[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6642005,"mediaKeyId","3406091-ce2376887a046938612e9b2c4e51c3d9","parentId",3406091,"title","Sea Monterey and Monterey County Business Council outline tourism, business support work and local economic outreach","audioSeconds",1176,"startMs",6258000,"endMs",7434000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3406091-ce2376887a046938612e9b2c4e51c3d9&start=6258&end=7434","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3406091-ce2376887a046938612e9b2c4e51c3d9/thumbnail_6258000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6642005/Monterey-County/California/Sea-Monterey-and-Monterey-County-Business-Council-outline-tourism-business-support-work-and-local-economic-outreach","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6642005-b28046c5edddaf72765e62c05d4e229e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770901151&Signature=FtDHQ0csQVyCXY6SNoqjHAThTgZbayft-eOMa7lPBUCK-xUz2d3538lLkXijF1JlF24ZcyqdxX3s70rWvju60N7r-m~VhH7mOgWzyTtz6qhbwW-B0oI6qJhtA6Nfzr4RfEAznP36DME89Z~WYNbq88jJH5K3ULii-~STCumEnb3IizB0GlLGyhrLRFAPC5uc8qEVKKClXsNybdYWk7Pr60bnW-CW6eJfyvalpPaclwPLwoun3shaBVkSqDHzuhTWdyNYqm~3gpC6Csc1BjbAuMG7Tv1caZcUdLiwV42cK5849-kh62myeol9z~zuKOlydOkv43Sl-cXPck3hbrXTiA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Monterey County","date","2025-05-20T00:00:00Z","article","Sea Monterey (C Monterey) and the Monterey County Business Council presented May 20 to the Board of Supervisors about their fiscal‑year activities funded in part by local development set‑aside (DSA) allocations. Both organizations described outreach to businesses, international and domestic tourism promotion, and efforts to help local firms win government contracts.

Why it matters: Tourism and business development are regional economic drivers for Monterey County; local DSA funding supports marketing, international outreach and technical assistance that can increase local jobs and tax receipts.

Sea Monterey highlights
Rob O’Keefe, president and CEO of Sea Monterey, said tourism spending in Monterey County was “not quite back” to 2019 levels overall but that hotel spending had reached a record high (more than $1 billion) and employment in hospitality was the highest ever — about 28,000 workers countywide. O’Keefe described efforts to attract meetings and conferences (high‑value visitors), broaden international representation (including outreach to Korean tour operators) and to highlight South County and less‑visited assets such as Pinnacles National Park. He previewed a new “How to Highway 1” stewardship campaign slated to launch in June to encourage safer, lower‑impact visits to Highway 1 corridors.

Monterey County Business Council (MCBC)
Paul Farmer, CEO of MCBC, described the county‑funded Apex Accelerator, Leadership Monterey County and a newly relocated Small Business Development Center (SBDC) office. Farmer reported that contract awards to Monterey County businesses assisted by MCBC were approximately $114 million in the most recent nine months and that the organization’s counseling and training work levered federal contracting dollars into local jobs; he noted a calculated 1,800 jobs created or retained from assisted contracts using BLS multipliers.

Board response and questions
Supervisors praised both organizations for marketing South County and expanding outreach to small businesses and noted public concern about overtourism in Big Sur and Highway 1. Several supervisors asked for more detail on performance indicators and on how to spread visitation across the county; Sea Monterey and MCBC said they are tracking room nights, tax receipts and leads for meetings and encouraged continued DSA support for outreach and international representation.

