I think it can you hear us? Okay. I can hear you on a zoom but I'm still waiting on grant. Good morning. This is a test. This is a test. This is a test. Okay. I can hear you on granitas. I can see you. So test complete. Thank you very much. you you you you Thank you. Recording in progress. Good morning. Board of Supervisors regular meeting for July 23rd, 2024 is now in session. Speaker's joining the meeting via teleconference. Please unmute your microphone. Will the clerk please call the roll? Supervisor Howard. President? Supervisor Marquez. Excuse. Supervisor Tam. President. Supervisor Carson. President Mey president my here. We have a Thank you. Please join me in the pledge of allegiance the board of supervisors, welcome you to its meetings. The board allows in person, in remote observation and participation by members of the public and its meetings. County of Alameda recognizes the important and invaluable public participation in the government. Be reminded that disruptive contact that renders orderly contact the meeting unfeasible and I'll Be reminded that disruptive conduct that renders or really conduct the meeting unfeasible will not be tolerated. This includes disruptive conduct that may occur through public comment. The chair will order the removal of individuals who are hopefully disrupting the meeting so that the meeting may continue in an early manner. For those attending the meeting in person, if you would like to speak to an item on the agenda or during public input, please submit a speaker card to the clerk. So your name can be called to speak at the appropriate place on the agenda. The clerk would now provide brief instructions on how to verbally participate vote the comment through online teleconferencing. Detail instructions are provided in the teleconferencing guidelines. A link to the document is included in today's agenda. If you are joining the meeting using a computer, use the button at the bottom of your screen to raise your hand to request to speak. When called to speak, please unmute your microphone to raise your hand to request to speak. When called to speak, please unmute your microphone and state your name. If you are calling in, dial star nine to raise your hand to speak. When you are called to speak, the host will enable you to speak. If you decide not to speak, notify the clerk when your call is unmuted or you may simply hang up and dial back into the meeting. As a reminder, you may always just observe the meeting without participating by clicking on the view now link on the county's webpage at acgov.org. When calls you will have two minutes to speak, please limit your remarks to the time allocated. Public comment will generally alternate between in-person and online speakers at the term by the President of the Board and subject to overall time limit. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any board of supervisors remarks? Mr. President, I am continuing the two o'clock and the four o'clock set matters items 114, 114.1 and 114.2 to September 17th over the last two weeks. I think our offices have received a number of letters and comments from the Deputy Sheriff's Sourcune, the Sheriff's Office, the ACLU, SEIU, and the MACS. I think we need to give an opportunity for the Public Protection Committee to consider and deliberate on these comments and see how we can accommodate them in the ordinance. And similarly, with the ad hoc committee on tenant protections, I understand that they are working very closely on, at least the stakeholders are on one aspect that would enhance tenant protections above 1482. And instead of legislating from the diets, I'd like to give an opportunity for these groups to help provide a richer deliberation. And I also would like to pull item 136 from the consent calendar to address the issue of board district representation. Thank you. So just so I'm clear on this. the bill. Thank you. I'm clearing this. So items 114.1 and 114.2. You would like to continue those until September 17th. 9 after recess. 917. And then item 136. You want to pull that off a consent correct just off of consent. Yes, I want to pull it off to consent and I Guess procedurally I'd like to continue it to the next meeting in August Okay, and that would be August August the six Right Supervisor Marquez. Thank you, President Meile. I'm also going to request a continuance for items 135, 136, 137, 138, and 139. These are the appointments to the Child Care Preschool and Early Education Account Community Advisory Council. And I'm going to request that this come back. I think survivor Tam requested one of those items to come back on August 6. I support that, but want to ask for a presentation to be provided, I want more background information on these appointees to make sure that we are indeed meeting the five categories. I also want to know where these individuals reside, some bio information. This is, as you know, we've been waiting for four years to make this decision. So I do need some more background information, so respectfully asking for a presentation to be provided on August 6th. So 135, 137. 135, 136, 137, 138, and 139. You'd like to continue that until August 6th. Requesting a presentation. So we have more background on these individuals. We want to make sure that we are identifying the five categories that were responsible to a point to this body and just basically you know we discuss this at several meetings I just need more information. Yeah we will have a presentation from first five on this matter at our board retreat next week. In fact, so. Okay, and then- But we'll still continue. Okay. This until August 6th. And with respect to what's becoming a pattern with these continuances, I'm just gonna state, at some point we have to vote. We've vetted both of these policy decisions, tenant protections and sheriff oversight for years. We have to vote. We've vetted both these policy decisions, tenant protections, and sheriff oversight for years. And so I'm very frustrated that again, we're delaying the conversation, the decision. At some point, you have to take a position. Both of these are going to have parameters to make adjustments in the future. So thank you. and the other board comments or remarks. Any one, two, three, four. To make sure that I follow the law. I attended the NACO. Annual convention. Since our last meeting. And participated in the committees that I serve on. And would like to take a moment to say a special thank you to ITD to Tim and the ship and Sybil. I didn't bring it with me, but they won our county, actually won the National Award in terms of technology for any county in the United States over a million people as the population had an opportunity to represent the county along with the county administrator and civil at the national conference regarding that. And again, I think despite the fact that we've been having a lot of issues in the technology area, which will continue. I do want to applaud our ITD department. Yes, President Miley, I attended the recent grand opening, ribbon cutting, celebration, tour, whatever you want to call it, that the assessment center that social services has stood up to help serve youth, particularly vulnerable youth, foster care youth, and am extremely impressed with the work that social services has done, that GSA has done in a very quick manner to stand this facility up, a beautiful facility located in a safe environment. And I just want to say thank you for allowing me to preview that. I also attended the same conference that Supervisor Carson attended was able to attend the community economic and workforce development meetings and was named at the end of that conference as next year, one of next year's vice chair for that committee. I'm very honored to accept that and I just want to remark, Supervisor Carson was a bit modest. We should all recognize that it was one of the last conferences he was able to attend and everybody that I spoke to, who found out I was from Alameda County, said two thumbs up, Supervisor Carson. I would say rock star status, sir. To a tee, everyone will miss you and was remarking, what are we going to do with that? Or it could have been we're glad he's gone. It could be interpreted a couple of ways. Thank you. I didn't get that feeling, but you could be right. I don't think so, though. So I'm blessed to be able to have attended that conference. And look forward to many more. Thank you. Any other board? Com I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm sorry, but I'm one o'clock and I believe the two and four-clock set items are being continued. Public comment listed on items at 11 and one o'clock will be taken after the item is called for presentation. And as I said the two o'clock and the four-clock the second second second second second second second second second second second second second comment on the items that have been continued. Yes. Okay. I just wanted to make sure that that's that's that's the appropriate protocol. Yeah, the council. Yeah, those items have been continued to a future agenda and will not be heard today. So you are not required to take public comment on them today. You can take public comment at the time they're heard. comment at the time they're heard. Okay. And if people want to speak on those items, they could speak on non-agent items during our public comment. I'm sorry, I couldn't understand what you said. But they'd be able to speak on those items during public comment on non-agent items. Okay. They could speak on public comment during the items not on the agenda, but since they are no longer on the agenda. Okay, right. Later on today. Okay. So by this car. Yeah, I, I, I, I don't know how many hours I personally set through items that have been pulled over the years. And for some strange reason is the first time ever in history that I can recall that we're now saying speakers can't speak regarding an item that's been pulled. They didn't know it was going to be pulled. They took their time to be present. They wanted their voices heard and as much as an inconvenience it might be because of the fact that at some point in time we're going to bring the item back. This is I'm just shocked I don't know where that came from but there's been hours upon hours upon hours upon hours sometimes two and three times in which we've heard these matters and then we knew that they were pulled. Can a council on any response? We've been consistently not hearing items that have been continued. Okay, all right. Okay, so if we have public speakers on these items that we can hear at this point in time please call the speakers. We'll go to the first speaker and alternate between in person and online speakers as necessary. Please state your name, the city you live in and which item you are speaking on. You will have two minutes to speak. Speaking on the item. Speaking on the item 81.1. Good morning. My name is Lee Espinoza. I'm a resident of Oakland. And I'm speaking on item 81.1. Through my work with Oakland Unified and the All City Council Student Union. I have been able to see our youths vision for change in the ways that they have mobilized to better their educational experience throughout many years. I'm here to express my support for item 81.1 because over the last five years youth have worked to get measure QQ or Oakland youth vote on the ballot and fully implemented. Students have worked to pre-register their peers, host candidate forums, and generally provide more civic education to ensure that they can be informed voters when they are able to vote. I'm thankful for the cities of Oakland and Berkeley as well as both school districts for their commitment to support Measure QQ and Measure Y. So we ask that you continue to support the implementation of youth vote by approving and signing the MOU. Thank you. District Attorney Pamela Price, you're on the line. Thank you. This is District Attorney Pamela Price. I'm speaking on item 52.1. I'm asking the board to please postpone this item. I would like to be part of the conversation and unfortunately I've not been given the opportunity to speak to either the board or in the governance of this county and we'll have an impact on our ability to provide public service to the residents of Alameda County for 100 years since 1925 district attorney employees have been included in the charter under a specific provision and so any opportunity to modify the charter should include the voice of the district attorney as well as the employees of the district attorney who I have not had the opportunity to speak to as well. This is a our governance over the last 18 months we've had the tremendous opportunity to diversify the workforce and to be able to hire. In contrast, the civil service opportunities have been somewhat limited in the county. And so I am asking the board, as well as the proponents, to engage us in the conversation, otherwise to do a major change in how we hire and how we manage our employees would be most undemocratic and I believe would undermine our ability to protect public safety. We have been very blessed to have a pipeline of employees and putting them in the context of the civil service process. I believe would delay our ability to hire and delay our ability to feel a number of vacancies and have a major impact on our governance. And so I do believe that it's so important that the board allow us to participate in the process and please continue this item until we have been able to engage in those conversations. Thank you. I know this highly unusual, highly unusual, public comment is public comment. Normally we don't respond to public comment. I'm not sure if that's legal, we don't or policy why we don't. Maybe we can be reminded. I think it's highly unusual because we have a department head. I think it's highly unusual because we have an elected department head. And while it is the board that has the ability to pull an item as well as it take actions on that item. Given the sensitivity of the request coming from a duly elected department head of the county. At the minimum, at the appropriate time, I'd like to at least get a public understanding of what process has gone forward before we got to this point to take this item up. I think the public deserves the ability to know what the public process has been. And on some level. process has been and on some level because this has an impact on a department heads ability to operate on some level and while we are always protect always protective of our employees and their rights. I think that the sensitivity of this issue, hopefully, and I think the ability for the district attorney to be present for that discussion, to me, seems reasonable. And I don't know what's been going on behind the scenes in terms of the discussions and or the ability to bring it to us. I don't know. I'm ignorant as to whether or not there's been a number of briefings that the DA's been in. I'm unaware if there's been some kind of negotiations, I'm unaware of those things. And I think that as we consider the item, which I guess by statue, only a board member can pull, I'd like to at least get that history before that actually takes place. Even if it's on when we come to our regular board item. to at least get that history before that actually takes place. Even if it's on when we come to our regular board item. Okay, and I do believe there'll be a chance to hear more about this today. I'm Adam, Adam, Adam, Adam, and my voice Ajayi and I am a rising junior at Oakland Tech. I want to thank the board for your support and dedication to measure QQ this far. As a newly 16 year old, I am very excited to vote at the possibility when Medjocqueue Q is implemented. I sincerely urge the board to sign the MOU by August 8th because my peers and I have poured our hearts and time into this initiative and it would be disheartening if it wasn't passed. And we couldn't vote this November making us feel that our efforts kind of went to waste but thank you again we really do appreciate your support and yeah please sign the MOU and continue to stand with us thank you Thank you. Elaine you're on the line. Elaine Lee please unmute your mic you're on the line. Hi my name is Elaine Lee and I live in Berkeley and I have an unlisted comment. A comment on something that's not listed for our discussion today. We're not on comments not on the agenda just yet. We'll be taking that up later. So, towards the matter of part of today's meeting this afternoon. Around what time do you know? I would say maybe closer to two or thereabouts. Okay. Thank you so much. Mary here on the line. Yes. Thank you. Can you hear me? Yes. We can. Please state what you're trying to be speaking on. Yes, my request today is regarding consent agenda item number one, two, six, reappointment, Renee Hertzfield to first five, Elimita County. My name is Mary Huffle and I've lived in Pleasanton for 14 years, Pleasanton, Myles, to Strict. I'm the CEO of Hiveley with headquarters in Pleasant and Supervisor Halpert's District. And we serve over 6,000 children, families, and providers in every city in Alameda County, so all of your districts. Ms. Hertzfield has served on the first five commission for 13 years and a CEO of Four Seas, a sister agency of Hiveley. Ms. Hertzfield is an amazing leader, public servant and community member. Be that as it may, I'm asking you to remove her reappointment and in subsequent meeting, name a new Alameda County citizen for seat six. There are two reasons. One, first five commissioners are allowed two four-year terms for a total of eight years. Ms. Hertzfield has already exceeded this by five years and with this reappointment will have served on the commission for 17 years. There are plenty of people who have the call and ability to serve on this commission. This will bring fresh perspectives and new voices to the table. Two, Miss Hertzville and I are CEOs of two of the four agencies that will be contracted to distribute the annual 150 million measure C money to providers. In early May at an Elk's fundraiser, Supervisor Halbert and I discussed how the role of first five expands to administer measure C funding. The conflicts around being a substantial funder in the early childhood education field is a material consideration as one looks to first five's governing body. At that point, you thought it best not to have any APs R&Rs on the commission. These four agencies are APs and R&Rs, and I agree completely. So please remove consent agenda item 1, 2, 6 and find a new commissioner for first five commission seats 6 to resolve the maxing out of term limit and upcoming substantial conflicts of interests. Thank you. Mr. President, before you proceed, I wanted to announce to additional continued items. One is item 25 that is being pulled and also item 26 on your consent calendar will be continued until your next meeting. So item 125. 126. And on the consent calendar and item 25 on your regular calendar. 