))
Internet of Things: Network of objects, remotely controlled, with embedded electronics and sensors that share data. Can be anything from a smart thermostat to an internet-connected refrigerator.
Satellite: Wireless broadband delivered via satellite, usually to remote or rural locations. High speeds, but not yet available for enterprise connectivity.
Wireless Delivers high-speed internet using a radio link between customer location and service provider facility. Wireless broadband can be mobile or fixed:
• Wi-Fi: A wireless standard for forming local area networks and facilitating a connected network of devices.
• Bluetooth: A wireless data standard for transferring data over short ranges. • 3G: 3rd-generation mobile cellular technology, primarily used for voice and text messages and some slow (not broadband) data.
• 4G: 4th-generation mobile technology offering far superior mobile connection speeds and high-definition voice.
• 5G: 5th-generation mobile technology. Much faster than 4G, it adds capacity to the existing SG networks, and also supports large numbers of devices e.g. for the “Internet of Things” and “Smart Cities.”
• Middle-mile: The segment of telecommunications network infrastructure that connects major telecom (often international) networks, national or core networks to users in homes, schools, government, and businesses.
• Last-mile: The final leg of a telecommunications network that delivers telecom services to end users.
9 Executive Summary
The Santa Barbara County Broadband Strategic Plan (BSP) responds to the regional need for high-speed internet access, which was heightened during the COVID-19 pandemic when schools, businesses, public services, and health care support moved online and people started working from home. Gaps in access to reliable, affordable high-speed internet disenfranchise households by limiting their access to education, the workforce, health care, and democratic processes. The digital divide defines the gap between those with the capacity to use technology and those left out of opportunities provided by digital access. While Santa Barbara County has access to moderate levels of connectivity, all households, businesses, and public institutions would benefit from the faster and more reliable internet access broadband connections deliver.
Following the lead of the statewide Broadband for All initiative the project coupled quantitative research with community outreach forums and interviews to gather data that reveal opportunities for closing the digital divide across the county and in each of the eight municipalities. Assessment of countywide infrastructure resources and policies engaged stakeholders and MOU partners, and community conversations highlighted organizations improving affordable access and digital literacy. From infrastructure to end-user support, the plan provides a solution that guides Santa Barbara County’s efforts to address the digital divide through infrastructure projects and the formation of a Digital Equity Coalition .
Outcomes of the project identify recommended actions for each of the MOU partners at the local and regional level. Success of the strategy implementation requires local organizational priorities to align with regional efforts, primarily through the development of a Joint Powers Authority (JPA). Organizing local and regional work efforts maximizes staff capacity and financial resources to achieve the following:
• Design of broadband infrastructure that results in middle-mile networks and last-mile priorities that interconnect communities and households, to increase capacity, redundancy, and resiliency for disaster preparedness and to encourage industry competition.
• Advance digital inclusion work efforts to improve access to affordable broadband and the necessary tools and training to connect with the support of the Digital Equity Coalition.
• Provide guidance on important partnerships and roles including public sector policy considerations, private sector participation, anchor institution connectivity and community-based organization engagement and support.
• Maintain a Geographic Information System (GIS) that leverages public and project data to identify priorities for infrastructure projects, and several scenarios for organization and execution provide action steps for public and private efforts. 10 The Broadband Strategic Plan provides the imperative to plan for future digital requirements that enhance economic development opportunities, and support health, safety, and equity in our communities.
Funding to improve high-speed internet access across the nation has been approved through the federal Infrastructure and Jobs Act and in California through legislation supporting the California Broadband Council’s Broadband for All action plan. The Santa Barbara County Broadband Strategy Plan presents data and recommendations that make each community, and the county, grant-ready for federal and state funding resources to improve connectivity. During the development of the strategy, Local Agency Technical Assistance (LATA) grants were released and regional applications were submitted to support strategy implementation. As additional priorities are identified, the strategy provides the necessary support for future funding applications.
Digital equity is achieved when all members of a community have the capacity to use technology that enables them to fully participate in society, democracy, and the economy. 1 This
includes access to reliable and affordable high-speed internet, the necessary device to connect to the service, and training and technology support that is responsive to the user’s level of need.
The digital divide disproportionately impacts people of color, Indigenous peoples, households with low incomes, people with disabilities, people in rural areas, and older adults2 . The
Broadband Strategic Plan provides the data, resources, and recommendations to foster digital equity in the region and prepare for a future of connectivity that serves the Santa Barbara County community.
1 https://www.digitalinclusion.org/definitions/ , 2022 2 https://www.digitalinclusion.org/definitions/ , 2022 11 Section 1: Introduction
In October 2021, Santa Barbara County formed the Broadband Alliance of Santa Barbara County (the Alliance) to develop a countywide strategy to close the digital divide between households able to access and navigate the digital world and those without the capacity or knowledge to do so. The Alliance is a formal partnership between the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments, the County of Santa Barbara, and the cities of Buellton, Carpinteria, Goleta, Guadalupe, Lompoc, Santa Barbara, Santa Maria, and Solvang, the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians (Tribe), Broadband Consortium of the Pacific Coast (BCPC), and regional economic development organizations. State and Federal legislation approved funds for public sector response to increasing demand and need for broadband infrastructure. BSP funding comes from members of the Alliance and in part from American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds. This project was supported, in whole or part, by federal award number SLFRP5502 awarded to the County of Santa Barbara, SLFRP1758 awarded to the City of Santa Maria, and SLFRP1228 awarded to the City of Santa Barbara by the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
California formalized public response to the need for increased capacity in broadband infrastructure in 2010. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the growing digital divide, and access to affordable, reliable, high-speed internet became an indisputable necessity for households across the country. The California Broadband Council was established through legislation3 to promote broadband deployment in unserved and underserved areas of the State as defined by California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and to increase broadband adoption for the benefit of all Californians. In August 2020, Governor Newsom signed California Executive Order N-73-20 requiring the development of a California State Broadband Action Plan4 (CBAP) in response to COVID-19. State and Federal Legislation supporting broadband deployment and adoption followed in 2021, with funding earmarked for the public sector targeting governmental agencies that had historically only participated via local permitting activities. California's Senate Bill 1565 authorized Joint Powers Authorities (JPAs) to issue revenue bonds for the deployment of broadband infrastructure under the Broadband Loan Loss Reserve Fund (the Fund), established with $750 million intended to provide credit enhancements to finance local broadband infrastructure. New funding tools increase opportunities for public sector participation in broadband infrastructure development, either through public-private partnerships or alone. Public sector developments reach unserved and underserved communities efficiently, delivering increased capacity and addressing the need for redundancy and resiliency in infrastructure to address community safety concerns, increase community access and enhance future planning efforts toward smart city initiatives. 3 S.B. 1462 – Padilla
4 broadbandcouncil.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/68/2020/12/BB4All-Action-Plan-Final.pdf, adopted December 30, 2020 5 leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB156 12 CBAP targets specific imperatives for closing the digital divide:
• 100% connectivity for all Californians at minimum speeds of 100Mbps • Access to affordable broadband and devices to connect to the internet • Access to training, equipment, and support to enable the use of the internet BSP is aligned with CBAP imperatives and informed by multiple data collection methodologies. The plan identifies priorities for funding community access to high-performing internet at the personal, household, community, business, and systems levels to improve digital inclusion across the county with upgraded minimum speeds, ubiquitous connectivity, and access to digital training and support. While some areas of Santa Barbara County are well-connected, businesses, families, and students are affected by a lack of capacity and connection at an affordable cost. The Alliance is a regional leadership effort to develop a coordinated framework that improves efficiency as the county collectively works towards achieving digital equity.
In the world of broadband, there are multiple definitions for the “served” and “unserved” terminology.
This BSP document leans heavily on two standards. First, the CBAP definition, which considers an area to be “served” if service is available with a speed greater than or equal to 100/100 Mbps. The second is the CPUC definition, which defines 25/3 Mbps as the threshold to consider an area to be “served”. For reference, Table 1 presents both standards used in this report.
CBAP Definition CPUC Definition Speed (Downstream/Upstream) Served
Served
>= 100 Mbps / 100 Mbps
Underserved Between 100 Mbps / 100 Mbps
and 25 Mbps / 3 Mbps
Unserved Unserved Between 25 Mbps / 3 Mbps and
10 Mbps / 1 Mbps
Priority Unserved Priority Unserved < 10 Mbps / 1 Mbps
Table 1: Broadband Service Definitions
Unless otherwise stated, all references to “served” and “unserved” terminology will carry the CBAP definition. In general, CPUC references are contained within Section 4 in the context of presenting data provided by CPUC.
BSP serves as a guiding document and planning tool for stakeholders to elevate awareness of broadband needs, accelerate and improve planning efforts across the county and within communities, and provide data that will support applications for funding allocated to Broadband for All initiatives.
The strategic framework within this document offers an opportunity to pursue additional initiatives and engage with public and private partners to support community resiliency and growth. Jurisdictions within the county can utilize the data in this plan to apply for funding identified at State and Federal levels and provide an organized approach that aligns areas of need with public and private interests to create a regional response. Federal and State grants allocated to support the Broadband for All 13 initiative increasingly evaluate proposals on metrics that include collaboration between multiple entities. BSP highlights opportunities to leverage the collaborative potential established by the Alliance to make the Santa Barbara County region grant-ready to apply for these funds.
Section 2: Project Scope and Approach
The purpose of BSP is to address the planning needs of the region, encourage infrastructure investments in Santa Barbara County, and present models for investment opportunities made by internet service providers (ISPs), public sector investment, and a combination of public-private investment. The project scope used a regional context, aligning with CBAP and focused on identifying a middle-mile approach, last-mile priorities, policies and resources for broadband readiness, and future feasibility studies for the county and cities. Despite jurisdictional boundaries that can inhibit collaboration, regional analysis highlights the interdependent reliance on physical infrastructure shared by all communities.
Outreach and data collection processes were developed to identify areas of opportunity and priorities for achieving Broadband for All. Several methods were added beyond the project's original scope to meet community needs and gather accurate data reflecting communities’ stories. Engaging stakeholders in data collection and outreach efforts mirrored the regional approach and contributed to unique municipal stories and those of several unincorporated areas within the county. The outreach and data collection methods used in the study assessed the overall status of the digital divide within the county and contributed to the formation of the Santa Barbara County Digital Equity Coalition.
Stakeholder Summary
To develop the strategic plan, an MOU was executed among the current SBCAG JPA to cover the costs and expenses of the regional planning effort. This action also formalized the Broadband Alliance of Santa Barbara County, an alliance that can be built on to execute project implementation.
The SBCAG Ad-Hoc committee represented the core stakeholder group, comprised of two county supervisors and three city council members, providing an important interface between the project and the SBCAG board and serving as a conduit to city councils. The committee provided oversight and direction monthly and played a leadership role during the public forum process. The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) provided oversight and input into the project, and members were actively engaged in executing the project scope and related activities. The EconAlliance team, with support of Tribe staff, organized public forums within each city and in unincorporated areas of the county.
The project defines stakeholders as representatives of government, ISPs, local agency staff, and technical consultants who assisted in the review and oversight of project activities, including GIS mapping, grant writing, and inclusion strategies. SBCAG was the hub for all the activities. 14 Figure 1: Hub and Spoke Model
Interested parties include community organizations, businesses, and individuals whose input via the data collection process contributed to the project's outcomes and recommendations.
Methodology for Outreach and Data Collection
Data collection for the strategic plan followed an ambitious timeline through multiple stages. The project design utilized quantitative and qualitative methods to draw a comprehensive and inclusive reflection of Santa Barbara County’s current status and needs.
The consultant began the process by developing a communication plan to outline steps for community engagement; the goal of the engagement was to collect accurate data to inform local government prioritization of projects and to enable stakeholders to secure funding to help close the digital divide.
The communication plan captures each method of outreach and data collection and identifies the lead person(s) or organization responsible for the deployment of the method (see Appendix A). This approach allowed for expediency and overlap of work efforts due to the project's ambitious timeline.
Data collection methods were organized into three areas of effort:
1. Crowdsourced data
2. In-person community engagement
3. Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping tool data collection Crowdsourced data
Two separate platforms collected crowdsourced data using public access links on SBCAG’s Broadband Project webpage: a needs assessment survey and speed tests. 15 Media outreach efforts started in March 2022 and ran through May 2022 to promote data collection efforts and notify the community of public forums, seeking public participation in the needs assessment survey and speed testing through publicly posted links. Efforts included coordinated press releases and a presentation to county Public Information Officers (PIOs) and legislative teams representing government, the Tribe, and school districts. Media outreach plans were built on the collaborative nature of the project, using a unified voice to reach underrepresented communities through trusted community sources.
Needs assessment survey (available in English and Spanish) The needs assessment survey was developed within an online survey tool, Survey Planet, and hosted on the BCPC website. The needs assessment survey was launched in March 2022 and ran through July 1, 2022. Early in the process, ten community members could not take the survey; browser or security settings within their unique network negatively impacted access. Community members unable to participate online could call in to report their internet connection status.
The needs assessment survey incorporates a skip-logic that collected data from four unique groups:
Age Range Number of Surveys
Completed
13-18 58
19-65 635
65+ 515
Business Owners 68
Table 2: Number of Needs Assessment Surveys Sorted by Age Group The number of survey questions varied using skip logic associated with the age demographic; for example, surveys for the 13 – 18 age demographic incorporated specific questions about distance learning and device use before completing the assessment. If the respondent self-identified as a business owner or potential owner, the survey added questions about their business. In some cases, participants could opt out of questions or be taken directly to the end of the assessment. The time to take the test ranged from 5 to 15 minutes.
Of the 1,276 tests completed, 1,208 were utilized for analysis and incorporated into recommendation deliberations. In the final analysis, two demographic groups, ages 19-65 and 65+, were combined into one group. The business owner group accounts for differentiation between the total number of tests and unique analysis. Everyone aged 19 and older could participate in additional business owner questions; only 68 opted to complete the assessment. Complete needs assessment data analysis is in Appendix B.
Speed testing (available in English and Spanish)
The speed test was launched in March 2022 and will collect data until early 2023 using a product licensed by Breaking Point Solutions, LLC and marketed by GEO Partners, LLC6 . BSP incorporates data
collected from March 2022 through July 2022. Speed test data is a significant ongoing benefit to planning purposes; authorized users can access the mapping tool for high-level planning, assess fiber routes, and identify available grants for proposed projects. Data will assist the public sector in defining 6 geopartnersinc.com/
16 scopes of requests for proposals (RFPs) for the design and engineering of future projects. The total number of tests taken was 3,213 at 2,584 unique locations.
In-person community engagement
In-person meetings and forums provided a range of benefits to the project. Public forums engaged key stakeholders who serve local community sectors highly impacted by COVID-19. Forums assessed community needs, identifying barriers to achieving Broadband for All as outlined in CBAP. A project FAQ was developed for English and Spanish speakers and was distributed during the forums (see Appendix C).
The summary of the In-person community engagement is:
• SBCAG Ad Hoc committee held 7 meetings
• Technical Advisory Committee held 8 meetings
• Public forms totaled 12, with 5 of the forums providing Spanish interpretive services • Interviews and meetings with City staff, including formal and informal, approximately 50 in total • Interviews and meetings with internet service provider (ISP) staff, 15 in total • City Council presentations for a total of 7
• Informal meetings and webinars total over 100 hours
Three ancillary educational webinars were developed and sequenced according to each stage of the public engagement process of the project
March 4, 2022: Broadband Planning: A Conversation about Public-Private Partnerships.
Kaina Pereira, Senior Advisor of Business Development, GO-Biz Barbara Hayes, Chief Economic Development Officer, Rural County Representatives of California (RCRC) May 12, 2022: Broadband Planning: Benefits of a Countywide Programmatic EIR for Broadband Deployment.
Steve Monaghan, CIO and Agency Director for Nevada County Information and General Service Agency September 14, 2022: The Broadband Landscape: An Overview of the Current State of Funding and Considerations for Grants.
Megan Beresford, Director of Broadband Programs, Learn Design Apply Inc.
Interviews were conducted with City staff and ISP staff to identify barriers to deployment and steps to support the acceleration of infrastructure projects. Section 4, Current Status and Findings of Broadband in Santa Barbara County, and Section 5, Assessment of the Broadband Provider Landscape discuss key outcomes of these interviews. Presentations to city councils provided project updates and highlighted legislation and policy initiatives to consider in planning efforts related to infrastructure, public and private partnerships, and smart city planning.
Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping tool data collection Using the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) map as a baseline for identifying underserved and unserved areas of the county, the strategic plan collected data to assess potential gaps within the map. The data creates a framework for establishing priorities for future network design work by capturing the information within the project Geographic Information System (GIS) mapping tool to assist 17 in setting priorities and actions to achieve Broadband for All. Additional data from other reports and resources are identified in section 8 and Appendix D.
The Geographic Information System (GIS) is a Map Data Portal developed to guide future planning and can be used by public sector staff. Some data collected for BSP is incorporated into the GIS, along with speed testing and early research on the status of broadband needs in the county. The GIS is a project deliverable covered at length in Section 6. To align with the state’s data and identification of unserved and underserved, the project GIS uses the CPUC map (refer to Section 1, Table 1 for CPUC unserved/underserved definitions).
Additional GIS data layers correlate CPUC data and assist with expanding trusted local data to share at the state and federal levels. BSP uses the map and layers to analyze the status of broadband now and in the future. Data will assist communities with project prioritization, grant support, tracking and measurement, and identifying future opportunities to close the digital divide. 18 Figure 2: Santa Barbara County CPUC Broadband Map7
As the FCC releases updated maps from broadband providers (e.g., the “location fabric”), additional layers will be added to assist in the priority and planning process.
Section 3: Overview of Technologies
The Broadband Concept & Architecture
Broadband refers to telecommunications technologies that provide high-speed internet connections to end users: households, businesses, and anchor institutions. A broadband internet connection provides users with a faster and better internet experience than the dial-up connections common in the early history of internet connectivity.
The amount of information (data) a broadband network can transmit is commonly known as bandwidth.
Bandwidth is divided into downlink bandwidth (data received from the internet) and uplink bandwidth (data sent to the internet).
7 broadbandmap.ca.gov, 2020
19 Bandwidth is measured in bits per second (bps). Depending on the transmission medium (e.g., fiber optic or wireless signals), a broadband network can reach speeds from dozens to hundreds of Mega bps (Mbps) or even Giga bps (Gbps)1. A higher network bandwidth enables higher web surfing speed or higher video quality for streaming.
Broadband connectivity enables users to access advanced and better digital services, such as telehealth, E-Learning, remote working, videoconferencing, interactive gaming, and pervasive video monitoring.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has defined the minimum download bandwidth needed for adequate performance of typical online activities. Table 3 displays each activity with its corresponding bandwidth.
Activity Minimum download speeds
(Mbps)
General Browsing and Email 1
VoIP Calls Less than 0.5
E-learning 5 - 25
Telecommuting 5 - 25
File Downloading 10
Social Media 1
Streaming High Definition (HD) Video 5 - 8
Streaming Ultra HD 4K Video 25
Standard Personal Video Call (e.g., Skype) 1
HD Personal Video Call (e.g., Skype) 1.5
HD Video Teleconferencing 6
Table 3: Minimum Bandwidth For Typical Online Activities (FCC) Notably, the connection bandwidth available for broadband service is shared among all services being used simultaneously within a household or business. Thus, a broadband service must provide enough bandwidth to support a combination of services.
Broadband Network Architecture
An internet service provider (ISP) is a company that offers access to the internet. A link must be deployed between a customer premise and ISP’s Point-of-Presence (POP) to get the service.
Similar to other utilities (like water or electric services), there is no direct connection between the service provider and each user. Instead, a network is shared to aggregate connections from several houses, towns, and cities and direct them to the ISP.
Therefore, a broadband network is divided into segments. Each segment aggregates a larger number of connections and data volumes. These segments are the last-mile/access network, the middle-mile, and the backbone, as shown in Figure 3.
20 Figure 3: High-level overview of a Broadband Network Customer Premise:
Customer premise is the location where users make use of the internet. A customer premise can be a home, a business, an enterprise, or a community anchor institution.
The internet connection from the ISP is terminated at a Customer Premises Equipment (CPE), which provides users with local connections to access the internet, typically through a network cable or Wi-Fi connection.
Last-Mile/Access Network Segment:
The last-mile segment is closest to the customer and represents the connections from each customer premise to an access node. Each access node aggregates connections from multiple customer premises.
Compared to the rest of the network, this segment has the lowest bandwidth but enough to serve a specific number of customers based on bandwidth requirements. Last-mile segment costs can be high and will vary based on household density and distance from the access node.
Depending on bandwidth needs, economics, and geodemographic conditions, this segment can be implemented using different technologies, including:
• Digital Subscriber Line (DSL)
• Data Over Cable Service Interface Specifications (DOCSIS) • Fiber-to-the-Home (FTTH)
• Fixed Wireless Access (FWA)
• Satellite
Further description of these technologies is provided in the following section.
Middle-Mile Segment:
The middle-mile segment consists of the connections from each access node to an aggregation node.
Each aggregation node groups the connections of various neighborhoods or small towns. 21 A middle-mile link is commonly implemented using fiber optics due to its high bandwidth. However, there are situations where deploying fiber is not feasible. For example, when an access node is remote, or fiber deployment is too expensive. In these situations, the option is to use wireless microwave links.
Microwave links offer lower bandwidth than fiber links but enough to serve as a middle-mile solution in remote areas or as a redundant connection.
Backbone segment:
The backbone segment is a high-capacity network that interconnects ISP’s Points of Presence (PoPs) and datacenters. The backbone segment aggregates the traffic from large geographic regions such as medium and big cities or major towns. Thus, backbone links need much higher bandwidth than middlemiles as they transport massive amounts of data. Therefore, the backbone can only be implemented using fiber optics.
Transmission Mediums
Internet signals can be sent from one point to another using different transmission mediums.
Transmission mediums can be classified into two types: wired and wireless. Each medium will have characteristics that make it suitable for specific situations. The most common transmission mediums are summarized below:
• Copper wires. Also known as “twisted pair,” copper wires are used in legacy telephone systems.
The electrical signal travels in the form of electrical pulses along the cable. Generally, broadband networks that use existing copper wires require low investment. Some copper wire (e.g., G.fast) technologies can achieve hundreds of Mbps. However, the speed rapidly decreases with distance going from hundreds of Mbps at 1,000 ft to less than 20 Mbps for distances higher than one mile.
• Coaxial cables. These cables are used by most cable TV companies and also carry information in the form of electrical pulses. Coaxial cables transmit higher data rates than copper wires (dozens of Mbps). Copper and coaxial cables have the lowest cost and deployment effort since most of the passive infrastructure (cables) are already in place, and minimum upgrades (like user equipment) are required. However, copper and coaxial cables are susceptible to several issues, such as interference and heat, that can degrade the services. • Fiber Optic cables. These are thin cables made of glass the size of a human hair that transport data in the form of light pulses. Fiber optic access systems enable bandwidths from hundreds of Mbps to hundreds or even thousands of Gbps and transmission over long distances.
Importantly, distance and speed will depend on the transmission technology being used. Thus, fiber installed today can achieve higher bandwidths by upgrading the equipment, ensuring a future-proof network. The highest cost associated with fiber networks ranges from $40,000 to $80,000 or even $100,000 per mile. While the cost might seem high, the deployment of fiber provides robust, future-proof networks with high reliability and extremely high bandwidth. • Wireless media. Wireless technologies send data through the air in the form of electromagnetic waves. Wireless solutions are preferred when fiber/cable deployments are not feasible due to cost or construction/deployment restrictions. Current systems offer remarkably high speeds depending on the frequency band and technology. Wireless solutions can achieve hundreds of Mbps with the restriction that the access nodes need to be in high places to cover the areas that require service (commonly 10 to 50 meters structure). Common wireless technologies are 22 mobile communications (e.g., 4G, 5G), satellite, microwave, and Wi-Fi. The cost associated with wireless systems is lower compared to fiber. However, it can be dramatically increased if new infrastructure (like towers) should be constructed. These systems have considerable high reliability, only affected by severe weather conditions like heavy rain.
A summary of the essential attributes for each transmission medium is provided in Figure 4:
Figure 4: Evaluation of different transmission mediums for broadband networks Broadband Technologies Overview
While fiber technologies prevail in the middle-mile and backbone segment, there are various broadband technologies to implement the last-mile/access network segment. It is then important to review each of them and understand their reliability, costs, reach, and bandwidth characteristics. The most important technologies are described below.
Digital Subscriber Line (DSL)
DSL technology delivers broadband services through existing telephone copper lines, a DSL modem at the customer premise (acting as the CPE), and an access node that aggregates individual subscriber lines into a high-capacity link called DSL Access Multiplexer (DSLAM). DSL speeds will vary based on distance going from a few hundred Mbps at distances lower than 300 ft to 20-30 Mbps at distances higher than 0.5 miles.
Figure 5 shows a high-level network access architecture for the DSL technology. 23 Figure 5: DSL high-level architecture
Data Over Cable Service Interface Specifications (DOCSIS) This technology delivers broadband services through the coaxial cable used for cable TV. In the DOCSIS architecture, the CPE is referred to as the cable modem, and the access node is the Cable Modem Termination System (CMTS).
DOCSIS enables data speeds up to 1 Gbps with a maximum distance of 5 miles. However, the coaxial cable is usually shared with various subscribers, and the bandwidth decreases depending on the number of subscribers using the network simultaneously.
Figure 6 shows a high-level network access architecture for DOCSIS technology.
Figure 6: DOCSIS high-level architecture
Fiber To The Home (FTTH)
Fiber to the Home (FTTH) is a fiber-based access network. It allows a large number of subscribers to connect to the access node.
24 FTTH is usually implemented through a passive optical network (PON) in which the fiber cable from the access node is “split” to reach multiple subscribers. In this architecture, the CPE is known as Optical Network Terminal (ONT), and the access node is Optical Line Terminal (OLT).
Several standards enclose this technology. The XGS-PON standard is based on a 10-Gigabit-capable symmetric optical network. The XGS-PON network will deliver a downstream line rate of 9.95328 Gbit/s and an upstream line rate of 9.95328 Gbit/s per optical port, shared by up to 64, 128, or 256 subscribers.
In addition, an XGS-PON network supports a physical distance of up to 12.4 miles between the OLT and ONTs at customer locations.
Most Federal Grants consider FTTH the best solution to provide broadband services to rural and underserved areas. This preference is due to the high bandwidth achievable. Most deployments can achieve symmetrical connections up to 100 Mbps downlink and 100 Mbps uplink. FTTH can be deployed leveraging existing civil infrastructures such as electric poles and utility holes, significantly reducing the CAPEX.
Figure 7 shows a high-level network access architecture for the FTTH technology.
Figure 7: FTTH high-level architecture
Fixed Wireless Access (FWA)
There are various technologies to implement FWA, which uses wireless signals to distribute services to customer premises. The first solutions were based on Time-division Multiple Access (TDMA) systems.
However, due to the expansion and popularization of mobile communications, technologies such as 4G and 5G have been adopted for FWA.
Wireless signals are transmitted from antennas installed at the top of high towers or buildings and received using CPEs located outside the customer premise. It leverages infrastructures like water tanks or electric poles/towers.
25 FWA supports different bandwidths depending on the mobile technology used. The 4G technology can meet FCC broadband definition providing bandwidth up to 25 Mbps/3 Mbps per subscriber. Similarly, the 5G technology can meet USDA qualified broadband definition of 100Mbps/20 Mbps bandwidth.
FWA is commonly considered an alternative to FTTH when fiber deployment or maintenance is too expensive or when geographic constraints exist (e.g., irregular terrain, the presence of natural resources).
Figure 8 shows a high-level network access architecture for the FWA technology.
Figure 8: FWA high-level architecture
Satellite
Satellite broadband is another wireless-based access network technology. It is a high-speed bi-directional internet connection established via communications satellites. Quality, speed, and cost of satellite connections depend on the type of satellites and their orbits. Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites located between 2,000 and 200 kilometers above the earth can offer high speeds at reasonable costs.
In this case, the CPE consists of a Very Small Aperture Terminal (VSAT) that includes a parabolic antenna to connect to the satellite plus a home router. The satellite connects relays the connection to the satellite hub that connects directly to a backbone node or ISP PoP.
Satellite systems are an option for extremely remote locations where neither fiber nor microwave links can be deployed. However, high costs associated with satellite service, typical speeds of 25/3 Mbps, and latency (the delay in packets traveling many miles between the satellite and the CPE) tend to create a poor user experience.
26 Figure 9 shows a high-level network access architecture for the FWA technology.
Figure 9: Satellite system high-level architecture
Table 4 summarizes pros and cons of broadband technologies.
Table 4: Pros and Cons comparison of Last-Mile Technologies 27 Section 4: Current Status and Findings of Broadband in Santa Barbara County
In Santa Barbara County, the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for additional broadband capacity, just as it did across the country. Increased demand for infrastructure impacted reliability, and many users lacked access to adequate internet service and devices. School districts became first responders in this crisis, keeping students and teachers connected via hotspots and providing computers. The need for additional capacity in northern Santa Barbara County had been identified prior to the pandemic by several cities, the county, and economic development organizations, including the Economic Alliance Foundation (EconAlliance), regional Chambers of Commerce, and the Economic Development Collaborative (EDC). The Tellus Ventures’ 2020 California Broadband Infrastructure Report Card assigned the County of Santa Barbara a "D" rating due to the lack of private sector competition (full report in Appendix E). Ratings were assessed if jurisdictions had at least one wireline provider that met the minimum standard of 100Mbps download and 20Mbps upload speeds based on CPUC and FCC data collected from ISPs as of December 2018.
During the outreach and data collection process, questions were presented to the county, cities, and several unincorporated areas to assess their alignment with best practices in broadband policy. A list of summary questions was developed from the statewide resource, Getting Connected: A Broadband Deployment and Adoption Resource Guide for Local and Regional Government Leaders8 . The county and
cities were presented with high-level policy questions, and full responses can be found in Appendix F.
Broadband Policy and Planning summary tables are provided with red, yellow, and green assessments. A red marking suggests there is work to do; yellow suggests work is in process or a partial adoption of best practices; green suggests that the best practice is in place and in alignment with broadband readiness.
Community forum summaries are presented in tables, community themes are identified, and an opportunities section for each community includes action items suggested to align with Broadband for All goals.
Santa Barbara Countywide Broadband Profile
County Overview
Municipality
Population
Size
Median
Age
Geographic
Footprint Major Industries
County 448,229 33.8 3789 sq mi
Professional, Scientific &
Technical Services,
Accommodation & Food
Services, Health Care & Social
Assistance
Demographic data from U.S. Census Community Snapshot9
Located along California's coastline about 300 miles south of San Francisco and 100 miles north of Los Angeles, Santa Barbara enjoys a mild and sunny climate, with the Los Padres National Forest and the San 8 California Emerging Technologies Fund (CETF) and Valley Vision, 2021: cetfund.org/report/getting-connected-abroadband-deployment-and-adoption-resource-guide 9 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Santa_Barbara_County,_California?g=0500000US06083 28 Rafael Range running through a significant portion of the overall county footprint. The County of Santa Barbara is home to approximately 440,000 residents10. The county is known for its beaches and natural beauty and is home to a diverse economy of wine, tourism, agriculture, space, engineering, and education. The county is bordered on the north by San Luis Obispo County and the east by Ventura and Kern counties. State Highway 101 is the major transportation route. The county identifies, as do the communities, as having Northern and Southern regions.
The northern region economy is driven by agriculture, healthcare, higher education, and a growing technology hub supporting Vandenberg Space Force Base. There are five cities, with the largest city in the county, Santa Maria, serving as a hub for the extension of County offices headquartered in the southern region. Santa Maria is home to Allan Hancock College, ranked one of the five best community colleges in California and one of the top 120 community colleges in the nation11. The City of Lompoc neighbors the Vandenberg Space Force Base, a major regional employer. Some unincorporated communities in the northern region are very remote and isolated such as Cuyama, New Cuyama, and Ventucopa to the east and Casmalia to the west. Remote communities throughout the north are located in rugged terrain and isolated valleys where world-renowned Chardonnay and Pinot Noir grapes are cultivated, and remote tasting rooms dot the Santa Rita Hills. North county is home to the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians (Tribe). Their sovereign lands are in the Santa Ynez Valley, where the Chumash host a casino and a cultural center, serving as a major contributor and economic driver for the area.
The southern region starts at Gaviota and runs through Carpinteria at the county's southern border.
Much of the Gaviota coastline is unincorporated, with a mixture of outdoor recreation areas and large cattle ranches and orchards. There are fewer unincorporated communities in the southern part of the county, they are less remote, and the transition between cities and unincorporated areas is almost unnoticeable to the outside eye. In the hills outside of the city of Santa Barbara are the communities of Montecito and Summerland, and UC Santa Barbara is tucked away in unincorporated Isla Vista, adjacent to the city of Goleta. The local communities of the county's southern region are served by awardwinning Santa Barbara City College and several higher education institutions, including a major research center at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
Data analysis illuminates the County's policy and planning gaps, depicts current infrastructure, and details the BSP county outreach strategy, revealing opportunities to reach Broadband for All goals.
Unincorporated areas of the county play an important role in an overall strategy, including the role that Vandenberg Space Force Base and Community Services Districts are poised to play as anchor institutions in the countywide network.
Broadband Needs Assessment
This section aims to examine the broadband needs in Santa Barbara County. This analysis provides the basis for characterizing the county's needs and identifying potential focus areas to improve broadband connectivity.
Four main components inform the analysis of the current broadband status across the county:
• Broadband Service Availability
10 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Santa_Barbara_County,_California?g=0500000US06083 11 hancockcollege.edu/about
29 • Speed Test Results
• Needs Assessment Survey Results
• Community Stakeholders Forums
The following subsections present the most relevant results from the above components.
Broadband Service Availability
This subsection aims to examine broadband service availability in Santa Barbara County using the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) data as a baseline to identify served and unserved areas of the county.
The CPUC collects broadband availability datasets from the incumbent ISP in the area and uses numerous resources to validate the data integrity, including subscription data, public feedback, and test results submitted by the public. The CPUC defines the following terminology according to the Senate Bill SB-156 released in July 2021. An area is considered "served" if at least one ISP offers service in the area according to the service characteristics below.
CPUC Definition Velocity (Downstream/Upstream)
Served >= 25 Mbps / 3 Mbps
Unserved Between 25 Mbps / 3 Mbps and 10 Mbps / 1 Mbps
Priority Unserved < 10 Mbps / 1 Mbps
Table 5: CPUC Broadband Service Definition
Federal and State funding agencies have made recent changes to meet societal requirements to achieve digital equity. It is important to note that the data presented in this section follows the CPUC convention described in Table 5 above. Importantly, the BSP is aligned with CBAP objectives, establishing a minimum download speed of 100 Mbps. It is worth noting that minimum speeds are in the process of being redefined. As noted previously, CBAP targets 100/100 Mbps, and the USDA grant applications require planning targets of 100/20 Mbps.
As the data presented in this section is based on a lower CPUC standard, it will overstate the level and quality of broadband service in Santa Barbara County. Therefore, it must be viewed as a relative reference point for the broadband needs in the region.
The maps displayed below were created using the public CPUC information available via the GIS Map Data Portal. It is important to note that ISPs often use the "Maximum Advertised Speed" to report the download and upload speeds to the CPUC. However, these speeds are typically not achieved due to multiple factors, such as the number of simultaneous users and specific network conditions. 30 Figure 10: Broadband service availability in the County of Santa Barbara (CPUC Data) The maps above, combined with U.S. Census Bureau data, indicate that 7.9% of the Santa Barbara County population does not have access to 25/3 Mbps internet services, corresponding with the population within unserved and priority unserved areas. The following charts detail the distribution of population and housing units according to broadband service availability:
Figure 11: Population and Housing units Distribution (CPUC Data) Although most of the population is concentrated in Served Areas with at least one incumbent ISP that offers 25/3 Mbps services, the service may not be available to each location within these areas.
Furthermore, the pricing may be perceived as too expensive to adopt the service. 31 Finally, the analysis identifies Priority Unserved areas in remote communities such as Casmalia, Los Alamos, and Cuyama, which represent opportunities to partner in developing the last-mile network.
Speed Test Results
Speed test data is gathered through a product licensed by Breaking Point Solutions, LLC, and marketed by GEO Partners, LLC. The speed test was launched in March 2022 and will collect data until early 2023.
The available results provide insights regarding the current broadband service end customers receive.
A total of 2493 speed tests were collected between March 2022 and July 2022. Figure 12 displays the locations of the speed tests received.
Figure 12: Speed Tests across Santa Barbara County
The graphics in Figure 13 detail the distribution of the received internet speed:
Figure 13: Speed Test results across Santa Barbara County 32 The following observations are derived from the analysis of the speed tests results:
• 94.5% of the received speed tests (2355 tests) were executed in Served Areas, with at least one incumbent ISP offering 25/3 Mbps services.
• 25% of the speed tests measured by the respondents show speeds below 25/3 Mbps service, indicating a low penetration of broadband services in the county population. • Of the speed tests reporting download speeds above 100 Mbps, 70% (650 tests) were performed in the Goleta Union Elementary School District and the Santa Barbara Unified School District. This skew must be recognized in interpreting the data.
SBCAG will continue registering speed tests through early 2023 to provide more balanced county-level results.
Needs Assessment Survey Results
To obtain further insights into the current broadband needs, a needs assessment survey was conducted among Santa Barbara County residents. The needs assessment survey was developed within an online survey tool, Survey Planet, and hosted on the BCPC website. The needs assessment survey was launched in March 2022 and ran through July 1, 2022. The time to take the test ranged from 5 to 15 minutes.
Of the 1,276 tests completed, 1,208 were utilized for analysis and have been incorporated into recommendation deliberations. The business owner group accounts for the differentiation between the total number of tests and unique analysis. Everyone aged 19 and older could participate in additional business owner questions; only 68 opted to complete the full assessment.
The following graph details the age distribution of the survey respondents:
Figure 14: Age distribution of Survey Respondents
The following observations are derived from the analysis of the needs assessment survey results:
• 98% of respondents reported having internet access at home. However, approximately 24% do not rely on at-home internet for work or school.
• 71% of respondents older than 19 years perceived the internet cost as too expensive. • The mean results assessing internet connection reliability were 6.18 with a standard deviation of
2.5, on a scale from 1 = very unreliable and 10 = very reliable.
4.8%
15.4%
37.2%
42.6%
13-18
19-39
40-65
65+
33 • Respondents indicated that the most important factors in internet service were reliability (32%) and price and speed (26%).
Santa Barbara County Unincorporated Area: Broadband Community Profile There are two areas of strategic interest for the county. The first is the alignment of countywide interconnections and anchor institutions with Golden State Connect Authority and the middle-mile network infrastructure. The second is supporting last-mile connectivity for rural residents. Achieving these areas of interest will require significant coordination work of the middle-mile between the cities and the last-mile of the unincorporated areas. It is recommended that the County focus on the connectivity of anchor institutions and the required network development and work closely with SBCAG as lead on middle-mile and last-mile infrastructure planning and deployment.
Future decisions will be made on who will build, operate, and maintain the infrastructure. Planning for infrastructure placement mapped to the needs of unserved and underserved communities is the priority. Communities lacking service, such as Casmalia, Los Alamos, and Cuyama, are priority areas, so network design work, grant writing, and identifying partners are the next steps to last-mile implementation and the Broadband for All goal.
Speed Test Results
Speed testing was promoted throughout the county, and data were grouped for analysis by location.
Data for unincorporated areas were sorted through two methods depending on the community. In Santa Ynez and Los Olivos, school district boundaries were used to provide clarity without overlapping Solvang data. Los Alamos provided a concentration of speed tests, so the data sort was completed using longitude and latitude parameters.
The graphics below detail the distribution of the received internet speed in the unincorporated areas.
Cuyama Valley
Figure 15: Speed Test results across Cuyama Joint Unified School District 34 Santa Ynez
Figure 16: Speed Test results across College Elementary School District Los Olivos
Figure 17: Speed Test results across Los Olivos Elementary School District *The Los Olivos School District was one of the areas that showed 0/0Mbps, meaning no service.
The speed test data for this area shows that 100/100Mbps service is available, so closing this gap from no service to minimum targeted speeds is possible. Infrastructure investments made by the Tribe will be vital to closing the gap. Communities throughout the Santa Ynez Valley will benefit from the strategy work and grant funding investments which also present opportunities for the County or providers to prioritize last-mile connections to the remote regions to the east and should be a priority. 35 Los Alamos speed test data collected using longitude and latitude.
Figure 18: Speed Test results across Los Alamos
Orcutt
Figure 19: Speed Test results across Orcutt Union Elementary School District Community Stakeholders Forums
In April and May 2022, community forums were held in several unincorporated areas of the county's northern region: Santa Ynez, Los Alamos, and Orcutt. Panelists from each community engaged in community conversations, and MOU partners promoted data collection efforts for the strategic plan.
Responses informed themes identified as broadband access gaps and community challenges in achieving Broadband for All and revealed the quality-of-life impacts. Tables 6, 7, and 8 summarize the discussion points arising from the responses to the questions provided and audience members' contributions.
Santa Ynez and Los Olivos
The Santa Ynez forum was moderated by a representative from the Santa Barbara Foundation, and panelists included representation from the College School District, the Tribe, and Visit Santa Ynez Valley. 36 April 27, 2022 – Santa Ynez Community Services District Office Challenges Perceived as affordable for some, not all, residents Digital literacy
Lack of awareness of training resources to increase self-sufficiency Hot spots insufficient to reliably connect students to online curriculum Increased demand on infrastructure decreases reliability Need reliable point of sale connectivity for local businesses Opportunities Increased access to education, tutorials for target populations Online trainings: increase digital literacy and develop local digital navigators Work force development, job opportunities require reliable connectivity Barriers Disproportionately impacts students, rural community members, multilingual community members, and English language learners Communication relies on internet service due to geography (e.g. the school district covers 585 square miles)
Equity requires accessibility to the same level of service Table 6: Santa Ynez Community Services District Office Public Forum Themes Los Alamos
The Broadband Consortium Pacific Coast moderated the Los Alamos forum, and panelists included community members representing the Los Alamos Senior Center, a local rancher, the school district, Farming First, and the Los Alamos Business Association.
May 10, 2022- Los Alamos Men’s Club
Challenges Lack awareness of affordability programs
Inadequate training resources/lack of awareness of training resources
Lack of infrastructure
85% of the community designated low income
Lack of service on the east side of the 101
Weekend tourism draws down Wi-Fi access for local residents Businesses need more infrastructure
Opportunities Expand on local elementary school fiber connection Barriers Disproportionately impacts rural community members, students Emergency response time for certain areas is very high
Lack of internet/cell service makes it difficult or impossible to request service
Table 7: Los Alamos Men’s Club Public Forum Themes
37 Orcutt
The Orcutt forum was moderated by the President of Allan Hancock Community College, and panelists included the Assistant Superintendent of educational services from Orcutt Union High School District, representatives of the OASIS senior center, and the Santa Maria Valley YMCA. The event focused on an in-depth discussion of infrastructure and the school district's challenges in reaching and serving their students. The school district serves students east of U.S. Route 101 to the coast in the west, as well as the community of Casmalia. School representatives shared plans to bus students from outlying communities to the school to complete online testing because they cannot reach them with hot spots and no other service is available.