Sources and attribution: Presentations to the Board of Supervisors by Rob O’Keefe (Sea Monterey) and Paul Farmer (Monterey County Business Council) and public comment from Mandy Lindquist (California Rodeo Salinas) during the May 20 board meeting.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","County of Monterey Board of Supervisors 5/20/25","oneSentenceSummary","Sea Monterey and the Monterey County Business Council told the Board of Supervisors May 20 they are expanding international outreach, meetings sales and small‑business technical assistance as tourism spending and hotel stays recover in Monterey County.","taxTitle","Monterey County, California","taxId",3728,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6642000,"Board continues Harper Canyon subdivision hearing to June 17 after agencies raise wildlife‑corridor concerns",4301,12930000,17231000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3406091-ce2376887a046938612e9b2c4e51c3d9&start=12930&end=17231","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3406091-ce2376887a046938612e9b2c4e51c3d9/thumbnail_12930000.jpg","/articles/6642000/Monterey-County/California/Board-continues-Harper-Canyon-subdivision-hearing-to-June-17-after-agencies-raise-wildlifecorridor-concerns","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6642000-0a96cab456656b9f9e5a1b6314db8ade/orig.mp4?Expires=1770901151&Signature=HQ-elIpMSukYKhsBx57I~vttlbZ6mDc98xsiroFVdE5BFjhrtxt-xMLdmMuZHbSIGU3wOJ5Fi7oPGnjkn2ElmN-0l-69BtMHhnEyjmBNKwW9w4rAmC2UroQ2~OWXjab46a6GfHlTYyHcTqHNa1RjTYxZaXySPMl-BuVcmOHLmCn5IQa5lBYp3PjrMKAKu-1b4QoF2kzoOFiFHzR6FV0BSvzv8r4ytXecex6L3Ec6oWBwbFNTE9VSA~4BQHdUZ2Y6ceUJDHK2sz~WATlVN5EIZ-rFeVIMWZZP8xuAbcC4l2LukJTL7J2d2QR~YBZATp5Dky-9iZEIfk8FBalXmr2v-A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Board of Supervisors continued deliberation May 20 on the Harper Canyon (Encina Hills) subdivision after the California Department of Fish and Wildlife and local conservation groups said additional time is needed to refine wildlife‑corridor mitigation.

Lede: Supervisors set a new hearing date of June 17, 2025, to allow Monterey County staff, the project applicant and CDFW to consult further on proposed mitigation to preserve connectivity between Fort Ord National Monument and the Santa Lucia Mountains via Toro Regional Park.

Why it matters: The 17‑lot proposal on about 344 acres has been entangled in litigation and environmental review for years. A Court of Appeal remanded the case to the county to address wildlife‑connectivity issues; the board is now considering updated analyses and mitigation measures focused on wildlife corridors and camera‑trap findings.

Background and recent work
Planning staff told the board the project was previously approved in 2015 but the approval was rescinded after appellate litigation required additional wildlife‑corridor study. The county contracted Denny, Duffy & Associates to run a camera‑trap study that recorded focal species — bobcat, coyote, fox, deer, mountain lion and wild pig — and produced a heat map of detections. Staff said mitigation revisions require dedicating about 54 acres as open space for Toro Regional Park and establishing corridor easements with building envelopes shifted to maximize permeability. The revised mitigation language lowered discretionary phrasing in places — replacing “should” with “shall” — and added specific measures such as wildlife‑friendly lighting criteria, homeowner education to reduce wildlife attractants, and prohibitions on livestock like chickens and pigs where they would undermine the corridor.

CDFW and conservation concerns
Jeremy Pullman, a senior environmental scientist with California Department of Fish and Wildlife, told the board the site sits within an essential corridor connecting the Fort Ord National Monument and the Santa Lucias and warned that development within that corridor could “completely isolate wildlife populations and disrupt this critical habitat linkage.” Pullman said the proposed footprint and narrow corridor segments increase the potential for human‑wildlife conflicts and that the measures in the supplemental EIR “do not adequately address CDFW’s concerns.” He recommended continued discussion and, if needed, consolidation or relocation of the development footprint to avoid long‑term population level effects.

Applicant and other perspectives
The applicant’s counsel, Matt Francois, said the project would leave roughly 90% of the overall property undeveloped and that mitigation in the supplemental EIR, along with the 54‑acre dedication, would create a corridor approximately 1,500 feet wide at key points — “about five football fields laid end to end,” he said in his presentation. The applicant also offered to record easements on adjacent lots of record to extend and protect the linkage.