126 and item 25. Item 25. the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . to raise my case. Thank you, President Miley. County Administrator, can I ask you to please repeat for the record. There seems to be a lot of confusion about the continuances in the beginning that were requested. So can you please just repeat that so it's clear? Based on board direction from this morning, the items, the set matters, items 114, 114.1, 114.2 were continued to your meeting on September 17. In addition, off of your consent calendar, item 135, the next meeting on August 6th. In addition, the two that I just announced item 25 is being pulled from the regular agenda item 126 is being continued to August 6. That is all accurate. Just want to flag that regarding measure C did ask for presentation to come before us at the August 6 meeting. Okay. Any more speakers? Lucas speaking on item 81.1. Good morning, board. My name is Lucas Brecky-Maisner. I'm going to go ahead and get the questions. Good morning, board. My name is Lucas Brecky-Maisner. I'm the executive director of Oakland Kids First, which has been working with the Oakland Youth Folk Coalition for five years. And yeah, I'm here with the young folks who have been here a few times before. And just really want to appreciate the support that this issue has received from the board and also really want to acknowledge the registrar to the plea for your hard work on this. I know it's been a lot and there's a lot of moving pieces and the testing provides unique challenges when you're innovating. So I just want to appreciate that effort. And encourage all to sign the MOU, Oakland assigned it, Berkeley assigned it, Berkeley unified, and Alameda County is the last stop. And as we know, the election starts in a few weeks. And so time is very much of the essence. So yeah, just want to really thank you for your support and encourage you to sign the MOU today so we can continue forging ahead and finalize everything ahead of the election. Thank you. John, you're on the line. John, please unmute your mic. You're on the line. Please take the item you're speaking on. to into the merits or for otherwise of of the memorandum it would understandings. The concern I have when looking at the attaching is that one back is going to be updating the voting system software in equipment. Now, the rest of the county did not both to implement under eight voting. And also I'm concerned with the certification. The California State, Secretary of State, certified the software and the test of it. It was also certified federally by federal testing agencies. If we touch it, then that certification by fear is no one void. Now, it's fine if you want to treat a whole separate system that doesn't touch, you know, our election system, our voter rolls, anything, you know, that has to do with the rest of the county. That's fine. But please don't touch our systems, the ones that, you know, are outside Berkeley and open. Because there's been no controversy over, you know, those systems to be doomed with. controversy over, you know, those systems to be doomed with. And so I'd like for it not to be touched. And I think it's desert. The rest of the county deserves to have a certified voting system in November. That was that certified by the Secretary of State. And I'm looking at the certifications of the Secretary of State website. And the last certification was done in July of 2020. So please just leave it and please don't touch it. Thank you. Dominic Dominici speaking on item 81.1 Good morning, I'm Dominici Morris. I am a part of the open youthful coalition also speaking on 81.1 with Oakland kids first, open district three. Times of the essence, we're at the finish line though, we're super close to getting Oakland youth implemented in time for November. Right now we just need this final step, one of the final steps. So we are looking for you to accept the terms of the MOU and sign it. I know a lot of folks have been working really hard on it. Our young folks have been working, a lot of us have been working on it since 2019. The registrar and their folks have been working on it. They all have been very supportive of it. The city's been supportive of it. We just really want to get this in action. For our young folks to be able to make this happen by November. So what we are asking for you to do is please accept the terms of MOU and sign in before we can have this historical measure being placed. Thank you for your support. Kim, you're on the line. The State which item you're speaking on. Thank you. I am also speaking on 81.1. My name is Kim Davis. I live in Oakland. Parent, former parent of OUSD students and a big supporter of the young people who have been working for so long and so diligently to implement measure QQ and also in Berkeley with their measure. This is, you know, in so many ways going to be a historic election, including for Oakland. And I would love to see a part of that be our young people stepping into their role as of that be our young people stepping into their role as really smart, savvy members of the voting population. I have supported QQ from the beginning and have seen how creatively, thoughtfully, respectfully, and patiently, these young people have been working through all of the systems to make this happen. And so I urge you all to take that step today to finally get these young people the right to vote in our school board elections in Oakland and in Berkeley. Thank you for your time. Sam Davis speaking on item 81.1. Good morning President Milly and Board. My name is Sam Davis and I am the President of the Board of Education for Oakland. I'm speaking in favor of item 81.1 youth voting. Just really grateful to the City of Oakland, the City of Berkeley, Berkeley Unified School District. And now the county and especially to Registrar, Tim Dup up we for all the work that is gone into making this possible. I know there's been some concern about costs. We really appreciate the city of Oakland stepping up and committing 84,000 to the software changes. I believe that the Berkeley Unified School District committed to the remainder and we contracted with a consultant who's a former registrar of voters in another county who's been collaborating with the registrar voters just in terms of helping to get through the process. We don't expect, you know, we know there's only 10,000 juniors and seniors in our high schools and in the charter high schools. Maybe a few private school kids will also want to register to vote. But so we don't expect this to be a massive number of voters if we get to 2000 per election. That would be great, but it would be very, very significant across the country when we see so many other jurisdictions restricting the right to vote for disenfranchised communities that hear an Alameda County or in Oakland and Berkeley were expanding the franchise So just imagine you know as as was mentioned as a historic election with an Oakland native at the top of the ballot and all the way at the bottom of the ballot We're expanding the franchise to our youth voters. I have an 18 year old myself. We're flying him to college on Friday. And let me just tell you, there's so much going on right now for our family. Registring to vote is not at the top of our list. It probably should be, but it isn't just to be honest. And so it's so meaningful to register students at 16 or 17 through the pre-registration process that already exists so that they can participate when they're still on high school. Thank you so much. Roy, you're on the line. Please stay, which item you're speaking on. Hi, good afternoon. Can you hear me okay? I'm good morning. to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to go to the office. I'm going to administration of the office. And I'm calling to ask the Board of Supervisors to not consider this item at this time until the District Attorney's Office has had further communication regarding this item and also to give the board an opportunity to research the history, the rich history as to why, specifically the district attorney's office is not subject to the classified employee as the rest of the county. Over the past 18 months, we've been able to bring on a number of staff members and basically have the flexibility to not only diversify the staff but also to basically build up a department that was understaffed when we came in. We believe that without having at least some dialogue to discuss what the impacts of moving forward with this potential charter amendment, it really could have the ability to have wide spread effects on the way that justice is administered in Alameda County and probably the potential to really bring the way the administration of justice bring it to a screeching halt if not amended correctly. So at a minimum, if this could be tabled until further discussion I've had we believe that this would be reasonable and prudent decision for the Board of Supervisors. Thank you for the work you do, and thank you for your time. Hello, good morning. It's begun item 81.1. My name is Yshella Rista and I'm an Oakland resident and Oakland High alum. I began working on Oakland Youth Vote in 2019 as a freshman and I will now be entering my second year in college in the fall. And while I, like many other youth organizers, had hoped to see Oakland Youth Vote come to fruition long before we graduated, I still have hope they are my younger sister and other Oakland students will be able to participate in this civic process and contribute to the betterment of Oakland schools. I hope that the work of hundreds of youth organizers is able to be honored through the continued effort to implement Oakland Vogue. And lastly, I'd like to thank all the city and county officials who have kept their Oakland you vote in their minds and hearts during this long process. I hope that you continue to advocate for youth empowerment and youth input in Oakland's education by signing the MOU today. Thank you. Ginny, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. I'm speaking on the charter amendment for the DA's office. And this is brand new to me. I don't feel like, you know, people have had a chance to look at this. I mean, this could have, This could have really problematic effects. And I think people need some time to come to understand this and have a real good discussion about it and make sure that any change to the charter is done right. So I ask you, please don't move quickly on this. People don't know about it yet. There's a lot to be discussed. Please, please hold off. Please continue this for today. Thank you. The Samuel A. Speaking on item 81.1. Hello. Hello, I'm Ed at Board of Supervisors. I'm Samuel, a OUSD graduate and I'm here with Open Kids First and with Open Youth Coalition. First off, I want to start off with the things for the AmiOS Board of Civil Riders for the continuous support towards Magic QQ in helping 16-17 year-old vote in school board elections. I've been working with I've been working on the implementation process of Magic QQ since the start of my ninth grade year. Now, seeing how far Magic QQ has gotten and knowing that my peers will be able to create change in their schools, it had a dream come true me. And many others who have been working on Project QQ. We are at the final stretch and all we need is for the Board of Civil Rights to sign on the MOU that will allow Oakland and Berkeley students to vote in the School of Elections by August 8. By supporting Project QQ and signing the MOU, you'll create a better school system that accurately shows students' needs and addresses of them. By supporting MCHQQ and signing the MOU, you'll create a better school system that accurately shows students' needs and addresses them. Thank you again for the help me to board the supervisors for their continuous support with MCHQQ and helping us achieve a better school board system. I'm going to ask for your name. Allison, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Hello. Allison Monroe. I'm speaking on item 21. I want to congratulate the county and behavior health on getting money from the state to run board and cares. Board and cares are one of the most supportive places for people's serious mental illness to live. They are disappearing partly because nobody knows what they are, what purpose they serve and partly because it's become impossible economically to run these places. So I want to thank people for going out and getting that $7 million from the state. Thank you. Alison Chen speaking on item 81.1. I'm going to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to be in the position to from the very beginning and I'm hopeful how far we've come. I appreciate your commitment thus far to advancing measure QQ and Berkeley's measure Y1, allowing 16 and 17 year olds to finally vote in local school board elections this November after years of advocacy and effort. I urge the Board of Supervisors to accept the terms and to promptly sign the MOU between Oakland, Berkeley, Alameda County, and the Berkeley Unified School District. It is crucial that this is done by August 8th to ensure Oakland and Berkeley youth can participate in the upcoming elections. Oakland, Berkeley, and the Berkeley Unified School District have already approved and signed the MOU, leaving Alameda County as the final step. I ask that you honor your commitment and sign now to uphold democracy and provide our youth with the opportunity to make their voices heard. Thank you. your speaking on. Please unmute your mic. Maybe you're on the line. Hello. Please. Yes, which item are you speaking on? I'm speaking on item 5, 2.1, admitting the charter. If the one and see for badges and many for charter, it should definitely go to the people first. So they can have input on asking that instead of going on this item today, we continue it for another day, both the voting of the Volumetric Army and the District Attorney's Office as well as labor. That would be effective. Have the ability to have input on this item. And unfair for the board supervisors to take up an action item and vote on it without input from all of the involved including the voters, the district attorney. Thank you. I'm going the California Open Union of the Homies for Mental Health outreach program for independent living. I'm here to come in, President Joe Biden. The people of America do not know what he have to do. He have saved America. He have saved the people that have made America. The elders who worked all their life in struggle to make this country great. The veterans who fought for this country who are most of the homeless out of 10% of the homeless, eight of them is fed to say. He stood of us, the man who is fairly that are men who are disabled from more struggle, people who are probably are men mean, I'm disabled from probably, he say the people of America who made this country, who founded this country, built this country. And the people have to understand that he has his child, he has to get old, you got to be a man for what he did, for what he's worth, not what he haven't done. And so the people of America are in stand. We have a great president there. It's no one perfect. We all make fall. But yeah, it's like we have to. I was born in 65 years old, in 2010 when I found out, senior citizen sleeping in the streets, he's not a garbage can, but because the system took the economy and home, and took the low income housing, Street, E9, Republican, we cost the system to get economy in town and turn it into a low income house and turn it into economy and kick the mind raise even way to the industry. You got two of our houses of them downtown. Austin says, the goal here by the food industry never happened. He's trying to correct this mistake of America, turning back on the people that made this country great. That's my people and the India. The people that fought for this country, why are you taking care of people from another country? So I think if people in this country and say it's wrong, that's wrong here. That's the only thing I came here to do. To come here to Joe Biden, but to sign our grants a law, to have the people that made this country great. Thank y'all. a lot of people you have made this kind of great. Thank you all. Christine, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Hello. We can hear. Hello. We can hear you. Please state which item you're speaking on. On speaking item 521. And I am, yeah, as the director of Element of Counter-Strike Attorney's Office, I'm against amending this mainly because it gives me the opportunity to diversify my team. I have been able to increase African American presence in my victim witness division. I have been able to incorporate more Asian Americans. This was done in a very fast manner. The reason I was being able to do that is because we have the opportunity to hire at will many individuals and it's a prom process. Also remember that working at the district attorney's office there's a lot of exposure to vicarious trauma because of the level of graphic description of how people harm other people. So sometimes there's tends to be a lot of turnover because of burnout and also because of Icaria's trauma. So it's important that we have a very spedacious way of hiring people. And I think this amendment will let in the time that I can bring people on board. And again, disqualified people that may not have degrees, but do have lived experience as victims themselves that can provide a whole reign of experience and build trust more quickly with victims of crime. So please ask you to consider this and to have a conversation with the district attorney's office and leaders from the district attorney's office to converse more about this and you know, and how this will be harmful for us to continue to maintain, you know, expeditious services and trauma informed services for our victims of crime. Thank you. Jorge speaking on item 58. I'm going to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to ask the committee to with Ebra to provide resources for small housing providers. I am 100% behind both tenants and housing providers get representation. But recently, with a lot of the laws that have come on, the smaller housing providers have been getting steamrolled. Most of them aren't interested in learning the nuances of the laws and things that have to happen. And what ends up happening is we end up frustrating people that are just trying to get a little bit of income and provide good housing for tons of people. Most of the small housing providers aren't here to get their tenants or squeeze every penny out, but what ends up happening is without them having any representation like the tenants have now they end up Clostening themselves thousands of dollars And also getting to the point where they're frustrated and they end up selling their units when they sell their units at this point Most of the time the people who are buying them have a higher income level. And also, as you guys well know, corporations have decided to start buying rental property throughout the country. So if we continue to squeeze out the small operators, again, they're not trying to become multi-millionaires, they're not trying to become the monopoly guy where they own the block. They're just trying to provide housing, a service like any other. And recently, we've been a little unfair to those people because they're outgunned. So I think it's a great program. I think there should be balance. I don't think at, you know, at some point prior to the landlords, housing providers were taking advantage of the tenants. I think that's changed and I think we need to put a little bit more balance on the opposite side to allow them to be able to at least defend themselves. Thank you. Just in here on the line, please state which item you're speaking on. I'm just going to ask for the committee to be on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Hi, actually, this is Cynthia Chandler. I'm the senior assistant district attorney and also the policy chief for the one, the proposal to change the charter to have district attorneys be civil servants. I'm speaking up in opposition to this change in the charter and I specifically want to talk about the importance of the integrity of the district attorney's office and actually being autonomous and having a level of autonomy separate from the rest of the county and specifically having our employees be civil servants. This is important because it's important to ensure that no one is above the law. It's important to ensure that we can maintain integrity and ethical behavior in our own ranks. I don't have to tell you all I'm sure that we have recently uncovered some very tragic histories of unethical behavior in the district attorney's office. It's imperative for a district attorney to be able to ensure that their employees are behaving ethically, that they are doing everything at the most standards in the law. And if folks were civil servants and we had to go through enormous loopholes to ensure that our ranks are behaving appropriately, that would harm the public. But more broadly, it puts external pressures on the office of the district attorney that are inappropriate at this time when we should all be working together to ensure transparency and integrity and equity in the administration of justice. I want to say that I'm speaking out today also as a long-standing union supporter, union member myself with five generations of activists in the union movement in my family. This is not a labor issue. This is about integrity and justice. Thank you all for listening today. Jackson Allen speaking on item 81.1 I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. Hello, hello, Al Meade County Board. My name is Jackson Allen and come see you're Oakland Tech. I support 81.1 because as many use in this community, I don't really have a saying what the board does. So it would be fair if I just had a voice on like what representative I can choose to voice like my concerns, like just for me but when it comes to Just matters of my education experience So I just want to thank you all for just like you know supporting like this measure You know because we've come a long way Just like working on this from 2019 to now So we've just been working like really hard on this and I just want to thank you like for just all your Just taking this into account like we really appreciate it and also for just future OEOC students to come like um Yeah, so that's that's all. Thank you Dave Thompson speaking on item 58. Good morning, supervisors. Dave Thompson, co-director of my voice, a membership organization representing working class folks in unincorporated Elmita County. I'm speaking to ask you to reconsider funding item 58, 645,000 for a landlord legal services hub, which would require a reallocation of funding from healthy homes that was meant to provide rehabilitation of rental properties in unincorporated county. We've talked to over 3,700 renters in the last year and a half and nearly 80% are saying habitability is an issue. So we're concerned that these funds aren't getting applied to rehabilitate housing that's in need of repair half of the housing stock in unincorporated 60 years old or older So we are concerned about what's gonna replace that funding we recognize that ARPA funding has timelines that After you be addressed and that contracting and all that is challenging in a short time period But are concerned about where that funding is gonna go Also would say we're very concerned about supervisor's tam, continuance of Jeff Caws. This has been a four year fight or track your occurred over the last 18 months. It's been a stymie protecting families that are renting in unincorporated county. Thank you. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. 12. minutes, two minutes, two minutes total. And this is the 23rd of July. For those of you who have recollect, I first appeared for you on 22nd of November to remind you of John Kennedy and Wilma Chan. So here we are, 23 July. And as I say, we have been about two minute allotments of declaration of principles right now. I'm telling you once again, change is mandatory. Growth is optional. Check yourself before you wreck yourself. Please understand. And I quote, the truth doesn't need you to believe it. It is the truth. It simply is and it survives whether you believe it or not. Lies need you to believe them. If you don't believe lies, they don't survive your skepticism and they simply disappear. Now, that item 52, congratulations and condolences. For the first time in more than 50 years. We have district attorney and sheriff not directly beholden to this sheriff. I mean to the clan and you're going to do 52.1. Do you know what you're fooling with? For the first time you have a district attorney not beholden to the clan. You have a sheriff not beholden to the clan. You have a share of not beholden to the clan and probability strongly indicates they don't owe the superior court or the Masons too much of anything. Now the prior occupants of the district attorney's office twice met with law. Jackie Spear two time Tom Olop look it up. Pimping victims of violent crime into victims and witnesses are slush funds. The second move, it has to relate to items, what is it? 1122? Part of your problem right now is you've given time and money to those to help homeless and they have key holders, not peer counselors, that also was affecting a law enacted by Jackie Spear. You don't have to listen to me but the truth will 11 and 15. Good afternoon. My name is Christopher Pryor. And I was born and raised here in Oakland, California. And since August of 23, when I got sick and went to the hospital, didn't even know why I woke up at I was homeless. And I'm still homeless today. But I'm going to show to call the housing consortium of East Bay, which runs the Lake Mary Lounge. And it's in limbo because the manager of the building, the people that own the building wants the program out. And they're not feeding people properly. They have third world cooks in their cooking pork and beef every day. That's not good for nobody. And they don't care at all. I even got attacked by the manager of her building because I was recording the kitchen where they are doing construction water running through the walls and the water is coming through the sprinkler system. What item are you speaking on? Public comment. We're not on public comment yet. Boy, 11. What's one ever want to want us for homeless? Which ever want us for homeless, house, and middle? Which ever? What? If we're not on public comment yet? You said what? We're not on public comment. What else was she said? You wasn't listening? What item are you speaking on? I was speaking on 11 15 to 22 and public comments. Okay. Come on Molly You heard it when she said it you mess with my time can y'all put time back up there for Molly taking my time Give him put it put it's time back up Get put it's time back up As I was stating as I was stating it's a damn shame how the seniors and the homeless people are getting treated in Oakland it's a shame it's a shame before God like I said I got sick in August 23 it took out my dog bladder now I'm dealing with God Cloma which I'm blind so everybody this side, I don't see who the fuck they are. It don't matter. I see you and I see you. The very ones that sit up there that look like me, that don't want to do nothing for us. And you sit there and you got that blank look. Like it don't matter. But when does humanity matter? When is color gonna stop being a factor in America? They tell me I'm black. This mic is black. Do I look like this? Mike? No. Stop it. Make decisions that's gonna help people. Stop making decisions that's gonna give you a profit. People are really struggling on these streets today. And I'm telling you, if y'all shut these shelters down, y'all see what's happening over the weekends, y'all see what happened at the Lake Mary. It's gonna get 100, thousand times worse in Oakland. And then they come into your neighborhood. If you watch the news, they all up in Danville. They all up in Walnut Creek. They're going to be everywhere. Next, you're going to be at your house where you pay your mortgages. You got your nice cars, your families, the kids in college. But what about the people that you're supposed to be representing? You're not doing it at all and it's not fair. It's not that we have to keep suffering, especially the natives. The natives of Oakland are suffering and it's not fair. You guys come from other points of the world. There are no additional speakers. Okay, I want to thank the speakers for speaking. So we have about 10 minutes before the 11 o'clock set item. So what we'll do is we'll just see if I can take up. I think we'll just go ahead and recess for 10 minutes and then come back at 11. Shake up the 11 o'clock, said item. So it's Carson. President Miley. What just second to my surprise. I just wanted to thank the young people who came to speak on your issue. It's good to have participation from the community in our meetings, and especially to have some youth present. Let's us know and underscores the fact of how much you care about what's happening that affects you. So, appreciate you being here. Okay, so what? So let's have a motion on the minutes for April 30th June 24th June 25th June 27th. I'll move approval of the minutes. Health second. Move by. Tam second by Mark. Yes. No board comments or questions. We have the roll call. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Mark. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Aye. questions. Give me a the roll call. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Aye. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Miley. Yes. All right. So we'll recess and reconvene at 11 to take up the said matter. Recording in progress the recording in progress. All right. Board of supervisors meeting is back from recess with the clerk please call the roll. Supervisor Halbert. Present. Supervisor Marquez. Excuse. Supervisor Tam. Present. Supervisor Carsonbert. President. Supervisor Marquez. Excuse. Supervisor Tam. President. Supervisor Carson. President Myley. Here. If we could have water in the chambers, please, thank you. the 11 o'clock set item, item 112, and that supervise of course, and reclaiming the month of July is disability for a month. Thank you very much, Mr. President. On Tuesday, July 23rd, which is coming, coming up, not yesterday, actually. I would like to proclaim Disability Pride Month, and I'd like to do that honoring Easy Does It. Disability Pride Month has celebrated every July to mark the anniversary of the Americans with disabilities act which was passed on July the 26th 1990. It is also an opportunity to honor the history achievements, experiences, and struggles of disability of the disability community. The first disability Pride celebration was Disability Pride Day that took place in Boston in 1990. Now there are events nationwide, empowering people with disabilities to take pride in who they are. Alameda County is enriched by the diversity and accomplishments of individuals with disabilities. of individuals with disabilities and we are especially fortunate to have been the birth play for many of the key activists in the disability rights movement, especially Judy Human, in terms of having so many accomplishments in that area and moving some legislation but also becoming a deputy secretary in the federal government as well, but who also founded many of the disability organizations that exist today and have served as models for others around the world. Easy does it. Emergency services is one of a kind, Berkeley-based, non-profit that provides affordable safety net services to seniors and people with disabilities empowering them to live independently in their own homes. EDA was incorporated in 1995 with Cecilia Weeks, a long time advocate for independent living and disability rights, which led a group of people with disabilities and their advocates which led a group of people with disabilities and their advocates to creating a nonprofit organization initially aimed at providing emergency backup attendant services. In 1998, City of Berkeley voters approved Measure E authorizing a property tax to finance these services. To this day, measure E remains EDA's principal sponsor, providing the majority of funding for their services, which not only includes emergency, attendant care, but also equipment repair and accessible transportation. In more recent years, EDA has expanded some of the services beyond Berkeley, including a wheelchair repair pilot program for the City of Oakland residents, and they are also service providers for the faster program, which provides free, roadside wheelchair repair assistance, and rescue rides for residents in a majority of Alameda County cities as well as the unincorporated areas within Alameda County. We are grateful for the essential life-saving services that EDA provides to our disability community supporting greater independence and self-determination. Congratulations on your nearly 30 years of outstanding work. We wish you much success and continued growth in the future. And we have Bruce Curtis, who is here as the executive director of the board chair for EDI. And I'm going to have Bruce say a few comments. And I'm going to have Bruce say a few comments and I'm going I can meet with one of the people who are you. Thank you. So I wanted to thank the supervisors, especially supervisor Carson, for this award in disability disability pride month here in Oakland. Oakland and Berkeley have a long history in the disability rights movement. And easy does it, emergency services is one of the organizations that has come out of the struggle that we've had for making it possible for adults with disabilities and seniors with disabilities to live in our communities and participate fully. So we really appreciate this award. We are trying to expand our services a small amount into Oakland and now we just received a award for some money from the City of Emeryville to provide our wheelchair repair services in Emeryville as well. We work very closely with the Center for Independent Living and Berkeley, which also serves Oakland and we really appreciate, again, the support that we're receiving from the supervisors of Alameda County. Thank you very much. Are there any speakers? Sean, you're on the line. You have two minutes to speak. Hello, thank you so much. I'd like to speak towards agenda. I, towards agenda item nine to reform the civil service protections in the district of Perney's office. We have not on that item. We're on item one. That's right. Yeah, so I'm happy to delay it. Yep. Thank you. No more speakers. Okay. Right. Thank you. And what we'll be doing now is recessing into closed session. you you you you Recording in progress Recording stopped being stopped. Okay. Recording in progress. Right. The board supervises back from closed session. Would you take the role? Supervisor Halbert. Present. Supervisor Marquez. Present. Supervisor Tam. Present. Supervisor Carson. Present.visor Marquez present supervisor Tam present Supervisor Carson present president Miley here. We have a poem. Thank you County Council is anything to report out from closed session Thank you Yes today in closed session the board authorized the County Council to retain and execute outside counsel in the matter of Garcia, V. Alameda, V. County of Alameda, at all United States District Court, for the Northern District of California case number three, colon two four, dash CV, dash zero three, nine nine seven, dash AGT, and the county council to execute the retention agreement and we will be retaining the law firm of shoot mahali in order to represent the county and that litigation and that was, Superior Court of California County of Alameda, case number 24, CV 07 8 935, the board authorized the county council to execute a retention agreement and retain outside council to represent the county in that litigation and the county will retain the law firm of GoFAR blipman for that representation and that was on a vote of 5-0. In the matter of Robinson V. Woods at all, United States District Court, Northern District of California case number 3-1-cv-09447-JSC, the board authorized settlement in this case the bill. The bill is called into one-cv-09447-JSC. The board authorized settlement in this case at its closed session on December 19, 2023. And the authority to settle the case was on an unanimous vote of 5-0. That case is now settled in the amount of $1,298,076. And that completes my report out. All right, thank you. So we're going to go to our set matter at two o'clock. No, excuse me, at one o'clock, item 113. I apologize to all of you who are here on that we were delayed 45 minutes. I did my best to get us back up here. I got to take responsibility so please excuse us for being tardy. It's no reflection on those of you who are here to be recognized for 30 years of service to the county. But since you've been here for 30 years, you understand. The challenges that, yes, yes, so, yes, that, you do understand, you're, I feel you, you feel me. Great. So, I'm going to now have the county administrator, make some remarks, and I will then supervise your Albert. Thank you, President Miley. Today, your board has the honor of recognizing 43 employees, 16 of whom are present from 13 county departments who have invested 30 years of their career serving our diverse communities here in Alameda County. In addition to each May declaring public service recognition week and this year, public service recognition month, we certainly extend our appreciation further each year when your board recognizes those employees who have achieved 30 years of service to Alameda County, a huge milestone that signifies their extraordinary commitment and dedication to our residents and communities. So to put this quickly into perspective in 1993 when these employees started their county service, gasoline was $1.11 a gallon. A half a gallon of milk was $1.39 and a dozen eggs cost only 91 cents. So while a lot has changed, what has not changed is the commitment dedication of our employees. And today I want to personally thank and also on behalf of all of the your colleagues, managers, and department heads and the board, our sincere appreciation and gratitude for your service and dedication. And with that, I will turn it over to the board president and vice president to present the certificates and read the commentation. All right. So welcome, if you're to present the certificates and read the commendation. All right, so welcome, if you're one for joining us today, along with the entire board, we are pleased to acknowledge your 30 years of service. Each of you will be presented with a very special commendation, just a small token of our appreciation. It's important that we take time to publicly convey our sincere appreciation for each of you having dedicated three decades of service to Ahmadi County and its residents. I'd like to take a few moments to read the commendation. Whereas the Board of Supervisors, the County Valimita, State of California, proudly salutes you for your loyalty and dedication, which strengthens the county, and helps us achieve our goals. And whereas we are proud of you for your accomplishments and the contributions which your 30 years of service as of December 31st, 2023 represent to the county of Alameda. Whereas the effectiveness and efficiency of government depends in large measure on your public service employees whose task is to provide services of the quality required and expected by the public on a daily basis. Whereas the importance of public service rendered by public service employees in the exemplary manner of their performance are often too or excuse me and their performance are too often unacknowledged. And whereas the county valumetit recognizes the dedication, talents, and contributions made by public employees at all levels of government. Now, therefore, we have resolved that this Board of Supervisors does hereby commend and express its appreciation to you for your contributions and service to the people of Alameda County. And extends its sincere appreciation to you for your commitment and dedication. I presented this 23rd day of July, 2024. I'll pass the baton to Vice Chair Halbert. Thank you, President Miley, and a very special welcome to each of you that are here present today. It's such a privilege to celebrate your 30-year commitment to public service here in Alameda County. As I say of any organization, it's all about the people. So you make this county run. So much in life happens in the last 30 years. Gas at $1.11, eggs 91 cents. We can remember that. We're honored that you've chosen to have your 30 years invested here with us at Alameda County. As a board, we express our heartfelt appreciation to all of you. For the past three decades, each of you have collectively helped shape our county into what it is today. Thank you. If you don't know, we're the 20th roughly largest county in America, one of the most diverse counties in America, you should be proud as we are. I'll be reading your name by department. We're going to go by department supervisor, Miley will present in your accommodation with you down at the dius. If you're here with us in person when you hear your name please come forward to receive your accommodation after all the names are read from a particular department. So we're going to go department by department. You'll assemble for a group photo with your department ad joining if they're here. And so President Miley, if you go down to the front there and stand by the commendations, we're going to start with the Sheriff's Office. And I note we have our Sheriff here and a 30-year employee who's with us here today, I believe, is Dennis Parish with us. And Sheriff, you can join. Yeah. And we'll have Sheriff and President Miley join for a photo at the Dias. Ah, Dennis, one of our first responders and dispatcher. Thank you for saving lives, literally. The next is our assessor's office. And come on down. The Norida Paul Arkagamucci. Thank you for the work. You can have the whole team come up if you like. The next will be our General Services Agency. Do we have Arasela Esparsa here with us? Arasela! We have Alameda County Health and we have three today, Carlos Flattis Diaz, Linda Hunt, and Leslie Wilson. Come on down. Let's see to make sure Carlos Linda Hunt and Leslie Wilson had to leave. Okay. A group photo here with those present. We have eight from Social Services Agency, so let's call all the names and then give them a giant round of applause as they all come down and take a group photo. Nelly Seja, Teresa Cugler, Denise Gaston, Mercedes Milano, Wanda Nubin, Anna Ortega, Marcus Thompson, and Ramona Wilkins. Come on down. Yeah. And the Treasurer Tax Collector Department we have Raquel Del Rosario Goto. Hmm. That's all of our departments, but we have one more. Hmm. Who else could have been with us for 30 years? It might be supervisor Carson Yeah, it's with the great pleasure that I present is to Supervisor Carson. You know, I call him the goat, you know, the greatest of all time. And I also call him the Dean of the Board of Supervisors. Now, 30 years is quite an accomplishment. I don't know if we've had any other county supervisor to serve that long in the history of Alameda County. So, you know, and we're going to be, you know, this is Keith's last, I think, opportunity to receive this type of acknowledgement, but we'll anticipate for him before his term is up at the end of the year, first part of January. But once again, we just want to show supervisor Carson all the love and respect that he is deserving and you know, he'll be the first to say He's only as good as the people he's worked with his staff and all of you so once again, let's give him a big round of applause Can I ask the department heads to share for another to come up for the photo? Thank you. Now, if we could get all of the honorees up here, we're going to try to get one group photo with everybody and the board. So all 30 year employees, if you could come on up, we'll see if we can get a group shot with everybody. you you you you So with supervisor Carson staff, please come out to the chamber so we can get a picture with supervisor Carson and all this staff you you you Well, the board is coming down. I do want to acknowledge that on day one, where's Mina? On day one, when I started off, Urmina Sanchez was the person who let me in my office, but she's a retired anewer to still working in the office. So, 30 years for her at least. Thank you. you you you you So before we have public comment on this item, as I said, supervisor Carson, we're going to confirm that we do think he's the longest serving supervisor in the history of the county. And then, um, presently, he's one of the longest serving supervisors in the entire state of California. So let's have public comment. We have no speakers. No speaker on this item. Okay, very good. Okay, so we have done the set item for 1 p.m. and I think we are now ready for the consent calendar because both set items for the two o'clock set item was continued as well. President Milade, do you want me to read the conting item is the 1.35, 1.36, 1.37, 1.38, and 1.39 are continued to August 6th. And item 126 is also continued to August 6th. Okay. I'll move the consent calendar with the exception of those that the county administrator listed as continued to August 6. Is there is there second? I'll second. Any board comments or questions on the motion? Can we call the roll? Supervisor Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Marquez. Hi. Supervisor Tam. Hi. Supervisor Carson. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask the question. I'm going to ask Number two three four five six seven eight nine ten eleven twelve thirteen fourteen question on fourteen Item 15 16 17 question on 17 Item 18 Item 20 21 23 24 the item twenty-one twenty-one twenty-three twenty-four twenty-six twenty-seven question on twenty-seven twenty-eight question on twenty-eight Question on 28. Oh, sorry. 28. Times two. 29. 30. 31. 32. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 40. 41. 42. 43. Question on 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 51. Listed here again. I guess we don't have to do it twice. 51. 52. 52. Item 52.1 is an ordinance. We'll take that up afterward. Item 53. 53.1. 53.2. 54. 55. the item fifty three point one fifty three point two fifty four fifty five item fifty seven fifty eight questions on fifty eight fifty nine sixty sixty one sixty two sixty three sixty four sixty five sixty six sixty the item. item seventy four seventy five questions on seventy five on seventy five questions on seventy five item seventy six seventy seven seventy eight seventy nine comment on seventy nine item eighty eighty one item 80, 81. 81.1 is crossed out. 81.1 is not in the motion. Very good. Item 82, item 83, item 84. Questions on 84. 85, 86, 87, 88. the bill. I have a number of items. 96, 97. Item 99, 100. Comments on 100. Item 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111. That concludes the Mass Motion. Is there a second? I'll second. Right. Before we take up the items that we have questions or comments on, I'd like to hold 58 out of the mass motion. Because some. Both 58 out. And then I just noticed I'm going to have to recuse myself on that item. I will amend the mass motion to exclude item 58, which we will take up separately. And vice president, how were I did not hear you include item 93. Was that included? Item 93, I have listed here as an ordinance. Is it not? No. No. Okay, then I would like to include item 93 in the mass motion. So including a 93 and pulling like 58 out is the second or okay with that. Who second at the mass motion? Yeah, I don't know what happened. The maker motion is fine with it. Okay, all right. Okay. So that's so the first question that we had as on item 14. Thank you, supervisor Hopper. Item 14, the question is since the governor is recommending that we phase out the Cal Works Mental Health Prayer Program. What is our contingency plan for the future because we have had to do some patchwork to put in 50,000 this year to fill in the gap. So I can start in if Director Ford wants to add anything she can certainly do that. And I also want to add that we did receive some questions from your staff, these questions earlier. So we are putting together responses for you as well. If I'm not able to answer all of them in this moment. So the behavioral health department did say that the behavioral health department continues to work closely with SSA to support individuals impacted by the change. And to that end, since the May revise teams have been meeting internally to assess all clients receiving the service and transitioning them to levels of care that will minimize disruption of their care. The behavioral health department is also in communication with SSA, should funding ultimately be restored or maintained and to plan accordingly. Other areas within the behavioral health department's vocational services division coordinates regularly across the system and with other programs and will be a continued resource through the transition. I have nothing additional to add. Thank you. So we're obviously trying to see if we can get the program to continue. On number, oh, go ahead. I'm sorry, surprise. The next item. The next item with questions is item 17. Yeah, I had asked this question beforehand, but in reading through the memo, it just seems like ever since the reach center was established. the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the funding for the received. I don't have that information right now and I can provide it to your board following. But since I've been in my position there has been an operational funding gap in in the reach program and Supervisor Miley's office has been supportive of continuing to help us meet that funding operational funding gap. Okay. Thank you. And let me just add that Colleen's predecessor, Alex Brisco, at that point in time when he headed up the agency, we did a study to determine the funding needs for both because the county only has two youth centers that we run or that we're responsible for, reach we totally run. And then youth uprising, we've contracted it that out to a nonprofit, but youth uprising is in a county facility and we provide resources to youth uprising as well. But both of them to run these youth centers, I think if I recall correctly, the study showed it was something like six to seven million dollars annually if I'm recalling correctly. So both reach NYU have always had a funding gap that we've tried to fill. And so I've made an ongoing commitment with the agency directors blessing to continue to support reach, even though reach serves more than just young people in my district. And why you, we support why you as well through GSA and other county agencies and departments and they get a baseline amount as well from I think the agency. Yes. Several hundred thousand dollars as a baseline for why you and while we were standing here I got the information about the budget. The current annual operating budget for reach for FY 2425 is 4.129 million, which includes the following county funding, measure A at 800, almost 800 1000 tobacco master settlement funding at 876,000 county general fund at 1.23 million IGT funding, intergovernmental transfer funding at 674,000, district four funding at 550,000. Outside county funding includes Mental Health Services Act funding at 535,000. This funding source has been in place since its inception. I think it has shifted somewhat. Mental Health Services Act funding, its inception? I think it has shifted somewhat. Mental Health Services Act funding, for example. I think it has shifted somewhat. But, measure A, I know has been tobacco master's element funds have been. Supervisor Tam, just to add to that and Supervisor Marley, you may recall many years ago, and it might have been prior to director Chala taking over. There was base funding that was contributed from other departments including community development social services. I think a couple other departments we actually reduced their base funding and built that into the reach budget. So there were contributions from other departments that are ongoing because we reduced their base and transferred it into the reach budget. going because we reduced their base and transferred it into the rich budget. Was it always intended to be funded by the county agencies? The reach has always been intended to be funded by Alameda County because we run it, we operate it, we own it. We also try to raise philanthropic money to support reach, but reaches primarily funded by the county. It's once again, you see only county run and operated and funded youth center in the entire county. Where's why you, the distinction is why you is, we carved that out for a nonprofit to run and operate that. But, you know, why you at one point, so vice-carsan and another county administrator, will recall, I don't remember if calling was the HZ, director, but at one point, why you had to get a million dollar bailout from the county at one point in his existence because it was running a deficit. But they're, you know, so they're constantly trying to raise their money from the felon, you know, from a lot of different sources, whereas reach primarily relies on the county for all of its resources. Okay, thank you. Next time for questions is 27. What happened to 19? Sorry, I didn't make note of 19. Let's go to 19. Item 19 is not in the motion. Oh, I'm sorry. That's the reason. 27, these are the home key contracts. I'm going to go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead and go ahead. . . . . . . . . . . One of the other things we want to know is what safeguards are in place to help protect the residents, funds from theft and also are there annual inspections to ensure that there's issues around health and safety in the units that are addressed. The leases for each operator with the county include the requirement to maintain the units and the community. The community is the community. The community is the community. The community is the community. The community is the community. The community is the community. The community is the community. The community is the community. We have to provide regular inspection and maintenance of the units under the terms of the ground leases. As to the resident and unit safeguards, both sites have 24-hour staffing that ensure the site is secure in each resident. Unit has keyed access that restricts unwelcome access by others. So they limit access. Okay. Thank you. The next item listed for questions is 28. Right. I appreciate the work that the Alameda County Health Agency has been working with the Food Bank and this is to make sure that the legacy that the late supervisor, Wilma Chan, had put in place with recipe for health, has continued to be implemented and prosper. I was curious of the 500 patients that recipe for health serves, how many are or can be supported by the food bank and the dig deep forms? So, the food bank is going to be the fiscal sponsor of dig deep farms, and they're moving dig deep farms to farming only. Dig deep farms was a partner of recipe for health, doing farming as well as bagging, acquiring groceries, bagging groceries, delivering groceries, calling patients to confirm the delivery and so forth. They were doing a lot more than just farming. Under the auspices of the food bank, they're going to be doing just farming. And the food bank is going to take on those other responsibilities with delivering food, gathering food, bagging food, delivering food, and so forth. But it's going to take them some time to come up to speed, to do that with the patients who are already receiving food prescriptions. So they will be ultimately a partner of Alameda County Health in the recipe for health program taking on that food delivery portion, not just a contractor, but a true partner billing medicale themselves ultimately. But right now they're in this interim stage where they're a contractor to us. They need to ramp up to get to the 500, which is why we're also requesting your board's approval for a contract with FarmFresh to you, which is a food delivery company. They deliver fresh vegetables to people's homes as they're a normal course of business. And that will help us meet the demand for new patients while we work with the food bank to ramp up to deliver food to the existing patients. So together with the food bank and a farm fresh, there should not be a gap in service or. There is going to have to be a hold in service. But the nature of the food prescriptions, we're working with with Alameda Alliance for Health, which is covering the food for some of the patients, but not all of the patients. And for those that are not covered by MediCal, there will be a break. But the nature of this prescription is not an acute need. So it's something that is not going to harm a person if it holds for a couple of weeks while the food bank gets on board. Okay. Thank you. I had a question too. Thank you for that background information. Will we get a future update with respect to the actual farms? And then I know there was also a potential farm in district two that was going to come online at the Masonic home. So will we get a status of those assets? I'm going to defer to the county administrators. That's not really under the Alameda County Health jurisdiction. My understanding is those are discussions that occurred between the Food Bank and Deputy Sheriff's Athletically, and we can certainly get an update. Okay, thank you. Next item for questions is item 43. This is about home visiting services for pregnant women. And I wanted to understand the language and the cultural requirements for some of the home visitors. I'll have to get that information to you. I don't have the language and cultural requirements for home visitors at my fingertips. Okay. Thank you. Next item for questions is 58. It was oh yes that's right so I think we have to present my lia as recuse himself. Yeah. Yes that was pulled out. 58 was pulled out. If the eight was pulled out. Then item 73. That's my name. I apologize. I had asked for this item to be continued from last week. I want to thank ITD and their entire team. I know you've been working around the clock to deal with the global disruption. So just wanted to thank your team. And I had pulled this item because I wanted more questions with respect to what is our policy as to when we report information on our community members with respect to ICE. Just wanted to have clarity around when we do and do not report that information to ICE. And that's the same question for item 75 as well. So the contract with the CHP is for access to the Crimson data. The immigration data is not accessible by the CHP. And it's my understanding that there's only a few organizations within the county, the sheriff, the DA and the public defender who actually have access to the immigration information that we house within the Crimson system. Great. Thank you for that clarification. Okay. The next item for comment is a 79 to Vizemar Kaz. Yes. I just wanted to flag. I'm excited to see the city of Newark invest in their community and pay for additional hours for library services on Sundays. It's a remarkable asset for the community. They absolutely love their library. There's a lot of community pride and just wanted to thank you, Devin, your entire team. I see you tabling at all the events I table at. And it's really amazing to see your staff connect and engage with the community. So I just wanted to appreciate that great work. Thank you so much for acknowledging that. It's a great crew. They're committed to the community. And the prometoras have been a huge partner in everything we do too. So who does to them and helping us be connected? Deb, could you let us know Sundays? Yes. Of all of our libraries, roughly what percent are open Sundays? Everything's open except for Union City. I think in Dublin they close a different day of the week so they can stay open on Sunday. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Thank you. Next item for questions is 84. Before you ask for question on item 84, I do have a correction to read into the record on that in terms of the recommended amount of the adjustment. Should be 69 033415. I want to read that into the record. That's in lieu of the 68 05 305 O number that is printed on the agenda in the initial letter. Very good. I assume that's an amendment to the motion made and seconded. So that's acceptable. And Sue Resetan. I'm fine with this, the maker with motion. Okay. With that said, questions on that to resume our case. Thank you so much So my question was whether or not all the ARPA dollars obligate have been obligated at this point They have largely been obligated I think there are a few other you know loose ends, but as your board is aware on those remaining Items we fully expect that they'll be fully spent or obligated by December 31're going to be able to update the remaining items. We fully expect that they'll be fully spent or obligated by December 31st. So, this item is to do the adjustments to reflect the expenses today. Can we get an update in September where we're at just to ensure that we spend money. We're monitoring it. We can provide another update and other update to the board and I think, you know, as you look at your agenda, there are items that are coming forward from some of the departments that are making adjustments in order to ensure that we fully expend those funds. Thank you. Last item for comment. That's a super resume because I think 100? Yes. This is the contract with consultant Wendy Ware. Just wanted to thank the sheriff or her partnership and leadership with these efforts. This was a recommendation number 22 from re-imagine adult justice. So one of the many, many recommendations is getting approved. I just wanted to highlight that great work in partnership. Thank you. Thank you for the recognition. I think that there's a lot of value in what Wendy's going to be able to put forth as far as some data points that we can look at so we can close some gaps. So thank you for that. Very good. No other seeing no other questions. I believe, President Miley, we can proceed with the vote. Okay. So the mass motions before us, if there are no other questions or comments, call the roll. So the mass motions before us if there are no other questions your comments call the roll Supervisor Halbert aye supervisor Marquez aye supervisor Tam aye supervisor Carson yes resident Miley yes Okay, so we have a couple of items. I need to recuse myself on And I'll just list them item 19 22 I'll just list them. Item 19, 22, 33, 39, and 58. Let me confirm 39. Yes. 58. 58. 58. Yes, so 58 and 58 yes. The parties and these items Jamie with backs has made contributions to my campaign committee over the last year, over the $250 limit and or threshold under the divine act. And then also Donald Frazier has as well. And then Derek Barnes has also made contributions over the 250 threshold. So I just wanted to point out those three individuals with those with items 19 22 33 39 and 58 I'll be recusing myself on. Very good noting that President Miley is recusing himself and leaving the room. I'll make a motion that we approve. And if anybody has questions or comments, we're going to say for item 19. I had a question on 19. 22. 33. 