you you you you you you you you All right. Good morning, everyone. I will now call the Board of Supervisors regular meeting. Order for December 10th. It's now in session. Speakers joining the meeting. The teleconference. Please unmute your mic. Will the clerk please call the roll. Supervisor Halbert. Present. Supervisor Mar please call the room? Supervisor Halbert? Present. Supervisor Marquette. Present. Supervisor Tam? Present. Supervisor Carson, excuse. President Meiley? Here. The court. Yes, thank you. So let's, the president, the legislative, please. The legislative, the five United States and America. You do the republic. The legislative, one nation, the five United States of America, to the Republic, which is the paying, one nation, and the better not, individual, liberty and justice for all. Okay. Board of Supervisors, welcomes you to its meetings. The Board allows in person and remote observation, in participation by members of the public and its meetings. The county of Alameda recognizes the important and invaluable role of public participation in government. We reminded that disruptive conduct that renders orderly conduct of the meeting, unfeasible and I'd be tolerated. This includes disruptive conduct that may occur through public comment, the chair of order, the removal of individuals who are woefully disrupting the meeting so that the meeting may continue in an orderly manner. For those who are in the meeting in person, if you would like to speak to an item on the agenda or during public input, please submit a speaker card to the clerk so your name can be called speak at the appropriate place on the agenda. 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 the 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 were calling in, dial star nine to raise your hand to speak. When you are called to speak, the host will enable you to speak. If you decide not to speak, notify the clerk when your call is unmuted. Are you may simply hang up and down 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 calls, you will have two minutes to speak. Please limit your remarks to the time allocated. Public comment will generally alternate between in person and online speakers as determined by the president of the board and subject to overall time limit. Thank you. Thank you. Do any board members have any remarks? All right. We have made arrangements for Spanish interpreters, uh, interpretation service for today's meeting. The clerk will now provide instructions on how to participate in the meeting using the interpretation channel. The night in here you. Spanish speaking interpreter. I believe the translation service is this afternoon. It's this afternoon not presently. Okay. Okay. So now we will take public comment on items on the agenda except as follows. 11 o'clock, 2 o'clock, 3.30 and 4 o'clock are all said matters. Mr. President, I also want to announce that your 2 p.m. Step matter item 49 will be continued to your December 17 agenda. So item 49. I am 49, which is your two o'clock set matter. That's continued. And also item 50 will be continued. The 330 set matter. Also to December 17. Yes. Thank you. I ask a question. 49 is the item with respect to just cause ordinance, a second reading. I'm not sure if it's going to be scheduled. I don't know if it's going to be scheduled. Thank you. Can I ask a question? 49 is the item with respect to just cause ordinance a second reading. I understand it's going to be continued to the 17th. Do we know what time it will be scheduled as a set matter? We haven't determined that yet. But it will be a set matter. It will be a set matter. Okay, and the agenda should publish this Thursday. You're right and correct. Okay, thank you. In my hope is to get it on in the morning. Okay, so items 49 and 50, those two set matters are continued. So we will take public comment on items Those two said matters are continued. So we will take public comment on items listed at 11 o'clock and 4 o'clock at set items. We'll take the public comment at that time. So any public comment on 11 o'clock said item and four o'clock said item, we will take public comment at that time. After the item is called for presentation and or discussion. So President Clerk, do we have public speakers on items on the agenda that are not listed as 11 o'clock or 4 o'clock recognizing that the 2 o'clock and the 330 set items have been continued. Yes we do, President. We have in-person and online. We'll go to the first speaker. We'll alternate between in-person and online speakers as necessary. Please state your name, the city the first and second and the first and the first and the first and the first and the and the first and the first and the first and the first and the and the first and the first and the and the first and the first and the and the first and the first and the and the first and the first and the and the first and the first and the and the first and the first and the and the first and the forward with the assignment of the disposition agreement related to the Coliseum. And I want to ask something else I think is so important as we have this incoming presidential administration in order to advance the best interests of the near 2 million people who reside in this county, it's going to require more times your additional collaboration. I'm speaking specifically between the county of Alameda, you wonderful folks, and the city of Oakland. To be honest, that relationship has not been the best. And I think we all can agree that there is room for improvement. This college CM complex and this deal, this negotiation offers that opportunity. Because again, we are going to deal with some tough times. And I want to encourage you all to not look at Oakland as a separate entity. I know sometimes people view the Coliseum as being simply an Oakland thing, but we know that's not true. We do know that it provides benefits for all residents