Public comment and conservation groups
Conservation organizations including Big Sur Land Trust and The Trust for Public Land urged the board not to approve the project as proposed and asked for more time to refine the corridor plan; Big Sur Land Trust staff said their group is working with partners to acquire nearby parcels (Farini Ranch) to protect the same corridor. Members of the community raised concerns that the camera‑trap sampling window did not cover known seasonal dispersal months and asked for additional, longer‑term monitoring.

Board action
After discussion, supervisors voted to continue the public hearing to June 17, 2025 to allow additional consultation between county staff, the applicant and CDFW and to give the agency more time to review the revised mitigation language and conceptual corridor figure. The board instructed planning staff to return with updated mitigation language and any revised maps in advance of the continued hearing.

Sources and attribution: Monterey County planning staff presentation by Craig Spencer; applicant presentation by Matt Francois (counsel); comment letter and in‑person remarks from California Department of Fish and Wildlife (Jeremy Pullman and Zach Mills); public comments and letters from Big Sur Land Trust, The Trust for Public Land and other conservation stakeholders.","The Board of Supervisors continued the Harper Canyon Encina Hills subdivision hearing to June 17 after state wildlife authorities and conservation groups said the supplemental EIR’s wildlife‑corridor analysis and proposed mitigations need further work.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6642014,"Monterey County presses for independent toxicology review as PG&E seeks to return Elkhorn battery system to service",10523,246000,10769000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3406091-ce2376887a046938612e9b2c4e51c3d9&start=246&end=10769","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3406091-ce2376887a046938612e9b2c4e51c3d9/thumbnail_246000.jpg","/articles/6642014/Monterey-County/California/Monterey-County-presses-for-independent-toxicology-review-as-PGE-seeks-to-return-Elkhorn-battery-system-to-service","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6642014-f3d6185a5ae365bf17c8e44e3795ff37/orig.mp4?Expires=1770901151&Signature=chXJU7FcSAjH22xmBexaUO6clINend0h90T3cE5Slqr4-j73kOBcr7mQtXasqeV30G7yaiwrVYlKL0GEDOxRbDzk8Z9PZjo-Ree-aDsiS~XyGNoouSIWnLxcT86J-vwC0~JWYGTzODCDNDMr0aove~gwAbgeTxIyfE4yYzni-O7w4153esHAhs04610t7IBhaCrKKZla3Kpjk-RXjEwObgu4KYcObQ1bdW1nF61EaGj2Zr11YpWivOMsdLUbdBPp1V4pPuYaNAzcemFGznY5i9C~8txoJhhbDbPTicDHQiocjV1RRtqw2CjD9fdjAyiAKe9geKZ2IZvBeHjxcRXZug__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Monterey County supervisors voted May 20 to have county staff commission an independent toxicologist to review air and soil sampling from the January Moss Landing battery storage fire after residents and state agencies raised ongoing public-health and cleanup concerns.

County staff and federal officials briefed the Board of Supervisors on ongoing debris and battery-module removal planning at the Vistra Moss Landing facility, and on air- and soil-sampling work that Monterey County Environmental Health is overseeing. PG&E representatives told the board the utility intends to re‑energize its Elkhorn battery system in June to support grid reliability; several supervisors and dozens of public commenters said more independent review and community involvement are needed before any restart.

Why it matters: The January blaze at Vistra’s Moss Landing battery facility — the largest battery storage fire in the United States — raised urgent questions about emergency response, air quality impacts and how to remove and dispose of damaged battery modules. Residents and local officials said communication and monitoring gaps during the response eroded trust and asked for stronger oversight and independent technical review.

County, state and federal update
Kelsey (county staff member) told the board U.S. EPA is overseeing Vistra’s removal planning and that “each step of the process is being done in a very strategic fashion.” She said Vistra has been characterizing roughly 100,000 battery modules and is preparing plans for deenergizing, removal, treatment and off‑site transport under EPA oversight; she added earlier work removed asbestos from the burned building and that no battery material had yet been transported off site. (Kelsey is listed as county staff in the meeting file and spoke during the county’s briefing.)

Rick Encarnacion, director of the county’s Environmental Health Bureau, said county staff and state Department of Toxic Substances Control have accompanied the contractor that is collecting community soil samples. He told supervisors that 16 of 27 sample locations in phase 1 had been completed and that lab results were expected in several weeks. Nikki Fowler, the county GIS coordinator, said a public dashboard with sampling locations and screening-level comparisons had been published on the county’s incident website.