Los Alamos is part of the Orcutt School District, so outreach summaries share similar themes.
May 18, 2022 – Lakeview Jr. High School
Challenges Fixed income and low-income areas cannot afford service Lack of awareness of affordability programs
Lack of equipment
Inadequate training resources/lack of awareness of training resources Lack of at-home internet for students
Opportunities Improve outreach opportunities
Barriers Disproportionately impacts rural community members, certain neighborhoods, students, seniors
Emergency response time for certain areas is very high
Lack of internet/cell service makes it difficult or impossible to request service
Table 8: Lakeview Jr. High School Public Forum Themes
Cuyama Valley
In 2019, the Blue Sky Center, the Rural Community Assistance Corporation, and the County Board of Supervisors developed a comprehensive community survey comprised of 63 questions for Cuyama Valley residents. The survey had a 42% response rate, with 143 households responding. The survey results identified broadband access as one of seven community priorities.
Key broadband results were as follows:
• 61% indicate internet access as a need.
• 23% have no internet at home, and 35% depend on cell phone data. Only 30% have high-speed internet, which is available via satellite subscription. • 52% of respondents indicated Wi-Fi/broadband as a most important need, the highest of any option listed in the survey.
The Cuyama Valley Action Plan, Appendix G, is the primary planning document for the valley. Preceding this plan were years of advocacy from within the community and by the BCPC. These combined efforts 38 result in a planned middle-mile fiber build from Santa Maria to Maricopa in Kern County. The build between Maricopa and New Cuyama is one of 18 priority projects in the queue for a planned build-out by the Golden State Connect Network. Last-mile fiber-to-the-home throughout New Cuyama is included in the project.
Analysis for additional last-mile opportunities along the route should be a planning priority for the County.
Engagement Summary
A common theme throughout each unincorporated area identified the remote geography and rugged terrain of parts of the county as a barrier to ubiquitous connectivity in the communities. If there are available connections, residents report that service is unaffordable. When affordability subsidies are applied, the quality of the connections may still not meet the 25/3 speeds originally required by the FCC.
Further analysis and design work will establish the best paths to last-mile connections for the rural and rugged regions of the county to meet 100/100Mbps.
To further assess connectivity in unincorporated areas, additional analysis needs to be completed to determine if last-mile connections are best provided by fiber or a wireless network. One of the most concerning reports revealed the difficulty or impossibility of requesting emergency services in some parts of the county due to the lack of connectivity. Many residents face affordability barriers and have transitioned to cell service only to avoid landline costs. For those utilizing satellite service in remote areas, uncertainty may be reduced, and connectivity is not guaranteed. Access is tied to the quality of life and should be a primary consideration as priorities and policies are identified regionally and locally.
Achieving digital equity in rural areas includes layers of challenges not noted in urban areas.
Unincorporated communities identified a lack of awareness of affordable programs as a challenge, and some were not sure they would be beneficial due to a lack of service options. Even if there was access, seniors and families in these areas may face cost-of-living constraints and may not have the income to purchase the necessary internet equipment.
Policy and Planning
County staff received the policy and permitting questions sent to all MOU partners, drawn from the statewide resource: Getting Connected: A Broadband Deployment and Adoption Resource Guide for Local and Regional Government Leaders12.
County policymakers have taken a very proactive stance on broadband deployment and were lead supporters of the strategic plan yet are challenged by a lack of capacity within planning staff to implement best practices for broadband infrastructure deployment. Broadband connectivity is a county priority, and community data collected through BSP can be used to fill gaps as regional broadband planning efforts progress.
Santa Barbara County
Inventory of assets Yes
12 California Emerging Technologies Fund (CETF) and Valley Vision, 2021: cetfund.org/report/getting-connected-abroadband-deployment-and-adoption-resource-guide 39 Permitting authority Maybe
Installed conduit Yes
Dig Once policy No
Permit process Yes
Online process Maybe
BB priority in planning Yes
Smart city priority Maybe
Wi-Fi/Fiber interest Yes
Table 9: Santa Barbara County Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment The County's role in broadband deployment involves two strategic areas of interest. First, aligning the countywide interconnection of facilities to the broader middle-mile approach and linking anchor institutions throughout the county. Second, supporting broadband deployment in unincorporated communities missing last-mile connectivity.
Broadband Infrastructure
The County of Santa Barbara has invested in developing a regional network connecting County facilities.
To date, this network exists through purchasing lit fiber from several providers. Conversations are underway regarding forming a public-private partnership (P3) approach to receiving service and benefits.
The Northern Santa Barbara County Fiber Loop– Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians (Tribe) In May 2021, the Tribe completed the Broadband Strategy & Feasibility Study: Tribal Lands of Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians (Appendix H). This work effort supported grant applications submitted in partnership with EconAlliance. The goals of the grant include a feasibility study and cost analysis of a potential fiber loop connecting their assets. The project would also benefit the communities of northern Santa Barbara County in accessing affordable, reliable, and redundant broadband service.
The Tribe has a population of 108 tribal members and has approximately 242 residents in 100 homes on the original Reservation land13. In December of 2019, the Tribe received Congressional approval for an additional 1,411.1 acres, including rights of way land into the federal trust status and is now known as "Camp 4". Up until recently, tribal broadband infrastructure had been developed to support their casino, hotel, and other enterprises. With COVID, new demands were placed on broadband and cellular infrastructure. They provided challenges for regular day-to-day education, healthcare, and business operations, including security personnel and first responders. Due to the Tribe's active participation in the region, their ability to lead broadband work efforts on the north county fiber loop feasibility project plays a significant role in countywide conversations and future work efforts.
In partnership and support by EconAlliance, the Tribe has submitted several applications for funding for tribal infrastructure needs. In June 2022, the Tribe and EconAlliance were awarded $444,787 in federal funding from the Economic Development Administration to build a Fiber Ring Broadband Strategy and Business Plan. A portion of the award will be used to identify and assess two viable routes for the fiber loop that will address the middle-mile broadband needs of northern Santa Barbara County. 13 santaynezchumash.org/the-santa-ynez-reservation
40 In addition to contributions to the middle-mile vision, the Tribe has developed proposals and acquired assets for last-mile fixed point-to-point and wireless, including 2.5GHz from the FCC. While this build-out is still in development, the Tribe anticipates opportunities for the entire Santa Ynez Valley to benefit from their investments and expansion. While it is unknown how far the range of this future service may cover, fiber deployment for areas outside of the Tribal lands should still be considered if there is a partnership opportunity to boost and support either the Tribe's or the County's priorities.
Vandenberg Space Force Base
With the capacity to welcome new commercial partners and support the growing mission of Space Force and other government partners, Vandenberg is ideally positioned as the West Coast hub for commercial and military space operations. Including being named as one of six candidates to host STARCOM, the Space Force's Space Training and Readiness Command, in April 2022.
Under development is a new master plan for the base and paves the path to enhancing the capabilities, infrastructure, and workforce to support a thriving space ecosystem, all of which rely on broadband infrastructure. A "mission development zone" is in development with targeted infrastructure investments to improve regional transportation and incentives to spur commercial space activity.
Vandenberg's infrastructure plans are generally closely held. However, the Commercial Space Master Plan outlines a detailed list of infrastructure opportunities that will enhance regional broadband connectivity. When the Telecommunications Infrastructure group began work in 2019, only Frontier offered internet connectivity to the base. Now, additional providers offer connectivity, but only on a limited basis over existing infrastructure, which means additional redundancy is an opportunity. The build-out of diverse communication routes and POP upgrades is a high-priority need for VSFB and potentially improve connectivity opportunities to the community of Lompoc.
This background reinforces a narrative that Vandenberg can be a critical anchor tenant for broadband infrastructure. Because of the base location, underserved communities around the base stand to strongly benefit from improvements in cross-connectivity and redundancy of internet connections to the base and the mission development zone. The opportunities Vandenberg provides to regional planning efforts are significant in ensuring redundancy and resiliency of the region's infrastructure and should be considered a strong partner as plans and priorities are developed.
Community Services Districts (CSDs)
CSDs of the county provide varied services and participate in a high-level assessment of their service areas. Table 10 highlights opportunities that benefit rural communities with connectivity for residents, businesses, and CSDs. None of the responding districts noted any major infrastructure improvements that would contribute to broadband infrastructure deployment. Santa Ynez CSD does have a complete and up-to-date asset and right-of-way inventory that could support broadband development in the Santa Ynez Valley. Districts that oversee water and wastewater infrastructure have assets that should be considered in conduit deployment for fiber or fixed wireless access. Fixed wireless access is an opportunity to enhance redundancy for emergency service needs, water and wastewater monitoring, and community use.
Where feasible, CSDs in the county can engage in a full asset inventory activity relating to broadband planning to locate possible routes and provide insight into the number of service connections needed for last-mile planning in unincorporated communities.
41 Community Services
Districts
Isla Vista CSD Los Olivos CSD Santa Ynez Vandenberg
Village
Does your CSD have a
complete and up to date
asset inventory – right of
way, easements, or others
- identified for broadband
infrastructure deployment?
No, we own none No Yes No. Lots of
information
but it’s not
complete or
up to date
If yes to the above, do you
believe it would be feasible
to use for broadband
deployment if deemed
appropriate?
N/A N/A Maybe the
sewer lines
N/A
Does your CSD have any
major infrastructure
projects planned within the
next 5-10 years in your
service territory that would
allow for the installation of
empty conduit for future
fiber installation?
No Assuming a Prop
218 vote that
moves our
wastewater
treatment efforts
forward is
approved by
voters, yes.
No No
Does your CSD have a ‘dig
once’ or ‘open trench’
policy/ordinance?
N/A No No No
Does your agency have any
permitting authority for
infrastructure
improvements within your
service area?
No Yes, but limited Yes Yes
If yes, what type of
improvements are typically
requested?
N/A As a fledgling
CSD our efforts
are only around
wastewater
treatment
powers we have
from LAFCO
Sewer lines Water and
sewer
Who provides your
internet service for any of
your systems monitoring?
COX
Communications
We currently do
not have any
systems
? Comcast
Business
Are you aware of whether
there would be community
support for community WiFi access?
Yes – 100% Not aware of
any. Perhaps the
businesses
downtown
would be, but
that is the extent
of it.
No No
Table 10: Community Services District Assessment Questionnaire 42 Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) The Santa Barbara County should consider the following actions:
1. Access (Capacity & Connectivity)
a. Based on data from the community forums and speed testing, the County should consider all options for last-mile infrastructure planning for rural communities to receive 100/100Mbps service.
b. Connecting anchor institutions throughout the region should remain a priority as it can support other community fiber and Wi-Fi options.
c. Engage with the Chumash Tribe and VSFB to identify partnership opportunities. d. Engage with RCRC and the Golden State Connect Authority network conversations to ensure local connections are identified as the network is in development.
2. Affordability & Adoption
a. Support training opportunities in rural communities; plan regionally and implement through community partners able to do the work.
b. Work with the Digital Equity Coalition to meet the needs of rural communities. c. Support county social services departments in joining Digital Equity Coalition work efforts and identify grant funding opportunities and community partnerships to increase capacity. Assist with adoption-related data collection in partnership with the Santa Barbara Foundation and the Digital Equity Coalition.
3. Requirements for Redundancy & Resiliency
a. Continue to partner with SBCAG in regional coordination of the Golden State Connect Network and last-mile planning and implementation.
b. Engage with the Tribe to assess partnership and coordination opportunities for the Golden State Connect Network and last-mile planning and implementation. c. Engage with VSFB to assess partnerships and coordination opportunities for Golden State Connect Network, anchor institution connectivity, and last-mile planning and implementation.
d. Seek grant funding to build the capacity of County staff to participate in regional work efforts and bolster funding for SBCAG.
e. Review permit application process and evaluate opportunities for centralized work efforts with SBCAG.
f. In partnership with SBCAG, meet with service providers to determine opportunities to expand last-mile through public/private partnerships and support private sector grant applications for funding to serve rural areas.
g. Engage with community services districts to assess opportunities such as anchor institutions, conduit deployment, and hosting community Wi-Fi.
Buellton: Broadband Community Profile
The City of Buellton is poised to play a crucial role in the evolving development of broadband infrastructure. Situated along major arterials that already have fiber infrastructure or where fiber is planned via the Golden State Connect Network, Buellton must take the opportunity to either directly engage or partner regionally to ensure the community's needs are considered. While not imminently poised to develop smart city planning, careful consideration and conversation must evolve to meet the community's future needs.
43 Community Overview
City of
Buellton
Population
Size (2020
Census)
Median Age
(2020
Census)
Geographic
Footprint Major Industries
5161 40.8 1.58 sq mi
Manufacturing,
Accommodation and Food
Services, Retail, Wholesalers
Demographic data from U.S. Census Community Snapshot14
Buellton is located at the intersections of State Route 246 and U.S. Highway 101 in the Santa Ynez Valley, ideal positioning for broadband infrastructure along two major thoroughfares. Several hotels and restaurants serve as a vacation homebase for tourists visiting the greater Santa Ynez Valley area and Santa Barbara County coast. Buellton is a direct conduit connecting U.S. Highway 101 to Lompoc, Vandenberg Air Force Base, and Vandenberg Village along State Highway 246.
Buellton is the second-largest city in the Santa Ynez Valley, with a population of 5,161. The average annual income is $105,694. While a strong entrepreneurial spirit contributes jobs to the local economy, a significant proportion of the community commutes to Santa Barbara and Santa Maria for higherpaying jobs. Major industries providing jobs within Buellton represent the cross-section of agriculture, industry, and tourism in the heart of Santa Barbara County. Manufacturing leads in job creation, with industrial districts housing approximately 50 light-industry facilities. The Hospitality and Retail industries serve locals and visitors alike with a mixture of small family-owned businesses (some multi-generational) and large national chains. Wholesalers round up the major job creators in Buellton, ranging from wine and beer to construction materials and agriculture supply chain materials.
Only 1.8% of the population is considered to be living at or below the poverty line. Of all households in Buellton, 24% are eligible for the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) to reduce the costs of internet plans and provide discounted access to a device. Of the eligible households, only 9% are enrolled in ACP, leaving a significant population that may benefit from the program to relieve an unnecessary added cost burden15.
The Buellton Union School District has two elementary schools serving the Buellton area: Jonata Middle School and Oak Valley Elementary School. The school district recently decided to add pre-K to align with California state initiatives and also offers programs for English language learners, after-school programs and activities, and a free summer meal program for children. Approximately 25% of households in Buellton speak a language other than English in the home, and the school district offers materials in English and Spanish to connect and communicate with families. The Santa Ynez Valley Joint Union High School serves all five local communities and is located six miles east of Buellton. Zaca Center is a preschool and after-school daycare center for children operated by the County of Santa Barbara. 14 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Buellton_city,_California?g=1600000US0608758 15 Geographical Information Center, Chico State Enterprises, accessed August 2022:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/8c0249a9de8d404a9b49966fb824b728 44 Medical care is available in Buellton and Solvang, connected directly through Route 246. The Buellton Medical Clinic takes both appointments and Urgent Care walk-ins. American Medical Response ambulance service operates out of Buellton with easy access to the U.S. 101 freeway and local communities. These facilities all rely on systems for patient care that require high-speed internet and strong infrastructure to function, especially during emergencies.
Broadband Needs Assessment
Broadband Service Availability
Based on all available data, broadband availability in Buellton is extensive. The map displayed below was created using the public CPUC information available via the GIS Map Data Portal (refer to Section 1, Table 1 for CPUC served/unserved definitions). It shows most of the city in green, indicating that a 25/3 Mbps Service is accessible in a significant portion of the county.
Comcast and Frontier are the major internet service providers serving the community. Although the CPUC data report high broadband availability, Buellton community members indicate that the actual bandwidth received is low.
Figure 20: Broadband service availability in the City of Buellton Speed Test Results
The graphics below detail the distribution of the received internet speed according to the data collected from the speed tests in the Buellton.
45 Figure 21: City of Buellton Speed Test results
Response rates to the crowdsourced data collection were low, and data collected via the speed test showed that none of the test takers met the 100/100mbps; 8 of the 20 tests taken were able to download at speeds over 100 Mbps and upload speeds were significantly slower. Poor test results could be due to the time of day the test was taken and the equipment connecting to the internet.
Community Stakeholders Needs Assessment
A public forum was held on May 19, 2022, at Oak Valley Elementary School to discuss and understand the broadband status in Buellton. The central themes identified access and adoption as the primary gaps in achieving digital equity and inclusion for the community.
Panelists for the May public forum included the Superintendent of the Buellton Unified School District, the CEO of the Buellton Chamber of Commerce, the Executive Director of the Senior Center, and the CEO of the United Boys and Girls Club. Table 11 summarizes the discussion points arising from questions posed to the panel by the moderator and community discussion.
Public Forum Summary – event held May 19, 2022 Oak Valley Elementary School Challenges Eligible community members don’t use affordability programs due to low bandwidth
Lack of equipment
Inadequate training resources/lack of awareness of training resources Need trusted agents to assist with training
Lack of home access (families drive to library for Wi-Fi for school access) Enrollment in affordability programs (55% of students on free/reduced lunch) Opportunities Centralize training at club houses where the senior population lives Replicate San Jose municipal model affixing broadband on streetlights for students Important for hospitality industry growth and businesses serving the industry Business processes have changed and require higher bandwidth Barriers Disproportionately impacts seniors who lack training, 27 families were never able to connect during the pandemic for school
Isolation for seniors and/or victims of domestic abuse
Table 11: Oak Valley Elementary School Public Forum Summary 46 Reliability of service to the community was identified as a need, and the leadership and advocacy of the school district will prove to be a reliable partner should the city choose to develop and broaden community connectivity through an open-access Wi-Fi network.
Economic development considerations were essential to the public forum conversation. It was noted that reliable connectivity plays a significant role in the city's ability to attract and retain businesses. The four top industries of Buellton all rely on the internet to maintain or grow their businesses; these industries likely have a client base outside of the area and therefore need reliable service. Retail businesses within the community serve local customers and visitors and need their point-of-sale equipment to stay online. The delay factor may be significant for businesses that rely on the system for day-to-day operations.
The school district did an outstanding job connecting their students to devices and hotspots during the COVID -19 pandemic. Even with their great work, students were in the library parking lot during the day accessing the library Wi-Fi system to do schoolwork; 27 families could never connect. While this may not seem significant based on the overall population, this anecdote does not account for senior citizens or others who were unable to connect during the pandemic but did not have a support network like the school to document their need.
Policy and Planning
Project team members met with city staff multiple times to discuss policy and planning efforts and shared the statewide resource, Getting Connected: A Broadband Deployment and Adoption Resource Guide for Local and Regional Government Leaders16. Survey questions were adapted from the Guide and emailed to city staff for their direct input. Responses informed key opportunities and priorities for the City of Buellton to improve redundancy and resiliency.
Analysis shows broadband has only recently become a priority for City Council. The city plans to take the step to add broadband considerations to the General Plan within the next year, building a baseline for support and future planning efforts. Policy considerations such as a Dig Once policy and placing conduit in the ground with every excavation are opportunities of interest as next steps.
Buellton
Inventory of assets No
Permitting authority No
Installed conduit No
Dig Once policy In process
Permit process In process
Online process No
BB priority in planning In planning
Smart city priority No
Wi-Fi/Fiber interest Yes
Table 12: City of Buellton Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment Broadband Infrastructure
16 California Emerging Technologies Fund (CETF) and Valley Vision, 2021: cetfund.org/report/getting-connected-abroadband-deployment-and-adoption-resource-guide 47 While the City does not envision itself in the role of ISP or even managing fiber agreements, staff intends to engage to the extent necessary to establish and manage public assets in areas where industry participation does not pencil out. The primary focus of infrastructure planning targets the lack of home access to mitigate the need for families to drive to the library to access Wi-Fi for schoolwork. The community has expressed interest in an initiative to create a community Wi-Fi system. High-priority areas for investment include the district of aging motels along Route 246 and the northern area of the city, in lower-income neighborhoods, and along the main arteries Central Ave, McMurray, and Avenue of the Flags.
Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) The City of Buellton should consider partnering with neighboring communities, the County, and the private sector to achieve Broadband for All. Based on the lack of staffing capacity and infrastructure, the City of Buellton should consider the following actions and prioritize policy considerations:
1) Access (Capacity & Connectivity)
a) Proactively work with the school district to determine the feasibility of an open-access network.
b) Proactively work with the private sector to determine the feasibility of a public/private partnership to increase access for the business community through grant funding. 2) Affordability & Adoption
a) Community feedback identified barriers for students and seniors in broadband adoption. While telehealth was not directly addressed, it is an area of opportunity and should be considered when prioritizing future planning efforts. b) Assist with promoting the Affordable Connectivity Program via community partners, including the Chamber of Commerce, the senior center, and the library. 3) Requirements for Redundancy & Resiliency
a) Continue to partner with SBCAG as the regional lead on broadband planning. b) Focus on policy development that reduces the barrier to broadband deployment, including General Plan updates and analysis of smart city infrastructure c) Meet with major service providers and discuss barriers and necessary steps to reduce barriers.
Carpinteria: Broadband Community Profile
The availability of service is high for much of the city of Carpinteria which is a benefit and good base for the community to build upon. The issues reported during the community outreach was that affordability is a barrier to accessing the internet. Therefore, community Wi-Fi would benefit Carpinteria residents and be a significant first step toward digital inclusion. It will be important for the city to seek partnerships to address access and adoption and work with ISPs, CBOs, and residents to determine a path forward to ensure a best-case scenario. Second, working towards smart city planning initiatives and solidifying relationships with neighboring communities for seamless transitions will support future redundancy and resiliency of broadband infrastructure. As noted in the process, broadband planning is a priority for the city so a good first action step would be to develop an inventory of assets that would support broadband deployment.
48 Community Overview
City of
Carpinteria
Population Size
(2020 Census)
Median Age
(2020
Census)
Geographic
Footprint Major Industries
13264 41.1 9.27 sq mi
Manufacturing; Retail; Professional,
Scientific and Technical Services;
Accommodation and Food Services
Demographic data from U.S. Census Community Snapshot17
Carpinteria is located on the south coast of Santa Barbara County, covering a land area of 2.6 square miles, and an ocean area of 4.7 square miles, for a total of 7.3 square miles. Elevation ranges from sea level to 700 feet above sea level.
Carpinteria was incorporated on September 28, 1965. It is a general law city, with an elected fivemember City Council and a City Manager appointed by the Council. Five local citizens elected for fouryear overlapping terms form the Carpinteria City Council. The mayor and vice-Mayor are selected by the Council from among the membership and customarily serve two-year terms. City departments include General Government, Administrative Services, Community Development, Public Works, and Parks & Recreation.
The Carpinteria Unified School District administers seven schools in Carpinteria and one in Summerland.
Elementary Schools include Aliso, Canalino, Family School, and Summerland School. Carpinteria Middle School, Carpinteria High School, Rincon High School (a continuation school), Foothill High School (an alternative school), and Cate School (a private high school) form the options for secondary schools.
Broadband Needs Assessment
Broadband Service Availability
Based on all available data, broadband availability in Carpinteria is high. The map displayed below was created using the public CPUC information available via the GIS Map Data Portal (refer to Section 1, Table 1 for CPUC served/unserved definitions). It shows most of the City of Carpinteria in green, indicating that a 25/3 Mbps Service is accessible in a significant portion of the county.
Community reports from Carpinteria indicate that the cost of broadband service is too high, which impacts the service's adoption. In addition, a lack of awareness of affordability programs within the community was identified.
17 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Carpinteria_city,_California?g=1600000US0611446 49 Figure 22: Broadband service availability in City of Carpinteria Speed Test Results
The graphics below detail the distribution of the received internet speed according to the data collected from the speed tests in the City of Carpinteria.
Figure 23: Speed Test results across the City of Carpinteria The number of speed tests taken in and around the community shows access to broadband services. Of the speed tests collected, 20% of the download speeds exceeded 100Mbps, and all the upload speeds registered under 40Mbps. However, knowing that devices and time of day can contribute to slower speeds, it is uncertain whether connectivity could meet the 100/100Mbp Broadband for All targets. 50 Community Stakeholders Needs Assessment
The June 2022 public forum was held in the Carpinteria Children's Project auditorium and moderated by Supervisor Das Williams. Based on all the data collected, affordability and access appear to be the most significant barriers to broadband adoption for some Carpinteria community members.
Panelists for the event included the executive director for the Children's Project, the Carpinteria Unified School District's technical director, and a local Zumaya group representative. Table 13 summarizes the themes that emerged from the comments of the panelists and the conversation that followed.
Public Forum Summary -event held on June 1 at the Carpinteria Children’s Project Challenges High cost of service
Lack of awareness of affordability programs
Multi-family homes: inability to access service per individual or family
Inadequate training resources/lack of awareness of training resources
Gap is caused by lack of access to modern technology
Need training
65% of students qualify for reduced/free lunches
Opportunities School district put Wi-Fi on busses/vans so students can access the internet
Partnerships with providers (Connect to Compete)
Digital Navigators and workshops
Outreach opportunities
Promotoras Network and digital navigators
Barriers Disproportionately impacts low-income neighborhoods Everything relies on the internet, so connectivity is required for quality of life
Table 13: Carpinteria Children’s Project Public Forum Summary Internet service is available in Carpinteria, yet the community states there is a need for affordable access. During the pandemic, the school district found it necessary to station Wi-Fi service in specific neighborhoods to ensure connectivity.
Policy and Planning
Project team members met with city staff multiple times to discuss policy and planning efforts and shared the statewide resource, Getting Connected: A Broadband Deployment and Adoption Resource Guide for Local and Regional Government Leaders18. Survey questions were adapted from the Guide and emailed to city staff for their direct input. Responses displayed informed key opportunities and priorities for the City of Carpinteria to improve redundancy and resiliency.
Analysis shows key areas where Carpinteria can incorporate updated policies to accelerate broadband infrastructure development, including community Wi-Fi. The city's General Plan calls out broadband 18 California Emerging Technologies Fund (CETF) and Valley Vision, 2021: cetfund.org/report/getting-connected-abroadband-deployment-and-adoption-resource-guide 51 infrastructure as a priority, and therefore a comprehensive list of easements and rights-of-way should be developed to enhance future work efforts. An open trench work policy is a good start. Further analysis should be done to determine how it aligns with the placing of conduit and if further action needs to be taken to accelerate broadband deployment.
While smart city planning has not been identified in planning documents, it should become an essential piece of future policy and planning conversations and updates. Based on the location of the city and proximity to urban and unincorporated areas, they can play a crucial role in anchor institution connectivity and the more extensive network when there are future interface opportunities, specifically transportation.
Carpinteria
Inventory of assets Some
Permitting authority Yes
Installed conduit No
Dig Once policy No
Permit process Yes
Online process Yes
BB priority in planning Yes
Smart city priority No
Wi-Fi/Fiber interest Yes
Table 14: City of Carpinteria Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment Broadband Infrastructure
The city's broadband journey began with its investment in the SBCAG-led initiative to develop a regional strategy. The city does not intend to develop any level of broadband competency, capability, or staff support. Primary focus areas are the development of capacity in portions of the community with specific needs, which include mobile home parks and multifamily dwellings. The city does not currently provide community Wi-Fi.
Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) The City of Carpinteria should consider the following actions:
1) Access (Capacity & Connectivity)
a) Continue development and availability of community Wi-Fi maintained by the City or in partnership with education and community centers. b) Seek grant funding to increase staffing capacity within City departments to work on broadband priorities.
2) Affordability & Adoption
a) A community Wi-Fi system would benefit those unable to connect due to cost. b) Support partnerships with the Digital Equity Coalition to expand awareness of the Affordable Connectivity Program.
3) Requirements for Redundancy & Resiliency
a) Continue to partner with SBCAG in regional coordination of the Golden State Connect Network and last-mile planning and implementation. b) Consolidate and create a complete asset inventory that could be utilized for broadband infrastructure deployment.
52 c) Prioritize smart city planning in the General Plan and develop necessary and corresponding policies.
Goleta: Broadband Community Profile
There are gaps in internet service for some of the community, but current major carriers plan to address the needs. Goleta has the opportunity to achieve smart city status and should consider installing conduit alongside any near-term and future city-led infrastructure projects. The overall footprint and proximity to neighboring communities benefit smart city planning, enabling them to connect regionally. In addition, the already-present high-tech industry could grow and expand with an increase in fiber infrastructure while also ensuring the surrounding community can connect.
Community Overview
Municipality
Population
Size
Median
Age
Geographic
Footprint Major Industries
Goleta 32690 35.6 7.9 sq mi
Manufacturing; Retail; Health Care and
Social Services; Information
Demographic data from U.S. Census Community Snapshot19
The City of Goleta was incorporated in 2002, marking its 20th anniversary in 2022. The city's eight square miles are nestled between the Santa Ynez Mountains and the Pacific Ocean, home to, among others, staff and faculty of the nearby University of California, Santa Barbara, and employees of a broad range of large companies headquartered within the city limits. Goleta's natural assets are a draw for families and businesses, including approximately 550 acres of city parks and open space, including nine neighborhood parks, five community parks, eight neighborhood open spaces, six regional open spaces, one community center, and three mini-parks20. The Goleta Train Depot is a passenger rail station served by Amtrak, connecting coastal train travel through the city. Another critical regional travel hub, the Santa Barbara Airport, is located within the City of Santa Barbara's jurisdiction adjacent to the City of Goleta.
More than 32,000 people live in Goleta, and many more commute to work within the city limits. The city hosts a thriving entrepreneurial business community. For a relatively small city, there is a wellestablished contingency of large, well-known companies that have made Goleta their headquarters, and new entrepreneurs are popping up each year. Manufacturing is an important industry feeding the Goleta job market and offering a range of employment opportunities across socioeconomic and educational backgrounds. The retail industry is another important job-producing sector, which positions successful homegrown shops alongside larger national retailers in one of the multiple shopping districts that serve students, homeowners, and renters across the community. The health care and social services industry includes Cottage Hospital sites, Sansum Goleta Family Medicine, administrative offices, and several specialized private practices. Finally, the information and communications sector in Goleta 19 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Goleta_city,_California?g=1600000US0630378 20 See Parks, Facilities, and Playgrounds Master Plan: cityofgoleta.org/projects-programs/parks-open-space/parksmaster-plan 53 represents the many technology firms that have settled in Goleta since before its inception. The city continues to attract more interest from this industry.
Equalitech, a local non-profit, has served residents for over five years and provided no-cost computer access and digital literacy programming through the pandemic. Equalitech is an official proctor of the NorthStar Digital Literacy program and demonstrated the need for improved connectivity and adoption, particularly in Spanish-speaking communities, by creating partnerships with local promotoras and educational organizations to improve opportunities through digital access. The median household income in Goleta is $98,03521. Yet, 43% of households are eligible for the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), a benefit for low-income households identified by federal program standards. Only 13% of eligible households are enrolled in an ACP program, leaving an affordability gap to fill in efforts to narrow the digital divide22.
One-fifth of the population of Goleta are children under 1823, and the city posts the second lowest child poverty rate in the county at 9.3%24, significantly lower than statewide and countywide averages. Over one-third of residents, 34% (ages 18 and older) and 37% (ages 5-17)25, speak a language other than English in the home. The school district reflects the multilingual realities of students' families providing dual language immersion programs, bilingual support services, and a website using Google translate to adapt text into five different languages. Children attend one of the schools in either the Goleta Union School District (Transitional Kindergarten – 8th grade) or the Santa Barbara Unified School District (high school). The school district provides Chromebooks and hotspots as needed to the student community, along with technical support services in English and Spanish.
Broadband Needs Assessment
Broadband Service Availability
Based on all available data, broadband availability in the City of Goleta is high. The map displayed below was created using the public CPUC information using the GIS Portal Map (refer to Section 1, Table 1 for CPUC served/unserved definitions). It shows most of the City of Goleta in green, indicating that 25/3 Mbps service is accessible in the area. However, significant portions of the city are colored red, identifying unserved areas.
COX Communications and Frontier are the major service providers for the city. Although the CPUC data report a high broadband availability, the community identified service reliability as a need. 21 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Goleta_city,_California?g=1600000US0630378 22 Geographical Information Center, Chico State Enterprises, accessed August 2022:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/8c0249a9de8d404a9b49966fb824b728 23 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Goleta_city,_California?g=1600000US0630378 24 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Goleta_city,_California?g=1600000US0630378 25 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Goleta_city,_California?g=1600000US0630378 54 Figure 24: Broadband availability in the City of Goleta Speed Test Results
The graphics below detail the distribution of the received internet speed according to the data collected from the speed tests in the City of Goleta.
Figure 25: Speed Test results across the City of Goleta The speed tests performed in Goleta showed speeds ranging from very slow downloads and upload speeds to having a nearby neighbor with download speeds of over 100Mbps. A speed test posted by the Goleta Valley Cottage Hospital network showed a download speed of 844Mbps and an upload speed of 328Mbps.
55 Community Stakeholders Needs Assessment
A public forum was held in Goleta on May 16 in the Goleta City Council Chambers and moderated by Supervisor Joan Hartmann. Based on the meetings and conversations and the data collected, Goleta's barrier to Broadband for All appears to be affordability and adoption for families, retirees, students, and the workforce as the cost of living continues to rise.
Panelists included the founder of Equalitech, property development and management professionals, the Executive Director of Isla Vista Youth Programs, the Assistant Superintendent of Goleta Union School District, the COO/CFO of Santa Barbara Neighborhood Clinics, and the President/CEO of the South Coast Chamber of Commerce. Table 15 summarizes the discussion points arising from questions posed to the panel by the moderator and the community discussion.
Public Form Summary – event held May 16, 2022, Goleta City Council Chamber Challenges Increased cost of living; internet may not be the priority Concerns over internet safety for children
Digital literacy: unable to connect or know how to use the internet Lack of devices
Lack of home access to the internet for some community members Opportunities Need reliable connectivity for services to clients, patients, POS systems A hub of technology that thrives on a business core with good connectivity Equalitech model: digital navigators and NorthStar Digital Literacy programs Impacts Disproportionately impacts some parents, seniors, students, and multilingual community members and English language learners Lack of devices leaves some ‘left out’ and missing opportunities Need reassurance that medical devices will stay connected Table 15: Goleta City Council Chamber Public Forum Summary In the public forum, two community members stated that access was challenging and unreliable. Based on conversations with the public sector and the major ISP, the community is covered in accessible internet service.
Results from the 93111 and 93117 zip codes were included in needs assessment reporting. Of the 145 participants that answered the question of access in the survey, all but one said they had internet access at home. In the public forum, two community members stated that access was challenging and unreliable. Based on conversations with the public sector and the major ISPs, the community is covered in accessible internet service.
Based on the meetings and conversations and the data collected, Goleta's barrier to Broadband for All appears to be affordability and adoption for their families, retirees, students, and workforce as the cost of living continues to rise.
Policy and Planning
Project team members met with city staff multiple times to discuss policy and planning efforts and shared the statewide resource, Getting Connected: A Broadband Deployment and Adoption Resource 56 Guide for Local and Regional Government Leaders26. Survey questions were adapted from the Guide and emailed to city staff for their direct input. Responses informed key opportunities and priorities for the City of Goleta to improve redundancy and resiliency.
Analysis shows Goleta is a contract city in that it has no intention to develop broadband as a utility.
However, based on conversations with city staff, public money may be used to establish infrastructure and asset ownership. Whenever the development of new capacity is concerned, the city will seek a revenue model (sources) to maintain staff and ensure their access to ongoing professional development in this area year after year.
Goleta
Inventory of assets No
Permitting authority Yes
Installed conduit No
Dig Once policy No
Permit process Yes
Online process Yes
BB priority in planning No
Smart city priority No
Wi-Fi/Fiber interest Possibly
Table 16: City of Goleta Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment Broadband Infrastructure
With City ownership of the 1,464 local streetlights, Goleta is well-positioned to serve as a pilot for smart city technology. From a connectivity standpoint, the town is complete. The "Old Town" area is a specific area of interest where considerable planning and investment occur. A phased approach to planning starts with community Wi-Fi in strategic public areas (Phase 1), the development of a roadmap and grid of city assets (Phase 2 - community network connecting anchors) and leads to the deployment of smart city technologies (Phase 3).
Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) The City of Goleta should consider the following actions:
1. Access (Capacity & Connectivity)
a. As per conversations with city staff, develop community Wi-Fi in the Camino/Calle Real corridor that meets 100/100Mbps.
b. Lead the conversation exploring partnership opportunities with anchor institutions and neighboring communities in smart city planning and what sort of accessible network would be required for a smart city network.
2. Affordability & Adoption
a. Ensure capacity to operate and maintain a 24/7 community Wi-Fi system through grant funding, private partnerships, or both.
26 California Emerging Technologies Fund (CETF) and Valley Vision, 2021: cetfund.org/report/getting-connected-abroadband-deployment-and-adoption-resource-guide 57 b. Partner with the Digital Equity Coalition to ensure affordability and adoption for the community is on track to meet 2026 targets.
3. Requirements for Redundancy & Resiliency
a. Continue to partner with SBCAG in regional coordination of the Golden State Connect Network and last-mile planning and implementation.
b. Consider developing a smart city strategy to draw the link from current and targeted businesses.
c. Identify and support catalyst projects that benefit from smart city planning. d. Meet with major providers to discuss public/partnership opportunities and assess whether the installation of city-owned conduit could rapidly move Goleta forward in smart city planning.
e. Prioritize infrastructure planning and necessary policies to reduce the barrier to fiber infrastructure deployment.
Guadalupe: Broadband Community Profile
What makes Guadalupe unique is the engagement and buy-in of civic organizations like the Guadalupe Business Association, Los Amigos de Guadalupe, Guadalupe Community Changers, and their grassroots community spirit. The community is well positioned to serve as a pilot and model for bridging their digital divide and increasing digital equity. While some data shows the community has access to the internet, the community reports say they are not, and there is work to do. The school district significantly upgraded its wiring during the pandemic to increase its ability to provide service to the hotspots they deployed. The district is poised now as a true anchor institution, and it will be important in the near term to explore other opportunities in the planning and development of a reliable and redundant network that meets the needs of the greater community and bolsters its resilience. Timing is essential as new developments are underway and the area within the city continues to grow.
Community Overview
Municipality
Population
Size
Median
Age
Geographic
Footprint Major Industries
Guadalupe 8057 27.6 1.39 sq mi
Agriculture, Fishing and
Hunting; Education;
Wholesalers; Retail
Demographic data from U.S. Census Community Snapshot27
Geographic significance to broadband infrastructure are arterials that enable the state's middle-mile connectivity resulting in last-mile opportunities. The City of Guadalupe sits in the northwestern corner of Santa Barbara County, forming a crossroads between the Pacific Coast Highway CA-1 and CA-166. The city hosts an Amtrak station providing a passenger line stop near the junction of the Union Pacific Railroad and the Short Line Santa Maria Valley Railroad, which serves primarily commercial freight transportation. Aside from the transport lines through the city, Guadalupe is largely rural, sitting among some of the most productive agricultural lands in the state and next to the National Natural Landmark 27 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Guadalupe_city,_California?g=1600000US0631414 58 Guadalupe-Nipomo Dunes Preserve. Guadalupe also boasts a theater that has been recently added to the National Historic Register and has plans for renovation, which would include a three-story campus for support and regional education in the performing arts, emphasizing the need for high-capacity broadband connectivity.
Guadalupe is home to many agricultural workers, and the dominant industries providing jobs in the city include agriculture, education, wholesalers, and retail. In agriculture, employers have identified a growing reliance on technology to communicate, requiring employees to advance their digital literacy skills. The local school district is a significant employer in the education sector, serving students from preschool through 8th grade at the Guadalupe Union School District, after which students attend a high school in a nearby district. Neighboring Santa Maria provides additional opportunities in education through employment with Allan Hancock College, Santa Barbara Business College, and the pre-K – 12 districts serving the area. The wholesale market is made up predominately of agriculture-related products, from seeds to the distribution of produce. Small businesses owned by local entrepreneurs and their families comprise the retail sector. Within the corridor of the city, where there are food services and light industrial manufacturing businesses, there are opportunities to enhance and grow those businesses when they have better broadband access, as the Guadalupe Business Association notes that connectivity is lacking.
The city has an overall population of 8,057, with nearly 80% speaking a language other than English in the home. Over a third of the population are children under 18, and according to the most recent U.S.
Census, 38% live below the poverty line. The median age is 27.6 reflecting the youngest average age among Santa Barbara County's municipalities. Guadalupe Union School District reported that during the COVID-19 pandemic, parents could attend school conferences and engage with educators in higher numbers because communication transitioned online, and they could use their cell phones to attend meetings. Of all households in Guadalupe, 47% are eligible for the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), and 46% of those eligible are enrolled28. Compared to countywide statistics, this is a significantly high number of enrollments in a benefits program designed to improve access to broadband through affordable plans and low-cost devices.
Broadband Needs Assessment
Broadband Service Availability
Based on all available data, broadband availability in Guadalupe is extensive. The map displayed below was created using the public CPUC information available via the GIS Map Data Portal (refer to Section 1, Table 1 for CPUC served/unserved definitions). It shows most of the City of Guadalupe in green, indicating that a 25/3 Mbps Service is accessible in a significant portion of the county.
Regarding ISP presence, Frontier and Charter are the incumbent broadband providers in Guadalupe.
While there is a belief that the community has broadband connectivity opportunities, affordability and adoption appear to be the primary issues.
28 Geographical Information Center, Chico State Enterprises, accessed August 2022:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/8c0249a9de8d404a9b49966fb824b728 59 Figure 26: Broadband availability in City of Guadalupe Speed Test Results
The graphics below detail the distribution of the received internet speed according to the data collected from the speed tests in the City of Guadalupe.
Figure 27: Speed Test results across the City of Guadalupe Speed test results did not reflect what was reported by the community during the outreach forums.
During the pandemic, the school district deployed 500 hot spots; the business community representative reported slow speeds or difficulty accessing service, and the city reported a desire for more infrastructure. Of the 49 tests, speeds ranged from very slow to over 250mbps. Upload speeds ranged from very slow to over 250mbps.
60 What made this data challenging to understand was that most of the test takers were using a California State University connection and not the local primary carriers. Infrastructure within or around Guadalupe provides 100/100Mbps service, which may not be accessible in some community areas.
Community members reported that there is some infrastructure, but it does not serve all areas of the community. Regardless of the infrastructure potentially available, the primary reasons that residents are reporting not being connected are due to affordability issues and a lack of devices.
Regardless of the infrastructure conversation, access and adoption are barriers to Guadalupe bridging the digital divide.
Community Stakeholders Needs Assessment
Two public forums were held in Guadalupe. Supervisor Lavagnino moderated the first forum.
Participants included the Mayor of Guadalupe, the President of the Guadalupe Business Association, the director of the Family Services Agency, the Superintendent of Guadalupe Union School District, a coexecutive director of Los Amigos de Guadalupe and the director of information services from the Community Health Centers of the Central Coast. The second forum was intended to be held in Spanish.