39. And 58 with questions. Yes. the motion. Thirty three. Thirty nine. And fifty eight with questions. Yes. Is there a second to that motion? I'll second the motion. Okay, with that said item nineteen. So this is the housing assistance. And I wanted to understand whether there's provisions in the standard contract language to require the housing providers to maintain your units because we have been getting constituent complaints. So wanted to understand if there's like a checklist of inspection that's done every year and I know that when you are responding to the question on the home key contracts, you basically said it was like an ask needed basis. So I'm going to ask if Jonathan Russell, our director of housing and homelessness services, I know he's on the line. If he could raise his hand, I'm sure he would be able to answer that if he's viewable. Thank you. Thank you. I see director Russell on the line now. Hello. Can you hear me? Okay. We can hear you. Great. Yes. I can confirm that specific to these contracts. All of the services provided through these contracts include what are called housing quality standard inspections, HQS for short, that is the HUD standard requirement also used in section 8 process. These are all tenant based vouchers, so these are services that are provided and leasing people on units on the private market. And so there are annual, there are pre-lease up inspections, pre-moved in, and then of course on an annual and then also as needed basis. So there is regular inspections of the units where the property, under standard, or managers are held to pretty rigorous standard in terms of the quality and the maintenance of the unit. And throughout this contract also there's ongoing liaison services between both the tenant and the owner. So throughout the year, each month, and or more than that, there's regular engagement with tenants. And so there's for maintenance issues or issues that might come up throughout the year. So there's multiple levels of management of the unit and the maintenance and all the related items for all these contracts and item 19. Thank you. That's very good to hear. Thank you. The next item for questions is item 58. Thank you, Vice Chair. There is a comment earlier in public comment, and I understand that this request is reallocating ARPA funds. It is time sensitive, we want to obviously invest every dollar back into our community, but with respect to the Healthy Homes project, do we have ongoing funding for that program? Is that something that I know in the city of Hayward, there's usually funding through CDBG grants. So, I'm just wondering how can we address unsafe housing conditions in the unincorporated part of our county, despite not as high participation as we wanted to see in this program? A Sandy Rivera Community Development Agency Director. So your board allocated some ARPA funds from the first tranche to the rental housing repair program. That was seen as one of the programs that the landlords would have liked to have seen as effects from the eviction moratorium and to move funds there. So that was about 1.6 million. And so after further discussions with the property owners or housing providers, they saw another program that they would like to move that to. And so while we're looking, we reviewed our minor home rental program and that participation rates were low. And so there was additional funding that's available and that's why we're moving it to this, we're recommending it, moving it to this program. But there is funding steel available to the minor home rental program. So if your concerns are there, it's just participation's been a little lower. Okay, and how are we getting that information out to the public? How are they aware that they can access? They've been tabling at sites. We've been going to property housing provider organizations and their spreading award as well. We think initially when that program started, we had smaller amounts that were smaller grant amounts. And so we've raised that to 30 and 50,000 depending upon what the issues are and so we were gaining some participation but not at the rate that we need to particularly have to use these funds pretty quickly. Okay thank you and then my comments on this I'm just gonna speak because I obviously tenets and unincorporated part of the county is really important and because we I'm not sure if you can see the comments. I'm not sure if you can see the comments. I'm not sure if you can see the comments. I'm not sure if you can see the comments. I'm not sure if you can see the comments. I'm not sure if you can see the comments. I'm not sure if you can see the comments. I'm not sure if you can see the I think that he did he lowers hand. Let's see had something else to add. Mr. Brooks, sorry. Hello there. Larry Brooks. Healthy home. So if you can hear me. I think my director covered everything in terms of the efforts we made attending a lot of events that were held by the East Bay Rental Housing Association, the Rental Housing Association, Southern Alameda County had a great impact in terms of the mailing that we did through the help of the assessor office, we were able to send out letters to over 20,000 property owners. And also we did some work with the housing authority to get the word out. But the bottom line was many of the landlords were reluctant to apply for that program. However, because of the efforts we made to reach them, we picked up quite a few landlords for our HUD-led hazard control grant program. The reason being is that those grants are just for addressing lead paint that doesn't involve us going in addressing any other things within the rental units. And that was the concern they expressed to us was that we would go in with the rental minor home repair grant funds. And that we would find a lot of things wrong within the units and not be able to give them enough money to address all of those things. And so they prefer us not entering at all, which to me is a good reason why you probably need to proactive rental inspection program because the rental housing providers are very reluctant to allow people to go into the units voluntarily. Thank you, Mr. Brooks. Appreciate that background. So the comment I wanted to make is this is aligned with tenants and have ability issues and unincorporated part of the county and I just appreciate staff pivoting and just want to acknowledge all of the hard work around these discussions with respect to tenant protections. I am very frustrated that this is four years in the making. And today we actually had an opportunity in the informational item. It wasn't even action. It was just to give feedback and now we're delaying that yet again. So I'm just asking my colleagues to please be mindful, respectful of the public of staff and we need to start making decisions. You know, adjustments could be made in the future, but making no decision is just a really poor governance and just wanted to say that's not a reflection of our staff. So thank you all for your hard work. I'll also say indeed, substandard living conditions are a big topic. My office has heard many people concerned about the conditions that they live in. Indeed, I'm committed to finding ways if this is one of them to alleviate people living in substandard living conditions. We have to do that. Education, allowing people the opportunity people living in substandard living conditions. We have to do that. Education, allowing people the opportunity to self-report, our code enforcement officers noting and I'm willing to look at all kinds of things, finds other penalties, rental housing providers need to know that they have to obey a law as it relates to providing standard living conditions and avoid unstandard, with a substandard living system. That is something that we will discuss in the future. I'm sure. So thank you. With that, the motions made and seconded, any other questions or comments? Seeing none, roll call. Supervisor Markettes? I. Supervisor Tam. I. President Miley recused himself from discussing and voting on the items and left the room. Supervisor Carson. Yes. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. With that we can welcome back, President Miley, as we take up ordinances. Your next item is item 52.1. Just a recommendation from the Revisor Halbert. Okay item 52.1, thank you. This is an item that of policy concern whether we should allow for employees to receive additional protections. And I know that we had discussion in public comment. And I note that there is question about the desire question about the desire to extend employee protections to additional individuals as was noted in public comment. I've received emails of concern questioning the timeliness of this given that an election is upon us and that there may not be enough time to have this item heard in a first reading and a second reading and comply with our labor rules and regulations in time to be placed on the August rather than November ballot. And so the first question I would ask of staff is a first reading, if it were to succeed today, I believe would require us to meet and confer with additional labor agencies. And if that were the case, would it be possible to complete that task in time for a second reading, which would allow for it to be placed on the November ballot? And supervisors, Marguerite Ismore, interim director of HRS, I do not believe there would be sufficient time to give the employee organizations the ability to meet and confer in good faith on this matter We have we provide the unions with a 10-day response timeline whenever we issue the notice to meet and confer and Based on the current trajectory and the deadline says, we would not be able to meet that deadline. Thank you. If we were instead to request additional discussion or dialogue around this item, would it be the preference that we could we schedule a work study session to discuss this could we ask a committee to take this up for further discussion so that we would have time to flesh out this item. I would defer to county council or CAO on that issue. My focus specifically on the obligation to meet and confer on anything that impacts employee organizations. I understand that. Given that we don't have time to have this done clearly, you've answered we won't have time to get this done to have this on a November election. My preference would be that we would simply discuss whether or not we would want to continue with this topic. I would support it and I would support it in the fashion of moving it forward in dialogue whichever way our staff feels most beneficial to proceed with the dialogue and so let county staff figure that out or we could provide direction. If we don't want to talk about it, we can just not talk about it that's up to us and I would favor doing that. I could make a motion to that effect if needed. But let's share dialogue first. Yeah. Any other supervisors have any comments? Because I think I see the district attorney's hands up. Can I recognize her? Any council? So if she was she already commented earlier day under the two minutes of public comment. If it's part of your board's deliberation of this item, She was already commented an earlier day under the two minutes of public comment. If it's part of your board's deliberation of this item, you had specific questions for her. You could ask her those questions as part of your deliberation on the item, but she is not eligible to get another opportunity to have just offer comment on it. Okay. to have just offer comment on it. Okay, so if somebody has questions for, they can ask questions, okay. Any other ship advisors have any comments or questions? Yes. Thank you. Can you clarify for me how many bargaining groups you would have to meet in Conferworth who would be impacted by this decision and I think you said there is a Timeline in which you had to give notice there's specific days. I just wanted to be clear on those Touch points. So we have The Alameda County welfare fraud investigators the Alameda County, welfare fraud investigators, the Alameda County District Attorney Association, the Alameda County Management Employee Association, Service Employees International Union, and we have a new union that has just organized. So right now there would be five separate unions impacted by the proposed change. And we historically have given our employee organizations 10 days to respond to an offer to meet and confer. Sometimes it happens quickly, sometimes it happens at the very end on the 10th day. Are there rules like you could send them an email that qualifies for request to meet. There's no specifics around there like certified mail or anything like that. No, it's 10 days. The notices emailed and we received some either 99% of the time an email response. Okay. And do we have a sense if our bargaining groups are in support of this or not? I don't know if there's since this was obviously the agenda was published last Thursday. Are we aware of possible support to let's say have a meeting next Wednesday? I would think at least the one of the employee organizations would want to meet and confer and but that doesn't ignore the county's responsibility to take a look at the impact. What are the issues and for us to identify those that we want to meet and confer on not just the unions? And if we were to proceed, this is the first reading. If we were to proceed, obviously there needs to be a second reading, but the meeting confer has to happen in between. At what point do you have to have your board letter written in order for us to hear this on our last meeting before we go on summer recess? I don't believe the letter would come from us. We have the meeting confer, doesn't have a deadline. I don't know which is the internal deadline for a matter to be placed on your agenda. I would have to defer to the clerk of the board. Or can the county administrator answer that? When would we need to have the items for the August 6 agenda finalized. If you're, I mean, it's generally two weeks. You have an item before you if you were to, if the board was to approve, you know, the first reading it would be continued for a second reading. That same letter would be continued for second reading, but obviously we would need to ensure that whatever requirements are before us are met before that. But the board took further action. But it doesn't mean the board letter doesn't change, right? It does not necessarily require another letter, but we would obviously want to ensure before we agendized it for the second reading or suggested that your board was to take action that we had complied with all the requirements. Yes, please. Yes, please. As a process matter, the way it works is there is a board letter before you should you take action on that board letter today to move, to complete the first reading and move to a second reading. Before you can have the second reading, we are required to, as Director Zamora has indicated, we're required to meet and confer, offer to meet and confer with the unions. If during that meet and confer process, there is some outcome that would modify the proposal that is before you today, then the matter would need to come back for a first reading again, because if there's new language that's not the language before you, that language needs to be read. And so even if we met and conferred and it happened miraculously fast, if there are any changes to that language, a new first reading would have to occur. And so the director is saying it's highly unlikely that it could happen by March 6th and the issue with, I'm sorry, August 6th. And the issue with respect to this item is the item before you is to put a measure on the ballot. And so there is a deadline that the ROV has with respect to when you can add things to the ballot. And it's my understanding that deadline is approaching. And so it's the you know as you know, your board is on hiatus after August 6th. So the next board meeting wouldn't be until late September because this has to occur at a regular meeting, not a special meeting because it's an ordinance. So it would not, if there were any changes, it would not happen and be able to come back to your board for final action in before, in time to be placed on the ballot for the November election. Okay. Can I ask the ROV what the filing deadline is to put a measure on the ballot? It's August 9th. I believe it. It is the 9th, 5 p.m. August 9th is the 88 days 5 p.m. Got it. Thank you. May I just follow up on to vice-marcus this question. During this period of meeting confer and I know you don't have a deadline but obviously placing a measure on the ballot does have statutory deadlines. What is the role of the department head typically in the meeting confer process? Typically if a matter impacts the department head typically in the meeting confer process. Typically if a matter impacts the department head or specific agency, labor relations HRS would reach out to the department and obtain input into the matter that we're negotiating or meeting confer on. So we would take that information and if it's a matter that Where your board has provided us Direction we would go back to the board in close session and provide your board with an update in close session To your knowledge has There have been discussions between the bargaining units and the elected department head. So indeed, so that was the question that I was going to ask of the district attorney and she's still on because we can ask that and so I can just say that I did confer with the district attorney before putting this letter together. And we spoke on the phone and they're in the process of perhaps discussing. But the question I have for the district attorney is if this gets to the point where our HR team is seeking discussion and input from the department head, would you participate in that? My hope would be yes. There would be some dialogue. Indeed, I think that's super important. I think it's important to include not only electric, elected, rather appointed, but certainly elected departments need to be at the table. If the district attorney is still on, she could perhaps weigh in and answer that. I'm not sure if she's on. Welcome. Yes, thank you. Good afternoon. Yes, I appreciate supervisor Halbert that you did notify me and I thought that I had notified the appropriate people to reach out to the union that I wasn't was understanding was proposing this. We were not able to convene any type of conversation with them. And I strongly believe that the district attorney should be allowed to have participate in the discussion and that it's highly unusual and inappropriate for a charter amendment to come before the public or before this body without anyone considering or understanding the impact quite frankly that it will have on our ability to administer justice. And I articulated that earlier. Of course, we would participate. And I can affirm that we have spent directed folks outside this office to reach out to those who are outside this office. We previously We have been working with the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff and the staff but from them. So I've not had any notification other than our phone call, brief call or information about what the basis of this is for and it is in fact beyond a, it's not just a question of rights, it's a question of the impact on our ability to operate the different units. We have a number of units that would be adversely impacted. Classes of employees that are funded by grant funds that we would probably lose some of that funding. So we're very concerned about it and we're beginning because we just learned that it was on the agenda this morning. We are beginning to assess the impacts and we'll be happy to share that with you with HR as well as any interested labor organizations. Thank you for that. I really do appreciate that and indeed your input is invaluable if that dialogue continues. Thank you. continues. Thank you. So I just want to follow up on so for eyes of Marques's kind of line of questioning. So if we were to proceed with this, this would be the first reading. Then it needs to go to meet and confer. All bargaining units would be sent a request to meet and confer. That would be scheduled. They'd be meeting confer. There's no guarantee it would happen prior to August 9. And then even if there isn't meet and confer prior to August 9, there's a possibility that the content of this charter amendment could be altered, and that would have to come back for yet a new first reading. And then that would probably be after August 9th, because if we did a first reading on yet a new