Public-health and community concerns
Public Health Director Ed Moreno said the county’s community health survey — conducted Feb. 19–Mar. 6 and intended to inform the local response — remains under analysis; he said a public summary was expected to be posted in May. Multiple residents who spoke during general public comment said they remain ill, reported ongoing animal and crop impacts, and urged delay of any restart of nearby batteries until cleanup, restoration and independent health review are complete.

PG&E presentation and questions
PG&E’s government relations representative Jasmine Venegas and regional vice president Teresa Alvarado briefed the board on PG&E’s Elkhorn battery storage system, a 182.5‑megawatt, 256‑“megapack” installation adjacent to the Vistra site. PG&E said Elkhorn is separated from Vistra’s building by concrete barriers, that the Elkhorn system disconnected automatically during the Vistra fire and has remained de‑energized, and that Elkhorn staff have implemented additional safety features including continuous air-monitoring and revised emergency action procedures.

Tim Wisdom, PG&E director of power generation, described prior work after a 2022 PG&E megapack incident at the Elkhorn site, saying a root‑cause analysis found a misinstalled vent that allowed water ingress and that PG&E had inspected every megapack, performed ‘‘dam’’ water tests, upgraded training with North Monterey County Fire District and added continuous emissions monitoring. \"We have the ability to monitor continuously any chemical constituents and the wind direction,\" Wisdom said.

Board action and direction
Supervisor John Church moved that the county engage an independent toxicologist to review the sampling and monitoring data produced so far; the motion was seconded, called and carried without recorded opposition. The board’s motion directs county staff to scope and hire an appropriate independent expert and to report back on costs and a timeline.

What the community asked for
Residents and community organizations urged additional steps: independent third‑party air monitoring under authority of the Monterey Bay Air Resources District, public release of plume and dispersion modeling, health‑care support and restoration for impacted farms and households, a full community involvement plan for the cleanup, and delay of any restart until more of those steps are complete. Several speakers said prior monitoring and public information had been insufficient during the January incident.

Next steps
County staff said they will work with county counsel and the budget office to scope the toxicologist contract and identify funding. U.S. EPA continues to oversee Vistra’s planning under its emergency response authority (CERCLA), and the county’s environmental health team will publish and update sampling results on the incident website as lab results are returned.

Residents may follow the county incident site for documents and the new GIS dashboard posted by the Health and Environmental Health bureaus.

Sources and attribution: County briefings and documents provided to the board May 20; statements to the board from Rick Encarnacion, Ed Moreno, Nikki Fowler (Monterey County), and PG&E representatives Jasmine Venegas, Teresa Alvarado and Tim Wisdom; public comments recorded in the May 20 meeting transcript.","Monterey County supervisors voted May 20 to have county staff commission an independent toxicologist to review air and soil sampling from the January Moss Landing battery storage fire after residents and state agencies raised ongoing public‑health and cleanup concerns.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6642010,"Monterey County releases annual contracts and procurement report, highlights $494.9M in FY2024 purchases and local vendor engagement",5494,892000,6386000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3406091-ce2376887a046938612e9b2c4e51c3d9&start=892&end=6386","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3406091-ce2376887a046938612e9b2c4e51c3d9/thumbnail_892000.jpg","/articles/6642010/Monterey-County/California/Monterey-County-releases-annual-contracts-and-procurement-report-highlights-4949M-in-FY2024-purchases-and-local-vendor-engagement","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6642010-ee5e01401701b50a9b6b09f3509a5cae/orig.mp4?Expires=1770901151&Signature=gHUyu--Ru-TS~OnqHOGW0zx25~j5jR3Sw4UZBJhuQWpRYkizX~NS0pI9k4NxzoWRq5s1eZyG-7IdNyf7gb95eBzwJDn-PJrmDGo95BrvCFj0uWayGkdADUIG9ENLkKq0dMxG-QcWyvfRTTcrEZ7RZJQdgKDewHe3C2o3uzqi2z7fkdV-F2KaNoL9Ftw0icQ5nnleFaLVQoZSis52yu~k1nKgzp2mKabc1k4-WZMuNn4oUtqgie8mtrJdmv~kJwfOZb4g4gAfDee4w4MD7gk3CkPYzz7PRIE9~icSfrETx6TLyR-Vyi~cu6Bt~mkZqdBbfWvtxpuYpmwwX2GJgsZbcw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Monterey County contracts and purchasing staff presented the county’s annual procurement report to the Board of Supervisors on May 20, summarizing purchases, vendor registration trends, countywide service agreements and improvements to transparency and vendor outreach.