here in the county of Alameda. The City of Oakland is in dire needs right now and Oakland is the economic engine of this county. So your ability and your willingness to move forward on this would not just be limited again to benefiting just Oakland residents is going to benefit the entire county. And lastly for me in this moment we need hope. We need a model of inspiration to give people a reason to believe that hope is possible. I refuse to believe that life is just doom and gloom because why get out of bed in the morning? What hope can I give my kids if I feel hopeless? So again, I just want to implore you with all the hardest sins that you have. I recognize that, but please move forward with this deal because the people here do deserve something that will inspire them and have benefited them. So thank you all for your service and happy holidays so you and your family members. I'm going to ask you to ask me to ask you to ask me to ask me to ask you to ask me to ask me to ask you to ask me to ask me to ask you to ask me to ask me to ask you to ask me to ask me to ask you to ask me to ask me to ask you to ask me to ask me to ask you to ask me to ask me to ask you to ask me to ask me to ask you to ask me to calling to because we need your help. I'm asking the supervisor give direction to the county council to finish the negotiations with AAG, AASG for the assignment of the disposition agreement with the A's second scheduled to December 17 meeting to have a public session in vote yes on the CBE lawsuit so we can finalize the resolution and ask my brother, John said we want to revitalize it open, we want to restore hope, we want to bring back the community and we are like he said it's not a separation but we are all in this together and bringing the Colosseum and bringing the people back to the Colosseum space is one way we can revitalize hope. So I appreciate you guys listening to me and I hope you guys have a blessed afternoon. Thank you. Edward Eskivar, close session item. the committee. We will have a little bit of more close session item. Hello, my name is Edward Escobar. I'm the founder of Citizens Unite. Speaking on the matter of the AESG, call a CM complex transaction. Ladies and gentlemen of the board,G, Coliseum Complex Transaction. Ladies and gentlemen of the board, I stand before you today to express my deep concerns regarding the proposed sale of the Oakland Coliseum. This iconic site is more than just a piece of real estate, is a vital part of our community's history and future. Firstly, the sale of the Coliseum threatens to undermine the economic potential of Oakland. The current redevelopment plans promise world-class entertainment, new neighborhoods, and affordable housing. However, these benefits are far from guaranteed. The delays and complications in the sale process have already shown that the promise investments and developments are uncertain. Selling the Coliseum now could result in a loss of control over this crucial asset, leaving Oakland vulnerable to unfulfilled promises and missed opportunities. Secondly, the Coliseum holds significant cultural and historical value for our city. It's been gathering place for generations, host and countless memorable events. Selling it to a private interest, risk erasing this legacy and replacing it with developments that may not reflect the needs and desires of our community. Moreover, the financial implications of the sale are concerning. The city of Oakland has yet to receive the $10 million payment from the African American Sports Entertainment Group, highlighting the financial instability surrounding this deal. Relying on uncertain funds during a financial crisis could exacerbate Oakland's economic challenges. In conclusion, I urge the board to reconsider the sale of the Oakland Coliseum. Let us prioritize the long-term interests of our community, preserve our cultural heritage, and ensure that any redevelopment truly benefits the people of Oakland. Thank you. John, you're on the line. Good morning. I am speaking. this is John Lindsay Poland of the American Friends Service Committee. I'm speaking about item 34 which would allocate $300 million from the county to capital improvement projects. In a $4 billion budget this is an enormous amount of funds. Many times more than the vast majority of items over which there is frequent debate, both among you and by the public, over much smaller expenditures. But there's almost no information in the agenda attachment about how these $300 million will be expended. In a presentation to the Board of Supervisors last year, $315 million of the overall capital improvement projects plan was identified for Santa Rita Jail. For your information, but also for the public on this extremely important decision, I am asking one of you, just one of you, to ask the following questions about the $300 million proposed for expenditure in item 34. One, how much of this $300 million would be designated for projects at Santa Rita Jail? Two, how much does this $300 million compared to previous years funds set aside for capital improvements and three, what is the status of $27 million in funds that were set aside in the capital improvement projects budget for the Santa Rita Jail Mental Health Program Services Unit that was set aside by the board last year and then scrapped as a project. What is the status of that in relation to three, these $300 million? Please ask these questions for all of our information and for fiscal responsibility. Thanks. Ray Bobbit for closed session item. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. All right. Thank you so much for allowing me to speak. My name is Ray Bobbitt from the AESG. Just wanted to first and foremost thank you again for your progress and your development and your work on this process. We're very grateful. The community is grateful. We decided not to bring a tremendous amount of support today. We just wanted to reinforce the fact that we're grateful that the board has been moving forward and making progress on this process. We want to clarify that this process with Alameda County is not connected to the process with Oakland. This is a completely separate set of circumstances and most importantly, that once the A's transacted this site became private versus public. And the truth is that this is going to be in the hands of people within this community who are born and raised in this community who have been here their whole lives. And most equally as important, this is an opportunity to revitalize a part of our city that's the most highly impacted. 70% of the people who are suffering from poverty live in district 6 and 7. 71% of homicide victims between the ages of 18 and 34 are African Americans that live within that district. 72% of the people who are uneducated, who are classified, and categorized as undecided are people who live in this community. This is an opportunity to have a highly impactful circumstance in which we can bring development and job creation and economic certainty to a part of our city that is constantly left out. And so anybody who would have any question with respect to the process, with respect to the impact this can have on the most underserved and the most impacted, I would like to speak to them directly. Our community would like to speak to them directly, come to our neighborhood, come talk to us, come communicate with us. Because at the end of the day, this is an opportunity to create hope and an opportunity to create a vehicle for economic development and our most impactives part of the city. Thank you. My name is Simnion Rainey. I'm working in California. Open you another homeless mental health outreach for independent living. Independent living. This will be are talking about. Get people alive back in order. School, job, health, food, it's the same life. And this is a genocide. Look out, just able people die on the streets. When they got burned to house them, and they could build up a church for them, and you see who died on the street. Oh, you as how often because the owner of the elder they say But the homeless this is sad That's homeless this is sad in Baghdad Trump. It's about what's right We need to do this for the Mayor of the people because it's sad Baggies child joy They see been a photo snow, homeless, 10 degrees. I'm going back to the hospital, I'm going to get joy. I'm going back here. I'm going back here. I'm going to get here. I'm going to get there. It's all about the world. WWW, worldwide will. It's not about the world. WWW, worldwide will. It's not gonna work. Only way it can work is God says, not man's system. And man is the problem. God needs to do right by the people and vote. And He said to you, because they vote for you. They don't represent them though. You represent other folks, they can vote for you, but you can can ask them. All we try to do is get some right, get you people off the street. The man died at home when it was on 17th and Franklin. Is that... Another day, just finished police car went down 19th and brought away the stop of no real person. He had his medicine. Our organization just for weakening, stop a mere real person, getting his medicine. This organization is just for weak people. We held feet, it came down to where they need. They went on the street, we had this problem. All we wanted to restore all of that job people. God bless you. Other than Miley, there are no additional speakers. No additional speakers. Councilmember, you're on the line. You have two minutes to speak. I want to highlight John Jones comments as well as John Lindsay Poland. And I don't so I just want to say that you know I was at the last walk of the Alameda County District of turn 8 out of the building last Thursday. And it's a really shame that she was recalled and that you allowed those extra time for those signatures to be counted. And we are going to miss the honorable Alameda County District Attorney that I voted for and many, many people voted for and the corruption, collusion of dark money has taken out people that we voted for to represent Alameda County as a district attorney. And I'll hold my other comments about the the investment for later but you know we're in a heap of trouble. The the county needs to do better with a lot of different issues. I hope that they appoint a district attorney that we can all I think you're out of order We're gonna take comments on that item at 11 o'clock. It's a set item I was trying to get a little grace Okay, well talk about the homelessness issue then maybe you could do better on the homelessness issue and I'm free in Palestine Free Palestine free Palestine free Palestine. Thank you. There are no other speakers, I think what we'll do is, let's see if we can So we don't have any minutes today either, huh? Okay. So I think what we'll do is recess. Recess into closed session for the next 50 minutes. So we'll recess in closed session until 11 o'clock. Thank you. Recording stopped. you you 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 to the next meeting. We have a question. Excuse. Supervisor Marcus. President. Supervisor Tam. Supervisor Carson. President Miley. President. We have a quorum. Thank you. we will return the closed session after the 11 o'clock set items. So we're going to go to item 48. Mr. President, item 48 is from the registrar of voters requesting that your board approve the following recommendations related to the certification of the election held on November 5th, 2024. The recommendations before you are that you declare elected and nominated the person having the highest number of votes for each office voted on under the jurisdiction of the Board of Supervisors at the November 5th, 2024 election as shown in the certified statement of results. That your board declared the results of each election as to each measure