It included the President of the Guadalupe Business Association, the director of the Family Services Agency, a co-executive director of Los Amigos de Guadalupe, and the lead educator from the local People's Self-Help Housing. Table 17 summarizes comments of the panelists and the conversations that followed.
Public Forum Summaries – events held on May 4 and May 11 at Guadalupe City Hall Challenges Lack of awareness of affordability programs
Program/provider restrictions: unable to access affordability programs due to previous tenants
Multiple individuals/families sharing a home
Need access to training and devices
Requires trusted agents to do outreach and help with devices and training Need reliable access – 500 hot spots deployed for students School had to rewire school to increase access
Community members need access to devices
Opportunities Partner with Family Services Agency and Little House for outreach Guadalupe Business Association has 40 members advocating for better connectivity
Business expansion needs more access to infrastructure
Impacts Disporportionately impacts students who need access to educational resources and ag-workers (transition to digital communication requires training)
Table 17: Guadalupe City Hall Public Forum Summary
It was also reported that within the agricultural workforce, there is a growing demand by employers for employees to be able to access scheduling and other information via the internet. Mostly, they are using phones to access the necessary information. In addition, employers in the education sector have identified parents' growing reliance on technology to communicate with their children's teachers. 61 Policy and Planning
Project team members met with city staff multiple times to discuss policy and planning efforts and shared the statewide resource, Getting Connected: A Broadband Deployment and Adoption Resource Guide for Local and Regional Government Leaders29. Survey questions were adapted from the Guide and emailed to city staff for their direct input. Responses informed key opportunities and priorities for the City of Guadalupe to improve redundancy and resiliency.
Conversations with community leaders suggest an interest in developing infrastructure and policies to improve broadband access. With regional support, the city can build a strong foundation of efficient and effective policy and planning strategies to reach broadband goals.
Guadalupe is unique in the level of local engagement and buy-in of civic organizations like the Guadalupe Business Association, Los Amigos de Guadalupe, Guadalupe Community Changers, and others as the conversation regarding affordability and adoption continues. Advocating for community Wi-Fi that would serve the unserved and underserved should be a priority for the local coalition.
Guadalupe
Inventory of assets No
Permitting authority Sometimes
Installed conduit No
Dig Once policy No
Permit process Yes
Online process Yes
BB priority in planning In process
Smart city priority No
Wi-Fi/Fiber interest No
Table 18: City of Guadalupe Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment Broadband Infrastructure
In the development of Pasadera, there appear to be conduits and junction boxes available to support Fiber-to-the-Home. Charter Communications has shared with the city its fiber footprint:
29 California Emerging Technologies Fund (CETF) and Valley Vision, 2021: cetfund.org/report/getting-connected-abroadband-deployment-and-adoption-resource-guide 62 Figure 28: Charter Communications Fiber Map for City of Guadalupe In recent years, the city has undertaken initiatives to provide community Wi-Fi access in public places, including recreation centers, libraries, and the senior center. The Leroy Park initiative recently included $39,000 of ARPA funding for updates.
The City of Guadalupe does not currently have a complete and up-to-date asset inventory; rights-of-way, easements, and other broadband infrastructure deployment information and mapping are on the City’s project list. Potential infrastructure components are already in place, and the viability of their structural integrity remains to be validated.
63 Figure 29: Caltrans Projects for City of Guadalupe
Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) The City of Guadalupe should consider the following actions:
1. Access (Capacity & Connectivity)
a. Proactively work with the school district to determine any partnership opportunities either together or with the private sector.
b. Assist in identifying residences that are unable to connect to internet service and develop an inventory of buildings not up to current standards as a tracker for future funding opportunities or ordinance development.
2. Affordability & Adoption
a. Community feedback identified barriers such as lack of equipment, limited knowledge of affordability programs, and technology training. It is essential to foster partnerships that will overcome the barriers.
b. Support deployment of the Affordable Connectivity Program c. Continue to engage with the community and support local work efforts and the work of the Digital Equity Coalition.
3. Requirements for Redundancy & Resiliency
a. Continue to partner with SBCAG in regional coordination of the Golden State Connect Network and last-mile planning and implementation.
64 b. Continue to partner with SBCAG as the regional lead on broadband planning to support staffing capacity.
c. Focus on policy development that reduces the barriers to fiber broadband deployment, including General Plan update alignments
d. Meet with the major local service providers and gain a clear understanding of the infrastructure available and determine what is needed for redundancy and resiliency e. Continue to engage with and track conversations and updates by the Golden State Connect network.
Lompoc: Broadband Community Profile
As Lompoc makes decisions on broadband infrastructure and planning, consideration must be given to the significant number of anchor institutions and the opportunity to build a safety net for the community. Internet is available, yet the community's low-income residents and some business sectors are challenged with a lack of affordable access. Economic development considerations connected to broadband infrastructure need to be explored. With the growing focus on Vandenberg Space Force Base, Lompoc should not be overlooked as an asset providing housing, a workforce, and services to the future private spaceport. Internet access and digital equity and inclusion initiatives are important to track to support workforce development.
Community Overview
Municipality
Population
Size
Median
Age
Geographic
Footprint Major Industries
Lompoc 44444 33.4 11.62 sq mi
Health Care and Social
Services; Education; Public
Administration; Retail
Demographic data from U.S. Census Community Snapshot30
The City of Lompoc is nestled in the Santa Rita Hills, nearly equidistant to the city of Santa Barbara in the south and San Luis Obispo in the north. It is situated near the center of California's coast along the Pacific Coast Highway, California Highway 1, and has major arteries running through the city, including Highway 1 and Highway 246. A map of the city is available at 636657284447470000 (cityoflompoc.com).
A map of the region is posted at 636657284445330000 (cityoflompoc.com) The City of Lompoc was founded as a town in 1874 and incorporated as a city on August 13, 1888.
Before the city's establishment, the construction of the La Purisima Mission in 1787 marked the earliest European settlement in the Lompoc Valley. Growth in the Lompoc Valley was sparked by the 1901 completion of the coastal railroad between San Francisco and Los Angeles, which included the extension of a spur into Lompoc. The Lompoc Valley is home to Vandenberg Space Force Base, the first missile 30 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Lompoc_city,_California?g=1600000US0642524 65 base of the United States Air Force. Today, the city is a travel destination known for its downtown mural program, local wines and acclaimed cuisine, historic landmarks, parks, and nearby beaches.
This city profile provides complete information on the city and its services: 636657286079970000 (cityoflompoc.com). The presence of community Wi-Fi networks at local libraries and public spaces is of major significance to Broadband for All goals.
Lompoc is home to 44,444 residents, and approximately 44% speak a language other than English at home, indicating a strong need for multilingual resources to support the local community. Lompoc has the second-highest proportion of children as residents compared to other municipalities across the county; 27.8% of local community members are children under 18 and attend one of the schools in the Lompoc Unified School District. The largest job-contributing industry in the city is Health Care and Social Services. Major health centers within the city limits, Lompoc Valley Medical Center and Lompoc Health Center, and additional private providers run small businesses to serve the community. Education is the second-largest industry in the city in terms of jobs provided due to the presence of the Lompoc Adult Education Center and Allan Hancock College campuses, in addition to the local pre-K – 12 school district.
Public Administration is the third-largest industry in Lompoc, with city staff serving the municipality and offices serving County departments housed within the city limits. Significantly, the Education and Public Administration sectors offer compelling benefits packages, including retirement planning and health plans. The fourth largest sector is Retail, comprised of small businesses and large nationwide chains serving the local community's needs.
The average household income is approximately $57,700, about $20,000 below the countywide average household income. Over a quarter of all children under 18 live below the poverty line (27%), and of the total population, 17% of residents are part of this designated underserved group. Over one-third of Lompoc residents are eligible for the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP), 36% of total households.
Of all the eligible households, 30% are enrolled with ACP and eligible for a reduced-price or free internet plan at minimum designated speeds31. The enrollment rate is on par with several North County zip codes and surpasses enrollment rates in the south county; however, increased enrollment rates would serve a significant portion of Lompoc residents. Current efforts aligned with initiatives at Partners in Education, Allan Hancock College, and the Department of Social Services may continue to improve enrollment rates.
Data collection efforts in Lompoc sourced city personnel, local business leaders, local non-profit leaders, education leaders, and community members, providing a clear picture of the current status of broadband efforts and revealing opportunities for future planning.
Broadband Needs Assessment
Broadband Service Availability
Based on all available data, broadband availability in the City of Lompoc is extensive. The map displayed below was created using the public CPUC information available via the GIS Map Data Portal (refer to 31 Geographical Information Center, Chico State Enterprises, accessed August 2022:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/8c0249a9de8d404a9b49966fb824b728 66 Section 1, Table 1 for CPUC served/unserved definitions). It shows most of the City of Lompoc in green, indicating that 25/3 Mbps Service is accessible.
Figure 30: Broadband service availability in the City of Lompoc Speed Test Results
The graphics below detail the distribution of the internet speed according to data collected from speed tests in the City of Lompoc.
Figure 31: Speed Test results across the City of Lompoc Based on the 76 speed tests taken in the city and analyzing for 100/100Mbps, very few of the tests achieved this result, although some participants had excellent download and upload speeds. 67 Community Stakeholders Needs Assessment
The May 2022 public forum held in the city was moderated by the President of the local American Association of University Women (AAUW). The panelists included the deputy superintendent of the Lompoc Unified School District, the local YMCA Executive Director, and a Lompoc librarian. The primary themes of the conversation were a lack of awareness of affordability programs, internet access, and safety.
There is a need for additional equipment and training resources within the community and access to a community Wi-Fi system. The library reported that their hot spot and computer checkout is a valuable program specifically for job seekers and others who lack connectivity. The school district had a challenging time connecting the students during COVID and, through a unique partnership with an energy company, was able to deploy hotspots throughout the city to ensure student access.
Public Forum Summary – event held May 14, 2022, at the Adult School and Career Center Challenges Lack awareness of affordability programs
Internet safety for children connecting remotely
Inadequate training resources/lack of awareness of training resources Poor connectivity
General lack of home access to the internet
Opportunities Access to online job applications and online trainings Primo Energy was a key partner in helping deploy hot spots for children via School District properties
Library checks out chrome books & hot spots to community members Impacts Disproportionately impacts students, multilingual community members and English language learners, community members lacking digital literacy Unable to apply for certain resources or register for programs that require connectivity – increased stress
Table 19: Lompoc Adult School and Career Center Public Forum Summary More data could help with a more thorough analysis, although affordability and access to reliable internet appear to be the biggest challenges for the community. Cost is the highest barrier to internet access as internet service is available throughout the entire community.
Policy and Planning
Project team members met with city staff multiple times to discuss policy and planning efforts and shared the statewide resource, Getting Connected: A Broadband Deployment and Adoption Resource 68 Guide for Local and Regional Government Leaders32. Survey questions were adapted from the Guide and emailed to city staff for their direct input. Responses informed key opportunities and priorities for the City of Lompoc to improve redundancy and resiliency.
Analysis shows that there are good broadband infrastructure development and policy alignment processes, and they are broadband ready. For policy consideration and as new fiber is brought through the city, the pavement installation moratoriums could be a significant barrier unless micro-trenching technology is excluded from the moratoriums. If not, this should be reviewed and updated as staff determines the best path forward.
Lompoc
Inventory of assets Yes
Permitting authority Yes
Installed conduit Yes
Dig Once policy Yes
Permit process Yes
Online process Yes
BB priority in planning Yes
Smart city priority Yes
Wi-Fi/Fiber interest Yes
Table 20: City of Lompoc Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment Broadband Infrastructure
The City of Lompoc is uniquely positioned in that broadband connectivity is more of an adoption than a deployment issue. As incumbent providers, the infrastructure provided by Frontier and Comcast within the city encompasses 100% of the community. With that said, some areas immediately adjacent to the city in the unincorporated areas have known coverage issues.
Frontier Communications is currently involved with an initiative to deliver fiber to the premises of all its subscribers. In addition, the town seems to be well-positioned with Verizon 5G Home Internet service.
Finally, the city already has a well-established footprint of community Wi-Fi areas.
For nearly three decades, the city has emphasized broadband infrastructure. A significant investment in establishing the current city infrastructure occurred in the 1990s when Comcast created the INET, which interconnected city facilities and the school district. A decade later, LompocNet was created to provide anyone in the community with wireless access to the internet. Today, LompocNet has some 300 subscribers. While a technology refresh of Wi-Fi infrastructure is of particular interest, the backhaul wireless network is a state-of-the-art multipoint-to-point system that connects all city facilities and serves as a foundation for the municipal network.
Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) The City of Lompoc should consider the following actions:
1. Access (Capacity & Connectivity)
32 California Emerging Technologies Fund (CETF) and Valley Vision, 2021: cetfund.org/report/getting-connected-abroadband-deployment-and-adoption-resource-guide 69 a. Explore partnerships with education, health, library, and community centers to support a community Wi-Fi system that meets 100/100Mbps.
2. Affordability & Adoption
a. Ensure capacity to seek grant funding and possibly private partners to rehabilitate current wireless infrastructure
b. Support local partnerships with Santa Barbara Foundation and the Digital Equity Coalition and identify how it may support connectivity for qualifying community members.
3. Requirements for Redundancy & Resiliency
a. Continue to partner with SBCAG in regional coordination of the Golden State Connect Network and last-mile planning and implementation.
b. Full assessment of connectivity of anchor institutions – benefits and opportunities. c. Explore public/private partnerships and develop a funding model to reduce city risk with aging infrastructure.
d. Explore Loan Loss Reserve funding from the State (SB156) to reduce city risk with aging infrastructure.
e. Continue safety, emergency response, and cyber security in planning and policy deliberations related to smart city planning.
Santa Barbara: Broadband Community Profile
The city of Santa Barbara had the highest engagement of the public in crowdsourced data collection.
While much of the city is connected and has done an outstanding job with some free connectivity services via the library (Appendix I), affordability and digital literacy are concerns. The primary economic drivers of the city have always relied on reliable connectivity, and they will continue to grow their demand for infrastructure. To address digital equity and inclusion, the Digital Equity Coalition will be a significant partner in providing data and other support to the city in phases 1 and 2 for expanding access and community adoption.
Community Overview
City of
Santa Barbara
Population
Size
Median
Age
Geographic
Footprint Major Industries
88,665 38.9 42.0 sq mi
Accommodation and Food Services;
Health Care and Social Services; Retail;
Professional, Scientific and Technical
Services
Demographic data from U.S. Census Community Snapshot33
The City of Santa Barbara is situated along U.S. Highway 101 between a south-facing coastline and the Santa Ynez Mountains. Santa Barbara has been promoted as the "American Riviera" and attracts over seven million visitors each year that attend arts and culture events and outdoor activities and enjoy the many hospitality services offered throughout the city's network of hotels and restaurants. 33 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Santa_Barbara_city,_California?g=1600000US0669070 70 In addition to being a popular tourist and resort destination, the city has a diverse local economy shaped by entrepreneurship and local investment. The accommodation and food services and retail sectors are the first and third largest industry contributors to the local economy and serve tourists and residents.
Health care and social services are the second largest industry in terms of jobs provided in Santa Barbara due to the presence of Cottage Hospital and Sansum Health Care centers, community medical clinics, private practices, and government service offices located in the city. A growing hub for tech and research supported by entrepreneurial endeavors shapes the fourth largest sector in the city:
professional, scientific, and technical services. The presence of four major institutions of higher learning provides a tributary to the local job market, including the University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara City College, Westmont College, and Antioch University.
Santa Barbara is home to a local population of 88,665 people living across seven zip codes and ranging across the socioeconomic spectrum. The median age of 38.9 indicates that, among other things, a large population of digital natives reside in the city that is likely able to navigate the digital world with some ease. It would be a mistake to assume that digital literacy has been achieved across the population due to the socioeconomic and language factors influencing access and familiarity. Approximately 33% of people speak a language other than English in their homes, showing a significant population that benefits from multilingual resources. The average annual income of $88,665 is above the statewide average, and 12.3% of the population lives below the poverty line, including 11.2% of children under 18.
Another revealing look at the impact of socioeconomic diversity on connectivity across the City of Santa Barbara can be seen in the percentage of households eligible for the Affordable Connectivity Program disaggregated by zip code.
Zip Code 93101 93103 93105 93108 93109
% Households eligible for ACP 41 28 19 14 30
% of Eligible Households that are
enrolled*
23 24 18 7 11
Table 21: Affordable Connectivity Program Eligibility and Enrollment Rates for City of Santa Barbara, sorted by Zip Code34 The city of Santa Barbara benefits from a thriving non-profit sector that works alongside public institutions and private organizations to benefit the residents they serve. Collaborative efforts in the city of Santa Barbara are targeted and reach communities through trusted networks. For example, children under 18 make up 18% of the population and attend one of the many schools joined together in the Santa Barbara Unified School District. The School District works with non-profit Partners in Education to promote digital connectivity and access to technology devices. This effort was ramped up during the COVID-19 pandemic, which has led to greater connectivity. The City of Santa Barbara Public Library provides many opportunities for free access to the internet and can be a partner in the adoption of broadband. Cooperation between public, private, and non-profit agencies has proven effective in reaching underserved community members.
34 Geographical Information Center, Chico State Enterprises, accessed August 2022:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/8c0249a9de8d404a9b49966fb824b728 71 Broadband Needs Assessment
Broadband Service Availability
Based on all available data, broadband availability in the City of Santa Barbara is extensive. The map displayed below was created using the public CPUC information available via the GIS Map Data Portal (refer to Section 1, Table 1 for CPUC served/unserved definitions). It shows most of the City of Santa Barbara in green, indicating that 25/3 Mbps Service is accessible.
Some businesses and higher education offices utilize their own internet service. COX Communications and Frontier are incumbent ISPs in the area, and most respondents are subscribers. Other providers include T-Mobile, Verizon Business, and SpaceX Starlink.
Figure 32: Broadband service availability in the City of Santa Barbara Speed Test Results
The graphics below detail the distribution of the received internet speed according to the data collected from the speed tests in the City of Santa Barbara.
72 Figure 33: Speed Test results across the City of Santa Barbara The City of Santa Barbara had the largest number of respondents to the needs assessment and the speed testing. Data collected via the speed test showed that most of the area has connection options with a wide range of speeds. Areas show consistently lower speeds, specifically near the Santa Barbara Zoo and the area between 101 freeway and E Cabrillo Blvd. The rest of the speed testing showed inconsistent connection speeds based on the provider, possibly due to equipment in use or the subscriber's plan. Another example of inconsistent access speeds was between Foothill Road, State Street, San Roque Road, and Alamar Avenue, zip code 93105. The area appears to be predominantly served by Frontier and COX Communications, with some locations showing less than 10Mbps download speeds and a nearby or neighboring property exceeding 100download Mbps. Broadband for All targets symmetrical 100/100Mbsp for all Californians.
Community Stakeholders Needs Assessment
Supervisor Das Williams moderated the May 2022 public forum held in the city. The panelists included Women's Economic Ventures, Santa Barbara Unified School District representatives, South Coast Chambers of Commerce, the Sansum Diabetes Research Institute, and Partners in Education. Spanish language interpretive services were provided to the community for the event. Notable for the City of Santa Barbara is that the discussion did not focus on the lack of infrastructure in the way it had in other communities. Primary themes included a lack of awareness of low-cost or affordability programs for internet service and the need for digital equipment. These issues can be addressed through partnerships and outreach and starting with options for low-cost and free equipment from Partners in Education and affordability programs offered by the city's primary carrier COX Communications.
Public Forum Summary – event held May 25, 2022, at La Casa de la Raza Challenges Lack of awareness of affordability programs
Inadequate training resources/lack of awareness of training resources Inadequate internet safety and responsibility training
Lack of reliable connectivity (1100 students needed assisted access during COVID)
Opportunities Private sector innovation showed great success and support for economic development
Partners in Education partnerships with the schools
73 Identify key partners and develop-wrap around approach Impacts Disproportionate impacts on multilingual community members, English language learners, rural community members, and socially and economically disadvantaged community members
Physical and mental health impacts of lack of access to the internet Need access to resources – nutrition and other social services Improve community awareness of emotional/social impacts of excessive screen time
Table 22: La Casa de la Raza Public Forum Summary
The needs assessment evaluated community sentiment regarding access and affordability, and analysis showed the total responses by zip code and percentage as calculated by all responses.
Based on the responses received, more than 50% of the respondents have a service that meets their needs, and most use it for work or school. Overall, the Santa Barbara community is connected to the internet, and the gap is noted as affordability. During the public forum, it could be inferred that some feel that children are 'too connected to the internet, as noted in the quality-of-life impacts.
Policy and Planning
Project team members met with city staff multiple times to discuss policy and planning efforts and shared the statewide resource, Getting Connected: A Broadband Deployment and Adoption Resource Guide for Local and Regional Government Leaders35. Survey questions were adapted from the Guide and emailed to city staff for their direct input. Responses informed key opportunities and priorities for the City of Santa Barbara to improve redundancy and resiliency.
Analysis of responses to the survey reveals readiness to implement policy and planning efforts that improve the efficiency of infrastructure development. Specific policy and planning efforts include assessment of the fiber infrastructure permitting process to clarify the pathway for applicants, formalizing a "dig once" policy into planning processes, and integrating broadband planning and development goals into the General Plan or other relevant guidance documents. The current programs offered through the Santa Barbara Public Library present a significant opportunity for policy and planning to coalesce with grant funding opportunities that would increase the capacity and reach of public-access internet and devices. In partnership with libraries and public entities, city efforts to accelerate public access Wi-Fi planning would reach multiple city goals, including support of the downtown business district and reaching underserved areas to further close the digital divide in Santa Barbara. It would be prudent to assess stakeholders' willingness to support such efforts.
Santa Barbara
Inventory of assets Yes
Permitting authority Yes
Installed conduit Yes
Dig Once policy Yes
Permit process No
Online process Yes
35 California Emerging Technologies Fund (CETF) and Valley Vision, 2021: cetfund.org/report/getting-connected-abroadband-deployment-and-adoption-resource-guide 74 BB priority in planning No
Smart city priority No
Wi-Fi/Fiber interest Yes
Table 23: City of Santa Barbara Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment Broadband Infrastructure
The City of Santa Barbara owns conduit, traffic signals, and some streetlights. Small cell facilities have been installed in some areas and are regulated by Municipal Code Chapter 9.170. As the City explores options for community Wi-Fi in the downtown corridor, developing a partnership with a provider and other public organizations may be the most feasible. Phasing in an entire system with fiber and Wi-Fi would create an open-access system that would provide the backbone for future smart city planning and support digital equity and inclusion initiatives.
For the city to move ahead, it would require investments, either grant funding or budget allocations, to build the capacity necessary for broadband infrastructure planning to become a priority. In addition to funding, City Public Works believes construction standard resources could assist the providers with the deployment of additional broadband capacity.
Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) The City of Santa Barbara should consider the following actions:
1. Access (Capacity & Connectivity)
a. Community Wi-Fi for the downtown business district that meets 100/100mbps– Phase 1 b. Explore partnerships with education and community centers to expand community WiFi- Phase 2
2. Affordability & Adoption
a. A community Wi-Fi system would benefit those unable to connect due to cost. b. Ensure capacity to seek grant funding for ongoing maintenance and improvement of the library's broadband infrastructure.
c. Define a partnership with the Santa Barbara Foundation and the Digital Equity Coalition to support connectivity.
3. Requirements for Redundancy & Resiliency
a. Continue to partner with SBCAG in regional coordination of the Golden State Connect Network and last-mile planning and implementation.
b. Full assessment of connectivity of anchor institutions. c. Design last-mile fiber for city infrastructure
d. Explore public/private partnership development and funding models for infrastructure development – specifically the construction of conduit on Anacapa Street downtown and as part of future pavement maintenance projects.
e. Smart city planning and policy development
f. Consider safety, emergency response, and cyber security in planning and policy deliberations.
Santa Maria: Broadband Community Profile
The City of Santa Maria is well poised to lead smart city planning and initiatives that will benefit the local community and regionally. While it appears that the areas in and around Santa Maria have connectivity, 75 there is a significant gap between current levels and future targets of 100/100Mbps. The industries within the city will benefit from enhanced broadband, as would the agricultural sector throughout the Santa Maria Valley, as the industry's reliance on broadband infrastructure will continue to grow. The agriculture sector should be considered a stakeholder, and key industry leaders should be included in broadband development conversations.
Community Overview
Municipality
Population
Size
Median
Age
Geographic
Footprint Major Industries
Santa Maria 109,707 29 22.4 sq mi
Manufacturing; Health Care
and Social Services; Retail;
Education; agriculture
Demographic data from U.S. Census Community Snapshot36
The City of Santa Maria hugs the county's northern border and is the most populous municipality with nearly 110,000 residents. Santa Maria accounted for 90 percent of countywide population growth from 2000 to 2010 and 42 percent from 2010 to 2020. Santa Maria was designated an All-American City in 1998 by the National Civic League, attesting to the culture of creativity and collaboration, grassroots organization and civic engagement, and progress toward solving unique challenges in a highly diverse community.
Santa Maria is home to a strong and diverse workforce. Top industries in Santa Maria include agriculture, manufacturing, health care and social services, retail, government, and education.
Agriculture creates an estimated 26.4 percent of employment in the city. The manufacturing industry spans a range of sectors. Major medical centers, such as Marian Regional Medical Center/Dignity Health Centers and Community Health Centers, are supplemented by an extensive network of small businesses providing in-person healthcare services to the community, creating job opportunities in small and larger business environments. Over 500 retail establishments comprised of national chains and small, familyowned businesses thrive in Santa Maria and provide the community with competitive shopping options and a strong job market sector. There are more than 6,500 business licenses. Santa Maria is home to Allan Hancock College and Santa Barbara Business College, providing vocational and community education and Associate degree courses that lead to transfer to four-year universities around the nation.
A.T. Still University (ATSU), in partnership with Community Health Centers of the Central Coast, operates its Central Coast Physician Assistant Studies program and enrolls up to 100 students, bringing an influx of students, staff, and faculty who will contribute to the economy and quality of life.
The median age in Santa Maria is 29.6, revealing a majority population raised in the age of digital media and access. Across Santa Maria, over 65% of households speak a language other than English at home, demonstrating an apparent demand for multilingual resources promoting public programs and community engagement. Nearly one-third of the population are children under 18 attending one of the seventeen elementary schools, four junior high schools, four high schools, or one technical school. Both districts offer programs for low-income families to ensure adequate access to the National School Lunch 36 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Santa_Maria_city,_California?g=1600000US0669196 76 Program, multilingual and migrant education options, and health services. Schools utilize online applications to communicate with students and their families and are equipped to provide technical support at age-appropriate levels and devices for high school students to use for academic purposes.
The City of Santa Maria provides a full range of municipal services, including police and fire services, engineering and planning, street maintenance, recreation and parks services, water and wastewater utilities, solid waste collection and disposal, and general administrative activities. The information technology function is centralized, providing all services through a common network and two datacenters. The City supports a hybrid technical environment with email, file, and collaboration applications running in the Microsoft 365 cloud and internal systems running on a clustered, hyperconverged, virtualized environment.
Data collection efforts in Santa Maria sourced city personnel, local business leaders, local non-profit leaders, education leaders, and community members, providing a clear picture of the current status of broadband efforts and revealing opportunities for future planning.
Broadband Needs Assessment
Broadband Service Availability
Based on all available data, broadband availability in Santa Maria is high. The map displayed below was created using the public CPUC information using the GIS Portal Map (refer to Section 1, Table 1 for CPUC served/unserved definitions). It shows most of the City of Santa Maria in green, indicating that a 25/3 Mbps Service is accessible in a significant portion of the County. However, there are significant portions across the city, colored in red, that can be identified as unserved areas.
Comcast and Frontier are the major incumbent ISP providers.
77 Figure 34: Broadband service availability in the City of Santa Maria Speed Test Results
The graphics in Table 24 detail the distribution of the received internet speed according to the data collected from the speed tests in the City of Santa Maria.
Table 24: City of Santa Maria Speed Test Results
Upon examination of the CPUC base map and the overlay of speed test data identifies where access or quality of connectivity is a barrier to internet adoption and, therefore, a barrier to full digital inclusion.
Curious are the spikes in upload speeds because most data collected across the region show the upload speeds typically trend below 100Mbp.
78 For a community the size of Santa Maria, the needs assessment data sampling was not robust enough to draw solid conclusions. Additional data collection may show that a significant portion of the community lack access to affordable, reliable broadband.
Community Stakeholders Needs Assessment
In gathering information from stakeholders and the public, a public forum with a panel discussion was conducted on April 26, 2022. Moderating the event was Dr. Kevin Walthers, the Superintendent and President of Allan Hancock Community College. Panelists included the chief of operations for the MidCentral Coast Boys & Girls Club, the economic development director of the Santa Maria Chamber of Commerce, the director of Instructional Technology for Santa Maria Joint Union High School District, the director of education for People's Self-help Housing, the COO of the Marian Regional Medical Center and a local legislative advocate for the Area Agency on Aging. Themes are captured in Table 25 and tracked similarly to data collected by the city for their CDBG funding regarding access and adoption.
Public Forum Summary – event held on April 26, 2022, at the Santa Maria Library, downtown branch.
Challenges Businesses find services to be cost prohibitive Need access to devices to support digital literacy
Inequities with access include quality and availability of service Opportunities Reliance on internet is going to continue to grow Broadband improves opportunities to attract businesses
Continue to grow partnerships between the schools and parents Positive impacts of internet access across all sectors
Increased patient engagement in health care
Impacts Disproportionate impacts on economically-disadvantaged community members
Exacerbating achievement gap for students
Community does not want to lose children in schools due to lack of access Table 25: City of Santa Maria Public Library (Downtown Branch) Public Forum Summary Policy and Planning
Project team members met with city staff multiple times to discuss policy and planning efforts and shared the statewide resource, Getting Connected: A Broadband Deployment and Adoption Resource Guide for Local and Regional Government Leaders37. Survey questions were adapted from the Guide and emailed to city staff for their direct input. Responses informed key opportunities and priorities for the City of Santa Maria to improve redundancy and resiliency.
Analysis shows city policies are not a barrier to broadband infrastructure deployment. With the pending update of their general plan prioritizing broadband deployment, they have the necessary data to apply for last-mile grant funding for a community Wi-Fi project. 37 California Emerging Technologies Fund (CETF) and Valley Vision, 2021: cetfund.org/report/getting-connected-abroadband-deployment-and-adoption-resource-guide 79 Santa Maria
Inventory of assets Yes
Permitting authority Yes
Installed conduit Yes
Dig Once policy Mostly
Permit process Yes
Online process Yes
BB priority in planning In process
Smart city priority Yes
Wi-Fi/Fiber interest Yes
Table 26: City of Santa Maria Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment Broadband Infrastructure
In recent years, the City has established a 30-year partnership with Astound Business Solutions (formerly Wave Broadband) to establish and maintain a fiber ring around the entire city. Whereas the city provides facilities and rights of way, Astound Business Solutions provides connectivity and network support for city needs.
The Astound supported fiber network consists of a 288-strand fiber ring that surrounds the central part of the city and connects two datacenters in a redundant loop. Eight fiber spur segments tie into the ring, providing network connectivity to city departments and locations, and one additional segment is currently under construction. The fiber network buildout is expected to continue for the next few years as the city grows and funding becomes available.
Figure 35: Astound fiber network (shown in purple)
The fiber network is 10 Gigabit Ethernet (GbE), with the other locations connecting at speeds from 300Mbps to 5Gbps. There are 39 city locations connected to the network through fiber, cable, Virtual Private Network (VPN), point-to-point microwave, and satellite connections. The average utilization across the network is approximately 50%.
80 Santa Maria is pursuing an initiative to establish a Citizens Band Radio Service (CBRS) in the city, which would increase infrastructure to provide Internet access. A request for proposals has been released, and prospective bidders are asked to design and scope the RAN to accommodate the proposed system and allow for expansion in the future. At the core of the system will be an on-premises radio access network (RAN) in the main data center, which is located inside the city Police Department. The facility is a startof-the-art datacenter with redundant power, UPS, and HVAC and is connected to the secondary data center via a fiber ring. The data center has sufficient rack space to accommodate the additional RAN equipment. It is also anticipated that some components of the RAN can run on the existing V.M. infrastructure.
Civic leaders are considerably involved in conversations regarding Santa Maria's "Smart City, Safe City" initiative to guide the implementation of future technology investments. Research has been conducted, a roadmap developed, and select piloting of specific technologies with companies like Motorola has occurred. The initiative seeks to improve residents' access to services and enable staff to be more mobile and productive in the performance of their jobs. The strategic plan encompasses six focus areas:
access to government services, public safety enhancements, community development projects, recreation, education, arts and culture, and environment. Ubiquitous network connectivity to create a mesh CBRS/Wi-Fi network across the city is foundational to these focus areas. It is anticipated that the wireless network will support the following:
• public access to Wi-Fi in selected parks and recreational facilities • mobile access to network services for staff
• sensors and internet of things (IoT) components
• automated vehicle location (AVL)
• payment and information kiosks
• informational signage
• traffic control
• smart building monitoring and control
• security cameras
• Wi-Fi on buses
• smart meters
Core network infrastructure and 4 locations have been proposed to initiate this strategy. Final locations for this project will be selected based on available funding at the time of the award.
The city shows little interest in taking on the responsibility of broadband as a utility. On the other hand, a primary focus will be the need for computer access to support digital literacy and resolve inequities with access.
With that in mind, initiatives have been funded through Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) to provide community Wi-Fi access at recreation centers and libraries. Specifically, the Information Technology Division and the Special Projects Division have discussed the use of CDBG-CV funding to provide broadband access through community Wi-Fi in public facilities and parks during set timeframes, primarily in low-income neighborhoods with greater needs. The Wi-Fi would also serve a secondary purpose to providing Wi-Fi to city personnel conducting business in these areas. 81 Figure 36: Santa Maria Fiber Network
In preparing for the application of CDBG funding, the analysis indicated:
1. According to HUD and Census information, Santa Maria has 13 Census Tracts that fall into the Low-to-Moderate income bracket. 50%+ with income 80% or less of the median.
2. These 13 tracts collectively have a population of over 89,000. Santa Maria, as a whole, has about 110,000 residents.
3. According to survey data from the “Hard to Count Maps” developed by the CUNY Graduate Center using Census Bureau data,
a. Survey respondents were asked several questions about internet availability, including:
i. Do you have no internet availability or/and only dial-up service? Yes/No • Results varied among tracts, but on average, 21.6% stated they had no internet access or only dial-up service.
ii. Do you just have cellular service? Yes/No
• Results varied among tracts, but on average, 15.4% stated they only had cellular service.
b. If the above results are extrapolated across the 89,000 population, we get:
• Over 19,000 with no internet or just dial-up; and
• Over 13,000 with just cellular service.
Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) Recommended action steps were developed in partnership with the city:
1. Access (Capacity & Connectivity)
a. Apply for grant funding via NTIA’s BEAD program (2023) to expand the community network to support programs available that will increase levels of adoption and literacy and target speeds of 100/100Mbps.
b. Lead the conversation regarding partnership opportunities and the connection of anchor institutions locally and regionally.
2. Affordability & Adoption
a. Engage school districts to champion the imperative for ubiquitous connectivity. 82 b. Support the Digital Equity Coalition and CBOs in developing strategies to increase ACP enrollment.
c. In partnership with the Chamber of Commerce and workforce development, seek funding to support the community's business needs regarding business growth and digital training.
3. Requirements for Redundancy & Resiliency
a. Continue to partner with SBCAG in regional coordination of the Golden State Connect Network and last-mile planning and implementation.
b. Apply for grant funding to build capacity within City staff to lead work efforts. c. Continue engagement in regional discussions of the middle-mile with SBCAG and Golden State Connect to ensure proper access points to assess opportunities with current projects under development.
d. Engage in and prioritize collaborative funding strategies to support last-mile projects in the unserved and underserved areas surrounding Santa Maria. e. Identify and support catalyst projects that will benefit smart city planning related to fiber installations.
Solvang: Broadband Community Profile
The City of Solvang is on track toward achieving Broadband for All. While current internet service does not meet the speeds targeted by the initiative for all community members, City staff and elected officials have shown their commitment to and consideration of necessary policy changes to continue to move towards Broadband for All, including the expansion of community Wi-Fi. It will be necessary for capacity to be built within the staff to track grant opportunities, planning, and policy updates and be the liaison with the community and potential private partners.
Community Overview
Population
Size
Median
Age
Geographic
Footprint Major Industries 2022
Solvang 6126 50.2 2.4 sq mi
Accommodation and Food
Services; Professional,
Scientific, and Technical
Services; Retail; Health Care
and Social Services
Demographic data from U.S. Census Community Snapshot38
The City of Solvang lies along State Route 246, approximately halfway between U.S. Highway 101 and State Route 154. Solvang is a well-known destination for tourists and locals known as "The Danish Capital of America," showcasing authentic Danish-American heritage and culture with over 1.5 million visitors each year traveling to experience the northern European culture, cuisine, and unique boutique shopping. The pedestrian-friendly village hosts three museums, over two dozen inns, hotels, a full38 U.S. Census Community Snapshot, accessed September 2022:
data.census.gov/cedsci/profile/Solvang_city,_California?g=1600000US0672576 83 service guest ranch, meeting facilities, plenty of restaurants and bakeries, retail shops, and the Solvang Theaterfest, a unique outdoor theatre.
Beyond industries that serve the tourism economy in Solvang, major industries drive business development and are considered in economic development initiatives. Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services is a major industry of hundreds of entrepreneurs that provide technical expertise as small business owners. The Health Care and Social Services Industry in Solvang includes a local branch of Cottage Hospital that provides medical and emergency services, an urgent care center, several senior living facilities, and offices for the social service non-profit People Helping People.
The average household income is well above the federal poverty line, yet 7.3% of the Solvang population is below the poverty line, and 13% of all children under the age of 18 in the community are identified as living below the poverty line. While the median age of 50+ indicates a high population of older adults,
19.2% of the population are children under the age of 18 that attend local schools in the Solvang School District or the Santa Ynez Joint Union High School District. Of all households in Solvang, 20% are eligible for the Affordable Connectivity Program, and 7% of eligible households are actually enrolled39.
Broadband Needs Assessment
Broadband Service Availability
Based on all available data, broadband availability in the City of Solvang is high. The map displayed below was created using the public CPUC information available via the GIS Map Data Portal (refer to Section 1, Table 1 for CPUC served/unserved definitions). It shows most of the City of Solvang in green, indicating access to 25/3 Mbps Service.
In terms of ISP presence, Comcast and Frontier are the major broadband providers serving the community. Although there is a high broadband availability, Solvang community reports indicate that the cost to access the internet is prohibitive.
39 Geographical Information Center, Chico State Enterprises, accessed August 2022:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/8c0249a9de8d404a9b49966fb824b728 84 Figure 37: Broadband availability in City of Solvang Speed Test Results
The graphics below detail the distribution of the received internet speed according to the data collected from the speed tests in the City of Solvang.
Figure 38: Speed Test results across the City of Solvang The number of tests taken for download and upload measurements was low but was adequate for data analysis purposes, with 25 submissions from 18 unique fixed locations:
While crowdsource participation was low, the speed test captured data that met the prior CBAP minimum standard of 25/3 Mbps; however, the service average is below the future minimum standard of 100/100 Mbps. On average, residents report satisfaction with their level of service. As mentioned in 85 Section 2, what remains unknown is how the speed test takers were connected and what equipment they were using, as equipment may impact results.
Community Stakeholders Needs Assessment
A public forum was held on May 5, 2022, in Solvang City Council Chambers to discuss and understand the broadband status at the City of Solvang. Panelists for the May 2022 public forum included representatives from Santa Barbara County Women's Commission, the CEO of the United Way Boys and Girls Club of Santa Barbara County, the CEO of the Chamber of Commerce, and the CEO of People Helping People and the panel moderator. Responses informed the themes identified as broadband access gaps significant to Solvang stakeholders and community members. Table 27 summarizes the discussion points arising from panelist responses to the moderators' questions and audience members' contributions.
Public Forum Summary – event held May 5, 2022 in Solvang City Council Chambers Challenges Cost to access internet is prohibitive
Inequity in pricing/speed tiers
45% of the students qualify for reduced lunch and may not have access to the internet or devices
Lack of devices cause low internet use among community members Inadequate training resources/lack of awareness of training resources Opportunities Boys and Girls Club partners with schools to provide safety net for students who need internet access after school
Localized access: Chamber provided onsite access to online EDD, PPP and Lendistry support during the Pandemic
Partnerships and policy development to expand and streamline internet signups as part of their intake
Need reliable access to the internet for economic growth and job training, both tied to economic development
Impacts Limited access to healthcare for telehealth patients Social isolation for some seniors without access and digital literacy Students limited from accessing online educational resources Low-income inability to access certain services or social aid (e.g. CalFresh) Job searches, housing and job applications are predominantly completed online
Lack of redundancy in the system increases safety concerns Table 27: Solvang City Council Chambers Public Forum Summary Policy and Planning
Project team members met with city staff multiple times to discuss policy and planning efforts and shared the statewide resource, Getting Connected: A Broadband Deployment and Adoption Resource Guide for Local and Regional Government Leaders40. Survey questions were adapted from the Guide and emailed to city staff for their direct input. Responses informed key opportunities and priorities for the City of Solvang to improve redundancy and resiliency.
40 California Emerging Technologies Fund (CETF) and Valley Vision, 2021: cetfund.org/report/getting-connected-abroadband-deployment-and-adoption-resource-guide 86 Analysis shows that Solvang intends to add Broadband in the update of their General Plan, which would open the way for policy development to lower barriers to infrastructure development, increase capacity, and allocate financial resources to support the work. The City of Solvang intends to adopt policies to track and develop comprehensive broadband connectivity throughout the city. While they have tracked rights-of-way and easements, there is a gap in records of fiber lines or services that could limit efficiency in infrastructure development.
Solvang
Inventory of assets Some
Permitting authority Depends
Installed conduit No
Dig Once policy No
Permit process Yes
Online process No
BB priority in planning In process
Smart city priority Yes
Wi-Fi/Fiber interest Yes
Table 28: City of Solvang Broadband Policy and Planning Assessment Broadband Infrastructure
The City of Solvang identified enhanced connectivity as its priority to ensure the stability and reliability of services for the community. The near-term focus will be building awareness of broadband as a utility and establishing the necessary policies to support that reality.
While the City intends to ensure an adequate infrastructure exists to deliver broadband for all, there is no intent to develop any new capacity or to provide oversight for maintenance and support. Instead, the city leaders will seek to develop an approach with SBCAG and neighboring cities to establish uniform processes to manage the abundance of broadband installation and connections throughout the City of Solvang.
Key Opportunities and Priorities (in Alignment with Broadband for All) In addition to countywide opportunities and priorities listed in Section 7, the City of Solvang’s efforts to reach Broadband for All should consider the follow actions:
1. Access (Capacity & Connectivity)
a. Based on the data, enhancing broadband services should be considered a priority via private-sector investments, public-sector investments, or a public-private combination. b. Community feedback shows that increased connectivity is essential in increasing economic opportunities. Based on Solvang's top four economic industry sectors, each of them would benefit from a more robust infrastructure.
