you you you you you you you you you you I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. you I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to go to the next page. I'm going to put something on mine. Answer the phone. It's wrong. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. you you Recording in progress Recording stopped Recording in progress. I don't see it here. Thank you. Thank you. Ready? Okay. Let's get started. Okay. Good morning, everyone. Board of Supervisors meetings going to be called to order. So if we could have silence in the chamber. All right, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mike, will the clerk please call the roll? Supervisor Howard. Present. Supervisor Marquez. Present. Supervisor Tam. Present. Supervisor Carson, excuse. President Miley. Here, we have a quorum. You all join me in the pletids of allegiance. Pletidiligians to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. The Board of Supervisors welcomes you to its meetings. The Board allows in-person and remote observation and participation by members of the public at its meetings. The Alameda County recognizes the important and invaluable role of public participation in government. Be reminded that disruptive conduct that renders orderly conduct of the meeting on feasible will not be tolerated. This includes disruptive conduct that may occur through public comment. The chair will order the removal of individuals who are woefully disrupting the meeting so that the meeting may continue in an orderly manner. For those attending the meeting in person, if you wish, or 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 will now provide brief instructions on how to verbally participate in public 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 and state your name. If you are calling in, dial star 9 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 web page at acgov.org. When called, 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 as determined by the President of the Board and subject to overall time limits. Thank you. Okay. Okay. Are there any board of supervisors remarks? Yes, Superintendent Albert? Yes, President Meile. I'm going to be continuing items 31 and 32 for two meetings. We'll discuss those in January. Not take them up today. Thank you. Any other board comments or remarks? I have some comments I'd like to make, but the person I want to make the comments about hasn't arrived yet, so I'm going to delay those comments in my remarks until he arrives. Okay, so we will now take public comment on items on the agenda except for items listed at 11 o'clock and 2 p.m. set matters. Public comment on items listed as 11 o'clock and 2 o'clock will be taken at the time the items are presented and discussed. The clerk will now recognize speakers on items other than the 11 o'clock set matter and the two o'clock set matter. I have this informed we have over 50 speakers. I'm going to give typically we give speakers two minutes, but I'm going to give speakers a minute and a half. Can you set it for a minute, 90 seconds? If you can't. Okay, great. All right. So speakers have a minute and 30 seconds. Yes. Okay. So if we can call the speakers both those in person and those are mode a minute and I have to speak and I just would remind speakers, sometimes folks repeat the same thing that somebody else has stated. Obviously, public, you can say what you like to say, but repeating information unless you really just feel it needs to be emphasized, just gets to be redundant. Okay, so call the speakers. Thank you. Please state your name, the city you live in, which item you are speaking on. Again, you'll have a minute and 30 seconds to speak. We will start with the first in-person speaker. Rebecca Rowan. Rebecca Roorin? Good morning. President Miley and members of the board, I'm Rebecca Rosen. I'm the regional vice president for the hospital council in the East Bay. And I'm here this morning in support of the resolution before your board to defer implementation of Senate Bill 43, which is item six on the agenda. SB 43 broadens the definition of gravely disabled for the involuntary detention, treatment, or conservatorship of individuals with behavioral health conditions to include those with severe substance use disorders and co-occurring mental health disorders. As hospitals, we strongly support the goals of SB 43 and are committed to working in partnership with Alameda County, other healthcare providers, law enforcement, EMS and behavioral health organizations to implement the new law. We are concerned, however, that it could result in a surge of patients needing services that will challenge our collective behavioral healthcare system. A pause in implementation, as called for in the resolution, will allow local and statewide work groups to develop policies, implementation plans, and communication protocols to implement SB 43 safely and successfully. For these reasons, we urge your support of the resolution. Thank you. Jody, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. I was speaking on 31 and 32. So, I'm going to go ahead and move on. Since the very time we're to pull those two items. Should allow speakers to speak on items 31 and 32. You're not required to because they will not be taken up on this agenda. So they'll have an opportunity to speak. Should the matter be? Well, it's continued. So when it comes up on the next agenda and your board is actually going to consider it, the alternative is since it's being continued to another meeting, it's no longer on this agenda, so they could speak at public comment on items not on the agenda if they chose to because this item's not going to be taken up on this agenda. Okay, Mrs. Johnson, you and anyone else who's speaking on items 31 and 32. Supervisor Halbert, pull those items. I apologize for that. And if you'd like to speak on those items, they're not only agenda. You would have to speak during public comment, which will take up at the conclusion of the meeting. But I'll try to do public comment before we get too far into the afternoon. So, okay. Call the next speaker. Crystal Salas. Good morning, board. My name is Crystal Salas and I am from the Native American Health Center. And I'm here to represent the PI and the UELP programs for you to. Oh, sorry. Our little shorter than the last person. So I'm here to, we ask that the Board of Supervisors to prioritize prevention services for communities that are historically marginalized from the mental health system. The Native American community is less than 1% and the UELP and the PI programming has allowed us to work with our communities so that we can facilitate our own healing and as broken down stigma reaching out for mental health services that has been historically hard for our community to reach out to. So we're asking that if the UELP programs are cut, that the Board of Supervisors should work with the Elmita County Behavioral Health to source alternate funding to maintain funding for these programs. They're so vital to our community and to the people that we work with, our youth, our elders and our families, that to sever these programs or to cut these programs would be very detrimental to the community. So I just thank you and I take that into consideration. Kitty, you're on the line. Please state your name in which'm going to ask for your name. Kitty, you're on the line. Please state your name in which item you're speaking on. My name is Kitty Cecil Hunter. I'm speaking on item six. Please vote no on item six. My daughter is dead. My daughter had good coverage and managed to stay alive and do well for about five years and then her insurance changed. And she went through a cycle of being arrested and being taken to an emergency room and then released and then a cycle of being arrested and then taken to an emergency room and then incarcerated and then released and I didn't know where she was. I couldn't find her and we kept her alive for a long time but but before 40th birthday, she died of a drug overdose. My daughter, who was the first graduate in our family, the first person to do all of the things and check all the boxes graduated from college before her older sibling. It's real suffering. There's real people out there dying right now. We can't delay. We've got to do what we can do now. Please, please vote no on item six. Thank you for listening. Kelly Thompson. I'm going to go to the committee. Kelly Thompson. Good morning. I'm Kelly Thompson. I'm the executive director of the Carlbie, Mattura Center for Family Counseling. I'm speaking about item number 62. We are very pleased that you are giving us an extension for our youth service center contract through 630, 2022. And we are urging the Board of Supervisors to support our continued funding to provide culturally affirming gender positive trauma informed free counseling services in East Oakland as part of the probation departments YSC's network in Alameda County under RFP number 902171. supervisors to approve that recommendation to not continue funding us. We're a black lead counseling center in that has deep roots in East Oakland. And we have been providing services for since the 70s. The recommendation is to defund us and to fully fund a white male lead agency that's outside of the community. We have certified SLAB certification and we have a team of highly credentialed mental health staff of color. We provide all that culturally affirming care to use of color and we are asking the board of supervisors to not accept that ill advise recommendation of non-award because it violates the county's policy for prioritizing racial equity. We ask you to find our services and continue to help the youth in DP Stokeland. Thank you very much for your time. I'm. Diane please take your name in which item you're speaking on. My name is Diane Golding. I live in open California. Item six. I am opposed to item six. I don't want to see any more delay in getting treatment to those who need it. Please implement SB 43 to save lives. People need treatment for this disease, just like other people need treatment for every other disease that's out there. It's an illness that can kill. And we can't afford to let people continue to die. This SB 43 will save lives. Please implement that without any delay. Thank you. I'm a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is a person who is My name is Wasim Ahmadiyy and I'm a community outreach ambassador at DGTI and nonprofit organization. I'm originally from Afghanistan and I have been living in Alameda County for the past year. I'm fluent in Dari, Pashto, English and Urdu languages. It has been almost an year since I started working with DGTI. Today I want to share one of our client's story with you. His name is Mahbubullah Azizi, an Afghan national who was one of our clients, and he graduated from computer science in India. He had previously worked as a general manager in a US campaign of Afghanistan supporting the US military in Afghanistan. However, after the clops of the Afghanistan government, he faced numerous challenges. The Taliban repeatedly searched for him at his house, but he managed to evade him and eventually flee to Pakistan. Therefore, he faced further difficulties while waiting for his approval of his SIV visa, special immigration visa. He later evacuated to Qatar, where he spent several months with no activity. These events lead to a high level of stress and depression for Mr. SZZ. When Mr. SZZ joined our program, he was unhappy stress and not active at all. He would wake up late, not going to the gym eating and whenever, when I refer to him to our mental health specialist, after having many sessions, he came back to his normal life and very active person. So we are proud to have such, we proud to bring back the happiness Okay, so I horribly request the Board of Supervisory to prioritize as I mentioned Ize the community as well as to advocate for us Time is up, you know, you don't do yourself any favors by going over time particularly we when we tell you your time is up. It only irritates us. Your time is up. Susan, please state your name in which item you're speaking on. My name is Susan Silva and I'm speaking on item six. I have a 46 year old son who has been seriously mentally ill for 20 years. and he just gets worse and worse and he's very lonely because he doesn't make any sense when he speaks. So people are afraid of him, he looks to shoveled, he doesn't get any help anywhere and when I try and help him. He's very proud and he doesn't want to admit that he has a problem. And because of HIPAA, I can't know his medical history. I can't know if he's been in John George or how many times he has been arrested. He had a wife, two kids, and a career. He's a college graduate, and now he just wanders the street. I help him when I can, but he has been violent towards me. So I can't let him stay with me. We tried that, and that did not work. So please do not delay in allowing people with grave disability like this to wait any longer. We need help. We need help. We need help. Now thank you very much. Linda Gruber Linda Gruber I'm here to support the car would be center for family counseling. The youth program coordinator at our joy in my role I work directly with youth from the community teaching them how to build community building community. I'm here to support the CARLB Center for Family Counseling. The youth program coordinator at Arjoy, and my role I worked directly with youth from the community teaching them how to build community, build healthy relationships, and in cycles of harm. So many of our youth are negatively impacted by their environment. They come from unstable homes, they grow up in traumatic situations, they have mental conditions and don't know how to cope. All of these situations are serious and can be destructive to the individual and the community. If an intervention is not made, but the Carl B. Center for Family Counseling has served and continues to serve as that intervention for so many of our youth. They offer mental, free mental health services for youth in East Oakland and across the day. I have referred three of my youth program to them and they've transformed completely in the way that they reach out to each other, interact with each other. They're outlook on life and their ability to take accountability for their actions in a restorative way. I'm concerned that should the Carle B Center for Family Counseling's funding cease, many of our youth will not have a local place to go to for help addressing their mental and health needs. So I implore the Board of Supervisors to continue to support and embrace our youth, Black youth, and people of color in order to promote a better Oakland. Thank you. Bob, you're on the line. Please state your name in which item you're speaking on. I'm going to be in the position. Bob, you're on the line. Please state your name in which item you're speaking on. I'm with the interfaith coalition for justice in our jails and I wish to speak on both item six and 56. Is my man in the half up yet? Supervisor Miley, I prepared a two- minute speech, but I will try to get through it. I urge the county not to delay implementation of SB 43. It's common sense legislation. It was passing anonymously in both houses of the California legislature. SB 43 is good because it allows people with severe mental illness and substance use disorders to receive treatment if they can't manage their own safety or medical care. It's a matter of life and death. The ability of the County of the implement SB 43 is linked to item 56 where again the County administrator begins budget discussions by painting a picture of doom and gloom. Every year the same doom and gloom is predicted. And she's asking you to approve budget workshops where the attendees do not include anyone from faith organizations such as my own organization or family organizations such as Spasmy or Nami. They will be prevented from attending. These predictions are way off again. Even in yesterday's newspaper, all editions of all major newspapers talked about how good the economy is doing, that the Fed has stopped raising interest rates and will be talking about lowering interest rates. So let's do the pen. Let's let's move forward with SB 43. Kamauyo Johnson. 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 of item 62. I am Dr. Kimoya Johnson. I currently am the program director for restorative justice for Oakland youth, Argyway. And I'm here on behalf of Carl B. Montoya Community Center for Family Counseling. I was born and raised in East Oakland, currently reside in deep East Oakland. I'm a mother and a grandmother of Native Oaklanders. And as a program director of Arjoy, we partner with Calbee Montoya to provide mental health services for our program participants. We have seen the service that Calbee Montoya has offered for us for young people and their families. And as a former Oakland Unified School District administrator, I've seen the importance of having a mental health center that is there for young people and their families who look like them, who represent them in their community. Transportation has been a deep issue for Deep East Oakland, getting to various places and having a community health center that is there and accessible for them, has made a tremendous difference and as families are struggling to come out of the pandemic, struggling to find some sort of normalcy in their family. And so I urge the board to continue to provide funding for Carl B. Montoya. Thank you. Speaker, you're on the line. Please state your name in which item you're speaking on. Patricia, you're on the line. Hi, my name is Patricia Contanem, commenting on item 6. Behavior Health Department says adopting SB 43 will overwhelm the system. What the really admitting is that they know lots of people out there who qualify to be treated for grave disability who are not being treated. So it's kind of an admission of failure. SB 43 doesn't redefine or lower the bar for grave disability. It just clarifies what was meant by the original law. Over the years, the interpretation of the criteria has been watered down to tamp down the number of people the systems accountable for food, clothing and shelter was never meant to sanction eating out of garbage cans wearing clothing, infested with firmen or soaked in urine or sleeping on sidewalks as a lifestyle choice. These are standards that we as a society would not deem acceptable for a dog, let alone a human being. It's true that severe and chronic SUD has been specifically added to the eligibility, but this is not entirely new. The majority of those with SMI now in the system have a dual diagnosis. So they're already dealing with these issues. The department claims that will be overwhelmed by all the new laws coming from the legislature. But these are emergency measures. If the system was working, then we wouldn't need these fixes. The county will have to reprioritize how they use resources to focus on the most vulnerable and the most underserved segment of the ill. Those with serious mental illnesses. Thank you. Thank you. Marina Zrahimi. I'm going to translate for her. Yes. Okay. So here we would like to first thank you the county and board of super supervisor to help us to work with our community with a prevention program here Farhanos Hi my name is Farhanad Rahimi Now I'm a demon. No, I am a pussy guy, I am a king. I am a priest, I am a priest, I am a Muslim, I am a Muslim, I am a Muslim, I am a Muslim, I am a Muslim. Do you have any advice for me? In 2021, I came to the United States from Afghanistan running from Taliban. And when I introduced with Afghan Coalition with the Prevention Program, they helped me a lot. Especially when I saw the counselor is helped me a lot with him mentally, because of what I'm coming from, I want to our country. And I had a lot of problems with PTSD and anxiety, and the counselor helped me a lot. I'm asking if they continue this program because of help us a lot. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. I'm going to ask you to vote. No. Item six. I have been involved with the mental illness program because of my grandson who had schizophrenia and took his own life when he was only 22 years old. And I know how difficult the system is to navigate and what needs to be done with. And item six delays the implementation of SB 43, which is a good program or a good bill and it will help the people with severe mental illness. I understand about 51 50s and how it's important for them to get the help that they need. And so I'm definitely asking you to support SB 43 getting through the system as soon as possible. Thank you very much. Jamila. I am from Afghanistan. I am from Afghanistan. I am from Afghanistan. I am from Afghanistan. I am from Afghanistan. I am from Afghanistan. I am from Afghanistan. And when we left Afghanistan because of Taliban, we went to Abu Dhabi, we stayed in a camp, which is, we were like a prison over there. My husband had a stroke over there because of depression, and he continued paralyzed. When we came to the United States, we had a lot of problems, especially mental problems. We had a lot of help. We needed a lot of help. When I came to the Afghan Coalition, when we saw the prevention counselors that when they hacked me, when they really welcomed me, it's really meant a lot to me. I am very happy to have you here. Thank you very much. I am very happy to have you here. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. which item you're speaking on. Joanne, please unmute your mic. Hello? Do you mean Joanne and Mai? Hello? We can hear you, which item are you speaking on? I'm speaking on item six. Okay. And I want to express my, I want to express my deep concern and urgency regarding the incremental implementation of SB 43. I have personally experienced the profound impact of a serious and mental illness within my family. I strongly believe in the urgent, I strongly believe in the urgent need for this legislation to be enforced without delay. Last year, my family faced an or deal with my son, who's juggling with a serious mental illness. He discontinued his medication. The situation escalated to the pond where he posed a danger to himself and the others. Despite our repeat effort to report him as a missing person and of learned of law enforcement, who the immuila and this, we face obstacles in securing the next system intervention. Finally, he was taken to hospital by 515-0 order and because he is a bravely disabled. Today, he is in the status of looking for a good job. It was this afternoon that time to learn that police were unable to take him to the hospital. Unless he wanted to really agree to visit treatment as those who were bullying with mental health challenges, often we see seeking count. We think for them at the University of Korea. I'm a student at the University of Korea. I'm a student at the University of Korea. I'm a student at the University of Korea. I'm a student at the University of Korea. I'm a student at the University of Korea. I'm a student at the University of Korea. Hello. I'm a student at the University of Korea. I'm a student at the University of Korea. KCCB. I have been deeply involved with GKVIA. PEI support group for about seven years from its inception to the present day. Many of us in Jikimi, including myself, started as beneficiaries of KCCP's social services and have since dedicated ourselves to giving back to our Korean community. For many of us, Jikimi is a lifeline, a source of solace and conduction. The mere thought of losing this vital support network is not only distressing but also unthinkable. Jikimi has been more than just a group. It's a platform where I can contribute meaningfully to our community. The potential loss of such a vital program is not just a loss of services, but a loss of a community pillar that upholds our spirits, our dignity, and our cultural connection. And we were speaking for item three. John, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. John Lindsay Poland with the American Friends Service Committee. First, I'd like to respond to the President that it is more than irritating to go through war. It is more than irritating to leave one's home country and come to another country where the language is foreign and the processes are foreign and the supervisors and public meetings are foreign. It is more than irritating. I'm speaking to item number 56, which arguably shapes all the other items on your agenda. It is your process for shaping the county budget for the next year. And it repeats what the process is from previous years, which have not been transparent, which set up a budget work group without notice that meets without notice that doesn't publish things in advance, even first supervisor staff. So I want to urge you when this item comes up to introduce some kinds of changes that make the process more transparent that require seven days advance notice for budget work group meetings and other board items that deal with budget policy or overall budget. In addition, it would be extremely helpful to have a report on the county's unrestrictive reserves that show what is available, what is on spent by different departments within the county in order to shape both your discourse and the public discourse about such an important budget matters. Please do take this up. Thanks so much. Juniper Dorado Hello. My name is Juniper. I'm speaking on item three. I'm a queer third gen Filipino and Taiwanese college freshman born and raised in Berkeley. I have been a UELP participant as an intern with Bayanihan Youth Group from Filipino Advocates for Justice for three years. I'd like to invite the Board of Supervisors and everyone in the room to think about what led to your success. Was there a life-changing force that set you up on the path to where you are today? Let me tell you about what that is in my life. The first workshop I ever held, as an FJ intern was at the beginning of my sophomore year, half a year into quarantine. It was over Zoom about tending to mental health in isolation. I was so nervous to be speaking in front of my high school peer attendees, but that after the workshop, I remember this feeling of vibrating energy in me. A mix of exhilaration, connection, pride, and excitement. I've grown a lot since this moment, but that feeling of hope and empowerment did not go away and has only grown in my work here. I also found a home in FHA. This space angered me through one and a half years of isolation and online school and through the many rough moments of junior and senior year. It's a place where I could express myself freely with trusted peers and mentor figures. I don't know where I would be without FHA. It is hard to find a place to learn about your identity as it connects to education and organizing. It is a false choice to decide between giving funds to addiction treatment and homelessness or giving funds to early intervention programs. Thank you for your time and consideration. Jackie, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Thank you, Jackie Coda. Item number 92.1. I want to thank the commissioners, excuse the supervisors for moving quickly on this. Item wanted to point out that, you know, it's unfortunate that Miss Faran had to resign as well. We would appreciate the Board of Supervisors looking at the Oakland NAACP for some representation. Also, there are several qualified people who had applied for the commission. It's important to understand that the public does not have access to the recording of the first meeting because the meeting was not published on the supervisor's website. We've asked that it be placed there please. And we asked that the replacements please be appointed as quickly as possible because as we pointed out in the working session last week about the form that the public was not aware of, come to find out there was preferential treatment given to the Board of Supervisors who actually voted against or voted to put the ballot measure B on the ballot and it was withheld from the public. These are the things that the commission needs to understand and work towards actually have better communication and no collusion. So measure B, a no on measure B, would have almost been left off the argument against it because of the fact that the shenanigans with the ROV. It's very unfortunate. And we would like to the Miley and Supervisor, however, to understand that we appreciate your voting no on measure B. Thank you. Dr. Thompson? Morning. My name is Dr. Thompson. I'm the clinical director at the Carl B. Materia Center for Family Counseling. I'm also a resident of Oakland and the mother of a black son. Defending our center centrally located in D.P. Stokeland, he races access by public transport and worsens racial and health inequities because many of our youth will not will forgo services rather than leave their neighborhood. This is at odds with probation's aim of helping youth access services in their own neighborhood. Our legacy is that we have served thousands of app promise youth for over four decades. We hire and train therapists of color to serve youth of color. We provide high quality mental health care to system-involved system involvement system impact at youth. Many of these youth experience structural and police violence, gang violence, sexual and domestic violence, persistent worry, leaving them with complex trauma and vulnerability to chronic illness. I'm speaking on item number 62. Given these heartbreaking circumstances, Oakland needs more community mental health clinics like the Center for Family Counseling, not less. And GSA is bent on defunding the only clinic of its kind and the heart of deep East Oakland. The Board of Supervisors should overturn the GSA's recommendation and help keep the center open and available to help our youth. We appreciate what you've given us. We need multi-meer funding. Thank you. Stephanie, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. and 92.1. So I am a commissioner on the Alameda County Elections Commission. I want to thank the Board of Super recruiting at people for the four positions designated for people from impacted communities. And I wanted to say that given the resignation of Pamela Feren and the difficulty in recruiting people from impacted communities,, in fact, there's no compensation for them on the commission. I wanted to urge the Board of Supervisors to provide compensation at the very least for the four at-large members who are designated to be from impacted communities. By their very nature, these impacted communities being impacted have less access to resources, less privilege, and are less likely to be able, people in them are less likely to be able to serve without compensation of some kind. Thank you. Nancy Fatcher. Thank you. Good morning. I first want to thank you all for your service to the communities that we all serve and care about. I'm honored to be here today as the Director of Behavioral Health from La Clinica de Rasa alongside the other many community providers here for UELP. I'm honored to stand with them. I'm here today as a representative of Couture Viennistar culture and well-being at La Clinica with our partners La Familia and Tibersiobasquez Health Centers to express my deepest concern regarding the MHSA prevention and early intervention funding crisis that the passage of proposition one would create for us. I just turned 62 and I'm looking back at programs that are effective and meaningful. I have never seen a program more effective and impactful than the prevention and early intervention programs with UELP. I'm tearing up, I'm just talking about it. The impact on reducing the funding for this work on our communities on a daily basis, and the ability to reach the communities we serve so that they can access timely mental health services in the language of their choice. The impact is really devastating. It will set us back more than a decade when our community struggled to access culturally and linguistically appropriate services. I want to ask you to represent our voices at the state and express our concern and support the preservation of UELP. Thank you. Molly, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Hi, my name is Molly Shirk. I'm speaking on item six. I live in Oakland, California. I am here to request immediate implementation of SB 43. My daughter is 49 years old, serious mental illness. She's paranoid schizophrenia. She makes bad choices because of her fears. She's refused housing. She's in and off the streets. Doesn't get medical attention. I'm also an RN case manager here in this county. And I see people dying needlessly in their 40s, their 50s, their 60s suffering from the serious mental illness and sometimes the subsequent substance use disorder. If in my experience in the medical side of this health system things would be implemented, it would be considered unethical to not implement life-saving measures. I believe this is a life-saving measure and I'm going to see it happen soon. I feel like I speak for other people that we're living in Groundhog Day. Nothing ever changes. Thank you. Rod Penelosa? Good morning. I'm Dr. Rodpinolosa, the clinical manager at Filipino Advocates for Justice. My experience in working with people of color, particularly the Asian-American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander communities, help seeking behaviors and practices are still highly stigmatized because of the cultural shame that is attached to mental health problems and asking for help. However, preventative early intervention work has been highly successful in addressing these factors through psychoeducation, counseling, mental health support, and consultations, and raising mental health awareness that empower and educate our community members through culturally relevant, really, really, relatable, and distinct mental health programs and services that address the needs of the people we are serving. In the five years that we at Philippine Advocates for justice have been providing preventative early intervention programs and services to our community members, encompassing all age groups and lifespan, GEI has proven to be effective in increasing self-sufficiency and self-reliance, improving decision-making and stress management skills, better self-care practices and normalization of help seeking practices. GEI has also increased access and affordability of mental health services for our community members, the youth, the young adults, adults and elderly population. This high level of functioning resulting preventative care is catalytic in preventing the escalation of and in reducing elevated mental health conditions that would require more costly long-term special mental health treatments. Thank you. Mindy, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Yes. Hi, this is Mindy Petchen. I'm speaking on item 92.1 and I want to make a couple of points very clear on this. In been said about someone, you know, that we have 31 qualified applicants to the Election Commission. Impacted communities is not part of this solution and impacted was not defined. And it was, in fact, in the original statements resolution. So I think right now, we host the Board of Supervisors to make sure that the replacement for Pamela Far Farron, and Helen Hutchinson are not legal voters, not common cause, not any of these things, but representatives of the NDCP and qualified data people who did apply to be on the commission who very well could serve the just purpose of what the commission is about. So I think that has to be taken as an urgent situation and we would dress it right away because we have upcoming elections and things which need to be taken. And it is also important as Jackie Koda stated, I just want to say I support 100% of what she put forward and we need to have more transparency to what happens on the election commission before all of us. That's what I have to say. Ronnie Tang. I'm a case manager. I'm dispensing the mental health association for Chinese community. So, MHCC, those missions to rise awareness of mental health within the Chinese community. Food accuracy, education, research, support, and services. But support mental health units in the Chinese community develop meaningful and productive life in their future. MCH SEC provides a culturally responsive and in language, Cantonese and mental wind to the Chinese immigrants and English speaking throughout our Middle-County. We invite many providers here today, and the Mandarin Health Safety Net for our English speaking and immigrant refugee community. And I'm here today to express my deepest concern regarding the P.I. funding, and thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Tony you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. I am speaking on item six. My name is Tony Valia and I live in Oakland and I understand the complexity of implementing 43 fully, but can the Board of Supervisors instruct the county to come up with a plan for perhaps implementing it in stages. If the report by the suit by Dr. Trouble says that 30 out of 58 counties don't want it, can't implement it or asking to not implement it right away, that means almost half are able to. So how are they, how are all the other counties managing to do this? The 48% other counties there must be a way so In fact The expansion of the definition is really what the definition of was there to begin with and it should just be paid attention to and Please vote no on six. Thank you. Monica Zunica. Good morning, thank you. I'm here also representing Coulterieby and Star Program, which is a prevention and intervention program. I'm a mental health specialist and supervisor at the Wurzewaske Health Center. Our program provides services to low income families, living in multi-generational households throughout Alamida County. We are completely, we are deeply concerned about the funding crisis that the passing of Proposition World will create and the severe impact it will have in our communities. As you know, Proposition Wall will most likely reduce our prevention and intervention funding by 50%. This drastic cut will push back a decade on a time when our communities struggle to receive the services. We are here now to ask, please, the Board of Supervisors. We owe our boys before the state planners and decision makers to express our concern and advocate for the preserving of UELP services. And immediately begin the search for additional funding sources to preserve intact mental health prevention services for all immigrants and non-English speaking communities in Alamira County. Thank you. Applause. Richard, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Hi, this is Richard Spiegelen from Oakland. I'm speaking on items six and 56. I'm, I serve as the chair of the interfaith coalition for justice in our j treatment. It's time to get over it and to figure out a way to address the needs of people, whatever category they fall into as quickly as possible. Secondly, and not unrelated on item 56 on the budget, there has to be transparency as other speakers have said. And I just wanted to mention that I believe at the end of the memo from the county minister, there's a reference to putting one and a half percent of discretionary funds into reserves. I think Alameda County has more reserves than it knows what to do with. And some of those funds ought instead to go to alternatives to jailing people, provision of treatment in the community, affordable housing, maybe even some of the things to get SB 43 addressed correctly. Thank you so much and thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Damon Johnson. Damon Johnson. Damon Johnson. Damon Johnson. Damon Johnson. Damon Johnson. Damon Johnson. Damon Johnson. Damon Johnson. Damon Johnson. Damon Johnson. Damon Johnson. the soldier. I'm the executive director at Black Man's speaking. I'm here in support of item 62, but I'm a returning family member who was formerly incarcerated. And I left at an early age, but hearing about item 62, the Carol B. Monter family center, if we can prevent things because we want to remove the barriers that we have, but also we want to catch them early. We talked about harm reduction in our community was going on here in Oakland. And people who love Oakland, they ain't leaving Oakland. And they want people like them from Oakland who understand it and look like them to talk in the language they understand. And if we don't save these programs and support you, we're talking about our young folks and also our old folks, because I didn't have a name for it when I was suffering with depression and all these other maladies but if they had a service like that that I know and I can go to in my community my mother could get the help she needed because as they say we kill our parents because we be trying to find ourselves and put on these masses but we need people to talk to I happen to sit on a cab committee of probation and we're talking about how do we were arrest this behavior that we have today in the city. So we have people out here able to do something and they're doing a good job but we want to do it more so continue to fund this program. But if we own arrest this behavior then we have to come and talk to the people sometimes creating it. Thank you very much. Thank you all. Yeah. Yeah. Gerald, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. OK, this is Gerald Petchenek in Oakland. I am speaking on item number 92.1. And I just wanted to pay tribute for second to supervisor Carson for his announcement that took everyone by surprise, including myself. And I received a call. It's one let everyone know to be perfectly transparent. I received a call Saturday after his surprise announcement Friday night of people in the community asking me to throw my hat in the ring or supervise a car's seat and I have chosen to do so. So his moment of conscience led to my moment of conscious and I want to thank supervisor Miley for giving me the theme of my campaign, probably unintentional. Excuse me, you make Alamedic. What are you speaking on? It's item 62, 92.1 that has to do with the lack of prayer and lack of thought in putting a woman named Helen Hutchinson who I in fact said to you could not be objective as a member of the Alexa Commission and she proved it right away by violating her oath to the Alexa Commission by taking a ballot position which is not allowed to. It's right there. And so my point is many, many technical a fortune. You've been tried and found wanting. Thank you. Ruben Roberts. for the community. Thank you. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. Good morning. My name is Ruben Roberts. I'm the partnership and training coordinator for Ardure Restort of Justice, Oakland Youth. For more than a decade, I've worked in schools, group homes, doing our attention centers, and many, many nonprofits throughout East Oakland. I'm here in support of the Center for Family Counseling in Autumn 62, because this is a vital part of East Oakland community, and important part to the work we do. As we know, restorative justice has the ability to transform hearts and minds of individuals to practice vulnerability and process their trauma to safe space, with a warm handoff. It's our licensed professionals who have the skill set to help us our most vulnerable community members to break through in their healing journeys. We are literally breaking generational trauma and undoing years of oppression that have plagued black and brown communities for centuries. I'm still in contact with many of my former students and it is a blessing that I can offer resources like the Center for Family Counseling to support the mental health and wellness of those that are impacted. One of the greatest factors is providing therapists that they can identify with, and it is a key healing component to have someone that can understand your story and make you feel safe. The Center for Family Counseling is the only mental health agency in East Oakland, and I'm concerned that our families and our children will not have no place to get the help to address their mental health and issues. And upcoming board supervisors meeting. I'm sorry, I'm about to leave. Okay. All right. Well, just thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I'll leave it there. Thank you. Patricia, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Good morning, supervisors. I'll be speaking on item number 92.1. First again, I would like to recognize supervisor Miley and supervisor Halbert for their no votes to allow any initiative measure initiative now labeled measure B to be going on to the March ballot. Thank you for your no votes on that. Additionally, I was very hopeful actually to see Helen Hutchinson make her resignation as the founding member of the Election Commission and the designated president. I think we need to move forward now, supervisors, with making some some rational choices for the Election Commission. Those rational choices would include having real community representation, which would include the NAACP. There are people who concerned about impacted communities. Not sure that you could get more impacted than that than putting a member of the NAACP, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People on a seat on that board, speaking as a woman of color myself. Let's make sure that whoever fills that spot is a true representative of especially the Oakland community, Oakland, Albany, Emoryville, and Supervisor Carson's district. Thank you. Jody Gettys. Hello, good morning. My name is Jody Gettys. I serve as a healing services manager at restorative justice for Oakland youth as well as the safe outside the system program director I just want to speak on item number 62 the call being a Toyota center is Organization that provides multi-generational care and has a long-standing legacy in Oakland for over 50 years Not just serving folks with training people who are able to provide services for our community members, who share their stories, their deeply community centered and community rooted. As a healing practitioner, I know myself because I see the fruit of their continued labor so many times through the SOS program, I encounter people in crisis who often are not thinking about access to mental health services and care and through providing a warm handoff and a relationship with the Center for Family Counseling. We put them on a pathway towards wellness that allows for them not to be in continuous systems of care for a long time that has not served them because of it being rooted in racism and institutionalized lack of laboratory practices. The Center for Family Concealing meets families and young people where they're at. And I believe we should continue supporting them. And we should say no to the GSA. I also want to reiterate what my colleague Ruben Roberts said that they're the only local mental health agency in East Oakland. Thank you for your time and say no to GSA. Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo! Faith, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Good morning. Thank you so much for your time. This is a faith battle I'm speaking on item 6, the request by Alameda County Behavioral Healthcare Services to defer implementation of SB 43 to January 1, 2026. I am responsible for directing a department of qualified and compassionate individuals whose responsibilities include providing support to community members under LPS conservatorship. Our department works in partnership with behavioral health on all LPS cases and we are quite familiar with the realities of LPS conservatorships. SB 43 represents a significant change to the criteria for involvement, the most restrictive approach to addressing mental health challenges by broadening the criteria for involuntary treatment under LPS. This new legislation necessitates a thoughtful, well informed and collaborative response from the county as the driver of this shift in treatment if we are to successfully build a system that is responsive to this change in legislation, an equity list is imperative with full perspectives from Federal out the county is various stakeholders and constituents to avoid consequences which an early implementation date will not allow. Deferring implementation until January 2026 will afford the behavioral health department the opportunity to ensure the county's highest deals are achieved through this massive undertaking delaying implementation until January 2026 will assure that all people are heard we can recruit and first and we appreciate your consideration thank you Christine Yang. I'm going to go to the meeting. Christine Yang. Good morning. My name is Christine Yang and I am a wellness counselor and case manager at Korean Community Center of the East Bay. I'm speaking on items. Item three. I work speaking on item three. I work with folks from the APA community from ages nine to 90 to help them tackle various challenges in life. Okay, a big portion of my work is to talk about street safety issues with monolingual seniors who live independently in affordable housing complexes. Throughout Chinese elders, I hear many stories. One of the incidents shared repeatedly by them was about a resident who was stabbed with a knife about a year ago and still recovering. None of his possessions were taken that day, but his sense of security and peace was stolen and his dignity and independence were robbed. He never gave me his own narrative of the incident because he could not begin to retell the story without shedding tears and choking up. When I share some information about trauma and activities to cope, he made sure that he could access the content of his film. He wanted to heal. He wanted to move on. And maybe he had been waiting for the right words in the right language. We've been able to reach people like him with the funding under the Corrimental Health Services Act. If this funding's taken away, how would these stories be told and who would reach and offer support for those who are silent about their trauma? We're asking the Board of Supervisors to prioritize services for communities that have been historically marginalized as a advocate in a state level for PI programs to continue receive funding, and to advocate for the programs that are crucial to our communities mental health and wellbeing. Thank you. I'm going to go to the next slide. Lawrence, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Hi, my name is Lawrence Abbott. I'm six. My baby brother, theodore is dead and we all thought he would certainly out live us all. And I want to put that in perspective. The main thing I want you to do, what I'm begging you to do is I oppose item six because it delays implementation of a state law SB 43 and SB 43 is really good because it allows people with severe mental illness and substance use disorders to be 5150, which we could almost never get from my brother over the 40 years that he suffered and our family suffered in Alameda County. And, you know, if they can't manage their own physical safety or medical care. So, finally, the state had to step in. I just wanted to say that I'm a political organizer with the Alameda Labor Council. I help elect labor-friendly candidates to public office, which is really great. Unions are powerful and donate to candidates. They get the attention and help for their workers and, you know, really important stuff. But that severely mentally ill, people like my baby brother, which gets a frenia, are the least powerful and the most vulnerable in our communities. And they suffer so and they usually die very young and often on the streets. So please, please, please stop the delay. The county needs to find a way to implement SB 43 now to say that we kept implement it now means that you know that people are sick and need help and you're not going to give it to them and they're going to die. Thank you, Paz. Maury? Hello Board of Supervisors. Thank you so much for having us here today to be able to represent ourselves, our families, and our communities. My name is Mori Chom and I will be speaking on behalf of Item No. 3 today. I am a refugee immigrant, also a daughter of genocide survivors. I'm 43 years old and it wasn't until recently when I made my move to the Bay Area in around 2008, 2010, where I discovered mental health prevention early intervention programs that were working with communities who were monolingual, providing them services that were really sensitive and appropriate and responsive, culturally and linguistically. I have been able to witness the programs and services effectiveness, meaningful impact, on not only individuals who would otherwise feel the stigma that has been for decades swept underneath the rug in our refugee and immigrant communities. It is through the services and programming of UELP prevention early intervention services that we've been able to recognize the stigma community-wide and collectively to be able to come together and recognize our traumatic passes and the journey forward towards healing. I've never seen a program this innovative and it's sad to say, and I beg you to please continue to support prevention early intervention for our marginalized communities. Thank you. Healthy Year on the Line. Please state which item you're Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Healthy Black. You're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. On mute your mic. Good. Morning. My name is Leonid Davis. I am deputy executive director and Healthy Black Families. And I'm here to support items to speak on items 26 and 26.1 and 62. Healthy Black Families serves of a black community and families supporting health equity, advocacy, and policy development throughout the community. We provide services for families throughout Alameda and Contra Costa County. We are located in Berkeley, South Berkeley. I'm pleased to see the funding for youth services out outworks and West Ocon Health Center and BIA. I am also here in protest of any cuts made to the mental health services in Alameda County and to continue to bring to the attention to the board that there if there's any funding adjustments to M MHSA funds and resources need to go to fulfill the need for culturally competent and congruent mental health services for the Black African American and African communities, as well as other vulnerable and marginalized communities and community-based organizations in Alameda County, especially to organizations like Healthy Black Families and the African-American Holistic Resource Center. It is past time to front an African-American mental health center and to offer free comprehensive mental health services in Alameda County to individuals, families, youth, and children. Funding for this is imperative based on mental health processes in our communities, especially with IU. What we do today creates the future and impacts the lives and the qualities of lives for generations. Help people act your time is up. Malchum. Malcolm. I the I and I'm sorry. My name is Mao and I live I am a refugee and immigrant. I came here to Oakland in 1993 and I have been a survivor of Khmeru genocide. I came here to want to let you know that I found Siri in 2010 and I start attending a group and get my treatment there support one another, I really, that made me feel at home and my anxiety has eased down. And so without Siri, I would be at a loss. And please, please do not cut that funding. And I really urge the supervisor to support UELP program and support our community and agency that Siri has been supporting myself. Thank you. I'm going to check with the clerk to see how many more speakers we have because we have set items at 11 o'clock. Oh, 16 and 5 on the right. So the 21 speakers who are still prepared to speak. I need to take up the set items at 11 o'clock then we'll come back to all of you the 21, the 16 that are here in the 5 online. All right. Because we have do this these set items. It's 11 o'clock now So so the first set item I'm going to is item 80 And that's a commendation for Zoe with Jess Korot We Jess Harri believe is she here? Yes, great. And if I mispronounce your name, please excuse my pronunciation. Zoe, we'll Jess Karara Dorado. Let me just, let me read this commentation because I've been waiting to do this for a while, because she really needs to be recognized. Whereas it is with great pleasure and utmost honor that we extend our recognition to Zo. A remarkable young individual who exemplifies the pinnacle of academic excellence, leadership and community involvement. Her exceptional achievement as the 2023 U.S. presidential scholar stands as a testament to her unwavering commitment to excellence and service. Whereas a graduate of Kasha Valley High School, those selection as one of the esteemed 2023 U.S. presidential scholars is a testament not only to her outstanding academic prowess but also to her exceptional leadership and community engagement. In a pool of approximately 3.6 million graduating high school seniors, once again 3.6 million high school graduating seniors, seniors. Those exceptionalism shown through securing her place among 161 scholars selected nationwide. So the pool was 3.6 million and 161 were selected and she's one of the 161. The U.S. Presidential Scholarship, Scholars Program founded in 1964 to identify and honor the nation's most promising students. Recognizes those individuals who showcase exceptional talent and dedication. Those invitation to this distinguished cohort stands as a testament to her exceptional achievements and her exceptional performance on SAT or ACT exams, marking her as a standout candidate. Those commitment to her studies, leadership, and involvement within her community is truly commendable. Her dedication to academic excellence is not only a reflection of her own hard work and commitment, but also a source of inspiration for her peers in the broader community. Furthermore, her selection has one of the 12 presidential scholars from California, just 12 from California, the state with the most scholars this year, as a testament to her exceptional abilities and dedication. So whereas her accomplishments transits in mere academic success, they embody a spirit of leadership, community engagement, and dedication to making a positive difference in the world. Her selection as U.S. presidential scholar is a recognition well deserved and a source of immense pride for her, her family, Kessler High School, their entire community, and I dare say, entire border supervisors. We'd be resolved that the board in this county, this state is hereby extend a heartfelt congratulations to you on the incredible achievement. May your journey continue to inspire others and serve as a shining example of dedication, talent, and the pursuit of excellence. So I, my colleagues, come down, we're going to take a picture with you, and then you can make some remarks. Let's give her a big round of applause. you I'm going for the Board of Supervisors for recognizing this. I think a lot of why God this recognition was because I care a lot about my community and programs like FHA and those that do these early prevention programs and support youth and their mental health is really important to me, especially as it relates to arts education and art accessibility, which is kind of like what the presidential scholar and the arts award is about. And so for me, I want to really connect art and community and how we can use art as a way for mental health services and things like that. So I don't know, I think like what I want to do is, I don't know. I didn't really prepare anything, but yeah, I'm just going to reiterate that programs like FAAJ really helped me assert my values in my community and I hope that you save pension. And yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Hello, thank you very much for the opportunity to speak. I absolutely did not prepare anything, but thank you very much for this wonderful honor for my daughter, Zoe. Very proud of her and all of her accomplishments and just to piggyback on what she said. It's a very important program like FHA that help communities grow youth in particular and also help build great leaders as well. And like yourselves leaders who help and dedicate their lives to their community and and funding groups like FHA and other groups in Alameda County are very important for looking into the future of our county and for our communities. Thank you so much. So thank you, you have a very proud and it's very great to have a students and young people at Zoe in our community throughout Alameda County and have parents that are helping to raise these type of young people as well. So once again, thank you. So we have another commendation. We're going to present this morning. And once again, it's a pleasure to present this. And this is also to some young folks as well. And after I read the commendation, I will have my senior colleague, Supervisor Carson, come down and take a picture with me and the young men and any of their parents are here as well. Frank, you want to bring that young man on up here? So people can see him. And I don't know if there's any young ladies. This is OK. So this is 100 Black men of the Bay Area and the Oakland Pal team, Oakland. Whereas a hundred black men of the Bay Area and the Oakland team, pal Oakland, comprised of nine talented boys and girls, age 12 to 15, participated in the 55th International Children's Games held in Da-Goo South Korea from July 5 to July 10. Whereas the team completed a competed in track and field events showcasing exceptional dedication, support internship, and teamwork, and proudly brought back to Oakland five medals, two gold, two silver, and a bronze. And whereas Mark Alexander and Frank Tucker, members of a hundred black men of the Bay Area, accompanied and monitored the Oakland athletes during the international competition, also serving as delegates representing the city of Oakland in the international cultural exchange for DaGoo Mayor's reception. Whereas the international children's games promoting principles such as fair play, equality, respecting and accepting differences, friendship and the Olympic spirit provided an enriching and culturally diverse platform for the youth. And whereas every participant from team Oakland became an ambassador of these great values, representing not only themselves, but also the City of Oakland and the United States, fostering global connections and understanding. Whereas the exposure gained through such international competition serves as an excellent leadership development resource for our youth, allowing them to experience new cultures and meet children from around the world. Therefore, we had resolved that the board of this county expresses our heartfelt congratulations to the Black men of the Bay Area and the exceptional young athletes of Team Oakland for their exemplary performance, sportsmanship, and representation on the global stage. Now, and I'll repeat that. That's the global stage. Thank you. You folks are just to be commended. Now supervisor Carson He was recognized recently at the 100 black men gala to receive the community Service award. So I definitely want to see if he has any marks, but also when I haven't come get a picture with me and the others Yeah, thank you very much, President Miley. I mean, other than the, and I'm very pleased that you recognized this incredible group that participated, but in addition to what they accomplished, and in addition to the opportunity that they had to experience their travels to Korea. Prior to all of that, it brought in their understanding and education of the world beyond where we live. And I do want to underscore the fact that these are not just the trips for the games. It is that, but it's a lot more that Frank and Mark Alexander and the 100 Black men spent a whole year putting together a program that includes our community to educate people around where they're going. Alex Han from the Korean community and others spent time opening up doors, educating so that it wasn't just the games, it was expanding their understanding and connection with the entire world. That's immeasurable. So I do want to underscore that. And we are very proud of you. You are new ambassadors, not just under the track and feel, which again, I want to underscore every single year at UC Berkeley in the month of May, there's the international games that go on that's hosted by the 100 Black men, and UC Berkeley has been very supportive of it. That's something I would encourage people to participate and support and attend every May to see these young people from our community engaged in track and field, showing that it's still alive. And I want to thank you all for that ongoing effort to do that. Really pleased and proud of what you do. And that shows another example of community-based organizations that are grassroots doing things in our community that normally don't get the kind of recognition that they deserve. And I want to digress for a second, because I know a lot of people might leave. I'm totally excited to see all second because I know a lot of people might leave. I'm totally excited to see all of you in the audience. Everybody in the audience, we have not had this kind of attendance for people to speak up for themselves, for themselves in a long time. So this is exciting to me. Give them a round of applause. I'm sorry. you I'm Frank Tucker, a member of the 100 Black men of the Bay Area, And I want to thank the entire board for recognizing our youth for what they've done for their families, what they've done for the city of Oakland, what they've done for Alameda County, for the state, for the United States. These young men and women And women traveled overseas and represented us with dignity and with class. As they waved the American flag, as they waved the Oakland flag, all eyes of the world looked at them and said, hey, not only did they accomplish and bring home the goal, bring home the silver, bring home the bronze, but they also showed the class that we have here in our city, in our community. They represented and they represented well. So I'd like to personally thank our youth for what you've done. I'd like to thank our coaches, Coach Flood, Coach Nola, Coach Margaret Dickson can't be here. She's ill, but of course, our coordinator, one-neter, and the anchor for all of health and wellness for the 100 black men of the Bay Area who's made a difference in what started out as kids, a lot of them are adults out here at their 30s and 40s, but Dr. Mark Alexander, Dr., you're the anchor of this, you've made it happen. Supervised, the Miley came through for us in the clutch. We had to bring, I found out that we had to meet the mayor of Daegu South Korea. And of course, in the community, in the Asian community, there's always a gift exchange. So I said, oh no, we don't have a gift where college, city hall, Mark Alexander is running to a world import and getting coffee bugs. What could we do? Nate came through for us. Nate came through, gave us a beautiful gift with the county logo, a crystal that we exchanged. So thank you, brother Nate. And of course, our 100 brother, who's up here at the Diaz brother Keith Carson, Keith has come through for the 100, for, what, about 30 years now, and has really made a difference for our health and wellness program. Of course, the international children's games is one of the key elements of our health and wellness. Because it keeps our youth healthy. It gets them college scholarships. It gets them international exposure. We're going to be in a Leon, Mexico next year. But I'll you travel the world representing everybody here in this room. So we thank you all. Thank you. Thank you. Good morning. Good morning. All right. I am Coach Flood and thank you on behalf of the 100 Black men and the county of Alameda for sponsoring us and on so many ways that you've gone from the gift from supportive words and thoughts about us traveling. And I just want to say guys, we did it, we have another title, we are ambassadors. We knew that, but to be when someone says that, then you officially that. So they did everything that it said is true, as far as them holding up the dignity, holding up the spirit of Oakland, holding up what it is to be even American. Because we did have some experiences where they had to take the high road as far as things as far as racism. We had experienced European racism while we was there. So the kids really did exemplify what it is to be this ambassador of the first of all themselves, the parents, the representative, the hundred black man, the representative, this Oakland. So I'm really proud to be a part of this organization. Pride of you guys. The journey is still going. From when we, before we even left, we were doing things like going to, going out to eat, going to the Korean Center San Francisco and it's still going. So congratulations guys. And I'm so proud to be a part of this organization. And I'm representing for Coach Dixon, who started this whole thing as far as with Oakland Powell, which really is a corner or a piece of it all as well. So she dedicates herself and her life to being in Oakland and representing Oakland and the youth and giving back to youth. And on the world stage, city stage, state level. So she can't be here today, but I know she should wish these words for you guys, okay? Thank you. Thank you. Applause. Any of the young men want to say anything? No? Thank you all. Thank the Board of Supervisors. Thank you all. Thank the Board of Supervisors. Thank you, Nate. Thank you, Keith. I'd like to thank you from Dr. Tommy Smith and his wife, the lowest myth. They send greetings to you, Keith. And I want to thank you for the support that we've got. It was a life on national news last year. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We've taken kids to Australia to Canada to Scotland, France, Greece. It's been an amazing adventure. We have sent many of our children have gone through gone on to college and gotten degrees. They've been inspired by this opportunity that we give them. This international travel and exposure gives our youth permission to dream and expose them to world cultures. It's just an incredible experience. So thank you, we look forward to your continued support and we'll continue to make Oakland and Alameda County proud of our youth. Thank you. Thanks, Danny. Thanks, Danny. So, I... Applause We need to take public comment on items 80 and 81. So, and we had folks who were still in the queue to speak 16 in the audience and other five online. So if you wanna speak on items 80 or 81, if you would also indicate that to the clerk, so you could speak on items 80 and 81, and then we'll also take the other speakers that we still had all left over from earlier, the 16 in the audience in the 509. So if we could have the call the speakers again. Colle, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. I'm a psychologist and the director of practicum training at the right institute. I'm also faculty at the right institute in Berkeley. I'm concerned here about item 62, which pertains to the defunding of the Carl B. Matorier Center for Family Counseling. I'm a psychologist and the director of practicum training at the right institute. I'm also faculty at the right institute in Berkeley. I'm concerned here about item 62, which pertains to the defunding of the Carl B. Matorier Center for Family Counseling. As a teacher and trainer of future psychologists, I hear throughout this meeting that calls for better and more effective health care for the most vulnerable residents of Oakland. But at the same time, I hear that the GSA is defunding the Center for Family Counseling after four decades of service when they work explicitly at the level of prevention and reducing barriers to mental health with a great deal of experience in treating but also training new providers to provide culturally competent services to black communities in Oakland. At the right institute, we've been working with the Center for Family Counseling for many, many years and relied on them to give some of the best training available for the next generation of leaders of color and mental health. But I've been watching mental health services for black residents be defunded over the last five years and shockingly, they're eventually in a few of those left that train new mental health providers. The Center for Family Counseling is the only one left that explicitly trains psychologists and doctoral level providers on working black communities. It's my understanding that the agency that is being funded has no experience training doctoral providers and clinician of color. We can't afford to move crucial services out of the neighborhoods that they serve and if we want to continue to claim that we care all about supporting youth and black communities we need to keep funding them. Ivy capsule. I'm going on item 62. My name is Ivy and I am a Latina mental health clinician. I provided culturally affirming and trauma-informed free counseling services with Carl B. Mintoia Center for Family Counseling in East Oakland. As someone who works directly with the people in this community, I have seen firsthand the value of community care and need for accessibility to mental health services. Defunding this vital resource will impact the community more deeply than I can express in 1.5 minutes. Continuing to remove access to resources will continue to worsen racial and health inequities. This community needs as much love and healing as possible and our people deserve quality care. Please overturn the GSA's recommendation and help keep the center open and available to help our youth. Thank you. Thank you. speaking on please unmute your mic. Zoom 4. Zoom 4 you're on the line. I'm John. John. You're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. I'm John. We're all pretty much. 92. I also want to speak to sex. And. I speak to sex and the election's mission was pretty much for Helen at least. She was very much involved in the ranked choice voting. And what my point is is that we need to get the focus off that and get it more into what the issues are rather than you know, the makeup. This thing is really not serving the people well. We've got people, you know, concerned with SB 43. Well, SB 43 is because we elected people who were not looking at the real problems and that this mental health problem has been around for decades and yet they just got around to it. Now they took everything and just dumped it right on the county. The county's going, hey, we're not really ready for this. And I can understand the pressure from the people coming in, but the people got to understand these people up in the state, the ones that you elected there, they neglected this problem for the entire state, for decades. And now they're rushing it through. But you know, yeah, we need help and the county should step up. But look at your elections. Take them seriously, because they are consequent. and the county should step up. But look at your elections. Take them seriously, because they are consequent. Captain Fisher. Captain Fisher. Diana Lam. I'm going to go to the next floor. Diane. The I'm speaking on item number 62. I'm a daughter for a few Gs and a therapist of color that formally trained at the Carl B. Matoyer Center for Family Counseling. Thank you again for the six month extension, but we need a multi-year contract that will continue to provide services to youth and families in deep East Oakland. I'm a native of East Oakland and my community is a deeply rooted one that is so full of love and light. Defunding these services would continue to perpetuate a cycle of violence in my community. And the Center for Family Counseling has historically trained the most black therapists and therapists of colors in the Bay Area since the 70s. The training I've received at CFFC is invaluable and it's been a deep honor to serve the community I come from. Thank you. I'm going to ask the committee to give a round of questions. Thank you. Hunter, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Yes. Hi. This is Hunter Cobb of Alameda, Alameda City. I'm speaking on item 92.1, the resignation of Helen Hutchison from the Election Commission. I appreciate the fact that Ms. Hutchinson resigned when it became apparent, as I understand, that she had violated the basic rule of impartiality of a member of the Commission. And I'd just like to point out, in terms of in appointing her replacement, I think it's important to look at the bigger picture of what we have to deal with. When past 20 years or so, especially since 2020, there has been a huge change in how elections are conducted. We've shifted from mostly one day voting in precincts with tabulations of votes done in precincts at the end of the day to mostly mail-in votes over several weeks with industrial style handling and tabulation of votes. Many parts of the process are now hidden to observers and there was concern concerning public access to viewing the election processes, but these have been violated in recent elections and complaints about this have been ignored by the registrar voters. Do you matters will be a big challenge to this election commission? That's a question. Is it even possible to have such a mail-in with them conducted in a transparent way? Thank you. So, Lotte? Good afternoon. Board of supervisors. My name is Salah De Lutui. I am a mental health specialist for the Pacific Islander Wellness Initiative. And it's been a great honor to see lives changing in my community. Marriage, relationships saved, leading to marriage, individuals getting better with their anxiety and depression. I've been working in this role for two years, and I've seen the transformative work that this program provides. And I thank you so much for funding it. We need it because people of color rather go to a clinician of color and a person that is culturally sensitive and is knowing. And so I beg you, please continue to find programs like this and others as other people feel comfortable to talk to people who look like us. People of color, we know this struggle. We were trying to live in this community in this US United States and trying to live a better life. And mental health services are deeply needed. Thank you so much. Mary, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Thank you. My name is Mary Dury. I am a doctor of psychology. I am one of the people that Dr. Thompson referred to as having been trained at the center, the calling materiore center for family council. I trained there in the late 70s. I was the executive director in the early 80s. And during the last 20 years, have served on the board. I couldn't be more eloquent than the people who have spoken about the value of this service to the community and the direct value to the clients. But I'd also like to underscore the indirect value it has to the whole community and the training of professions there. I'm an example of it. I took the learning and training I had at this agency and into the rest of my professional career, state and Oakland, I'm a resident of East Oakland and feel indebted actually to this community and to this agency. And it's heartbreaking to me that they have to divert their energies to help fight for survival. They've been at this for 47 really good years and may they continue. Thank you. H&T, H&T, H-E-W-A-N. Thank you very much for giving us this opportunity. Can you hear me? Okay. I'm Mona Afari, an immigrant, therapist, founder of CERI, a non-profit organization that was founded in response to the need of 100 Cambodian survivors of the Cameroos genocide who were struggling with PTSD and needed mental health support. For the first five years, we used Medi-Cal, but Medi-Cal would only provide services for a limited period, severe diagnosis, and was not culturally congruent. Our youth and our survivors needed something much more than that. It was only after we received the NHSF funding that we were able to build a community of hope for our survivors and our youth. At CERI today we provide preventative and culturally relevant services to 1200 Southeast Asian survivors of war torture and genocide annually. And there is no stigma in receiving the innovative preventative mental health services. Losing this funding means losing the anchor that has provided mental health stability for a thriving and resilient Southeast Asian refugee community. We urge the Board of Supervisors to support the ongoing UELP preventative and early intervention services and programming. Thank you so much. Elijah Chum. Elijah Chum. All right. Good morning board supervisors. I'm speaking on item number three. I'm Elijah Chum, Director of Community Wellness and Advocacy for the Center for Empowering Refugees and Immigrants, lovingly known as Siri, based here in Oakland. I'm a child of Cambodian Genocide survivors, and I'm proud to stand by Mike May elders here this morning. Let's give them a round of applause. It has taken me 41 years to find language to speak to my elders and community members about healing from genocide and the intergenerational trauma that impacts the children. Siri is a sacred space of preventative mental health care and we are funded by the ULP program from Alameda County Behavioral Health. We are steeped in cultural humility and offer 15 different languages and we humbly learn and unlearn from the lived experiences of our community. At Siri, we weave and connect different modalities of healing from Western models of therapy and support groups for our elders and mothers and youth. We also offer ancestral traditions like Buddhist chanting, dancing, community gardening. We also offer drama therapy. We mobilize for political action. We offer leadership and workforce development. We sing, we cook, and we share food. Through our various forms of preventative engagements, we are breaking down systems of abandonment and rejection. We join the anti-deportation movement to keep families together. And we offer these wraparound care and services, and especially to the 1.5 generation who are most vulnerable to deportation. So thank you for today and keep PEI at ULP programs. Thank you. Alison Monroe. And Monroe here from Oakland. Regarding item 56, I agree with John Lindsay Polin, the budget process needs to be transparent regarding item three. The MHSA report, although MHSA has done a lot of good things for many people, it is not solved the problem of serious mental illness because it is not focused on the most seriously mental illness and because the money in that program can't be used for involuntary programs. Now SB 43 does apply to the most seriously, mental, who are in danger and that's why I'd like you to find a way to implement SB 43 as soon as possible. That's item six. A lot of people have asked you to vote no on item six. It is a moral issue because so many people with SCD and SMI are going to die in the next couple years. Because of fentanyl overdoses. That's what happened to my daughter after the county spent a great deal of money trying to keep her alive. And about 200 people died last year in this county from fentanyl overdoses alone. And meth now has fentanyl in it. It's not safe for the person who doesn't have the sense they were born with to do injectable or smokeable meth anymore. I'd like you to delay implementation by one year only, and to ask for a three months update like Sacramento and San Diego counties have. There's also a petition online with 850 signatures supporting implementation of SB 43. Thank you. Christopher P. The speaker after that will be Samuel Raimi. Christopher P. Good morning. My name is Christopher Pryor. Born here in Oakland, California in 1962. I watch Oakland go from a community of African Americans to a community supporting the world. But my community is gone. It's in the streets now. That's why I'm at. I'm feeding the homeless going blind, God diabetes, but I'm still out there in the fight. I'm a soldier. And all I'm telling you is that we need to get good food. This is why people go to dialysis. This is why people are sick. It's the food. We need better food. And I've been getting it. Vice President Herbert, Ronnie Forbes, Colleen, I'm just telling you, it needs to change the food and we need to change our attitudes because racism, those young men shouldn't want to South Korea and face racism. But we face racism right here every day. I've been facing this since 1962. My mother came here from Puerto Rico, Santucci, New English and Alameda County tried to lock her up for $400 because she wanted to better her life. But I'm here fighting for everybody, especially the streets. They need us. then speaker after Mria Raimi. I'm with the California Open Union and other homeless with mental health outreach for independent living. We have a world problem. And the infection is started from America. I'm speaking from, what's that? 1.2, but it's gonna be 2. Only Ukraine. I'm against this, but I'm for this. We the people. For for Ukrainian. How can you train in the village of Germany to eligible resident on behalf of the county social services agency. I have a problem when I don't have a problem with them because everybody most in America is an immigrant except the native Indian. Everybody in here come from another country. We all are one. All these wars and this thing is causing me a hell hell that's why Prince Harry came here two years ago in July It's a good and take it's a world problem. It's not just a community problem war destroyers people alive Okay, oppression starts People alive homeless destroyers alive people in mental health. We are already going out and doing outreach to bring them here. We need our facility so we can do the work. And I need that facility. We're going to work wherever we got food. We got some as clothes for, we don't know what to do with. We need space to put the storage clothes for the homeless. We don't have no place to go to work. We got a ton of clothes. I need a program. Thank you. Matthew Culley. After Mr. Culley will be Chris. Chris Lubaina. I'm going to go to the next slide. Good morning. My name is Matthew Cully. I'm a resident at back on 16th Street and speaking on item 29. Although the historic building is owned by the city of Oakland, due to negligence, it is not compliant with California law or what any same person would describe as hospital for humans. In contrast to California title 25 code 34, most rooms do not have heaters, much less ones able to maintain 70 degrees Fahrenheit through P above the floor. We are fed one mill a day, which is put out buffet style at 2pm and left out until midnight. These meals often contain cooked chicken, which serves safe standards, does not permit to be left out for over two hours in that style. My room has no doorknob and doesn't close fully. The shared bathroom has a broken shower. Lights in the hall are out and maintenance is not happening. People are getting sick and this historic building is in disrepair. When it is government owned and we are charged 30% of our income to stay there, we are wondering why. Why is it that in America the poor, the homeless, the impoverished are treated as a subhuman race? Are we not the land of the free, the home of the brave? Are we not the richest country in the world? Thank you. Chris? Hello? Hello? Okay, thank you. I'm going to go to the next slide. Hello. Hello. Okay. Thank you. Good morning, respective board of supervisors, also respective county administration and council. Just want to say what a room we have here today. A lot cooler this morning. But the presence is still strong. My name is Chris and I'm speaking to item three as an ally to the Korean Community Center and also everyone in this room. I'm a graduate student parent at UC Berkeley. I'm also a social impact entrepreneur through the Real People's Fund. And have been a community care provider for over seven years in Alameda County and also SF County for residents housed and unhoused with moderate to severe physical and mental health co-occurring disorders. As a community organizer part of the family housing at UC Berkeley Village of Albany, this community is home to communities of culture, international students, and first gen students. Domestic violence has actually been a longstanding issue since the 90s and occurs at higher rates in the village compared to the rest of the community. It is only getting worse. As someone who is impacted by DV growing up and currently living in the same structural conditions that create unsafe home environments, my learnings as an organizer is that DB cannot be addressed with without grounding community and trust. Prevention is key to unlocking care and access is everything. Thank you. Reverend Kim Chambers. members. Reverend Chambers. Good morning to Board of Supervisors, President, to all of you. Thank you so much for this opportunity. I am President of the Interfaith Council of Alameda County, which runs a safe car park program. Over the last five years, we have ran program for serving about 900 clients. In this program, they drive in at seven, they drive out at eight in the morning. They get a snack, they get daily water. We do DMV registration for them. Up to $300, we do minor auto repair. We keep it car running and legal in on the streets. We even offered assistance with driver license. We didn't job referral, wraparound service. We bring in different other organizations and nonprofits that can help and assist. We give them work projects that they go out and they do other work projects into the community. We give them a $20 a week gas fund when they park four out of five days. What we do with this safe car park program is to keep it going, keep the people cars running, keep it legal, keep them off the streets, keep them in a safe environment. Basically, for the last three months, we have worked with totally volunteers. Closing the program down, the 29th of this month. And it will be closed permanently if it wasn't for this opportunity of supervisors Carfson's office to offer us some emergency assistance. Now, last but not least, and quickly, see if of Oakland going tonight for $450,000 to expand this program to two different sites. One would be William Chapel which we have the pastor William Chapel here in the presence of this meeting and the second one would be downtown Oakland at Corinthians Baptist Church. We will be able to serve 100 people per night. You have to grab up. All right. What item were you speaking on? Item 26. Okay. And if you would like to add another 50,000 today, we will share. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. I just got to say thank you supervisor Carson for your long. Can we give supervisor Carson a hand everybody? He's retired. Abnoble. Thank you. Tina, you're on the line. State which item you're speaking on? I'm addressing item six and on SB 43. I'm a little shocked to hear people from the community asking for no expansion of grave disability when which was such a narrow window of assistance that got him no assistance when he was suffering from cellulitis that led to sepsis. If you can't help yourself or get help from an EMT when your leg is so red and it looks like you have elephant isis and the EMT is saying, well you're in the parking lot of a CVS so therefore you're showing you can help yourself. So they turned him away. That's absurd to me. That's a system that is, as we say, broken. And it also seems like it's a system that's just denying care people for vegetarian excuses as opposed to really looking at what is indeed gravely disabled. So people with severe, severe, sensabuse issues, people with very serious mental illness who lack insight into their condition, social workers, other people on the scene, they all know that the term gravely disabled is way too narrow for them to offer help. It needs to be expanded. I urge you to wait no longer than a year to expand the term and get people the help they need as soon as possible. It will save lives. I am desperate in urging this request. Thank you and have a thank you for your timing consideration to mental health and keep expanding every program you can. We're in a very serious crisis. Thank you. Caller, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. I just want to urge to the office recognition that every dollar spent on healthcare saves 5, 10, 25 dollars on half-fettles and prison cells. That's all. Speaking to Secretary too. the your mic 710. 510 710 please unmute your mic. I'm going to go to the next slide. Karen, you're on the line. Please state which item you're speaking on. Hi, everyone. My name's Karen. I live in district five and I work in downtown Oakland serving all of Alameda County, especially those impacted by the car fuel system, which is also heavily impacted with mental health and substance abuse. And I'm here to speak for, I believe it's item number three, asking the Board of Supervisors to continue funding underserved ethnic and language programs for prevention and early intervention. Newsom proposes the Modernization Act that reallocates funding from our programs, from the programs for affordable housing substance use and those with severe mental health. I just want to be here to reiterate the needs spoken to and shared by the Korean Community Center of East Bay so that to encourage y'all to continue funding their programs and the work that they do today to stay confined other funds for other causes instead of letting you know these healthcare workers fight for this piece of funding so they can keep their doors open and continue to provide incredibly important work to an underserved community. And I also see that there's funding for a allow family and I just wanna give my support to their work as well. And I believe that's item two. No additional speakers. So Clark's informed me me there's no the speaker such as I'll make sure any of the speakers on items that are not the set items. Other than item 80 and 81 and he speakers on item 80 and 81 but not the set item 82 or the two o'clock set items. Okay, so we've heard all the speakers. I gave you a minute and a half today because we had so many speakers. Appreciate everyone speaking this morning to the Board of Supervisors. So I'm going to now go back to Board comments because I wanted to make some comments. I didn't want to make my comments until the underserved arrived and he's here. I think many of us know the underserved Rich Lucia will be retiring. This will be his last Board of Supervisors meeting. And I wanted to take the liberty of making some remarks and maybe other board members might want to make remarks in the sheriff and county administrator. I've known me under sheriff since I've been on the Board of Supervisors. In fact, when former sheriff Charlie Plummer used to have the jailbreak run, so run with the underirt of that big hill out near the Santa Rita jail in the training center. I mean, that's quite a run of that hill. It's not for the thing of heart. I know the SWAT team runs up the hill quite a bit. And I know with the undershirt of Lucia, he generally was the person that I and my office would call upon normally to both get information and to receive information regarding any number of things regarding the Sheriff's Department. It's not like we couldn't communicate with Sheriff Plummer or Sheriff A-Earn, but generally under Sheriff Lacheev was the person we would normally communicate with. So I know the Sheriff is well deserving of his retirement. Let me just go through some of his accomplishments. He began his work in law enforcement in 1969. When he was starting in law enforcement in 1969, I was graduating from high school. So a long time ago, hired by the Alameda County Sheriff's Department in 1995. Sheriff Charlie Plummer promoted Richard Lcia to Under Sheriff in 2006. He was under Sheriff for 17 and a half years. 