and other matters under the jurisdiction of the Board of Supervisors voted on at the November 5th, 2024 election as shown in the certified statement of results, and that you accept appointments for the elective offices for the November 5, 2024 general election in which the number of persons who have filed a declaration of candidacy does not exceed the number of persons to be elected as enumerated on your agenda and the attachments. Great. Thank you. Any board member questions before we call the public? I'll move item 48. Okay. Don't move. Yeah. Okay. Let's see you from the public. Call public speakers. We'll go to the first in person speakers and we'll alternate between speakers. Please state your name. The city you live in and you will have two minutes to speak on the item. Edward Escobar, item 48. Board of Supervisors, we know that Tim DePuy has not been effectively doing his job. My name is Edward Escobar. I'm the founder of the Citizens United Coalition for Community Engagement. And I'm also one of the organizers for both of the recalls. Tim DePle does not inspire confidence in the electorate. The voters deserve much better, much, much better. We have the communities within the City of Oakland for example in D7 and D6 people of color that are being further marginalized Elections as it is our view is being complicated So we need to make them as user friendly as possible Tim DePouy is not providing or facilitating this process to make it better. The voters deserve better. Voters deserve better. Voters deserve better. Enough is enough. We all have continued actions until we get this resolved. As an example, the San Mateo County, the Board of Supervisors taking action against the sheriff there for the San Mateo County. We ask that you do the same and dispatch Tim DePuy. He is no longer doing his job effectively. So we demand that this be done ASAP. I'm Edward Eskibar, Citizens United. Thank you for your time. Caller, you're on the line. You have two minutes to speak. My name is Merrill Lusting. I'm a member of the Interfaith Coalition for Justice in our Jails and an active community member in the city of Berkeley. I really feel like we need, I feel, I know that we need to take the time to look at all the candidates and give the community a chance to have input. This is a considerably important nomination or appointment that you're going to be making. Excuse me. When I'm on that item, run item 48. So if you can wait for us to get to the next item, you can speak on that item then. Okay. So the next speaker. Mark Zulim. Good morning supervisors. My name is Mark Zulim, Castra Valley, and you know me from the Election Integrity Team Alameda County, California, Itaqa. I've been a volunteer with a number of engineers, software, programmers, businessmen, all from Alameda County who have analyzed our elections. And we say our elections need to be improved. We're asking you and you've heard us many, many times as well as the Election Commission. Thank you for setting that up, because we recommended that to improve our elections. Our elections have become somewhat of a joke. 65 years Alameda County, why are we delaying the counting of our ballots? Hawaii is finishing before we do. So we're asking that you begin at the top. We're asking for a reorganization of the ROV, Mr. Tim DePouy, holds two offices or two managerial positions, information technology and the ROV. Our elections have become extremely complex and we deserve a manager who can focus on that and improve our elections. There's many, many problems with our elections. We have listed them again and again. We're not asking that you not certify any particular election today. We're asking you for the improvements. Transparency. Transparency. Mr. Dupuis and the ROV has not been transparent. They're releasing of the Casavot records, for example. Why did was there a stoppage or a delay on that? Why have observers been denied sufficient access? So there's a number of reasons why we want the reorganization of the ROV. We're asking that at the begin at the top with Mr. Tim DePuis and perhaps other staff. Thank you. Jackie, you're on the line. Thank you. I appreciate the item 48. I'm speaking to. I wanted to just talk about the certification of the elections. Our team, the election integrity team of Alameda County, ETACA, has been doing observing and elections analysis. And unfortunately, our registrar, our voters and the leadership there has received an F for failure. There continues to be a conflict of interest with the ROV overseeing both the registrars, voters and the IT departments that creates a conflict of interest. The ranked choice voting issues continue to be a problem because even though it's been implemented for years, people don't understand it and thousands of ballots are consistently adjudicated. The voters' choice act is long complex, but using that as an excuse as to reasons why there are delays is unacceptable. The education of the public needs to understand that vote by mail ballots take over two weeks for one ballot to actually finally be tabulated. That's a job of the registrar voters for education. Costs are unnecessarily high, chain of custody, lax verification. Our registrar of voters spent three years lying to the public, falsy claiming that the CBR access was illegal, damaging the public trust, all the while failing to implement an actual law, 3016.5, which would have extremely improved the processing of our ballots and would have required less signature verification, rejections, adjudication, and printing costs would have required less signature verification, rejections, adjudication, and printing costs would have been lowered substantially. We have a registrar who fails to follow election assistant standards and logic and accuracy, accuracy, public testing, as well as a secretary of state's procedures for the 1% manual telly. We still have lots of problems, and the