2. Affordability & Adoption
a. Community feedback identified barriers to broadband adoption for their senior community, their children, and telehealth clients. Enhancing capacity and training on accessing the internet is a priority for the community. b. Increased training opportunities should be a top priority and considered when there are future discussions regarding what digital equity work efforts should be funded.
3. Requirements for Redundancy & Resiliency
87 a. Continue to partner with SBCAG as the regional lead on broadband planning. b. Seek grant funding or other funding to build the capacity of City staff to work on broadband issues.
c. Map city rights-of-way and incorporate it into GIS for future design and engineering. d. Develop and map city infrastructure that could be utilized for fiber installation, which may follow along with existing infrastructure.
e. Work towards a ‘dig once’ policy at a local and regional level and continue to evaluate policies to align with deployment efforts.
f. Review the permit application process for ease of use for fiber builds and apply best practices where feasible.
g. Meet with service providers and identify local barriers to deployment and opportunities for public-private partnerships.
h. The general plan update is on track toward Broadband for All goals.
Section 5: Assessment of Broadband Provider Landscape
With the passing of SB 156 in 2021, the public sector can access funding to invest in infrastructure that would help close the gaps between the unserved and underserved. The lack of broadband access typically points to a marginal business case to incentivize local service providers to deploy the necessary fiber infrastructure. Historically, there have been significant challenges nationwide in reaching lowdensity rural areas due to topography or cost.
While no local governments within Santa Barbara County have stated an interest in becoming ISPs, through the strategy process, civic leaders are engaged and developing an understanding of the imperative to provide Broadband for All and the significant resources that have become available to achieve that vision. Based on this new awareness, a significant opportunity now exists for collaborative approaches, achievable through grant funding and for stakeholders to engage and help create the local landscape of the future. As a result, an industry transition occurs where incumbent service providers may consider the public sector a partner.
This section aims to assess the broadband provider landscape for residential subscribers in Santa Barbara County and provide initial recommendations for reducing broadband deployment barriers.
Broadband Provider Landscape in SBC
The data utilized for this analysis include the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) broadband availability data and U.S. Census Bureau data. The CPUC collects broadband availability datasets from the incumbent ISP in the area and uses numerous resources to validate the data integrity, including subscriber data, public feedback, and test results submitted by the public.
Table 29 lists residential internet service providers (ISPs) with a presence in Santa Barbara County and the technologies offered for end subscribers, as well as the percentage of the population and housing units served by each ISP.
88 Internet Service Provider Technology Population Population (%)
Housing
Units
Housing
Units
(%)
Frontier Communications
Asymmetric xDSL
308946 68.94% 115217 72.81%
ADSL2, ADSL2+
VDSL
Optical Carrier / FTTx
Comcast Cable
Communications
Management, LLC
Cable Modem – DOCSIS 3.1
206686 46.12% 66112 41.78%
Optical Carrier / FTTx
Cox Communications
Cable Modem – DOCSIS 3.1
189567 42.30% 77251 48.82%
Optical Carrier / FTTx
Impulse Internet Services
Asymmetric xDSL
17533 3.91% 7483 4.73% Copper Wireline (other than
xDSL)
Terrestrial Fixed Wireless
City of Lompoc
(LompocNet) Terrestrial Fixed Wireless 13732 3.06% 5280 3.34% Charter Communications
Inc Cable Modem – DOCSIS 3.1 8046 1.80% 2118 1.34%
Inyo Networks Optical Carrier / FTTx 3061 0.68% 944 0.60% Ranch Wi-Fi Terrestrial Fixed Wireless 819 0.18% 267 0.17% GeoLinks Terrestrial Fixed Wireless 736 0.16% 317 0.20% Others -- 661 0.15% 270 0.17%
Table 29: Santa Barbara County Residential Internet Service Providers The following observations are derived from these results:
• Frontier Communications is the ISP that serves the largest segment of residential subscribers, offering service to nearly 69 % of the population in Santa Barbara County. • The other two major ISP in Santa Barbara County are Comcast Cable Communications Management and Cox Communications, each serving more than 42% of the population in the county.
Furthermore, the map below displays the concentration of internet service providers (ISPs) across Santa Barbara County, representing the number of options available for end consumers. Areas with more than two ISPs offering services are minimal and concentrated in the county’s cities, indicating that the broadband market is not very competitive and end subscribers do not have multiple choices for selection.
89 Figure 39: ISP concentration map in Santa Barbara County (CPUC Data) Changing Roles
Significant government investment is and will continue to occur over the next few years to result in broadband becoming as available as power and water. What is unique about this is the level of investment of public funds and the new role of municipal government as a partner with industry. Prior to COVID, the availability of service to rural areas and neighborhoods where the return on investment was a risk, those barriers to entry can be removed through public/private models. A definition of roles is required where an ISP can offer its services and innovate its capabilities. The public sector can provide resources that close the gap related to providing areas to neighborhoods with needs.
Challenges in the Permitting Process
This strategy seeks to describe and develop a level of public-private collaboration where none has previously existed. Identifying current issues, removing barriers, and seeking to accelerate deployment and adoption will benefit the entire region.
The project team met with representatives from Charter/Spectrum, COX Communication, Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon to gain an understanding of what the barriers are, from a business perspective, to deploy broadband and maintain their current assets. The summary from each of them was the same.
The unique rules and regulations of each city and county territory make it challenging and costly when attempting to coordinate a build or upgrade existing infrastructure. Several even stated that, at times, a project could be delayed due to uncertainty of what is required, permit review may be delayed, and the project becomes too cost-prohibitive to continue.
The costliest aspect of a fiber installation project is the excavation for conduit installation, which increases the risk of added project delays. In response, California’s Assembly passed AB-41, expanding the State’s existing dig-once policy and requiring the Department of Transportation to not only notify broadband companies of a project and opportunity to install conduit but also to install conduit for fiber 90 in priority areas by default. Replicating similar policies at the regional and local level would similarly be impactful with increased collaboration opportunities.
Similarly, pole attachments are increasingly more challenging yet vital as they provide a path for broadband installation where trenching is not feasible. Some Cities manage pole installations through the encroachment permit process, and some do not. Some poles are owned by a utility, and adding additional infrastructure may require pole replacements which also becomes cost prohibitive. High-fire districts have increased utility restrictions and updated specifications which increase costs. Centralized coordination and tracking of pole attachments could expedite broadband installations.
Carriers reported that it is incredibly challenging to work through a permitting department where staff may not have experience and do not understand the industry, leading to delays in issuing permits. Some established policies include requirements for a half-day (or less) upgrade or repair to include complete traffic control rather than a temporary alert cone. Providing telecommunications companies maintenance considerations similar to those provided to utilities would ease the burden, including allowing notification of customers directly of services provided versus notifications sent by permitting agencies which cause alarm and may lead to misunderstandings.
In summary, opportunities for regional coordination and local permit policy review would increase regional broadband readiness. As a starting point, the following are initial recommendations for reducing broadband deployment barriers:
• Accelerate permit processing – City and County staff time is reported to be limited. Anticipating the number of new broadband projects, capacity building within permit departments, and support with regional coordination by SBCAG is recommended. • Standardize permit requirements – Work towards a standardized application process where feasible. Regional coordination of a permitting system. • Develop dig once policies and related communications – dig once enables multiple providers to participate and share costs and establish a planned approach to reduce construction costs and disruption.
• Develop a pole asset inventory, including ownership, maintenance, and replacement schedule.
Additional recommendations and strategies are provided in the California Local Jurisdiction Permitting Playbook41.
Section 6: Regional GIS Map Data Portal
Summary
Unique to this project is the creation of an online interactive map data portal, incorporating data from numerous validated sources into a single curated system. After investigating a variety of options, the project team selected SimpleLayers42 as the technology partner to provide this functionality for the following reasons: a) the company has a 10+ year history of providing GIS support to Santa Barbara 41broadbandforall.cdt.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2022/09/California-Local-Jurisdiction-PermittingPlaybook-1.pdf 42 simplelayers.com 91 County, b) the company has a history in the broadband space, and c) the company is entrepreneurial by nature and flexible in providing support and developing a city-driven business model.
Data Library and Map Development
The GIS Map Data Portal addresses the task of presenting societal needs in the context of existing and potential broadband infrastructure. It consists of a data library and an interactive map portal visualizing the data.
The online GIS data library is comprised of three categories of materials, referenced initially in Section 2:
• General context (3 layers): {municipal boundaries, county boundaries, anchor institutions} • Broadband context (8 layers): {installed BB, proposed BB, speed test survey} • Societal context (9 layers): {zones of designated need, demographics] The process of accessioning map layers into the data library consists of two phases:
Phase 1: Data Discovery & Validation: map layers relevant to the project are discovered through web searching and direct outreach to governmental channels; the provenance of found layers is validated to ensure that they are from primary sources. The data collected for this application was received from California Lutheran University, the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), the National Telecommunications Information Administration (NTIA), the California State Geoportal, Caltrans, the Center for Disease Control, the U.S. Treasury, the Santa Barbara County Public Works Department, and the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG).
Phase 2: Technical Correction and Import: map layers passing validation are scanned for technical issues that interfere with data interoperability (undefined field types, disallowed characters in attribute fields, missing or wrong map projections, etc.); layers are corrected and imported to the library.
The online interactive map presents the data library layers styled to represent desired facets and functionality, including navigation, search, query, and export. Comparing and aligning with CPUC areasof-need mapping, the interactive map can discover and communicate how broadband service quality relates to CPUC-designated served and unserved areas (refer to Section 1, Table 1 for CPUC served/unserved definitions). Reconnaissance spatial analyses are presented in Section 4 of this document for municipalities and the county.
92 Figure 40: Map Portal Tool showing suite of interactive tools Recommendation: Maintain and Expand Usage of the Map Data Portal As broadband becomes recognized as a utility, visibility to all critical municipal infrastructure will become expected. The system offers many applications, including measuring the progress of digital inclusion work, assisting in fiber asset management and operation, and aiding in developing grants and applications for funding.
The platform requires support, maintenance, and continuous updates in capabilities to continue to leverage the information shared and result in benefits to the region. Absent use, the capability created will eventually be overcome by events as static data becomes outdated. Discussions required include:
• Support: This platform has been designed to provide every city with a map of priority areas and fiber infrastructure. Discussions should follow that examine the value of this platform in service to the cities and overall region. The information collected should continue with additional sources of fiber maps, right of ways, and adoption status. • Maintenance: As an IT platform, systems administration is required. Adding data, continually enhancing functions and tools, software licenses, and user support are common needs that require technical resources.
Section 7: Strategic Priorities and Actions
This section brings together areas of consideration and recommendations based on the data collection and findings presented in previous sections. The recommendations are aligned with legislative and practical outcomes to achieve Broadband for All.
Three primary goals for improving broadband services within Santa Barbara County are discussed and elaborated on throughout this section.
93 • Achieving Access Through Improved Broadband Infrastructure • Achieving Affordability and Adoption
• Achieving Redundancy and Resiliency
Achieving Access Through Improved Broadband Infrastructure Ensuring broadband access requires significant improvement in broadband infrastructure across Santa Barbara County. Below are the requirements and vision for developing infrastructure, followed by an elaboration on one of many viable operating scenarios for the county and a plan to accelerate near-term outcomes essential to long-term broadband infrastructure development.
Characterize Broadband Network Needs
The requirements and vision for Santa Barbara County are characterized below based on the network segments of interest, namely, the middle-mile and the last-mile.
Middle-Mile Deployment
Santa Barbara County's middle-mile network requirements include high-capacity fiber optic infrastructure to interconnect the communities while extending proximal connectivity to last-mile networks across the county, particularly in the more rural areas.
It is desirable for jurisdictions to have two points of entry via a ring topology to ensure service continuity in the event of service outages or cuts on a fiber optic trunk line. It is further desired to rationalize the interconnection of middle-mile network segments of various network operators, including incumbent ISPs, future ISPs, and the State of California. Importantly, a robust middle-mile network will improve the economics of last-mile networks, stimulating more last-mile development where it is most needed.
In addition to planning for an ever-increasing need for capacity, the middle-mile network intends to provide an open-access network (OANs) framework that offers incumbent ISPs and new entrants equal and non-discriminatory network access to service the community.
For the public sector, middle-mile benefits include reduced costs for the interconnection of facilities, support for telehealth, remote learning, and economic development, as well as enhanced services and innovation for smart cities.
Santa Barbara County Middle-Mile Vision
The envisioned regional middle-mile network incorporates the work done to date. It completes the regional aspects of the network with the establishment of redundant fiber in the south, traversing both inland and along the coast.
The Santa Barbara County middle-mile vision is a robust middle-mile network with three main network segments displayed in the graphic below: the North County Fiber Network, the South Coast Route, and the Buellton Connector. The envisioned middle-mile network provides a robust network with four rings that offer physical route diversity and multiple interconnections with last-mile networks. 94 Figure 41: Santa Barbara County Middle-Mile Vision
In recent years, considerable dialogue and high-level designs have been developed for the North County Fiber Network. The Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians has led the way in securing initial resources to explore the feasibility of this network.
State of California Middle-Mile Broadband Initiative
In May 2022, the California Department of Technology (CDT) released a statewide construction evaluation map with 10,000 miles of proposed build-out spanning the entire state. This full-system design map was delivered to Caltrans as they are actively conducting pre-construction analysis on the proposed routes outlined in the map.
The updated map involving Santa Barbara County is displayed in the graphic below. In the coming months, CDT will evaluate affordability and identify where the state will be able to build and where it will need to use Indefeasible Right of Use (IRU) leases. 95 Figure 42: State of California Middle-Mile Broadband Initiative Planning Santa Barbara County Broadband Delta Analysis
A delta analysis was performed to identify network segments of the Santa Barbara County middle-mile vision for potential projects to complete the map and provide the requisite connectivity throughout. The delta analysis presented below is contingent on the plans of the State of California, and as the State's plans evolve, the region will stay involved in the conversation. 96 Figure 43: Middle-Mile Broadband Delta Analysis
Note: Areas shaded in white represent the middle-mile gap in the current State of California plans.
According to the delta analysis, the South Coast Route and the Buellton Connector are the network segments requiring further analysis to close the gap unaddressed by the current plans from the State of California.
Areas of Focus
The State of California plans significant investment in the Santa Barbara County middle-mile network.
Local efforts should focus on complementing the state-level work by analyzing funding requirements and business and operating models to deploy and manage the middle-mile network.
The areas of focus for middle-mile network deployment are:
1. Ensure funding to complete the high-level network design for the middle-mile network.
Completing a high-level design of the middle-mile network must happen in concert with other key stakeholders, including the Golden State network, Caltrans, the Cities, and the Chumash Tribe.
2. Support and coordination with the work performed by the Chumash & Econ Alliance with funding from an EDA Grant for the North County middle-mile analysis and design.
3. Continue coordination with the State of California Middle-Mile Broadband Initiative. The actions of SBC will pivot off the states' plans which will be monitored closely.
Last-Mile Deployment
Last-mile fiber connectivity is the delivery network from the optical aggregation node to the subscriber locations, which are residential households, businesses, and anchor institutions throughout the community. Multiple technologies are available for delivering last-mile connectivity and are profiled in Section 3.
While a "fiber first" approach will be pursued via Fiber-to-the-Home (FTTH), it may be necessary to consider other technological alternatives, including fixed terrestrial wireless and satellite. Wireless technologies still require fiber connectivity for backhaul and middle-mile connections to the Internet Points of Presence (POPS). Points of Presence (POPS).
Last-Mile Deployment Prioritization
A cluster analysis was performed to identify areas lacking access to 25/3 Mbps service based on annually collected CPUC Broadband Data (December 2020). The following map displays areas of broadband need that are the target of last-mile network deployment. The radius of the circles is proportional to unserved and priority unserved populations (refer to Section 1, Table 1 for CPUC unserved definitions). An estimated 9,400 households lack 25/3 Mbps service.
Importantly, the CBAP initiative specifies a minimum download speed of 100 Mbps. The inference, therefore, is that a substantially higher number of households in Santa Barbara County lack sufficient broadband service.
97 Figure 44: Last-Mile Broadband Delta Analysis (CPUC Data) Urgent priorities for last-mile deployment are provided in Table 30 and are further referenced in Section
4. Priority Community Incumbent ISP in the area
Los Alamos Frontier Communications
Casmalia None – providers left the area
Cuyama/ New Cuyama Satellite availability; Applied Technology Group Inc.
Guadalupe Frontier Communications and Charter Communications Inc
Table 30: Last-mile deployment priorities in Santa Barbara County Areas of Focus
There are two areas of focus for last-mile network deployment:
1. Ensure funding to complete feasibility analysis for last-mile broadband deployments in the unincorporated areas in broadband need.
2. Capitalize on the processes established during the strategy development and utilize a technical advisory committee to assist with developing plans for last-mile funding.
Broadband Operating Scenario
In parallel with the needs analysis and the network design views referenced throughout this document, it is crucial to begin the process of "imagineering" the future to consider how the middle-mile networks will acquire funding, how the network will be managed, and to determine roles and responsibilities.
Primary components to consider in this journey are described below. 98 • Funding and Ownership Model: Analysis of funding options, stipulations, and obligations associated with receiving funds.
The network scope is defined, often to comport to grant specifications. It encapsulates passive infrastructure (rights of way, conduit, poles, fiber cables, etc.) and active network infrastructure (fiber optic equipment) applied to middle-mile and last-mile networks.
County partners will need to consider obligations of ownership of broadband infrastructure and develop plans accordingly.
• Operating Model: Consideration of the range of network operating activities (network provisioning and service delivery, network maintenance, customer care, etc.) and the delegation of such tasks by county partners to a selected entity.
It is important to note that, as the owner of the broadband infrastructure, certain responsibilities defined in partnership and operating agreements are in full effect and must be planned accordingly.
In short, a governance framework is required to accompany and oversee the defined operating model.
• Roles and Responsibilities: A responsibility assignment matrix is provided to identify the key project stakeholders and to convey the roles and responsibilities of each.
County partners need to consider the ramifications of operating and governance models for Broadband Infrastructure.
In the context of Santa Barbara County, any reasonable broadband scenario will include two criteria:
• Open-Access Network: A requirement for most Federal and State funding, an open-access network offer public and private ISPs wholesale access to broadband infrastructure and services with fair, reasonable, and equal terms.
• Outsourcing of Operating Activities: The Communities have clearly stated a preference to avoid direct operational responsibility for managing and operating a broadband network.
A Broadband scenario that meets the above criteria is described below.
Broadband Scenario: SBCAG, County or Municipal Ownership of Middle-Mile and Last-Mile Networks In this Broadband scenario, SBCAG implements a countywide entity that acts as an Open-Access Network (OAN) provider, offering wholesale services to broadband infrastructure. In this way, jurisdictions are not competing with ISPs but are facilitating their service delivery to end subscribers.
The model would be the same if the County or a city were to act as an OAN provider. Throughout this section, SBCAG will be referenced for the sake of the scenario, and it is important to keep in mind that the County or one of the eight cities would follow the same model.
The open-access approach enables competition among ISPs across the open-access network owned by SBCAG. Meanwhile, SBCAG maintains neutrality, non-discriminatory practices, and standard pricing for network providers.
99 The OAN could be managed via the Joint Powers Authority described in Section 2, which would establish SBCAG as the owner. The same standards would apply if the County or a city chose to act as an OAN provider.
The following approaches are implemented at the network level:
• Middle-mile approach: Ownership of a middle-mile network that complements and integrates with Golden State Network, providing a robust middle-mile network for Santa Barbara County. • Last-mile approach: SBCAG, County or city, acts as the "provider of last resort" for the last-mile network in unserved areas offering wholesale services to incumbent ISPs and new entrants and stimulating retail service competition in Santa Barbara County.
Funding and Ownership Model
The funding and ownership model is described as follows:
• SBCAG applies for funding to design and build the middle-mile and last-mile network infrastructure, including the passive (e.g., conduit, fiber, poles) and the active (e.g., OTN, routers) components.
• The capital for the physical infrastructure can be obtained via the assistance of Federal and State funding programs. Provided that CAPEX deployment is funded, a sustainable business case is achievable.
• The construction activities for the network deployment can be outsourced to a third party, while SBCAG, County, or a city oversees the activities.
• SBCAG, County or city, maintains the ownership of the passive and active infrastructure.
Figure 45 provides an overview of the ownership model for the described broadband scenario.
Figure 45: Ownership Model
Operational Model
A three-actor model is proposed if SBCAG, the County, or a city within Santa Barbara County has no interest in becoming an ISP or managing the network. The model displayed in Figure 46 does not require SBCAG, the County, or a city to perform the functions of an ISP. 100
Figure 46: Operating Model
• SBCAG (Owner): SBCAG, the County or a city, is the open-access network owner and establishes the standard pricing structure and terms of service. SBCAG negotiates and contracts with an OAN Operator to perform operational activities. SBCAG has no operating responsibilities contract with ISPs or subscribers.
• OAN Operator (Third-party): A third-party entity outsourced by SBCAG to perform network operations and maintenance activities. On behalf of the owner, it sells and supports wholesale network services to ISPs. The OAN Operator does not sell services to end Subscribers. • Internet Service Provider (ISPs): The ISP purchases access to the open-access network from the OAN Operator based on bandwidth utilized or a flat monthly fixed fee. It sells consumer-end services to Subscribers, such as internet access, telephone, or TV services. In addition, it performs subscriber installation, provisioning, subscriber management, and customer service activities.
• Subscribers: Subscribers are the end users that purchase services for their home from the ISP of their choice. They receive broadband services and pay the ISP of their choice.
Roles and Responsibilities
The responsibility matrix considering the principal activities for broadband network deployment and operations activities is presented below.
Broadband Scenario
Stakeholders
SBCAG
(SBCAG JPA)
Network
Constructor
OAN
Operator
Internet
Service
Provider(s)
Cities or
County
Middle-Mile and Last-Mile
Network
Ensure Funding for Network
Detailed Design P O O O S
Passive Infrastructure
Construction S P O O S
Active Infrastructure Deployment S P O O O
Network Operations
Network O&M Activities S O P O O
Field Maintenance Activities S O P O O
Service Delivery
Subscriber Installation and
Service Provisioning O O O P O
Subscriber Management and
Billing O O O P O
Customer Support O O O P O
P = Primary
S = Secondary
O = Observer
Table 31: Broadband Scenarios Responsibilities Matrix
101
Accelerate Outcomes
Alvin and Heidi Toffler's book, Revolutionary Wealth43, contrasts the speed at which various kinds of public and private organizations respond. It is no secret that change in the private sector can occur faster than in the public sector. To accelerate outcomes, strategies will require the innovation prevalent in the private sector to be strategically coupled with investment by the public sector via grants. Creating processes by which collaboration occurs provides the bridge and means to accelerate outcomes for all concerned.
Imperative
The overall imperative to achieve Broadband for All must occur sooner, not later, while funding opportunities are a priority at the State and Federal levels. Implementing 21st-century technology solutions will not occur without the future infrastructure in place. The gaps, shortfalls, and vulnerabilities revealed by the pandemic continue and, now that they are evident, also reveal foundational shortcomings in the social and economic well-being of our communities.
Focus Areas
As immediate next steps, resources through Local Agency Technical Assistance (LATA) grants were requested in September 2022 to accomplish the following:
• Formalize the countywide Broadband Alliance via a joint powers authority (JPA) and hire staff for initial capacity building.
• Complete a programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to remove obstacles to construction.
• Complete the high-level technical analysis to implement the strategy and validate feasibility, costs, and available funding.
• As feasible, align policies and permitting to expedite broadband builds.
Actions
To achieve accelerated outcomes, public and private civic leaders must continue to communicate a sense of urgency. In addition, maintaining an overall regional approach that includes collaborative coordination of activities, sharing strategies and outcomes, and compilation of external best practices for quick start application while leveraging available resources will be necessary.
Achieving Affordability and Adoption
Priorities for improving affordability and encouraging adoption:
• Support the Digital Equity Coalition – leverage the countywide network of community-based organizations focused on connecting, literacy, & learning (Community Foundation). • Leverage Federal Programs - Use federally funded programs as a catalyst to develop local strategies, attract collaborative funding, and conduct community action. 43 Toffler, Alan and Heidi (2006): Revolutionary Wealth. Knopf Inc. 102
• Conduct a Last-Mile Pilot (s) – Develop processes for applying for technical support at the neighborhood level to achieve access, literacy, and community development. (Guadalupe) Support the Santa Barbara County Digital Equity Coalition Leverage the existing network of community-based organizations focused on connectivity in underserved communities, digital literacy, and e-learning opportunities. Work is already happening in Santa Barbara County amongst community partners and CBOs that offer programs relevant to affordability and adoption goals.
Imperative
To meet the diverse needs of communities across Santa Barbara County, a strong coalition of partners is needed to advocate for each area and deliver resources that empower constituents to engage in the digital world. A successful and sustainable effort to improve adoption requires a partnership between organizations that have already gained the trust of their members and can deliver culturally responsive programs and content that reflect community needs.
The Santa Barbara Foundation is a central convener in the county with the time, staff, funding, and aligned mission to support digital equity initiatives led by community organizations. With the support of the Broadband Consortium Pacific Coast, the Foundation has taken the lead in creating a Digital Equity Coalition. A successful Digital Equity Coalition is led by an organization that has established relationships with organizations working closely in each community and is mission-driven and financially able to support convening efforts on a long-term basis.
Focus Areas
Support the Santa Barbara County Digital Equity Coalition led by the Santa Barbara Foundation.
Participation connects public, private, and non-profit entities to the existing networks of communitybased organizations that represent the needs of underserved communities. Coordinate within the K-12 education system, community colleges, libraries, and CBOs with access and inclusion goals and strategies to create a broad network.
Formalize an agreement with the Santa Barbara Foundation to convene the Digital Equity Coalition in support of the following goals:
• Connectivity: Access and availability of affordable broadband is the first step in meeting lastmile needs. Inform residents of provider options and promote cost assistance programs to lower cost barriers.
• Adoption: Adoption occurs as residents sign up for service. Engage community bridge builders and trusted agents as digital navigators to assist neighbors in overcoming resistance and concerns using new technologies.
• Ubiquity: Ubiquity refers to the availability of the internet to all, everywhere. The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated children's need for a virtual connection to the classroom. The same connections are needed for telehealth and social programs. To move forward, communities need to plan and secure funds for a ubiquitous capability to ensure no one is left unplugged in a time of need.
Actions
As next steps, the following actions are recommended:
103
• Solicit input from the Digital Equity Coalition in discussions about broadband improvements, focusing on recommendations from the community that would lead to ubiquity in their neighborhoods.
• Partner with the Santa Barbara Foundation and the Digital Equity Coalition to apply for and secure funding to sustain ongoing work in underserved communities. • Encourage and support philanthropic partnerships that bolster digital literacy investment through education, workforce development, and vital services.
Leverage Federal and State Programs to Increase Adoption Rates Use federal- and state-funded programs such as the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) as a catalyst to develop local strategies, attract collaborative funding, and conduct community action that supports ongoing connectivity and adoption.
Imperative
Federal and state programs encouraging consumer adoption provide directed processes and coordinated publicity to increase connectivity in underserved communities. Leveraging programs to increase outreach efforts provides a coordinated opportunity to build connectivity and adoption into social services, education, and workforce goals across the county. Programs such as ACP catalyze conversations about existing outreach efforts and opportunities for collaboration between organizations to ensure households in need are informed and supported as they seek affordable internet access and grow their digital literacy capacities.
Focus Areas
Utilize the Digital Equity Coalition to support and promote existing programs with outreach strategies that are multilingual, culturally responsive, and dynamic that can grow as community needs transform with increased digital literacy and improved access. Leverage existing federal and state subsidy programs to coalesce the efforts of public services and community-based organizations, and fund ongoing initiatives to support affordability and adoption goals.
Encourage local public agencies and organizations that work with households eligible for federal and state subsidy programs to identify strategies that will build digital literacy into their client success metrics:
• Embed conversations about connectivity and adoption into their client engagement processes • Allocate resources toward digital literacy and educational programs • Formalize accessibility and adoption as a metric for client success.
Partner strategically to apply for funding that supports adoption and connectivity outreach efforts.
Actions
Grow and expand existing outreach efforts among public service and community organizations by connecting them through the Digital Equity Coalition. Support civic entrepreneurship to develop and fund ongoing support for underserved communities. Share federal and state program information through the Digital Equity Coalition to support integration into public service client engagement activities in social services, education, and community safety net programs. 104
Conduct a Last-Mile Pilot
A Last-Mile Pilot aims to develop processes for applying technical support at the neighborhood level to achieve access and adoption. This strategy identifies several communities where a pilot project provides an ideal opportunity for establishing best practices. A coordinated effort is necessary to achieve Broadband for All in communities of need, and includes the following activities:
• Public Sector Capacity Development: technical assistance grants are available to deliver the needed resources.
Work with the local education sector (as a public partner lead) to create a ubiquitous network (wireless) that can serve as a safety net to overcome gaps due to availability and affordability.
Plan for municipal oversight. Rely upon the participation of social service stakeholders and CBOs to deploy.
• Private Sector Engagement: identify resources and remedy pain points.
Coordinate engagement of broadband providers to identify current levels of access, plans to increase levels of access, and opportunities for new and expanded services. • Convene Community Stakeholders: coordinate community engagement to ensure the commitment and completion of planning and execution of local strategies.
Task Description - Accompanying the availability of access and affordability to those disconnected, is the need to insure adoption and the development of digital literacy skills. This work involves community-based organizations creating an awareness of benefits and resources available online to stimulate access (connection) and the commitment to participate in digital skills training programs.
Imperative
Communities of need appear across the region, and there is an urgency to acquire the resources necessary to conduct a last-mile pilot project. Guadalupe has been identified as a prime opportunity for the planning and execution of a project.
Focus Areas
The Santa Barbara Community Foundation, in partnership with SBCAG and the Broadband Consortium, is uniquely suited to coordinate the conduct of this continuing activity. • Guadalupe is applying for funding to cover a last-mile pilot – coordinate and leverage the results to replicate in additional last-mile priority locations. • Build an evaluation process to identify opportunities for replication and refinement.
Actions
The efforts in communities such as Guadalupe and Los Alamos require focus and acceleration, documentation, and communication of lessons learned so they can become best practices. Considering the imminent receipt of $15,870,746.44 for Santa Barbara County, these efforts provide confidencebuilding examples in repeating the successful conduct of the work required. 105
Achieving Redundancy and Resiliency
Priorities for enacting redundancy and securing resiliency:
• Create a Regional Organization – Expand SBCAG's role via LATA funding to establish a Joint Powers Authority for regional broadband planning and support. • Identify and Prioritize Funding Opportunities – Attract funding and recruit technical resources to support local communities as they seek to increase local capacity and close the digital divide. • Maintain a GIS capability – Continue to collect and maintain information and create tools that support the deployment of last-mile and middle-mile, and increase adoption levels.
Create a Regional Organization
The Santa Barbara County Association of Governments is a regional planning agency comprised of representatives from the County of Santa Barbara and all eight incorporated cities. SBCAG distributes local, state, and federal transportation funds and acts as a forum for addressing regional and multijurisdictional issues. Although this work focuses primarily on transportation, funding has been requested to broaden the work to include broadband planning and support by establishing a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) between the County and the Cities of Santa Barbara County. The work involved includes governance and oversight of fiber assets via shared ownership by the communities they serve. There are three primary activities required:
1) Oversight & Monitoring
A physical accounting of the assets involved, monitoring where the network goes, strands in use and users, and publicly used vs. available unused capacity. Oversight and monitoring activities provide for the establishment of lease arrangements of unused fiber to private telecoms until needed for public use.
2) Operations & Maintenance
Covers the day-to-day operation of a function like an internet service provider and will likely be a P3 arrangement. Municipalities will share the cost of the connection and the internet service it provides to the region. In addition to maintaining the help desk service, ongoing financial oversight (billing) will result in significant savings for all concerned. 3) Strategy & Planning
Focuses on the ongoing growth of the network size and capability, extending it to new areas, connecting to new anchors, and developing technology applications of interest to municipalities. The first two areas provide revenue, and this activity will result from the targeted strategic investment.
The Last-Mile Federal Funding Account44 is the funding opportunity that supports this structure, designed to fund last-mile broadband infrastructure projects. Interested organizations include local governments, non-profits, and tribal entities. A full list of eligibility criteria, program rules, and guidelines can be found in Appendix A45 of the California Public Utilities Commission's Decision 22-04- 44 cpuc.ca.gov/industries-and-topics/internet-and-phone/broadband-implementation-for-california/last-milefederal-funding-account 45 docs.cpuc.ca.gov/SearchRes.aspx?docformat=ALL&docid=470543650 106
05546. A public map shows priority areas and digital equity data; potential applicants can register for more detailed information. SBCAG's collaborative role in this model is to convene and coordinate on behalf of the region, which provides added benefit to the overall proposal to be submitted.
Imperative
As new investment occurs and the acquisition of publicly owned broadband assets follows, an organizational construct is required to oversee and maintain the assets. This broadband strategy has been developed based on collaboration within a "hub and spoke" model between SBCAG, the County, and the Cities of Santa Barbara County. Creating a regional organization for broadband leverages work that occurs for virtual highways in the same manner as collaboration for physical highways.
Focus Areas
• Establish JPA
• Perform a programmatic EIR
• Perform Middle-Mile Network High Level Design and Engineering • Conduct a Last-Mile Pilot
• Propose and secure funding for last-mile projects countywide • Secure funding to maintain SBCAG involvement and perpetuate collaborative planning Support Model
The support model builds upon the existing relationship between SBCAG and the Cities and the County as defined by the project MOU. Regarding capacity-building, conversations will follow defining roles and responsibilities for regional processes and required revenue sources.
Hub and Spoke: SBCAG, governance, municipalities’ participation 46 CPUC Decision 22-04-055
107
Figure 47: Hub and Spoke Model of governance and participation Identify and Prioritize Funding Opportunities
With local and regional opportunities identified in this document, the MOU partners must collaborate in grant funding processes to increase their capacity to implement or support the capacity of SBCAG to lead broadband infrastructure work efforts. Collaboration is key when securing grant funding, as applications must show that work efforts are aligned at a local and regional level and to ensure no overlap in work or duplicative efforts. One of the main purposes of developing a regional strategy was to organize and prepare local government to secure and execute funding to deliver Broadband for All and to close the digital divide. The Digital Equity Coalition is organized similarly, and pending the direction the MOU partners determine is their best path forward, collaboration is recommended to coordinate the following as outlined above:
• Seek funding to complete the middle-mile in partnership with the Golden State Network and/or the private sector.
• Seek funding to complete the last-mile – partnerships may include the Rural County Representatives of California, the Tribe, SBCAG, and the private sector. • Seek funding to support the Digital Equity Coalition to address internet adoption and access to technology and training.
A summary of public sector grant opportunities can be found in Appendix J.
Maintain Collaborative GIS Capability
Maintaining a centrally administered map data portal is an important collaborative tool with regional benefits to track progress as the strategic plan is implemented and public and private sector investments are made. The regional collaborative GIS will allow for SBCAG, public works, and planning teams throughout the county to interact through a common platform. As work efforts continue to center on achieving broadband for all and reaching the underserved, the measurement of progress is required in digital inclusion, last-mile planning and construction, construction management, asset management and operations, identifying priority areas, and developing grant funding. This tool should be for internal agency use; however, aspects of the map may be shared externally (with special considerations for privacy) to build trust with the private sector.
Actions
The crowdsourced GIS platform is a unique product of the Santa Barbara County Broadband Strategy.
The system is a functional prototype demonstrating the tool's power and is well-positioned for use as a resource. With that said, it lacks implementation and commitment for use by the community and the development of a support model. GIS positions the public sector with the systems necessary to manage broadband infrastructure and adoption as a utility. If the region is committed to broadband as a fourth utility, GIS will be essential in the tracking and management of assets, including continued collection and maintenance of information and the creation of tools that support the deployment of last-mile and middle-mile infrastructure and increased adoption levels.
For the near term, GIS is a tri-county resource and tool to assist in securing grant funding. A long-term sponsor should maintain the system and update data as capabilities evolve so it can continue to serve the interests of all communities.
108
Focus Areas
Assuming a commitment to continued use of the GIS platform, the following focus areas apply:
• Continue to collect maps related to public right-of-way, local and otherwise. • Continue to work with Cal Trans and share GIS information related to the Golden State Network. • Collect and manage fiber maps from providers and new map information collected through the permitting process.
• Develop tools that assist in estimating costs and applying for funding (for example – speed testing).
• Continue to monitor data from the CPUC, NTIA, USDA, and local sources related to adoption levels and areas of need.
• Strive for digital equity in all planning processes by utilizing GIS to prioritize projects that reach underserved populations.
• Identify needs and functional potential to use as a system for asset tracking, status, and operations.
• Full-service terms and costs related to the Regional Collaborative GIS are detailed in "Regional Collaborative GIS: Service Details" Appendix K.
Section 8: Opportunities and Benefits
The preceding section outlines priorities and action steps to reach Broadband for All goals in Santa Barbara County. The following section describes opportunities and benefits that updated infrastructure and a connected community could bring to the region, improving prosperity and retaining competitive advantage in a technologically advanced society.
Improve Safety and Security
Broadband infrastructure plays an essential role in public safety, locally and regionally. Public safety planning involves what is known as the OODA loop, specifically, engaging in activities that allow communities the capability to observe-orient-decide-act. The tools and technologies to bring this to communities are all enabled by broadband. The best description of the impact of broadband for safety and security involves response and recovery activities during a natural disaster. Today's Emergency Operations Centers (EOCs) serve as a facility where information is gathered somewhat mechanically from the internet, human input, media stories, and other resources where a fusion process occurs so that leaders can assess, plan, and respond to what is occurring.
Up-to-date broadband infrastructure takes these processes to a new level of situational awareness with the use of hardware and software that expands and accelerates the collection and analysis of data, increasing and improving emergency responders' understanding of incident command. The broadband infrastructure provides immediate feedback from audio, video, environmental (air, water, seismic), and other sensors to accurately convey what is occurring.
Redundancy in the network is imperative to keeping it operational. Redundancy can be achieved through network design, where anchor institutions are interconnected via a series of loops. If a line is cut, service to the network is not lost. On the other hand, resiliency is achieved through partnerships with multiple broadband providers and the hardening of the network to not fail in the absence of power loss. If one provider is experiencing an outage, another can pick up the slack. Disaster recovery 109
equipment and planning can ensure the network is up and operational to keep anchor institutions connected, communication flowing within the response team, and necessary communications with the community impacted.
Economic Development
Whereas tourism is a primary economic driver in the county, the primary potential benefits of broadband development lie in education, business retention, public safety, and emergency response for existing and future residents and businesses.
Job and economic growth are directly tied to economic development, and the broadband initiative is central to attracting and retaining businesses in each municipality and across Santa Barbara County.
Businesses are tied to local customers without the infrastructure to provide reliable, affordable, highspeed internet. They cannot utilize modern technologies for promoting and running their businesses through point-of-sale software, customer relationship management systems, permitting processes, and global supply chain management. As these online systems improve and grow, businesses will rely on updated infrastructure to keep up with the pace of development and innovation.
Santa Barbara County is home to multiple institutions of higher learning, including a significant research and innovation hub at UCSB. The higher education schools serve local students and attract out-of-area students because they are considered top-performing schools located in a safe and enjoyable place to live. In addition to the award-winning research from UCSB, the two county community colleges provide vocational and lower-division education to thousands of local residents who become employees and entrepreneurs who need to be trained in modern technologies to stay competitive in the marketplace.
Formerly analog vocations such as auto mechanics, construction, landscape, and agriculture are increasingly digitized, as are the training programs preparing the labor force. On-campus and in-home access to technology and the internet is imperative for success in the workforce, and research shows that smartphone and small device access is insufficient47. Elementary and high schools are increasingly tasked to begin technology familiarization and training at younger ages. While some schools in the county adequately incorporate digital tools into the curriculum, pockets in the county do not have sufficient speed and capacity at their schools to enable children to learn using technology. These children are the job creators of the future and deserve high-capacity infrastructure to carry them through their education. The region needs multiple carriers to provide competition in the broadband space, which will lower prices and play a role in the attraction and diversification of businesses.
A portion of the needs assessment focused on businesses. Of the total respondents who took the needs assessment survey, 68 completed the section focused on business (Figure 48). 47 A. Gonzales, 2021: The Importance of Large Screen Device Ownership. (Digitunity Digital Opportunity Network) 110
Q50 – Do you own a business?
Figure 48: Needs Assessment Results to the question, "Do you own a business?" Of significance to this section is Figure 49, displaying answers to needs assessment question Q60 – What impact would gigabit internet service have on your business? (Check all that apply):
Figure 49: Needs Assessment Results to the question, "What impact would gigabit internet service have on your business?" 111
The responses show that there are businesses within Santa Barbara County that would benefit from access to faster and more reliable internet service, which would help them become more efficient, grow their market share, provide more products or services to customers, and access needed resources.
Achieving Digital Equity
Despite the high number of connections across Santa Barbara County, there are pockets of the population where broadband adoption is limited by barriers, including affordability, access to technology, and low digital literacy. The cost to access the internet is prohibitive for some households, and inequity exists in the tiers limiting high-speeds to higher-cost plans. Federal and state programs seek to reduce the digital divide by subsidizing the cost of internet plans and requiring a minimum 100Mbps download and upload speeds for low-cost plans. Opportunities exist in Santa Barbara County across public, private, and community-based organizations to embed affordability program enrollment into social services, education, and community engagement. To educate households about these programs and support their enrollment, community organizations build on partner relationships to conduct outreach and provide technical assistance.
Households excluded by the digital divide require access to in-home technology to fully participate in the digital economy, learning opportunities, and public services. Low-income households often rely on a mobile device rather than large device technology48. However, research repeatedly links success outcomes to in-home devices rather than mobile devices, finding that computer use significantly increases user engagement, digital literacy, and improved range and functionality49. County-wide programs such as Partners in Education deliver free technology devices and support services to families with students enrolled in public schools. Federal, state, and philanthropic funding opportunities exist to expand these programs and create specialized programs targeting other vulnerable populations.
Santa Barbara County is home to rural, urban, and suburban communities that reflect a range of cultural backgrounds, languages, and shared histories. Many of these communities require different approaches to outreach and education about broadband, access, and digital literacy; there is no one-size-fits-all approach to equitable connectivity. The fabric of the community-based organization network in the county is woven from organizations embedded in the communities they serve that have established reputations of trust with community members. Some already work with their communities to improve access to high-speed internet and offer digital literacy and educational content tailored to their needs, including several libraries across the county and higher education institutions. Opportunities to increase adoption and build capacity through multilingual programs would narrow the digital divide and empower users to participate in the digital landscape.