12 of those years were as retired and new attend. And I know, I mean, I've only known two under Sheriff since I've been here. Under Sheriff Lucia and under Sheriff Curtis Watson, who was African American, and was, I think, a very exemplary under Sheriff as well. Under Sheriff Lucia increased sworn staffing by 200, including deputies, sergeants, lieutenants, captains, commanders, and professional staffing by 125. He created the Youth and Family Service Bureau through grants and partnerships. And what most people don't understand with Youth and Family Service Bureau, that is so unique to law enforcement because they have clinicians in that bureau. They do things that are preventive. They do things that are intervention. So it's just not strictly law enforcement, but they do all of those things through youth and family service bureau. And that bureau serves the unincorporated area and beyond. But I know it's primarily focused in the unincorporated area. He created the motorcycle unit through grants and work through the CHP issues with Sheriff Plumma resulting in the CHP cash valley office. And just to speak about that, I know when Sheriff Plumber was here, both he and I had concerns about the CHP and their commitment to traffic safety and law enforcement in the unacorporated area. Not that the CHP wasn't capable, but they had an obligation not just to police the highways, but their obligation is to provide traffic enforcement on the streets in the unincorporated area. So I know the sheriff and I and clearly the undershirt really pushed hard to make sure the CHP understood their responsibilities in the unincorporated area. I'm sure if Lichia created existing BEAT and sector systems at the Eden Township Substation and was instrumental in increasing staffing at the Eden Township Substation implemented 12-hour shifts at the substation. He created the Valley substation through efforts with our former colleague, Supervisor Haggert, the county administrator and COPS office grants. He facilitated the Alameda County Sheriff's involvement with a Void, the 21 DUI campaign, which is really, really, really important to try to prevent people from driving under the influence of the so very important. Pioneer, the system, which became the multiple county-wide radio interoperability system known as the East Bay Regional Humanications System Authority. I know I serve on that. I don't go to any of the meetings, but I serve on it. I think David might be on it as the representative. Yeah. He's a founding member of UASI approval authority, Urban's Area Security Initiative, and the Bay Rich Mult-county data and our operability. Created the Paralta Community College Police Services which is now has been disbanded. He created the Social Services Police Service. Created the Children's Hospital Police Services which also has been disbanded. He created the Transit Crimes Unit through multiple year, multiple grants, with the cops office funding. And that has also, that particular piece has been disbanded. He created the airport police services through many difficult negotiates with the Port of Oakland and the Oakland Police Department. And we're not gonna go down that rabbit hole and talk about that, but we could. But it's in place now. Facilitated a 30% at 50 for sworn staff through MOU negotiations with the county and wrote the Senate bill which authorized the benefit through Asera, which is really, really important. I know that the sheriff has been with us in many closed session conversations around benefits for our sworn officers as well as our non-SWorn personnel and sheriff's department. And it should be noted that he assisted with many of these accomplishments by the hard working members of the Sheriff's Department because nobody does this work alone. They have to have good people working with them. I often say I'm only as good as the people I work with and I know the sheriff of the chair feels the same way. And I'm pleased to have worked with him and consider him a friend. And he definitely says he could not have accomplished these many accomplishments without the support of Sheriff Charlie Plummer who we all know was bigger than life. Charlie Plummer, he was a legend. And I'm just very, very delighted, I'm not delighted you're leaving us rich, but I'm extremely delighted that Sheriff Sanchez has appointed the first African-American female underserved who I've seen as a deputy in the unincorporated area, then as a sergeant, then as a lieutenant, a captain, now the underserved April over there. I'm just very, very delighted, April. So we have two females heading up the sheriff's department in Alameda County, women of color nonetheless. How progressive and how could can that be? Yeah, let's give them a round of applause. I mean, that is so phenomenal. And so I'm anticipating the department I mean, that is so phenomenal. And so I'm anticipating the department will continue to be cutting edge and go about discharging responsibilities in a professional and constitutional manner and with a lot of innovation. So I just wanted to recognize under Sheriff because this is his last meeting. I want to see if my colleagues have commensely like to make County Administrator and the sheriff. Any of my colleagues want to make any remarks about the under sheriff? Surprise of Carson. Thank you very much, President Miley, for giving the illustrious history of the under sheriff. Really appreciated. I had the privilege of my first known, that's not true. My second job in politics, working for Congressman Ron Delams for 15 years. And one of the things that Congressman Delam instilled in all of us who had the ability to work on his staff was that despite what your own beliefs are, your own positions are, if you feel that secure and deep about them, you should never ever be afraid to open up and hear somebody who might have a counter view, a counter position. And we saw that with some of the people who the congressmen interfaced with and operated with on a regular basis who were also his peers in congress. Some of them very questionable individuals, but it seemed as though he had developed not only a communication relationship with a friend relationship with. I feel very privileged that my time here on the board as supervisors has been a continuous learning opportunity for me every single day, every single meeting, every single opportunity is continuous education. And when working with the area of public safety, which has historically been an area that I've been one of the activists on prior to coming to the board. I had to learn need to understand public safety from the inside out because if you want to make any changes, you need to know it. You need to subsequently change not just philosophically but structurally. Charlie Plumber gave me that opportunity to do that, and for people who don't know, and they may have heard this before, Charlie Plumber arrested me when I was an activist in Berkeley. And I developed a very fond relationship with Charlie once I got on the board and appreciated him. The same thing with Greg Aherne. I never hesitated even on top and tough issues where I had a position to reach out and to engage in conversation with him. Many times from his point of view, it was a short conversation, but it was very pointed. And I appreciated that. But it really has been historically Rich LeCia, who has been kind of the sounding board to give me the understanding of the mechanics. So we may disagree, we may agree, but let me tell you how the car is built. And I think that that is so important. And to understand how things operate if you want to make change is to understand it. And so I personally want to say a big thank you for being an ongoing teacher to me and exposing me and giving me a better understanding of the mechanics to the extent that I can understand the mechanics of how the Sheriff's Office and law enforcement operates not only here but on a national basis because the fact that you've been able to sit at all of those tables and bring that information back to Alameda County and integrate it into how we operate is extremely valuable. But more importantly is through all of the engagement that I've had the privilege of having with Richelichia, the opportunity to get to know him as a human being, as a person, not as a person who works in the sheriff's office, not as the under sheriff, but as a human being and as a person. And I think it has been one of the value privileges as the undershirt, but as a human being and as a person. And I think it has been one of the value privileges of my life that my wife Maria and I and Lisa and you have had an opportunity to get to know each other as human beings. I wanna say thank you for that. That's long lasting. That's not momentary. That's not at the end of a retirement. And I appreciate that. And I appreciate you, Enlisa. Under Sheriff Luciep, I got to tell you I could not do my job without you. You are amazing. professional, prompt, all the answers that we need at our fingertips. I, my heart, from the bottom of my heart, I gotta tell you, I appreciate you. I appreciate getting notes from you saying how, and I'm proud that you're a district one resident, and I'll continue to serve you as best I can. And I'll echo my comments of my fellow board members, and indeed, Sheriff and under Sheriff, you're standing on the shoulders of great people, and I know that you're going to rise to the occasion and be just as great and I've already proven that. But for all the years of service, under Sheriff, thank you for all you've done for All of Me to County. Appreciate you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. so long. So thank you and I've always I'm getting to know you better now in my new role but I've always been aware of you you are a legend and Hayward as well. So thank you for your long standing commitment and service and I just really appreciate your positive attitude. You definitely have a can-do spirit always trying to advance issues in our county. So just thank you for your leadership and service and I wish you all the best. I also wanna extend my congratulations and appreciation. I don't know you as well as some of my other colleagues, but in the short time that I've been here, you've been extremely helpful when it comes to a lot of the youth and family programs and making sure that the board and myself, my staff stay informed particularly when we were dealing with some of the issues around the ESAL and their future. And I understand that based on the recitation from President Miley, you have out live a lot of great programs that you started and it sounds like we're coming full circle and having to implement some of them. And we are always impressed with your institutional knowledge and hope you can continue to share that with the office and with the county. I understand the last time we talked last week that you have five job offers but you're not taking any of them because your family is your first priority. Well thank you. Thank you for the opportunity and share up and under share if I think I speak on behalf of all of the department has the under sheriff you know has always been designated as the go to operations day-to-day contact for us and so we have certainly enjoyed that you know relationship and you've been a great supporter facilitator and you know we haven't always agreed but you've you know always been responsive and I think very direct with us and so I you know I've just mentioned that you know the areas that you know I think we've all worked with you on rich you know not not only the budget but certainly labor relations capital projects litigation so many other things. And I know that some may know that Rich also has a national reputation in terms of grants management and relationships certainly at the federal level with the COPS office and has been always creative and innovative around revenue and grant opportunities. And I think that's something that he leaves along legacy of. So, you know, the list it certainly go on. We really have seen you as a bridge over, you know, three sheriffs that I've had the opportunity to work with. And we look forward to working with Sheriff Sanchez and with Under Sheriff April Luckett, the Hemi as well. So thank you, good luck to you Rich. And you know, retired in Nootin's never really retired here. So we'll be seeing you. Thank you. I guess we know where one of those job offers came from, huh? I just see that Chief McDonald just entered the room. Maybe you've been there for a little bit, but I've been engaged with all the good well wishes and memories that are supervisors and our office and the county has had with our undershift. And I want to say, and I've already had a conversation with undershift which is as far as my gratefulness for him to stay on another year with the Sheriff's Office and it's you know it was very selfless of you and the fact that you it showed how committed you are to not only the Sheriff's Office but to our county residents and the fact that you have been in long for so long, and you've seen so many changes in the evolution of long for a moment, but I think the key is that, you know, with some individuals, the profession passes you by. But with this unique individual, he continued to make sure that he evolved with the profession. And so we've seen what he's been able to do and what he's been able to achieve. And I am grateful for his service, thankful that he has provided so much for our agency and our agency has a lot to be thankful for, or because of this man, and what he's been able to do in his time. With not only just the sheriff's office, but he had a pretty lengthy career with Hayward police as well. And so I still continue to hear of your history with the Hayward PD, and the fact that you are well respected, not only with those were our two agencies, but law enforcement across the board and even nationally. So I commend you for your heart, your dedication, for your service and we will definitely feel your absence on your last day for sure. Congratulations to you. So I'm a sheriff. Can we hear from you? I have no buttons to the party. It says speak and then I get to speak in this thing. Okay. Well, I'm honored beyond words. I mean, I'm usually pretty good with coming up with words. It's kind of hard. It's it seems like it was just yesterday. So Somehow you know 75 years goes by really fast. So those of you that Are we hopefully you'll all get to 75 plus and I can tell you when you get to 75 It just feels like you you just started with your life but as I look back on my career, my one hope always was that I would help people. When I took the oral board for the Hayward Police Department in 1968, they asked me, why do you want to become a police officer? And it's not such an unusual question, by the way, on oral boards. And my answer was because I want to help people. That's literally my answer, and that's been my mantra of my entire life, not just as a piece officer, but as a human. And the fact that I've managed to help people to a point where you feel compelled to say the very kind words that you did today means an enormous amount to me. The fact that Sheriff Sanchez has given me the opportunity to continue to do what I loved during the past year. I consider that a gift. I know that I have indicated that it wasn't wild about working for free for a lot of time, but I did it, and I don't regret even a second of it. So I won't bore you with a whole bunch more. But when I'm, let me just leave with this. I'll probably be seeing you all around here. Because there's a person that has a huge influence on my thought process who's probably sitting in this room besides the sheriff. And I would be remiss if I didn't listen to her. So with that, I'll just say, I'll probably see you around. Thank you very much. Well, thank you, and Sherif, and I'm sure we'll know when the party's going to take place so we can all get invited to your retirement. And I guess we will be seeing you around. You kind of give us some indication. So once again, congratulations on how many years of service have it? Over 40 years of service. Let's give another round of applause. Okay. So now we're going to go to our set item item 82, which is a public hearing. So item 82 is a public hearing and first reading and introduction of an ordinance amending a county ordinance to a public hearing and first reading and introduction of an ordinance amending a county ordinance to add the Alameda County Sheriff's Office annual military equipment report. Motion move move to open the public hearing. Second. I'll second move by how we're second by my kids. move to open the public hearing. Second. Second. Move by Howard, second by Marquez. We need to take a vote on opening it. Could you call the roll call? Supervisor Halbert. Supervisor Marquez. Hi. Supervisor Tam. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Miley. Yes. Okay. the president of the president of the president of the president of the president of the president of the president of the president of the president of the president of the president of the president of the president of the So, while they're getting that ready, good morning, first of all, or afternoon, I think, afternoon. My name is Miguel Campos. I'm a captain for the Sheriff's Office and I'm currently assigned to support services. This is my lieutenant Gustavo Morra. My role in this, back when this assembly bill 41 was created by the legislature, I was responsible for authoring the general order researching the assembly bill and the associated law that came with it and making sure that our agency developed a general order that was compliant with the assembly bill 41 regarding a military equipment and what the legislature defined as military equipment. Since then, that was, we got the ordinance approved by the board back in October 22nd of last year. Part of the requirements of the legislature was to have a annual report authored completed by the agencies for the year, preceding the approval of the ordinance. So we have our annual report that we have compiled, which is we have a presentation for that. The annual report is actually attached as well to the agenda. Part of the requirements of the annual report were to report on all of our usage on anything that's defined as military equipment for the agency. How we used it, what we used it for, how much money we spent, the training that was involved, and also part of that is to request any new items that we would like the board to authorize for the coming year. So I'm gonna let my lieutenant go through the presentation here since he's the one that created it. the Thank you. Good morning, supervisors. Again, my name is Lieutenant Maura, Gus Maura. We're under Captain Campos. So assembly bill 481, one was enacted. It requires law enforcement to create policy, which we, Captain Campos drafted about a year ago has been posted and approved by you. We also would require to do a military engagement meeting, which took place on November 17th when I get into that here in a minute. Any report was completed on time and was also posted on our website and submitted to the board of soups for approval. Thank you. Pre-government code 772, these are some of the items that we have to do to comply with the AB481. We're going to go over some of these items that are also on our very large military equipment report. I won't go over the whole thing with you guys. As far as usage, we use our military equipment 593 times during this reporting period. For 481 of those times was our drones or UAV units that we have. We use our military vehicles 92 times, less lethal munitions, 12 times, multi-projectile munitions twice, and EOD robots eight times. No funds were spent during this reporting period. Prior to this bill getting enacted, we had already acquired all of our military equipment. With exception of training, we have to do periodic training over our staff. They'll be covered here in a minute. We send one student to a one sworn officer to a Lesleto chemical agents school. 49 officers to a basic rifle tactical rifle school. 153 officers to recertification. Four new SWAT members join our team and attend a basic SWOT school and we had three SWOT members attend EOD school. We had several options for the public to contact us in case they have questions about our military equipment or they have complaints. We have posted our email which is the best way to reach either myself or Captain Campos. And these are some of the emails that we received recently or some of the concerns addressed by the public. The use of multi-projectile munitions, or also known as scattershot munitions, they also express concerns in regards to the retention of our footage from our drones when they get deployed. And I want to talk about that here in a minute. And last, concerns about putting weapons on our drones, which we've never done, but I'm going to talk about here in a minute. I am the military equipment coordinator. I took over Captain Campos when he promoted a captain. And an audit was conducted, a very lengthy audit during this report and no violations were noted or reported. Usage of our military equipment or violation of policy. And like I said, our military equipment report was provided through our website. It's been on our website for the last couple of months. It's about 150 pages long, so I'm not going to go over the whole thing with you unless you want me to. New acquisitions per AB 481. If we want to add a, or we want to request items to be added to our military equipment, we have to make those on a report. We would like to add a four additional, we currently have four, approved four, and we'd like to add two more to our inventory of the Matrice 30T. There's a new one that came out has better flight time, 45 minutes, flight time, a lot of nice features that can facilitate on searches. And we request in a total of 12, those. I'm a nation. We made a mistake during the initial request on the actual name of the Mination rifle Mination that is 200 rounds and this is just for a sake of transparency We just want to let you know that the appropriate name is the one at the top. We've we've request additional chemical agents and smoke canisters to be added to our inventory. You'll see what we add in amounts since we're removing a lot of them. 40,000 less lethal lunches and rounds. We also request these items to be added to our inventory. And this is the last slide as far as less lethal and impact rounds requested. And this is one of the reasons why we are asking for additional drones. This three specifically, a total of seven are were discontinued, so they will be removed from our inventory. We had a 250-cal submachine guns that were destroyed in July of this year. They're no longer on our inventory. And again, this is just a correction to initial approval for 200 rounds of rifle rounds. And this is why we're requesting additional rounds of less lethal to be added to our inventory. We get rid of all these decreased of 526 rounds of chemical agents and small canisters. This is part of that inventory of 40 less lethal munitions that we're removing for our inventory. A lot of them and things on the next slide are scattered shot of multi-project out rounds that we've received concerns about from the public. And with a total decrease of 979 rounds for my inventory. So, it's explains why we were requesting additional to be added. Through our compliance with AB481, we feel that the Sheriff's Office has fulfilled the requirements set forth by this bill. We have a policy in place that we just recently reviewed it and continue to stay on top of it. Overseas, the use of our military equipment, funding, and future acquisitions and any use of that equipment. This military equipment and your report reaffirms our commitment to providing transparency and information to communities and elected officials in addition to insurance compliance with a law. Like I talked about it, one of the things that we require to do is host a community engagement meeting. We reached out to some of you for this meeting. It was well publicized through all of our social media platforms on a website. We found a location that was centralized and convenience conveniently located for the public. And it was on Friday, November 17th at the Castro Valley Library. Over 35 members attended in person. We actually signed in, so we have that number. But we also provided this platform at the request of the public, live streamed, or virtual. We had a total of 110 members of the public that watched the meeting either life or later since it remained on our platform as well. Some of the public concerns that were brought up at that meeting or through our conversations, through email, is formal and informal training of the use of our military equipment, which we're going to talk about here in a minute. Like I said before, implementation or deployment of our drones and whether the staff, the response, the response on regular time or an overtime. So overtime was a concern by the public. Like I said earlier, they also expressed concern of how long now we're retaining the footage, or video footage from utilizing those drones, which is in request of better deletion policy, which I'm going to address here in a minute. Like I said earlier, the use of scatter shot or multi-projectile munitions, specifically concerns of incidents in the jail. We had as indicator on our report, we had two incidents where we used projectile munitions to address, we followed policy at the escalation steps in place before we'd resorted to this. The other concern was that all the counties in the Bay Area do not use multi-project outmanations like San Francisco, Santa Clara, San Mateo. In consideration of the public concerns of our subject matter experts that attended that meeting are currently revising and updating our policy in regards to when our drones authorized to be used and for what type of incidents with more restrictions. In regards to armying or having weapons on our drones, that policies have been updated to make it clear that we do not have weapons on our drones and we don't intend to have any weapons on our drones. We also review in and working with county council of belief in regards to better practice in regards to retention of video from recording videos during drone deployments. Multi-project nominations. We had some discussions and we reviewed those two incidents that we had in the jail. No injuries were reported. No policy violations either. We reached out some of those counties that were reported to us that had not deployed or had any multi-project top munitions. Santa Clara County has a CTS, 44-mil riot, CES, smoked multi-project top munition, and San Mateo County has the CTS thing, ball grenade, which is one of the munitions that we have. And I just want to close this since the public protection committee on June 22nd. The sheriff's office has taken into care for consideration the public's comments and concerns as a result. Several requests regarding multiple project out munitions have been removed. In addition, the approval of the aforementioned request will decrease the amount of less lethal munitions assessed by the sheriff's office by 783 items. 426, six of those are chemical agents and 357 of those are impact rounds. Out of all those, 609 are multi-projectile munitions being removed from our inventory, which one of the concerns from the public is to, well, we had this. And that concludes my short presentation. Thank you. I'll point out a number of comments before we inform the public. Yes. Questions or comments? Yes. Either way, yeah. Thank you for that report and addressing some of the comments that I'm sure we received for similar to the ones that you received. And I know our staff has been in contact with you. When you talked about the removal of the, is it four of the six scatter shot munitions, were those categories because you said in the end it was like 609 multi projectile munitions were being removed from your inventory. I'm trying to understand the difference. There's a couple of things going on here. Part of our, during our annual report and inventorying all of our less lethal items, part of the solution that we came up with with our SRE commander's came up with was to mainstream a lot of the solution that we came up with with our SRE commander came up with was to mainstream a lot of the items that we have. It affects how we're trained on them if we have two different types of the same unition but two different models. We got rid of one so that we can just streamline it and just keep another one instead. Like I said, it helps with training. Everyone's using the same items. Part of some of that is the scatter shot munitions that we're getting rid of. So we are getting rid of a lot of it. You know, in this past year and a half that I've been involved with this, I've been in constant communication with the board and with advocates as far as their concerns and with the community. And we have made a lot of changes. We hear what they're saying and we hear their concerns with the community. And we have made a lot of changes. We hear what they're saying, and we hear their concerns. Part of what we're trying to do now is find alternatives to the scatter shot munitions because we know that is a concern of the community. We don't want to get rid of them all yet because we don't have a replacement for our alternative for them. In order to find an alternative, we research and then we have to come to the board again to get it approved. So that takes, that's a process and that takes some time, which is what we're in the process of doing. But we don't want to get rid of them all yet because we don't have an alternative, but we are willing to get rid of, to most of them, but we want to keep them in our inventory just in case we use them. And as you can see, we've used them twice in the past year. Out of all the times we've used our military equipment, it's been 0.2%. With no injuries, I think that shows, and they're both in the jail, I think that shows that our staff is not eager, but we're never eager to use force in any case. But it's not our first go-to when we're trying to get compliance from an incarcerated person. Most of the time, we de-escalate for at least an hour. And part of that de-escalation involves getting multiple employees involved. Sometimes people don't respond to certain people for a certain reason, for whatever reason. But we try to get multiple people involved. Sometimes people don't respond to certain people for a certain reason, for whatever reason. But we try to get multiple people involved to try to talk to the person, supervisors, any clinicians we have in the jail, mental health, behavioral health. And also we have staff that are trained in crisis intervention, we get them involved. So we really go through all of our options before we resort to any sorts of use of force. We found that this item is effective in what it does, the scatter shot, and it's most effective in the fact that it's it's it's destructionary in nature. It is defined as a pain compliance But for us we found that the the best use for it is It's a loud bang. It's a loud bang You hear you see a flash and it distracts the incarcerated person for just those few seconds that we need in order to safely go hands-on and detain them We're looking for alternatives because we hear the concerns, but until we find those alternatives, we don't want to get rid of anything because it is useful to all this time. I see. You had also mentioned on the drone usage policy that you're going to be basically prohibiting adding weapons to the drone, is that going to be part of the compliance report? So that came up during our community engagement meeting. So the community engagement meeting per the legislation is supposed to occur after we present the report to you. But the board wanted us to have it before, which I understand you wanna know what the community's concerns are before it comes to you. So we kinda did it, go backwards, but I think it's effective. Arming of the drones, that concern came up, and we've never done that. We've never thought about doing that. That's never been an option for us, but we know that seeing things in the writing for the community is important. So we have no problem putting that in our order or in our policy, which is what we're in the process of doing now. It's never going to happen. We don't do that. I mean, we don't arm our drones. They're not weapons. So we have no problem putting that in our policy, but that's gonna come along with the other retention policy that we discussed. We're looking at a 60 day retention policy. We're researching other agencies, other policies, and 60 days seems, 30 to 60 days seems to be the norm. And then the other thing that we're going to adjust in our drone policy is there's a line in there that says that when it describes when we can use our drones, it says any time the sheriff or their design need determines it's necessary. We're going to remove that just so it stream lines dictates when we can use our drones and doesn't have that generalized burbage in there. And those were the concerns from the community we got as far as the drones go. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Captain. I really appreciate your responsiveness when we had the public protection committee meeting. That was my request to bring this before Board approval so the public can weigh in. So thank you for doing that. I know that was additional work, but I think it's important to be very transparent to the extent we can get that feedback. But what's more important is your willingness to be receptive to that feedback. So I want to acknowledge that the sheriff, your entire leadership team for making yourself available not just for the public meeting but I understand there's been a lot of communication with individuals throughout the county. So thank you for taking the extra time to do that. I am really interested in the updates on the drone policy. Do you have a timeline in which you anticipate to have a draft policy? Would you be open to having that come back to public protection just for more community engagement? Absolutely. And we anticipated in the beginning of next year, when we want to research, we want to be sure we make the right decision and that we're sure we put the right verb agenda. So it may seem like it's easy just change a few words and add a few things here and there but the process isn't that it's got to go to the proper channels and we got to do the proper research but I wouldn't anticipate early next year. Okay. January February of next year. Okay and you're comfortable with that coming back to public protection? Absolutely. Okay, and it would be two policies, policy on deployment, the use as well as retention. So two separate policies. Well, it would be the same policy. So we have one of those areas. We have one of those. Okay, understood. And in terms of the use of scattered shots, there was two incidents in the last year. Do you know what housing units those were used in? I do not. Not a hand. Okay. Can you get that information for us? I can tell you that. Okay. I can tell you that without knowing exactly, it was most likely one of our, I don't know what they call them now. Restrictive housing units correct. The verbiage changes a lot. Can you just define that for the person? So those housing units, they house kind of our, our, our most harder to manage carcerated persons. So they, they, they're in a single cell by themselves. It'll get along with others for lack of better term. And I know that though, that's where it occurred in one of those housing units. Sheriff, did you want to say something? Yeah, no supervisor. I know that you had inquired about making sure that we weren't using or deploying these devices in housing areas where we have some folks who are saying that have mental health conditions. And so I remember reaching out to one of my supervisors and I'm going to look for that response now. Okay. Okay. We'll get that information shortly. And then in terms of the usage of drones, how many pilots are certified to? I don't know exactly the numbers, but I believe it's a little over 20. Okay. All right. Okay. I can get you the exact numbers as well. Okay. Thank you. I'll wait for public comment. Thank you. Thank you again for your report. An update. Obviously, we've all been talking to the same people and I have similar questions because I've been hearing the same things brought up. Could you describe, I guess, on some level the five various scatter shots that are being used because there's not just one, there's several different models, right? I'm talking about the models. Yes. I'm not an expert on on the Leslie Thomeanitions or the Scattershot munitions, but the ones that were trying to keep and we're trying to keep two different models. And those just one of them's a about a 30 caliber rubber bullet in the other and the other ones a 60 caliber. So it's just once one's bigger than the other now why we need both of them. I'm not I'm not a tactical person as far as that goes, but I can definitely get you some information on on the need for both of them. But we are going to rid of, I think, two of the other ones as far as that goes. Okay, I guess my intelligence where there were five different of your requests, there's five different scattershot models. So, and you may be talking about our multi-projectile munition by name, it's multi-projectile. I don't believe it falls within the scatter shot is a term that was created by the community. It's not one of our terms, it's not what they call it, the manufacturer. So in defining scatter shot for myself and for the bill, I thought of it as multi-projectile. Now there's a couple of multi-projectile munitions that shoot out what they call like baton rounds and some of them are foam, some of them are wood and there are three rounds that are in one canister. They're not scattered by nature. They are direct impact. So it's a very tight space and the target area is very tight. So by nature, it's not scattershot. And I believe that by the community's definition of scattershot, that's not what they're regarding when we're talking about scattershot. They're talking about the canisters that shoot out rubber pellets. Some have 50 rubber pellets and they shoot them out upon explosion. And the concern is their indiscriminate nature because you can't control where every single pellet goes. So by that definition, the other multi-project malignitions aren't indiscriminate in nature. So they wouldn't define they wouldn't fall under the community's definition of scatter shot but they are multi projectile which is why they fall under that definition. So regardless is the whether they're multi-life foam multi wood multi-rever they they're not a single shot. Those three that you were speaking of, there's three separate baton rounds in each canister, but it's shot out of a 40 millimeter weapon, so it's a directed target. An all three come out, but they don't scatter. It's a very tight target area. So why wouldn't you use just one rubber bullet, one wooden baton, as opposed to having it come out in multiple ways? Why would you not do that? That's more of a pain compliance. And it depends on the situation that the person puts us in. If we have, if we have an area in the one that I'm thinking of that we did use it, was in the jail, and they were hiding behind furniture, or the desk, or the table in the pod room. So using that where you can more direct the munition was more effective than using the scatter shot where they're hiding behind something and the scatter shot wouldn't be effective in that case. So before we use any type of munition, those are the things that we take into consideration to see what's the most effective. And in that case, that was most effective because it could be more targeted at the incarcerated person as opposed to a bunch of... Can I add to that? Yes. So those are more direct impact munitions. And so those are usually utilized when we have somebody who's armed, we need to like if they break a phone or they break a tablet and they have a metal piece in their hand, they're using it as or in a stabbing fashion. We will have that munition available to have a direct hit on them to basically try to knock everything out of their hand or distract them, but it's still a direct hit. The scatter shot is more of a distractionary device where we need time and kind of a distraction to enter and take them off guard, basically. And minimize risk as far as safety and injury to not only the individual, but our staff. So there's different munitions for different uses. And I know that it has been used in the past as far as direct hit for those who are armed because that has more likelihood to cause injury whereas a scatter shot has less likelihood cause injury. So for the scatter shot or the multiple usage shot. Is there no possibility that an unintended person could be hit? the community. So is there a possibility that an unintended person could be hit? For the uses that we've seen so far, there hasn't been anybody else in the area with the individual. So it's more focused on the individual. So is there a written policy on when and how to use it? There is a protocol, but in discussion with my team, I think that we just need to make sure that it's a very strong protocol that's followed before the use of the scatter shunt. We talked about that before. So why is it that probably Santa Clara, Salano, San Mateo, San Joaquin, these other counties have chosen not to use it. So in the research and I know you guys have more information because you reached down to those counties directly. San Francisco included. They do, I don't know, I don't remember what San Francisco has, but some of those counties do have these types of munitions, but they have a very strong protocol that they follow before they deploy them. So that's something that as far as what we're looking at, how do we make sure that we are bolstering our protocols to make sure it's very clear as far as guidance for our staff? At this point, I want to switch for a second. At this point, on the, you don't have any written surveillance policy for the use of the drones. Or, and when we talk about surveillance, I'm assuming we're talking about a crime's not in progress or there's no, you know, we're not serving a certain order or anything like that. We don't use the drone for surveillance of the community unless there's a private progress or if there's an incident that's occurring. But as far as a written policy, that's not in the written policy. We don't do it by practice. There's a lot of things we don't do in practice that aren't in our policy. We don't do it by practice. There's a lot of things we don't do in practice that aren't in our policy. We just, you know, policy would be huge if we just, if we said everything we don't use it for. But if it is a concern of the community, that it is something we will take into consideration as far as documenting in our policy. Do you know if any of our other neighboring counties have a surveillance policy? I do not know. But that's what we're taking back with us and find out. Are we taking public money? Are we taking public money out? I said are we? Okay. I might have a couple more questions I'll wait until afterwards. I'll save my questions until after public Hello, can you hear me? Yes. I am speaking as a member of an on behalf of Oakland privacy. We strongly support the tone removal of scatter shot munitions. They're also concerned about the sheriff's use of drones. In particular, whether the usage policy the police the usage policy agreed to between the community and the county in 2021 is being adhered to. Your use policy mandates editing out from surveillance footage individuals not suspected of a crime but testimony given on a prior date by the sheriff's rep said that all footage is being retained. It's not being edited, apparently. If this is true, this does not build trust between the community and the sheriff. Further, the usage policy prohibit provides no limit on how long drone surveillance footage is kept. Beyond the civil liberties implications, it is hard to imagine the use to the county of months old surveillance footage of random people in their backyards or on the street. We strongly urge you to mandate that this surveillance footage be deleted after one month, just as many Alcove cities are now specifying that ALPR data be deleted after one month, unless marked as evidence. I know this was talked about in the report, but I want to reemphasize that the... the reduced strongly. Thank you. George, you're on the line. Yes, thank you. George Lippman, former member of the Berkeley Police Review Commission and current Vice Chair of the Peace and Justice Commission. Overall, I'd hope to see as low an amount of militarized equipment being used by the Sheriff's Department as possible. This is not a war zone. Sometimes we speak about it rhetorically as one, but we're not at war with our own communities. And we're not at war with our own communities and we're not at war with the prisoners in our jail. Specifically, I would like to speak in support of getting rid of the scattershot or whatever you want to call them, multi-targeted munitions. What we've found in Berkeley is that once you have munitions like this, they will be used regardless of the policy, whether by needs of exigencies or role officers or whatever if it's convenient and they can get away with it. I'd also like to finally say regarding the number of munitions. If we only count the number of munitions and the times they were fired and we need to count the number of times they were pointed. Pointing a gun at somebody is a use of force that's recognized. So hopefully we can get a better reporting that includes that kind of use of force as well. Thank you. here on the line. Hi, this is Jean Moses. I'm a member of the Interfaith Coalition for Justice in Our Jails, and I want to voice my opposition to keeping any multi-projectile equipment in the Sheriff's inventory, even though it's called Less Than Leethal. There is a very clear record of the use of a projectile after a Red Sox game in 2006, which hit a young woman in her eye and killed her. And I think that Less Than Lethal really depends on how these things are used and if there is any way to remove them from the inventory and not keep the 900 munitions that are still remaining. I think that is very important for Alameda County. I also want to thank the officers for their careful response to community questions and for