biggest problem we have is the public's lack of confidence with this registrar. We need change. There are failures that have been the constantly brought forward and unaddressed. I'm Ananda Neal. Good morning, Honorable Members of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors. I'm Ananda Neal, a campaign staffer for At Large Candidate, Canita, Matori. Following on our November 12 comments, I must express our deep frustration with the ongoing lack of transparency regarding the recent at large election results. As previously noted due to significant visibility issues with the electronic voting machines, Ms. Metory along with the majority of her fellow at large candidates submitted a formal letter urging the board for an independent review so we can interpret our results. The foundation of our democracy relies on fair and transparent elections. When voters are unable to confidently see and verify their selections, this trust is compromised. These concerns are not isolated, at least for other at large candidates, either considering. Or having announced a participation in the upcoming special election, our expressing reservations about the registrar voters capacity to fulfill their duties in accordance with election law. Moreover, during a recent review of election data dashboards, we observed a stark contrast between San Francisco County's accessible and user friendly platform and Alameda County's virtually unusable system. This disparity further erodes public confidence and underscores the urgent need for improvements in transparency and accessibility. Given these issues, our campaign lacks confidence in participating in the upcoming special election under the current conditions. Our supporters have echoed these sentiments expressing doubts about the registrar's ability to conduct a fair and transparent election. This issue transcends individual campaigns or partisan interests. It is about safeguarding the integrity of our electoral process and ensuring that every vote in Oakland is counted, visible and trusted. We urge the Board to act promptly to restore public confidence and uphold the democratic principles we all cherish. Thank you. Patricia, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Good morning Board of Supervisors. You've heard me speak many times in this chamber. I've called for Tim DePuis immediate removal from his post as director of ROV. I've worked for Alameda County ROV since 2014 as a poll worker. During those years, I have spoken to Mr. DePuy many times regarding issues I see on the ground at the polls. Jackie Coda gave you a really great succinct summary of many issues with this registrar. I will leave you with this. Ask Mr. DePuis what a 200-100 ballot is. 200-100 ballot is a code of a ballot that is given to conditional provisional voters that are from out of area and never advised that their ballot will be tabulated. You heard that right and you know how to contact me. Kanita Matong. Hi, good morning. My name is Kanita Maturi. I am recently ran for one of the 10 candidates in the at large election. I'm here to speak in support of the integrity acts to ensure that our electronic system is fair and transparency election. Sorry. We've seen too many mistakes in the past election and if we don't ask these problem will keep damaging public trust. Problem of severe several of us are from the last election, all considering running or our running and we need a system that we can trust. Ignoring this issue is not an option. We must take real action restoring confidence in our democracy and protect the integrity of our election. I ask if you guys would please consider doing something. Thank you. John, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Yeah, John, we're all free month. And I've spoken to this many, many times. We've tried to get Mr. DePouy to be transparent. And I do, in our state, one statement he made, and I repeated it back then. Mr. DePouy thinks that observers are auditors, or he's blamed them that they're observers, but they think they're auditors. Yes, we are auditors. We the people on this election, it's our election. We deserve to be able to see everything that occurs in that election. We get to see the ballots as they come in all the way through to when they're tabulated and stored. We want to see it in the chain. We want to be able to verify the chain of custody ourselves. We don't want to just, you know, be able to have to use binoculars to see if somebody is doing their job or not. And it's the law. And we're in court. We're getting, you know, trying hard just to make it transparent. We're not asking for any real big favors. We're just saying we want an election, our election to be transparent to us. Thank you. Gerald Petunak? Yes. I just want to be clear before I start. Is each speaker being given one minute or two minutes? Because I saw it went to one minute. Was that two minutes? Okay. That's one to be clear. All right. Thank you very much. Supervisors and this morning I was cleaning up my work. I had helped cleaning up my notes and notebooks and tests. And I found my testimony from the 2022, which was two years ago, where I said this was as supervisor Carson, Albert and others, remember there was a big boo-boo, a big boo-boo in the rank choice election for Oakland City Board. And we said at that time, election integrity team of Alameda County, we were having trouble because of a lack of transparency. We were ushered into rooms standing like 20 feet away from where the ballots were. And we just said simply hey, we can't see it. And it was like we were talking Greek or something. So here we are two years later. We had supervisors who did sit and listen to what we said. And since I grew up in New York, well, I could think of his yogi bearer, his deja vu all over again. Yeah. I mean, here we are. And you just heard a bunch of people, there's still no transparency. All right, they