Santa Barbara County is ripe for collaborative efforts to bridge the digital divide through partnerships between community-based organizations and public services, increased access to educational opportunities, and improved funding with the aid of cooperative grants and philanthropic investment. 48 A. Gonzales, 2021: “The Importance of Large Screen Device Ownership.” Digitunity/Digital Opportunity Network 49 A. Gonzales, 2021: “The Importance of Large Screen Device Ownership.” Digitunity/Digital Opportunity Network; T. Correa, I. Pavez & J. Contreras, 2020: “Digital inclusion through mobile phones: A comparison between mobileonly and computer users in internet access, skills and use.” Information, Communication & Society, 23:7, pp. 1074- 1091; E. Tsetsi & S. Rains, 2017: “Smartphone Internet access and use: Extending the digital divide and usage gap.” Mobile Media & Communication; K. Pearce, R. Rice, 2013: “Digital Divides From Access to Activities: Comparing Mobile and Personal Computer Internet Users.” Journal of Communication, 63: 4, pp. 721–744. 112
Resources and goals have already begun to coalesce across the county under the leadership of the Santa Barbara Foundation supported by the Broadband Consortium Pacific Coast.
Smart City Planning
Aspects of a Smart City
Broadband infrastructure catalyzes the development of smart cities and communities. With faster internet speeds and improved communication, communities throughout Santa Barbara County can implement smart technology-based solutions to their unique local issues. Smart cities utilize digital technology to connect, protect, and enhance the lives of everyone in the community. It adopts practices that address challenges and creates a technologically enabled, sustainable infrastructure while equitably integrating technology, community, and even nature to enhance a community's livability and resilience.
Once community broadband infrastructure is in place, smart city applications allow the collection and analysis of data from IoT sensors, cameras, and other technologies to monitor the environment enabling communities to decide how and when to act. As smart communities continue to develop, a host of technologies are possible that will improve public health and safety, communication, transportation, waste management, and more. Modern technologies that may one day find their way into a smart city include:
• Smart Utility Meters – Devices that attach to buildings and connect to a smart grid, allowing utility companies to efficiently manage the community's energy flow. • Smart Transportation – Connected vehicles mean more efficient traffic flow, fewer hazards, and more reliable public transportation.
• Smart Waste Management – The collection and disposal of waste can be costly and inefficient.
Smart Waste management monitors trash collection flow, rate, and amount, allowing cities to work with waste management companies to improve the overall efficiency of trash collection. • Smart Air Monitoring – Smart air monitors detect dirt, chemicals, dust, and more floating in our air. This data can aid cities in detecting polluted areas so that they may develop solutions and improve public health and safety.
• Smart Streetlights – These streetlights utilize a combination of cameras and sensors to improve city efficiency, safety, and data collection. Smart streetlights create dynamic lighting, monitor weather and environmental changes, display digital signage and alerts, aid in parking management, extend cellular and wireless communication, manage traffic, and manage emergency response. The benefits include reduced energy costs, increased pedestrian satisfaction and safety, reduced carbon and light pollution, improved traffic and parking, revenue opportunities, and crime detection.
With the data collected from these technologies, communities will improve infrastructure, public utilities, services, and decision-making to improve quality of life.
Health, Safety, and the Economy
Smart city planning results in a host of benefits to local communities and economies and feeds advanced technologies and solutions. A smart city is safer and more resilient by applying resources where they are most needed. Smart cities grow when civic leaders invest in their citizens and the future by looking forward at the physical environment, safety, economic development, job creation, education, distance learning, telehealth, and telemedicine, all of which cannot be improved without greater connectivity.
Smart city technologies empower city agencies, citizens, businesses, and developers by allowing cities to optimize operations via real-time data intelligence to improve citizens' daily lives through enhanced city 113
services. Smart city technology improves applications' use of city data and aids communities in enhancing operational efficiencies and citizen engagement, allowing public visibility of real-time citywide data to improve mobility, connectivity, and safety services. In addition, the new technologies drive the creation of new businesses and revenue streams resulting in economic development.
Smart City Vision
A smart city cannot truly be smart without well-connected citizens, businesses, and government, equipped with the appropriate technologies and provided equal access to services that, in the future, require a reliable internet connection. The Santa Barbara County Broadband Strategic Plan is a launch point for smart city planning and could connect residents while improving public/private and citizen/local government relationships within the region.
Smart city development takes preparation and participation. Without ubiquitous broadband infrastructure, a community lacks a solid foundation for building smart solutions. A broadband strategy must be established for communities to connect as many citizens as possible. Once a broadband connection is available, civic leadership is required of city and community planners, local businesses (specifically technology and innovative services), and citizens. According to the American Planning Association, knowledgeable and forward-looking planners are the backbone of smart city development.
City planners and public works departments are experienced in both the art and science of land use and public engagement, making them significant drivers behind the planning process.
The Urban Sustainability Directors Network outlines key steps in smart city planning. Government departments should become connected via digital strategies and sustainability, and IT directors should converge on a shared purpose to find similarities across departments, sectors, and jurisdictions. Local governments should begin to recognize new capacities in the changing role of IT, looking at the role to help build new staff expertise. Planners, businesses, and the public should collaborate to create new partnerships with the tech sector and develop a solid understanding of the potential for innovation in their region. Specifically, the partnership between the city and industry is critical to a smart city's success. In addition, local governments must better understand and adjust to emerging technologies, mastering innovation and quicker adoption. Local governments can then increase communication with the public and get citizens more engaged in the process via crowdsourcing applications, staying mindful of the privacy issues for businesses and citizens when making city data available for smart city technologies. Finally, procurement rules are designed to ensure fairness and transparency but can sometimes create restraints on the adoption of new technologies in emerging markets. A reexamination of this system to become more transparent and innovative will speed up the smart city planning process.
Creating a mechanism for securing resources for investing in smart city development is recommended to create technology programs, grants, and opportunities that help governments, businesses, and citizens along the smart journey. By increasing the awareness of these opportunities, communities will find avenues to create smart solutions and opportunities to connect the government and the public to achieve common smart goals.
Conclusion
With the rapidly changing broadband landscape, including new FCC mapping requirements and varied definitions for served and unserved, this document provides a baseline for the Alliance. The document 114
provides guidance for the region and recommendations focusing on additional fiber to support future demand and movement toward a ubiquitous network for all homes, schools, public services, libraries, and businesses.
Recommendations are informed by the data, the evolving landscape, the need for redundancy and resiliency for safer communities and the groundwork for smart city infrastructure. Using the strategic plan, Santa Barbara County can foster digital equity and become broadband ready, in alignment with California Broadband for All.
Appendices
Appendix A - Communications plan
Appendix B - Needs Assessment data
Appendix C - Project FAQ’s
Appendix D - GIS data list
Appendix E – California Broadband Infrastructure Report Card Appendix F - Responses to Get Connected Resource Guide
Appendix G - Cuyama Valley Action Plan
Appendix H - Broadband Strategy and Feasibility Study:
Tribal Lands of the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians
Appendix I- Santa Barbara public library broadband connectivity Appendix J - Grant opportunities
Appendix K - GIS service details
1 Appendix A
Communications Plan for SB County Broadband Strategic Plan Development Goal: Engage with the Santa Barbara community with the purpose to collect information that will help local government prioritize funding to help close the digital divide.
Purpose for
Communication
Communication
Prep Activity
Channel Targets Timing – Month Lead Notes
Data collection
via needs
assessment
survey and
speed test
Develop press
kit to include
digital collateral
for social media
channels; other
orgs; PIO’s
• Press
release
• Chambers
• Websites
Businesses,
individuals,
Cities
PIO’s
Release date:
Monday March
21 SBCAG/BCPC Completed with
great media pick
up; good
engagement
with high level
of engagement
in survey and
speed test;
*GIS
Project status
updates for
Cities to keep
communication
channels open
and build trust
for the process;
collect
important data
Develop ppts;
meet with CM’s
or other reps 1-
1 to set up
presentations to
full councils
• Email
• Phone
• In person
• Zoom
City Council’s
and general
public
March/April/Ma
y/June/July
Bill and Maria Target to
complete by
May 30; Still
need Goleta to
schedule City
Council
meetings
*GIS
Monthly project
status updates
to keep
communication
channels open
and build trust
for the process
and strengthen
outreach
Develop ppts to
be reviewed by
TAC 2 weeks
prior; develop
content and
track project
status for
presentation
• Email
• Zoom
• In person
(?)
SBCAG Ad-Hoc
Committee
FebruaryNovember 2022Technical
Advisory
Committee –
Mike, Bill, Maria
Ongoing
Engage
stakeholders
and interested
parties for data
collection and
corroboration
Chose location
and audience –
develop content
and/or panels to
focus on digital
inclusion
In person Panelists,
stakeholders,
and Interested
Parties
April/May/June Econ Alliancecommunity &
outreach team:
Lauren, Maria,
Jill
Completed
*GIS
Engage school
districts to help
provide insight
into digital
needs
Identify key
point of contact;
messaging
development;
identify key
issues for
student’s ability
to connect
• Email key
points of
contact
• Engage via
outreach
efforts and
include in
panel
discussions
• District IT
staff
• Superinten
dents
BCPC/Econ
Alliance
outreach
Ongoing
*GIS
Connect with
ISP’s to
determine
services/service
levels and
Develop ppt to
share project
goal and current
status
One on one
meetings with
company
representative’s
• ISP team’s March -
September
Bill and Maria Additional
detailed data
possibly
available with
2 digital inclusion
initiatives
UCSB
partnership
*GIS
Second round
of data
collection to
targeted areas
Identify what
we need to ask
for from current
Needs
Assessment
Survey
• School
districts
• Local
community
channels
• CBO’s
• Areas of
low
participatio
n
June/July Maria/UCSB To be addressed
via Digital equity
coalition -
Completed
Public sector
outreach
Identify
expertise in
public/private
partnerships;
deployment;
grant writing;
policy
development
• Zoom • Public
sector staff
and elected
officials
March/May/
June/August/Se
ptember
Bill and Maria Public/Private
partnership
webinar – April;
Programmatic
EIR – May;
Grants –
September
*GIS
Project Contributors and Outreach Audience
Governing Board/SBCAG
• Who: SBCAG
• Provide project leadership and oversight - Staff
• Approve recommendations & assign resources- Board
• Meet weekly with the BCPC Project Team and as needed – Staff SBCAG Broadband Ad-Hoc Committee (Policy Advisory)
• Who: Subset of SBCAG board members
• Project participants that provide insight, feedback, advocacy and policy advisors • Meets monthly with the SBCAG staff and BCPC Project Team (second Mondays) BCPC Project Team
• Who: BCPC staff; Econ Alliance team; Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Tribe representative; REACH
• Project organization for data collection and analysis; engages with the public/private sector • Meets daily/weekly/monthly and additional as needed
Technical Advisory Committee
•Who: BCPC project team, SBCAG staff, local agency staff and technical consultants • Review and oversight of project activities; GIS mapping, grant writing, inclusion strategies • Meets monthly (first Fridays)
Stakeholders
• Who: Representatives from government, telecom, education, anchor institutions and community-based organizations who contribute technical/policy information & feedback; • Engaged by project team via direct outreach throughout the project Interested Parties
• Who: Community organizations, businesses and individuals whose input via data collection may influence outcomes;
• Engaged with project via direct outreach and media; in person events and web-based data collection throughout the project
1 Table of Contents
Adolescents (n = 58)........................................................................................................... 3 • Demographic and Background Information.................................................................... 3 o Age ............................................................................................................................................................3 o Gender......................................................................................................................................................3 o Race ..........................................................................................................................................................3 o City ............................................................................................................................................................3 o Money concern.......................................................................................................................................4 o Free or reduced lunch at school........................................................................................................4 o Education level of parents/guardians ..............................................................................................4 • Internet & Device Use ......................................................................................................... 5 o Types of Internet-connected devices...............................................................................................5 o Number of Internet-connected devices............................................................................................5 o Data use ...................................................................................................................................................5 o Internet use (for distance learning)...................................................................................................6 o Internet assessment (for distance learning)...................................................................................6 o Broadband access for youth ..............................................................................................................6 • Relationships between money concern and Internet/device use................................ 7 o Money concern and internet experience (distance learning during the pandemic).............7 o Money concern and types of internet-connected devices..........................................................7 o Money concern and number of internet-connected devices......................................................8 o Money concern and data use .............................................................................................................8 Adults (n = 1,168)............................................................................................................... 10 • Demographic and Background Information.................................................................. 10 o Age ..........................................................................................................................................................10 o Gender....................................................................................................................................................10 o Race ........................................................................................................................................................10 o Income....................................................................................................................................................11 o City ..........................................................................................................................................................11 o Number of household members ......................................................................................................12 o Number of student household members.......................................................................................12 • Internet at Home ................................................................................................................ 13 o Place for Internet use..........................................................................................................................13 o Reason of no at-home Internet.........................................................................................................13 o At-home Internet access....................................................................................................................13 o Reliance on at-home Internet ...........................................................................................................13 o At-home Internet service provider ..................................................................................................14 o Internet cost..........................................................................................................................................14 o Internet reliability.................................................................................................................................14 o Internet speed.......................................................................................................................................14 o Internet performance ..........................................................................................................................15 o Most important factors for Internet.................................................................................................15 • Internet-connected device ............................................................................................... 16 o Access/own of Internet-connected device....................................................................................16 2 o Types of Internet-connected devices.............................................................................................16 o Number of Internet-connected devices..........................................................................................16 o Data use .................................................................................................................................................17 o Broadband speed choice...................................................................................................................17 • Relationships between income and Internet/device use ............................................ 18 o Income X at-home Internet access..................................................................................................18 o Income X access/ownership of Internet-connected device......................................................18 o Income X types of Internet-connected device..............................................................................18 o Income X number of Internet-connected device .........................................................................19 o Income X data use...............................................................................................................................26 Adults who own business (n = 68) ................................................................................. 28 • Business ............................................................................................................................. 28 o Business ownership ...........................................................................................................................28 o Business type.......................................................................................................................................28 o Number of employees ........................................................................................................................28 o Number of employees in Santa Barbara........................................................................................28 o Work from home before/after the pandemic.................................................................................29 • Internet for business......................................................................................................... 29 o Internet providers for business .......................................................................................................29 o Internet service for business............................................................................................................29 o Internet service quality for business..............................................................................................30 o Internet service speed for business ...............................................................................................30 o Impacts of Internet service on business .......................................................................................30 o Impact of Internet service on employees during the pandemic ..............................................31 o Important factors of Internet service..............................................................................................31 3 Adolescents (n = 58)
• Demographic and Background Information
o Age
Frequency Percent
13 22 37.9
14 27 46.6
15 2 3.4
17 1 1.7
18 1 1.7
Do not answer 5 8.6
Total 58 100.0
o Gender
Frequency Percent
Male 26 44.8
Female 30 51.7
Do not answer 2 3.4
Total 58 100.0
o Race
Frequency Percent
Hispanic or Latino 41 70.7
White/Caucasian 7 12.1
White/Caucasian + Hispanic or Latino 3 5.2
White/Caucasian + Native American or Alaska 1 1.7
White/Caucasian + Asian 1 1.7
Asian + Native American or Alaska 1 1.7
Do not answer 4 6.9
Total 58 100.0
o City
Frequency Percent
Mean 13.75
Std. Deviation .939
Minimum 13
Maximum 18
4 Orcutt 48 82.8
San Luis Obispo 6 10.3
Santa Barbara 3 5.2
Solvang 1 1.7
Total 58 100.0
o Money concern
Q9 - Would you say that money is a concern in your household? Frequency Percent
No, I do not have money concern 24 41.4
Yes, I have money concern 14 24.1
I am not sure 18 31.0
Do not answer 2 3.4
Total 58 100.0
o Free or reduced lunch at school
Q8 - Do you qualify for free or reduced lunch at school? Frequency Percent
No 1 1.7
Yes 35 60.3
I am not in an educational program 1 1.7
I am not sure 18 31.0
Do not answer 3 5.2
Total 58 100.0
o Education level of parents/guardians
Q7 - What is the highest education level of a parent/guardian? Frequency Percent
High school 23 39.7
Some college 10 17.2
4-year degree 6 10.3
Graduate/Doctoral/Professional Degree 3 5.2
Vocational or Certificate 1 1.7
Other 13 22.4
Do not answer 2 3.4
Total 58 100.0
5 • Internet & Device Use
o Types of Internet-connected devices
Q12 - Which of the following Internet-connected devices do you have? (Please select all that apply)
Frequency Percent
Laptop or Desktop 44 75.9
Tablet/iPad 26 84.5
Smartphone 49 84.5
Smart/Streaming TV 41 70.7
Gaming Console 33 56.9
Supporting Accessory (Alexa, etc.) 11 19
Medical Device 2 3.4
Security System, Doorbell, Camera 13 22.4
None 1 1.7
o Number of Internet-connected devices
Q13 - To the best of your knowledge, how many of each internet connected devices do you have in your household? (Please select a number for each if possible.
N (who answered) Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Laptop or Desktop 54 1 10 2.50 1.881
Tablet/iPad 41 1 10 2.07 1.649
Smartphone 55 1 10 4.07 1.864
Smart/Streaming TV 49 1 6 2.82 1.302
Gaming Console 41 1 9 2.29 1.569
Supporting Accessory (Alexa,
etc.)
26 1 6 2.00 1.327
Medical Device 10 1 7 2.10 1.969
Security System, Doorbell,
Camera
28 1 10 2.32 1.982
Total 58 0 38 14.03 6.994
o Data use
Q14 - What activities do you use the most data/Gigabytes on? (Select all that apply)
Frequency Percent
Gaming 30 51.7
Music/Video 30 51.7
6 Uploads/downloads (publishing videos, or
downloading content)
18 31.0
Telehealth 0 0
Teleconferencing/video chat 9 15.5
Social Media Platforms 24 41.4
Other devices that connect to Wi-Fi 5 8.6
o Internet use (for distance learning)
Q10 - While distance learning during the pandemic, I used...
Frequency Percent
Do not answer/unclear 2 3.4
I did not do distance learning 1 1.7
My home internet 53 91.4
Other (e.g., School internet) 2 3.4
Total 58 100.0
o Internet assessment (for distance learning)
Q11 - How would you rate your experience with your internet during the pandemic as it related to distance learning?
Frequency Percent
Horrible, I was not able to learn much 4 6.9
It was bad, but I still made it possible 14 24.1
Okay, but wish that I had better connectivity 15 25.9
My connectivity was good, but it was hard for others 12 20.7 Incredible! I had no issues 11 19.0
Do not answer 2 3.4
Total 58 100.0
o Broadband access for youth
Q6 - Do you think that Santa Barbara County needs to increase broadband access for its youth residents?
Frequency Percent
No 2 3.4
Yes 20 34.5
I have access but I am not sure about the whole
region
4 6.9
I do not know 32 55.2
Total 58 100.0
7 • Relationships between money concern and Internet/device use o Money concern and internet experience (distance learning during the pandemic) The t-test analysis examined whether adolescents rate their internet experience differently during the pandemic, as it related to distance learning, depending on whether they have money concern in their household. The result indicates that there was a statistically significant difference between two groups (t = 2.54, p = .02), such that adolescents who do not have money concern rated their internet experience more highly (M = 2.48, SD = 1.16), compared to those who have money concern (M = 1.50, SD = 1.09).
o Money concern and types of internet-connected devices The chi-square analysis examined the relationship between the types of internet-connected devices that adolescents have and money concern in their household. The result indicates that there was no statistically significant difference between two groups (t = 1.24, p = .22). Those who do not have money concern have approximately 4 different types of internet-connected devices on average (M = 4.13, SD = 1.62) and those who have money concern have approximately 3 different types of internet-connected devices on average (M = 3.43, SD = 1.74).
The following table compares the types of devices between those who do and do not have money concern.
I do not have
money concern
I have money
concern
I am not
sure
Total Statistics
Laptop or Desktop 18 (41.9%) 11 (25.6%) 14 (32.6%) 43 χ2(2, N =56) = .078, p = .962
Tablet/iPad 11 (44.0%) 5 (20.0%) 9 (36.0%) 25 χ2(2, N =56) = .674, p = .714
Smartphone 21 (43.8%) 14 (29.2%) 13 (27.1%) 48 χ2(2, N =56) =
5.072, p = .079
Smart/Streaming TV 20 (50%) 8 (20%) 12 (30%) 40 χ2(2, N =56) =
3.267, p = .195
Gaming Console 13 (40.6%) 6 (18.8%) 13 (40.6%) 32 χ2(2, N =56) =
2.925, p = .232
Supporting
Accessory (Alexa,
etc.)
7 (63.6%) 1 (9.1%) 3 (27.3%) 11
χ2(2, N =56) =
2.866, p = .239
Medical Device 1 (50%) 1 (50%) 0 (0%) 2 χ2(2, N =56) =
1.210, p = .546
Security System,
Doorbell, Camera
8 (61.5%) 2 (15.4%) 3 (23.1%) 13 χ2(2, N =56) =
2.438, p = .296
Note. “Total” in each column is the number of participants who answered they have the corresponding Internet-connected devices.
8 o Money concern and number of internet-connected devices The t-test analysis examined whether there are statistically significant differences in the number of internet-connected devices depending on whether they have money concern in their household. The result indicates the following:
– There is no statistically significant difference in the total number of internet-connected devices between those who do not have money concern (M = 15.38, SD = 6.54) and those who have money concern (M = 14.43, SD = 8.84).
– There is a statistically significant difference in the number of laptops/desktops (t = 2.33, p = .03), such that those who do not have money concern have more laptops/desktops (M = 3.00, SD = 1.98) than those who have money concern (M = 1.71, SD = .73). – There is no statistically significant difference in the number of:
o tablets/iPads between those who do not have money concern (M = 2.11, SD =
2.08) and those who have money concern (M = 1.89, SD = 1.36). o smartphones between those who do not have money concern (M = 4.54, SD =
2.27) and those who have money concern (M = 3.71, SD = 1.64). o smart/streaming TVs between those who do not have money concern (M = 2.86, SD = 1.17) and those who have money concern (M = 3.09, SD = 1.04). o gaming consoles between those who do not have money concern (M = 2.00, SD = 1.12) and those who have money concern (M = 2.90, SD = 2.56). o supporting accessories (Alexa, etc.) between those who do not have money concern (M = 1.91, SD = 1.22) and those who have money concern (M = 2.14, SD = 1.86).
o medical devices between those who do not have money concern (M = 1.33, SD = .58) and those who have money concern (M = 2.50, SD = 3.00). o security systems/doorbells/cameras between those who do not have money concern (M = 2.23, SD = 1.54) and those who have money concern (M = 3.00, SD = 3.32).
o Money concern and data use
The following table indicates the activities that adolescents, who do and do not have money concern, use the most data/Gigabytes on. The chi-square test analysis indicates that there are no statistically meaningful relationships between money concern and data use.
I do not have
money concern
I have money
concern
I am not
sure
Total Statistics
Gaming 15 (50%) 8 (26.7%) 7 (23.3%) 30 χ2(2, N =56) =
2.401, p = .301
Music/Video 11 (36.7%) 9 (30.0%) 10 (33.3%) 30 χ2(2, N =56) =
1.252, p = .535
Uploads/downloads
(publishing videos,
or downloading
content)
7 (38.9%) 5 (27.8%) 6 (33.3%) 18 χ2(2, N =56)
= .191, p = .909
Telehealth 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0
9 Teleconferencing/vid
eo chat
4 (44.4%) 3 (33.3%) 2 (22.2%) 9 χ2(2, N =56)
= .633, p = .729
Social Media
Platforms
11 (47.8%) 6 (26.1%) 6 (26.1%) 23 χ2(2, N =56)
= .689, p = .709
Other devices that
connect to Wi-Fi
2 (40%) 2 (40%) 1 (20%) 5 χ2(2, N =56)
= .756, p = .685
Note. “Total” in each column is the number of participants who answered they use the most data/Gigabytes on the corresponding activity.
10 Adults (n = 1,168)
• Demographic and Background Information
o Age
Frequency Percent
19-21 4 .3
22-39 185 15.8
40-54 237 20.3
55-65 222 19.0
65-70 184 15.8
70-75 169 14.5
75-80 89 7.6
80-85 54 4.6
85+ 11 .9
Do not answer 13 1.1
Total 1168 100.0
Note. 3 participants in the 65+ group indicated themselves as “below 65.” These participants are classified to “55-65” in the above table.
o Gender
Frequency Percent
Male 598 51.2
Female 517 44.3
Other 15 1.3
Do not answer 38 3.3
Total 1168 100.0
o Race
Frequency Percent
White/Caucasian 939 80.4
Hispanic or Latino 69 5.9
Asian 45 3.9
Native American or Alaska Native 7 .6
Black or African American 4 .3
Middle Eastern/North African 3 .3
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 3 .3
White/Caucasian + Hispanic or Latino 24 2.1
White/Caucasian + Asian 10 .9
White/Caucasian + Native American or Alaska Native 7 .6 White/Caucasian + Native Hawaiian or other Pacific
Islander 3 .3
11 White/Caucasian + Black or African American 4 .3
White/Caucasian + Middle Eastern/North African 4 .3
Hispanic or Latino + Native American or Alaska Native 5 .4 Hispanic or Latino + Black or African American 2 .2
Hispanic or Latino + Asian 1 .1
Asian + Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 2 .2
Do not answer 36 3.1
Total 1168 100.0
o Income
Frequency Percent
<$20,000 56 4.8
$20,000 - $40,000 68 5.8
$40,000 - $60,000 112 9.6
$60,000 - $80,000 126 10.8
$80,000 - $100,000 146 12.5
>$100,000 571 48.9
Other 22 1.9
Do not answer 67 5.7
Total 1168 100.0
o City
Frequency Percent
Anaheim 3 .3
Boardman 9 .8
Buellton 21 1.8
Denver 3 .3
Forrest City 4 .3
Goleta 28 2.4
Hawthorne 5 .4
Isla Vista 19 1.6
Lompoc 31 2.7
Los Alamos 12 1.0
Los Angeles 32 2.7
Los Olivos 3 .3
Orcutt 79 6.8
San Francisco 10 .9
San Jose 6 .5
San Luis Obispo 18 1.5
San Marcos 6 .5
Santa Barbara 797 68.2
Santa Maria 3 .3
Santa Ynez 1 .1
Solvang 20 1.7
12 Thousand Oaks 2 .2
Ventura 1 .1
Other 53 4.5
Do not answer 2 .2
Total 1168 100.0
o Number of household members
Q34 - How many people live in your household?
Frequency Percent
1 215 18.4
2 564 48.3
3 166 14.2
4 142 12.2
5 40 3.4
6 24 2.1
7 5 0.4
Do not answer 12 1.0
Total 1168 100.0
o Number of student household members
Q49 - How many people living at your home are in elementary, high school or attending college?
Frequency Percent
1 177 15.2
2 126 10.8
3 32 2.7
4 6 0.5
5+ 2 0.2
Do not answer 825 70.6
Total 1168 100.0
13 • Internet at Home
o Place for Internet use
Q43 - Where are you most likely to use the Internet?
Frequency Percent
Home 1048 89.7
Work or school 79 6.8
Café or some other public site 4 0.3
Library 2 0.2
Friend's house 1 .1
Other (e.g., car, hotspot) 18 1.5
Do not answer 16 1.4
Total 1168 100.0
o Reason of no at-home Internet
Q42 - If you do not have Internet at home, why not?
Frequency Percent
Too expensive 11 0.9
There is no internet service provider where I live 7 0.6 Other 49 4.2
I have Internet 24 2.1
I don’t have a device to connect to the internet 1 0.1
I don’t know how to sign up or connect to the
Internet 1 0.1
Do not answer 1075 92.0
Total 1168 100.0
Note. The survey did not provide “I have Internet at home” option in this question. 24 responses of “I have Internet” were recorded by manually coding the responses of “Other”) o At-home Internet access
Q35 - Do you have internet access at home?
Frequency Percent
No 10 .9
Yes 1154 98.8
Do not answer 4 .3
Total 1168 100.0
o Reliance on at-home Internet
Q36 - Do you rely on at-home Internet for work or school? Frequency Percent
No 285 24.4
Yes 876 75.0
Other 5 .4
14 Do not answer 2 .2
Total 1168 100.0
o At-home Internet service provider
Q37 - If you do have internet service at home, who is your internet service provider? Frequency Percent
Advanced Wireless 9 0.8
AT&T 4 0.3
Boingo Wireless, Inc 1 0.1
Charter Spectrum 17 1.5
Comcast 110 9.4
Cox Cable/Cox Communications 807 69.1
Frontier 123 10.5
I do not know 2 0.2
Impulse 17 1.5
Other 48 4.1
T-Mobile 4 0.3
Verizon 13 1.1
Do not answer 13 1.1
Total 1168 100.0
o Internet cost
Q41 - Do you think your internet cost is:
Frequency Percent
Inexpensive 17 1.5
Reasonable 316 27.1
Too expensive 832 71.2
Do not answer 3 0.3
Total 1168 100.0
o Internet reliability
Q44 - How reliable do you find your internet connection? (1 = very unreliable ~ 5 = average ~ 10 = Very reliable) N (Valid) Mean Std. Deviation Median Mode
1163 6.18 2.50 6.0 5
Note. There are 5 missing cases
o Internet speed
Q45 - What speed do you feel your internet connection is? Frequency Percent
Slow 247 21.1
Moderate 654 56.0
Fast 264 22.6
15 Do not answer 3 0.3
Total 1168 100.0
o Internet performance
Q46 - Does your internet performance meet your needs?
Frequency Percent
No 172 14.7
Sometimes 300 25.7
Mostly 448 38.4
Yes 246 21.1
Do not answer 2 0.2
Total 1168 100.0
o Most important factors for Internet
Q47 - What is most important to you regarding your internet service? Frequency Percent
Price, I want it to be a competitive price 210 18.0
Speed, I do not want any delay in download or upload 182 15.6 Reliability, I do not want my internet to be interrupted 381 32.6 Bundled services, I want Internet, Cable, Phone service etc. to be in one place 6 0.5
Customer Service, I want responsive customer support 7 0.6 Price and Reliability 4 0.3
Price and Speed 314 26.9
Speed and Reliability 14 1.2
Price and Customer Service 9 0.8
Price, Speed, and Reliability 21 1.8
Price, Reliability, and Customer Service 1 0.1
Price, Reliability, Speed, and Customer Service 1 0.1
All of the above 9 0.8
Other (e.g., bandwidth, broadband) 8 0.7
Do not answer 1 0.1
Total 1168 100.0
16 • Internet-connected device
o Access/own of Internet-connected device
Q48 - Do you have access to or own a device that connects to the internet? Frequency Percent
I neither have access to or own 8 0.7
I have access to 219 18.8
I own 936 80.1
Do not answer 5 0.4
Total 1168 100.0
o Types of Internet-connected devices
Q38 - Which of the following Internet-connected devices do you have? (Please select all that apply)
Frequency Percent
Laptop or Desktop 1148 98.3
Tablet/iPad 873 74.7
Smartphone 1107 94.8
Smart/Streaming TV 913 78.2
Gaming Console 267 22.9
Supporting Accessory (Alexa, etc.) 406 34.8
Medical Device 85 7.3
Security System, Doorbell, Camera 459 39.3
None 2 0.2
Total 1168 100.0
o Number of Internet-connected devices
Q39 - To the best of your knowledge, how many of each internet connected devices do you have in your household? (Please select a number for each if possible) N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
Laptop or Desktop 1146 1 10 2.62 1.359
Tablet/iPad 922 1 10 1.88 1.034
Smartphone 1107 1 10 2.30 1.151
Smart/Streaming TV 942 1 10 1.87 1.127
Gaming Console 293 1 8 1.64 1.016
Supporting Accessory (Alexa, etc.) 434 1 10 2.82 2.141
Medical Device 103 1 4 1.29 .636
Security System, Doorbell, Camera 471 1 10 2.78 2.357
Total 1166 0 58 10.46 6.565
Note. A total of 1167 participants answered this question. One participant who answered “10” to each device was considered as an outlier and thus excluded. 17 o Data use
Q40 - What activities do you use the most data/Gigabytes on? (Select all that apply) Frequency Percent
Gaming 171 14.6
Music/Video 887 75.9
Uploads/downloads (publishing videos, or downloading
content) 571 48.9
Telehealth 84 7.2
Teleconferencing/video chat 532 45.5
Social Media Platforms 265 22.7
Other activities (e.g., work, smart home devices) 259 22.2 Total 1168 100.0
o Broadband speed choice
Q - The State of California has set a goal for all California businesses and homes to have access to at least one provider of broadband with download speeds of at least 100 megabits per second no later than 2026. Some cities have set a goal of residents to be able to choose Gigabit speeds or 1,000 megabits per second of service (1 Gbps or 1,000 Mbps). If you could subscribe to much faster speeds, which would you be more likely to choose?"
Frequency Percent
PRETTY GOOD, and MOST AFFORDABLE (For example -
up to 4 devices) 100 Mbps for $55 - $60 per month 350 30.0 GREAT (Streaming, operating a business): 250 Mbps for
$80 - $100 per month 347 29.7
BEST, VIRTUALLY UNLIMITED (Really fast Internet, can
support all devices running at the same time, streaming, gaming, operating a business): 1,000 Mbps or 1 Gigabit for $100 - $150 per month 336 28.8
I am not sure 89 7.6
Other 40 3.4
Do not answer 6 0.5
Total 1168 100.0
18 • Relationships between income and Internet/device use o Income X at-home Internet access
A chi-square test analysis examined the relationship between adults’ income and at-home internet access. The result indicates that there are significant differences in at-home internet access among the various income groups.
At-home internet
No Yes Total
Income <$20,000 2 54 56
$20,000 - $40,000 2 65 67
$40,000 - $60,000 4 108 112
$60,000 - $80,000 0 125 125
$80,000 - $100,000 1 144 145
>$100,000 0 571 571
other 0 21 21
Total 9 1088 1097
Note. χ2(6, N = 1097) = 25.445, p < .001; 71 missing cases o Income X access/ownership of Internet-connected device A chi-square test analysis examined the relationship between adults’ income and the access/ownership of Internet-connected device. The result indicates that there are significant differences in the access/ownership of Internet-connected device among the various income groups.
Internet-connected device
Total
I neither have
access to or own
I have
access to I own
Income <$20,000 1 18 37 56
$20,000 - $40,000 1 16 51 68
$40,000 - $60,000 1 23 87 111
$60,000 - $80,000 1 24 101 126
$80,000 - $100,000 1 17 125 143
>$100,000 3 97 470 570
other 0 9 12 21
Total 8 204 883 1095
Note. χ2(12, N = 1095) = 23.733, p = .022; 73 missing cases o Income X types of Internet-connected device
19 A chi-square test analysis examined the relationship between adults’ income and types of Internet-connected device among adults. The result indicates that there are significant differences in the types of Internet-connected device among the various income groups. <
$20,000
$20,000 -
$40,000
$40,000 -
$60,000
$60,000 -
$80,000
$80,000 -
$100,000
>
$100,000
Other Total Statistics
Laptop or
Desktop
48 (4.4%)
66 (6.1%)
109
(10.1%)
125
(11.6%)
140
(13.0%)
570
(52.8%)
22 (2.0%)
1080 χ2(6, N =1101) =
60.811, p < .001
Tablet/iPad 25
(3.0%)
42 (5.1%)
82 (9.9%)
92 (11.1%)
108
(13.0%)
464
(56.0%)
16 (1.9%)
829 χ2(6, N =1101) =
46.731, p < .001
Smartphone 52
(5.0%)
61 (5.8%)
102
(9.8%)
118
(11.3%)
131
(12.5%)
560
(53.5%)
22 (2.1%)
1046 χ2(6, N =1101) =
29.756, p < .001
Smart/
Streaming TV
23 (2.6%)
40 (4.6%)
76 (8.7%)
100
(11.5%)
113
(13.0%)
502
(57.6%)
18 (2.1%)
872 χ2(6, N =1101) =
102.022, p < .001
Gaming
Console
9 (3.4%)
11 (4.1%)
19 (7.1%)
31 (11.6%)
21 (7.9%)
169
(63.3%)
7 (2.6%)
267 χ2(6, N =1101) =
25.007, p < .001
Supporting
Accessory
(Alexa, etc.)
8 (2.0%)
11 (2.8%)
18 (4.6%)
44 (11.2%)
45 (11.5%)
257
(65.6%)
9 (2.3%)
392 χ2(6, N =1101) =
64.711, p < .001
Medical
Device
5 (6.5%)
10 (13.0%)
2 (2.6%)
12 (15.6%)
14 (18.2%)
34 (44.2%)
0 (0%)
77 χ2(6, N =1101) =
16.565, p = .011
Security
System,
Doorbell,
Camera
10 (2.3%)
12 (2.8%)
31 (7.2%)
43 (10.0%)
40 (9.3%)
279
(65%)
14 (3.3%)
429 χ2(6, N =1101) =
68.086, p < .001
o Income X number of Internet-connected device
The t-test analysis examined whether there are statistically significant differences in the number of internet-connected devices that adults have depending on their income levels. The result indicates the following:
N Mean Std. Deviation
Laptop or Desktop <$20,000 52 2.19 1.547
$20,000 - $40,000 65 1.91 .931
$40,000 - $60,000 111 2.40 1.201
$60,000 - $80,000 124 2.59 1.460
$80,000 - $100,000 142 2.27 1.053
>$100,000 565 2.87 1.383
other 21 3.00 1.225
Total 1080 2.63 1.350
Tablet/iPad <$20,000 29 1.62 .979
20 $20,000 - $40,000 46 1.85 .816
$40,000 - $60,000 85 1.75 .872
$60,000 - $80,000 95 1.71 .933
$80,000 - $100,000 118 1.67 .763
>$100,000 488 2.00 1.159
other 16 2.50 1.155
Total 877 1.89 1.052
Smartphone <$20,000 47 2.06 1.634
$20,000 - $40,000 62 1.97 1.130
$40,000 - $60,000 106 2.04 1.103
$60,000 - $80,000 116 2.32 1.547
$80,000 - $100,000 136 2.17 .939
>$100,000 557 2.43 1.018
other 21 2.86 1.153
Total 1045 2.31 1.142
Smart/
Streaming TV
<$20,000 29 1.79 1.207
$20,000 - $40,000 41 1.80 1.308
$40,000 - $60,000 85 1.69 1.047
$60,000 - $80,000 106 1.75 .984
$80,000 - $100,000 116 1.72 .921
>$100,000 501 1.95 1.172
other 20 2.20 1.576
Total 898 1.87 1.131
Gaming Console <$20,000 13 1.69 .630
$20,000 - $40,000 12 1.92 1.084
$40,000 - $60,000 18 2.00 1.372
$60,000 - $80,000 34 1.85 1.077
$80,000 - $100,000 27 1.59 .931
>$100,000 181 1.55 .974
other 7 1.86 1.464
Total 292 1.64 1.017
Supporting Accessory
(Alexa, etc.)
<$20,000 9 1.89 .782
$20,000 - $40,000 14 2.43 1.828
$40,000 - $60,000 22 2.36 2.150
$60,000 - $80,000 43 3.09 2.706
$80,000 - $100,000 50 2.32 1.435
>$100,000 275 2.93 2.181
other 8 3.00 2.928
21 Total 421 2.81 2.155
Medical Device <$20,000 6 1.33 .816
$20,000 - $40,000 10 1.40 .966
$40,000 - $60,000 3 1.00 .000
$60,000 - $80,000 11 1.36 .674
$80,000 - $100,000 19 1.21 .535
>$100,000 41 1.27 .593
other 0 . .
Total 90 1.28 .636
Security System,
Doorbell, Camera
<$20,000 10 1.80 1.135
$20,000 - $40,000 13 1.77 1.166
$40,000 - $60,000 33 2.36 2.074
$60,000 - $80,000 44 2.93 2.193
$80,000 - $100,000 41 2.22 1.891
>$100,000 286 2.97 2.496
other 14 3.07 2.895
Total 441 2.79 2.362
Total <$20,000 56 6.70 5.724
$20,000 - $40,000 68 7.34 5.476
$40,000 - $60,000 112 8.43 5.224
$60,000 - $80,000 126 10.14 7.016
$80,000 - $100,000 145 8.88 4.786
>$100,000 571 12.12 6.822
other 21 13.67 5.799
Total 1099 10.55 6.582
a. Total number of devices
N Mean Std. Deviation
Total <$20,000 56 6.70 5.724
$20,000 - $40,000 68 7.34 5.476
$40,000 - $60,000 112 8.43 5.224
$60,000 - $80,000 126 10.14 7.016
$80,000 - $100,000 145 8.88 4.786
>$100,000 571 12.12 6.822
other 21 13.67 5.799
Total 1099 10.55 6.582
22 – There are statistically significant differences in the total number of internet-connected devices among the various income groups (F(6, 1092) = 17.048, p < .001). Specifically, the following groups are statistically different from each other o “>$100,000” group has more internet-connected devices than <$20,000 (p < .001)
$20,000 - $40,000 (p < .001)
$40,000 - $60,000 (p < .001)
$60,000 - $80,000 (p = .002)
$80,000 - $100,000 (p < .001)
o “$80,000 - $100,000” group has more internet-connected devices than <$20,000 (p = .028)
Other (p = .001)
o “$60,000 - $80,000” group has more internet-connected devices than <$20,000 (p < .001)
$20,000 - $40,000 (p = .003)
$40,000 - $60,000 (p = .037)
Other (p = .018)
o “$40,000 - $60,000” group has more internet-connected devices than Other (p < .001)
o “$20,000 - $40,000” group has more internet-connected devices than Other (p < .001)
o “<$20,000” group has more internet-connected devices than Other (p < .001)
b. Laptop or Desktop
N Mean Std. Deviation
Laptop or Desktop <$20,000 52 2.19 1.547
$20,000 - $40,000 65 1.91 .931
$40,000 - $60,000 111 2.40 1.201
$60,000 - $80,000 124 2.59 1.460
$80,000 - $100,000 142 2.27 1.053
>$100,000 565 2.87 1.383
other 21 3.00 1.225
Total 1080 2.63 1.350
– There are statistically significant differences in the number of laptop/desktop among the various income groups (F(6, 1073) = 10.049, p < .001). Specifically, the following groups are statistically different from each other:
o “>$100,000” group has more internet-connected devices than <$20,000 (p < .001)
$20,000 - $40,000 (p < .001)
$40,000 - $60,000 (p < .001)
$60,000 - $80,000 (p = .029)
$80,000 - $100,000 (p < .001)
o “$80,000 - $100,000” group has more internet-connected devices than other (p = .019)
23 o “$60,000 - $80,000” group has more internet-connected devices than $20,000 - $40,000 (p < .001)
o “$40,000 - $60,000” group has more internet-connected devices than $20,000 - $40,000 (p = .018)
o “$20,000 - $40,000” group has more internet-connected devices than Other (p < .001)
o “<$20,000” group has more internet-connected devices than Other (p = .018)
c. Tablet/iPad
N Mean Std. Deviation
Tablet/iPad <$20,000 29 1.62 .979
$20,000 - $40,000 46 1.85 .816
$40,000 - $60,000 85 1.75 .872
$60,000 - $80,000 95 1.71 .933
$80,000 - $100,000 118 1.67 .763
>$100,000 488 2.00 1.159
other 16 2.50 1.155
Total 877 1.89 1.052
– There are statistically significant differences in the number of tablet/iPad among the various income groups (F(6, 870) = 3.712, p = .001). Specifically, the following groups are statistically different from each other:
o “>$100,000” group has more internet-connected devices than $40,000 - $60,000 (p = .048)
$60,000 - $80,000 (p = .013)
$80,000 - $100,000 (p = .002)
o “$80,000 - $100,000” group has more internet-connected devices than other (p = .003)
o “$60,000 - $80,000” group has more internet-connected devices than other (p = .005)
o “$40,000 - $60,000” group has more internet-connected devices than other (p = .009)
o “$20,000 - $40,000” group has more internet-connected devices than Other (p = .031)
o “<$20,000” group has more internet-connected devices than Other (p = .007)
d. Smartphone
N Mean Std. Deviation
Smartphone <$20,000 47 2.06 1.634
$20,000 - $40,000 62 1.97 1.130
$40,000 - $60,000 106 2.04 1.103
24 $60,000 - $80,000 116 2.32 1.547
$80,000 - $100,000 136 2.17 .939
>$100,000 557 2.43 1.018
other 21 2.86 1.153
Total 1045 2.31 1.142
– There are statistically significant differences in the number of smartphone among the various income groups (F(6, 1038) = 4.611, p < .001). Specifically, the following groups are statistically different from each other:
o “>$100,000” group has more internet-connected devices than <$20,000 (p = .032)
$20,000 - $40,000 (p = .002)
$40,000 - $60,000 (p = .001)
$80,000 - $100,000 (p = .015)
o “$80,000 - $100,000” group has more internet-connected devices than other (p = .010)
o “$60,000 - $80,000” group has more internet-connected devices than $20,000 - $40,000 (p = .049)
other (p = .045)
o “$40,000 - $60,000” group has more internet-connected devices than other (p = .002)
o “$20,000 - $40,000” group has more internet-connected devices than Other (p = .002)
o “<$20,000” group has more internet-connected devices than Other (p = .008)
e. Smart/Streaming TV
N Mean Std. Deviation
Smart/
Streaming TV
<$20,000 29 1.79 1.207
$20,000 - $40,000 41 1.80 1.308
$40,000 - $60,000 85 1.69 1.047
$60,000 - $80,000 106 1.75 .984
$80,000 - $100,000 116 1.72 .921
>$100,000 501 1.95 1.172
other 20 2.20 1.576
Total 898 1.87 1.131
– There are NO statistically significant difference in the number of smart/streaming TV among the seven income groups (F(6, 891) = 1.662, p = .127). f. Gaming Console
N Mean Std. Deviation
25 Gaming Console <$20,000 13 1.69 .630
$20,000 - $40,000 12 1.92 1.084
$40,000 - $60,000 18 2.00 1.372
$60,000 - $80,000 34 1.85 1.077
$80,000 - $100,000 27 1.59 .931
>$100,000 181 1.55 .974
other 7 1.86 1.464
Total 292 1.64 1.017
– There are NO statistically significant difference in the number of gaming console among the seven income groups (F(6, 285) = 1.095, p = .365).
g. Supporting Accessory (Alexa, etc.)