showing up today and continuing to be in communications. Thank you. Farbeer on the line. Hello. I'm Annie Farvatwell. I'm representing the Racial Justice Action Team of the Berkeley Quaker Media. We are advocating for the ban of scattershot munitions. Those munitions are available to use and they are indiscriminate and dangerous. They fire outward in a radius, cannot be targeted and so can strike an unenbalged person and individuals head and neck are going. As was just mentioned, these are areas of the body that can use that state, use the force law prohibits targeting for crowd control. So these also produce a loud bang at 175 decibels, which is louder loud enough to cause long-term damage according to OSHA. Testimony shows that the sheriff's office used these scattershot munitions that get the inmates with serious illness. These are not just statistics in an annual report. These are people, maybe your brother or your sister, who could be permanently damaged in the name of compliance. We're asking you to require a modification of the sheriff's policy to exclude all types of multi-projectile scattershot munitions and grenades going forward. Thank you. Yada, you're on the line. Hi, scattershot should definitely be banned. A nice attempt to play kick the public by saying that the drone policy is being revised by having nothing concrete for us to look at today. There are significant issues with the drone policy and transparency. The general order seems to have been changed a few years back to allow what is basically a blanket drone use authorization Rather than granting themselves a blanket authorization, which can easily be abused law enforcement should amend the existing list to include specific scenarios They feel are currently missing as a reminder the policy already contains an exigen circumstance clause waiting Sheriff approval and therefore having both of those elements concurrently results in a lack of policy The public needs to be able to verify that law enforcement is or is not adhering to said policy. And asking for more drones from DJI, arguably the most problematic drone manufacturer on the market and which several agencies have outlined national security issues and are subsequently restricted or outright banned. The US Commerce Department blacklisted DJI in 2017, the U.S. Department of Interior grounded its DJI drone fleet in 2019. The Department of Defense issued a list of approved U.S. and European drone makers known as Blue Drone List. DJI is not on it. The U.S. General Service Administration announced it would only buy drones from Blue Drone List for government purposes in 2021. The Pentagon stated that DJI drones still constitute a threat to national security and blacklisted the company in 2022, and there's legislation to regulate these drones, including the American Security Drone Act of 2003, stemming the operation of pernicious and illicit drones act, and also a security researcher was able to access highly sensitive customer data on So pass on this please and reduce the retention period. John, you're all online. Hi, John Lindsay Poland with the American Friends Service Committee. I'll differ with Captain Campos about the community's definition of scatter shot munitions. These include all multiple to project die munitions, these include all multiple to project nominations because they cannot be accurately targeted even against a single person who is being targeted in terms of hitting the neck or the head or the groin. This is why United Nations special repertoire on torture said that this ammunition, including multiple projectile munitions, quote, fulfills no legitimate law enforcement purpose that cannot be achieved through the use of ammunition containing single non-metallic kinetic impact projectiles in its arsenal. And there's no reason why it can't follow others and not use these and take them out of the arsenal for all uses because they are dangerous regardless of whether previous uses actually injured people in the recent past we do have testimony of people who in the jail were subject to them before and were injured. Also injury does not include trauma which is also should be considered an injury but is not usually measured as such. Please ban all of the scattershot munitions for all circumstances. Virtual meeting, you're on the line. My name is Wendy Alson with Berkeley Friends Meeting, Graceful Justice Action Team, and here too, strongly oppose multi-shot initiates, scattershot musicians, munitions, and request them to be banned both from the jail and the use in the community 2020. They were deployed and fired during the George Floyd protests and as we hear there being used in individual cells where somebody is already under control and compliance for somebody who was mentally disturbed they may be unable to physically comply at the time to their illness and further traumatizing them with either extremely loud noises or actual pellets and other objects inhumane and unnecessary. And again, we ask that they be banned and then the report not be approved and a lesson until the policy is changed. Thank you. Alison Monroe. Hello, Alison Monroe. I agree with other speakers that multiple untargeted projectiles should not be used, including in the jail, or many people are seriously mentally ill, and that drone footage should be discarded promptly. Thank you. I have given great thought every day to the problem of violence. And I just want to add my debt to all the callers who are saying we do not need scatter frought their lessons. And as 1984 we do not need surveillance. Thank you. Yalanda, you're on the line. Thank you for taking these comments. My name is Yalanda Huang. I've been a resident of Alameda County for 40 plus years. My concern is that you have people in the jail who are clearly mentally ill because you don't have any other place to put them. And, behaviorally, one of the reasons why people who are mentally ill is that they're unable to comply with orders well, they're unable to follow direction well, they're unable to comply with rules and regulations. You also have a jail staff with people who are primarily just high school graduates and they lack training in basic and many what I would consider to be necessary critical thinking skills. I think because they lack these critical thinking skills and they're told only to follow orders, you get injuries that are inexplicable and unreasonable such as the injury that happened to Maurice Monk. I think it's a recipe for disaster to give, to place weapons that can cause serious injuries in these situations. And I think that it is until the issue with mentally ill people are resolved, until you get better training and people with greater critical thinking skills. I would strongly urge you not to put scatter shot musicians in the jails. Thank you. Natasha, you're on the line. Hey, I'm a district five resident. I'm also a member of the Care First Jail's last coalition and also civil rights attorney. I also want to state my opposition to the use of scatter shop weapons and support a complete ban on them related to the drones, to limit the system for drone use as well as to implement a retention policy that does not allow for indefinite collection of drone data. Looking back to the fees we used in the, we know they are used against people who are mentally ill, because they're going to give them that the border visors is currently tasked with task would comply with a court order to improve mental health services in the gym. Weapons are people. There are weapons of war that we are using to confront people. By using them, the Alameda County is also a liquefied of maybe 481 requires that the board find that there are no reasonable alternatives for the equipment and that the use policy adequately protects civil liberties. The thought improves the use of any type of military equipment, which would include scattershot weapons. I have not heard, we have not seen, that there is an established, no reasonable alternative use to creating a safe environment in the jail. We will thank you. Tiana, you're on the line. Thank you. Hi, good afternoon, supervisors. My name is Tapiana. I'm a community advocate for the Asian Law Caucus' Criminal Justice Reform Program. On behalf of the caucus, I'm here to reiterate our opposition to the use of multiple multi-project show munitions outside and inside of San Maria Jail and the needs to regulate your own usage. To begin, multi-projectile munitions are incredibly dangerous to our community members. There is no way for deputies using the military equipment to shoot the projectile munitions without risking hitting people's head, neck or groin area. Whether or not the sheriff deputies are using projectile munitions in the jail now, there is no justification for their use, either inside or outside the jail, because of their data in the discriminant nature. Moving on to the needs to regulate drone usage. Alameda County's policy and practice for the use of drones is inconsistent with the needs of criminal investigation and with civil liberties. Although the policy states that the drone footage should only be retained for criminal investigations, because the Sheriff's Office has no policy for deletion of drone footage, all footage whether or not any value for a criminal investigation has been retained indefinitely since the start of the program in 2015. The Board of Supervisors needs to ensure drone usage is being properly regulated and should prohibit further use of dangerous project out munition weapons. Thank you. President Mane, there are no additional speakers. Okay, I'll return it back to the board for comments on Mr. Carson. Thank you very much. First, I want to get clarity. The request for all of the items, military items for the military list. It's not just for the use only within Santa Rita, right? Correct, it's agency-wide. Agency-wide. Correct. Okay, and so the other aspect of that, as it relates only to the multi-projectile shooter or the whatever it's referred to as the scattered shot, are there policies in place for not using or using or how to use them outside of the jail situation? So all of our less lethal, we have a less lethal policy on when we could use our less lethal munitions, any less lethal munitions, but it doesn't specifically define each individual less lethal munitions that we have when we can use it. That's up to the decision of the incident commander that's on scene and given the circumstances and what would be useful and and and and less affected to less harmful to the community. So we want to use the lowest level force at all times in order to affect our our goal. And so that's up to the incident commander, did you determine what needs to be used? So for going back to just within Santa Rita, the usage of the scatter shot or the multi-projectile weapons, how does one determine whether or not they're going to use it, especially if a venison just pops up and they find themselves in a situation where they have to make instant decisions? I really appreciate the work all of you do because being in an environment you got to think at that moment, right? And it's sometimes a little difficult to process procedures and process when you're you got something right in your face. So for those types of munitions, we don't carry them on our person all the time. The less lethal that we're talking about the multi-projectile or the scattershot munitions. That is something that has to be pre-planned. So it's discussed. So in the jail particularly the watch commander has the authority to make the determination on what we're going to use and what we're going to use at given the circumstances. And that's part of the debrief or the de-escalation process. When we're trying to de-escalate with the incarcerated person, part of it's also, okay, what's going to be our next step if this doesn't work. The watch commander of the jail gets involved. We, if it comes down to the fact that we have to create a team to go in and detain the incarcerated person for whatever reason, at that time we discuss what munitions are going to be used and why. And it's ultimately determined by the watch commander as far as what's going to be used, given the circumstances. But we don't have them in a rapidly evolving situation. Like if a deputy were to go into a pod and all of a sudden an incarcerated person would attack them, we don't have those on our person in order to deploy them. But your inventory that you're requesting is 161 drones, 450 plus rifles, and I'm assuming the rifles are inclusive of the multi projectile shooters. It's 44,000 rounds of ammunition. So I think 1800 chemical agents and smoke canisters and for armored cars. So these are things that have already been approved. The only new items that we're requesting, if you're looking at the annual report are 21 through 24 Those are the things that the new items that we're requesting to actually just page 21 and 22 are the new items Everything else that you see on our inventory has already been approved That was approved on October 22nd So the purpose of this annual report is not only to discuss why we view things things and what we've used them for, but to get the new things that we want approved. But also to address the mass quantities of things we have, we're a very large agency, a very large county that a lot of other entities and municipalities depend on us for mutual aid, and to help them when their resources are limited. And as well, so we need to have and also for training as well. So we need to have a large amount of munitions for multiple situations, whether it be to help out our neighboring cities or to cover the 1.6 million residents we have, and we have a very large county. And often these munitions also have an expiration date. So sometimes we have to, we can't use them if they're exhausted their expiration date. So as you can see by our annual report, you know, we do possess a lot because we're large county, but we use them very minimally. I'm not going to argue that, but this is the total request though. I mean, if it was in October or in its inclusive, it's the total request. So we include the inventory list if that's what that's already attached to our general order. What we're requesting, this is kind of unique and I know why Supervisor Marquez was asking about this to our public protection as far as the process of what this annual report looks like and what the boards responsibilities are as far as what this entails. This is a brand new or a legislature. So we're kind of playing it by year as far as what we need to do. For the annual report, it's review of the annual report and whether we're complying with the legislator and then also approve any new things that we're requesting. Now, that doesn't mean that obviously the board can decide to review anything they would like to, as far as what's already been approved, but we're prepared right now to address the things that we're requesting as far as new items. But we'll review anything that the board would like us to. Thank you. I know that we have the responsibility for providing mutual aid. And I don't know, I want to digress for a second. I don't know how often we're in constant negotiation, ratification of our different MOUs with our cities around our ability to provide mutual aid if needed. And I'm saying that because, you know, being the old guy on the board, there's been a number of times Oakland has called us into mutual aid. And in the end of the day, we got the bad rap on everything. And the Oakland Police Department walk away, Scott Free, in the city of Oakland, are paying legal fees and we're not being looked at as the bad, I mean they're not the only one that has bad guys. And while we are well equipped to provide mutual aid, I am deeply concerned that at the end of the day it just seems like historically, historically, historically we come out the negative on it because of the use of force, and which means the equipment that we use to carry out the use of force. So I'm not sure how ongoing the refining of the request from mutual aid and how we provide that protects the county more so for doing the work that others are not doing on their turf. So I can speak to that supervisor. There have been conversations that we've had with our neighboring law enforcement agencies including Oakland where we will respond, but there's been an ask from Oakland specifically that we respond and fall under their use of force policy. And that's impossible for us to do because we train as an agency on our policy and use of force is very obviously our highest liability within law enforcement. So we train what we learn based off of policy and practices and the way that we follow our policy, it has to be ingrained in each individual. So the expectation of following somebody else's policy, which we do not train on and which we would probably read on the day that we would be providing mutual aid, is not, we're always going to rely and go back to what we've been read on the day that we would be providing mutual aid is not there. We're always going to rely and go back to what we've been trained on. So it's an impossible ask for a city to ask for. So that's number one. Number two in response to exactly my concerns. I share the same concerns as you. When we get called for mutual aid, should it be for any city, they will be the agency that takes primary. They take the front line. It is their city, it is their jurisdiction, and they should have that primary response. And we should be a support to that response. And historically, that may not have been the case. And some cases where we were on the front line with that jurisdiction. So yes, I will agree with you that we have incurred a number of incidents with liability and making sure that we have good partnership with our law enforcement agencies, but knowing what the expectations are. When they do request mutual aid, it is that they will take the lead and the Sheriff's Office will be a support. Yeah, I, not to digress too much, but I want to just recognize the comments made. The tough job that you have to protect our community, called in from mutual aid by an agency that needs you and that expects you to perform. And we have different rules of engagement. We need to go back on what we're trained to do, and that's what we do. But indeed, it's unfortunate that we often are made, the bad guys, unfortunate that we often are incurring liability. And I too would like to review the rules of mutual aid and what we're liable for and whether we can indemnify ourselves some way or be indemnified. But I don't know. That's another topic. For today, however, a couple of things that indeed, I think need to be clarified. I heard two different things. One, no other county uses these items. Counties around us, and I I heard yes they do. So please help clarify, public comments over, your are professionals, do other counties currently have in their inventories. These multiple projectile instruments, yes or no? Yes, there's, Lieutenant Moira, he did the research on that. But maybe not every county? No, absolutely not. Did the research in other counties, military equipment lists, and also contacting counties themselves? So he can speak a little more to what he discovered as far as I can. To answer your question, I was at the community engagement meeting and out of the four counties that were mentioned that do not possess multi-project out rounds I contacted those those counties in San Mateo and Santa Clara they both have a type of multi-project out around what are the other two counties that were mentioned? San Francisco and It's I'll have to look at my PowerPoint better. No, San Francisco and San Lecanae I believe. Okay, so we surveyed four other counties in the Bay Area. Did we survey any others? We contacted some others down south that do have them. But specifically I focus on those counties that were the concerns by the public. Do we happen to know Contro Costa County? Is it right next to us? We did call but I don't have that information. The bottom line is other counties do have them. So then I have to also sort of ask and understand. The state of California has regulations on a lot of different things. Has the state of California ever made these not available or talked about making them illegal? Because if the state were to say you can't use them, then we wouldn't be able to use them. Absolutely. So there wasn't assembly bill. It's 48, that was a couple of years years ago that dictated that limited the usage of a lot of our less lethal munitions during crowd management situations. This would have been a time for them to eliminate some of these items, but they didn't because they understood that there's a need for them in certain situations. Instead, they limited, they restricted the uses of them to certain situations and specifically related to crowd management situations. But to me that kind of speaks volumes is the fact that it was at this time when they had the ability to eliminate them if they wanted to, but recognizing that there's a time and a place for them, they just articulated when we can use them in the public. Then getting to the instances when we do. I know you mentioned two in the last year, when any of them known to be or diagnosed to be mentally ill. That I don't know. I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found that I have found because I've heard the community concerns is that these devices will not be deployed in our mental health housing units and our therapeutic housing units. So I definitely will agree with the concerns that I've heard. So we will put it in our policy that in those areas where we house those who are receiving acute care or basically those units where we have those who are suffering from mental health conditions that those devices will not be used. So while we don't have the policy here before us today, you're committing that we will take care of that. As I totally agree, that we should have that in our protocols. And again, these are used, I think I heard you say, maybe an hour of deescalation goes by, maybe more, and different techniques of deescalation you mentioned and that this is the very last resort, which is why maybe we've only used it two times, which is why maybe the state of California still allows them, they recognize this last resort need. But I have to also, the comment made earlier, it was sort of, if you have them, they will use them. If they're there, they'll be used. Somebody will find a way to use them. Does the data bear that out? Do we have indiscriminate use of these items? Do we have nobody can ever protect 100% forever against a rogue individual? But this doesn't happen indiscriminately from what I understand. You're correct. You know, you can't control what human beings do 100% of the time. It's this human nature. But we have protocols not only when we use them, but we also evaluate after we use them to ensure that's part of the audit process and that's part of our DB process and that's far as our use of force review process is review after we use any type of force, whether it be with a less lethal munition or just bodily personal body weapons, we review that use of force at a supervisory level and it goes all the way up the chain to make sure that we're acting within policy, within the law, and within what's reasonable. So anytime we use any of these items, it gets documented and it gets reviewed all the way up the chain. Besides the very rare use, say in the jail, it was also mentioned that in the riots of 2020, we're used. I understand it, I think, that state law changed somewhat after that. They limited that use. But I mean, what could happen in those situations, which we all watched on the news. If you didn't have, how many times did you have to use them? And what would happen if you didn't have them? What would be the alternative? Well, use or the alternative actions. What one thing is, neither one of us were there at the rise as far as what they faced specifically. So we can't really speak to why there was any deployments of this particular munition if there were. But it's definitely something that is weighed heavily before any device is used, whether it's Leslie Thul or whatnot. One thing I want to add to the jail, any type of jail incident where we are potentially trying to deescalate a situation, it's not just the sheriff's office that's trying to deescalate. We partner up with our AFPH or behavior health team to come and try to deescalate as well and afford them some time or try to get, you know, because we know the uniform sometimes is something that people react to. So bringing people who are not in uniform, which is our behavioral health team is what we also utilize. And it is an hour or two hours sometimes where until we can gain compliance or where we have to make decisions to utilize these tools. I realize we have to serve the entire community. You've heard a lot of voices and we've heard a lot of voices, and we've heard a lot of voices today, and they should be respected. I completely respect the intelligence of the people that spoke early today. But the broad swath of our community, I often here enjoy your protection, want your protection, and are thankful for it. And so your training tells you that last resort and I heard you say that restricted use, maybe a watch commander, not on everybody's person at all times, very important. And so I feel that the situations you're put in and what you have to do that can be controlled by protocols that we'll see at some point. With regard to drones, is there state standard for how long footage will be kept? I believe that, and that's what one thing that we discussed at the community engagement meeting was researching what the standards are. And there is a state standard and that's what we're going by. That's part of our research. As far as when we determine what our retention period is going to be, it's not only the state standard, but also what the best practices and the agencies around us. I guess we can rely on the state for some of that then. I heard people say, do you keep random people footage in backyards of random backyards? Well, we don't we don't surveil people randomly if there is a if there's an incident Say a search warrant and we have the drone flying overhead because people run out of houses So then it follows them might there be someone in their backyard three houses down Possibly But they're not the intention of of of the footage of the incident our our intent to, when we didn't have a retention policy to keep this footage was, it was not in a fairies, it was just in case, because you never know what you might have captured that is needed for another case down the road. But now that we hear what the community's concerned about, what the advocates are concerned about, we'll flip it and have a retention policy that satisfies the community that's best practices with those around us. I hear the voices of the community as well, a segment of the community, but I just wanna make sure you're listening to all segments of the community that might want you to keep footage that may be admissible in court that may lead to solving of a crime that may keep people safe. So when you say you're going to bring back this policy, I don't want anybody that is not committed in crime or even close to that random people to be feeling as though their rights are being infringed upon. But I would hope that we would protect that everybody who is being viewed in a bit of a crime or an investigation of crime would be captured. And the question I have around that is this footage is admissible in court and it's helpful to our investigators. Absolutely. And in the items that we're talking about as far as the retention policy and destroying the footage after 30 or 60 days, whatever it's not it's footage that we've determined is non evidentiary. So it doesn't it won't help us with the incident that we're investigating. But anything that's evidentiary, we'll keep. I realize there's a balance here. I realize we have to get rid of the things that aren't needed, that can't help us, that we don't have to have. But I'm supportive of this request and looking forward to seeing the protocols that will go along with it in place. And my hope is that indeed it strikes the balance of not harming anyone's privacy or several liberties but also keeping everything that protects everyone. So thank you. I appreciate your responses. I'm just trying to get back to the request today, which is basically to approve a report that took a snapshot in time from September from November of last year, this is Saturday of this year, right? And then you're also asking for us to come form with AB481 to add this reporting requirement into our ordinances. The discussion we had about the purchase of the equipment on page 22, the use of the military equipment protocols, the mutual aid, is that something that you collect and then put in the next year's report as part of this process or is this something that comes to the public protection committee throughout the year? I mean we could do it either way but I think that something like this that is obviously you know we've heard a lot of people come out and speak. I think this is something that we would come ahead of that to public protection to show what we have, the changes that we have made to make sure that they do satisfy the board and what the many people in the community are asking for. So I wouldn't wait until next year, obviously to do these changes as far as our policy, like our President Marquette said with our drone policy, we would present that far ahead of time. But you're not asking us to do that today. No, no, no. Right, okay. Thank you. I will be concise. So thank you for the dialogue. The exchange has been very helpful. So I understand what we're here to do for today, but obviously this expands the discussion. So thank you for your willingness to come back to public protection. I know we'll get updates with regard to the policy with respect to drone usage and retention. I'm hearing that you're going to continue to research other counties and their use of the multi-projectal munition and you are researching alternative options. So that discussion, I'm hoping we'll also come back to public protection. And then I'm hearing from my colleagues, the wanting to also look at the rules around mutual aid. So separate from our action item today, but it obviously relates to this discussion. So we'll continue to keep the public informed and engaged. And again, I truly appreciate your willingness to hear this feedback. I think it's just going to strengthen public safety for everyone's benefit throughout our county. So thank you. All right. Let me just make some comments. I've listened to everybody. First of all, I appreciate the fact that we're eliminating the 50 caliber Browning machine gun. It never had been used. Something Charlie Palmer had on the vessel. And if it had been used, I think would have been because it would have been a war because the 50 caliber machine gun is a weapon of war. And that's something when this came to public protection last year, before Marquez was here, I was hard to get that decommissioned. And that's super high-powered point and we need to have a balance. At one point, I can remember when people oppose drones, they didn't want to share its power with them drones. They thought that was excessive. But we do know drones, they're a tool. And we need to regulate the retention, we need to regulate the use. It's not inappropriate for folks to think that maybe they would be weaponized. So in the Sheriff's Department it's clearly indicated that there won't be weaponized. We're not going to have drones flying over and then shooting people and taking folks out and there's that and the other. So I think to lay those suspicions but I do think it's important that you know we've got 1.6 million people in this county. We expect public safety. If law if government's not providing public safety, then we're not doing our jobs. Then we all need to be armed and protect ourselves as we go through the course of our lives here in this county. So public safety needs to be paramount, and needs to be balanced. We don't want officers to have to go hands on with inmates or hands on with the crowd. What's gonna end up, it's gonna be even worse. The officer's safety as well as the safety of the individual or people that they're dealing with. We don't want them to have to go hands on. We want to have the appropriate tools so we can deal with the circumstance and nobody can anticipate every circumstance that's going to occur. If you think you can, then you're being naive. So you need these tools. I have a lot of confidence in the Sheriff's Department. You've reviewed this. You've tried to be cognizant of what advocates are pushing for, but in the, because we need to, under 21st century policing, we need to ensure public trust and confidence and legitimacy in law enforcement. But on the other side, we need to ensure that officers are safe and well and that we can recruit people to want to go into these situations and serve and protect society. Otherwise, we all need to be armed. And I know people don't want that to happen. People don't want us all to be carrying guns and having to defend ourselves. So I think what we have here is appropriate. I'm gonna continue to put my confidence in Sheriff's Department as you're interacting with the advocates and with the public and trying to come up with reasonable approaches. But by no means, if you ever go down the road and you jeopardize public safety because there are people pushing for things that you feel are just totally unreasonable. I think it would be a disservice to all of us. I just want you to keep that in mind. I'm not just pointing it to you, Captain and Lieutenant. I'm speaking generally law enforcement holistically because it's a push in a pull. And if you go to one extreme, it's bad. If you go to another extreme, it's bad. If we have a 50 caliber submachine gun, that's roaming the streets of Oakland. I mean, yeah, people need to get upset about that. Or out on the waterways, that's where this machine gun is going to be. But if you're in a jail situation and you have inmates that are causing problems, do you want the sheriff's identities to go hands on or do you want them just to sit back and watch somebody do harm to another inmate? You've got to have tools to deal with that. And you've got to have tools to deal with it under the circumstances. And the officers, another part of 21st Century policing is that all the officers are trained. I mean, we have an item here dealing with deescalation and I'm going to have to share about later on on our agenda if we get to it today with a new simulator, a simulator, excuse me, that's going to provide better de-escalation training. But so it just frustrates me that people are so critical of law enforcement. And then the fact is you wouldn't have these tools if they weren't made available, if the federal government says we're no longer going to surplus our these type of tools and law enforcement can no longer use them then you wouldn't they wouldn't be available. But on the circumstances, you need certain tools to discharge your responsibilities, to both protect the victims, protect the public, protect officers and also protect the perpetrator. So here she might not end up being killed themselves. So that's all I've got to say on this point. So I think where's the county administrator? Okay, yeah, just have a motion to move the close public hearing and adopt the order. Oh, wait a minute, just move just close the public hearing. I can close public hearing, right? Yeah, that's what I thought okay. Okay. There's a motion by Halbert seconded by I'll second closing public hearing this is just a close public hearing Let's have the roll call Supervisor Halbert. Hi, supervisor Marquez. Hi supervisor Tam. Hi supervisor Carson. Yes, President Miley Yes, you know, I've been asked if we could take a brief recess. It's County Council's shaking ahead Um, so yeah before we have a motion before we take the motion on yeah, there's there's an issue that they want to address Yeah on this before we take the motion. So we're gonna take a Quick, this is just a five minute recess. Five minute recess. Yeah. And then we're going to come back and take up the vote on the item. Okay, so we're going to take a five minute recess at the request of the county administrator and county council. you 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 back. I'm going to be back. Recording in progress. All right. Board's back from recess. I apologize. I thought this recess was going to be five minutes in. But the attorneys and staff are still conferring on the item. So the clerk could just take the role. Supervisor Halbert. Present. Supervisor Marquez. Present. Supervisor Tam. Excuse. Supervisor Carson. the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember the councilmember get everything in the proper order. So we're going to delay taking action on item two at this time, 82, excuse me, 82, and we'll come back to it later today once the staff had a chance to resolve the concerns that they have. So what I'd like to do is if we could go ahead and do the minutes, let's see, we have the minutes because we haven't done the minutes yet. Let's see. I'll move the minutes that were in our packet from Tuesday, November 14th as presented. Second. Okay. So we're moving the minutes from November 14th. Regular meeting moved by Marquez second by Halbert. They'll board comments or questions on the minutes if we can have the roll. Supervisor Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Marquez. Hi. Supervisor Tam excuse. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Miley. Yes. Okay. the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the motion of the So, meeting 83 through 96 items 83 through 96. Second. Okay. The consent calendar has been moved by Halbert Second by Mark Hiz. And I just want to mention, on item 92, Pamela Ferrin is resigning from the Eleccents Commission and I know I've conferred with the NAACP and I'll be making another appointment. I just wanted to ask an FYI for some transparency for the public. Okay, so if there's nothing else if we can have the role. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Tam, excuse. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Excuse. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Miley. Yes. OK. Let's see if we can try the mass motion. And we're going to, as soon as we get through that, then we'll see if we can get to the two o'clock and send items. But we'll do or excuse me, set items. So we'll deal with that after I get through this mass motion. Okay. President Miley, I'd like to move in the mass motion items. 1.2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Questions on 6? Questions for 6? 7. Question on 3 and 7. questions for six. Questions for six. Seven. Question on three and seven. Three and seven. Item eight. Item nine. Ten. Eleven. Twelve. Thirteen. Fourteen. Fifteen. Can we pull 15 out of the window? Pull 15 out of the mass motion so supervisor my like can recuse himself Item 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 26.1, 27, 27.1, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32 have been continued. thirty seven thirty eight thirty nine forty forty one forty two forty three forty four forty four point one forty eight forty nine fifty fifty one fifty two fifty three fifty four fifty five 53, 54, 55, 56. I have questions on 56. 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 60, 62 questions. Supervisor Carson, 63, 65, 66, 67, 68, 68, 68. 1, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76. I note item 77 has been withdrawn 78 in the mass motion 79 And that's it for the mass motion Okay, so Supposed how word is read the mass motion. Is there a second? The mass motion. I'll second. Okay, so it's been second. I don't know there's a number of questions and discussion on various items. Versus number three. Supervisor Sam. Yes. Thank you, supervisor Hobart. So we heard this morning from a number of community-based organizations over the concerns about the prevention services being shifted potentially on Proposition 1. And I've met with the Korean Community Center of the East Bay and they basically upped a lot of their mental health care services, particularly for the immigrant population. Can you just touch on how you think the community-based organizations, mental health care services needs would be affected with this potential $46 million shifting in prevention services under Proposition 1. Thank you for the question. Supervisor Tam Colleen Chavla, Director of the Health Care Services Agency. I wanted to defer to Dr. Trouble, who is the Director of the Behavioral Health Care Services Department. And while she's coming up, I want to just clarify for folks who are listening that the reductions that people are discussing are what is, it's preemptive. It's contemplating what would happen in the event proposition one passes in March of 2024 and are not what's included in what is before you today. So I'll defer to Dr. Trouble to respond to your question. Thank you Supervisor Tam for the question and to all the Supervisors. I appreciate the opportunity. So specifically, again, as Director Travela mentioned, there are no changes at this point with our image-to-said plan. We are hoping to move forward as we have, we think the investments in what the community said and many of the providers is completely accurate. The metrics we're seeing, the impacts we're seeing are doing well. Again, if proposition, as Director Travela mentioned, if proposition one does pass, it does mean that approximately $50 million of the services that are currently provided and not just a prevention but also treatment that are non-full service partnership will be in jeopardy based on the legislation the way that is written. So for us, we have a robust plan that we've been starting immediately as far as when we knew that the state was looking toward doing these kind of changes and we're trying to do a variety of things. We're looking at how to maximize as much as we can in the current contracts that we have. We know that we need there. Most of the voices today were about UELP but it really is impacted on many different services including crisis, UAP language, culturally based enrollment services. So for us, it is almost a, at a firming exclamation point, it is correct that those services are make a big difference. But to the extent we can reduce our reliance upon images, say, as our first goal. Number two, we're looking at the current, and I believe this board has had the opportunity last week to hear how the buckets or the allocations will change. We're looking to see whether or not there's a way that we can certainly meet the requirements of Prop 1, should it pass in the voters in March, but also to see if there's a retooling of some of the programs that can still reach communities of color, those who have been compromised from many different reasons, trauma, other things that we know because we do see and the data speaks for itself, a trajectory that we want to avoid, that if we don't provide support and treatment in that way, same with crisis and other services. The other options that we're looking at, as I've mentioned before, are to the extent that we compare organizations together. Again, these are all preemptive conversations because it has not passed, but we're looking line-by-line, literally contract-by-contract of the approximately 100 or so million programs total and the 50 million that is of question today. At the end of the day, we will have to do what most counties are not looking forward to make some critical decisions based on what's required. We'll have to figure out how to meet what the obligations will be under care court, which is starting in December. And so at the end of the day, we're trying to see if we can maximize other revenue sources, use other things that are appropriate, knowing that some are kind of categorical. And then we will be working with community stakeholders and we've already started that process so we'll be having to do it continually until we figure out what's going to happen. I appreciate that. At the work session when you looked at the buckets, a lot of the funding was shifted toward housing. And I know Supervisor Miley as representative of the county with the region is looking at a regional housing bond measure. And I know there's certain uncertainty, but would it be possible because of that flexibility that we asked for maybe offset some of it should both the housing bond pass and prop one pass so that we don't have to shift as much. That's a wonderful question. If we, the housing dollars that will be for image, or it will be a BHSS, it's passed. We'll be mostly for rental subsidies for things like that with a little bit of capital to be able to treat and support individuals. As I mentioned in the last presentation and I still maintain that coupling treatment with housing is what keeps people healthy and safe and remaining alive. So for us, certainly the dollars that are housing, providing that we meet every letter of the law, we provide services that support individuals with treatment and housing vouchers or subsidies. That is a way, and we can draw on some of the expertise and some of the providers that have done this work, even whether it's prevention or not, because they've had great success. So yes, there's a way to retool it, but we are making sure we're validated in that against the state to make sure that we're not missing every area. But for us, if we go without that level of analysis, the cost is too great. The impact to lives is too great. So yes. Thank you. Welcome. And let me just weigh in to, from the work session last week and then we appreciate the advocacy of all the folks who were here today earlier and filled up the chambers. I know supervisor. our reserves, our designation accounts, and our escrow accounts. And I've been in conversation with the county administrator about that as well as the auditor. And we do expect to have that for the board to take a look at in the public to next month, January and or February. So depending on what the board decides to do there, because we do need to have healthy reserves. That's one reason we have the AAA rating and we're able to do a lot of things. We do need to do that but there might be designations and escrow accounts that we can either reassign or use resources from some of those accounts if necessary to help. Because I do believe that mental health is a crisis. I fundamentally believe it's a crisis. It's affecting so many things from homelessness to law enforcement to the J. I mean, it's a crisis. So that's one thing. And then I know I'm like a broken record on this, but I got to keep saying it. Measure W is out there. Measure the voters approve Measure W here in Alameda County. It's being litigated unfortunately. And that's very unfortunate that it's being litigated. But the money continues to be collected. And that's in an account. We can't touch it just yet. But I do anticipate that we will win that lawsuit eventually, and depending on what the board decides to do with Measure W, because as a general tax, we could actually allocate some funding from Measure W to help offset some of the impacts of Prop 1 should pass. Putting money into housing, and