thing before August 9th, we still need to do a second reading, and a second reading would occur in September, which is beyond the deadline. So is that kind of accurate what I laid out here? Yes, that is accurate that they impacted unions, which are the unions in the DA's office, would all need to be noticed. And we already know that at least one of those unions is rejecting and not agreeing to support the proposed changes in this item. Okay, so we could pass this today recognizing that it's probably not going to get back to us prior to August 9th. That would give the bargaining units and the district attorney and everybody HR a chance to meet and then we would be revisiting this sometime in September. that's one scenario. Another scenario is that we could reject this outright. Another scenario is we give direction that we want to have HR, county council, bargaining units to begin to have conversations around this with the district attorney and bring back kind of the thinking on this was something to this effect later in the year. I think those are kind of our three alternatives. I would surprise. Those are among the options that you have. Yeah. All right. So if I was working. So if you're not paying attention, I care about deadlines, I care about calendar, I care about agendas. So I'm going to support the motion for the sake of we have to meet and confer. And given how long it takes to get things done, here at the county and people's schedules, it's probably going to take over a year to get some kind of concerns and saw this. So I say we just start the process. I don't think it's realistic that it's going to be on the November ballot. I think we just have to own that and accept that. But I will support the action for the sake of, let's start the conversation. Because if we don't start it, it's never going to happen. Can I get clarity? Are you, because I don't think there's a motion before in front of us, is the motion to move forward with this charter amendment or the motion to give direction. No, I'm going to support the motion for the charter amendment because this will trigger the meet and confer process. Without starting that process, this goes nowhere. But making it clear that I don't think it's realistic that we're going to have all these meeting confer meetings with our labor groups with the district attorney by the publishing of our next agenda. That's just not reasonable. That's a nice mark and Tam, excuse me. I appreciate it and I respect the process, but fundamentally we are voting on the first reading of an ordinance that is problematic, that we know is problematic for the bargaining units. So I would rather see a first reading on something that there is more collaboration on rather the process of the process and the process of the process and the process of the process and the process of the process and the process of the process and the process of the process and the process of the process and the process of the process and the process of the process and the process of the process and the process of the process and the process of the process and the process of the process and the process of the process that we'll never get to. I support supervisor Marquez it starts the ball rolling I'll be it on an imperfect ordinance that'll all get flushed out and changed but I'm happy if that doesn't meet with the majority that we would fall back to supervisor Tam's position, which is just start the conversation. A fresh, happy, happy, happy, support both. But I'm gonna second the motion to make it. I'm just wondering what people say. If we're gonna do the ordinance, I'll have to have the clerk read it. And then, but supervisor Carson is raised his hand. Yeah, I repeatedly keep hearing the word imperfect. And I think, you know, the public needs to know what do we mean by imperfect? Because it seems like it's an inside discussion at the moment. And so I'm going to ask that first, the HR directors come up, because I have some questions for her. Given your knowledge of what we're talking about, which seems to be kind of ambiguous to anybody outside of the tent, what are the challenges that, honestly, other than just meet and confer and having schedules set up? Do you see through HR based on what it being suggested today? Challenges not to say you can't meet them, but I think they need to be a part of the record. When we're dealing with ambiguous language, that causes problems and not only how we're going to meet and confer the information that's communicated to the union, having a mutual understanding of what language of the intent of the language. That's one big part of it. Certainly working with the Office of the DA, getting the issues relative to a proposal that we may be putting at the table with the unions. Another big issue is in any meeting confer or any negotiations, there's two parties. There's two interests. And so we as the your board's representatives, the county's representative, there are certain issues that we want to make sure that we address in the meeting confer. So it's not just that specific language, but it's the impact of that language. And because the language as written in the board that are so ambiguous, it does cause some problems in the meet and confer process. The union may think it's one thing, we may think it's another, so there has to be a meeting of the minds of what that means. So given the fact that this is being proposed, are there other bargaining units that might, at some point in time, be impacted by this? And do you have any responsibility in terms of you doing your due diligence to kind of look out and see if that is a case? I mean, is there a ripple of potential ripple effect here? There is because there are certain classifications that are right now in the office of the DA that are based on the existing language. The title is assistance. So in their run represented, they may organize at certain points. So we need to then marry, again, the ambiguousness of the language with the unrepresented employees in the future who may organize themselves. And in this case, do you run, is a little unusual, but do you run kind of fiscal analysis to get a sense of what the fiscal impact may or may not be in this case? There will be impact staffing because you have the entire office of the DA that has been primarily unclassified, that will be falling into the classified service. And so they will be there's work associated with classification compensation, progressive discipline, all of those matters that are typically part of the classified service that county council staff will need to devote dedicated staff to the DA's office to manage the operational issues. There's going to be a lot of meat confer associated with the operational issues at the DA's office, so their HR labor relations are gonna have to step in and provide guidance and help the department manage those issues. So significant and there will be impact of staff. So I know that the perception, which may be true, about government in general, not just county government, is that everything moves at a snail's pace is very slow. But you mentioned a number of things that under reasonable circumstances, a reasonable HR department would go through in order to do that. And I know this is not the only thing that your staff and you are doing and people are trying to consolidate it into like the next 24 hours have the answers, right? How challenging, honestly, I mean, if you were to put aside some time sensitive things to try to focus on this, how reasonable is the amount of time for you to at least come up with your due diligence, regardless as to what the outcome is on the policy side with the policy makers? It's going to be very challenging given the timeline because staff are conducting concurrent negotiations right now with some bargaining units at the same time. We're doing ongoing and concurrent meeting confers with all of the employee organizations on matters that impact countywide. So it would have to be either staff putting aside and we cannot put aside meet and confer negotiations because then we're getting hit with an unfair labor practice of our refusal to either engage in meet confer or negotiations and it I would be coming back to your board for additional staff to handle this additional workload because it's not just the meet and confer on this matter it's the ongoing ripple effect that will be with the DA's office now being all classified. When did you get the board letter for today's agenda? Last week, late last week, I received the initial draft of the letter. Meaning like Thursday Friday, Wednesday Friday. I believe it was right before it was posted. So Thursday, I believe I received a preliminary draft. So they hadn't been any conference conferring with you regarding any of this. You just got what you got. There was potential different language that hadn't settled. And so my preference was not to vote staff to do any kind of analysis of potential language. It wasn't until we received the final draft that was going to be placed on your agenda that we were looking at it. We still haven't again because our focus has been on negotiations. We haven't done a deep dive analysis of what that means. Under most circumstances, if you were asked to kind of make your recommendation to us in terms of your professional opinion, would it be that we start this process, have this discussion, and if we have to make adjustments, then we've got to come back and do it again, which then might have a challenge on trying to meet what I keep hearing as the objective, which is to meet a timeframe. What might your thought be about, you know, your initial thoughts and recommendation in terms of this, even though we're policy makers, you don't have to take your recommendation, but just understanding that you're professional. I'm not the rest of my colleagues maybe, but I'm not. So if I were to seek your thoughts about that. This item to me is so important. Our charter guides, it's not a guide. It is the rule that we follow. And so language is very important. And it's such an important matter that similar to the actions we took when we proposed the change from the 25-day recruitment period and we changed the charter to allow a shorter recruitment period of 14 days, we took a very measured approach and getting input from interested parties. We gave you regular updates, we gave you board regular updates on that. We talked to our leadership to find out, get their input as well. We ultimately, then we received authority to meet and confer on that issue. And once we reached agreement with all the impacted and employee organizations, then we drafted the language, the argument, and we proceeded on this issue again because it's so important, I, my recommendation would be to take a measured approach. Reach out to the office of the DA, get her input on this. It doesn't mean that we may or may not change it, but I think that's an important part of this entire process. Work towards what is the ultimate goal that we want, and I'm hearing supervisor Howard of extending certain rights to employees, represented employees, that may or may not be the whole story. I think we just need that whole story and I feel fractured right now. Thank you very much. I wanna switch over to County Council for some questions. Obviously you're I'm assuming, and it should be obvious, but I'm assuming your office reviewed this material. Yes, we reviewed the material on the agenda. And what are some of the things that you think are very important that we have to consider in the document that you receive. Because you didn't draft, your department didn't draft the document. Correct. And I just wanted that to go on record. Absolutely not. So what to me is very important is, as directors and Moira said, we're talking about a charter amendment. It takes amazing expense to amend the charter because it requires a vote of the people. As our history dictates, Alameda County has not amended its charter often. Whether you know we should do more or less that's a discussion for a different day but every time we put a charter amendment on it's a countywide election and that comes at a cost. So my belief, certainly my recommendation to your board is that when you draft a charter amendment it should be measured. You should study and evaluate the unintended consequences of what you draft. And so drafting language in a vacuum when you don't have sufficient understanding regarding the operations of the department to determine one, whether the language you've drafted, in fact, accomplishes your goals. When you are not clear, at the time you you set out to draft charter language, what your goals even are. When it is unclear, who, when the language that you write is unclear regarding who it reaches. But generally, when we started off with the charter amendment for measure A that HR prepared and the charter amendment to section 62 of the charter that my office prepared, it took us months of work and evaluation of drafting language, vetting it to ensure that we had anticipated the unintended consequences of what we were drafting, not just the charter amendment, but the ballot question that we did we dot our eyes, did we cross our teeth, did we say what we mean, where there are alternative interpretations of that language that could be made, and writing good law, because that's what a charter amendment is, it's law, writing good law, because that's what a charter of eminence is, it's law. Writing good law takes time. And it also takes knowledge of the department that will be impacted. I heard the DA say earlier that moving that the language was just proposed could take grant funded positions and impact them. So one of the questions would be, if you do this, are you making employees whose employment is subject to a grant and thus not stable? Because if the grant goes away, are they now tenured employees? And you'd be forced to lay those employees off and go through the county's layoff process, which can lead to unintended consequences depending on lay those employees off and go through the county's layoff process, which can lead to unintended consequences depending on how those employees are currently classified in the office. Because based on the language and the charter, if this were put on the ballot and it passed, those employees who've been there for a year automatically go into the classified civil service. We don't have a choice which employees go and which employees don't go. And so I'm not aware that study of these types of impacts have been done. And generally those are the kinds of things that the county would want to be aware of as part of its consideration whether or not to put something on the ballot. What are the impacts of that action? And we don't know, I don't know the landscape in the DA's office with respect to who is an assistant in the DA's office, who falls under this existing language. So there are hosts and as Director Zamora said, we have concerns because this would conflict with language that we now have in the DA's MOUs. And so that's unresolved, not the DA's MOUs, but in the MOUs with unions in the DA's office. That's unresolved. So that would be part of the meeting, for processes you'd wanna resolve these things because the county has an interest in having clarity so that it can perform its labor relations, roles, and functions appropriately. And from my point of view as a lawyer, I'm always interested in seeing that we take actions that help us reduce risk and put us in good stead to interpret the laws that govern us. So when did you receive the board letter? The one that we're considering right at the moment. So the version of the board letter that is on the agenda today, I received on, I think, yeah, Thursday. Yeah. Do you feel as though you had a reasonable time to do your due diligence on this? That's an interesting question. And I know, you know, I know there could be this kind of view that especially in the legal world you kind of take everything through a sieve and really just squeeze it all out but I'm saying reasonable as opposed to. So how do I want to answer this question. So let me ask you this I guess based on receiving it on Thursday, you mentioned unintended consequences a number of times. What more specifically, I mean, without getting into the minutiae of it, might be some of the unintended consequences beyond what you just briefly kind of outlined. Yeah, I think that- But to the extent that it could be more specific because I'm a lay person and I don't. The most obvious one is that it won't accomplish the thing that it's intended to accomplish because there has been no study of the landscape of classifications and informal job descriptions that are used in the district attorney's office with the language that is before us, we don't know that it caps that if the goal, and I don't know truly at this point what the goal of your board is. So even as we went into labor relations, it went into a meeting confer. We don't know what your board wants to achieve. We don't know what your board wants the outcome in. If you vote to pass this, the assumption is you want this. But again, as Ms. Amora has said, this is vague and ambiguous and unclear. So we don't have a clear directive about where we're going with this and what they desire to outcome from the county side of this and putting this on the ballot is. But and so from that we also don't know as I alluded to began to allude to who it captures. So you know in terms of when you don't know what the goal is, it's difficult to write better language. And it's difficult to achieve clarity about who should be captured and who shouldn't. As I mentioned earlier, we know that at least one bargaining unit in the DA's office has rejected this language and doesn't want this, but we don't know what the other things are they want. So it's the overall, the difficulty in some of the information that's part of this action does not make it easy for us to assist anyone with achieving their goals. And that is that sort of the unintended consequences when you don't understand what the goals you are trying to achieve are. And what the landscape is to interpret whether or not this language achieves those goals, the potential for unintended consequences could be great because we haven't done the study to know. because we haven't done the study to know. So, you know, after reading it over the weekend, basically Monday, I had one perspective. And since I haven't been infinitely involved in this, I don't know who or what coached or why people called today, but people who called earlier in public comment, and I don't know who they are. I mean, they seem to not be in support of this. But again, I don't know who they are. I don't know if they were planted. I don't know who they are. I don't know if they were planted. I don't know. Any of that stuff, right, as a policymaker, but they said that they weren't supportive of it prior to that. And kind of my understanding is that everybody was supportive of it. So I don't know if it's, you know, I don't want to waive the scale to say how you vote based on what the way of the scale is or how much money you get paid, but it's kind of like, you know, not knowing that. So the author of the board letter, what is the goal? I think right now it's incumbent upon each of us to say which way we want to go. Supervisor Marley outlined two or three options. And would you repeat what they are briefly? Because I think it's a matter of whichever one of those has the most support. Well, three options as I see it. One would be to advance this charter change, recognizing that it's not going to make it to the ballot, but it provides a framework from which to move forward for the collaboration that I think everyone is looking for with the DA's office, the bargaining units, HR, accounting council, et cetera. That this would provide the framework for that option two would be not to pass this ordinance and to give direction in terms of what we'd like to see happen. Option three is to reject this outright. So I would be happy with either of the first two and I think if there's more support for one or the other if we have a majority of one or the other whichever has the support of either of those I would be I would be supportive of them. So we could go down the line and decide those are the three options unless there are permutations of them or variations of them. We should discuss what we have support for it. In fact, with all due respect, I really didn't answer my question because you authored it and I was wondering what was the goal behind you