N Mean Std. Deviation
Supporting Accessory
(Alexa, etc.)
<$20,000 9 1.89 .782
$20,000 - $40,000 14 2.43 1.828
$40,000 - $60,000 22 2.36 2.150
$60,000 - $80,000 43 3.09 2.706
$80,000 - $100,000 50 2.32 1.435
>$100,000 275 2.93 2.181
other 8 3.00 2.928
Total 421 2.81 2.155
– There are NO statistically significant difference in the number of supporting accessory among the seven income groups (F(6, 414) = 1.226, p = .292). h. Medical Device
N Mean Std. Deviation
Medical Device <$20,000 6 1.33 .816
$20,000 - $40,000 10 1.40 .966
$40,000 - $60,000 3 1.00 .000
$60,000 - $80,000 11 1.36 .674
$80,000 - $100,000 19 1.21 .535
>$100,000 41 1.27 .593
other 0 . .
Total 90 1.28 .636
26 – There are NO statistically significant difference in the number of medical device among the seven income groups (F(5, 84) = .270, p = .928).
i. Security System, Doorbell, Camera
N Mean Std. Deviation
Security System,
Doorbell, Camera
<$20,000 10 1.80 1.135
$20,000 - $40,000 13 1.77 1.166
$40,000 - $60,000 33 2.36 2.074
$60,000 - $80,000 44 2.93 2.193
$80,000 - $100,000 41 2.22 1.891
>$100,000 286 2.97 2.496
other 14 3.07 2.895
Total 441 2.79 2.362
– There are NO statistically significant difference in the number of security system/ doorbell/ camera among the seven income groups (F(6, 434) = 1.632, p = .137). o Income X data use
A chi-square test analysis examined the relationship between adults’ income and activities that they use the most data/Gigabytes on. The chi-square test analysis indicates that there are statistically meaningful relationships between income and data use in terms of the following activities: music/Video, telehealth, teleconferencing/video chat, social media platforms.
However, there are no statistically meaningful relationships between income and data use in terms of the following activities: gaming, uploads/downloads, and other activities. <
$20,000
$20,000 -
$40,000
$40,000 -
$60,000
$60,000 -
$80,000
$80,000 -
$100,000
>
$100,000
Other Total Statistics
Gaming 10
(5.9%)
10 (5.9%)
17 (10.0%)
22 (12.9%)
22 (12.9%)
83 (48.8%)
6 (3.5%)
170 χ2(6, N =1101) =
3.411, p = .756
Music/Video 30
(3.6%)
41 (4.9%)
79 (9.4%)
92 (11.0%)
112
(13.4%)
470
(56.1%)
14 (1.7%)
838 χ2(6, N =1101) =
41.571, p < .001
Uploads/dow
nloads
(publishing
videos, or
downloading
content)
25 (4.7%)
37 (7.0%)
58 (10.9%)
64 (12.0%)
67 (12.6%)
275
(51.7%)
6 (1.1%)
532 χ2(6, N =1101) =
6.415, p = .378
Telehealth 7
(9.2%)
7 (9.2%)
14 (18.4%)
9 (11.8%)
18 (23.7%)
21 (27.6%)
0 (0%)
76 χ2(6, N =1101) =
26.980, p < .001
27 Teleconferen
cing/video
chat
14 (2.8%)
22 (4.4%)
37 (7.3%)
52 (10.3%)
70 (13.9%)
300
(59.5%)
9 (1.8%)
504 χ2(6, N =1101) =
34.039, p < .001
Social Media
Platforms
15 (5.9%)
23 (9.1%)
32 (12.6%)
21 (8.3%)
43 (17.0%)
114
(45.1%)
5 (2.0%)
253 χ2(6, N =1101) =
16.181, p = .013
Other devices
that connect
to Wi-Fi
11 (4.9%)
15 (6.7%)
25 (11.1%)
24 (10.7%)
30 (13.3%)
112
(49.8%)
8 (3.6%)
225 χ2(6, N =1101) =
4.197, p = .650
28 Adults who own business (n = 68)
• Business
o Business ownership
Q50 - Do you own a business?
Frequency Percent
No 773 66.2
Yes 68 5.8
Yes, and it is a home-based business so answers are similar 199 17.0 Yes, but I am not interested in answering additional questions 110 9.4 Total 1168 100.0
Note. The following analyses were done with the adults who own a business (n = 68), including 19-65 group (n = 43) and +65 group (n = 25)
o Business type
Q51 - What type of business are you in?
Frequency Percent
Agriculture or wine 6 8.8
Education 3 4.4
Healthcare 5 7.4
High tech 6 8.8
Mining/Manufacturing 3 4.4
Professional Services (consulting, legal, engineering,
accounting, banking, etc.)
23 33.8
Restaurant/Food 3 4.4
Retail 5 7.4
Other (e.g., Entertainment, Construction 14 20.6
Total 68 100.0
o Number of employees
Q53 - About how many employees work for the company?
o Number of employees in Santa Barbara
Q54 - About how many employees does your company have in the Santa Barbara area? Frequency Percent
1-10 51 75.0
11-20 10 14.7
21-40 3 4.4
41-60 1 1.5
61-100 1 1.5
Do not answer 2 2.9
Total 68 100.0
29 Frequency Percent
None 8 11.8
1-5 41 60.3
6-10 7 10.3
11-20 7 10.3
21-30 1 1.5
31-40 1 1.5
41-60 1 1.5
Do not answer 2 2.9
Total 68 100.0
o Work from home before/after the pandemic
Q56 - Before the pandemic, did you have employees that work from home, and if so, how often did they work from home?
Before After
Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
At least one day per week 11 16.2 4 5.9
2 - 3 days per week 5 7.4 6 8.8
More than 3 days per week 2 2.9 27 39.7
5 days per week 11 16.2 29 42.6
The company's employees do not
work from home
37 54.4 4 5.9
Do not answer 2 2.9 2 2.9
Total 68 100.0 68 100.0
• Internet for business
o Internet providers for business
Q58 - Which of the following Internet Service Providers do you use at your business? Frequency Percent
Advanced Wireless 1 1.5
Comcast 6 8.8
Cox Cable 39 57.4
Frontier 9 13.2
I do not know 1 1.5
Impulse 5 7.4
Other 5 7.4
Verizon 1 1.5
I do not know 1 1.5
Do not answer 1 1.5
Total 68 100.0
o Internet service for business
Q59 - For your business, what type of Internet service do you currently have? Frequency Percent
30 Cable (usually provided as part of your cable TV
package)
36 52.9
Dial-up (requires you to use a modem and your regular
phone line)
1 1.5
DSL (usually provided by the phone company) 9 13.2
Fiber connection (uses fiber optics to provide the
signal. May be provided by the phone company or other
providers. Typically used for higher speeds)
3 4.4
Mobile Phone Wireless, Cellular (typically is part of your cell phone plan)
1 1.5
Satellite (usually provided as part of your Satellite TV package)
2 2.9
T-1 Service (a special kind of service often available
from the phone company rated at 0 a fixed 1.5 Mbps)
1 1.5
Wireless (usually provided by an independent service
provider using an antenna on the roof pointed to
another ground antenna)
8 11.8
I do not know what type of connection I have at my
place of business
5 7.4
Do not answer 2 2.9
Total 68 100.0
o Internet service quality for business
Q60 - How is your business Internet Service?
Frequency Percent
Speed is too low 17 25.0
The connection interrupts 33 48.5
It meets my current needs 16 23.5
Do not answer 2 2.9
Total 68 100.0
o Internet service speed for business
Q61 - How would you rate the speed of your Internet service? Frequency Percent
very slow 10 14.7
slow 21 30.9
acceptable 23 33.8
good 8 11.8
excellent 5 7.4
Do not answer 1 1.5
Total 68 100.0
o Impacts of Internet service on business
Q63 - What impact would Gigabit Internet service have on your business? Frequency Percent
No impact 21 30.9
The business would hire more employees 7 10.3
31 The business could provide/attend more webinars and
online training
13 19.1
The business could reach more markets, more
territories, more locations
14 20.6
The business would be more efficient 37 54.4
The business could provide more products and services
to its customers
18 26.5
Total 68 100.0
Note. 6 participants answered “Other.” The following are their responses:
• cost too much
• I could spend less time kicking the cox modem when they say I have super fast internet but can’t download a simple website.
• My services would be more professional as my video calls would be better quality with more continuous service
• Frankly it wouldn't really have any impact on business operations - I just get annoyed with slow connections and am more-or-less willing to pay for speed • If this is code for 5G I am opposed.
• The owner would not scream in frustration after being throttled at week 3 each month. o Impact of Internet service on employees during the pandemic Q64 - With the pandemic and the safer-at-home orders, how much has the current Internet service impacted you and your employees’ ability to work from home? Frequency Percent
not at all (no reliance on internet) 9 13.2
not at all (works great) 20 29.4
SOMEWHAT (down or too slow) 25 36.8
In a BIG WAY (not able to effectively work) 12 17.6
Do not answer 2 2.9
Total 68 100.0
o Important factors of Internet service
Q65 - What is most important to you regarding your Internet service? [Ranking] Rank Frequency Percent
Reliability, I do not want my internet service to be
interrupted
*1 41 60.3
2 12 17.6
3 - -
4 2 2.9
5 10 14.7
Fast, I want speed and availability of abundant broadband 1 15 22.1 *2 23 33.8
3 14 20.6
4 1 1.5
5 10 14.7
Price, I want to pay a competitive price 1 11 16.2
2 12 17.6
*3 32 47.1
4 4 5.9
5 4 5.9
1 6 8.8
32 Customer Service, I want a friendly voice and good
customer support
2 5 7.4
3 10 14.7
*4 34 50.0
5 8 11.8
Bundled Invoice, I want one invoice for internet, cable TV, and/or phone service
1 13 19.1
2 1 1.5
3 4 5.9
4 4 5.9
*5 40 58.8
Total 68 100.0
Additional Analysis by Zip Code
Table of Contents
Adolescents ....................................................................................................................... 32 Zip code....................................................................................................................................... 33 Relationship between zip code and Internet use (for distance learning) ......................... 33 Relationship between zip code and Internet assessment (for distance learning) .......... 33 Adults .................................................................................................................................. 34 Zip code....................................................................................................................................... 34 Relationship between zip code and at-home Internet access............................................ 34 Relationship between zip code and reliance on at-home Internet..................................... 35 Relationship between zip code and Internet cost ................................................................ 36 Relationship between zip code and Internet speed ............................................................. 36 Relationship between zip code and Internet performance ................................................. 37 Relationship between zip code and Internet reliability........................................................ 38 33 Adolescents
Zip code
Frequency Percent
93434 44 75.9
93440 2 3.4
other 2 3.4
Do not answer 10 17.2
Total 58 100.0
Relationship between zip code and Internet use (for distance learning) The chi-square test analysis indicates that there are statistically significant relationships between zip code and Internet use (for distance learning).
Q10 - While distance learning during the pandemic, I used...
I did not do
distance
learning
My home
internet
Other
(e.g., school
Internet)
Do not
answer
Total
93434 0 41 (77.4%) 2 (100%) 1 (50.0%) 44 (75.9%)
93440 1 (100%) 1 (1.9%) 0 0 2 (3.4%)
other 0 2 (3.8%) 0 0 2 (3.4%)
Do not answer 0 9 (17.0%) 0 1 (50.0%) 10 (17.2%)
Total 1 (100%) 53 (100%) 2 (100%) 2 (100%) 58 (100%)
Note. χ2(9, N = 58) = 30.604, p < .001
Relationship between zip code and Internet assessment (for distance learning)
The chi-square test analysis indicates that there are no statistically significant relationships between zip code and Internet assessment (for distance learning).
Q11 - How would you rate your experience with your internet during the pandemic as it related to distance learning?
Horrible, I
was not able
to learn much
It was bad,
but I still made
it possible
Okay, but wish
that I had
better
connectivity
My connectivity
was good, but
it was hard for
others
Incredible! I
had no
issues
Total
93434 2 (50.0%) 9 (64.3%) 11 (73.3%) 11 (91.7%) 10 (90.9%) 43 (76.8%) 93440 1 (25.0%) 0 1 (6.7%) 0 0 2 (3.6%)
other 0 0 2 (13.3%) 0 0 2 (3.6%)
34 Do not
answer
1 (25.0%) 5 (35.7%) 1 (6.7%) 1 (8.3%) 1 (9.1%) 9 (16.1%) Total 4 (100%) 14 (100%) 15 (100%) 12 (100%) 11 (100%) 56 (100%) Note. χ2(12, N = 56) = 18.813, p = .093
Adults
Zip code
Frequency Percent
93013 19 1.6
93101 55 4.7
93103 37 3.2
93105 125 10.7
93108 37 3.2
93109 40 3.4
93110 32 2.7
93111 39 3.3
93117 117 10.0
93254 5 .4
93427 10 .9
93434 5 .4
93436 15 1.3
93440 23 2.0
93441 2 .2
93454 12 1.0
93455 17 1.5
93458 3 .3
93460 7 .6
93463 10 .9
other 5 .4
Do not answer 553 47.3
Total 1168 100.0
Relationship between zip code and at-home Internet access The chi-square test analysis indicates that there are no statistically significant relationships between zip code and at-home Internet access.
Q35 - Do you have internet access at home?
No Yes Total
93013 0 19 (1.6%) 19 (1.6%)
93101 0 55 (4.8%) 55 (4.7%)
35 93103 0 37 (3.2%) 37 (3.2%)
93105 0 125 (10.8%) 125 (10.7%)
93108 0 37 (3.2%) 37 (3.2%)
93109 0 39 (3.4%) 39 (3.4%)
93110 0 31 (2.7%) 31 (2.7%)
93111 0 39 (3.4%) 39 (3.4%)
93117 1 (10.0%) 116 (10.1%) 117 (10.1%)
93254 0 5 (0.4%) 5 (0.4%)
93427 0 10 (0.9%) 10 (0.9%)
93434 0 4 (0.3%) 4 (0.3%)
93436 0 15 (1.3%) 15 (1.3%)
93440 0 23 (2.0%) 23 (2.0%)
93441 0 2 (0.2%) 2 (0.2%)
93454 0 12 (1.0%) 12 (1.0%)
93455 0 17 (1.5%) 17 (1.5%)
93458 0 3 (0.3%) 3 (0.3%)
93460 1 (10.0%) 6 (0.5%) 7 (0.6%)
93463 0 10 (0.9%) 10 (0.9%)
other 0 5 (0.4%) 5 (0.4%)
Do not answer 8 (80.0%) 544 (47.1%) 552 (47.4%)
Total 10 (100%) 1154 (100%) 1164 (100%)
Note. χ2(21, N = 1164) = 21.302, p = .441
Relationship between zip code and reliance on at-home Internet The chi-square test analysis indicates that there are statistically significant relationships between zip code and reliance on at-home Internet.
Q36 - Do you rely on at-home Internet for work or school? No Yes Other Total
93013 10 (3.5%) 9 (1.0%) 0 19 (1.6%)
93101 17 (6.0%) 38 (4.3%) 0 55 (4.7%)
93103 10 (3.5%) 27 (3.1%) 0 37 (3.2%)
93105 53 (18.7%) 71 (8.1%) 1 (20.0%) 125 (10.7%)
93108 14 (4.9%) 23 (2.6%) 0 37 (3.2%)
93109 18 (6.3%) 21 (2.4%) 0 39 (3.3%)
93110 17 (6.0%) 13 (1.5%) 0 30 (2.6%)
93111 15 (5.3%) 24 (2.7%) 0 39 (3.3%)
93117 42 (14.8%) 73 (8.3%) 2 (40.0%) 117 (10.0%)
93254 0 5 (0.6%) 0 5 (0.4%)
93427 1 (0.4%) 9 (1.0%) 0 10 (0.9%)
93434 1 (0.4%) 4 (0.5%) 0 5 (0.4%)
93436 8 (2.8%) 7 (0.8%) 0 15 (1.3%)
93440 4 (1.4%) 19 (2.2%) 0 23 (2.0%)
93441 0 2 (0.2%) 0 2 (0.2%)
93454 5 (1.8%) 7 (0.8%) 0 12 (1.0%)
36 93455 7 (2.5%) 10 (1.1%) 0 17 (1.5%)
93458 2 (0.7%) 1 (0.1%) 0 3 (0.3%)
93460 1 (0.4%) 6 (0.7%) 0 7 (0.6%)
93463 3 (1.1%) 7 (0.8%) 0 10 (0.9%)
Other 2 (0.7%) 3 (0.3%) 0 5 (0.4%)
Do not answer 54 (19.0%) 497 (56.7%) 2 (40.0%) 553 (47.5%) Total 284 (100%) 876 (100%) 5 (100%) 1165 (100%)
Note. χ2(42, N = 1165) = 165.599, p < .001
Relationship between zip code and Internet cost
The chi-square test analysis indicates that there are statistically significant relationships between zip code and Internet cost.
Q41 - Do you think your internet cost is:
Inexpensive Reasonable Too expensive Do not answer Total 93013 1 (5.9%) 2 (0.6%) 16 (1.9%) 0 19 (1.6%)
93101 0 20 (6.3%) 35 (4.2%) 0 55 (4.7%)
93103 0 7 (2.2%) 29 (3.5%) 1 (25.0%) 37 (3.2%)
93105 2 (11.8%) 30 (9.5%) 93 (11.2%) 0 125 (10.7%)
93108 0 15 (4.8%) 22 (2.6%) 0 37 (3.2%)
93109 1 (5.9%) 9 (2.9%) 29 (3.5%) 1 (25.0%) 40 (3.4%)
93110 0 6 (1.9%) 26 (3.1%) 0 32 (2.7%)
93111 0 10 (3.2%) 29 (3.5%) 0 39 (3.3%)
93117 1 (5.9%) 23 (7.3%) 92 (11.1%) 1 (25.0%) 117 (10.0%) 93254 0 2 (0.6%) 3 (0.4%) 0 5 (0.4%)
93427 0 7 (2.2%) 3 (0.4%) 0 10 (0.9%)
93434 0 1 (0.3%) 4 (0.5%) 0 5 (0.4%)
93436 0 5 (1.6%) 10 (1.2%) 0 15 (1.3%)
93440 0 8 (2.5%) 15 (1.8%) 0 23 (2.0%)
93441 0 2 (0.6%) 0 0 2 (0.2%)
93454 0 4 (1.3%) 8 (1.0%) 0 12 (1.0%)
93455 0 3 (1.0%) 14 (1.7%) 0 17 (1.5%)
93458 0 1 (0.3%) 2 (0.2%) 0 3 (0.3%)
93460 0 1 (0.3%) 5 (0.6%) 1 (25.0%) 7 (0.6%)
93463 1 (5.9%) 3 (1.0%) 6 (0.7%) 0 10 (0.9%)
other 2 (11.8%) 1 (0.3%) 2 (0.2%) 0 5 (0.4%)
Do not answer 9 (52.9%) 155 (49.2%) 389 (46.8%) 0 553 (47.3%) Total 17 (100%) 315 (100%) 832 (100%) 4 (100%) 1168 (100%) Note. χ2(63, N = 1168) = 151.754, p < .001
Relationship between zip code and Internet speed
37 The chi-square test analysis indicates that there are statistically significant relationships between zip code and Internet speed.
Slow Moderate Fast Total
93013 3 (1.2%) 14 (2.1%) 2 (0.8%) 19 (1.6%)
93101 12 (4.9%) 29 (4.4%) 14 (5.3%) 55 (4.7%)
93103 6 (2.4%) 23 (3.5%) 8 (3.0%) 37 (3.2%)
93105 22 (8.9%) 76 (11.6%) 27 (10.2%) 125 (10.7%)
93108 6 (2.4%) 24 (3.7%) 7 (2.7%) 37 (3.2%)
93109 7 (2.8%) 25 (3.8%) 7 (2.7%) 39 (3.4%)
93110 5 (2.0%) 24 (3.7%) 3 (1.1%) 32 (2.7%)
93111 9 (3.6%) 18 (2.8%) 12 (4.5%) 39 (3.4%)
93117 21 (8.5%) 78 (11.9%) 18 (6.8%) 117 (10.1%)
93254 3 (1.2%) 2 (0.3%) 0 5 (0.4%)
93427 3 (1.2%) 4 (0.6%) 3 (1.1%) 10 (0.9%)
93434 0 4 (0.6%) 1 (0.4%) 5 (0.4%)
93436 3 (1.2%) 8 (1.2%) 4 (1.5%) 15 (1.3%)
93440 12 (4.9%) 11 (1.7%) 0 23 (2.0%)
93441 2 (0.8%) 0 0 2 (0.2%)
93454 4 (1.6%) 5 (0.8%) 3 (1.1%) 12 (1.0%)
93455 5 (2.0%) 9 (1.4%) 3 (1.1%) 17 (1.5%)
93458 2 (0.8%) 1 (0.2%) 0 3 (0.3%)
93460 5 (2.0%) 2 (0.3%) 0 7 (0.6%)
93463 2 (0.8%) 6 (0.9%) 2 (0.8%) 10 (0.9%)
other 0 3 (0.5%) 2 (0.8%) 5 (0.4%)
Do not answer 115 (46.6%) 287 (44.0%) 148 (56.1%) 550 (47.3%) Total 247 (100%) 653 (100%) 264 (100%) 1164 (100%)
Note. χ2(42, N = 1164) = 75.087, p < .001
Relationship between zip code and Internet performance
The chi-square test analysis indicates that there are statistically significant relationships between zip code and Internet performance.
Q46 - Does your internet performance meet your needs?
No Sometimes Mostly Yes Total
93013 1 (0.6%) 4 (1.3%) 10 (2.2%) 4 (1.6%) 19 (1.6%)
93101 7 (4.1%) 13 (4.3%) 22 (4.9%) 13 (5.3%) 55 (4.7%)
93103 3 (1.7%) 9 (3.0%) 19 (4.2%) 6 (2.4%) 37 (3.2%)
93105 17 (9.9%) 28 (9.3%) 44 (9.8%) 36 (14.7%) 125 (10.7%) 93108 5 (2.9%) 8 (2.7%) 18 (4.0%) 6 (2.4%) 37 (3.2%)
93109 8 (4.7%) 6 (2.0%) 16 (3.6%) 9 (3.7%) 39 (3.3%)
93110 4 (2.3%) 6 (2.0%) 13 (2.9%) 9 (3.7%) 32 (2.7%)
93111 7 (4.1%) 8 (2.7%) 14 (3.1%) 10 (4.1%) 39 (3.3%)
93117 14 (8.1%) 31 (10.3%) 50 (11.2%) 22 (9.0%) 117 (10.0%) 38 93254 4 (2.3%) 1 (0.3%) 0 0 5 (0.4%)
93427 3 (1.7%) 2 (0.7%) 3 (0.7%) 2 (0.8%) 10 (0.9%)
93434 0 2 (0.7%) 1 (0.2%) 2 (0.8%) 5 (0.4%)
93436 2 (1.2%) 2 (0.7%) 5 (1.1%) 6 (2.4%) 15 (1.3%)
93440 6 (3.5%) 8 (2.7%) 9 (2.0%) 0 23 (2.0%)
93441 2 (1.2%) 0 0 0 2 (0.2%)
93454 1 (0.6%) 2 (0.7%) 8 (1.8%) 1 (0.4%) 12 (1.0%)
93455 1 (0.6%) 6 (0.6%) 7 (1.6%) 3 (1.2%) 17 (1.5%)
93458 0 2 (0.7%) 0 1 (0.4%) 3 (0.3%)
93460 4 (2.3%) 1 (0.3%) 2 (0.4%) 0 7 (0.6%)
93463 2 (1.2%) 3 (1.0%) 4 (0.9%) 1 (0.4%) 10 (0.9%)
other 0 1 (0.3%) 2 (0.4%) 2 (0.8%) 5 (0.4%)
Do not answer 81 (47.1%) 157 (52.3%) 201 (44.9%) 112 (45.7%) 551 (47.3%) Total 172 (100%) 300 (100%) 448 (100%) 245 (100%) 1165 (100%) Note. χ2(63, N = 1165) = 88.324, p = .019
Relationship between zip code and Internet reliability
Q44 - How reliable do you find your internet connection? (1 = very unreliable ~ 5 = average ~ 10 = Very reliable) N Mean Std. Deviation Minimum Maximum
93013 19 5.68 2.286 1 10
93101 55 6.53 2.602 1 10
93103 37 6.14 2.299 1 10
93105 124 6.73 2.545 1 10
93108 37 6.05 2.285 1 10
93109 38 6.68 2.494 1 10
93110 32 6.72 2.174 1 10
93111 39 5.87 2.557 1 10
93117 117 6.09 2.330 1 10
93254 5 4.60 1.517 3 7
93427 10 5.70 3.057 2 10
93434 5 6.20 1.095 5 7
93436 15 6.67 2.610 2 9
93440 23 4.91 1.756 1 8
93441 2 2.00 1.414 1 3
93454 12 6.33 2.605 1 10
93455 17 5.82 2.580 2 10
93458 3 5.33 3.512 2 9
93460 7 3.29 3.302 1 10
93463 10 5.40 3.627 1 10
other 5 7.00 3.240 3 10
Do not answer 551 6.17 2.504 1 10
Total 1163 6.18 2.501 1 10
What is Broadband?
Broadband provides the fastest connections today, making it the most common type of residential internet service. Broadband is a type of high-speed internet connection that is always “on.” Santa Barbara County
Broadband Strategic Plan
The Broadband Alliance of Santa Barbara County (Alliance) formed in October 2021 to develop a regional broadband strategic plan through a partnership between the Santa Barbara County Association of Governments, County of Santa Barbara, and the cities of Buellton, Carpinteria, Goleta, Guadalupe, Lompoc, Santa Barbara, Santa Maria, and Solvang, the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians, Broadband Consortium of the Pacific Coast (BCPC), and regional economic development organizations.
Broadband Alliance Strategic Plan
The plan will identify broadband internet
infrastructure and affordability needs in Santa
Barbara County.
The plan will be completed by the end of 2022.
Once the Plan is complete, the Alliance will seek
funding opportunities for projects to improve
internet access in homes, schools, businesses,
healthcare, and facilities to high-speed internet
countywide. It will also help improve disaster
preparedness and encourage industry
competition.
How you can help
Please take a minute to complete a Santa Barbara
County broadband internet needs assessment survey
and speed test on a personal computer or laptop at
home, work, or wherever you connect at
www.sbcag.org/broadband
Information collected helps to improve affordable
access to high-speed internet countywide. Privacy
controls protect responses and anonymous
participation is an option.
If you do not have internet, please call Santa Barbara
County Association of Governments (SBCAG) at
1-805-961-8902 to report why you don’t!
FACT SHEET
FAQ and Resources
Tell us about…your internet experience.
Take a survey & speed test on a personal computer or laptop at home, work, or wherever you connect at www.sbcag.org/broadband
If you do not have internet or access to equipment to take this test, please call Santa Barbara County Association of Governments (SBCAG) at 1-805-961-8902 to report why you don’t!
Last Updated: 4/20/22
Broadband Words To Know
Bandwidth: Capacity of a broadband connection, often a synonym for data transfer speed.
Kilobit/Kilobyte: Kilobits per second (Kbps) is a measure of dial-up speed, where one Kb = 125 bytes.
Kilobyte (KB) means 1,000 bytes and is a measure of storage capacity or data size.
Megabit/Megabyte: Megabits per second (Mbps or Mb) is a measure of transmission speed, with a 1Mb connection being able to transfer 1MB (megabyte/MB) of data in 8 seconds. Megabyte is a measure of the size of computer files or capacity. 1MB = 1,000 KB.
Gigabit/Gigabyte: Gigabit is a unit describing data transfer speed, usually per second (Gbps).
Gigabyte describes the size of computer files and capacity. 1GB = 1,000 MB (megabytes) Middle-mile: The segment of telecommunications network infrastructure that connects major telecom (often international) networks, national or core networks to users in homes, schools, government, and businesses.
Last mile: The final leg of a telecommunications network that delivers telecom services to end users.
Dark fiber: “Unlit” or unused optical fiber available for use in fiber optic communication.
1. Why am I important to this project?
By taking the Santa Barbara County broadband needs assessment survey and speed test, you are helping to identify if your community has good, poor, no or unaffordable internet service. Your information along with many others will be added to a map to seek funding improve affordable access to high-speed internet countywide.
2. What is the Santa Barbara County Broadband Needs Assessment Survey? This survey helps us learn about your specific needs and experiences regarding internet access. Your response will help inform planning efforts to increase high speed internet access to communities that need it most within Santa Barbara County.
3. What is the Santa Barbara County Broadband Speed Test? The SB County Broadband Speed Test will collect data about your internet speed and create a map of the community that will help inform decision makers in their effort to seek funding to improve affordable highspeed internet in Santa Barbara County.
4. What is Broadband-For-All?
In December 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom signed historic legislation, Broadband for All, to advance the State’s commitment to bring affordable access to high-speed internet service across California.
5. Is the Broadband Strategy Plan about 5G network technology? No. The work of the Broadband Alliance of Santa Barbara County is not to advocate for one particular technology. The Alliance is focused on fiber optic cable infrastructure and affordability of high-speed internet across all of Santa Barbara County.
¿Qué es la banda ancha?
La banda ancha proporciona las conexiones más rápidas hoy en día, lo que la convierte en el tipo más común de servicio de Internet residencial. La banda ancha es un tipo de conexión a Internet de alta velocidad que siempre está "encendida".
Plan Estratégico de Banda Ancha
del Condado de Santa Bárbara
La Alianza de Banda Ancha del Condado de Santa Bárbara (Alliance) se formó en octubre de 2021 para desarrollar un plan estratégico regional de banda ancha a través de una asociación entre la Asociación de Gobiernos del Condado de Santa Bárbara, el Condado de Santa Bárbara y las ciudades de Buellton, Carpintería, Goleta, Guadalupe, Lompoc, Santa Bárbara, Santa María y Solvang, la Banda de Indios Chumash de Santa Ynez, el Consorcio de Banda Ancha de la Costa del Pacífico (BCPC) y organizaciones de desarrollo económico regional.
Plan estratégico de la Alianza de la Banda
Ancha
El plan identificará la infraestructura de Internet de
banda ancha y las necesidades de asequibilidad
en el condado de Santa Bárbara.
El plan se completará a finales de 2022.
Una vez completado el plan, la Alianza buscará
oportunidades de financiación para proyectos que
mejoren el acceso a internet en los hogares,
escuelas, empresas, centros de salud e
instalaciones a internet de alta velocidad en todo el
condado. También ayudará a mejorar la
preparación ante las catástrofes y a fomentar la
competencia en el sector.
Cómo puede ayudar
Por favor, tómese un minuto para completar una
encuesta de evaluación de las necesidades de Internet
de banda ancha del condado de Santa Bárbara y una
prueba de velocidad en un ordenador personal o
portátil en casa, en el trabajo o dondequiera que se
conecte en www.sbcag.org/broadband.
La información recogida ayuda a mejorar el acceso
asequible a Internet de alta velocidad en todo el
condado. Los controles de privacidad protegen las
respuestas y la participación anónima es una opción.
Si no tiene Internet, llame a la Asociación de Gobiernos del Condado de Santa Bárbara (SBCAG) al
1-805-961-8902 para informar de por qué no lo tiene!
Hoja Informativa
Banda ancha móvil
Internet de alta velocidad
diseñada para su uso sobre la
marcha con una conectividad
perfecta de un lugar a otro.
Conexión Inalámbrica Fija
Servicio de banda ancha prestado entre
las torres y los clientes mediante ondas
de radio. Principalmente se encuentra
en las zonas rurales.
Satélite
Servicio de banda ancha
proporcionado por satélites que
orbitan la Tierra. El servicio por
satélite puede verse afectado por
la línea de visión y la latencia.
Cable
Internet proporcionada por una
compañía de televisión por
cable a través de una red mixta
de coaxial y fibra óptica.
Fibra
El servicio de fibra óptica utiliza fibras de vidrio
transparentes para transportar datos a través de
distancias. Algunos clientes pueden recibir conexiones de fibra directamente en su casa, pero la fibra también se utiliza para transportar datos desde las comunidades a la Internet más amplia.
DSL
La línea de abonado digital (DSL por sus siglas en
inglés) es la banda ancha suministrada a través
de una red mixta de fibra y líneas telefónicas de
cobre tradicionales.
Graphic: connectednation.org
Preguntas frecuentes y recursos
Háblenos de... su experiencia con el Internet.
Realice una encuesta y una prueba de velocidad en un ordenador personal o portátil en casa, en el trabajo o donde se conecte en www.sbcag.org/broadband Si no tiene Internet o acceso al equipo para realizar esta prueba, llame a la Asociación de Gobiernos del Condado de Santa Bárbara (SBCAG) al 1-805-961-8902 para informar de por qué no lo hace.
Última actualización: 4/20/22
Palabras de la banda ancha que hay que conocer
Banda ancha: Capacidad de una conexión de banda ancha, a menudo sinónimo de velocidad de transferencia de datos.
Kilobit/Kilobyte: Los kilobits por segundo (Kbps) son una medida de la velocidad de conexión telefónica, donde un Kb = 125 bytes. El kilobyte (KB) significa 1.000 bytes y es una medida de la capacidad de almacenamiento o del tamaño de los datos.
Megabit/Megabyte: Los megabits por segundo (Mbps o Mb) son una medida de la velocidad de transmisión; una conexión de 1Mb puede transferir 1MB (megabyte/MB) de datos en 8 segundos. El megabyte es una medida del tamaño de los archivos informáticos o capacidad. 1MB = 1.000 KB.
Gigabit/Gigabyte: Gigabit es una unidad que describe la velocidad de transferencia de datos, normalmente por segundo (Gbps). El gigabyte describe el tamaño de los archivos del ordenador y su capacidad. 1GB = 1.000 MB (megabytes) Milla intermedia: El segmento de la infraestructura de la red de telecomunicaciones que conecta las principales redes de telecomunicaciones (a menudo internacionales), las redes nacionales o centrales a los usuarios en los hogares, las escuelas, el gobierno y empresas.
Última milla: El último tramo de una red de telecomunicaciones que entrega los servicios de telecomunicaciones a los usuarios finales.
Fibra oscura: Fibra óptica "no iluminada" o no utilizada disponible para su uso en la comunicación por fibra óptica.
1. ¿Por qué soy importante para este proyecto?
Al realizar la encuesta de evaluación de las necesidades de banda ancha del condado de Santa Bárbara y la prueba de velocidad, está ayudando a identificar si su comunidad tiene un servicio de Internet bueno, malo, nulo o inasequible. Su información, junto con la de muchos otros, se añadirá a un mapa para buscar financiación para mejorar el acceso asequible a Internet de alta velocidad
en todo el condado.
2. ¿Qué es la encuesta de evaluación de las necesidades de banda ancha del condado de Santa Bárbara? Esta encuesta nos ayuda a conocer sus necesidades y experiencias específicas con respecto al acceso a Internet. Su respuesta ayudará a informar los esfuerzos de planificación para aumentar el acceso a Internet de alta velocidad a las comunidades que más lo necesitan dentro del Condado de Santa Bárbara.
3. ¿Cuál es la prueba de velocidad de banda ancha del condado de Santa Bárbara? La prueba de velocidad de banda ancha del condado de Santa Bárbara recopilará datos sobre su velocidad de Internet y creará un mapa de la comunidad que ayudará a informar a los responsables de la toma de decisiones en su esfuerzo por buscar financiación para mejorar el Internet de alta velocidad asequible en el condado de Santa Bárbara.
4. ¿Qué es Banda Ancha para Todos?
En diciembre de 2020, el gobernador Gavin Newsom firmó una legislación histórica, Banda Ancha para Todos, para avanzar en el compromiso del Estado de llevar un acceso asequible al servicio de Internet de alta velocidad en toda California.
5. ¿El Plan Estratégico de Banda Ancha es sobre la tecnología de red 5G? No. El trabajo de la Alianza de Banda Ancha del Condado de Santa Bárbara no es abogar por una tecnología en particular.
La Alianza se centra en la infraestructura de cable de fibra óptica y la asequibilidad de Internet de alta velocidad en todo el condado de Santa Bárbara.
NAME: City Boundaries
DATE: June 3, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Polygons for California
Incorporated Cities
SOURCE: CA State Geoportal
(https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/CALFIREForestry::city-boundaries/about) NAME: CPUC Anchor Institutions
DATE: March 27, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Community institutions; BBcapacity.
SOURCE: CPUC
(https://cpuc2016.westus.cloudapp.azure.com/ar
cgis/rest/services/CPUC/CPUC_2021_Community
_Anchor_Institutions/MapServer)
NAME: CA _County Boundaries
DATE: August 10, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Polygons for California Counties
SOURCE: CA State Geoportal
(https://gis.data.ca.gov/datasets/CALFIREForestry::california-county-boundaries/about) NAME: Speed Test Data
DATE: June 20, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Listened speed-test public survey.
SOURCE: GEO SOFTWARE Express Optimizer
(login required)
NAME: SBC North County Ring
DATE: June 22, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Proposed Network
SOURCE: BCPC Planning Discussion (traced from
graphic)
NAME: Crown Castle Intermarket Fiber
DATE: June 7, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Installed Network
SOURCE: Crown Castle (traced from web-map:
https://www.crowncastle.com/infrastructuresolutions/)
NAME: Crown Castle Local Fiber
DATE: June 7, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Installed Network
SOURCE: Crown Castle (traced from web-map:
https://www.crowncastle.com/infrastructuresolutions/)
NAME: CalTrans permit-lines
DATE: June 23, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Installed Network
SOURCE: CalTrans District 5
(https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappv
iewer/index.html?id=409850b9be624e3c8403db
9f11406ae5)
NAME: TPA Proposed Network
DATE: April 22, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Third Party Administrator
proposed network
SOURCE: Golden State Network: Statewide
Middle-Mile Network Design, April 22, 2022
(traced from PDF)
NAME: CalRenNetwork
DATE: April 22, 2022
DESCRIPTION: CalRen installed network
SOURCE: Golden State Network: Statewide
Middle-Mile Network Design, April 22, 2022
(traced from PDF)
NAME: CalTrans permit-points
DATE: June 23, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Installed Network
SOURCE URL: CalTrans District 5
(https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappv
iewer/index.html?id=409850b9be624e3c8403db
9f11406ae5)
NAME: BB Adoption at 25/3
DATE: June 7, 2022
DESCRIPTION: % of residential fixed Internet
access connections per total households with BB
SOURCE: CPUC
(https://cpuc2016.westus.cloudapp.azure.com/ar
cgis/rest/services/CPUC/CPUC_2021_Broadband
_Adoption/MapServer/1)
NAME: Fixed consumer served status 25/3
DATE: June 7, 2022
DESCRIPTION: ISP BB data, validated by the CPUC
SOURCE: CPUC
(https://cpuc2016.westus.cloudapp.azure.com/ar
cgis/rest/services/CPUC/CPUC_2021_Fixed_Cons
umer_CASF_Served_Status/MapServer/0)
NAME: Consumer Fixed DD
DATE: June 7, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Maximum advertised downstream
speeds
SOURCE: CPUC
(https://cpuc2016.westus.cloudapp.azure.com/ar
cgis/rest/services/CPUC/CPUC_2021_Fixed_Cons
umer_Downstream_Maximum/MapServer/0)
NAME: EJ Communities
DATE: May 5, 2022
DESCRIPTION: “Environmental Justice" metrics
SOURCE: SBCAG
(http://www.sbcag.org/uploads/2/4/5/4/245403
02/connected_2050_final.pdf)
NAME: i16 Census BlockGroup Disadvantaged
Communities 2018
DATE: May 5, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Designations of "disadvantaged"
block groups
SOURCE: CA State Geoportal
(https://gis.water.ca.gov/arcgis/rest/services/Soc
iety/i16_Census_BlockGroup_DisadvantagedCom
munities_2018/FeatureServer)
NAME: OOKLA below 25/3
DATE: May 5, 2022
NAME: SVI2018_CALIFORNIA_tract
DATE: May 5, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Speed Tests - Ookla Median
Speeds Fixed Broadband Below 25/3 Mbps
(Census Tract Level)
SOURCE: NTIA
(https://broadbandusa.maps.arcgis.com/home/it
em.html?id=a3f9dbcb40e14f149628d082efd50f2
c)
DESCRIPTION: Communities that will most likely
need support before, during, and after a
hazardous event.
SOURCE: CDC
(https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/placeandhealth/svi/
data_documentation_download.html)
NAME: Households Cannot Afford
Last Update: June 23, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Demographic Analysis…
SOURCE: Dr. Jamshid Damooei, CLU (Private
Report)
NAME: Opportunity Zones
DATE: May 5, 2022
DESCRIPTION: Economically distressed
communities where new investments, under
certain conditions, may be eligible for
preferential tax treatment.