I know none of us believe that's a bad thing. What's bad is taking the money from mental health to put it in housing. We need, you know, it's not either or we need both of those things. We need all of that to have to work. And then the one other thing I would say that I said in the work session and I once again Supervisor Carson school me on this one I got here, the county said to face challenges over the years because of the state, the state constantly shifting responsibilities and mandates onto the county. And fortunately, the county has had good administration and good folks at the suposoil level. And the county's always figured out how to manage these circumstances because that's what we do. But the point is by doing that, it doesn't help us in terms of the state not doing what the state does. So we'll make it happen, because I do think nobody wants to see the prevention aspects of mental health go away. We just can't afford to because it's sort of like. It's sort of taking funds from one critical area, putting it into another critical area. And that one critical area that we're really trying to stabilize now becomes even more severe. So I just wanted to state that for the record as well, particularly in light of all the advocacy that we had in the chambers earlier today. Anybody else have anything else on item three? Vice Carson. was excited by the diversity of individuals that we had this morning focused on this item. It's the most that we've seen, I've seen at this board chamber pre-pandemic, maybe years pre-pandemic to that. So that was exciting and only people who are impacted can speak for themselves. Nobody else really can do it. They don't have the lived experiences. They could be allies and supporters and that's always good. They have an academic and data understanding and that's good. But it's best when people who are impacted speak for themselves. So I was totally excited to have that diversity of group here. And hope it continues. And a number of things, since we're on this. How, where are we in terms of the past three year budgeting for mental health? Are we out of that cycle and to what extent can you just kind of paint a vision of overlapping services from that three-year period to this three-year period and since everybody's not on the health committee or focuses on mental health until we get to the board How did we get to a three-year rolling cycle? That's a great question. So logistically for those that are less familiar, the image is say has three-year plans of that covers. This current three-year plan started in July 1st of this year and it goes through to the other remaining years. That is part of the legislation. What is also part of the legislation is every three years, every county does a community planning process. What we in this county do it every year so that we can bring back both to the health committee and the constituents of community, quite frankly, transparently, where we're functioning. In terms of what's happened at a high level, even in the pandemic, we've rolled out several different things that we had started on and committed to being one of the crisis services, some of the outreach programs, the outreach and coordination with our jail, some of our in-home outreach teams, and that care coordination, as well as funding a number of facilities, emergency departments to help work with us and coordinate in triage. So if you mean programmatically, there's been quite a lot of new programs. What we're hoping to do is use this next three-year plan to continue to develop some of the newer programs of which we mentioned previously, whether they're culturally centered, whether they're affirming, and some of the ones programs of which we mentioned previously, whether they're culturally centered, whether they're affirming, and some of the ones that are working well, some of the outreach, the clinical services. And so that's essentially how, where we fall, and I'm not sure if that answers your question, but that's where we are at this time. Yeah, I appreciate that. And with a three year rolling proposal, there's a budget. There's a projected budget. And so at the beginning you say this is how much we're going to spend over three years. Hopefully this is the time period which we expanded. And so when somebody looks at the financial ledger they see different pots of money that's unspent because it was a part of the original plan for spending. Is that correct? And I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. No, I had to ask you all of this to get an understanding myself. Yes, sir. Yes, you did. You had it absolutely correct. What is often confusing is that we are also having to budget two years in the future. And there's always time clocks on every dollar that we spend in programs. And so it is a rolling cycle for sure of implementation. Depends on when our plan is approved. It also depends on when the state for some programs, we actually had to submit for approval. For example, I mentioned CAT. We actually had to wait, we encountered the funds and waited for their approval to start new innovative programs, which actually was very novel in the City of California to have EMS peer with the clinician and the way that we had. So there's a lot of factors that impact that. The other piece is the unspent dollars maybe, and I think your board has heard it a few times, the workforce crisis. When are we rely heavily on the community, in the provider community, and when they're having a challenge in space, what we don't do is liquidate their contract. We know that it's valuable, so we'll work with them to either augment contracts or enable their flexibility to provide client-level services. If there's an emergency, we give them the flexibility to speak to the needs of the clients. But there's a variety of reasons, as you've mentioned, that we'll show a positive, but what it means is that all those factors, as well as when the state actually gives us the funds, which is again two years later, it is a constant dynamic process that our finance, myself, and our executive team have to balance. Thank you. And I wanted to ask that question because I know that supervisor Halbert and supervisor Miley are increasing their request for a look at the reserves and the trust accounts. And I'm assuming that they're not just talking about just the general one, they're talking about department specific that have reserves and trust accounts, and to understand a little bit about how they are applied and how they're used. Because it may look as though there's all this money, but don't know that it's already been a spoken for if you put it in that context and so you know as we look at each of the department's reserves and trust accounts and then the overall counties we have to put those in a perspective in terms of time, amounts and when they're going to be allocated. Nobody be care about that but that's one of the educations I had to go through. Thank you. And if I may add, I apologize. You also raised the point. Approximately between $18 and $30 million, we had to reserve for our B-chip applications. For Azure Board, we pursued capital expenditures. The state released grants. We were successful. But it also meant we had to commit dollars for the services that will be housed in those facilities. So yes, part of those trust accounts are our savings, is that we have encumbered and won't spend because we've committed to the state to build whether it's lock facilities or outpatient treatment, so we have a lot of facilities based on that. Yes. And that's the same thing for the overall budget. Yes. But you know, in all transparency, hopefully we'll go through that. People will see it even if they don't accept it. So on some level, the privilege of being in Sacramento all these years have been at the table to see how the entire all 58 counties are viewed in terms of their operations, not just in mental health, but since we're talking about mental health, mental health in this case. And there's this constant focus from the finance department of state of California over the last several administrations around seeing those pots of money 58 counties not just Alameda County 58 counties and on some level saying how come it's Not out the door and how come we can't see results Not knowing that based on state statue we put those things in plan, right? Nobody be able to care about that, but I just want to say it on the record. And as a result of that, the current governor as frustrated as he is, is making some drastic moves to move that money out of service into housing. And as much as we all support housing, we may only control housing in a incorporated area, not in the cities. They got to go through their own planning process. There are no cities that want senior housing, reentry housing, mental health housing in their communities. They don't want it. People come out and speak as well as they did here I have supported but not in my backyard So we got to do a balance of repriding services while we've come up with the housing that people actually realize Thus goes to care court and all the other prescriptive things that we are now being struck We are now being told we have to do, to go through that. And so once again, I know you and Colleen and Donna and Susan have been saying this for a year. How challenging is it at this point in time for you to get staff to provide the services again? We can say do the services, but if you honestly are having a problem to provide the services again, we can say do the services, but if you honestly are having a problem finding the people delivered the services, you can't ignore that. We can try to address it, but we can't ignore it. It is incredibly difficult. I've mentioned in public settings before, in the pandemic, it was very supportive and there was all court press allocation of funding and resources and esteem for workers in the healthcare field. Although many of us consider ourselves part of healthcare, unfortunately with the mental health crisis, that comes with a level of stigma, a blame, although there are certainly improvements, it is massive. And so recruiting individuals to be in a position to devote their heart, their soul, to helping support individuals in and of itself is complex. We've worked on a variety of strategies with our human resources department, which I'm thankful for, to help us increase pay, to bring in retention bonuses, sign on bonuses as well for in longevity pay. And we still have not been able to pin the dial. And what we hear from them is as well as housing, not just for the community, but in total, it's a challenge. And so it's an all court press for us to retain staff. And the other piece that we have seen is with the pandemic switched to telehealth for some of our partners. And though that's rolling back, many individuals for their own health and their wellness and safety are opting to remain virtual. And most of the work, especially for our county partners, is in person. So it is a very uphill battle. We're still very committed to it whether they work in settings that are clearly under scrutiny and a lot of advocacy against whether it's the jail, whether it's in crisis in the community for us, we're agnostic. We just want to have as many providers on the street and in the community as we possibly can. And it is complicated. We are fighting it feels in some ways against each other or many other counties to retain the same number of individuals. I'm actively supportive of people who have lived experiences being a part of providing the services and people who are closer to the individuals who are requiring it that they provide services. How challenging is that to add to the individuals who are requiring it, that they provide services. How challenging is that to add to the mix? Because again, I was excited to see the diversity of our ethnic representation today, with their various languages, with their various cultures, all which has to be factored in to providing mental health. How difficult is it today to get individuals like that to supplement this workforce that we can't seem to find? Not just in Elmita County, not just in California, but across this country. It is incredibly difficult, I'll say for a few reasons. First, it is wonderful. We find that we were very proud to be the first county in the state of California that opted into a measure and legislation that enabled us to draw down medical funds for people with lived experience as a professional designation. So we were the first. Since then, we've been able to at least fund. We're working and hopeful that we'll be able to bring in costifications to about 170 individuals, 70 to 80 depending on the cohort group, individuals that do just that. And why that's important is that even though we have for years, we have providers that provide lived experience that want to be a support to the system, they were not able to be drawn down Medi-Cal. And our CBO providers, they live and breathe on their ability to sustain themselves, not just rely on the county, but also helping and drawing down revenue and other sources. So it's complicated if a person can't make it through the certification process that's complicated. The other part is that the health crisis that we saw had experience, had real impact on people with lived experience. They themselves experiencing bouts of depression, anxiety, people who are working in the workforce. Our own team members are, it was complicated. One of the factors that we are doing well, that again, it will certainly change the landscape, should proposition one pass, is our ethic in linguistic and difference. Our ability to bring in staff or providers or community providers that look like the community, that speak the language of the community. That's complicated and it is difficult to do as much as we'd like to do, but it is something that we think is the right thing to do. And I think the last part I would say, if I can be frank, sometimes the richness of the experience is made preclude that person from working. So for example, if they live their life, which is something we'd want to recruit, they may have had interactions with law enforcement. They may have been jailed. They may have records. And so there are still some barriers with those folks who legitimately have gone through the life, made a recovery wanting to work with the system, but nevertheless they have trouble with clearing certain levels of work and certain places to work in. So that's a real complicated factor for us. So there's a variety of reasons, but by and large, even with those, we have been very successful and we actually will continue to utilize individuals with a linked experience and family members because that lived experience for both areas have been really critical and have given us feedback and some accountability. So I guess what I'm hearing you say is having a long term funding source to provide the service to individuals who would clearly add value in that space is very challenging to be able to find long term not one time with long term funding for and current conditions statewide and locally are that you have to be certified in certain areas in order for us to be able to provide the service. It doesn't mean that we're not going to still push the envelope on making sure that we use every opportunity to connect with people where they are and provide the service. That's correct. want to raise is you held a lot of listening sessions coming up to this three year plan. So it wasn't void of not attempting to reach out to individuals. And again, I'm raising these questions. We may disagree, but I just want them on the record. Did you hit every one of our districts? Yes, we did. Did you participate with the offices in order to try to do the outreach? Yes, we did. Do you think that there was any way that the activist community would not aware of their ability and opportunity to participate? I can't speak for the individual community members, but we certainly received a lot of feedback. We directly. And whether they chose to show and attend the listening sessions, we still recorded their feedback. And so we tried to en masse as much as we could, covering every area. So it would have been very difficult to not know because we publicize, we show up, we send the outreach, we blot, we do whatever we can. But we acknowledge that it didn't, it may not have reached everyone, but nevertheless, we found that people who didn't really want to participate in the community feedback but they wanted to write us a letter. They were able to do that or they wanted to have a meeting with myself or other people in our office. They did that. So you may be aware, I, I, I on my own coming out of the pandemic, saying that coming out of the pandemic is a whole different world than us going into the pandemic held individually, um, sessions and meetings with the Spanish-speaking Latino groups. A lot participated. The same thing with the Asian Pacific Islanders. A lot participated. Same thing with the African American community. A lot participated. Separate from that with the African American provider network. A lot participated separate from that with the African-American provider network a lot participated in that. It underscored the data you already have and and Kimmy and and Colleen already have in terms of historical patterns with the same individuals and not being able to necessarily meet those needs but it has accelerated, accelerated coming out of the pandemic. What's your challenge in terms of meeting this new acceleration and national final question for this item? I'm going to shape some of my comments. I think it may be based on the other item. So I'll shape that. That is, it is a day loose of need and I don't mean to be theatrical, but it really is a crisis. Our challenges as many as we have established, we have now our crisis and other services that are all over the county. We've created residential facilities. We've added more beds. It is simply not enough. And we acknowledge that. And I think most all of our county partners acknowledge the same thing. And yet we are faced with legislation that may preclude us from being as nimble as we had been to move some other things forward. But it is, it is nevertheless still our commitment. It is very complicated and but we don't have any other option. The need is there. Okay, thank you. Yes, this is item three. Okay. By the way, thank you for the report. Yes, this is item three. Okay. By the way, thank you for the report. I think it was four or five inches deep and we're still going through it. But very detailed. Just very top line. You talked about housing going along with services. I agree. Housing is extremely, extremely difficult to find and provide. Supervisor Carson mentioned, nobody wants it in their backyard. I'll mention that I know at least one city, Dublin has added a lot of housing and a lot of senior housing, but indeed it hasn't added across the board on all spectrums of housing. We also housed County Jail. We also housed military installation and a federal institution in our city. But not as many people are. We've takes five years to get through the planning process, the permitting process, the construction process. We add 50 units here, 50 units there across the year, we maybe add a couple hundred. We don't even have a housing element in unacorporated Alameda County yet. We're not going to have housing. Tell me what that does to your plan of we need housing to go along with services if we don't have enough housing. How do we cope with that? Well, cope is exactly what I feel we're doing. I think I will, I hope to answer your question. What we've tried to utilize is the community expansion grants, for example, for housing. And I'll defer to Director Troubola, but they will be adding hundreds of beds, not nearly fast enough, but on the housing side. For us, we're looking through the beach ship that grants that I mentioned. We're looking for, I believe at least 150 of which are approximately 50 to 70, depending on permitting will be for locked units. So the will is there. There are some things that are happening, but I think you hit the core of our challenge. What we're finding and what the results of our studies and the feedback that we have gotten is that long-term stable housing is what helps a person stabilize on a long term. And even with the subsidies and the rental assistance that the Proposition 1 will provide should everything pass in that direction, it won't necessarily solve that challenge. So that means for us locally, and when I say us, I won't be presumptive enough to speak for the board but our certainly our department means we'll have to creatively think of the partnership with OHCC, the long-term issues and quite frankly actually income. We have a vocational division which actually provides work and connected connecting people to work and stable income in order to to to garner down that those are the past fours that we think. At the end of the day for us there's there's no way that we are seeing a positive outcome less we wrap around a person. So whether a person's in a facility, residential treatment, whether we provide them vouchers in the community, whether we provide them rental subsidy indefinitely for them to remain, we'll have to do all of that because we're not able to solve on our own, the housing crisis that California is facing as well. But I'll defer to Director Troubler on OHCC. Yeah, I want to concur with what you said, supervisor Halbert and what Dr. Troubler affirmed that it is what we are doing now is coping because we have a housing shortage. The community development agency did a really fantastic analysis that the housing needs assessment at the health committee not very long ago and found that as a as a community all the cities within our county and the unincorporated parts as a county we have under invested in low income housing and very low income housing and over invested in market rate housing and what that means for people who have mental illness or Substances use disorder who are disabled and need low income units need very low income units There are not enough of them to to meet the demand we have. So it is what we're doing now. It's why we have the homelessness crisis that we do is because we do not have the inventory that we need to house people and then wrap services around them so that they can remain stably housed and secure. If I may just say that I've asked that hopefully the president of the Board and the County Administrator bring Michelle's report to the full board. It is one of the best reports I've ever seen that doesn't just it breaks down all aspects of housing in Alameda County and since it's baseline information, it affects every single thing we do. Everything we do based on the way that she's been able to break it out, other than just by income. So another high level question that I ask and we have a three year plan revolving into another three year plan. And I ask this question even annually when we budget. Some percentage of things that we've done, they just didn't plan out the way we wanted it to. What are we cutting and not doing anymore? It's run its course, we've completed it or just didn't work out. And we have to try something new because doing the same thing doesn't get us any different results. What are the some percentage of new things that we're trying, either because it's been proven to work elsewhere, or we've determined that it's where we want to go to next. And of the last three years, and you mentioned a few of things that we've invested in, done. But what are we then not doing? And then what are we going to start to do that we've just never thought of before? Just high level. Supervisor, what you can be proud of at least in your constituents that you represent is that the state often reaches out to Alameda County specifically for TA to do exactly what you're describing. Some of the novel programs, again it doesn't solve the world but that have had really key in-house outreach programs, things like that. So there is a track record. Some of the things that we have were out in front of is a payment reform is current now. We did that a few years ago. We started in 2017-18 to do payment reform, which meant for us, we incentivize our providers, as well as our partners, to have better and higher outcomes. So those things are novel. We will, to the extent that Proposition 1 will allow us, we will continue to do those things are novel. We will to the extent that proposition one will allow us, we will continue to do those things that work. What we're seeing is a higher level of illness for individuals who have severe mental illness. So we're now looking at more, I hate to say that because oftentimes it's politically galvanizing the opposite direction, but quite frankly the highest level of care, whether that's locked, or whether that's working with people who are not able to care for themselves. Clearly, everyone will have to do care court. Our county is slated to do that in a few months in December of 2024. That will be very novel for us. So we're establishing a different way. Every county has a different way of doing it. We are wrapping around individuals through full service partnerships. That will be new for us, meaning most of the services that we have provided didn't necessarily go through the courts. So we're going to be partnering with them differently. And this is for the highest level of care for individuals. The other thing that is news, we've already allocated about $18 million of which $8 million is image to say for the African-American wellness hub. Again that is something very novel. I certainly respect, as he provides a Carson has had history of doing things like that. We're trying to learn from his proven history to be successful and we're actually getting outreach and other counties doing very similar work to us. So there's lots of different programs. Integrated is something also that's pretty novel to Alameda County that we'd like to explore further. And what I mean by that is working directly through CalAIM as well, but also working with our hospital EDs, connecting with them and having services that are cohabitated by behavioral hospitals. So at the end of the day, it is not a hospital or other organizations seeking services from the county, we're already there. Whether or not we fund that direct program, but we're able to tap into the individuals who were not coming before. So the good thing is that the community is telling us what more we need to do. And you'll probably see that in the very, very robust book. You're absolutely right. Very long book. We wanted to be as transparent as we could in terms of the MHSA plan that we have. And what they're telling us is we also need more preventative work with our and support to our LGBTQ populations as well as more UALP things that you heard today, they're telling us what they need. And we believe them. The other piece that we are starting much more intentionally is doing work through our faith-based communities. And again, to the extent, depending on what happened was a prop one, we don't want to leave those avenues behind because we did find that they were stepping up through the pandemic. So those are very high levels. We don't want to leave those avenues behind because we did find that they were stepping up through the pandemic. So those are very high levels for us. The definition of insanity is repeating that, which is not successful. So the good thing is we're looking at our metrics. We're looking that we were able to decrease the number of unnecessary 5150s. We were able to work with our sheriff and other partners. There are less people that are in our jails. And we are very hopeful at that, as well as less people in our EDs in the emergency room. Now we have much more. The other factor that I'll finally say is the expansion work, we're one of the newer counties that are doing active work with the opioid settlement. So we're pairing with that outreach and the feedback from our community to actually do concrete high level treatment of people who have substance use disorders. Very concretely, it could be Narcan that people know has saved live and it's been mentioned. I have in other forums. In the last couple of weeks, two people didn't die because our staff were helped and trained and ameliorated the symptoms in real time. That's what this is about for us and that's what we'll continue to do. Those are very minor things that are out there but we want to continue to do that in a new way, meaning having behavioral health step up as a health care provider that it is to help support somebody other work. So those are some of the examples at a high level. All right, thank you. I'll continue to go through the report. As all reports, the devil's always in the details. But for me, it's all about execution. What happens on the ground and what we see results? Paper's good on the ground is important to me. Absolutely. Thank you. OK, so I think we're ready for item six. Is that the next item? Next question is on item six. Item six. I had a question on number six. So I know you had presented at the last board work session on the recommendation to defer the implementation of SB 43. And you heard some of the speakers today that talked about some of the concerns they have with that deferment. Can you just kind of reiterate the steps that we will be taking to implement and be ready to make sure that it gets in place. I know you're looking at 2026. Also, is there an option to look at 2025 given, you know, the workforce shortage that we're facing? Then can you also address one of the comments or several of the comments that were made that those that were seriously, mentally ill, would fall through the cracks and not get the treatment that they need if we didn't do this implementation soon. Thank you. I will start Supervisor Tam there, but that's the most critical. And it is heart-wrenching because for your awareness and to clarify, SB 43 does not provide a path forward for treatment. What it does is expands the Lentermist Pressure Act to mean that there's a broader ability now for people to place people on a locked 72 hour hold. The counties and our partners are responsible for the treatment component. And that is exactly where we stand. If we knew right now, like probably one of very few counties, maybe a hand, maybe two, in the state of California that were ready to do it, If I knew that people who were placed on a psychiatric hold in a hospital had a safe place to go and that that hospital had the capacity to safely treat that it would be a no-brainer. I heard the numbers that were cited in real time. There's other counties that are having their board. So now the numbers at 47 with a few more, so we'll likely be over 50. I've heard some numbers quoted at 56. I won't say that out of the 58 counties, but at least over 50 will delay implementation to varying degrees. That is without question the only way. For us, we're no longer even arguing whether it should be. Many of us who've been in the field for long enough know it is the right thing to do. To enable us to safely bring in people who have substance use issues. And I think that speaks to supervisor Harburt's questions around the novel, the new programs that we're doing that we haven't done as much of, is medication-assistant treatment. We're doing more of the work that we see based on the need. Now, that being said, I understand that some counties are implementing within a year. Some people are implementing by the 2026. For us, because we think we'd like to go through a multi-step process, if you asked me, could we safely implement in a year? I would say no. I would say there's more to be done. I would say by what we will be looking for, your board is to hopefully approve the expansion of different services. We actually hope and look for your approval to do some things differently to work with our emergency departments. Concretely, we have not even certified certain providers with the ability to drop and release hold. We have to come back to your board for that approval given the way the Alameda County is structured. So there's a lot of reasons besides the bed availability and even though I as I mentioned before, a lot of the beds and the work will be implemented i.e. through beach ship that won't happen until 2027. So it will take us at least, at least a year to be in a position to begin that process, to do the training to coordination and everyone with our providers. Logistically, you ask for steps. The legislation, and I mentioned, so I apologize if it's a repetitive, the legislation doesn't allow you to pick and choose aspects that you will do. For example, you can't first only focus on certain populations, the medically fragile. You can't do that. It is all implemented or not. What you can do, though, is to begin to implement programming. You can begin to expand beds. You can begin to work with your providers to train them. You can designate facilities. You can enter into an inter-county agreements. As of this morning, we were notified even Marin now has been approved, so that means all of the Bay Area counties have approved a delay, and we can work together because we know that people are not going to fit in a box. They're human beings, and they need to have support. So it will allow us to roll out, even if the law doesn't exist, we can roll out programs at any time that we've finished, at any time that your board approves them. We can do that, but it means that we cannot legally apply the law until that term or the resolution that you've set up is established. Thank you. Yeah, I mean, I want to say and don't take this the wrong way. Don't tell me what we can't do. Tell me what we can do. And you did that because you said we can start rolling out programs now. You said we can do that even if we don't fully implement. Um, even if I think I heard you say even if the law doesn't allow, but I don't think you said that because you would never do something. I would never do that. But what can we do and I want to understand the most vulnerable that have historically slipped through the cracks that we hear from people in the community that called in today, how can we, without fully implementing, take care of them first before we take care of everyone? Because if we don't fully implement, like many in our community have asked us to do, and to push us into this, I'm torn honestly if we don't do that I want to at least know that we're not turning our backs on those that will otherwise fall through the cracks and I guess maybe I'm one that would rather try and fail but I tried, then not try at all. I'm leaning towards doing this. 48, 52, 56 out of 58 counties. That's what convinces me because you just shared that data. And so I'm going to certainly have to balance that. But I'm not going to give up on asking, what are we going to do for those most vulnerable, the ones that we hear about, because we have to, and we can't wait for a new apartment building to be built for them. We cannot. I know. So where are we going to put them, how are we going to show that moral imperative for those people that are suffering the most and going to die this winter if we don't do something about it? Thank you. I appreciate the question and I'll start with the latter comment. You'd rather try and fail than having not tried it all. And our position is we don't want, we can't fail. We don't want to practice on the community. For example, if we do not have protocols... They're going to die otherwise, but anyway. We hope they don't. We hope and pray they do not, absolutely. So our goal is to protect the community. If implementing in January in a couple weeks means that someone may die because they will be placed on a hold and moved to the jail without adequate support and treatment to wrap around them or move to an emergency department who is not ligature-proofed, we with ethical foresight won't practice. We won't practice. If we, which we see in the trends, note that there is an over-incarceration and is an over-inclination for our system to detain individuals who are of color, who represent many of the organizations that you saw today, our legal and moral imperative is to make sure that we do it safely, that we don't replicate what we're seeing in the terms of the trends. Now, if you're asking, what do we do right now? The law again does not provide treatment. What it does, it places a person on a hold. There is nothing that prevents us from touching that person's life, from reaching them. Research does not say that placing a person on a psychiatric hold will mean that their substance use issues will go away. It doesn't mean that. What research and what our data and what national and worldwide data shows is that treatment is what makes a difference. What the law will provide is that if family members or hospital providers are seeing an issue, they can place the person on a hold, but counties have a moral and responsible imperative to provide the services. So there will be nothing that precludes us from identifying those individuals. There is nothing. And even if a person, and I'll specifically speak, I believe there were comments around that the county is already serving. The county is not serving in our lock settings, people who have a primary diagnosis of substance use. That doesn't exist because the law has not implemented. It is true that many people have mental health as well as substance use issues, but this is a very different population that some people have. The major issue in their life is substance use. Certainly they may have a mental health. And it means that a clinician like myself or people who even have eons of experience only to discern what is appropriate level of care. So the services, the outreach, the programs we have already launched, the between 200 beds that we're planning to bring into the county, the outreach programs as well as the 150 I believe or 200 depending on how we're able to and what happens with proposition one that we're bringing on for care court. All of those things can happen before January of 2026. It does not preclude us from providing treatment. What it does do is enable people to place people on a locked psychiatric hold for 72 hours. That didn't exist for medical reason and or for the substance use issue, but it does not preclude us from doing the work that we We're not going to implement this, but you are going to come back with programs that we can do By roughly when and I'm supposed you're going to bring it to the Health and Human Services Committee and can you keep us informed as we open those programs because while we can't implement this because putting people on hold and sending them to the jail, I understand that. So what are we going to do when you develop those programs that we can do than on all leaders? Thank you. I hope so. Our hope is to bring back to you the feedback we've gotten from the stakeholders. We're planning to do a robust process at the same time of building a system. So we'll be beds for SUD in the East County I think right? Inosed Carson. I, uh, kind of, uh, in a weird kind of space, because a lot of times I'm calling and I'm asking kind of operational questions. Um, supervisor, however, you keep asking this question, what is it that you specifically want to see them do? Be more specific. What is it that they should do? I would hope that we could find the beds that are easiest to find and find more of them. I know we've been working for a year and a half and beyond before that. We don't have any beds for SUD and East County, so I've asked for that. If find a solution that doesn't require us to have the long term housing because it takes too long, but still be able to serve people that need the service. And I haven't, I still haven't heard that other than that we're going to be bringing new programs, but the most vulnerable of people that continue to suffer that we continue to hear about, and without implementing this program, how are we going to serve the substance use disorder plagued person who themselves chooses not to seek help? How are we going to do it? Yeah, so I don't know about you. I have two immediate family members who I've been personally with that I had to call 5150 on. You may have had that experience, I don't know. More than once. I have family members who have been a John George. So I personally, since I've been on this board for more than 20 years, have experienced the challenges of dealing with a system. And maybe that's why I've had personal attention a little bit more so to mental health. I'm not assuming that our workers aren't doing the best they can do. Because I've been out there with them even in the streets when they're trying to provide the services. So I'm assuming that all of our employees are doing the very best they can do with what they have. Based on that, I'm also assuming that managers and department heads are looking at every opportunity to try to meet the demands that we have here. The current mental health director was over John George for a long time when it was very under a lot of criticism in terms of people not being able to occupy a bed space because the demand was so great, there are attempts to try to meet that demand meant that people had to be on the floors and other places, all in the media. It wasn't because they didn't care, didn't want to provide the services, they didn't have all of the necessary things in order to do it. So it was damned if you do, damned if you don't. They brought people into John George and they tried to service them, they didn't have the space. They didn't have the space. It wasn't that they weren't trying to identify the space, they didn't have the space. And so as the representative of this board sitting in Sacramento on a regular basis for the last couple of years, Dr. Trouble and Colleen and her respective positions, we've all been at those tables directly, along with our 58 other, 57 other colleagues saying, we want to do this. We want a healthy community. We want mental health in our community. And we're doing every damn thing we can in order to do that. We don't have it. It's not available at this point in time. So as opposed to just being political and saying, yes, let's go ahead with quick care court knowing that if we say that we can execute it and then we come under additional criticism, to me just doesn't make sense. That's why 50 some counties are saying, we wanna do it, we wanna push our foot to the pedal, we don't have any gas. We don't have the people to provide the services, we don't have the facilities to provide the services, the don't have the facilities that provide the services, the facilities we have have to go through a planning process, people show up as they do every single time and say not here. So I don't know how you overcome that other than with proper planning and proper thought and being real about the outcomes, not being unrealistic about the outcome. Yes, so if I should, not on this item. Oh, because you want to go to another item. Yeah, but it's still related to behavioral health item number seven. Okay, let me finish on six first Yeah, just a few questions on six so if we delay the implementation of prop of SB 43 Will there be any implications to our location implementation of care courts? No, they are two of the many new legislations that are passing. We are on set and on track to implement December. Now, since you had the work session with us last week, I've heard the governor on the news. He's really jumping on all the counties for our delays. How do we respond to that? I mean, that is a if I can interrupt for just a second, let me say this because I forgot to say this. The few counties that have gone on board, these counties have been given some additional things to sweeten the pot. They may have the ability to negotiate for existing space. LA County being one of those. San Francisco, from where the governor comes, being another one of those. And even as they sat at the table talking about this, they said they couldn't do it initially. They couldn't do it. So it's not just more dollars, but they couldn't do it. So, you know, politics being what it is. Everybody didn't have the same access to what they got. Okay. I understand that. Anything is, did you want to say anything else on this as well? Because I've heard this out there with the governor, but I suppose the Carson has helped to provide some more enlightenment on this. Yes, I am following the threads of certainly the governor's eyeer with counties. I think what I would say is the fact that California is so diverse, and yet representing everyone, really representing a lot of different perspective, and yet all the counties could come together collectively for the most part and say we can't do this safely is talking point number one. The other piece that I would say as Supervisor Harbor mentioned, there are so many opportunities that the state has put forth where those yet haven't been realized. For example, the Six Bed Substance Use Program, we've not yet received the dollars from the state. And so we're looking to continue to advocate. So it's wonderful that there's so many changes. And it is once in a career. But I go back to the comment, we don't want to practice on people's lives. And it doesn't preclude us from doing some novel changes and seeking your approval to do some things in the meantime. But we do understand that it's a political testimony to say that all of county implemented SB 43 and we're opting to not be in the politics. We're opting to look at what is the outcome if people are placed on a psychiatric hold and there is not a clear path forward. What is the outcome? If one provider has a different definition of a new law, it's not trained or our bench, our legislative capacity. So for us, we are trying not to be in the politics because again, many of us believe it is the right thing to do to help our system and community, expanding the definitions, but we want to make sure we're doing so safely. And I know when I read the board letter, you know, I just want to quote you said, given its statutory role in the Alameda County Behavioral Health. In the designation of LPS facilities and clinicians, the department is required to evaluate the system's ability to respond to the legislative changes impacting the behavioral health needs of Alameda County. Then you indicate all the different things from coordination, staffing to facilities, to the impact on hospitals, it's just quite a bit. This seems, in what you're saying to us today, too, in the public, this seems to be based based on sound, rational judgment, because I too kind of believe that once again, on that seeing our staff, they won't have a sense of urgency and a moral imperative. But based on what you're saying, it just seems as if we move ahead with implementation, we could be causing more harm than good. And that's what's kind of convincing me. And then I know Rebecca Rosen was here earlier, Rebecca from the hospital council spoke about the fact that we should delay implementation as well. Because I know it's sort of like what comes first, the chicken or the egg you know her meat you remember say this last week because We can't leave people in the streets. They're not gonna get stabilized on the streets But if we don't have facilities to put them in they're not gonna get you know They're not gonna get the Services they need because we're