Lede: Contracts and Purchasing reported $494.9 million in goods and services procured for fiscal year 2024, including $146.4 million spent locally within Monterey County. The office said it will move to a new Oracle ERP that should improve real‑time reporting and vendor self‑registration.

Why it matters: The report is intended to help board members, small businesses and the public understand how county purchasing dollars flow into local economies and support contracting strategies that favor local, minority and small businesses.

Key figures and takeaways
Deborah Wilson, the county’s contracts and purchasing officer, told the board FY2024 procurement totaled $494,905,900, with 70% (about $350.9 million) spent in California and $146.4 million spent in Monterey County. She said vendors may claim multiple business types (for example, a vendor can be both a local business and a women‑owned business), and reported the vendor self‑registration tallies: 71 certified green vendors, 6 disabled‑veteran enterprises, 288 local businesses, 74 minority‑owned enterprises, 32 nonprofits, 300 small businesses and 58 women‑owned enterprises.

Procurement card (P‑card) spending for FY2024 totaled about $10.3 million, Wilson said, with airline and hotel travel among the largest categories; partial 2025 P‑card spend (July through December) totaled $4.4 million in the report.

Countywide service agreements and outreach
Wilson and Angelica Rayles summarized over 70 countywide service agreements worth roughly $44.9 million in contracted funds; staff reported that more than 51% of the countywide service agreement dollars are awarded to local vendors. County staff highlighted outreach steps: a vendor expo with about 150 attendees, partnerships with procurement technical assistance organizations (PTAC/Apex), and new solicitations advertised in additional local papers to broaden reach. Wilson said the county had added two electrician vendors to help diversify service providers.

Surplus and savings
Jaime (surplus program manager) reported a 2024 cost savings through the surplus reutilization program of $59,059.51 and said the county’s surplus sales generate additional cost avoidance. Contracts and Purchasing also reported that the unit has answered a rising number of California Public Records Act requests and has improved response times through an online portal.

Training and professional engagement
Wilson highlighted the county’s procurement academy: 87 graduates in 2024 and 28 so far for 2025. County counsel and the risk manager provide regular academy modules, she said. The county hosted regional procurement chapter meetings and will host the Monterey Bay chapter of the California Association of Public Procurement Officials in May; staff encouraged departments to send participants.

Next steps for transparency
Wilson said the move to an Oracle ERP should enable real‑time vendor profiles and procurement reporting; she asked the board for continued support for implementation. Supervisor comments focused on local spending trends; supervisors asked for year‑over‑year bar charts showing the County’s share of procurement dollars retained locally to track progress. Several board members praised the outreach to small and rural vendors.

Sources and attribution: Deborah Wilson, Contracts and Purchasing Officer (Monterey County Contracts and Purchasing), and Jaime (surplus program) presentations to the Board of Supervisors on May 20, 2025.","County contracts and purchasing staff presented a fiscal‑year 2024 spend report May 20 showing $494.9 million in goods and services procurement, $146.4 million spent inside Monterey County and an increase in small business registrations. Departments described vendor outreach, a procurement academy and plans to improve reporting via an Oracle ERP.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Sea Monterey and Monterey County Business Council outline tourism, business support work and local economic outreach

Board continues Harper Canyon subdivision hearing to June 17 after agencies raise wildlife‑corridor concerns

Monterey County presses for independent toxicology review as PG&E seeks to return Elkhorn battery system to service

Monterey County releases annual contracts and procurement report, highlights $494.9M in FY2024 purchases and local vendor engagement