SOURCE: US Treasury
(https://www.cdfifund.gov/opportunity-zones)
24 March 2020 Tellus Venture Associates Page 1
A
Superior infrastructure. At least two competing primary wireline providers. At least one advertizing fiber-to-thepremise service at a minimum of 1 Gbps download/500 Mbps upload speeds, and another offering service at a
minimum of 400 Mbps download/20 Mbps upload speeds
using any technology.
B
Above average infrastructure. At least two competing
primary wireline providers. At least one advertizing service at a minimum of 900 Mbps download/35 Mbps upload
speeds, and another offering service at a minimum of 100 Mbps download/20 Mbps upload speeds.
C
Average infrastructure. At least two competing primary
wireline providers. At least one advertizing service at a minimum of 400 Mbps download/20 Mbps upload speeds,
and another offering service at a minimum of 30 Mbps
download/5 Mbps upload speeds.
D
Barely passing. At least one wireline provider that meets the Central Coast Broadband Consortium/Monterey Bay
Economic Partnership minimum standard of 100 Mbps
download and 20 Mbps upload speeds.
F
Fail. At least one wireline provider offers service, but no service is available that meets the Central Coast Broadband Consortium/Monterey Bay Economic Partnership minimum
standard of 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload
speeds.
F- Unserved. No broadband service available
Data used in this analysis was submitted by Internet service providers to the California Public Utilities Commission and the Federal Communications Commission, and is current as of 31 December 2018.
The Central Coast Broadband Consortium’s online map shows Report Card and other broadband infrastructure data for California:
Central Coast Broadband Consortia online map
Tabular data are here:
Central Coast Broadband Consortium wireline broadband
availability analysis (22 March 2020 revision)
California
Broadband
Infrastructure
Report Card
24 March 2020 Tellus Venture Associates Page 2
County Grade GPA
Median HH
income
Population
2019
Pop at Zero
service Pop at 6/1 Pop at 10/1 Pop at 25/3 Pop at 100/20 Pop at
1000/500
Alameda B- 2.77 $96,623 1,669,301 42,183 1,625,420 1,625,420 1,625,328 1,624,526 777,443 Alpine F 0.04 $63,330 1,162 964 184 184 93 93 0
Amador F+ 0.61 $59,360 38,294 7,304 29,955 29,955 29,704 16,273 8,794 Butte D- 0.68 $48,900 226,466 17,220 202,173 202,173 202,021 202,015 908 Calaveras D- 0.84 $43,709 45,117 6,395 37,631 37,598 36,481 32,803 7,333 Colusa F+ 0.62 $55,333 22,117 9,972 11,912 11,902 11,687 8,724 3,125 Contra Costa C+ 2.40 $99,646 1,155,879 16,123 1,137,941 1,137,941 1,137,817 1,135,594 271,988 Del Norte D- 0.78 $46,327 27,401 2,298 25,103 25,103 25,094 24,967 0 El Dorado D- 0.70 $66,814 191,848 29,090 155,560 155,147 152,277 118,455 18,770 Fresno C- 1.86 $53,004 1,018,241 58,250 928,507 928,474 911,406 892,284 416,031 Glenn F+ 0.41 $44,677 29,132 6,582 19,415 19,415 18,855 18,855 0 Humboldt F 0.01 $43,351 135,333 19,729 111,202 111,186 110,201 4,656 2,678 Imperial F+ 0.52 $44,003 190,266 22,872 165,968 165,968 163,093 161,599 0 Inyo F 0.17 $49,545 18,593 2,898 15,685 15,685 15,685 3,161 1,086 Kern D+ 1.41 $52,777 916,464 60,629 853,571 853,232 851,993 812,876 227,405 Kings D 1.25 $44,243 153,710 31,351 117,502 117,502 116,989 116,867 21,557 Lake F+ 0.50 $39,469 65,071 8,931 49,561 49,561 49,073 49,044 5 Lassen F 0.02 $40,141 30,150 16,885 11,393 11,044 8,970 1,420 780 Los Angeles C 2.09 $71,244 10,253,715 123,278 10,117,079 10,114,383 10,099,184 10,020,081 1,491,396 Madera D 0.96 $53,976 159,536 21,563 136,909 136,906 120,396 106,634 22,030 Marin C- 1.70 $103,955 262,879 10,142 251,262 251,247 251,244 247,958 44,016 Mariposa F 0.01 $53,020 18,068 4,270 13,332 13,332 1,621 665 545 Mendocino F+ 0.39 $49,229 89,009 22,110 64,377 64,377 63,241 60,134 165 Merced D 1.24 $45,356 282,928 29,758 240,454 240,371 236,197 235,308 64,661 Modoc F 0.01 $46,453 9,602 4,815 4,501 4,281 3,560 212 21 Mono D- 0.72 $51,725 13,616 1,806 11,761 11,761 11,758 11,748 3,978 Monterey D+ 1.63 $66,576 445,414 25,796 415,779 415,779 413,959 411,606 64,361 Napa C- 1.85 $81,413 140,779 9,643 129,893 129,893 129,555 129,080 23,844 Nevada D- 0.69 $63,475 98,904 16,681 75,129 75,129 74,480 61,265 18,871 Orange C 1.97 $90,950 3,222,498 95,492 3,117,814 3,117,810 3,114,447 3,102,956 631,080 Placer D- 0.77 $69,455 396,691 23,527 364,684 364,684 358,814 254,737 72,227 Plumas F 0.13 $54,063 19,779 6,980 12,685 12,459 7,696 4,562 4,050 Riverside C- 1.85 $61,520 2,440,124 70,900 2,363,555 2,362,246 2,358,462 2,311,946 138,013 Sacramento C+ 2.30 $65,857 1,546,174 32,382 1,501,390 1,501,158 1,495,666 1,485,576 278,441 San Benito D 1.17 $77,834 62,296 7,179 53,627 53,627 53,345 53,109 3,597 San Bernardino D+ 1.47 $53,008 2,192,203 62,384 2,125,625 2,122,675 2,113,136 2,094,985 61,085 San Diego D+ 1.33 $75,775 3,351,785 146,198 3,193,656 3,193,599 3,188,076 3,174,047 809,031 San Francisco B- 2.73 $105,602 883,869 5,654 875,514 875,514 875,499 875,243 434,942 San Joaquin C- 1.89 $61,184 770,385 39,920 724,429 724,213 722,354 717,529 115,364 San Luis Obispo D- 0.71 $71,439 280,393 30,464 238,007 237,958 235,704 231,472 6,627 San Mateo C+ 2.63 $109,450 774,485 5,530 767,981 767,981 767,959 765,051 356,271 Santa Barbara D- 0.86 $73,141 454,593 20,794 433,088 432,028 430,158 423,978 36,981 Santa Clara C+ 2.27 $114,959 1,954,286 56,749 1,894,086 1,893,868 1,892,893 1,879,862 493,878 Santa Cruz C- 1.67 $79,281 274,871 15,745 258,099 258,094 257,890 255,805 61,596 Shasta F+ 0.49 $47,020 178,773 22,906 145,334 144,613 140,654 128,288 4,295 Sierra F 0.03 $49,899 3,213 2,817 131 131 131 131 131
Siskiyou F 0.00 $43,244 44,584 7,476 35,199 35,199 21,685 106 48 Solano C- 1.79 $77,349 441,307 23,178 416,332 416,289 416,184 392,264 40,362 Sonoma D+ 1.56 $75,627 500,675 17,307 479,842 479,840 479,385 475,062 23,238 Stanislaus C- 1.88 $56,162 558,972 23,859 529,325 529,000 526,042 522,228 106,628 Sutter D+ 1.51 $60,713 97,490 4,920 90,688 90,688 90,064 89,972 11,647 Tehama F+ 0.32 $44,185 64,387 21,362 34,336 34,172 31,531 31,298 236 Trinity F 0.00 $38,118 13,688 11,379 1,865 1,865 1,865 0 0 Tulare D+ 1.34 $45,565 479,112 44,568 419,298 418,925 403,208 400,619 134,853 Tuolumne D- 0.80 $53,722 54,590 12,280 38,533 38,533 38,267 37,892 9,495 Ventura C- 1.72 $82,761 856,598 19,476 834,276 833,405 832,061 826,581 18,218 Yolo D- 0.72 $64,825 222,581 19,234 199,757 199,652 195,318 141,673 20,589 Yuba D+ 1.39 $54,145 77,916 11,541 62,426 62,426 62,282 61,688 13,597 California total C- 1.69 $68,011 39,927,313 1,491,734 38,170,740 38,157,599 37,982,739 37,247,563 7,378,314 24 March 2020 Tellus Venture Associates Page 3
County Grade GPA
Median HH
income
Population
2019
% Pop at
Zero service % Pop at 6/1 % Pop at 10/1 % Pop at 25/3
% Pop at
100/20
% Pop at
1000/500
Alameda B- 2.77 $96,623 1,669,301 3% 97% 97% 97% 97% 47% Alpine F 0.04 $63,330 1,162 83% 16% 16% 8% 8% 0%
Amador F+ 0.61 $59,360 38,294 19% 78% 78% 78% 42% 23%
Butte D- 0.68 $48,900 226,466 8% 89% 89% 89% 89% 0%
Calaveras D- 0.84 $43,709 45,117 14% 83% 83% 81% 73% 16% Colusa F+ 0.62 $55,333 22,117 45% 54% 54% 53% 39% 14%
Contra Costa C+ 2.40 $99,646 1,155,879 1% 98% 98% 98% 98% 24% Del Norte D- 0.78 $46,327 27,401 8% 92% 92% 92% 91% 0%
El Dorado D- 0.70 $66,814 191,848 15% 81% 81% 79% 62% 10% Fresno C- 1.86 $53,004 1,018,241 6% 91% 91% 90% 88% 41% Glenn F+ 0.41 $44,677 29,132 23% 67% 67% 65% 65% 0%
Humboldt F 0.01 $43,351 135,333 15% 82% 82% 81% 3% 2%
Imperial F+ 0.52 $44,003 190,266 12% 87% 87% 86% 85% 0% Inyo F 0.17 $49,545 18,593 16% 84% 84% 84% 17% 6%
Kern D+ 1.41 $52,777 916,464 7% 93% 93% 93% 89% 25%
Kings D 1.25 $44,243 153,710 20% 76% 76% 76% 76% 14%
Lake F+ 0.50 $39,469 65,071 14% 76% 76% 75% 75% 0%
Lassen F 0.02 $40,141 30,150 56% 38% 37% 30% 5% 3%
Los Angeles C 2.09 $71,244 10,253,715 1% 99% 99% 98% 98% 15% Madera D 0.96 $53,976 159,536 14% 86% 86% 75% 67% 14%
Marin C- 1.70 $103,955 262,879 4% 96% 96% 96% 94% 17%
Mariposa F 0.01 $53,020 18,068 24% 74% 74% 9% 4% 3%
Mendocino F+ 0.39 $49,229 89,009 25% 72% 72% 71% 68% 0% Merced D 1.24 $45,356 282,928 11% 85% 85% 83% 83% 23%
Modoc F 0.01 $46,453 9,602 50% 47% 45% 37% 2% 0%
Mono D- 0.72 $51,725 13,616 13% 86% 86% 86% 86% 29%
Monterey D+ 1.63 $66,576 445,414 6% 93% 93% 93% 92% 14% Napa C- 1.85 $81,413 140,779 7% 92% 92% 92% 92% 17%
Nevada D- 0.69 $63,475 98,904 17% 76% 76% 75% 62% 19%
Orange C 1.97 $90,950 3,222,498 3% 97% 97% 97% 96% 20%
Placer D- 0.77 $69,455 396,691 6% 92% 92% 90% 64% 18%
Plumas F 0.13 $54,063 19,779 35% 64% 63% 39% 23% 20%
Riverside C- 1.85 $61,520 2,440,124 3% 97% 97% 97% 95% 6% Sacramento C+ 2.30 $65,857 1,546,174 2% 97% 97% 97% 96% 18% San Benito D 1.17 $77,834 62,296 12% 86% 86% 86% 85% 6% San Bernardino D+ 1.47 $53,008 2,192,203 3% 97% 97% 96% 96% 3% San Diego D+ 1.33 $75,775 3,351,785 4% 95% 95% 95% 95% 24% San Francisco B- 2.73 $105,602 883,869 1% 99% 99% 99% 99% 49% San Joaquin C- 1.89 $61,184 770,385 5% 94% 94% 94% 93% 15% San Luis Obispo D- 0.71 $71,439 280,393 11% 85% 85% 84% 83% 2% San Mateo C+ 2.63 $109,450 774,485 1% 99% 99% 99% 99% 46% Santa Barbara D- 0.86 $73,141 454,593 5% 95% 95% 95% 93% 8% Santa Clara C+ 2.27 $114,959 1,954,286 3% 97% 97% 97% 96% 25% Santa Cruz C- 1.67 $79,281 274,871 6% 94% 94% 94% 93% 22% Shasta F+ 0.49 $47,020 178,773 13% 81% 81% 79% 72% 2%
Sierra F 0.03 $49,899 3,213 88% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4%
Siskiyou F 0.00 $43,244 44,584 17% 79% 79% 49% 0% 0%
Solano C- 1.79 $77,349 441,307 5% 94% 94% 94% 89% 9%
Sonoma D+ 1.56 $75,627 500,675 3% 96% 96% 96% 95% 5%
Stanislaus C- 1.88 $56,162 558,972 4% 95% 95% 94% 93% 19% Sutter D+ 1.51 $60,713 97,490 5% 93% 93% 92% 92% 12%
Tehama F+ 0.32 $44,185 64,387 33% 53% 53% 49% 49% 0%
Trinity F 0.00 $38,118 13,688 83% 14% 14% 14% 0% 0%
Tulare D+ 1.34 $45,565 479,112 9% 88% 87% 84% 84% 28%
Tuolumne D- 0.80 $53,722 54,590 22% 71% 71% 70% 69% 17% Ventura C- 1.72 $82,761 856,598 2% 97% 97% 97% 96% 2%
Yolo D- 0.72 $64,825 222,581 9% 90% 90% 88% 64% 9%
Yuba D+ 1.39 $54,145 77,916 15% 80% 80% 80% 79% 17%
California total C- 1.69 $68,011 39,927,313 4% 96% 96% 95% 93% 18% 24 March 2020 Tellus Venture Associates Page 4
County Grade GPA
Median HH
income
Housing
Units 2019
HU at Zero
service HU at 6/1 HU at 10/1 HU at 25/3 HU at 100/20
HU at
1000/500
Alameda B- 2.77 $96,623 605,977 12,617 592,666 592,666 592,627 592,237 286,659 Alpine F 0.04 $63,330 1,783 782 980 980 533 533 0
Amador F+ 0.61 $59,360 18,278 1,608 16,178 16,178 15,966 8,366 4,380 Butte D- 0.68 $48,900 85,447 7,856 74,805 74,805 74,738 74,736 294 Calaveras D- 0.84 $43,709 28,210 3,640 23,882 23,866 23,346 21,107 3,824 Colusa F+ 0.62 $55,333 8,195 3,741 4,362 4,356 4,272 3,299 1,241 Contra Costa C+ 2.40 $99,646 416,062 5,712 409,642 409,642 409,577 408,523 92,540 Del Norte D- 0.78 $46,327 11,352 1,236 10,116 10,116 10,113 10,055 0 El Dorado D- 0.70 $66,814 91,987 14,887 73,246 73,073 71,455 48,900 8,058 Fresno C- 1.86 $53,004 334,239 18,746 306,626 306,615 301,474 291,820 144,122 Glenn F+ 0.41 $44,677 11,310 2,860 7,247 7,247 7,025 7,025 0 Humboldt F 0.01 $43,351 63,138 10,705 50,211 50,202 49,704 1,918 1,166 Imperial F+ 0.52 $44,003 58,002 7,312 49,967 49,967 48,944 48,204 0 Inyo F 0.17 $49,545 9,532 2,005 7,520 7,520 7,520 1,586 526 Kern D+ 1.41 $52,777 299,674 16,184 282,640 282,489 281,933 265,138 75,189 Kings D 1.25 $44,243 46,414 4,851 40,028 40,028 39,853 39,804 7,402 Lake F+ 0.50 $39,469 34,409 5,020 25,889 25,889 25,565 25,542 5 Lassen F 0.02 $40,141 12,763 5,743 6,089 5,913 4,564 637 285 Los Angeles C 2.09 $71,244 3,568,898 39,424 3,524,367 3,523,182 3,516,837 3,484,265 514,205 Madera D 0.96 $53,976 50,496 5,025 45,046 45,045 36,548 30,416 5,476 Marin C- 1.70 $103,955 112,394 2,949 108,659 108,652 108,650 105,980 19,755 Mariposa F 0.01 $53,020 10,489 3,094 7,120 7,120 793 308 252 Mendocino F+ 0.39 $49,229 40,760 11,160 28,500 28,500 28,030 25,968 63 Merced D 1.24 $45,356 86,955 8,966 73,992 73,964 72,586 72,304 20,843 Modoc F 0.01 $46,453 5,272 2,779 2,335 2,209 1,844 118 12 Mono D- 0.72 $51,725 14,106 1,955 12,103 12,103 12,042 12,029 2,431 Monterey D+ 1.63 $66,576 141,007 8,313 131,465 131,465 130,996 130,053 20,034 Napa C- 1.85 $81,413 55,180 3,499 51,036 51,036 50,982 50,728 10,229 Nevada D- 0.69 $63,475 53,984 8,448 41,913 41,913 41,631 35,482 9,192 Orange C 1.97 $90,950 1,104,164 39,232 1,057,955 1,057,953 1,056,522 1,052,637 202,491 Placer D- 0.77 $69,455 167,548 10,761 152,028 152,028 149,130 102,866 28,479 Plumas F 0.13 $54,063 15,895 5,900 9,930 9,779 6,410 2,899 2,549 Riverside C- 1.85 $61,520 847,851 31,634 814,638 814,008 812,432 793,068 40,936 Sacramento C+ 2.30 $65,857 574,449 11,831 557,682 557,595 555,532 551,336 112,613 San Benito D 1.17 $77,834 19,395 2,558 16,352 16,352 16,216 16,149 1,069 San Bernardino D+ 1.47 $53,008 723,783 30,913 691,137 690,339 686,634 678,374 20,968 San Diego D+ 1.33 $75,775 1,219,460 43,908 1,170,774 1,170,750 1,168,513 1,163,371 316,880 San Francisco B- 2.73 $105,602 399,372 1,359 396,384 396,384 396,383 396,197 178,384 San Joaquin C- 1.89 $61,184 246,521 12,360 231,858 231,791 231,175 229,588 39,238 San Luis Obispo D- 0.71 $71,439 122,810 10,856 107,109 107,095 106,091 104,254 2,387 San Mateo C+ 2.63 $109,450 279,248 2,357 276,455 276,455 276,445 275,305 127,039 Santa Barbara D- 0.86 $73,141 160,111 5,216 154,599 154,120 153,272 150,840 14,826 Santa Clara C+ 2.27 $114,959 671,439 17,035 653,208 653,139 652,821 648,034 171,945 Santa Cruz C- 1.67 $79,281 105,862 3,777 101,706 101,705 101,620 100,729 26,930 Shasta F+ 0.49 $47,020 78,027 11,430 61,973 61,625 59,874 54,024 1,793 Sierra F 0.03 $49,899 2,352 2,062 77 77 77 77 77
Siskiyou F 0.00 $43,244 24,200 4,600 18,600 18,600 11,560 43 20 Solano C- 1.79 $77,349 159,586 6,382 152,512 152,497 152,455 142,971 15,420 Sonoma D+ 1.56 $75,627 204,976 7,611 195,511 195,509 195,254 192,112 9,610 Stanislaus C- 1.88 $56,162 182,514 8,107 172,452 172,362 171,300 169,830 37,677 Sutter D+ 1.51 $60,713 34,398 2,062 31,600 31,600 31,359 31,323 4,094 Tehama F+ 0.32 $44,185 27,655 9,655 14,417 14,328 13,025 12,921 96 Trinity F 0.00 $38,118 8,942 7,695 843 843 843 0 0
Tulare D+ 1.34 $45,565 150,622 16,142 130,046 129,932 125,732 124,840 41,734 Tuolumne D- 0.80 $53,722 31,624 7,256 21,208 21,208 21,066 20,899 4,735 Ventura C- 1.72 $82,761 289,647 7,060 281,613 281,308 280,728 278,329 5,559 Yolo D- 0.72 $64,825 77,679 4,561 72,156 72,156 71,163 52,216 7,630 Yuba D+ 1.39 $54,145 28,650 5,099 21,937 21,937 21,877 21,636 4,848 California total C- 1.69 $68,011 14,235,093 550,536 13,575,389 13,570,218 13,495,657 13,163,951 2,648,209 24 March 2020 Tellus Venture Associates Page 5
County Grade GPA
Median HH
income
Housing
Units 2019
% HU at Zero
service % HU at 6/1 %HU at 10/1 % HU at 25/3
% HU at
100/20
% HU at
1000/500
Alameda B- 2.77 $96,623 605,977 2% 98% 98% 98% 98% 47%
Alpine F 0.04 $63,330 1,783 44% 55% 55% 30% 30% 0%
Amador F+ 0.61 $59,360 18,278 9% 89% 89% 87% 46% 24%
Butte D- 0.68 $48,900 85,447 9% 88% 88% 87% 87% 0%
Calaveras D- 0.84 $43,709 28,210 13% 85% 85% 83% 75% 14% Colusa F+ 0.62 $55,333 8,195 46% 53% 53% 52% 40% 15%
Contra Costa C+ 2.40 $99,646 416,062 1% 98% 98% 98% 98% 22% Del Norte D- 0.78 $46,327 11,352 11% 89% 89% 89% 89% 0% El Dorado D- 0.70 $66,814 91,987 16% 80% 79% 78% 53% 9% Fresno C- 1.86 $53,004 334,239 6% 92% 92% 90% 87% 43%
Glenn F+ 0.41 $44,677 11,310 25% 64% 64% 62% 62% 0%
Humboldt F 0.01 $43,351 63,138 17% 80% 80% 79% 3% 2%
Imperial F+ 0.52 $44,003 58,002 13% 86% 86% 84% 83% 0%
Inyo F 0.17 $49,545 9,532 21% 79% 79% 79% 17% 6%
Kern D+ 1.41 $52,777 299,674 5% 94% 94% 94% 88% 25%
Kings D 1.25 $44,243 46,414 10% 86% 86% 86% 86% 16%
Lake F+ 0.50 $39,469 34,409 15% 75% 75% 74% 74% 0%
Lassen F 0.02 $40,141 12,763 45% 48% 46% 36% 5% 2%
Los Angeles C 2.09 $71,244 3,568,898 1% 99% 99% 99% 98% 14% Madera D 0.96 $53,976 50,496 10% 89% 89% 72% 60% 11%
Marin C- 1.70 $103,955 112,394 3% 97% 97% 97% 94% 18%
Mariposa F 0.01 $53,020 10,489 29% 68% 68% 8% 3% 2%
Mendocino F+ 0.39 $49,229 40,760 27% 70% 70% 69% 64% 0% Merced D 1.24 $45,356 86,955 10% 85% 85% 83% 83% 24%
Modoc F 0.01 $46,453 5,272 53% 44% 42% 35% 2% 0%
Mono D- 0.72 $51,725 14,106 14% 86% 86% 85% 85% 17%
Monterey D+ 1.63 $66,576 141,007 6% 93% 93% 93% 92% 14% Napa C- 1.85 $81,413 55,180 6% 92% 92% 92% 92% 19%
Nevada D- 0.69 $63,475 53,984 16% 78% 78% 77% 66% 17%
Orange C 1.97 $90,950 1,104,164 4% 96% 96% 96% 95% 18%
Placer D- 0.77 $69,455 167,548 6% 91% 91% 89% 61% 17%
Plumas F 0.13 $54,063 15,895 37% 62% 62% 40% 18% 16%
Riverside C- 1.85 $61,520 847,851 4% 96% 96% 96% 94% 5% Sacramento C+ 2.30 $65,857 574,449 2% 97% 97% 97% 96% 20% San Benito D 1.17 $77,834 19,395 13% 84% 84% 84% 83% 6% San Bernardino D+ 1.47 $53,008 723,783 4% 95% 95% 95% 94% 3% San Diego D+ 1.33 $75,775 1,219,460 4% 96% 96% 96% 95% 26% San Francisco B- 2.73 $105,602 399,372 0% 99% 99% 99% 99% 45% San Joaquin C- 1.89 $61,184 246,521 5% 94% 94% 94% 93% 16% San Luis Obispo D- 0.71 $71,439 122,810 9% 87% 87% 86% 85% 2% San Mateo C+ 2.63 $109,450 279,248 1% 99% 99% 99% 99% 45% Santa Barbara D- 0.86 $73,141 160,111 3% 97% 96% 96% 94% 9% Santa Clara C+ 2.27 $114,959 671,439 3% 97% 97% 97% 97% 26% Santa Cruz C- 1.67 $79,281 105,862 4% 96% 96% 96% 95% 25% Shasta F+ 0.49 $47,020 78,027 15% 79% 79% 77% 69% 2%
Sierra F 0.03 $49,899 2,352 88% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3%
Siskiyou F 0.00 $43,244 24,200 19% 77% 77% 48% 0% 0%
Solano C- 1.79 $77,349 159,586 4% 96% 96% 96% 90% 10%
Sonoma D+ 1.56 $75,627 204,976 4% 95% 95% 95% 94% 5%
Stanislaus C- 1.88 $56,162 182,514 4% 94% 94% 94% 93% 21% Sutter D+ 1.51 $60,713 34,398 6% 92% 92% 91% 91% 12%
Tehama F+ 0.32 $44,185 27,655 35% 52% 52% 47% 47% 0%
Trinity F 0.00 $38,118 8,942 86% 9% 9% 9% 0% 0%
Tulare D+ 1.34 $45,565 150,622 11% 86% 86% 83% 83% 28%
Tuolumne D- 0.80 $53,722 31,624 23% 67% 67% 67% 66% 15% Ventura C- 1.72 $82,761 289,647 2% 97% 97% 97% 96% 2%
Yolo D- 0.72 $64,825 77,679 6% 93% 93% 92% 67% 10%
Yuba D+ 1.39 $54,145 28,650 18% 77% 77% 76% 76% 17%
California total C- 1.69 $68,011 14,235,093 4% 95% 95% 95% 92% 19% 24 March 2020 Tellus Venture Associates Page 6
Central Coast Broadband Consortium Broadband Infrastructure Grading Methodology Broadband infrastructure grades compare the primary, wireline infrastructure in a region, county, town or census block to the Californian average:
In a study conducted for the East Bay Broadband Consortium (EBBC) in 2013 , in cooperation with the 1 Central Coast Broadband Consortium, core broadband infrastructure was evaluated in Alameda, Contra Costa and Solano Counties using data submitted to the California Public Utilities Commission by Internet service providers. A comparative report card was developed, with the average grade – “C” – set at the most prevalent infrastructure, and corresponding service levels, available to residents of California: a combination of relatively high speed cable modem and mid-range telephone company DSL facilities.
This methodology was subsequently used by the Central Coast Broadband Consortium to evaluate Californian broadband infrastructure and service on a statewide basis, on behalf of the California Emerging Technology Fund and the California Center for Rural Policy, and to do in-depth analysis of broadband service and infrastructure in Monterey, Santa Cruz and San Benito counties.
The primary data for assessing the quantity and quality of broadband infrastructure comes from the California Public Utilities Commission, which collects service level reports submitted by providers to the Federal Communications Commission annually, and then runs that data through a validation process. The most recent data available was submitted by carriers as of 31 December 2017. This data can be broken down to the census block level, and shows what level of service Internet companies claim to provide, but not necessarily what they deliver. The accuracy of this data and the definition of A
Superior infrastructure. At least two competing primary wireline providers. At least one advertizing fiber-to-the-premise service at a minimum of 1 Gbps download/500 Mbps upload speeds, and another offering service at a minimum of 400 Mbps download/20 Mbps upload speeds using any technology.
B
Above average infrastructure. At least two competing primary wireline providers. At least one advertizing service at a minimum of 900 Mbps download/35 Mbps upload speeds, and another offering service at a minimum of 100 Mbps download/20 Mbps upload speeds.
C
Average infrastructure. At least two competing primary wireline providers. At least one advertizing service at a minimum of 400 Mbps download/20 Mbps upload speeds, and another offering service at a minimum of 30 Mbps download/5 Mbps upload speeds.
D
Barely passing. At least one wireline provider that meets the Central Coast Broadband Consortium/Monterey Bay Economic Partnership minimum standard of 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload speeds.
F
Fail. At least one wireline provider offers service, but no service is available that meets the Central Coast Broadband Consortium/Monterey Bay Economic Partnership minimum standard of 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload speeds.
F- Unserved. No broadband service available
East Bay Broadband Report Card, Tellus Venture Associates, 28 January 2014. 1 24 March 2020 Tellus Venture Associates Page 7
service levels varies from company to company, although it is generally consistent within any given company. In other words, if Company Z exaggerates the speeds and availability of home Internet service, it tends to do so to more or less the same extent everywhere. By using a comparative system for ranking, rather than using the absolute values provided, the variation in the accuracy of the data can be smoothed out and an apples-to-apples comparison can be achieved.
Consumer-grade service throughout California was assessed, and the averages of available service (median, mode and mean) used as one of the two primary grading benchmarks. The other benchmark was the minimum level of service of 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload speeds, which was determined by a 2018 study conducted by the Central Coast Broadband Consortium and the Monterey Bay Economic Partnership to be the minimum necessary to conduct business, do homework, enjoy 2 online entertainment and otherwise fully participate in today’s digital economy.
Upload speed was given equal weight to download speed because upload speed provides a reliable indication of the capacity of the underlying infrastructure. It is increasingly important to consumers and businesses alike. When a service provider skimps on upload speeds, as frequently happens, it is usually because its cables and other core equipment have a limited capacity.
The data was examined, and irrelevant data points that skewed results were removed. Grades were then assigned according to the criteria in the table above.
A "C" grade indicates that consumer grade broadband service, and consequently the underlying core infrastructure, in a given area meets the statewide average. A "D" grade means it meets the minimum service standard determined by the CCBC/MBEP study. "F" grades indicate full or partial failure. "A" and "B" grades show that service in an area is superior to the California average.
The first step in grading was to give a letter grade to each census block in California. Then, the grade points were tallied, weighted by population and averaged for the census blocks within cities, counties and unincorporated areas, to produce a numerical grade on a four point scale, which was rounded to the nearest tenth.
The numerical grade point average for an area was then converted to a letter grade on the following scale:
Infrastructure Grade Point Scale
A 4.0 C+ 2.3-2.6 D- 0.7-0.9
A- 3.7-3.9 C 2.0-2.2 F+ 0.3-0.6
B+ 3.3-3.6 C- 1.7-1.9 F 0.0-0.2
B 3.0-3.2 D+ 1.3-1.6 F- No service
available
B- 2.7-2.9 D 1.0-1.2
Achieving Ubiquitous Broadband Coverage in the Monterey Bay Region, Monterey Bay Economic Partnership, November 2 2018.
24 March 2020 Tellus Venture Associates Page 8
Contact:
Stephen A Blum
Tellus Venture Associates
www.tellusventure.com
[email protected]
+1-831-582-0700
Tellus Venture
Associates
®
24 March 2020 Tellus Venture Associates Page 9
County and City responses - policy and permitting questions Questions presented to all MOU partners, drawn from the statewide resource, Getting Connected- A Broadband Deployment and Adoption Resource Guide for Local and Regional Government Leaders, CETF/Valley Vision, March 2021.
County of Santa Barbara
Does your City/County have a complete and up to
date asset inventory – right of ways; easements; or
other identified for broadband infrastructure
deployment.
SB County General Services
and Public Safety agencies
Does your agency manage and approve permits for
fiber installation on poles?
Unsure
Has your jurisdiction installed any conduit for fiber? Yes, for County department/agency use only.
Does you City/County have a ‘dig once’ or ‘open
trench’ policy/ordinance?
No
Does your planning department have a clear
process for permitting for fiber or other telecom
infrastructure?
Yes, there is a permitting
process.
If yes, can the application be completed online? Unsure Does your General Plan or other planning
documents uniquely call out broadband or
telecommunications infrastructure as a priority?
Efficient and reliable
broadband connectivity is a
priority.
Does your General Plan or other planning
documents identify Smart City planning as a
priority?
Unsure
Is your jurisdiction interested in developing or
improving your municipal Wi-Fi or fiber
infrastructure?
SB County has taken steps to
enhance both, but there is
always room for
improvement.
City of Buellton
Does your City/County have a complete
and up to date asset inventory – right of
ways; easements; or other identified for
broadband infrastructure deployment.
No
Does your agency manage and approve
permits for fiber installation on poles?
No
Has your jurisdiction installed any
conduit for fiber?
No
Does you City/County have a ‘dig once’
or ‘open trench’ policy/ordinance?
In process
Does your planning department have a
clear process for permitting for fiber or
other telecom infrastructure?
Public Works manages through encroachment process
– policies are in development in planning.
County and City responses - policy and permitting questions If yes, can the application be completed
online?
Planning is online, however not specific to fiber
installation.
Does your General Plan or other
planning documents uniquely call out
broadband or telecommunications
infrastructure as a priority?
Not currently, but likely will be later this year
Does your General Plan or other
planning documents identify Smart City
planning as a priority?
Not yet
Is your jurisdiction interested in
developing or improving your municipal
Wi-Fi or fiber infrastructure?
Some interest: potential to partner with schools
City of Carpinteria
Does your City/County have a complete
and up to date asset inventory – right of
ways; easements; or other identified for
broadband infrastructure deployment.
Some plans exist as part of permitting process, but
they have not been consolidated as a citywide
resource.
Does your agency manage and approve
permits for fiber installation on poles?
Yes, through the encroachment permit process
Has your jurisdiction installed any
conduit for fiber?
No, not yet.
Does you City/County have a ‘dig once’
or ‘open trench’ policy/ordinance?
No, Carpinteria Municipal Code (12.04) provides
provisions for open trench work (excavation)
Does your planning department have a
clear process for permitting for fiber or
other telecom infrastructure?
Yes
If yes, can the application be completed
online?
Forms are PDF and permits are processed
electronically.
Does your General Plan or other
planning documents uniquely call out
broadband or telecommunications
infrastructure as a priority?
Yes, and this was reiterated recently when discussing
the MOU with the Council
Does your General Plan or other
planning documents identify Smart City
planning as a priority?
No
Is your jurisdiction interested in
developing or improving your municipal
Wi-Fi or fiber infrastructure?
Within City properties, yes. The Carpinteria City
Library already has Wi-Fi as well.
County and City responses - policy and permitting questions City of Goleta
Does your City/County have a complete
and up to date asset inventory – right of
ways; easements; or other identified for
broadband infrastructure deployment.
The City of Goleta does not have an asset inventory of
right-of-way or easements identified for broadband
infrastructure deployment. Proposed locations must
comply with the City’s adopted Design and Development
Standards for Wireless Facilities in the Public Rights-ofWay.
Does your agency manage and approve
permits for fiber installation on poles?
Yes
Has your jurisdiction installed any conduit
for fiber?
No, we have not.
Does you City/County have a ‘dig once’ or
‘open trench’ policy/ordinance?
The City does not have a ‘dig once’ or ‘open trench’
policy/ordinance.
Does your planning department have a
clear process for permitting for fiber or
other telecom infrastructure?
The Wireless Telecommunications Chapter 17.42
TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITIES of the Goleta
Municipal Code provides standards, permit
requirements, and procedures for wireless
telecommunications antennas and related facilities
consistent with the applicable provisions of Federal law.
Public Works also provides Chapter 12.20 WIRELESS
FACILITIES IN PUBLIC ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY of the
Goleta Municipal Code.
If yes, can the application be completed
online?
Yes, the application can be completed online through
our Goleta Web Portal or can be submitted via
email @Planning Counter - City of Goleta.
Does your General Plan or other planning
documents uniquely call out broadband
or telecommunications infrastructure as
a priority?
No, while we have policies regarding Wireless Antennas, it is not called out as a priority.
County and City responses - policy and permitting questions City of Guadalupe
Does your City/County have a
complete and up to date asset
inventory – right of ways; easements;
or other identified for broadband
infrastructure deployment.
No, only partial.
Does your agency manage and
approve permits for fiber installation
on poles?
Only when it involves encroachment permit.
Has your jurisdiction installed any
conduit for fiber?
No
Does you City/County have a ‘dig
once’ or ‘open trench’
policy/ordinance?
No
Does your planning department have
a clear process for permitting for fiber
or other telecom infrastructure?
No
If yes, can the application be
completed online?
No
Does your General Plan or other
planning documents uniquely call out
broadband or telecommunications
infrastructure as a priority?
No
Does your General Plan or other
planning documents identify Smart
City planning as a priority?
No
Is your jurisdiction interested in
developing or improving your
municipal Wi-Fi or fiber
No
Does your General Plan or other planning
documents identify Smart City planning
as a priority?
No
Is your jurisdiction interested in
developing or improving your municipal
Wi-Fi or fiber infrastructure?
In concept, yes, but we would need to evaluate the
feasibility of this further.
County and City responses - policy and permitting questions infrastructure?
City of Lompoc
Does your City/County have a
complete and up to date asset
inventory – right of ways; easements;
or other identified for broadband
infrastructure deployment.
Yes, the City has a thorough inventory via our GIS.
Does your agency manage and
approve permits for fiber installation
on poles?
Our Agency does manage and approve permits for
fiber installation on poles. For the work in the ROW
required to install fiber, an encroachment permit is
required from the Engineering Division. This work
also requires a Joint Pole Agreement from our
Electrical Division.
Has your jurisdiction installed any
conduit for fiber?
Yes.
Does you City/County have a ‘dig
once’ or ‘open trench’
policy/ordinance?
We do have a policy that sets a moratorium for
trenching on newly resurfaced/improved streets. For
more substantial street improvement projects, such
as reconstructions, overlays, 3 steps, or cape seals, a 5-year moratorium will be in place. For slurry seals
and microsurfacing, a 3 year moratorium will be in
place. For fog seals, a 2-year moratorium will be in
place. As far as open trenches go, our policy is to
either have trenches filled in by the end of the
workday or otherwise place steel plates over them
until they can be backfilled.
Does your planning department have
a clear process for permitting for fiber
or other telecom infrastructure?
Yes, but each project is reviewed on a case-by-case
basis and would either be submitted as a building
permit or a discretionary planning project based on
location, size, etc.
If yes, can the application be
completed online?
Yes, applications can be found online but must be
submitted by mail or in person.
Does your General Plan or other
planning documents uniquely call out
broadband or telecommunications
Yes. The Lompoc 2030 General Plan (Public Services
Element) refers to broadband and
telecommunications in policies 14.1, 14.2 and
County and City responses - policy and permitting questions infrastructure as a priority? implementation measure 30.
Does your General Plan or other
planning documents identify Smart
City planning as a priority?
Yes, the City’s 2030 General Plan specifically refers
to “Smart Growth”.
Is your jurisdiction interested in
developing or improving your
municipal Wi-Fi or fiber
infrastructure?
Yes.
City of Santa Barbara
Does your City/County have a complete and up to date
asset inventory – right of ways; easements; or other
identified for broadband infrastructure deployment.
Yes, regarding street rights of way.
Does your agency manage and approve permits for fiber
installation on poles?
Yes, as relates to temporary traffic
control in street right of way.
Design approval is more relevant
for underground infrastructure or
pad mounted equipment.
Has your jurisdiction installed any conduit for fiber? Yes, for traffic signal and governmental IT purposes.
Does you City/County have a ‘dig once’ or ‘open trench’ policy/ordinance?
We have a pavement maintenance
moratorium policy to encourage
coordination.
Does your planning department have a clear process for
permitting for fiber or other telecom infrastructure?
No. PW and Planning have been
focused on clear process for small
cell facility deployment.
If yes, can the application be completed online? Yes.
Does your General Plan or other planning documents
uniquely call out broadband or telecommunications
infrastructure as a priority?
No
Does your General Plan or other planning documents
identify Smart City planning as a priority?
No
Is your jurisdiction interested in developing or improving your municipal Wi-Fi or fiber infrastructure?
Some interest in municipal Wi-Fi
in Downtown and other areas for
Economic Development. No re.
fiber infrastructure.
County and City responses - policy and permitting questions City of Santa Maria
Does your City/County have a complete and up to
date asset inventory – right of ways; easements; or
other identified for broadband infrastructure
deployment.
Yes – Public Works
Does your agency manage and approve permits for
fiber installation on poles?
If the poles are in the right-of-way, an
encroachment permit would be
needed through public works
engineering. Planning would not
require a permit for installation of
fiber on poles in the right-of-way.
Has your jurisdiction installed any conduit for fiber? Yes, and we have been building out our fiber infrastructure over the last
few years.
Does you City/County have a ‘dig once’ or ‘open
trench’ policy/ordinance?
No policy or ordinance. But open
trench comments are identified on the
encroachment permit prior to
commencement of work.
Does your planning department have a clear
process for permitting for fiber or other telecom
infrastructure?
The city does not have a specific
telecom. ordinance but does follow
FCC requirements for permitting
telecom infrastructure. The
Community Development Department
Planning Division has specific
information regarding permitting
telecom projects.
If yes, can the application be completed online? The planning application is available online. Completed applications may
be submitted via email or directly to
the Community Development
Department office.
Does your General Plan or other planning
documents uniquely call out broadband or
telecommunications infrastructure as a priority?
The version that is now being updated
does.
Does your General Plan or other planning
documents identify Smart City planning as a
priority?
Yes.
Is your jurisdiction interested in developing or Yes.
County and City responses - policy and permitting questions improving your municipal Wi-Fi or fiber
infrastructure?
City of Solvang
Does your City/County have a complete and up to
date asset inventory – right of ways; easements; or
other identified for broadband infrastructure
deployment.
The city has an inventory of right of way
and easements that have been
dedicated to the city. The city does not
have an inventory of broadband lines or
services.
Does your agency manage and approve permits for
fiber installation on poles?
It depends on what is being attached to
the poles. Signs and telecommunication
equipment needs to go through a permit
process.
Has your jurisdiction installed any conduit for fiber? No, the City does not install conduit for fiber.
Does you City/County have a ‘dig once’ or ‘open
trench’ policy/ordinance?
No
Does your planning department have a clear process
for permitting for fiber or other telecom
infrastructure?
For broadband conduit being installed in
the streets and public right of ways. An
encroachment permit would be
required.
If yes, can the application be completed online? No
Does your General Plan or other planning documents
uniquely call out broadband or telecommunications
infrastructure as a priority?
No. The City of Solvang is going through
an update to the General Plan and there
will be provisions for broadband in the
updated General Plan which is
anticipated to be completed in the first
half of 2023.
Does your General Plan or other planning documents
identify Smart City planning as a priority?
The General Plan Update identifies
broadband as a specific goal and
priority.
Is your jurisdiction interested in developing or
improving your municipal Wi-Fi or fiber
infrastructure?