not the facilities But then if we put them in the facilities and they haven't gotten treated, then there's, you know, that's gonna mess up the facilities. So it's a difficult complex dance that you're trying to undertake. And I think what would give me more comfort, and I think it was something you responded to Supervisor Howard with. If we can see incrementally, because you're saying, we're not going to be delaying moving heavy stuff, we're just delaying the full implementation of SB 43. In terms of understate law, but we're going to be making strides to do everything we can to get to that without the mandate of the date being January of 2024? No, wait no. No. Yes. You want to delay some 26, but it was originally going to be two weeks from now. Yeah, right. Right, right. So I think that would help me if we have a sense of how we're progressing. We could absolutely provide your board at your direction with updates on our progress and your question speaks to, I believe, supervisor, Tam's earlier question about, what are the things that we can implement? We can do programs and we can provide information on that. We probably will be seeking your support to look at the way that facilities are designated as we did. Again, your board approved through the COVID crisis, our ability to designate facilities and work with our providers. We may be seeking those things from you. So we will be doing both and we at your discretion would like to come and provide updates and for the public to know that there are programs and things that are happening. And the final thing is that I was surprised because once away, I know you said also at the work session because behavioral health is in the agency that also houses the health systems, the coordination you're going to be working very closely. Okay, all right, so if I was my guest. Thank you. I, all right. So if I was my guest. Thank you. I appreciate the discussion. Also want to echo the comments. It was heartwarming to have the public here and speak from their life experience. So I want to acknowledge I know that's not easy to come down to this space to do that publicly. So I am going to ask that we do get updates on program implementation. But I want to be respectful to your workload. You've got a lot coming at you and you've done so much in the short period of time that I've gotten to know you. So I want to acknowledge and appreciate you for the great work as well as your entire team. Would it be possible to get an update on the programs that could be implemented or have potentially been implemented by April? Is that reasonable to get an update back to the full board? Initially, I was thinking health committee, but this has been such a robust discussion. Public's playing close attention. I think it would just make the most sense if possible if my colleagues on the health committee are open to that to have that update come back to the full board. Thank you. Yes. One last question, President Miley, if I could. If we were building on what Roger Tam and Aslan at the beginning, nothing would preclude us from continuing to push back the implementation date to January of 26th. If today we say we'll push it back a year. Between now and a year, if we're not ready, we can at this time next year push it back a year. Between now and a year, if we're not ready, we can at this time next year push it back another year. We'll be monitoring this along the way April being one date. Does anything preclude us from doing that? We delay it to 25. We can still delay it to 26, sometime along the year. Is that right? I believe we would certainly defer to County Council to clarify, but we believe that the resolution itself and the implementation or whatever your will is. I think I mentioned that at the work session, you can direct us to implement by a particular date, which is, and so the words of the resolution says, until you can change that and direct us to implement by, which would enable us to implement it sooner, should there be capacity and ability to do that. But I don't know if you say that we must implement IE within a year. If you can come back again, I'm not sure how the legislation works. Come back again and say no, not this year, the next. That would be two different actions. I'm not familiar with that. I don't know of any of our county partners who have done that. What I have heard them do is IE, either one year or two years with the ability to implement sooner should there be adequate capacity and safe precautions taken, which would again change the resolution from until to buy. County Council seems like we can just change a word from 2026 to 2025, and then later if we aren't comfortable with that, we can implement another resolution. No, my apologize. When I meant word, I meant it says the last line is until 2026, I was saying what I understand from other counties is by 2026 that would allow counties to implement before. I think the question that County Council is saying whether if your board directs a implement a year, can then we pivot that and then implement the next year? So what? I think what you said makes fine sense because it allows us to do it sooner without, I mean, again, if we were to change it to say get this done by 25, it's with no lack of understanding that if we can't get it done by then that we could, would extend it year. It just, I guess it's a bit of semantics. I, uh, six of one half dozen of the other, um, whether we put it out till 26, but make progress along the way or ask to push harder. It's just two ways of doing kind of the same thing. I'm not advocating that we ever not be cognizant of what we actually can accomplish. It's just a matter of when. Yeah, I was surprised to have heard. I think what the director is saying is we could implement by 2026, which you'll, you know, if we can do it sooner or we do it sooner, not by 2025, but by 2026, as opposed to, that's what she said to us. That's what I think that's what she's saying. Yes, and what I don't know would have to certainly defer to County Council. I'll be phase implement. When I thought I also heard that we, I guess with program, because you also said we can't pick and choose what we want to do out of it It feels like if we could we would pick and choose what we would want to do and implement that sooner we can't but I'm assuming we're always gonna push as hard as we can for everything so whether we Have it say until 2026? We're still gonna push ahead with programs you You mentioned that. Whether we change it to say by 2026, we can do it earlier. We're going to push to get that done. I'm just trying to balance what some speaker said, which is get it done by 2025. And if we can't, then extend. If I may, supervisors, I agree with Dr. Trouble's recommendation. I'm looking at the resolution now. And certainly by your testimony, we've heard your interest in having this be implemented as soon as safely possible and reasonably possible. So, and Dr. Trouble has suggested this modification so that the under the resolved number one, and it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not that it's not and institutions code section 5008 by January 1, 2026. So that changed plus the sentiment that you have shared with us today would give us direction. I'm good with that. Yeah, let's have a motion. Oh. No. Oh, wait a minute. Do we have to? We're not doing motion, do we have more pulled items? Oh, yeah, this is already in the mass motion. Yes, yes. But we do need to change the word in the result until we're taking out the word until and putting the word by January 1, 2026. I just want to respectfully ask we did raise this at the work session last week. So it'd be helpful if it was already included in the resolution. We could have saved a little bit of time just trying to move us along. But I appreciate the discussion and like the flexibility. So thank you. The next question was for item seven. Did we cover that? That's super. I just am. What's the next one is item 56 and then 62. We had public comment on item 56. This is our annual budgeting process and a couple of thoughts and they were shared. I think in an email. Would it be possible that we, going into this year's process, that we could include a longer sunshine period such that the data, the staff reports, the materials that would be presented at a meeting be provided to the community seven or ten days in advance as opposed to three because I'm hearing in my own personal experience has been we get a lot a lot a lot of data with three days notice and that's legally compliant but I'd like to see because we're planning so far in events next six months and we just have the data be seven to ten days. The other thing is we have a lot of dates where it's, you know, a month of April or early April or, but can we get the exact dates firmed up at some point so that we don't run into announcing a date, you know, a week in advance, but people know what the dates are, a couple of weeks in advance. And then I also had feedback that a lot of our presentations and discussions and committee ad hoc meetings were at a time of day, 3 p.m. that didn't work for people. And could we not have some allowance for an evening meeting. I know that I've also had the request that we do it road show style in each district, but, and I think it's been done that way before, I wasn't here then, but I feel like maybe we should do that, or maybe we don't have to do it in every district, but to have maybe South or East County, or another part of our county have an in-person meeting. But if that's not possible, that we have at least in the evening, because people can use technology, we know that. I'm just trying to be sensitive to those that can't spend a lot of time at 3 p.m. And so if we could make those three things, I would appreciate it. And I don't know if county council, or county administrator can contemplate this. And I'm gonna step in for a second. As chair of the Budget Committee, but not just as chair of the Budget Committee, as the person who actually worked with the community at that time, it included Livermore and all parts of your district in putting together what this operator's would look like. We had tons of meetings in order to try to come up with the structure that we operate now. When I inherited the position, we met in the board conference room as the budget committee, and it was just department heads. This is predating the person everybody wants to point the finger at, which is Susan. She wasn't the county administrator. Because everybody says she's the problem. But she wasn't the county administrator. Steve Zaley was. And at that time it was just department heads, the county administrator, and one board member. And they made the decisions about proposing the budget. They came out in June. And then there was the week of hearings. And that was it. I challenge you to go and check with all the 57 other counties. They don't have the structure we have in place. They don't go through the budget process the way we do. Some of them, the majority of them, more than half, it's done in almost a single meeting or it's done in a single week. I challenge you to go and check that out because a lot of my colleagues say, what in the heck are you guys doing? And they've said that for years. And so the structure we had went from just department heads, one board member and the county administrator to an open process outside of the board conference room into a public arena that doesn't go just with the county proper department heads. We did something unheard of. Nobody made a like it today. They criticize it all the time. And you know, all we got is criticism around it. But we had an open process that the community decided who the extended workers of voting members were going to be on that working group. The community did. So labor sits at that table with their designated point. Community groups, including the taxpayers association, which is consistently critical of us, have a place at the table. Community-based organization decided who they wanted. Just because certain people aren't the selected ones on there doesn't mean that we didn't go through a public process. They just, people just didn't want them on the voting committee. I'll put it just like that. And so, we do way more than anybody else. Some of the reasons why we can't give all the scheduled dates is because since this is a structure that nobody else has, we invite the treasurer from the state of California to come and present. We invite the finance director from the state of California to come and from the budget project which analyzes the budget outside of the formal state of California. We invite outside people who have an impact on the state budget to come in and educate. We can't tell them what date they need to be here. They're inviting guests. And 90% of the time, 95% of the time, they come. They enlightened. An open brown act meeting. 90% of the time, 95% of the time, they come, they enlighten, an open brown act meeting. Because some board members choose not to show up as their own fault. But the meetings are scheduled, they're open. We have historically had a community meetings around the budget. That the community chose what those dates were. So supervisor, however, if you wanna have go ahead and have night meetings out in Livermore, you could schedule just like every other board member as in their meetings. On whatever day of the week, night of the week that they choose to do it as added information around the budget process. And then we do something extraordinary. None County employees participate in recommending how we address the budget deficit. Doesn't happen any place else. And that's before the formal process starts in June, which is almost two weeks of open brown act meetings around the budget. We've done it in order to educate people and inform people around the budget process. And again, my colleagues and the other 57 say, I don't know what you guys are doing. We don't do that. Everything that we do well, we should continue to do well. I don't think our administrator is at fault for anything other than and I if there's a problem with having a longer lead time of the data to be available I'm responding to comments that came to me from outside of my district in fact I believe it came from a community member that has called in several times about this, but it's not in my district, but longer lead time for them to evaluate that indeed, if we can't rely on somebody from Sacramento that we can tell them when to come, but when they tell us, they schedule their times and month in advance. I'm guessing they don't just show up with three days notice if we can get the date firmed as firmly as possible and that we have a county meeting that would be at night. If you're saying and maybe we can clarify, I'm open to holding my own town hall meeting for the budget process, but that's not what I'm asking for. I'm asking for the county to be transparent and accessible to the community in the evening because that's when they're not hard at work. And all I can say is the things that we do, that we do better than everybody else, we should continue to do. And I think we can always get continuously better. And I don't see how any of these things are insurmountable or not achievable and that they're not, I don't see all their bad. That's all. You know, we had a speaker today that said, all the county administrator presents is doing glume. That's their privilege to say that. They, you know, I support their ability to say that. But when we're just giving information as we continuously do that comes from the state of California, like the state budget letter that just came out the other day that was not drafted by anybody from Alameda County that says the state of California anticipates significant significant general fund budget deficits in fiscal year 23, 24, 24, and 25 accordingly. That immediate action to reduce current year general fund expenditures should take place. That people should have measurable and ensure prudent spending. And if we're supposed to ignore that as opposed to try to factor that in, I think that we're being stupid as elected officials. I would at least like to get a budget meeting that doesn't conflict with an ACTC meeting which is what we did last year and mainly of us. When you become the budget chair then you could do it. Well, what you're not the budget chair. I'm a member of ACTC as well. I got a bunch of other meetings as well. Other than just ACTC. So when you become the budget chair, then you schedule them. Well, I don't know if we can decide. We can decide when these would be. We could decide that change this policy right now to not have conflicts like that, or to have a nighttime meeting. That's not up for one. I'm getting, believe I heard, that said. Supervisor Carson, I don't know. We'll see how it goes. I just said my piece. Yes, I've kind of gone through the county's budget process for many, many years and we do get some criticism. Once again, I don't think that criticism is universal, but I've heard some criticism in the unincorporated area as well as some criticism from some folks here in North County, particularly that's generally the only criticism. I hear, I don't hear that criticism coming from the bargaining units, I don't think. And I don't hear that criticism coming from our, and once again, I don't, maybe I have, but I'm not sure if I heard it from our community-based organizations, but I know the counties work very hard to come up with a budget process. I can remember when I was on the Oakland City Council in the county had budget hearings over here. And these chambers were full with a lot of folks and a lot of anger. And Charlie bring out his chain saw, Charlie Plummer. And it was pretty controversial. So I know they've worked on kind of a process. And like I said, it's not like it can't be improved but you know I'm willing to go along with the desires of the the budget committee and the county administrator in terms of how we want to proceed I do I do want to also say yeah I think if anybody from the public were to say the county administrator presents gloom and doom, I would disagree with that person vehemently, because like supervisor Carsten, states facing a $68 billion deficit, and we all know when the state faces a deficit, who's gonna pay the piper, they're gonna pass it on to the counties and to the cities. So it's better to be prudent and conservative as opposed to being liberal and spend-thrift. So I don't know where we go from here, but I would leave it in the hands of the budget chair and the county administrator, unless others have an opinion and want to weigh in on this topic. So let me just add that this is the beginning of the process. So you're right. We do not have definitive dates for each step in the process, largely contingent on what's happening to the state and federal government as well as internally here. We've tried to build in as much flexibility as possible. So we will have more definitive dates as we get more information. And in terms of advance information, our goal is to provide everybody with the most current information possible. And as the Professor Carson has said, it's largely information sharing. So I think it benefits everyone to have the most current information available. And again, I'll just reiterate the flexibility because we're also dependent benefits every one to have the most current information available. And also, and again, I'll just reiterate the flexibility because we're also dependent, you know, we're working with our county departments who are doing a lot of the heavy lifting as well as my staff in terms of presenting. The information as we get further down the road in terms of our own data and presentations, just like, you know, we have the early budget hearings. We again have identified to pull in, you know, a date probably an early April contingent on your boards annual budget schedule to do those presentations. So I think we tried to maintain flexibility at the same time meeting our noticing requirements and our meetings as you know are open to everyone and several of the stakeholders are on the committee. I know that there are a couple of positions on the committee that are open, and those are appointments that I know we've, you know, for board members to make from representing, I think, a couple of areas in the county. So I think, you know, we try to keep it as dynamic a process as possible, and certainly it is a much more open process than in most other jurisdictions. I'll just weigh in that. I agree with the budget strategy that was presented in item 56. We have a multi billion dollar budget. We work with the information we have now from the state and federal government. We have an obligation to plan for the worst and work toward the best. So that is basically an essence what the strategy is right now is to put together a bit of a rainy day fund for this uncertainty. So I'm comfortable with our strategy at the moment. And if we want to provide more opportunity for public comment, I think we certainly have that flexibility to do that and we can call for more meetings. Okay, I'll wait. So I understand the process, I understand why it's in place. I think it is a good one. There's many touch points for the public to engage. I just wanna ask a couple of clarifying questions. So what typically happens in committee meetings is a PowerPoint presentation is presented at the meeting. So just want to be clear. Maybe this is a question for the clerk. But is that PowerPoint presentation uploaded to our website after the fact so the public can access it? Yes, it is. Okay. And then what is the structure of public comments in the committee meetings? Is it in the beginning of the meeting and the meeting? Normally at the time in which anyone raises their hand and has a question, we stop right in the middle, let them ask their question. We don't do it like we do our board meetings getting it to end. It's whenever you have a question. Okay, so this body is a little bit more flexible is what I'm learning. And we also have public comment because we follow up around that. I think that's right. Okay, and then any member of the public can speak on items none of the agenda, pretty much every Tuesday. Under public comment, if they had a question concerned about the budget, they wanted to speak up on the issue. They're always welcome to do that in a regular meetings, correct? Our meeting is a brown acted meetings. They're open to anyone who would like to participate. You don't have to be a member of the budget work group. Often there are people who are not members of the budget work group. Often there are people who are not members of the budget work group who come and speak. They ask for clarification. We try to clarify it. We try to give every opportunity to exhaust your questions and to respond to them. People may not like what they see. People may not like what they see. I may not like what they see, but we try our best to do it. You know, on some level, now I'll stop there. Thank you. And then in regard to the vacancies, who makes that appointment? Is the president of the board made those appointments? So there are designated positions for many of the agency and department heads and then as noted, the labor representatives are selected by the labor coalition. We have one management and one other representative, generally SEIU, the CBOs. We have one from North and South County. They're selected by the consortium. We've got an incorporated area representative designated by the board. We've got a tri-valley representative designated by the board a tri-city representative designated by the board. And community members representing the legal women voters in the taxpayers association. Okay, so- Okay, by the way, every single year since we start we have special meetings special meetings with all of the labor representatives and they show up special meeting with all the community-based organizations and they show up all around the budget and Who else is it that's special? Yeah, so I mean, we have they haven't added opportunity just around their own issues. And they're always always there. That's aside from the general meetings. That's a targeted meeting at that audience. Okay, so I can support this, open to feedback on ways we can improve, but based off what's presented in the report and my short window of experience as last go around, I do feel strongly that there's multiple touch points for the community to engage in the process. So I'm comfortable supporting it. Thank you. Yeah, and for the Tri-City, I mean Tri-Valley Representative, you know, Supervisor Halbert could weigh in on who we'd like to appoint to the budget committee without a corporate area. That supervisor, Tam and myself, and then for the Tri-City, I'm assuming that you supervise the Marques and Supervisor Halbert, Raymond and Union City and Newark. I'm assuming that you supervise the Marques and supervise the Albert Fremont and Union City and Newark. Yeah, you know, as a budget year, that's out of my realm. I don't know what goes on in Tri-Valley and out and that when Scott Haggerty was on the board, Scott was very active in that and there was always presence there. I mean, never heard what we're hearing now. I think we've sent communications to members of the board for requesting recommendations for the unincorporated area as well as the tri-value. So I get a lot of feedback. I put it that way from folks in the unincorporated area wanting to understand the county budget, wanting to weigh in. And this that the other and we've the other, and we're trying our best to accommodate them, they've even wanted to have things done to kind of do the budget a little differently, but in a way the county administrator is explained to me to do the budget differently and would require a herculean change in the mechanisms that are underpinning the entire budget process with the MOU and other things. So we just try to continue to work through all that, but I can tell you for a fact, because I observed it when I was in Oakland City all how the county would really struggle with its budget back in the 1990s and there were some major budget crises then. So I do you know I recognize that things are a lot say and are here in terms of the budget process and once again it might not be perfect but as they say let's not let the enemy of the the perfect be the enemy of the good. Yes. Okay. Thank you. You know, again, I'm taking this personally. So I'm going on the record. Prior to the pandemic, there would be a town hall meeting hosted by the supervisor in that district out in Fremont. There'd be hundreds of people who came from that area. The same thing that happened at Bishop Ranch Park or whatever it's called in. You know, but people took the initiative to do that and the information was taken to them. The same thing in my district, but people took the initiative to do it as opposed to directing somebody else to do it. You got staff, you should staff it. We bring the information to you. So it's ours to add up. But again, dumping this on one person to take on yet another task that has limited staff themselves, you know, people need to do their basic work in my opinion And then they got the full complement of the county behind them to support it But don't dump it on them like everything else is being dumped on our department heads This item was discussed thoroughly now we're gonna back the item number seven So for I a 10. I think there was a question on 62. But we skipped seven. So I'm going to go back to seven. Thank you. I wanted to get a better understanding on the medication assisted treatment for the sanary Rita jail clients because we're looking at increasing that care from 15 million to 20 million of which part of it is going to be offset by the opioid settlement. So I wanted to understand how effective these treatments are and how we measured their effectiveness. Thank you, supervisor Tan. The health care community broadly has established that medication assisted treatment works well. So for example, when a person is suffering from severe overdose, they can immediately come to provide support, certainly recessive tape, but actually provide long-term medically overseen care. So it's not just a traditional, it really is a higher level of, so it's the nexus between behavioral health, substance use, and medical provision. And it's consistently been successful. It just is common knowledge for this particular item, which is also part of I think your question. We're looking to basically, although we're not the healthcare provider in the jail, we're basically looking to fund additional medications that can find, so that inmates can find relief and support and additional treatment that they hadn't necessarily been available to receiving. So because it's been proven effective, because it's been proven actually better than effective, it's one of the safest ways to make sure that a person is okay when they're suffering from acute substance use issues and intoxication. They can be medically managed and supported in then a longer term trajectory of care that they can follow them. Thank you. Okay, and I have a question real quickly on item 53, the fair budget. Typically that comes to the fair committee. I don't think it came to the fair committee this year. Was that an oversight or your ad hoc committee? I don't know if it's a case that I'm not sure that has necessarily been the case on the budget. Because frankly, we usually don't get a lot of lead time. And I know that there's a deadline at the state. But we can check to see if there's any flexibility. Okay. Yeah. I don't necessarily have any problem with the. With the item, but just in terms of process. No one once he insubisely has a we can check to see if there's any flexibility. Okay, yeah. I don't necessarily have any problem with the item, but just in terms of process, I don't know when, once he unsupervised, Haggerty's here, he was always on top of that. I kind of followed his lead. We stopped having those ad hoc meetings. We could have somebody who didn't want to go to one. Okay. We could reinstitute them anytime. All right. I think we're up to item 62. Right. Right. Okay. I have a 60 to the last one. Thank you. I guess the probation department general service agency. I guess the Arjoe individuals who came and spoke today, did they previously have a contract with in this area? No, thank you, Supervisor Carson, Mark Stwa, Chief of Astonopps, Arjoe I believe was here in support of the Carl B. Matoyer. Okay. Did they, the Carl Carl B originally have a contract? Yes, they've had a contract for several years and the board letter. This board letter is to extend their current contract than the other providers for six additional months for the procurement process to be completed for the new contract. Okay. So they have a six month extension. Correct, if it's approved by the board today. If it's approved by the board today. Because they made a sound as though there was gonna be a void in terms of providing, I guess, services that have been historically provided. And they were very direct and specific to African Americans in the East Oakland area. How is this, how is 62 impacting all of their allegations about impacting negatively services to African Americans and the DP Stokeland area, which they also said just based on what they said today. It's the only resource that provides the kind of service they provide to that population. Item 62 would continue the services that are already in place. I believe what they came to the board about today is the current procurement process. And the concern that they have about who's being awarded contracts for the new contract. I see. awarded contracts for the new contract. I see. But at least for the next six months, if not passed then, the population that they have, that they've been providing services to should remain pretty stable. Yes, that doesn't mean that there isn't going to be another provider in and around that tent work, but in terms of what they historically claim, is that's not my district, so I don't follow it as closely, but that they historically say that they provide the services to. Yes, I believe that just from my understanding of everything that's gone on and the services that they have provided, what they're presenting to the board is that the Carl Bumertoire Center, if they're not awarded under the next contract, then they as a provider would not be the ones providing the services to the community and D.P. Stokeland. The RFP process would result in East Oakland being served, but it could potentially be a different provider. Okay. All right. Thank you. Yeah, you can just say that because I've talked to the staff about this because it was brought to my attention. And I mentioned to the folks that, the contract was going to be extended by six months. But as staff pointed out, they're still concerned about what's going to happen beyond that particularly since they've provided services for the last 40 years. It's my understanding that through the RFP process, another provider was going to be selected. But I think the staff is revisiting the whole RFP process. I think I can say that. And then the score sheets around, because none of this has come to the board yet, the score sheets around that have not been made public because nothing has come to the board about this RFP. So I don't know if the staff can speak to where we're going to go in the future, but that might help provide a little bit more clarification for the board and for the public around these contracts. So thank you to the providers of my We are looking at the geographic locations that are the providers will be Located and where those services will be there was originally an expansion to only have one provider In Oakland rather than two, but now we're revisiting that based on concerns raised. I don't Because it's an actor procurement. I'm mindful of what I do and do not say, but that is being evaluated. Any other thing too, as I know, Carpene, Victoria, they actually appealed their, the ruling, did that appeal go to the auditor or did it go to GSA? So they did protest original noses of intent to award with a larger geographic area to one provider. Their protest was denied. It did go to appeal to the auditor's office. And now the protest was upheld. However, with consultation with probation and some of the broader questions about the community. We had a lot of questions about the community. We had a lot of questions about the community. We had a lot of questions about the community. We had a lot of questions about the community. We had a lot of questions about the community. We had a lot of questions about the community. We had a lot this relative to the fact that the appeal went through and they were denied on the appeal. And this was going to come to the board. So I asked the staff to take a look at all of this. Because you have had it come to the board with that appeal, then I would have wanted to look at the score sheets and other things. But obviously they're figuring out how they can address this concern. Thank you. I appreciate that, President Miley. You know, since I've been on the board, I really, even though we represent the entire county, the five of us, and you can do whatever you want in anybody else, I really try to stay out of other people's business, because I got a way a lot on my plate. And I don't need to be anybody else's geographical, or even though a lot of people keep messing around in my district. And the demographic shifts have happened so much that there are only a few pockets that are verifiable where African Americans in particular still reside. Most of those are kind of more in your area, Castro Valley in East Oakland. And again, I try not to figure your handling, your business, I don't need to be shadowing, right? But sitting on the health committee and sitting on some of the other committees, and since day one I've been here, the numbers for African Americans are just off the chart in all of these negative areas, especially in health care and mental health. When I hear people today who rightfully so came to you come here and alleged or say that those who have credibility and have been providing services, I don't know the quality of services, but providing services that people have been taking advantage of I felt very compelled to just kind of get a better sense of where things are. Didn't want to be messing around in your business. Carolyn Johnson calls me a lot and I go like, did you top to Nate as they formulate their opinion? And I appreciate that, that you got my back on that. Because you know, when you decided you weren't gonna run again, people thought I made that decision. But they, they can't tell the difference between carcass and them just kidding. I'm just kidding. I'm just kidding. But yeah, but that was the rumor going around. You decided not to run? No, I said that was Keith. So, okay. So I think we got that. I don't think so. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. I think we got that. I don't. Okay. Okay. I think we got that cleared up to the thanks. Okay. So I just had'm really pleased with item 65. It's, they're going into a contract for further deescalation type training. And I think that's really, really fantastic because I know there's been criticism around on the knee for deescalation. I know when I convened the ad hoc committee on reimagining public safety, one of those de-escalation was one of those things that folks were really clamoring for. And based on my reading of the board letter, this is going to heighten the ability for our deputies to have more skills in de-escalation. So I don't know. I'm sure if you want to maybe just speak a little bit more tied on 65 and then I'll go to 66. Sure. Yeah, this is a unique system. In the past, we've had what we call them shoot, don't shoot kind of videos, but this is a this is an entire system that will react to whatever the deputy does. So if it's a hostage, I'll just make something up here. It's a hostage situation where a deputy steps into the wrong area, then the hostage taker will do something different than had the deputy not stepped into that area or had stepped into it. So it's almost like another human is in the room with you. It's got that, it's this amazing technology, but it really helps our deputies to function, to learn how to function in very violent sometimes and in other times when they have to be be constantly using their head about trying to keep the person or persons that they're dealing with calm enough that they can deescalate the situation to a point where force is not required. No level of force is required. So it's a really good system. Yes, so thank you. I just really wanted to highlight that because I know once again, Sheriff's Department and law enforcement are constantly being criticized, and at least in this sense, since it's another example of the Sheriff's Department taking steps to improve its ability to gain the trust and confidence of the public and try to deescalate matters as opposed to the use of force. And then item 66, we're going to decommission the boat, the Susan M. Vessel. And I believe the M is Marinishi. The Susan Marinishi Vessel. I think that's what the end stands for. That's the vessel that had the 50 caliber machine gun on it, the Susan M vessel on the waterway. And the only issue I have is who's responsible for policing the S-Wary? Is that OPD? Is that the sheriff? Is that the Coast Guard? Because we've had instances of pirating on, you know, the S-Wary. Yeah, so it's the local police department because it's within their city and in some cases, Alameda. But the sheriff's Office doesn't really have, we have concurrent jurisdiction, but there isn't a lot of unincorporated area under water in the estuary area. We've always, as you know, Sheriff Plumber purchased the Susan M. Well, we bought it for a dollar from the federal government. And the hardest part of getting rid of it is that nobody wants it. We tried to give it to a whole lot of folks, but unfortunately over the years, it's just, it's very expensive to maintain and it hasn't, we haven't been able to maintain it. So it's at a point where it's just essentially scrap. Okay. Thank you for that explanation. to maintain it. So it's at a point where it's just essentially scrap. Okay, thank you for that explanation. So I believe if there are no other questions on the mass motion, I think the one change on the mass motion was item six, were we put in by in the resolution the resolve? County Council, In the resolution the resolve County council Attorney Thank I don't know did your Do we You're you're editing the motion is that what you think? I'll agree to that. I made the motion. Okay, so Suppressor Halberts agree into that you know what it would be helpful if you could pull that item that. So it's not a matter of But Mass Motion before us, can the clerk call the roll? Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Aye. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Myles. Yes. All right. Now item six. I'll move the item and just update the resolution to add the word by before January 2026. Under the resolve. Under the resolve. If I may and we just conform I just want it to be clear so that when the clerk takes the minutes it'll it'll be accurate so just to to confirm that the motion is that the board approve the resolution with the following amendment that on paragraph one of page two, that the word until be replaced with the word by, such that it reads by January 1, 2026. Is that correct? Yes, that ask the question. Why? Such that it reads by January 12, 2026. Is that correct? Yes, that is the motion. Thank you. Seconded. If it moves in second, I'm Marques and seconded by Helbert. There was a board comments on this clerk all the roll. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Mike Hathes. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Aye. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Meiley. Yes. So item 15, I need to recuse myself on item 15, not the entire item, but for the sake of brevity, I will recuse myself on the entire item. The main reason I have to recuse is because one of the CBOs is boss and the executive director of boss Don Frazier has made a campaign contribution to my campaign back in February of this year for about $1000. So under the Vine Act, I can't vote on this. So I'm going to recuse myself on the entire item and leave the room. Is there a motion to approve item 15? I will move item 15. A second. Very good. Seeing no discussion. I'll ask the clerk noting that Supervisor Meile has left the room. Recused himself. As the clerk call the roll, please. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Aye. Supervisor Carson. Yes. Supervisor Meile recused himself from discussing voting on the item and left the room. Thank you very much. The item passes. With that, we'll invite President Miley back. Welcome back. Thank you. OK, so I think we've covered the board agenda other than the set items for two o'clock. And you have some ordinances. Oh, all right. Let's do the ordinances. Get that out of the way. First ordinance that I see is item 45. I am 545 is the second reading of salary ordinance amendment. And ordinance amending certain provisions of the 2023, 2024 County of Alameda, salary ordinance. Moved away the full first reading and adopt the ordinance. The board. The board. The board. The board. The board. The board. The board. The board. The board. The board. The board. The board. to get the clerk reading. Okay, okay. Let's have the roll. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Aye. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Miley. Yes. Item 46 is also the second reading of the salary ordinance amendments. An ordinance amending certain provisions of the 2023,24 County of Alameda, Valerie Organs. Moved away of the full second reading and adopt the ordinance. Second. Moved by Halbert, second by Tam. Any more comments or questions? Hearing none, please call the roll. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Aye. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Miley. Yes. You can't leave yet. Item 47 is the first reading of salary ordinance amendments affecting classifications and the health care services agency at and at the Alameda County Employee Retirement Association. And ordinance amending certain provisions of the 2023, 2024 County of Alameda salary ordinance. Valimita Salary Ordinance. Moved away the full first reading of the ordinance and move for its adoption. Second reading. Second introduction. Introduce the ordinance. Okay, moved by Albert, seconded by Tam. Any board comments or questions? Call the roll please. Supervisor Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Mar the roll please. Supervisor Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Marquez. Hi. Supervisor Tam. Hi. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Miley. Yes. Item 64 is the second reading when ordinance modifying a fee schedule in the Sheriff's Crime Lab. And ordinance amending the fee schedule for the crime laboratory unit of the Elimita County Sheriff's Office. Moved away the full second reading of the ordinance and move for its adoption. Second. Move by Halward, say my name. Any board comments or questions? Color roll. Supervisor Halward. Hi. Supervisor Marquez. Supervisor Tam. Hi. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Aye. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Meiley. Yes. And then your last item is to go back to item 82. Oh yes. Because your set matter and the sheriff's ordinance. Okay. So tell us what we're doing on that. With item 82, we closed the public hearing and then staff. Okay, so tell us what we're doing on that. With item 82, we closed the public hearing and then staff wanted to confer around. Yeah, so my understanding is that you closed the public hearing, so now it's back to your board for action. I may have additional comments depending on what motions may or. Right, once I have some sense of what your action is. Okay, thank you. All right. It is an ordinance that we're going to ask the clerk to read in its entirety. What we would recommend is that the clerk read the ordinance in its entirety first and then your board go from there. Okay all right go forward. The title and the text of the ordinance please. An ordinance amending title 9 chapter 9.45 of the general ordinance code concerning the military equipment use policy to remove the annual military equipment inventory. The Board of Supervisors of the County of Alameda hereby find and declare the following. Whereas Governor Gavin Newson signed the AB481 into law on September 30 of 2021. And whereas the California ledger's slager adopted AB481 to increase public transparency surrounding how California law enforcement agency funds acquire and are used military equipment as defined under AB481. And whereas AB481 requires California law enforcement agencies to obtain approval of the applicable governing bodies through the adoption of an ordinance containing a military equipment use policy before taking certain actions relating to the funding acquisition and our use of military equipment. And whereas on September the 20th 2022, the County of Alameda Board of Supervisors adopted the county's military equipment use policy through the adoption of Title IX, Chapter 9.45 of the county's general ordinance code. And whereas the original adoption of Section 9.45 included a point in time military equipment list as an attachment to the ordinance. And whereas in the inclusion was not intended to make the military equipment list a part of the ordinance to the contrary under AB481 and the military equipment use policy, the list may be modified at any point during the year and accordance with the term of the ordinance. And whereas AB 41, which requires California law enforcement agencies that receive approval for military equipment use policy to submit to the applicable governing body and annual military equipment report for each type of military equipment approved by the governing body within one year of approval. And annually thereafter so long as the military equipment is available for use. And whereas AB481 requires the applicable governing body of each California law enforcement agency to annually review the military equipment use policy to either a renew approval of the policy, b, disapprove a renewal of the authorization of a type of military equipment, or or see amend the military equipment use policy to incorporate new or different military equipment and whereas AB481 requires the board of supervisors to consider whether each type of the military equipment complies with the following four standards. One, the military equipment is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officers and civilian safety. Two, the proposed military equipment use policy will safeguard the public welfare. Safety, civil rights, and civil liberties. Three, if purchasing the equipment, the equipment is reasonably cost effective use policy that was in effect at the time, or if prior use did not comply with the accompanying military equipment use policy. Corrective actions has been taken to remedy, non-conforming use, and ensure future compliance, and whereas the Board of Supervisors has considered each of these standards in the military equipment and find that the military equipment identified has complied with the standards for approval. And whereas the Board of Supervisors find that the annual military equipment report reflects a significant reduction in the inventory of that equipment from the previous years. And whereas these inventory reductions are acceptable to the Board of Supervisors and consistent with the adopted military equipment use policy. And now therefore the Board of Supervisors of the General Code of Ordinances, is hereby amended to remove the Military Equipment Inventory AB 481, attached there to, and Section 2, this ordinance shall take effect on the 31st day after final adoption. Vice Carson, yes. Yeah, I'd like to make a motion that we accept the ordinance is written minus removing five inventory items. The five that I'd like to highlight and recognize as my motion would be defense technology Stinger 60 caliber rubber ball canister number 1087 defense technology Stinger 32 caliber rubber ball canister 1090 defense technology multiple rubber batten round number 60 40 60 64 Defense Technology Multiple Rubber, Batten Round, Number 60, 40, 60, 64. Defense Technology Multiple Wood, Batten Round, Number 60, 98. And Defense Technology Multiple Form, Home, Batten Round round 60-99. Two things based on that. One is, I may not sound like it, but I deeply respect the work that our sheriff's office does in terms of their role to try to maintain peace and decorum within Alameda County, be it within their responsibilities in the unincorporated area or within their oversight of the institutions that people are housed within the Alameda County, as well as the times that they're called in to do service as supportive or backup from usually. I am not in their shoes and I don't want to second guess the decisions that they have to make, whatsoever, as I'm not there. And I don't want to have to second guess it. At the same point in time, our world has totally changed. The United States has totally changed in terms of the areas of public safety. On any given day, we read and hear about actions that take place in which our law enforcement people are called into action. Be it an elementary school and a social event to someone's home, someone's church synagogue or mosque, and find themselves in a very compromising if not putting themselves in harm's way. So I don't wanna second guess their ability to do their job and make decisions on a split second. As I heard the resolution as it was listed, it says whether or not there is a reasonable alternative. I thought I heard that there is a single gun or single extraction that comes out of our guns that could easily be used as more surgical. Maybe it's more physically impactful. I don't know. As opposed to a scattered approach. Again, not trying to question the use of it in the incident, but a scattered approach. Be it within Santa Rita? Or, unfortunately, if it's called in the mutual aid, or if it's called into an emergency at someone's home. Unfortunately, too many incidents in which people are attempting to do their job as law enforcement across this country, we find far too many incidences, even that they that they within law enforcement would acknowledge in which people who were not directly involved or involved in the action get caught up in it and unfortunately are impacted by it sometimes tragically. And so the ability to use a reasonable alternative method of containing someone with these devices that are supposedly less impactful negatively than the traditional bullets that come out of these weapons, I think still exist and can be applied. And again, I say that without being in their shoes. Let me kind of end my comments on this. Two weeks ago at this very single, at this very date, I was privileged to be out of the country in the Middle East. I went to a conference in the Middle East at pay for it on my own, so it wasn't paid for by government as came out of my own pocket, in which the majority of countries in the Middle East were there present. But in addition to that, there were about 26, 27 countries from Africa present with representatives. There were Russian representatives. There were Iranian representatives. There was Department of Defense from the United States government present and representatives there at this conference. And a number of the sessions were taking place around a wide myriad of issues, including public safety. The use of drone and drone technology sat in on a thing with the Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Defense present and weaponry discussed, especially as it related to some of the incidences that are taking place around the world, not just in the Gaza area and the Middle East, but worldwide, being discussed as one of the issues. The interesting thing is outside of the facility in the Middle East where they were hosting this conference, the entire time I was there in the Middle East, I did not detect, it's not to say it wasn't present, I did not detect a real heavy arms presence or police presence. And I was totally surprised by the fact that most of the places I went, public places as well as non-public places, they just didn't appear to be present law enforcement. There might have been present security in some of the stores, but the use of technology probably helped to to supplement for that and especially facial recognition. They're probably supplemented for that in those areas, but there wasn't and that was because they virtually have no crime. Now their governments are different. We got to acknowledge that. And everybody doesn't have the right to own a gun. We acknowledge that. But it was quite eerie to be in a place where you never heard a siren. At any time of the night, you felt very comfortable to walk around at midnight. They acknowledge that crime just basically does not exist. And where people who may work midnight shifts or women who may be taking the public transportation at night home, felt very safe. At some point, I hope that we get that same environment here, but it seems a long way off. And so with that, that's my motion that I offer up. Is there a second? I'll second the motion. Just need some quick clarification. Did you include a DevTec 10th 87, the Stinger 60 caliber, Robert Ball canister and the DevTec 10th 87, the Stinger 60 caliber, Robert Ball, canister and the DevTec 1090? Stinger 32? What number is that? Pardon? What number are you referring to? The motion? No, no, which you were asking me, did I include? Yeah, you excluded the ammunition like four or five that goes with the you right I just focused on the weapons if they didn't have the weapons they couldn't use the ammunition but that was kind of kind of how I looked at it otherwise everything else seemed to be okay okay But that's kind of how I look at it. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. I'm fine. is as a Sheriff's Department feel about that. I don't know if you got all the different items. You know, I think obviously the board has a job to do and take everything to account when they make the decisions. We just hesitate because we don't have an alternative in place at the time or in the moment. So when they're taking away immediately, then unfortunately what that means is we have to now use things that may be a higher level force that we ordinarily wouldn't because we had this tool and we don't have a reasonable turnip to replace it. We will do what we always do in adapt and overcome and figure it out if that's what the board decides. It's not the best decision for us but we'll do what we have to do to make it work if that's the case. Okay, thank you. Surprise, Albert. Yeah, so I also want to respect what you do day in and day out, you and the entire team. And I heard the testimony earlier today that these are, and just now you mentioned that your professional recommendation is to keep these items in use. And you were very clear. It's in very limited instances and only after extensive de-escalation. And I for one support and value public safety extremely high. I think most people in our community do as I talk to people, they want to be safe. And knowing that these are items only used as a last resort and only used after extensive alternative de-escalations. Hearing as you say that the alternatives you may turn to might be more harmful than not. And given the position that you're currently trained in these items, and that we haven't had many issues with them, I'm inclined to introduce a substitute motion that would adopt the ordinance as presented. And would offer you a chance to explain would that be something that I'm guessing you would be in support of? Absolutely, and I can assure you, I can assure the board that we are looking at alternatives. But as you know with the process and getting these things approved, it takes some time. But we truly do value the concerns of the community that speaks up and that's spoken up. And we do want to find alternatives to this. That would be safe for the person who were using it against as well as ourselves. And so that is what we're in the process of doing. I just hesitate to get rid of anything without having any alternatives. Seeing that you have no alternatives, if this does go away and we just use the example of another public demonstration riot that we experienced, I'm hearing you say that if you're not able to use these then you might have to use other more drastic measures. But that said, I just want to say you're not prepared currently today to get rid of these. You're going to have to adapt. You're going to have to make changes. And to me, it's, that's put public safety at risk. So that's why I'll make a substitute motion that would adopt the ordinance as presented. And then we'll see where it goes. Okay, is there a second? I'll second it. Sub's up to motion. Okay. Supervisor Marquez. Thank you. I really appreciate. Supervisor Carson's motion. But one thing stood out to me very strongly about the discussion earlier today. And that was the sheriff, our new sheriff, Sanchez, saying on the record that she's making a commitment to not use this in the housing units where individuals that suffer with mental health are occupying. And so that's really important to me. I'm looking you in the eyes. I also trust that you are trying to make improvements, you're exploring alternative options. We've had this discussion twice at public protection. So I'm gonna support the substitute motion, but with the expectation that we are gonna see moving in the direction of alternatives as quickly as possible. I'm puzzled with the fact that I'm glad that it hasn't been used out in public. The fact that there's only been two incidents in one year that's not excessive, so that demonstrates to me that there is restraint in your truly, that's the last resort that you're leading to to use this. Projectile, but I am concerned, you know, what if a right does happen in the next year? So can you just help me understand for what I'm doing? I'm not going to be able to do that. to use this projectile, but I am concerned, you know, what if a right does happen in the next year? So, can you just help me understand for the purposes about the side of O'Centery to Jill? Do you know the last time these projectiles were used? I don't, but I know when you asked, you said the last two years years and so that's what we went back to. I don't know and I wasn't there in 2020 with the George Floyd protests if we did use those. But speaking from my limited knowledge of the devices of the munitions, there wouldn't be as effective in a crowd management situation because they don't cause the pain compliance that's necessary to really scatter people in that nature. It's really effective in a jail setting when there's only one person there that we need to control. And I've spoken with our SWAT team commander, and he agrees, we only use them, we've only used them in the Jail's primarily because of that purpose. Okay, I also want to just state that I'm making this decision based off I feel strongly that we have to continue to have this dialogue, we have to hear from the public on every possible side of the situation. I'm also struggling with the fact that I know that every agency in my district is struggling to hire law enforcement. So we need to have a balance here for public safety. So I'm voting on this motion to continue this what I feel is the start of a partnership with new leadership with the new sheriff so You know, I know we can't predict and we can't control what's gonna happen the future But I just hope that we continue to have this exchange that you continue to be receptive to the public so that way we can bring about Beneficial policies that I know we can't legislate right here on the day, but I'm hoping that we do that through public protection. Thank you. Absolutely. Anybody else? Supervisor Marley, I second it to advisor Carson's motion because when my staff had the conversations with the Sheriff's Office, they talked about two alternatives that would have that less effect of a scatter motion and it wasn't in the listing that supervisor Carson had mentioned. And the Sheriff's Office specifically said that they have tested this and that it is less harmful than let's say tear gas using the two that I mentioned the depth 10 10 87 stinger 60 and the depth 10 10 90. So that's why I'm kind of confused about your comments that you're taking away something that you need right away without a substitute. So maybe my interpretation was that those five items which would include the 1087 and the 1090 would be going away. 2 in my reading is incorrect. Those are items we already possess. So we're not requesting those as new items. We already possess those items. Right. So that's why they're not going to be on page 21 and 22 because 21 and 22 are only items that we don't currently possess or items that we're trying to increase the quantities of. Most of those items on 21 and 22, currently possess or items that we're trying to increase the quantities of. Most of those items on 21 and 22, we already possess those, but we only possess a certain amount, and we're trying to get the board approval to up those amounts. The only one that, only truly new items we're trying to, that we're requesting is the drone, is the Matrice 30T, I believe it is. Everything else, we're just trying to increase the quantities of, and for the drone, is the Matrice 30T, I believe it is. Everything else, we're just trying to increase the quantities of, and per the bill, if we wanna do that, we have to, even if it's already been pre-approved, we wanna increase the quantity, we have to get approval for that. So that's why it may not be, it's not in 21 and 22, but it is in our inventory list of items we currently possess. And so my understanding was that I wanted to go back and take those out. If it's clear you guys go for it. All right, anybody else? Miss okay, we have a substitute motion before us. If there's no other. Okay, it is with regard to what I believe Supervisor Tam asked, which is there is a substitute for the scatter munition instrument, whatever we want to call it. And she's, I think, expressing that she's heard that it's a reasonable substitute. And the findings that we're making, the words that we're read, is that we're finding that there are no reasonable substitutes for the scatter again. So maybe it is a substitute, not a good one, not a reasonable one. And so, but I think she's feeling that it is. So if you could help me get past our finding that it's not a reasonable substitute because that's what we're saying, that's what I need to hear. And I think that's what Supervisor Tam was wanting to get at. And I know I'm on the other side of this, so to speak, but it's what we're saying. Well, I mean, just like you, I want to be clear on everything as well. So I can speak intelligently about it. And I don't know if we got to make sure on the order, or Supervisor Carson, the items that you wanted to remove, the five items. My understanding was that it was the the sting ball canister, the 60 caliber, which I believe is 1087. And what's the alternative for that? And is it reasonable? So we don't have an alternative for that in our possession right now. But we will research and try to find that and then the stinger the 1090 the 30 caliber. Those are items that we already have in our inventory that we're not trying to get approved in this process. We're only trying to get approved the items that we don't currently have. But not that we have right now. Any further questions, comments? Okay. So can I have the clerk? Do we need to have any else from County Council before we vote on the substitute motion? No. If you're voting on the substitute motion, I have nothing further. Okay. Okay. If you can call the role on the substitute motion. Oh, yes After all of that discussion that we had today I was surprised that at the very time in which we got ready to vote that we were called into a recess. Could I find out what the purpose of that recess was? Because it seemed pretty secretive or speculative. And for people who've been following this issue very closely, I think they have a responsibility to know kind of what happened at the 9th hour. Because I don't know. No, no, last the county councilor, county administrator to provide information on that. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. and what you were voting on, that you were well aware of what you were taking the action on, which is why we asked the clerk to read the full ordinance. And just to add that discrepancy also included the language of the ordinance. So we wanted the ordinance was included in the package is read aloud. And so we asked that it be read aloud so that there would be greater clarity as to the ordinance, the full terms of the ordinance that would be acted upon. Changes because if there were any changes, it was read into the record, but I didn't have copy of it. I don't know what those changes were. But what was read into the record is the ordinance that was included in the agenda package and posted online. That's what was read in the record. So what was changed? What was the purpose of the delay, which was like a 20, 30 minute delay? So we didn't change anything during that meeting. We reviewed the documents in the package to determine whether or not they reconciled and it made sense to go for it. I mean, in total transparency, the agenda language does not match the ordinance. And so if you look at what is on the agenda, the agenda refers to adding the inventory list. To, well, the agenda item is hold a public hearing and first reading and introduction of an ordinance amending county ordinance number zero dash two zero two two dash three eight to add the Alameda County Sheriff's Office annual military equipment report, the ordinance removes the inventory list from the existing ordinance. So since the statement of what the ordinance did on the agenda didn't match the actual ordinance that was posted in part of the packet. We wanted to ensure that the ordinance was read. It was available to the public because it was in the packet. So the board letter was clear and so we wanted to make sure that the public was aware that that was the ordinance that was to be adopted, it must be adopted. In further transparency, it was apparent from the board discussion that there might have been a motion to remove certain equipment from the inventory list. In anticipation that there would be a motion to remove certain equipment from the inventory list, we wanted to be sure that that motion would be stated in a way to comply with the findings and actions that you would be taking today. So, had Supervisor Carson's motion, been the motion that was voted, once it was seconded, there was discussion, but if that motion was the motion that came to a vote, I would have asked for an amendment to that motion to make sure it was stated in a way that achieved what I believed to be your goal. And so, that was part of the delay was to make sure we understood how all of these parts would work together. So if a motion to amend was made, was a motion to remove from the inventory list was made, it would be made in an effective manner. So we were preparing for all of the contingencies to make sure that we could assist your board to take an effective action. Thank you. Question. So the substitute motion on the table now is to remove the inventory list at all. So it's not picking and choosing from a inventory list that's removed. Is that correct? It's to remove the inventory list from the existing ordinance. Inventory list is already an existing ordinance and the motion is to remove it. It's a prior inventory list. So the action item in the ordinance before you removes the inventory list that was attached when you previously approved the policy. The ordinance adopts a policy. What the ordinance that you have today, if you look at the wear-ass clauses, you are acknowledging that, and you're accepting the report today, which has a different inventory list than the inventory list that's in the existing policy. I mean, that's in the existing ordinance. And so you're acknowledging today and making findings that the required findings regarding the sufficiency of the inventory list today and allowing them to continue to use it, but you're just taking the inventory list out of the ordinance. And the reason the sheriff is asking you to take the inventory list out of the ordinance is because the reason the sheriff is asking you to take the inventory list out of the ordinance is because the inventory list can be updated and things can be taken from it or added to it throughout the year. So it doesn't require, it is not necessary that it be attached to the ordinance because what you were required to adopt and by ordinance was the policy. But with that, would the board have any sense at the end of the next year what was part of the inventory or not? Because this is fairly prescribed. The report comes up with specific amounts including the 44-100 munitions is pretty specific but we wouldn't know that right and I just want to make sure that Supervisor Halberd's motion based on what he's proposing is what we see in front of it. The purpose of the report is to tell you what the inventory is. So because you, because a motion to remove things from that inventory was not the successful motion, that that report is the inventory. OK. Had your motion passed, then that report would you would have removed things from that inventory that the language that I was prepared to offer to clarify your motion was to remove those things from the inventory list if that was going to be the motion. Okay thank you. So since the title, the caption on 82 is, it's not correct. Do we have any legal challenges if we vote on it? We shall see. I think that there's an argument that because what you are adopting is in fact what was requested in the comments that you received, the public was aware of what the issues were that the agendas sufficiently put you on notice that they were, that you were adopting an ordinance regarding the inventory list and the policy and that if you were interested in that item, you needed to come and listen to this presentation and report. The report was part of the agenda notation. Thank you. I still need to go. The question I had is I thought under the legislation that the board of supervisors needed to approve the purchase of new equipment. But you want the flexibility to remove and add equipment to an inventory list by taking out the inventory list? No. I think the way it's, every time we get something approved, or any time we want to buy something new, we have to come to the board to get it approved. That doesn't change. But I think what it is is when you renew the ordinance and an annual annually, part of that is if you renew the old inventory list and that means it can't change, right? So you have to approve the new inventory list in order for it to be a part of the ordinance or it'd be a part of the bill. So we're just asking to approve the new one that we have with the requests, within your requests, and also with taking out what we want to take out. So we will have a new less inventory list, you know, depending on what happens here. It won't be the old one. The sheriff is required to come forward every time they want to add to the inventory list, even if even with the removal of the list from the ordinance code, they still can't purchase it without coming to your board. Any other discussion, clarifications? Hopefully that provides a little bit more transparency on what occurred. Any other questions? Okay, I think we're ready for the substitute motion, the roll call on the substitute motion. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Abstain. Supervisor Carson. No. President Miley I So the motion passes Okay, I appreciate the the patients of the public we we are three hours and 15 minutes behind our two o'clock set items And we have two two o'clock set items that I'm going to go to now. So the first set item is item. It's item eighty eighty two point one. The same hospital update. Yes, I was supervisor Miley, I have a concern. We have an urgent need to address several items in closed session. Is it possible that we could convene to closed session and at least address those closed session. We have some litigation issues that are very time sensitive. And we have outside council also waiting. They've been waiting all day to brief your board on some issues. It'd be nice to have an opportunity to eat because we've been at this all day but you know. Guys are killing me. So we're going to say that the need to meet with outside councils more important than me taking up these items at the moment. So we literally have an urgent item that was that was there was a problem and I much time you think we're going to need. If we could just do that item. I'd be happy. How much time do you think we need? need in close-up? If we could just do that item. I'd be happy. How much time do you think we need? Well, we have a lot of items. But just if we do this one item. If we do this item, I think we can do it in 10 minutes. Okay, all right. So we're gonna, I'm gonna let the public know. We're gonna recess into close session and be back out at, see it's 515, 545. Six, okay. All right, so we're gonna recess in the closed session. We will be back out to take up the two set matters at six o'clock and then I will take public comment and then we'll probably go back into closed session. All right, sorry about that, but you guys, I'm hopefully who are following us, can understand I'm doing the best I can. All right, we're recessing into closed session. Recording in progress. Back into open session. Supervisor Miley will join us shortly. Would the clerk please call the roll to establish quorum. Supervisor Halbert. Present. Supervisor Marquez. Present. Supervisor Tam. Present. Supervisor Carson. Excuse. Present. Supervisor Miley. Excuse. the community. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the supervisor. I'm going to go to the supervisor. I'm going to go to the supervisor. I'm going to go to the supervisor. I'm going to go to the supervisor. I'm going to go to the public. I am pleased to bring forward an informational update regarding St. Rose Hospital. Our board has not heard back since the feasibility committee presented in October and it is my goal to keep this body and the public informed of the progress moving forward. Before I turn this over to Director Colleen Challa to present on this critical matter in my district, I want to provide an update regarding the City of Haywords Plan to assist St. Rose on an annual basis. Last Tuesday on December 12th, the Haywords City Council unanimously, I can't say that word right now. You unanimously passed a referral to staff that was bought forth by Mayor by mayor silliness and council member Bonilla. The primary equals of the referral are to number one support St. Rose Hospital with a $250,000 to $500,000 annually from their local measure see funding, subject to the new operator in place. Measure see is a half-sense sales tax approved by the voters of Hayward in 2014 and can be used to repay borrowing for facility construction called debt services as well as fund capital improvements. The second priority was to partner with Elimita County Healthcare Services Agency to maximize the impact of these contributions utilizing IGT funding. This is a new proposed investment and the city staff will bring back a plan with metrics, funding options, and a timeline as to St. Rose is a crucial piece of the healthcare system in Hayward. The Regional Safety Net and Elimita County's vision, 2026 school that there is to be health care for all. As a lifeline provider who accepts any person regardless of their ability to pay including approximately 400,000 county residents who rely on the hospital annually within a 15 mile radius. The city of Hayward intends to not only support the sustainability of the hospital but also to serve as a partner with the county and other key stakeholders. The city recognizes it is increasingly rare for municipalities to have a full service hospital within their jurisdiction. Especially one that will serve low income and indigent patients. They intend to work with county staff to examine data from other cities who help to fund their community's local hospitals. Now I'd like to turn this over to Director Challa to further update our board. And I believe I will verify in a second whether or not there's anyone online, this item I apologize was supposed to be heard at two o'clock and it's now nearly, I don't know, 6.30 or so. But thank you all for your patience and it's just really important that we get this information out to the public. Thank you Thank you supervisor mark his while the presentation is coming up. I'll say that I do know that The chair of the St. Rose Board Garrett Contreras was here a while ago as was Mark Friedman who as you may remember Was the co-chair with me on the St. Rose Sustainability Study Steering Committee. So I know that they were both here and I don't know if they're still on, but appreciate their support for this work. So just a little overview of what I'll provide an update on today. I'll just give you the highlights again to refresh your memory of the sustainability study that was presented to your board in October. I'll talk a little bit about the process that St. Rose initiated following that sustainability study finalization. And then you've already heard Supervisor Marquez discuss the City of Hayward's support for St. Rose Hospital. So the purpose of the sustainability study was to determine how to continue to meet the health care needs of the community that's currently being served by St. Rose Hospital. We know that St. Rose Hospital has been struggling financially for quite some time and has relied on increasing county resources to continue to operate. The study steering committee was co-chaired by myself and Mark Friedman of Eden Health District, and you'll see the other members of the study steering committee listed there. Kaiser, Alameda Health System, the hospital council, St. Rose and Washington Hospital. And I neglected to say that the hospital council representative was also online for the hearing earlier. So the conclusions that were reported to your board in October that were presented by ANOVA Group, ANOVA Group, initiated their study in July of 2023 and concluded it in October of 2023 in the same month in which they presented your board with their recommendations. And there were three critical conclusions or recommendations. The first that St. Rose Hospital is a critical resource for the community. And its closure would present a hardship to residents in the community as well as surrounding facilities who have would have to absorb their emergency room volume. St. Rose Hospital does not appear to be sustainable as a standalone hospital without substantial and ongoing and increasing public funding commitments. And third, that the St. Rose Hospital board should move quickly and decisively to pursue an integrated affiliation with a health system that has the resources to continue to support its operations. So following those findings and in conjunction with the board of St. Rose Hospital, the board initiated a process to retain Steve Hollis and Kaufman Hall consultants to identify partnership opportunities for the hospital. So that was the second key finding of the Inova study was to identify partnerships and St. Rose Hospital's board embarked on that immediately after the conclusion of the study. Steve and Hollis is one of the two entities engaged by the St. Rose Hospital Board. He has a 30 year career as an investment banker and consultant to California nonprofit hospitals. His client list includes almost all of the major systems in the state, many community hospitals and also public hospital districts. And he's also worked for a number of major investment banks and leading healthcare industry advisors, including Goldman Sachs, Kane Brothers and Kaufman Hall. And he retired from Kaufman Hall in 2021. Kaufman Hall was jointly engaged with Steve Hollis as a management consulting firm with leading strategic advisor to healthcare organizations. The Kaufman Hall Managing Director Nora Kelly has been with Kaufman Hall for 14 years, and she is key on this project for Kaufman Hall and advises health systems, medical groups, and other healthcare providers on strategic partnerships and mergers and acquisitions. Electo has been supportive. As you know, they're the management company for St. Rose Hospital. They've been supportive of the process and are involved in the process, but the advisors are working under the direction of the board of directors of St. Rose Hospital. So in terms of the process that that Kaufman Hall and Stephen Hallis have initiated, they have contacted a number of potential partners to and are currently working with them to put together non-disclosure agreements with those interested parties. So to date some of the parties that they've been in contact with have signed NDAs, some of them have declined to sign NDAs and some of them are still evaluating their interest. Parties that sign the NDAs, and some of them are still evaluating their interest. Parties that sign the NDA will be asked to submit a proposal and requesting information about partnership terms, the structure that they would offer in an affiliation and other details. The RFP is a confidential document and has not been made available to me or to others and will only be made available to parties that sign the NDA. The NDA also allows for interested parties to access a data warehouse, no, a data closet, a data room, it's called a data room. So they get some confidential information with which to make their proposal. And it was important for your board to know that the advisors have committed to not making any representations about any future financial support from the county or any other stakeholders. And if there are any bids that reference county support, they would arrange a conversation with the county at the appropriate time. So the deadline for the proposals that have been requested is January 12th and the advisors will be working with the potential bidders between now and them and pardon me in the data room and also facilitating any partnerships with one another or others that might arise in their conversations. But their goal is to help facilitate the most robust bids possible by January 12th. So following the receipt of those bids, the advisors will compile them and present a summary analysis of all the proposals to the St. Rose Hospital Board for their consideration and determination of next steps. So that that is a summary of where they are. I think it would be appropriate for me to come back to your board following the January 12 deadline to provide information on what we can share at that time. And then you've already heard I had a slide in here about the City of Hayward's support for St. Rose Hospital, but you've already heard about that from Supervisor Marquez. The only thing I would add is that I have been in conversations with the City Manager of Hayward, and we are talking about how to make sure that we can utilize Hayward's contribution to maximize the IGT for those St. Rose's benefit. So that concludes my presentation. I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Director Chala. I just want to note that City Manager Kelly Makadou and believe he's the chair of the St. Rose Hospital Board, Gareth Contreras, is available online. Any board questions, comments? And do we have any public comment? This will come back to us in Jan Feb. Yes, I would defer to your board's desire, but I'd be happy to come back in. I would say February is probably the better time frame after we have more information following St. Rose's process. Present, Miley. Do you have any insights into how many entities were interested and even considering the RFP? I was told it's a small handful. Okay, like one hand. And then did they get their distress hospital loan? They're 17.1. They were granted it. I don't know if it has arrived. I see that the board chair controversies on camera and he might have more detail on the distressed hospital loan if that funding has arrived within the hospital. Yes, supervisor, the funds have not been received to this point, but all deadlines have been met, and the process is moving forward as expected. We have just we have just recently received the $2 million grant from the legislature for the acute or sub-acute floor of the hospital. What's the current cash on hand in terms of coverage of operating expenses? It didn't come prepared to speak to the financials of the hospital of this type, getting the current status of the process is in place. I think the support from the county, both recently a couple of months ago, has been instrumental in keeping things moving forward and things are in a relatively stable place right now, as the best I can say. And you had the January deadline for submittal proposals, right? And how long do you think the St. Rose Board will be deliberating on that? We have to tell January 14th that when we'll know some more specifics and I'm just trying to understand by February, I'm just trying to understand by February, I'm just trying to understand by February, I'm just trying to understand by February, I'm just trying to understand by February, I'm just trying to understand by February, I'm just trying to understand by February, I'm just trying to understand by February, I'm just trying to understand by February, I'm just trying to understand by February, I'm just trying to I hope that answers your question. Yeah, I'm just trying to understand, but by February, will you be in a position to let us know whether you're close to a selection or still going through the due diligence process with each one? I think the deadline of January 14th and the agreements that get put in place for further discussions with those entities that are interested in a future with St. Rose Hospital. I think that process will take place rather rapidly and hope to be able to report back some progress to you in February to provide you. Okay, thank you. Anybody else? So I have a couple quick questions. So the contribution from the City of Hayward is this? The first time the city of Hayward has agreed to make a contribution. The two foot, the quarter of a million up to 500 million. I'm 500 thousand. Yes, to my knowledge the city hasn't contributed towards the hospital and the past other than through some smaller philanthropic donations through the charitable funds or whatnot through the foundation. But as far as a substantial capital investment into the hospital like this, to me this is I think that's unprecedented and shows the buy-in that the city has and the value of the organization and the cooperation and the desire to work closely with the county to maximize those funds for specific, you know, deliverables at the hospital that are really important to city council and to our community. Yeah, thanks. I thought that was the case. I just have it articulated by you, I don't know, the public record, I think is really great because I thought that was, you know, this is a good, a good sign, very good indication. And then the, the payer mix for St. Rose, where do the, basically, the patients come from? What geographical area? The geographic area. Sorry, go ahead. It's basically five zip codes, supervisor, Hayward specific in the surrounding areas, Union City included some of the unincorporated areas, and a little bit at East Oakland, or the primary service areas. I think, you know, from a paramex standpoint, if we can refer the ANOVA study that we have in the area, and we can refer to the area that we have in the area. So, I think, you know, from a paramex standpoint, if we can refer to ANOVA study that was done, it went into some granular detail on what the root cause of any structural deficits that the hospital incurs on an annualized basis is to your point a large part based on the paramex. And that is part of the challenge of an independent standalone hospital right now and the reason why we're seeking a partnership to be part of the broader universe. This is a direction that the board at St. Rose feels strongly about and has taken control of this process to make sure that the resources at the hospital are maintained that are necessary, but also a large part in a major partner with the County Healthcare Services Agency as we move forward. Okay, and I don't think this is being violation of any of the confidentiality information that you'll be receiving. But I'm trying to recall, was it ever explored creating an assessment district for St. Rose Hospital? Because I know at one point, surprised that the moment chair was looking at, like, eating a health district, and maybe some other possible. Because I know an Alameda, Alameda's got a assessment district. Was that ever contemplated, explored? It was, and I know Mark Friedman had been here earlier, and I don't think he's on the line if he's on the line He could raise his hand because he certainly could speak more in detail. I see he's here So I would defer to Mr. Friedman. Yeah, if we could hear a little bit about that that'd be helpful too And I and I apologize, uh, Garrett and Mark and everybody else for our delay and getting to this at six o'clock four hours later. No problem. I'm glad to be able to participate online. The Eden Health District has looked extensively at the possibility of restoring our taxation authority. We're one of only two health districts in the state that received no tax revenue. Our revenue comes from the two medical office buildings that we own and are fully leased. So, but we would very much like to explore further. We're meeting with Assemblywoman Ortega on Thursday to discuss whether we should try to restore taxation authority in the current legislative year. But certainly if we are able to do that and go to the voters, St. Rose would be one of the top priorities for any funds that would be received. We would also want to support probably projects in San Leandro and unincorporated areas, Ashland, Cherryland, and other places within our district. But we would feel that top priority would certainly be to support the ongoing sustainability of St. Rose. Okay, and I for one would sign be to support the ongoing sustainability of St. Rose. Okay, and you know, I for one would, you know, what sign on to support that. And once you have a little bit more, it's flushed out. And if you want to bring it to our our pow committee, I'm pretty confident that county would sign on and support kind of speaking out of turn. We think we would. Well, thank you. We would love to do that. And we'll be in close touch with you and your staff about that. And I'll let you know personally how it goes with Assemblywoman Nortega in terms of the lay of the land in Sacramento from her perspective. OK. Thank you for the update. Thank you, gentlemen, for being here for your patients and just want to say there are copies of the City of Haywords referral. I think my staff has passed that out to everyone so your office should have a copy of that and just want to acknowledge the collaboration with all of the counterparts with the steering committee and just happy to see this progress room along and just really want to emphasize on this is going to take all hands on deck to keep this hospital open in district two. So I hope that we continue to move in that positive direction collectively. Thank you. One last question is that heyward City of Hayward contribution meant to be annual for how long? So just to be clear on the referral the referrals directing staff So it needs to come back to the council for a final vote But with respect to proceeding to analyze what the options are that was unanimous Okay, thank you. All right, so if there's no other public comment on item 82.1, we, any, any, there's no public comments, right? Okay. All right. So we can go to 82.2. All right, it's me again. I'm here to present you with an update on the recipe for health program, which you recall has a strong partnership with D cell and the Olinites Circular Food Economy components operated by D cell. So I wanted to, because our program touches so many parts of D cell's food operations, we wanted to give you an update of where we are with recipe for health, which as you know, as you may recall, has been moved from the CAO's Office to Healthcare Services Agency. So we'll talk a little