authoring? Yeah, so I think as a intent, because it devoted up, voted down kind of a policy issue, the vote to not to anything kind of a policy issue. I mean, because the county council kept saying, I can't seem to figure this out, because I don't know what the goal is. And so the substance part of it, I'm having at the moment hearing from HR issues into the service, and that's their responsibility. Hearing from county council, their concerns, and their supposed to be protecting us as a county and as individuals, especially the board members. Not ensuring, not having clarity about what it is that they're reacting on. And you are the author. I thought you can kind of invite me in terms of the specifics, reasons for it and the goal. Otherwise, he goes right back to the kind of second or the first or third recommendation that the president had is, you know, to have it, I don't want to say further study because he goes back into the issue that Supervisor Marquez mentioned that we do all this study and we have all these discussions, we do all this study and we have all this discussions, we do all this study and we have all this discussion, we do all this study and we have all these discussions and we keep discussing it and you know, we keep kicking the can down the road. So I'm still waiting to understand since you authored it what's the goal and the intention. as I mentioned when I introduced the item today, we have a situation where our county charter requires that we treat employees who are essentially performing similar functions, but in different departments, and we're treating them differently. And so I would like to see if there's an opportunity for us to treat them the same, that we would have congruency for departments, for employees that perform essentially the same functions. And that would be the goal. There are clearly complications rather, it's complicated as things often are when you get into the details of how to implement that. And so the goal is to have employees protected in the same manner as they are in other departments performing similar functions. Public speakers, so we bring it to the the the dius here. We allow the public to weigh in and make comment. We ourselves provide dialogue and comment and that's democracy, that's the brown act, that's how we function. As Supervisor Marquez mentioned, we can move forward from here. This kits the ball rolling and we've talked about the ball of government sometimes moves very slowly. But to answer more directly, labor unity, labor parity, fair treatment across our departments is a dialogue that I think we should have and I support the first two options, either the first two options that's surprisingly, President Miley outlined. two options, either the first two options that Supervisor Miley outlined. And what I would say is that right now we've got county employees who are in the district attorney's office who are unclassified, they basically at will. So the issue is whether or not certain classifications will become, I mean, whether certain employees will become classified and no longer be at will. I know in the county a lot of our employees are in bargaining units. So the question is, are there employees in the DA's office want to be classified as opposed to unclassified? And that's why I think either this provides a framework to have those conversations or we have to give direction to have those conversations or we have to say we don't support those employees having the opportunity and bargaining units to have the opportunity with the DA and our folks at NHR to discuss whether or not they want to become classified as opposed to unclassified. recognize that when I say this, what's before us is imperfect, but it does at least provide a framework for us to move forward. And I don't think we're going to get anything back prior to August 9th to put on the ballot, but this starts that journey. That's kind of what I see. So, if I was a Tam. Thank you, President Miley. I share the goal about protecting workers' rights and how to balance that with management rights. But I have to say this when it comes to putting something forward that modifies the charter on a first reading of an ordinance. And I appreciate that consensus is elusive even when we have collaboration. That's the reason we had this issue with both 1185 and tenant protections. It's not just a matter of like, let's put something on the books and hope for the best. Let's make sure that we have a good chance It's not just a matter of like, let's put something on the books and hope for the best. Let's make sure that we have a good chance of protecting the county's interests, but also achieving the intended goal. And in this situation, it sounds like frankly, we didn't really make an attempt to have an opportunity for the affected parties to even talk much less disagree, right? We're hearing snippets here and there about the disagreement. So I just don't feel comfortable, especially as a good government advocate of pushing something forward at this point just for the sake of trying to have a forum to have conversations. I think we have to have an intentionality when it comes to what we're trying to achieve with a charter amendment. And I was a signatory on measure B and that was my stance at that point and I want to be consistent. I supported the prosecutors' desire to look at just cause and I make no secret about that but I want to be consistent in how we push things forward in a way that protects all the bargaining units at the county. Yeah. And once again, I agree with, I agree with you as a supervisor, and the reason I support this direction is because I don't anticipate that this is what we had before us today. I don't anticipate this is going to be on the ballot for November 5th. I suspect as a result of what we do if we do pass this ordinance today, it's going to start the whole process of deliberation and collaboration and conversation that might take six months, it could take longer, who knows. But if I thought this was going to end up on the ballot, I wouldn't support because I know there are too many what's the word imperfections with what we have here because typically as you said I don't support putting something on the charter of charter change. It's the charter's the Constitution for the County and it takes a vote of the electorate to change the charter with an ordinance similar to what we might do with tenant protections or sure oversight. We can amend that with two readings of a board can do that but with a charter change that would require a ballot measure. So I think if we do move ahead with this today, it starts the conversation. And that's the reason why I would support this. And if I, if supervisor Mark Keds is still in line to want to see his movement direction, I'll have the clerk read the ordinance. I'll make the motion if the ordinance complies. Be read. You would you. She's moving the ordinance complies. Be read. You would you. She's moving the ordinance. You want to read the ordinance? The title and ordinance calling a special election to be consolidated with the statewide election to be held on November the 5th, 2024. For the purpose of submitting to the voters of the County of Alameda. The question of whether the charter of the County of Alameda should be amended to modify the unclassified service positions by removing other employees in the office of the district attorney. Second, move the way the balance before first meeting. You want to go through that? Okay. Move the way the balance before first reading. You want to go through that? Okay. Okay. All right. Okay. Make sure I don't mess this up. So I'm requesting to wave the balance of the first reading. Wave the balance of the first reading. Okay. So surprise, Mark, it's moves away the balance of the full reading of the first reading of this ordinance and we're adopting that as well as the resolution be correct just making sure everything is captured in this motion. Second so it's not necessary that you adopt the resolution on this reading. Okay, but yeah because you can't move forward. Without the meeting. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So just stick to the motion being waving the reading of the first ordinance, the full reading of the first ordinance. And just to echo my comments earlier. I am confident this is not going to be on the November ballot. We don't have enough time to get through the due diligence. This is not a perf, this language is imperfect. My goal for voting on this is to start the conversation and to bring all parties to the table because I'm afraid if we don't do this, we will not take action on this for years. And I'm making this motion, and frustration of how long it's taken, for many other items that were continued today. So, as I'm... As well as my supervisor, Mark, is there a second? I'll second. Second. And I just want the record to be clear. You are only moving 52.1A. Correct. Yes. And I, and in super eyes, Marquez also articulated the clear intent of the motion as well as clarifies any assumptions. Exactly. I want to say that again. It's not. as well as clarifies any assumptions. Exactly, I want to say that again. It's not going to be on the ballot. Yeah, because I'm voting for this because I don't expect that it's going to go on the ballot. On this ballot? Yes, I expect it to be. The future ballot possibly, but not this November election. The number of fifths that we will be having conversations about this with all the respective stakeholders. And Suvraza Albert has seconded so at the clerk to call the roll. Supervisor Howard. Hi. Supervisor Marquez. Hi. Supervisor Tam. Epstein. Supervisor Carson. Yeah, I'll make a comment before I make my vote. You know, I don't think this is the right way to kind of run government. And I think it sends bad signals to our employees who we entrust that are specialized to do their job and to recommend we don't always have to accept their recommendation, and to recommend, we don't always have to accept their recommendation, but to dismiss what they raise as grave issues, I think, you know, politically can do that. I think that there's a lot of risk in this, and there are going to be a lot of aftermaths. Having said that, I'm not going to be here, thank goodness for my 30-year thing today, I'm not going to be here. Thank goodness for my 30-year thing today. I'm not going to be here. So I'm going to support it. And we'll see what happens. President Miley. Oh, did you call Supervention Albert? All right. Yes, OK. Yes. Motion passed. Four was it forwarded and one abstention? Four and one abstention. Right. Okay. So the motion passes four eyes, one abstention. Okay. And so the next steps will be that I HR will begin sending out the notices to meet and confer. That's basically the next step, right? Okay, and then we'll see. But we don't anticipate we will be having this matter back before us anytime soon. Okay, our next, what's our next item on today's agenda? Your next item is item 56. The recommendation from the community development agency. item is item 56. The recommendation from the community development agency. Oh, okay, 56. So if we can have the staff from the community development agency, I think speaks to why we're wanting to waive prevailing wage. the committee. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. from the base allocations for the City of Pleasanton. They had a small amount of base allocations left from the measure A1 and they wanted to use it on this project. Your board had originally approved this project and now we are asking to move the small amount of funds that they have available to this project. It would be for an ADU project. And for the requirements that are typically used for measure A1, they're for larger multifamily projects. And since it's a small amount of funds, the Pleasanton would like to use the funds for these ADUs. And so an additional, using these additional prevailing wage requirements would cost a project approximately another hundred thousand dollars and so we're asking for this waiver. Any other board questions or comments? Supervisor Marquez. Do we know if the city of Pleasanton collects inclusionary, I'm sorry I'm exhausted. I'm not even thinking of the term I want to use. Inclusionary housing fee in lieu. I can't think of the term, but I think let me explain what I'm trying to get at. So usually cities have an ordinance to promote affordable housing. So they collect in lieu fees. Do they have that in the city of Pleasanton where they would have access to their funding funding source to help supplement this project? I am actually unfamiliar with whether or not they do collect that but I'm going to look over. It's a Jennifer Pierce and she says yes they do. Okay so couldn't do we know the status of that account whether or not There's sufficient funds in that Designated fund to apply to this project Hi supervisor Jennifer Pierce Pleasanton does have in lieu fees. I don't know the status of the account, but at last check I believe they had at least $150,000 but they've declined to utilize it on this project so far. Okay, thank you. Any other questions? So do we have a motion on this item? Okay, so I'll move the item. These are second. No second. Okay. So it it dies for lack of a second. So let's go the first one is an ordinance amendment. Your next item is item 69, which is the first reading of salary ordinance amendments. The first one is an ordinance amending certain provisions of the 2023, 2024 County of Alameda Salary Ordinance. The second is an ordinance amending the November of the 13th, 2022, through November the 22nd, 2025, Memorandum of understanding between the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers and technical engineers local 21 AFL-CIO Civil Engineer Management Unit in the County of Alameda. Is there motion? Move away the fall first reading of both ordinances and move for the introduction of the ordinances? Is there a second? Is there a second? I'll second. Okay, we'll move by Miley second by Marques. Any board questions or comments? Call the roll. Supervisor Halbert, excuse. Supervisor Marques. Hi. Supervisor Tam. Hi. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Miley. Yes. Next item. to provide a car, Senator. Yes. President Miling. Yes. Next item. Your last regular item is item 81.1. It's a recommendation from the registrar of voters related to a memorandum of understanding related to youth voting in the cities of Oakland and Berkeley and with the Berkeley Unified School District. So is the red chart voters going to provide a brief report on this? The memorandum of understanding in front of you today, or Tim DePouy, register our voters. The memorandum of understanding in front of you today is the last signature required for youth voting. The agreement for youth voting between Berkeley Un election if possible for Oakland unified school district and Berkeley unified school district. and so on, this item 81.1. I'd like to move forward with having it placed on a November ballot. Moved by Sir Rice Carson. Second. Second by Tam. Sir Vice, however. Yeah, I just want to confirm that this MOU calls for the jurisdictions that are asking for underage voting to occur to pay the costs associated. That's correct. They are going to pay for both the development of the software to technically implement youth voting and they will be paying for their portion of the election at a rate of a standalone election because we will be running youth voting as almost as a parallel separate election with full expenses. And as I understand it correct me if I'm wrong, we could be open to litigation on several fronts, one being whether this is constitutional or not. And in that case, we are indemnified by the jurisdictions. However, there are other things we might get sued on, such as implementing this, which is within the purview of the Red Shore voters to do. And if that were done in a way that would cause litigation, then we would not be indemnified by the agencies requesting us to do this. That would be on us, is that right? So I wanna back up and just clarify a few things. We're already being sued over youth voting. So we're in that litigation and we're in the process of defending that litigation. This, one of the terms that was negotiated as part of this MOU was for the city and the city of Berkeley, not the city of Berkeley, but for the jurisdictions to defend and indemnify us as a result of that. Those in defending and indemnify provisions are reciprocal. And so it exactly when we would have to bear the brunt of the cost of litigation versus when those jurisdictions would depend on the type of litigation that was brought. So if you know if we made a gross error in performing our duties, they're not going to defend and then identify us for our gross errors, for example. So they're, they're, they're, they're sharing of, I mean, it depends, it's a fact in case by case analysis based on the nature of the litigation that ensues. We get sued in connection with litigation all the time, but this is designed to address the, the, the, the new scope of work that the cities and the school districts wanted us to perform, that we had not performed historically. So this is the MOU. Between the cities that established that the cities are the jurisdictions are responsible for paying the cost of the technology because but for their charter amendments that authorized youth youth voting, we would not be incurring the cost of that technology. So this is the action before you today is just about that MOU. And it's a business agreement recognizing the respective duties and obligations of the parties around this new scope of work, which is youth voting. That's what this MOU is about.. That's what this info is about. So that's the action that we're currently. The action before you today is not, is not the direction to implement youth voting. Your board gave that direction at a previous time to implement youth voting. What happens in this info MOU is that the parties have acknowledged and put language in the MOU to do it for November. If it's feasible, if the technology allows it to happen in November, that it will happen. But this agreement is not restricted to November, it will live past November. So the litigation that we're currently in, as you mentioned, is that something we're indemnified or or not? We should be indemnified for that litigation because that is purely about the leakality of youth voting. With regard to this MOU and it calls for the condition that this would be technically feasible to implement. Are we technically feasible to implement? Mr. Redishar. Today we are not technically feasible to implement youth voting. We're continuing to work with our vendor. But as of today, we are not technically feasible based upon the requirements that we've been given by the jurisdictions. Is it proper course of steps or good government to approve an MOU when we're not technically feasible or will it say that if we indeed are not, does the MOU not take effect? Or is it conditional upon it being technically feasible? So as I indicated, this MOU survives November, whether or not youth voting occurs in November. If it is consistent with your board's goals and desires that the county continue to work towards implementing youth voting, then this agreement has been negotiated and is in place and supports the interests of all of the involved jurisdictions to continue to work toward making it happen. And it's been a long negotiated MOU. The parties, all of the parties have spent lots of time coming to this agreement. For the first time, the cities are taking the final steps, they need to take under their charters to actually implement youth voting. They have been in our taking steps and actions to allow, given if the technology will support it, to allow youth voting to be realized. And so this would be your, as the last signature on the agreement. This would be your statement of commitment to continuing to push for youth voting. Is there the expectation we're setting though that this will be achieved in time for this November election? The technical feasibility of the current requirements, we are not going to be able to make it to the November election with its current requirements. Okay. But as council mentioned, if we're not able to at this time, the MOU continues and it would just be a matter of time before when you are able. When will we know the answer to that sometime before August 9th, I guess, or when will we know? When will we know whether with the current requirements we'll be able to achieve youth voting for the election with the current- For this coming election, yeah. With the current requirements, we're running out of time. So it'll be very, very soon. Okay. Um, thank you for negotiating this agreement with so many different jurisdictions and different. I know that city of Berkeley and the school district in Berkeley are in one scenario where the school district is agreed to pay for the cost of the election. Oakland's in a little different position. So a lot of different groups that you're negotiating with. This is one MOU that covers everyone now. This is one MOU covers both Berkeley Unified and Oakland Unified. It does. Thank you. Yes. the vote is in Berkeley and Oakland. Respectively voted overwhelmingly to pass this measure allowing 16 and 17 year olds to have the right to vote in the school board elections back in November of 2016. 