Yes. Grant funding or private sector
investment will be needed to achieve
such goal.
F: BROADBAND INTERNET
Rationale: More than half of respondents indicated their preference to direct funds to improve internet access and speed.
Goals: Bring in reliable communications infrastructure including fiber, licensed microwave systems, etc.
Bring in permanent network infrastructures. Bring rural broadband to the Valley for all residents.
Strategies: Coordinate with the Cuyama Joint Unified School District and the Kern County Superintendent of Schools in continuing to make progress on the telecommunications tower located at Cuyama Valley High School. Identify a telecommunications or public entity partner. Explore grant funding options through USDA and the California Public Utilities Commission. Communicate the Cuyama Valley’s need for broadband infrastructure to the Broadband Consortium of the Pacific Coast. Consult Caltrans to more efficiently install broadband infrastructure.
Responsible parties: County of Santa Barbara District 1 Supervisor’s Office, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Broadband Consortium of the Pacific Coast, California Public Utilities Commission, Cuyama Joint Unified School District, Kern County Superintendent of Schools, Applied Technology Group, Digital West, Caltrans
Cuyama Valley Action Plan, 2020 pg 35
Broadband Strategy & Feasibility Study:
Tribal Lands of Santa Ynez Band of
Chumash Indians
Final Report for the
U.S. Department of the Interior
Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development (IEED) Chumash Grant Award 2020-2021
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 2
Contents
Executive Summary......................................................................................................................................4 The Chumash and Northern Santa Barbara County .........................................................................7 Stakeholders in Broadband and Economic Vitality:7
Introduction................................................................................................................................................. 16 Purpose of Grant Broadband Strategy and Feasibility Study .......................................................16 Overview: Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians ......................................................................17 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................ 18 Process Elements and Flow.....................................................................................................18 Broadband Connected Facility Inventory & Asset Technology Mapping........................................18 Tribal Needs Assessment ........................................................................................................19 Gap Analysis………………………………………………… …………………………………………………………………19 l Broadband Strategy Options………………..…………………………………………………………………………………………………..19 Chumash Tribal Spectrum Update ....................................................................................................... 20 FCC Rural Tribal Priority Window Opportunity...........................................................................20 Tribal Broadband Facilities Analysis.................................................................................................... 21 Broadband Needs Assessment .............................................................................................................. 24 Tribal Business Enterprise/Department Survey & Survey Findings...............................................24 Key Findings from Business Enterprise/Department Interviews...................................................25 Key Findings from the Household Needs Survey .......................................................................27 Gap Analysis................................................................................................................................................. 29 Broadband Strategy .................................................................................................................................. 30 Chumash Broadband Strategy Options Table……………………………………………………………………………………………36 Funding Sources.................................................................................................................42 Timeline & Action Plan.......................................................................................................42 Appendix A: Results of the Business Enterprise/Department Survey................................... 43 Appendix B: Business Entity/Dept. Needs Assessment Survey ................................................ 57 Appendix C: Results of the Household Survey ................................................................................ 67 Appendix D: Household Needs Assessment Survey ...................................................................... 68 Appendix E: Highlights of Chumash Business Enterprise/Department Interviews .......... 72 CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 3
Table of Figures
Figure 1: California Broadband Infrastructure Report Card, Tellus………………………………………… Figure 2: Santa Ynez Valley Long Haul……………………………………………………………………………….
Figure 3: Santa Ynez Valley Long Haul……………………………………………………………………………….
Figure 4: Lompoc Long Haul……………………………………………………………………………………………..
Figure 5: Lompoc Metro…………………………………………………………………………………………………… Figure 6: Santa Maria Long Haul……………………………………………………………………………………….
Figure 7: Santa Maria Metro……………………………………………………………………………………………..
Figure 8: Notional: Northern Santa Barbara County Fiber Ring Network………………………………………….
Figure 9: Methodology Process Elements and Flow…………………………………………………………….
Figure 10: Asset Inventory Map and "Stoplight" Image……………………………………………………….
Figure 11: Inventory Asset Service Description…………………………………………………………………..
Figure 12: Facility Asset On-Site Speeds…………………………………………………………………………… Figure 13: Business/Dept. Survey/Interview Contacts………………………………………………………… Figure 14: Household Survey Internet Service…………………………………………………………………… Figure 15: Chumash Broadband Gap Analysis……………………………………………………………………..
Figure 16: Chumash Lands for Potential Spectrum Use………………………………………………………..
Figure 17: Tribal Broadband Strategy Options…………………………………………………………………….
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 4
Executive Summary
The Chumash Broadband Feasibility/Strategy Study grant, awarded fall 2020 by the U.S.
Department of Commerce Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development (IEED), was to develop a feasibility study for connecting traditional Chumash lands with new Chumash Trust lands, identifying potential use of the 2.5GHz spectrum awarded the Chumash by the Federal government (FCC) as part of the Tribal Rural Priority Window (TRPW).
The Santa Ynez Band of Chumash is a federally-recognized tribe comprised of 113 Tribal members, 1200 lineal descendants, and 200 members residing in 100 homes on the reservation. As articulated in the Chumash Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), there is not only alignment, but an inter-relationship, of Chumash economic vitality and broadband needs and those of Northern Santa Barbara County (NSBC). The Chumash Casino Resort and the Tribe’s two gas stations are in Santa Ynez, as is the Chumash Museum in development. The Tribe has two hotels are in Solvang, and the Kita Winery is in Lompoc. The Chumash have potential future commercial investment interests in Santa Ynez Valley, Lompoc, in other NSBC areas and Santa Barbara County areas and beyond.
The Chumash workforce includes workers from numerous Santa Barbara County communities.
The Chumash IT department can be applauded for continually enhancing internet service over the past several years. The Tribe made a major investment by having Frontier build fiber from Buellton to the Casino, and by contracting for redundant services from additional carriers. The Tribal IT approach has been measured, deliberate, responsive, costconscious, and admirable. The Chumash have enjoyed great growth and expansion over the years in both commercial development and member support services and the IT department has been successfully navigating this rapid growth by unusual responsiveness, if not consistent connectivity across the enterprise. Connectivity impacts of Chumash growth, however, are now straining IT resources and a new way forward is critical.
This Study includes a Broadband Asset Inventory, a Business Entity/Department Survey (of 12 Facility, program and Tribal leaders) and a Household survey of 58 Tribal members living on the reservation (Household survey response rate of 40%). Interviews of nearly all of the Business Entity/Department Survey respondents were conducted, and from the results of all of the above, a Gap Analysis was performed. Final piece in the Study is a Chumash Broadband Strategy Options Table (preliminary trade-off review), providing Tribal leadership with six optional strategies to explore against numerous target considerations.
The Gap Analysis includes an “Ideal Future” (Chumash Tribal members, facilities and guests enjoy “Robust, reliable, equivalent, state-of-the-art connectivity across the greater Tribal Enterprise”), yet the current Tribal broadband profile features the following:
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 5
• Several key areas currently unserved completely (e.g. Camp 4); other areas significantly underserved or have reliability issues (existing residential area, Education Center, Chumash Employee Resource Center (CERC), Fire Department, etc.).
• Tribal member broadband service in existing residential area does not meet demand. • Guest broadband expectations of the Tribe’s key tourism-related, revenue-producing entities are not being fully met (in Solvang hotels, and some parts of the Resort). • Tribe now owns FCC-awarded 2.5GHz spectrum not yet deployed for Tribal benefit • Tribe’s new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) platform cannot be maximized at current connectivity levels in most locations and cloud-based apps will only increase • Tribe is currently without a planning strategy for meeting 5-year connectivity demands (Note:
This Study is a first step in addressing this)
Reviewing these gaps in light of research data and likely future needs, Study partners articulated several areas of key consideration for evaluating broadband strategy options include:
• Need for a “consistent connectivity
platform” across the Tribal enterprise
• Gigabit speed as a standard for all
Tribal locations and stakeholders
• Redundancy assurance
• Five-year planning framework
• Alignment with the Northern Santa
Barbara County Fiber Ring
• Ownership of broadband assets to
increase Tribal control and future
commercial opportunity
It is suggested that Tribal leaders evaluate the following identified options using the factors in the Options Table as well as the above considerations as guidance. Strategy Options:
Option 1 – Trust Lands:
Midmile fiber from Goleta to Trust Lands with last mile fiber to all Tribal service and business sites on federal land. Tribe owns fiber on its Tribal lands.
Option 1 – Off-Site Tribal Locations:
Upgrade current contracts to gig service for business competitiveness, to accommodate cloud apps like ERP
Option 2 – Trust Lands:
Extend mid-mile fiber from Goleta, Buellton or elsewhere to reservation’s key anchor facilities (Casino/Resort). Provide last mile to reservation sites with 2.5GHZ fixed wireless Tribal spectrum.
Tribe owns fiber on fed lands; Tribe owns spectrum connecting fed lands.
Option 2 – Off-Site Tribal Locations:
Adopt Option 1 for Off-Sites
Option 3 – Trust Lands:
Option 1 model for mid-mile fiber to reservation’s (Resort & Clinic). Last mile to Tribe’s fed sites with 2.5GHz Tribal wireless. Tribe owns fiber on fed lands, spectrum connecting fed lands. Tribe seeks Competitive Local Exchange Carrier (CLEC) or other Tribal authority to provide fiber to local CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 6
areas, possibly off-setting service costs of Tribe’s off-site locations (see Klamath River Rural Broadband model)
Option 3 – Off-Site Tribal Locations:
Option 1 Off-Site model until CLEC/other designation secured; then extend owned fiber to Tribe’s off-site locations, local area
Option 4 – Trust Lands:
Participate in MuralNet/Cisco Sustainable Tribal Networks Program re sovereign network pilot program, an infrastructure trial providing data in exchange for Cisco support, equipment, etc. (would use Tribe’s dedicated spectrum throughout Tribal lands) Option 4 - Off-Site Tribal Locations:
Adopt Option 1 Off-Site model
Option 5 – Trust Lands:
Upgrade current fiber agreement with Frontier to gigabit service and provide non-anchor fed land service/business sites with Tribal spectrum
Option 5– Off-Site Tribal Locations:
Upgrade current contracts to gigabit service
Option 6 – Trust Lands:
Adopt a Service-Level Agreement (SLA) Model for single point management and control: SLA contractor would assist the Chumash in upgrading, investing, transitioning and maintaining gigabit service (outsourced broadband management for IT dept)
Option 6 - Off-Site Tribal Locations:
See above Trust Lands
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 7
The Chumash and Northern Santa Barbara County:
Stakeholders in Broadband and Economic Vitality
As the Chumash Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) points out, the economic interests of the Santa Ynez Chumash, the Santa Ynez Valley and Northern Santa Barbara County (NSBC) are not only aligned but are very much inter-related.
The Chumash Casino Resort and the Tribe’s two gas stations are in Santa Ynez, as is the Chumash Museum now in development. The tribe’s two current hotels are in Solvang, and the Kita Winery is in Lompoc - all of these entities contribute to Northern Santa Barbara County tourism and retail and benefit from Northern Santa Barbara County (NSBC) tourism services and other attractions. The Chumash have potential future commercial investment interests in Santa Ynez Valley but also other NSBC areas and elsewhere (currently including a space-related education and visitor destination to be potentially developed in the City of Lompoc and a commercial center being proposed for the City of Buellton). The Chumash workforce includes not only Tribal members, but workers at various levels from many geographical areas in Northern Santa Barbara County and beyond. The Tribe operates two NSBC bus stops for employee pick-ups – one in Santa Maria and one in Lompoc. Tribal member entrepreneurship is being fostered not just on Tribal lands but also in the communities housing current Tribal members and lineal descendants. Chumash representatives contribute and serve on boards and committees throughout the region.
Currently, four of the greatest economic opportunities of Northern Santa Barbara County (NSBC) cannot be realized due to a lack of robust, reliable, affordable broadband. All of the NSBC opportunities below are dependent upon enhanced broadband and all are critical to the Chumash as well:
• Chumash business expansion and Tribal member entrepreneurship • Vandenberg’s transition to a “Spaceport of the Future” featuring commercial space launch and space business
• Development of the Santa Maria Public Airport’s commercial park • Development of the seven Northern Santa Barbara County Opportunity Zones (three in Santa Maria, three in Lompoc and one in Guadalupe, two cities of which provide many Chumash employees)
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 8
California Public Utilities Commission (as of December 31, 2018) showed the Santa Barbara County broadband adoption rate as 83%. But this is for a minimum of 6 Mbps download speed and 1 Mbps upload speed, hardly the speed of
business, telework, telehealth and distance learning. A recent analysis of statewide broadband (California Broadband
Infrastructure Report Card, March 2020, Tellus
Venture Association) gave Santa Barbara County a D-,
meaning that there is only one wireline provider as of
2018 offering (not necessarily even in all areas)
broadband speeds of 100 Mbps down/20 Mbps up.
While 2019 figures not yet out may show some slight
improvement, the fact is that broadband in the area is
insufficient to the needs of the new reality of online sales, global collaborative work platforms, teleworkers, telemedicine and distance learning.
Note: In the Interim Final Rule of the American Rescue Plan (ARP) Broadband Rules (page No table of figures entries found.71), it is stated that “eligible projects are expected to be designed to deliver, upon project completion, service that reliably meets or exceeds symmetrical upload and download speeds of 100 Mbps.”
As seen by the following Fiber Locator maps, neither Santa Ynez Valley nor other parts of Northern Santa Barbara County are well served with broadband:
Figure 2: Santa Ynez Valley long haul
Figure 1: California Broadband
Infrastructure Report Card, Tellus
Ventures, 2020
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 9
Figure 3: Santa Ynez Valley metro
Figure 4: Lompoc Long Haul
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 10
Figure 5: Lompoc Metro
Figure 6: Santa Maria Long Haul
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 11
Figure 7: Santa Maria Metro
Other North County communities, e.g. the City of Guadalupe and the communities of Los Alamos and Cuyama communities, are similarly un or underserved.
Improved Northern Santa Barbara County infrastructure, such as the Northern Santa Barbara County Fiber Ring
Network conceptualized by
Chumash grant partner
EconAlliance, is a broadband
enhancement that is a key focus
of both Chumash and Northern
Santa Barbara County
stakeholders. It supports job
creation and the business
attraction, retention and launch
that foster economic vitality of
the tribe, of the Santa Ynez
Valley, and also of the other
cities and communities in
Northern Santa Barbara County
and the broader region. Figure 8: Notional: Northern Santa Barbara County Fiber Ring Network Concept CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 12
Tribal representatives have served on the Northern Santa Barbara County Advisory Group for the Broadband Consortium Pacific Coast since the Group’s inception, working cooperatively to address Chumash, Santa Ynez Valley, and North County broadband enhancement needs and to support development of the Northern Santa Barbara County Fiber Ring Network which would benefit them all.
The broadband interface between the Chumash and the Santa Ynez Valley, and ultimately all of Northern Santa Barbara County, took an even more positive turn upon the award by the Federal government of dedicated Tribal 2.5GHz spectrum to the Chumash, spectrum which will benefit at least the Township of Santa Ynez as by default it needs to cross over the Santa Ynez community to connect traditional and new Chumash Tribal lands recently placed in trust. Any new fiber laid on or to the Reservation to enhance Chumash broadband connectivity in effect will also enhance broadband in Santa Ynez Valley and serve as a “first leg” of the Northern Santa Barbara County Fiber Ring Network.
The Chumash serve on numerous other NSBC and regional boards addressing the economic vitality, infrastructure, workforce development and other common needs of Northern Santa Barbara County, an area boasting a diverse industry portfolio and great potential, but also featuring seven Opportunity Zones within its footprint.
NSBC hosts Vandenberg Space Force Base (Vandenberg Air Force Base until 2021), one of the nation’s two most critical space launch complexes. VAFB supports Department of Defense polar launches and ICBM missile testing, as well as NASA civil launches and commercial launches for global corporations. The Base has a stated goal of becoming a “spaceport of the future”, catering to the commercial space business opportunity projected to grow exponentially, with the Base projecting economic impact of its traditional and new space support being estimated at $2.4 billion.
Despite its being in a high-tech sector, VASB itself struggles to provide broadband at the speed of today’s business demands. (In 2020, Chumash grant partners EconAlliance and the Broadband Consortium Pacific Coast were asked by the Base IT leadership to support Base broadband enhancement efforts through market research with telecom providers.) As cited in the Tribe’s Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), Chumash Tribal leaders are considering support options for a proposed multi-million-dollar space destination attraction/space education center in Lompoc which leverages Lompoc’s proximity to Vandenberg. This investment would give the Chumash linkage to the City of Lompoc and further the Tribe’s tourism opportunities for its Kita Winery, based just outside Lompoc.
All six of Santa Barbara County’s American Viticultural Areas (AVAs), are located in Northern Santa Barbara County, including that in which the Chumash Kita Cellars are located (Sta. Rita Hills AVA). Wine grapes are the County’s second largest crop and NSBC is home to about 250 wineries and 95% of the County’s vineyards.
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 13
Most of Santa Barbara County’s $2.8B ag community, boasting over 100 commodities with exports to 40 countries, is in Northern Santa Barbara County and in normal times provides approximately 25,000 jobs. While strawberries are the North County’s premier crop, wine grapes are second and row crops and nursery products fall consistently in the top ten. It is worth noting that many of the NSBC employees working as field workers in the ag and wine business transition to hospitality workers, staffing hotels and restaurants such as those owned by the Chumash.
The NSBC region also features a significant manufacturing industry, a 100-year-old energy industry, and has struggled to welcome an emerging IT sector, hampered by insufficient or non-existent connectivity. Growth, effectiveness and innovation in these non-agricultural industries and sectors are not able to be maximized due to the area’s broadband limitations.
The shortcomings of Northern Santa Barbara County’s high-speed internet and connectivity infrastructure (broadband) have been brought into sharp focus through the lens of the COVID-19 disaster. In addition to impacts on healthcare and education, hospitality and retail, key industry sectors important to both NSBC and the Chumash, have been significantly impacted.
Impacts on hotels and restaurants are well understood, but the lack of robust, reliable connectivity, and in some cases the lack of any internet at all, has also impacted the area’s ability for retailers and wineries to thrive.
In the Chumash-adjacent City of Solvang, for example, which normally welcomes over one million visitors a year, 2020 saw days in which less than 25 visitors were to be seen in the entire town. For various months in 2020 and the start of 2021, 100% of the tasting rooms of over 200 wineries, in addition to restaurants, bars and other visitor-serving businesses, were shuttered or severely restricted by the State, throwing thousands of hospitality workers out of work.
Northern Santa Barbara County broadband inadequacies hindered retailers in transitioning from just “Main Street” retail to offering products online to a global market. Wineries commonly generating over 50-80 percent of their revenue from tasting rooms faced not only the usual shipping and exporting obstacles in transitioning to online sales, but also the NSBC broadband issues.
North County’s three hospitals and string of Community Health Centers (CHCs) are now, due to COVID-19, forcefully implementing telehealth options, as is the Chumash Tribal Health Clinic. Hospitals are either offering or exploring telesurgery for the future, as well.
While the Chumash Clinic connectivity is currently acceptable, Tribal health services, as well as those of Northern Santa Barbara County, will no doubt have increased broadband needs as healthcare migrates increasingly to virtual platforms.
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 14
The seven Opportunity Zones of Northern Santa Barbara County (NSBC) include three in Santa Maria, the largest city of the County, three in Lompoc, adjacent to Vandenberg, and one in Guadalupe, a community comprised of many disadvantaged farm workers. Many Chumash Casino employees come from these areas, so much so that the Chumash operate bus pick-up stops in Santa Maria and Lompoc. At the height of the pandemic, in April 2020, unemployment in the three Opportunity Zone cities skyrocketed. Lompoc unemployment, for example, was at 19.1%, Santa Maria at 11.7% and the ag community of Guadalupe was at 11.7% (source: California Employment Development Department-EDD). Many Chumash Casino and hotel employees were furloughed or terminated.
The 2019 per capita income in Santa Ynez township, adjacent to the Chumash reservation, was $50,400, but according to the American Community Survey 2019-1 Year Estimates (ACS 2019), the average per capita income in the three North County cities housing NSBC Opportunity Zones is only $19,374 in comparison to the U.S. per cap of $35,672, while the average per capita income of all five of the incorporated cities in Northern Santa Barbara County is $27,940 (ACS 2019).
In the United Ways of California pre-COVID report Struggling to Stay Afloat, The Real Cost Measure in California 2019, authors demonstrate that the poverty rate in most California communities is much greater than national poverty rates indicate. While the U.S. poverty rate is determined mostly by food costs, the United Ways of California Real Cost Measure analyze the “real cost” of living in California (community by community) by considering not only food costs, but housing, transportation, health care, childcare and other basic needs.
In this analysis, over 35% of Santa Barbara County residents do not meet the report’s $75,000+ household income level required to meet basic needs. The greatest number of these residents reside in Northern Santa Barbara County, as shown by the area’s Opportunity Zone locations.
There is a direct correlation between education and poverty and in this regard, Northern Santa Barbara County is at a disadvantage. While NSBC is home to Allan Hancock College, a highly respected California community college, and is situated nearly midway between two world-renowned universities - California Polytechnic University San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly) and University of California Santa Barbara (UCSB), NSBC suffers from a lack of fouryear degree program access. North County actively engages in seeking to attract other four-year degree programs accessible to more students than Cal Poly and UCSB, and the Chumash Education Director has expressed an interest in hosting university coursework in the Chumash Education Center to afford access to Chumash Tribal members potentially interested in university degrees.
As mentioned above, possibly the four greatest current economic opportunities of Northern Santa Barbara County – Chumash business expansion, Vandenberg’s “Spaceport of the Future”, Santa Maria Public Airport development, Opportunity Zone development - all have CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 15
an important nexus with the Chumash, and none can be fully maximized currently due to a lack of affordable broadband.
However, the lack of robust, state-of-the-art, reliable broadband on Chumash lands and in Northern Santa Barbara County already is considered an NSBC priority and it can be further addressed cooperatively through Chumash partnerships with the organizations, communities and service providers who have been working this issue for the benefit of the residents, economic stakeholders, and visitors of Northern Santa Barbara County.
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 16
Introduction
Purpose of Grant Broadband Strategy and Feasibility Study The Feasibility Study grant provided by the U.S. Department of Commerce Office of Indian Energy and Economic Development (IEED) for development of a Tribal broadband strategy was designed to “improve quality of life, spur economic development and commercial activity, create self-employment opportunities, enhance education and distance learning, and meet emergency and law enforcement needs by bringing broadband services to Native American communities”.
The Scope of Work for which the IEED contracted with the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians was “a feasibility study to develop a strategy to connect the traditional Chumash Reservation with new Reservation lands at Camp 4, providing broadband to the current underserved reservation area and the new unserved reservation area recently placed into Trust by the Tribe.”
“The immediate benefits of broadband deployment will be harnessing opportunities for technology for current and future Tribal residents of the reservation, enabling opportunities for telework, distance learning, telemedicine, and other quality of life” aspects.
The goals of the Chumash broadband feasibility study are to:
• Create an effective strategy to support the enhancement of broadband services to the Tribal members who are currently or will eventually be residing on Tribal land. • Evaluate feasibility, broadband delivery options, and possible routes for an extension of existing service to the underserved residential portion of the existing reservation and to the newly acquired Tribal lands at Camp 4, which is currently unserved.
• Identify connectivity issues and potential solutions to ensure enhancement of Chumash service delivery to Tribal members (healthcare, education, etc.) • Support acquisition of newly available licensed spectrum being awarded through the FCC’s Rural Tribal Priority Window offering 2.5 GHz spectrum to American Indian tribes.
• Recommend connectivity enhancements to better support existing Tribal businesses • Facilitate greater access to broadband for Tribal businesses to be located on traditional Chumash reservation land and on new Tribal lands and in the local community. As an active participant in the local community, the Chumash will design a Tribal broadband strategy that will support not only the reservation, but also local economic, educational, infrastructure, and community development initiatives.
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 17
Objective 1 (Process): Provide a strategy for broadband deployment & support. • Assess the current state of broadband capabilities, including current gaps & community needs.
• Integrate potential opportunity resulting from the availability of 2.5 GHz spectrum. • Apply best practices to create a shared roadmap.
Objective 2 (People): Accelerate broadband adoption.
• Determine the level of overall community awareness of broadband capabilities. • Create a sense of urgency for broadband deployment and the development of digital literacy.
• Develop Tribal advocates and community stakeholders for adoption.
Objective 3 (Technology): Identify broadband infrastructure needs, potential applications. • Validate the current and create a potential future topology of broadband infrastructure for Tribal lands.
• Create a technology map that describes what exists, current gaps, and potential future applications.
• Create an investment strategy to acquire tools and technologies for development of future capabilities.
Overview: Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians
The Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians (Chumash) is a federally recognized tribe of 113 Tribal members and 1,200 lineal descendants. Over 200 Chumash Tribal members live in 100 homes on the original reservation.
Tribal lands are situated 20 miles north of Santa Barbara in northern Santa Barbara County, and is accessible by Highways 154 (the Chumash Highway) and Highway 246. The lands are adjacent to the township of Santa Ynez and the City of Solvang.
In 2019, the tribe placed an additional 1,411.1 acres in new trust lands; this land is referred to as “Camp 4” and is expected to have 143 new homes as well as support some agricultural activity.
The Chumash own and operate the Chumash Casino and Resort, the Hotel Corque and Hadsten House hotel properties in Solvang, as well as the Kita Winery in the nearby Santa Rita Hills. The Santa Ynez Band of Chumash is a member and supporter of hundreds of community organizations and is a leader in both the economic and philanthropic sectors of Santa Barbara County and the region. Its
What the Chumash Tribal Community currently lacks is adequate broadband and cellular coverage to support many of the technology platforms that are needed for everyday life and competitive business activities. The lack of adequate coverage also hinders the work of security personnel and first responders who are often challenged in meeting security, emergency and law enforcement needs by weak and/or unreliable signal strength on both Tribal lands and in the Chumash facilities sited in nearby Northern Santa Barbara County communities.
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 18
Methodology
The broadband feasibility study development featured a 3-step process:
1. The first step involved both qualitative and quantitative research.
2. Analysis of this information led to a comprehensive understanding of the current state as well as immediate needs. The collection of survey and interview data also provided an understanding of emerging and anticipated requirements.
3. From here, a review of recommended potential strategies (options) and comparison factors (Strategy Options Analysis Table) was created to facilitate Tribal leadership decision-making.
Process Elements and Flow
Figure 9: Methodology Elements and Process Flow
Broadband Connected Facility Inventory & Asset Technology Mapping An inventory of the broadband assets at the Tribal facilities was performed. The facilities were organized in a “stoplight” graphic (page ___) that was color coded to indicate the adequacy of the existing connectivity. This visual representation enabled a simple way of highlighting problem areas and priorities. A survey question of facility leads or support personnel contributed information on the download and upload speeds of each Chumash facility asset.
Analysis
Strategy
Recommendations for
Potential Adoption/
Solutions Comparison
Research
• Conversations
w/IT Team,
Leadership
• Broadband-Related
Inventory of
Facilities
• Needs Assessment
-- Resident/HH
Survey
-- Business/Dept
Survey
-- Interviews:
Facility Leads
• Asset
Technology
Mapping - Visual
“StopLight”
Representation/
Supporting
Tables
• Needs
Assessment
Analysis
• Gap Analysis
• Development of
Broadband
Strategy Options
• Identification of
Key Analysis
Factors for
Decision-making
• Options Analysis
Table
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 19
Additional information gathering from the IT team regarding service providers, types of service, contracts, etc. facilitated a foundational understanding for the remainder of the grant work.
Tribal Needs Assessment
The Tribal needs assessment was comprised of two perspectives – those of the Tribal business enterprises/ service departments and those of the Tribal residents/households. To assess potentially diverse needs, two separate surveys were developed and administered:
The business enterprise/department survey (Appendix B) was distributed to 12 Tribal leaders, executives, and managers of either Tribal business entities (i.e. the casino, hotels, etc.) or Tribal service domains (i.e. HR, Education, Clinic, etc.). Business entity/department survey respondents were offered a follow-up interview to clarify or enhance their survey input. Appendix A summarizes the results from each question of this survey. Interview input was synthesized and incorporated into the overall needs assessment (see page___), with Highlights of the Business Entity/Department Interviews appearing in Appendix E.
The Tribal resident/household survey summarized in Appendix D was distributed to 58 Tribal members living on the reservation. Twenty-four responses were received for an impressive 41% response rate.
Gap Analysis
From needs assessment and asset inventory data, ideal versus actual states related to broadband were compared, with gaps identified and next steps articulated in a Gap Analysis Table.
Tribal Broadband Strategy Options, Decision-Making Factors, Options Table Due to finding a greater number of enhanced broadband strategy options than expected, with decision-making considerations quite possibly unique to Tribal perspectives and priorities, Study partners elected to articulate all identified strategy options, contributing suggested decision-making factors and an Options Analysis Table for Tribal leadership use in narrowing the field. It is quite good news to have found so many potentially viable strategies, as this fact could support a greater number of funding opportunities, as well.
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 20
Chumash Tribal Spectrum Update
FCC Rural Tribal Priority Window Opportunity
As mentioned previously, the Tribe applied for spectrum through the FCC’s 2.5 GHz Rural Tribal Priority Window (“RTPW”). The 2.5 GHz band is suitable for both mobile coverage and fixed point-to-point uses and is currently used to provide broadband service by legacy educational licensees and commercial providers that lease the spectrum.
To facilitate RTPW Tribal applicants, the FCC established reservation maps. The SYBCI map included the 137-acre existing reservation (“Old Reservation”) but did not include the additional 6.9 acres Museum parcel (“Museum”) and the Camp 4 annexations. It also did not include the fee lands that the Tribe owns in Santa Ynez. For all lands not on the FCC map, the Tribe requested waivers from the FCC and was required to show a local presence for the Tribe.
The Tribe applied for the spectrum for the “Old Reservation” in application 0009169139 which was granted on January 4, 2021.
The Tribe applied for waivers for the Museum and Camp 4 parcels plus for the Tribal lands in between these 2 parcels; this was necessary for contiguous transmission/routing of broadband between both parcels. The Tribe applied for waivers for all three (3) parcels by application Nos. 0009169131, 0009169143, 0009169146 Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Mission Indians, Eligibility and Local Presence Exhibit and Request for Waiver (collectively the “Waiver Requests”). The Waiver Requests were all approved by the FCC Memorandum Opinion and Order dated March 1, 2021. DA-21-247A1.pdf (fcc.gov) On March 9, 2021, the FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau granted the three remaining applications from the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians. The call signs of the licenses are WRKZ447, WRKZ448, and WRKZ449.
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 21
Tribal Broadband Facilities Analysis
The broadband asset inventory included identification of Chumash-owned facilities and the level of broadband or other service they “officially” feature. For analysis, comparison was also made with what facility users are experiencing on the ground* (survey and/or interview information). Findings are presented in a map and a “stoplight” graphic depicting the Tribal facilities. Facilities are color-coded to allow for quick identification of problem areas and priorities. As might be expected in a stoplight image, the colors are as follows:
• Green indicates the site is well-connected with services that are somewhat scalable for the near future.
• Yellow sites depict locations where service availability is limited and less than the bandwidth desired for current needs.
• Red sites have unacceptable bandwidth and options or are unserved.
While several of the sites in the stoplight graphic on the next page show “green” or “Acceptable” connectivity service level based on purchased services, it is noteworthy that there is variance in this service in comparison to speeds documented at the site. Speed data garnered from “on the ground” users in those facilities was often quite different. (See table of on-site speeds reported below Facility table)
If on-site speeds recorded rather than purchased speeds were used as the metric for the stoplight graphic, of the six “green” or “Acceptable” sites shown* in the Facility table, only the Chumash Casino, the Chumash Resort and the Clinic would fall into the “Acceptable” range (while Clinic would be “Acceptable”, the rest of “Santa Ynez Reservation” - e.g., residences - in the Facilities table would not).
While most of the facility inventory includes only Chumash business entities (e.g.Resort, hotels), or Tribal member service sites (Education/Learning Center, HR), the “facility” labeled Santa Ynez Reservation includes both the Clinic, with satisfactory service at a documented 500 Mbps, and Tribal residences. While not indicated in following tables of the asset inventory, Tribal member survey respondents reported upload and download speeds at their homes on the reservation (See Household Survey Analysis, Question 6). Of the ten respondents reporting upload speeds, four indicated only “high” or “slow”, six documented speed tests at their homes. Average household upload speed for six reporting: 19 Mbps.
Ten respondents reported download speeds of between 55 and 404 Mbps as tested at the residence. Download speed of those reporting averaged 234 Mbps. At an average of 19 Mbps up and 234 Mbps down, Chumash Reservation residences are severely under-served.
It should be mentioned that both the variance in facility “official” speeds and on-site speed tests as well as the Chumash residential connectivity service issues described above were further validated by non-speed-related survey questions regarding service satisfaction. *“On the ground” speeds at Chumash Santa Maria and Lompoc bus stops have not been tested CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 22
Figure 10: Asset Inventory Map and "Stoplight" Image
Green – Acceptable Service Levels
1. Santa Maria Park & Ride 50 Mb Cloud Metro Ethernet
2. Lompoc Park & Ride 50 Mb Cloud Metro Ethernet
5. CERC 1GB Ethernet Cloud Solution (Back to the Casino)
6. Hadsen House 100 Mb Cloud Metro Ethernet
7. Hotel Corque 100 Mb Cloud Metro Ethernet (Fiber to restaurant)
8. Chumash Casino Redundant Dual 500 MB Fiber (Comcast / AT&T)
9. Gas Station #3 50 Mb Cloud Metro Ethernet
Yellow – Functional, but Limited
3. Kita Winery 200 MB Business Class
Red – Unacceptable / Unserved
4. Learning Center Point to Point Wi-Fi to Tribal Clinic
10. Fire Department Point to Point Wi-Fi to Tribal Fire Department
11. Gas Station #1 1.5Mb T1
12. Camp Four Parcel Not developed
13. Santa Ynez Tribal Reservation 500 MB for the Health Clinic – Otherwise local offerings
14. Chumash Museum In development – Anticipate 100 MB solution Figure 11: Inventory Asset Service Description
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 23
Note: Speeds identified for the CERC Human Resources center in the “official” data above show a contracted simultaneous speed of 100 Mbps up and down, while the Chief HR Director on site documented only 129.39 Mbps uploading and 296.30 Mbps downloading speed (wired/Frontier). Wireless was much worse. The data below, compared with that above, indicates a significant variance in what is assumed and what users are experiencing.
Chumash Enterprise: Internet Speeds
Wired
Upload
(Mbps)
Wired
Download
(Mbps)
Entity (ies) or
Domain
Wireless
Upload
(Mbps)
Wireless
Download
(Mbps)
19.3 72 Division- LLCs
Hotel Corque
3.9 47
17 73.5 Division LLCs
Hadsten House (Hotel)
18 56.47
Education Department 6.9 32.8
Chumash Fire
Department
22.9 180
500 - Comcast
500 - AT&T
500 - Comcast
500 - AT&T
Chumash Casino &
Resort
129.39 Frontier 296.30 Frontier Human Resources
Chumash Employment
Resource Ctr (CERC)
TBA 24.27
Tribal Clinic 500 500
309.5 432.7 Casino: Technology Svcs
Chumash Gas Station 38.3 48.6
3.1 Casino: Strategy Div
Figure 12: Facility Asset On-Site Speeds
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 24
Broadband Needs Assessment
As mentioned in the Methodology, the needs assessment was comprised of 2 elements and 2 separate surveys: a Chumash business enterprise/service department survey with followup interviews and a Chumash household survey of residents. The Business/Department Survey (Appendix B) was developed as an in-depth look at the applications needed by the entity or department, with survey questions and interview points of coordinated with the Tribe’s IT team. The Household survey (Appendix D), also developed in coordination with Chumash IT, was developed to determine typical household usage and needs. Surveys were administered from mid-March through mid-April 2021.
Tribal Business Enterprise/Department Survey
The following table lists the key contacts who participated in the Business Enterprise/Department survey, with the facility or department they were representing listed as well. Interview dates are also shown (interviews summarized on p. ____).
Bus Entity/Dept
Survey Submitted
Entity (ies) or Domain Survey Respondent Interview
Date
3/22/21 Division- LLCs
Hotel Corque
Hadsten House
Hotels
Scott Gold, Director 3/26/21
3/23/21 Chumash Fire Department Joseph Zavalla, Fire Chief 3/23/21 4/02/21 Education Department Dawn Valencia, Director 4/09/21 4/02/21 Chumash Foundation Veronica Sandoval, Chief
Operations & Communications
Officer
4/05/21 Chumash Casino & Resort Kyle Schaffer, Director IT Infrastructure
4/05/21
4/05/21 Human Resources Dan Nogal, Chief HR Officer 4/07/21 4/05/21 Tribal Clinic Nathan Hawk, IT Security
Specialist
4/07/21
4/05/21 Strategy Division Halise Ekmen, Chief Strategy & Performance Mgmt Officer
4/16/21
4/06/21 Santa Ynez Band of Chumash
Indians
John Elliott, CEO 4/16/21
4/14/21 Technology Services Michael Figueroa, Audio Visual Supervisor
4/19/21
4/16/21 Chumash Cellars (Kita Winery) Michael Figueroa 4/19/21 4/16/21 Santa Ynez Chumash Museum
& Cultural Center (in
development)
Kathleen Conti, Director
Figure 13: Business/Dept. Survey/Interview Contacts
CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 25
Key Findings from the Business Enterprise/Department Survey The findings from the Business Enterprise/Department survey are summarized as follows:
• There are many Tribal locations that are unserved (Camp 4, new Tribal lands), underserved (Chumash residences on Reservation), or lacking reliable adequate service (e.g. CERC, Education Center, Fire Station, Kita Winery, hotels) • Responses to Business Enterprise/Department Survey “speed” question shows a significant variance of user speeds at the site from reported purchased speeds, indicating that the Tribe does not have the control it needs over its connectivity • Tribal business and service entities are not well-positioned for new or emerging applications, enterprises or Tribal member support service expansion (e.g., new Tribal ERP platform, increasing cloud-based applications, Internet of Things (IOT), Education Center’s possible University programs, potential new duties for Chumash Fire Department, etc.)
• The Internet services the tribe has today are not Service Level Agreement (SLA)- based, thereby leaving the tribe vulnerable to performance issues and outages.
SLA-based services would give the tribe greater reliability than it has today • In lieu of owning its own fiber, having additional carrier and service options would be beneficial to the Tribe, potentially addressing purchased vs received services • The opportunity to have fiber-based options should be pursued • Considering additional ISP options would also allow the Tribe to build redundancy into its network
• Gigabit service across all Tribal enterprises would enhance current service and support all current and projected near-term needs
Key Findings from Business Enterprise/Department Interviews • The remoteness of the reservation causes there to be limited ISP carrier options with limited and/or costly service offerings. As a result, ISP solutions have accordingly become transactional rather than strategic. • Tribal business enterprise and Tribal member support services growth are increasing the number of transactional solutions, complexity of service, IT efficiency, and creating more of a challenge in providing a comprehensive, streamlined strategy scalable to meet growing Tribal broadband needs and opportunities. • Adequate service today does not imply satisfactory service in the near future, as onpremise assets such as the new Chumash Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) platform and other cloud-based solutions, as well as off-site opportunities such as potential off-site gaming, will require greater bandwidth and speed • Software as a service migrating to platform as a service, may need new carrier for “platform as a service”
• Numerous Tribal areas are unserved (newly acquired lands) or under-served (Reservation residential, Education/Learning Center). See Facility Inventory above CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 26
• Broadband asset ownership never previously considered, as assumed that costs of entry would be cost-prohibitive. Knowing that provider costs are increasing and that transactional leasing can never capitalize on best pricing, Tribe’s IT department has also learned that the Tribe now owns 2.5GHz spectrum awarded by Federal government, that grants are available for broadband infrastructure development, that other Tribes own and sometimes enjoy a healthy ROI on Tribal-owned broadband assets, so owning fiber or other broadband assets is no longer off the table – asset ownership would allow for Tribal broadband to grow and expand as needed and already owning its own equipment, time to ROI may only be two-three years
• Fiber to individual Chumash facilities probably still too expensive when spectrum may suffice or be equivalent
• Wifi modernization needed; only hard-wired sites (e.g., Casino, Clinic) seem to have reliable connectivity
• Telework will be ongoing, will expand, CERC will be requiring as space becoming a premium (50% of workers at home; 50% in office). Videoconferencing and teleconsulting are Tribal cost-savers
• A Chumash key carrier (Frontier) is currently in bankruptcy proceedings • Guest experience, guest expectations, proximity marketing key competitive factors that must be met for growing Chumash visitor-related service revenue o Current guest dissatisfaction with Hotel Corque/Hadsten House connectivity. o Families now bringing minimum of four devices (Corque x122 rooms + lobby, pool, etc., Hadsten House
o Geo-fencing or proximity marketing also requires high bandwidth/speed at hotel/Resort locations
• Connectivity issues of special (safety/security) concern:
o Internet drop-offs during high-traffic events or peak times (issues create security concerns)
o Residents without landlines cannot get them from Frontier (“port is full”); cell phones go out with electricity outages because Casino generator does not power cell tower on top of Casino (security concern)
o Cell phone usage in Resort/Casino, hotels
o Internet issues, slow speeds at hotels
o Fire Department internet drops (often Mondays, plus 2x/week) o Employee Verizon cell users without access in certain areas, in emergencies need to send/receive calls on personal (non-Verizon) cell phones o Residents without landlines entirely dependent on internet and cell phone in emergency, cannot get landlines unless another resident gives one up (Frontier claims to be out of “ports”); only cell service that works in residential area is Sprint; Sprint tower on Casino not energized during outages, presenting residents with no internet, no cell service when electricity CHUMASH BROADBAND STRATEGY & FEASIBILITY STUDY 27
is out unless they have a landline (Note: HR states eventually employees will take training on phones, have access on phones to Employee Handbook, time-off requests, etc., so HR impact as well for residents who are also employees)
• Tribe needs to ensure that new acquisitions come under IT connectivity control • Lack of single strategic solution (single platform, Service Level Agreement (SLA) or and/or asset ownership and current connectivity gaps or unreliability creating significant Tribal inefficiencies, probably increased overall costs of doing business, costs of service
• Gigabit service across the Tribal enterprise – owned or leased – would solve many of the stated connectivity issues, if what was leased was what was actually available at the site (see variance mention above in Facility Inventory text) • Planning for broadband needs of Tribal businesses, service entities and residents 5 years out is advisable (CEO) to meet already anticipated or potential demands:
o Development of Camp 4 – new homes, RV park (entrepreneurship needs, business operation needs)
o Clinic – advanced diagnostics
o Chumash museum
o Possible expanded role for Tribal Fire Department with Camp 4 development o Possible four-year university coursework at Education Center; remote educational services for Tribal member students distributed across U.S. o Increasing digitalization
o Growing need for interconnectivity across enterprise
Key Findings from the Household Needs Survey
Fifty-eight (58) Tribal member households were surveyed regarding their current Internet service and family broadband needs; 24 of those households (40%) completed the survey.