bit about the program just to remind you what it is. Talk about the changes in the food sourcing and our partnership with DSAW, a proposed bridge for six months, and then our next steps. So just to remind your board, the recipe for health program is a food as medicine program wherein patients are prescribed fresh produce and health coaching in order to reduce food insecurity and improve nutrition-related health outcomes. This work has been in partnership from the beginning with Alameda Health System and all in. And is the components include produce that is grown by BIPOC farmers at dig deep farms, at diesel, using regenerative and organic practices. And the health coaching is culturally relevant and incorporates nutrition education, movement, stress reduction and social support. Right now there are services, these services are accessed through community health centers and they are in 10 clinic sites with five clinic partners with expansion plans in 2024 to include three new sites with additional partners. These are our partners and funders and funders. And you can see that we've got programmatic partners, those who help us deliver the food and the services to beneficiaries. We have QI quality improvement, data and evaluation partners and also funders. And I'd like to mention on a prior slide that MediCal claims cover part of the cost of these services. But we try to provide these services to everybody who's eligible, even if they are not medical beneficiaries, because we want to have a single standard of care for low income folks in our county. So grant revenues cover the services for non-medicate beneficiaries. So you can see since its inception, recipe for health has reached over 5,000 total patients. And most of whom have the food pharmacy alone, but 33% of whom also have health coaching along with the food pharmacy. And we've delivered together more than 65,000 bags of food, which equates to over a million servings. And we've trained a number of providers on food as medicine. So recipe for health really results in improved health outcomes, improved health behaviors, improved mental health, reduced chronic conditions and improved food security by the measures that you see listed here. So the food sourcing issues that we're here to talk about really today are around the change in direction for diesel. So right now the produce is procured. The produce for recipe for health is procured from dig deep farms, which is a program of diesel. And the produce is grown, bagged, and delivered by different elements of the circular food economy, which reside at diesel. Changes in diesel priorities to return to their original mission of recreational programs have resulted in a decision to sunset these elements of the circular food economy on December 31st of this year, which is also the same date that our contract with D cell for the food partnership in Recipe for Health Ends. So D cell is considering our request to extend a six-month contract to June 30, 2024 to avoid disruption in care for patients who've been prescribed recipe for health food and services and that time will enable the health care services agency to identify and bring on one or more new food partners to help us continue to provide uninterrupted services to recipe for health patients. And at the same time, D-SAL and the Alamina County Food Bank may engage in due diligence explorations to explore the food banks interest in taking on components of D-SAL's circular food economy. And with the continuation of our partnership for an additional six months, we can ensure that future patients who are prescribed food and health coaching can continue to receive services without interruption. So our proposal, which we've been in close conversation with D cell about, would require two things. One, the extension of our contract for food between the health care services agency and D cell. So this is to provide the food that they're currently providing under contract. And then up to $450,000 in additional funding that has been identified to cover any remaining gap associated with the recipe for health program. So we've identified four funders who have agreed to contribute to filling that gap for the six month period, the health care services agency, Alameda County probation, the Alameda Alliance for Health and the Alameda Health System Foundation have each agreed to contribute to closing that gap to enable the services to continue to be provided to Medi-Cal and Non-Medical patients. So the next steps that we are continuing to work with D cell on is a clear accounting of D cell's expenses associated with recipe for health for the period January 1, 2024 to June 30, 2024. It will require a board letter from healthcare services agency to extend our contract with D cell to provide produce for recipe for health and that is a per bag rate of up to $210,000 to support any remaining funding gap for SAP for health. And then we would healthcare services agency would identify an onboard additional food vendors in the six month period to make sure that we have continuity of services and have redundancy in the program so that we're not entirely reliant on one provider for our food source in the recipe for health program. And I'm happy to answer any questions. Dr. Chen, who is the medical director for recipe for health is here also to answer any questions you might have as well as Rebecca Gebhardt, who's been working working closely with the finances, with D-SAL on our programmatic efforts. So the 5,174 patients, are they, is that what's currently on an ongoing basis or is that how many have been served since beginning? I believe it's since beginning thought yes This beginning and so any at any one time what is the census number of patients roughly we are Delivering about or producing delivering about anywhere between 809 producing, delivering about anywhere between 800 and 970 bags of groceries a week. And then do they get like one bag for the week? It's a 12 week program. Do you want to come in? One bag for 12 weeks? No. One bag a week for 12 weeks. One bag a week for 12 weeks. All right. So after three months, that's the improved patient outcomes is measured after three months. Do they re-up or what if they keep going or... We're going to ask Dr. Chen to respond to those questions. Welcome. I see again. Thank you. Great question. So they get the three months and some patients will get a refill and the improvements that we show we're measuring at six months and at 12 months through our evaluation partners. Part of the strength of the program is they not only get the food but they get the behavioral nutrition supports to make the changes in terms of your life habits so that these changes can be sustained. That includes education, how to self correct behavior ongoingly. Okay. And with regard to the number of prescriptions written across the areas where we currently have clinics, is it concentrated in any one area or another, is one area doing better with prescriptions than another or are they all equal? They're not all equal because the size of the clinics are different and the number of staff at each of the clinics are different and so they're all fairly robust. Some of them have more sites than others and those sites that have more sites than others, and those sites that have more will have a higher number of prescriptions. Yeah, I guess if there's one, two, three, four, five, and roughly eight to 900, then there might be 200. Clients per clinic. I note that access, West Oakland, health, and Alameda Health System Newark are pending 2024. So what is it going to take to get them on board and would they be covered in the 450, if we move forward with the $450,000 funding, will that be sufficient to bring these on board? If I could interject for just a moment. So I should have created a little more background. So very recently, Medi-Cal started covering this as a service. This had been provided as a program that Dr. Chen had begun with Alameda Health System, had partnered with Alin, Supervisor Chen, also championed this as something that she wanted to see proliferate, not just here in Alameda County, but across the country. And in large part due to the efforts of Dr. Chen, and also the support of Supervisor Chen, it has become a model upon which a medical community support has been built. So most recently it's become a medical benefit and that's got a whole lot of other complexities attached to it. So part of the reason that it moved from the County Administrator's Office to the Health Care Services Agency is because we have more infrastructure to manage health care services build to a managed care plan. So now this is really a ramp up, we're in a ramp up phase, but because of the transition with D cell, we have to hold on the ramp up because we need to stabilize during this transition. We need to find a new partner who can do all the things that are not just producing the food, whether it's growing or acquiring, but also deliver the food and capture all of the information that's necessary in order to bill Medi-Cal so that we can get revenue to continue the expansion. So it's not a very complicated machine in the back, And this six month extension is, in fact, not only does not grow the program, it caps the program so that we can all kind of have a transition period and we can move on to another provider and D cell can transition out of the services that they're currently providing. A lot of work to do there, but encouraging that Medi-Cal will cover, then will they then is it near full cost recovery or it's pennies on the dollar probably? We are in negotiations with Alameda Alliance right now on the rates and things look good for the rates. But as I mentioned earlier, not all of the participants in the program are MediCal beneficiaries or enrolled in Alameda Alliance for Health. So it doesn't cover everybody who needs the program. And so there are still other sources of funding that cover those costs. Roughly what are the costs to serve? If you have a patient for a delivery each week, times 12, what is it roughly costing? And assuming we were even able to find the same type suppliers, maybe we can find a more efficient supplier, or I don't know, maybe not, but in the past, what is it then? Do we know? Well, I think now it's 80% of reimbursement is 80 per week. Yeah, 81 per patient right now for reimbursement. The net covers a number of pieces of it. So if you're thinking of the cost of the food and we've done a comparison and looking at other vendors and are actually our numbers through RT self program is actually lower than a lot of the vendors that are out in existence who will grow the food and deliver food and package the food. So for example, I recently visited SOS meals on wheels. They know that all of their costs, the buy food, produce food, drive it out nine. Some of them are volunteers, but not all. But they, $12 a meal every day that a senior gets a meal, $12. Now that's more than a meal, it's camaraderie and wellness check and all that rolled up into that delivery. I get it, but it's $12. The meal. So, how would we be able to apples to apples compare? Well, I guess what I would say about that is we're not in the position of providing the food. We're in the position of providing the whole service. We put, you know, we purchased the food at a rate that we negotiate with the provider. We purchased the coaching at a rate that we negotiate with the provider. And so together, that's the cost that we have. But if it's around the cost of the meal or the cost of the food, that's probably more a diesel question than it is a health care question. So we have an $80 per patient per week or an $80 per patient amount that we can allocate, but that's supposed to cover food and the coaching right now in our current rate structure. All right, very, very good. All in for this. We talked about a year and a half ago. I remember Dr. Chen and I think I shared with you that I believe education, the right food, behavior changes, incredibly powerful. And I think we'll continue to see people get better and stay better, and especially that we're focusing on specific ailments, diabetes, hypertension, cholesterol. These are correctable. And I think I shared with you that Safeway had a similar program, and it's employees benefited tremendously from the education alone. So Godspeed to you. Thank you for all you do. Thank you. Thank you for that update. Clearly our office has been helping to try to do some matchmaking between trying to find an alternative source for food. But in the six months that we're talking about and one of the potential sources was like the Alameda food bank and they're interested obviously in more than just providing the food. They they're interested also in the farming component. So are we planning on transitioning like all three aspects to recovery, the farming, the regenerative farming part as well as the delivery. Or is that something that is desalbed, investing it completely? I would defer to desalbed to act cancer. So speaking as a board member of desal and Michelle steroids her as well, she can add what D.Cell board decided to do was to essentially divest ourselves of everything except for recreation in the unincorporated area and maintaining the food hub that exists in the unincorporated area. So this chance to keep the farms and the recipe for health program together, we're not opposed to working to try to make that happen for six months, but we're not committed to doing anything after the six month period. The current diesel budget is for the farms is safe through June 30th, but after that, we would need to transition those items off of our books. We do have long-term leases for all of our farms. And so if there is an agency that wants to negotiate with us, we would need to start those real estate negotiations now. But we actually haven't received anything from the food bank yet. Yeah, my recollection was the food bank was evaluating whether the dispensals out for them and to look at the rates, you know, the I think we charge what $29 or $27 a bag for the food. And so they are looking into their whole cost and what portion of it. But they also did receive a significant grant to look at the regenerative farming piece of it. So that was what was, seemed like a good match at that time. I'm just concerned that in six months, you may not be able to look at getting all three aspects of the circular food economy. So there's currently two aspects, the recipe for health program and the farms, but the food recycling program has been paused. We had to pause that in October because the number of bag deliveries had grown substantially since July. And we needed to take all available drivers and move them over to recipe for health. We didn't have sufficient drivers to actually do both things. So the food recycling program was paused in early October. So the 450,000 bridge amount is that to pay for the drivers or just the farmers or the whole? So currently the recipe for health program right right now is paying $23 a bag and our costs are probably closer about 48. So we have been we D. Sal have gone into debt trying to keep this program running and working with Dr. Chowla, Director Chowla and the recipe for L team. We are agreeing to move forward at a rate that will cover the actual costs of the program. And so that 450 is to backstop our actual costs. But we the program can't run on on 23 dollars a bag. So I believe that the health alliance is willing to increase that rate. So that's a good thing. But at this point, you know, decals a nonprofit. It's not able to subsidize a program like this. So how was decal subsidizing it in the past? We had some savings that we're going to be able to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to make a decision to to create the food hub. And we had to take out a $970,000 loan to do that. And these funds we had saved to start paying down that debt, but we've had to dip into those to cover these costs. So in the county budget, there's a line item of $2 million or a desal that comes out of the sheriff's office. Is that only for the recreation programs? So it's been 700,000 for the recreation program. When I look at the last, our budget, the line item was $2 million. So if I said, Tam, was that the amount that was part of the contract summary that showed how much the county is providing to desal. So that's from multiple sources similar to the 300,000 that you approved this morning social services has been providing funding and I think other county agencies as well, including probation and others, have with your boards approval Contracted with diesel for certain activities, but the $300,000 that we approved this morning The board letter said it came from the general fund through the social services agency the contract that was listed Was a sub item under the sheriff's budget It's a contract to look at that. I mean, if that's the case, that would be funding that the sheriff's providing to decel, but I don't believe it was $2 million either. So we'd have to verify that. Okay. Several contracts with probation. And those contracts allow us to hire probationers. And so we act as an employer and they work in our programs, including as drivers. So some of the resources that we receive are job training and employment programs and some of the programs that we receive funding for subsidize the farms and some of the grants that we have, subsidize all these things. Our budget is almost, it's $5.5 million a year. So we do quite a bit of fundraising some of it coming from the county I'd say probably half the rest of it is coming from other grant sources that we are continuously applying for our former executive director was a great grant writer without her it's going to be very difficult for us to continue to raise funds for the program. Hence we're looking at cutting back. So you said, up the four and a half million budget, half comes from the county, this includes state. It'll be 109 funding from the probation department. Yeah, I don't have the exact numbers because I don't have the budget in front of me, but that's just from memory from about a week and a half ago of my looking, yeah. But we do have money for our administration costs that come from the sheriff and our recreation program. We have grants that come for recreation. So there's a lot of different funding sources. We have almost 27 funding sources Okay Look into this a little more. Thanks. Happy to meet with you and share Yeah, Michelle I have a couple questions and for you and Colleen so and for you and Colleen. So, DeSAL, after the six months, will no longer be doing the circular food economy. We are looking to move the recipe for health program and hopefully the farms as well. It would be really great to move the farms with that. But DeSAL won't be doing that. Yeah. Okay. And then, will the county, through recipe for help, be doing the circular food economy or just the recipe for help? Yeah, I think that whether we're using recipe for health in a couple of different places, recipe for health is the food pharmacy program, the food medicine program, and it doesn't actually include the farming. The farms, right? Right, so it's not okay. What we're focused on now is finding a partner to provide the produce. It may end up being, you know, one of our partners may end up being the food bank who might want to take over some of the infrastructure from D cell around the circular food economy, but it could be others also. Okay. All right. And then the food hub that's at the former animal shelter, what's going to happen with that food hub after six months? We'll be continuing to operate it. We have, as I said, the $900,000 loan that has to be paid off. We'll be operating it as a commercial kitchen and leasing space out But we also have a community development block grant that needs to be maintained for 10 years where we are doing job training and access for programs for the unincorporated county Economic development work and that program if we end we're early in year three of that 10-year commitment and if we end what we're doing we'd have to pay back the full $800,000. So we really do need to continue the food hub in its current form of providing economic development opportunities, but we believe that we'll be able to operate it as a commercial kitchen and that revenue which has been part of the planned budget will pay off the debt. Gotcha. Gotcha. So, and I don't know if Colin can enter this, but now what about the other possible food hubs? It's recipe for health, having anything to do with the other. No. Okay. And then the negotiations to try to find a provider, is that contemplated if this provider would try to deal with the other food hubs or you don't know. No. I mean, the food hubs aren't part of the recipe for health program. It happens to be the place at the Fairmont Food Hub where the bags are or the produce is bagged, but it doesn't require an actual food hub. Other food producer partners can do those in other locations in their own locations or other places. The value of those food hubs is really, it's really the economic development opportunities for low-income people who want to expand on their food businesses. And so while the original food hub up on the Fairmont campus is really, it was needed in order to clean and process dig deep farms food. It was also needed to bag all of the recipe for health bags. It's also been an economic development generation because it's actually very large space. But as we're thinking about, as D-SAL was thinking about partnering with the county to build more food hubs, It was really not around bagging groceries for recipe for health. It was around the economic development opportunities that folks everywhere want. A commercial kitchen is a very costly space to rent. And one of the reasons why low income folks don't get into the food businesses because they cannot afford to lease that space. So that was the real purpose of the additional food hubs. But last April, we decided not to continue with that program. OK, so just a couple of quick questions, hopefully. So what do I, you've probably been in these meetings, I know Aaron has. So what do I say to the C.J. and others about the Royal Food Hub? What's happening with that? Do we know? Or is that just going to go away? Well, the county still has a commitment of funding to the various sites. And there were funds that we raised that came to the county, that D. Sal did a lot of grant writing around, but that we are not going to take, we're not going to take the money. It wasn't ever coming to us directly. So I think there's $9 million that has been raised to go towards these food hubs. So who are you referring to? To the federal earmarks or is there other funding that the sale has raised and submitted or deposited with the county? Because I'm not aware of that. No, I'm referring to the earmarks that came from different activities that our former executive director took to try and get those. Yes. So my understanding is that there are two federal earmarks direct meet if I am wrong that were negotiated along with our federal lobbyists. So those were approved. I believe one was through Swalwell's office and the other one was through Rokana. Those funds, as I understand it, have been set aside in our at federal HUD, the county, or whoever is gonna operate, the food hubs still has to develop a plan that's consistent with the earmark for that funding. So that's not sitting anywhere with the county or with diesel. My understanding is that it's a federal earmark that's committed to a specific project as was represented when we requested the earmark and it is at federal HUD waiting for a plan. And I think your board's well aware as there was some capital funding that was identified for multiple food hubs, but there was never a sustainable operational plan or any ongoing funding to support operations. So I appreciate this information about all of the food hubs, but what about the Royal food hub? Who has responsibility for that? Is that going to be the city? None of that earmark is going to a Royal, right? So, is that food hub? What do I say to people in the community and others about the Royal food hub? That's what I'm trying to understand. Yeah, I appreciate that. So, D.Cell got involved in negotiating that lease with the city of Oakland and was working with, you know, the nonprofit partner that we had and essentially, you know, created a lease and asked that nonprofit partner to take the lead and become the lessor rather than desal being in the middle because it was originally set up that desal would be the less or and then we would sub lease it and we decided not to be in the middle anymore. So Oakland which owns the park is going to be leasing it directly but desal is no longer in the role of negotiating that on their behalf. I see. Okay. So that would be about black. Without hill. We can't do that working with the city on the Royal food hub. Right. For the most part. Okay. And then if they're successful, that they they could be part of the tide into the whole recipe for health because they could provide food to the county. Is. Well, no, yes. Health because they could provide food to the county is No, yes, if the Royal food hub gets operational with that be would they then be a provider of food to the county for rest of the for health? The food hub is in a place that grows food by itself. Okay, so we need the produce The food hub is right now the food hub on the Fairmount campus is just where the produce is bagged. But the produce needs a provider. So the food hub wouldn't by itself be a part of the real world. It's still need a provider form that's giving them the food. So they okay. All right. I think I understand it. Okay. So my last question is Michelle mentioned that right now it's costing $23. And- That's the revenue coming in. And the actual cost is 48, did you say 48? Closer to 48, yeah. Okay, so is any of that cost being covered by Medi-Cal? What are the- Medi-Call 23. The whole 23 is- We are in discussions with Medi-Cal to increase the rate right now. And it looks promising. Okay, so when you say it but it's not going to, you don't think it's going to cover the whole 40. I don't think it's going to cover 48. Oh, it might cover 48 actually. It may. Okay. All right. Okay. That's it for the moment. But wait a minute. So with that cost, does that cost, I'm sorry, does that cost include the production of the food, the bagging of the food, the transportation of the food, the providing food is medicine, so that $40, $48 covers all of that. Yeah, exactly. So essentially whether we grow the food at the dig deep farms we whether we grow the food of the dig deep farms or whether we Buy the food from a organic producer the cost of the food is incorporated in that budget So we will pay dig deep farms and the payment to dig dig deep farms is just like the payment to Earl's organics Which is where we're getting the food? You got to buy the food from someone. And then the food is brought, it's processed, it's separated out, it's bagged. It takes about two and a half, almost three days to bag all of those 977 bags. And then we have over two storage units, cold storage where we have to keep those bags. And then we have drivers driving right now seven days a week to deliver all 977 bags. So they're out every day, eight hours a day. We also have a driver trainer because guess what, there's a lot of turnover in that driving role. And so essentially we have to train people on a regular basis. Okay, all right. I think supervisor Carson had his hand up. Since the county administrator was mentioning the earmarks with both Congressman and Rokana and also Congressman Swahwell, we met with both of them separately in September in their offices and Supervisor Swallow himself brought up the earmark and was not happy at that point in time at all about his participation in that earmark and that's one of the reasons why he had to park it as opposed to lose it because they get a lot of requests for earmarks. And then in the conversation with Ro Hana, it came up as well and he had the same response. And I just want to say that in terms of there's only so much money that is appropriated to each Congressperson for your marks. And nothing is guaranteed, but we need to be closer toward making sure that what they're asking for is realized, so that that money doesn't sit there unused for a long time, especially given the fact that Airmarks just came back after the Republicans frozen. So I appreciate the update. I just want to be clear at what point will we know the status of the farms? We're going to begin negotiations with the food bank probably in January. Okay. But like I said, they haven't actually reached out to us. So we'll have to have that conversation. I plan to write them a letter from the board and respond to a letter that they sent to Director Chowla. Okay. And that will include the farms that are already online and those that are proposed and concerned about Masonic homes in Union City. So is that all going to be included in that assessment? Well, we're going to ask them how many forms they actually want to run, but we have five right now. I would say that the one on the Fairmont campus is the one that produces the least amount of produce at this point. So we're probably about halfway. We have about half of the acreage under production at Ardenwood. Masonic just in the last, I don't know, nine months, eight months, we got the well built. That cost us about $90,000. And so development of the farms themselves takes some time. So we have not actually entered into any kind of production on the Masonic farm yet, but the water is now finally there. So that was good. There's the oldest farm we have is the site right next to the firehouse and the greenhouse. Those are the two that DSL might keep and turn into a community garden for the Ashland community. Like that might be a good thing to do because I don't think that given their size, anybody's gonna wanna farm them. So, and then probably the one next to the food hub could also become a community garden, but it's really the masonic and the arden wood farms that we would want to try and transfer. Okay, and then what is the status there was supposed to be a commercial kitchen also in Hayward at the Mahi Menace Community Center? It's really the same situation. Haysal is a non-profit, is, you know, we're not a county agency and we no longer have an executive director. So we don't have the staff capacity to build out these other food hubs. So I would say that, you know, if there was an identified partner in Hayward, we'd want to do the same thing where the lease would be directly to that nonprofit partner. Okay. And we're happy to provide T.A. but we can't be the less or. Understood. Thank you for the updates and I'm happy to discuss this further off. Thank you. In the worst case scenario, a farm wasn't able to produce enough. We supplement by purchasing. I know that Bay City's produce recently folded in with daylight foods. They supply hospitals, commissaries with food, or did. Bay City's produce trucks going to our hospitals. If we couldn't grow it, would we buy it? And would we look at all alternatives to buy the quality of food that we need? Are you talking about recipe for health in the future? Or are you talking about right now? Well, the next few months as we look to stabilize and look for an ongoing replacement for the recipe. Just for clarification. Currently, just so that everybody understands based on the information that we've been provided. Right now, the food that is being obtained for recipe for health from diesel is not all grown at the farms, correct? It looked like about a third of it was in terms of the costs and two-thirds of it was being purchased by diesel. Yes, that's true. So a year ago in December, we were delivering about 200 bags. And those were almost a week. And those were almost 100% filled by the farm foods. By June or July 1st, we were at 450 bags a week. And by October 15th, we were at 800. And by November 30th, we were at 977. So our farms could not miraculously suddenly start growing that much extra food, and so we did have to supplement. That plus the current harvest is over, and so we do have a winter crop that's been planted, but that winter crop won't be harvested for a couple of months. So we are supplementing right now with another organization's food. Okay, well, I just throw out Bay City's produce, find company that we've done business with before they produce organic food that goes to hospitals, they're right down the street, they're now part of daylight foods and they might be a good vendor. Yeah, so Dr. Chan has certainly been trying to find us a partner to replace what D. Sal does for us. And it's a food, the actual provision of the food is one component, but it's the provision of the food. It's the delivery of the food, and it's also the gathering of the information that's sufficient to build medical for it. So those three things together make finding another partner very complicated. We did issue a procurement two months ago, I think. And I know that Bay City's was at the bidders conference, but we did not get any bidders on our proposal. Yeah. Have we reached out to any consultants for farming? How to make a farm the most productive it can be? Or do we have enough knowledge in-house that we don't need to know any other farming techniques or capabilities? Does D cell have... D cell or us? Or we're ready to take over, yeah. Yeah. The D cell has. D cell or also we're waiting to take over. Yeah. Yeah. The D cell has brought in consultants and has gone to conferences and has sent its farming staff to trainings. We believe in professional development. But yeah, we have been strategizing for years, but we've also been building out our farms for years. So the first farms we bought were like not bought, but at least we're back in 2008. So it was a garden and we've been growing ever since then. If we compared our yields from the farms to what other farmers get yield wise, how many acres we have under farm? I'm not sure we've done it at that level. Or not, I do know that we've been struggling to have enough farmers to actually get the whole farm, Ardenwood, under cultivation. So it's actually difficult to identify and bring on board a new farmer. And even if we were trying to fill the vacant positions that we have right now, we were told not to expect, we, the board were told not to expect to bring on board somebody more than one every two months. But we're not going to cultivate more without more people, takes people to do that work. And so we would need to hire to do more. So I think in this moment, we're trying not to expand, we're trying to understand what it is we're going to be transferring and whether or not someone else wants to take on the farms. I guess labor shortage reaches every corner of the market. Hard to find good people. Yeah, it's a nice paying job with benefits. One quick thing is deep farms still farming at the site next to Camp Sweeney. Yeah, that's called the Bayview Farm next to Camp Sweeney. He's still farming there. Yeah, but like I said, it's the least productive of our farms. Okay. Thank you. Let's see if there's any public comments on this item. Quite a bit there. No public comment. Okay. Alison, you're on the line. Good evening, everyone. Members of the Board of Supervisors and agency heads. I am Allison Pratt. I'm the Chief of Strategy and Partnerships at Alameda County Community Food Bank. It has been mentioned a few times tonight that ACCFP has expressed interest in considering taking on namely the produce production and procurement processing delivery and that medical back-end support that Colleen was referring to that's needed to maintain the recipe for health program and that we have asked for this six-month period to do our due diligence. And I really just wanted to let it be known that I am on the line tonight in case there's any questions about the food banks intentions here. All right, thank you. Yes. President, I like just to wrap up, there've been a number of, you know, county partners working on this as you know, county partners on working on this, as you know, along with DSAW board members and their staff. And just so the issue that'll be coming back before your board, that the healthcare agency director just presented, is a plan to sustain the recipe for health program through June of 2024, which will be, as was mentioned, a contract between healthcare and diesel, and then the supplemental, what has been identified as the supplemental $450,000 gap, which we understand is required by diesel to sustain the recipe for health program through June. So what's pending is a definitive budget, if you will, from be in the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of the state of All right. Thank you. Anybody else have any questions, comments on this information item? Okay. Thank you. All right. I think we have exhausted the Board agenda for today. So finally, those of you hung out for waiting for public comment on non agenda items. It is now that time. And we apologize that it's taken so long, but we appreciate all of you. Appreciate the staff hanging out. So let's have comments on non agenda items from folks online and those in person. Simul Remy. Chris, Chris Pryor. Teri Clancy. I'm here to speak on behalf of Evalon Mobile Home Park off agenda. We're a little disheartened that the agenda items number 31-32 were postponed. We're not sure what the reason for this was but we'd like the opportunity to discuss it further before January 9th. We'd like to emphasize that the position we are in affects all mobile home parks in the area. And we're very grateful to have a very good time. was but we'd like the opportunity to discuss it further before January 9th. We'd like to emphasize that the position we are in affects all mobile home parks at the area. And we're very grateful to have a rent stabilization ordinance but it only works if you're willing to at a hold and defend it. Our ordinance was designed to be used in conjunction with the mobile home residency law or MRO. We've recently been made aware that there are loop holes in our ordinance that do not exist in the emerald. We're asking for those loop holes to be closed by clarifying some of the ordinance's language. Those changes would not rewrite the ordinance, they would only clarify. Last night around 5 p.m., our residents received a letter from our owner, stating that they would be rescinding our 200% rent increase, and listed reasons why they shouldn't have to because of what the ordinance says. Although they are not properly using the ordinance in conjunction with the emerald as they should, they're right. There are language problems in the ordinance. We'd like to discuss this matter further with you before our next meeting on January 9th. We'd like to hear your position on the matter because we promise you this owner is a bagged actor and is ignorant, is not ignorant to the actions they're taking. They're previously trying to override our ordinance and they have in mind to make aggrires egregious returns on their investment, which are outside of the bounds of the law. The right that the landowners have to return on their investment must remain within the bounds of the law and cannot trump our rights to live in peace. The Constitution protects all of us. Okay, we would like to add that just today, the Constitution protects all of us. Okay. Okay. We would like to add that just today several more tenants receive notice of more of rent increases and we just got word that some got issued 120 day eviction notices just today. This means that we are still on tight timelines and we ask that the moratorium that we're asking for be approved to pause this while we work on fixing those loopholes. No other public speakers in the audience are online. We got two hands raised. Dave, you're on the line. Thank you. Dave, you're on the line. Yes, good evening. Supervisors. Thank you for taking our comments. I'd like to commend the residents of Alolan who came in this morning at 9.30 am to. Give comment to the items number 31 and 32 that were continued. Much, I won't repeat what they said, but other than to say that it is gravely important that these amends, that these amendments to the ordinance and the moratorium are put in place in January. So that situations like these families have faced will not happen to the other 719 households in mobile home parks and unincorporated Alameda County. Thank you. there's no additional speakers. Okay. I want to thank the public speakers and the board. Wait a minute. Is there another hand? Okay. If there's speakers who want to speak, I'll not agenda items who are virtual, please raise your hand so we can hear from you and then go back into closed session. Patricia, you're on the line. Thank you. First, I just like to recognize supervisor Miley for his announcement earlier which I actually missed regarding the NAACP being considered for that seat on the elections commission. And again thank you to all of you supervisors. Please understand that the citizens certainly do appreciate your hard work and the fact that you've had to be there this entire long day. We've seen you do this before. Thank you again. I actually did have a question. I was looking on your website trying to figure out if the special meeting that I attended last week, if that video is going to be available. I think it's just labels. You know was dated in August of this year. So is that something the public can anticipate might be posted at some point. Did I lose it? No, we're here. Can the. That's a clerk now. This the special meeting that we had last week. Was that recorded? And will that be posted? Special meetings held off site are not posted. If Miss Beatty would like a link to that video, she can email cbs at acgov.org and we'll be able to provide that for you. All right, thank you, the mysterious voice the board of directors and the board of directors and the There's no other speakers. The board supervisors are going to recess back into closed session. the recording in progress. Okay. Are we set? Okay. The board of supervisors, we are back from closed session. The clerk take the role. Supervisor Howard, excuse, supervisor Marquez. Vice-im. Supervisor Cham. President. Supervisor Carson. President. President Meiley. Here. So, county councils, is there anything that report out from a closed session? Yes, I have quite a bit to report out from closed session today. So, with respect to item under conference with legal counsel, existing litigation item D on today's agenda, the board authorized county council to retain outside council and to execute a retention agreement to represent the county in that matter. With respect to item four, I'm sorry with respect to item four, I'm sorry, with respect to item H on the close session agenda under conference with legal counsel existing litigation, the board authorized the existing council outside council representing us in the Babu matter to continue to deal with issues and requests by the Department of Justice in that case. To the extent that the Department of Justice is seeking information that it is authorized to seek under the consent decree and exercising services provided under the consent decree that the county can continue to. I mean that outside council can represent the county with respect to those matters with D O J. That was that was also on a 5 O vote as well as the prior item was on a 5 O vote. With respect to item under conference with legal, under your closed session conference with legal counsel, potential litigation, seat, threat of litigation, the board authorized on a vote of 5-0, the county council to retain outside council, to handle matters related to the cease and assist letter and request for unconditional commitment by the Alameda County Committee of Open Government as indicated on the posted agenda. We are authorized to retain outside council to represent the county as necessary with respect to that matter with respect to item at F Un oh, no not item math with respect to Item B under conference with legal counsel existing litigation the arm-stead matter the board at its closed session on August 1st, 2023 provided authorized settlement authority in this matter. This matter is now settled and the final settlement amount is $1,950,000. And it authorizes the risk manager to complete the qualified assignment documents. The closed session vote was Carson, Supervisor Carson, Miley, Albert and Marques voted for zero with supervisor TAM excused. With respect to the conference with legal counsel existing litigation item E, the case of a Campora V. Alameda County Social Services Agency, that it's closed session on September 19, 2023, the board authorized settlement authority and the final settlement amount in that case, which is now agreed to reach settlement is $875,000. The vote was supervisors Carson, Miley, Halbert, and Marquez and Tam all voting for the settlement, so it was on a 5-0 vote. With respect to item G under conference with legal counsel existing litigation, Matthews v. Alameda County Social Services Agency, California Civil Rights Department case number 220220717660521. At a closed session on December 5th, 2023, the board authorized and granted settlement authority. That matter is now settled and the settlement amount is $100,000. The supervisors who voted for that settlement were Halbert, Tam and Marquez voting yes on a 30 vote with and I believe that completes all of the matters that I need to announce out today with respect to litigation and threats of litigation. I believe there may be other items to be announced out of closed session. Okay, thank you. Yes, the other item I'd like to announce is with the upcoming retirement of the Chief Probation Officer, Marcus D'Wall at the end of January 2024, the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved today the designation of the Assistant Chief chief probation officer Brian Ford as the acting chief probation officer effective December 24th 2023 Brian was promoted to assistant chief probation officer in March 2020 after serving as deputy chief for 18 months and was a consultant trainer when he first joined Alameda County in January 2018. His prior experience includes 16 years as a Deputy probation officer and director for the County of Los Angeles, including three years as a consultant with the Carey Group. Please join us in congratulating Brian and thanking Marcus for his many years of executive leadership to the probation department and dedicated service to our communities. And we will be working with Brian during this leadership transition. And if I may, I just want to make sure to double check myself that I've announced it out correctly for all three of the items today where I announced that the board authorized the retention of outside council that includes the authorizing the county decks. The county council to execute the retention agreement and those were all on a vote of five zero all five supervisors voting in favor. Is there any further report outs? All right, so the board supervisors did a lot today and we are going to adjourn this meeting and we will not meet again until January 9th, 2020-4. And I want to thank the clerk and all the staff that hung in there with us today. So the meeting for December 19th, I've forgotten what day this December 19th is now adjourned. Recording stopped.