2016. That's when they passed measure Y1 and they passed it with a 70.3% voter support for it in the city of Berkeley. voter support for it in the city of Berkeley. Oakland passed in 2020 that same measure, which was measure QQ with a 67.88% vote to authorize persons age 16 and above for otherwise eligible bill to vote under state and local law to vote for the Office of School Board Director. In May of 2023, the board, this board, this board of Supervisors, 2023, passed a letter directing the ROV to implement Berkeley Y1 and Oakland Measure QQ by the next election. That was this Board. It might not be the present people who are sitting on this Board, but all the way back to 2016, we knew this was coming to us. We had eight years to prepare for this. I don't accept the fact that we're not ready to implement this and I think the smoke screen that we keep, I keep hearing from my colleagues on this board, is just that. It's the same kind of argument that I guarantee, because I've been going back and reading some history books that people experienced when African-Americans were trying to get the right to vote, and they were getting these racist kind of things that were raised about them, when women were trying to get the right to vote. And they were getting these racist kind of things that were raised about them when women were trying to get the right to vote. And they were getting the sexist questions raised about them because they really didn't want them to have it. So let me look for some reason to not allow you to get it. And so they had to go state by state in order to get the right to vote. So we had time to do this. And then to come up with a last hour, to me seems like it's this conspiracy to make sure we block these young people from getting the right to exercise their opportunity to vote on just school board elections, not even the regular election. We should be encouraging people to participate in the democratic process as opposed to segregating certain groups out and targeting them and scapegoating them and putting them in a position. The questions that I keep hearing being raised are they going to pay for the election? We don't ask that every single time we have an election and all the other cities got to pay for the election. Are they indemnified if something goes wrong? I never heard that with respect to the other elections that take place every election cycle. And they pay for the elections. If there's litigated, then we figure it out. So, you know, this is a new day and age that seems in my head to be revisiting the same days and age that people have been fighting for their right to be equally included in this days and age that people have been fighting for their right to be equally included in this country from the time that we were brought here slaves, brought here to work the land, didn't have a voice even though we, the women were in the room when the declaration and the constitution was written but didn't have a voice. And now we're going back to that. I believe that certain people on this board have that kind of attitude. And so therefore again, I think that we should move it forward. And we're already announcing that we can't do it if we move it forward. After eight years of knowing this, we were gonna be at this point. That's bad planning. That's not even advanced thinking. And in that regard, I questioned whether or not a department head that knew was coming, you know, adequately is addressing their job in a fundamental way. I feel that way about this. I respect those feelings, Mr. Viser Carson, but I just can't help but say you've made a comment, I think, almost an accusation that members of this board, you feel, I mean, I want to go back and look at the tape that you would almost call us. Some of us, one of us members of this board, not supportive of women's right to vote. That's incredibly insulting. What you've suggested, what you brought to us, by the way, you brought to us on a consent calendar months ago, a consent calendar item out of a committee, one line of a consent calendar item, and it's blossomed into this. I wasn't here in 2016, but the city of Berkeley and Oakland could have done this MOU with us back then, because as it was mentioned, this lives on past. It just says, when you can make it feasible, they could have started this eight years ago. It didn't. It started a few months ago, maybe a year ago, in a consent calendar item. And I fully support that. Both things on the consent calendar today to have it discussed. Come on, man, don't play that game with me. Something of this magnitude and something that is arguably not even technically legal to do, something that's not in the constitution of the state of California. And you know, we had a deep discussion about that. Slaves weren't legally able to vote either. Again. They weren't legally, because the people who wrote the laws, wrote the laws, to make sure that they weren't legally able to vote. The same thing with respect to women. You're trying to circumvent that process. I think you should go to the state of California if you want. That to happen. And we're not doing that. We're circumventing the process here. And that's fine. I don't disagree that the city of Berkeley and city of Oakland should be able to call these questions and ask us to do this. I do want to protect us from legalities. And I'm glad to hear that we are in demnified if cases are found that we... I call for the vote. Well, you can do that, but I'm just going to say, I disagree with the process that's been done. You can vote it down, man. You can vote it down and people know where you are in these issues. I am describing where I'm at. I'm taking offense at your characterization of members of this board in doing so. That's all. All right, the question has been called. Let's have the vote. I do think we need clarification. Supervisor Carson, could you state your motion? My motion is that we move the MOU be signed by this Board that advances forward. And I'm hoping that the outcome of us moving the MOU means that this coming November, these young people have the right to vote and that we don't have some obstacles put in the way that we knew it was coming all along and we wait until the last minute to try to throw them up because you know you can't get them. That kind of unplanting by department head needs to be taken under serious consideration. So then moved in. I seconded the motion without all the editorials. That's okay. Second by Tam. Call the roll. Supervisor Halbert. Yes, thank you. I am going to explain that I don't believe this is constitutionally sound. I believe we're at risk litigation. So I'm going to abstain. Supervisor Marquez. I. Supervisor Tam. I. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Miley. Yes. Okay. Motion passes. Four eyes. One of the abstention. I think that concludes all of our- I conclude your regular items. Okay. So what I'd like to do is- I think that includes all of our- I think that includes your regular items. Okay, so what I'd like to do is before we go back into the closed session, see if there's public comment or non-agentized items of a comment on items that are non-agentized for today's meeting. Never include items that were either withdrawn or continued. We do have a speaker online. John, you're on the line. Go ahead. You have two minutes to speak. John, you're online. Go ahead. You have two minutes to speak. If you want to get rid of racism and bigotry, things like that, then simply just stop talking about it because the human nature actually not to be a racist or a bigot. It's when people keep repeating it over and over and over again that it lives and it takes on its own life. It would be amazed how fast it goes away when you simply just stop talking about it. Thank you. David Thompson. Good afternoon supervisors. Dave Thompson, my voice. We are a membership organization representing working class and people of color in unincorporated Alameda County Here to express our real rage and disappointment and the fact that just causes not moving forward with this board today We have been working on protecting local renters for the last six years on nearly six years We went through a lengthy process as Surveyser Marquez, Miley and Haberdall know meeting with stakeholders. Unfortunately, the supervisor that blocked movement on this is no longer here to listen to this, but we really need this to move forward. There are 8,000 single-family renters, households, and unincorporate Alameda County that need protection. Each week we wait, there continues to be more evictions, and continue either self-eviction or unlawful detainers need to move forward. Thank you. Leo? Afternoon, supervisors. My name is Leo Slamau, co-director of my Invoice. Thank you to supervisors who have been participating in our ad hoc committee, supervisor, Harvard, supervisor, and the county staff. My name is Royce, we willingly came back to the table. We willingly came back to the table to participate in these long discussions. Not everyone is a public servant. Even though I see public servants every day in our community, and they dedicated at least every meeting three hours in the total of this process 10 hours of talking about the substantive issues with people that don't agree with them, right? Combined with Supervisor Surmiley's process last year, that's another 15 hours, right? So, New York Pro-AZ meetings, but I mean, we have just taken 24 hours of policy, deliberation, testimonies, 24 hours of our community members time, only to be met with continued delay of the discussion of even the update of what happened, right? I mean, we are willing to continue to talk about what needs to be improved and what we can and, you know, and what we can propose, but at the same, you know, we are just really, really appalled by the delay of this vote. And, you know, we were continue to report everything of the progress to the state HCD about the non-compliance of this housing element, which has sent comments again. And we're really concerned, you know, there's 85 hundred folks categorically excluded who also raised the majority of habitability concerns. So this is a system that we're trying to put together that is really broken and we see no way of moving forward without this discussion that needs to happen. Thank you. Jenny, you're on the line. You have two minutes to speak. My name is Jenny Madson. I am third generation from Livermore and have paid rent in Alameda County since 1969 in Pleasant and Oakland, Union City, Sherryland and now Stanley, Andrew. And I worked in about every city in the county too. I can share a lot of story over 55 years, but I don't want you to dismiss them because of age. I'm not gonna share the one I was gonna tell today, which is all about what happened to me in Cherryland in the 1990s, 1991 to 1999 in the same unit there. Look, now, as you will know, there is nowhere else to go. And there, I've got plenty of company in this. There are 10,000 households in urban, unincorporated Alameda County who are in the same single family housing both that I was in then. The housing providers who get your attention say that this is because of the market, but I think it is clear that it is a market driven by a political agenda. If this board continues to delay providing tenant protections in Alameda County, you're just like Marie Antoinette telling people to eat cake when they can't afford bread. You need to vote, you need to move this. You need to at least have just cause. Please, thank you. I can be done. EBR-AK, you're on the line. Hi, good afternoon supervisors. It's Derek Barnes, calling from my EDRJ, Ebra. And I just want to make a comment about the agenda items that are being continued. And I think most of you know in Chamber that we have never left the table. We've never walked out of meetings. We have been in these discussions for years. And I think we will continue to champion the balance rights of renters and owners and making sure that we collectively come together to introduce balanced policy and legislation that makes sense and that does no harm. And so our commitment to this body and legislation that makes sense and that does no harm. And so our commitment to this body is to continue the with the discussions and be a part of these meetings so that we can come to some conclusion about the kind of good housing policy that makes sense for the county and the unincorporated areas of the county. So I just wanted to reassure you that we are still in this. We will continue the discussions and that we will endeavor together to make sure that we pass something that makes sense. Another item I'd like to share with you and this is on behalf of our member owners and our board of directors of Ebra and RHA SAC and the Berkeley Properties Property Owners Association that we are thrilled that the county is taking steps to advance education, especially with the owner resource center starting in the unincorporated area of Alladmida County. You all know how I feel about education and making sure that that's the starting point before we get to the stick of enforcement. So we thank you for your leadership and we thank the staff for continuing to work with us in this endeavor. Thank you. Elena, you're on the line. There is a translation for it, so because it's for Spanish. Okay. Oh, today we understood that it was brought to the month of September. A topic that was supposed to be treated today. And I have a question. How long did the decision for other jurisdictions from seeing the day before the planning concord. How long have you been doing this? Today, when I was receiving the news that it was or was it postponed, our, uh, uh, uh, just cause a cause. Acosta. Estabared, you're looking. That outside the building, where they're right now, you're where building where you and I were in the morning. It is a description that says in memory of all the children who died due to violence. And that description is that memory is the right there in front of the edificio. And I ask all the families of the areas not incorporated. They are not currently protected. For the next one, it's more than clear that the less protected and that was something that even one of you supervisor did in the past together and asked this question, are the protected children? No, they are not. It is important that the vote of just cause to continue forward. I will do the same again. How long did you take for the other jurisdictions? I, as a mother, I hope the protection for our parents responsible for our children does not have to be part of that structure that was out for the review. Maria, you're on the line. Good afternoon, county supervisors. My name is Maria Miranda. I'm organizer with my hidden voice. I have been speaking with you all for some years now regarding the research booth. We're here today because we are highly frustrated and really angry. And I think it's very justified anger that we're feeling after five years of working through this. I did wanna go over a little bit of our timeline. I know not all of our supervisors have been here throughout the full time, but this conversation was brought to the County Steering Committee back in fall of 2019. And these specific items were introduced back in fall of 2021 about regarding like specific needs and urgent tenant needs that are going on. So this going on now for years and these conversations have been going in circles because either one supervisor or another is not committed to just working it out. We need to give this session to at least discuss what has been going on at the ad hoc meetings that has now been past the dates that you guys have set forth 75 days. And we are still waiting for at least some more guidance on how to push this forward. We have worked together. We have made some concessions, especially around mandatory mediation. But our priority is still just cause and ensuring that it is as inclusive as possible. I also wanted to highlight that interpretation was canceled for us due to the items being canceled. And unfortunately, some of our folks may not have interpretation right now. And so that's another piece of this. It's really silencing the voices of our people that have been in these conversations for years. And now this time when it's only been expanded, it's now been further delayed and we are incredibly disappointed. We will not stop picking the sword. Thank you very much. There are no additional speakers. Okay, I want to thank the speakers and we're going to recess in the closed session. We're going to recess in the closed session. Before we recess back in the closed session, I just want to mention that we will be adjourning the meeting today. County employer Raquel Hazel passed away. It is with a profound sadness that we share the unexpected passing of Raikau Hazel on July the 11th, 2024. She worked in for the county for over 32 years. On March 30th, years. On March 30, 1992, she was hired as a custodian at Fairmont Hospital in Transfer to Island Hospital in 1998. She joined the General Services Agency as a janitor on October 7, 1999. She provided Genitorial Services to various facilities located in the Oakland downtown area for over 24 years. We will remember her as a hardworking individual who took pride in her work. Her sincere, friendly and humble demeanor will be truly missed. So we will adjourn in her memory on supervised cars. Thank you, Mr. President. I have another name that I'd like to add to the adjournment list for the day. Max Anderson, who was known for his deep compassion for others and his commitment to advocate for the underserved community and also the affordable housing in public health and social justice community. Max dedicated his whole life and public service, having served as the critical care nurse, served as US Marine Corps, and then started as political career as a member of the City of the Berkeley City Planning Commission from 1989 to 1996. In 1996, he was elected to the Berkeley Rent Stabilization Board, and in 2004, Max Anderson was elected to the Berkeley City Council, where he served for 12 years. Throughout his 12 year tenure at the Berkeley City Council, Max Anderson was instrumental in several issues, areas, successfully passing the Berkeley right to no ordinance regarding cell phone radiation exposure, the Berkeley minimum wage increase, the breath mobile program where he secured its services for children with asthma in the schools, the sugar, sweetened beverage tax to help reduce child who had diabetes among our youth, and a study that reviewed city workers complaints regarding hiring and promotion discrimination. Max's achievement was a treatment, was a testimony, it was dedication to public service and his commitment to make City of Berkeley a better place to live, work, and thrive for his residents. He'll be remembered by a number of people in the community and there will be a public service in a couple of weeks To celebrate Max's life Max was not just an elected official Max was a personal friend And just wanted to make sure that we Also a journey memory of Max Anderson. Thank you. So when we adjourn, we will adjourn and memory of those two individuals. So right now, right now we will be recessing back into closed session. the recessing back into closed session. Recording stopped. you Recording in progress Recording stopped you you the recording in progress. the supervisor Marquez. Present. The supervisor Tam. Present. The supervisor Carson. Excuse. President Meile. Here. Anything to report out from closed session? I have no additional items to report from closed session. Right. So we'll return in the memory of the two individuals. I have a moment of silence for each. Board of supervisors, meaning for July 23rd, 2024. It's now adjourned. Recording stopped.