don't tell us what procedures are happening at what time? They don't tell us how the rank choice votes are being counted. So, you know, what can we do? We're coming in front of you and, and please do something about the plea, like we said, six months ago, a year ago, year and a half ago, two years ago, and I can tell you, Harmie Dillon is being appointed to the Justice Department Civil Rights Division, that may be more action to try to do something. So, thank you very much. Tonya you're on the line. You have two minutes. A very pleasant good day to everyone, respect to all in their various positions. My name is Reverend Tunea and Scott Smith and I want to speak to the Corruption and lack of transparency in this most recent election. It took me $3.95 in all of four minutes to find out that one of the candidates did not live in the district that she was running from that was a convicted drug dealer and was running under a fake name. We need more accountability to the voters we trust Our registrar voters to stand in our state to act I may complaints about this person and What ask why do I care because I don't live in that district? Well, I work in West Oakland. I serve West Oakland and I grew up in the district, and that's why I care. It's important to me who serves us. And if the people who are charged with making sure our elections run smoothly, run legally, run ethically, do not care about us, then they need to be removed. And someone else needs to be put in that position. That goes for the registrar voters and that goes for every other position that you're considering filling today and that I hope to be able to speak on as well. We have got to do better. Ranked choice voting does not work. The voters don't want it. They don't like it. They don't comprehend it. There is no accountability. As if someone said earlier, you should not be having to use vernacular to survey what is going on and observe. You should be able to use a microscope. You should be able to use a magnifying glass and everything should be open and honest so that we can be held accountable for what we do as public servants to this community. Our children are watching us. We are accountable to our future generations. Are we going to leave a legacy of leadership? Or are we going to leave a legacy of corruption? Thank you and have a blessed day. Mindy Pachinik. The lack of transparency by Tim Dupuis and the lying to you of the Board of Supervisors. He lied to your face that Shirley Weber had demanded that he actually do the CVRs as in an aforementioned PDFs. Otherwise, he'd go to jail. And as you yourselves have documented, that was in true, that was a lie. And that's part of what Tim depre, why he needs to be fired. He's absolutely made it impossible. I've used binoculars. I've gone down there and had to waste my time because there was no process going on, even though they say there's a process. Now, I'm running from may or of Oakland in the upcoming election in April. And it's time that we have make sure that that election is transparent. As many as said, from beginning to end, from when the mail-in ballots until we can stop them, come in to where we can see all the election processes. And if I win the election for mayor, we're going to get rid of rank choice voting. That is something that needs to be done under the city. And given that Oakland is bankrupt. OK, good. I will leave it at that. And let's continue the discussion. Caller, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Hi, my name is Anna Apidaka. I am a councilwoman for the city of Newark. I'm calling to just making public comments here. First of all, I do want to thank the Red Shower voters. Newark had one of the closest elections in Alameda County and thank you for automatically doing the manual count, which was accurate. And for Newark, with four votes at the time was the, how close this election was and in the end it was three votes. So thank you for the accuracy and integrity of making sure every vote was counted accurately. I do want to say that. But my comments are somewhat of frustration. I spoke to many my colleagues throughout Alameda County and our city clerks had a really hard time getting information out of the British farm voters regarding the elections. And it's very hard to understand why there wasn't a better communication and lays on with our city clerks trying to do what was right by the candidates who applied and get information that they can relate to the candidates. So I would hope that the Board of Supervisors do help oversee that process to make sure we can have that connections. But I also wanna say that as a voter and as a long time participant in elections, it is very frustrating how long it took, especially during that first week, when there was no updates until the Thursday after elections. And then it was very minimal with only 5,000 votes being released as well as on Friday and then not having anything into that falling Monday. The New York election was tied at that point. It did not change on that Thursday with the 5,000 votes released and so I think the risk of photos needs to do a better process. And I don't know how, but I just where I feel like elections since 94 have been involved in. Thank you, Anna. work on. And. There are no additional speakers at this time. All right. Thank you. Okay. Back to the board. Is there a motion? I move item 48 second. Move by 10 second by Albert. I just want to. For the board takes the vote. See you have any comments from board members? I just want to say People's concerned, you know the ROV The board will not necessarily be doing anything to disparage the ROV That's a personnel matter that we will discuss in closed session. But the concerns that have been raised have not gone on deaf ears. We do understand what people are saying. These elections are very difficult in Alameda County, the magnitude of the electorate, the diversity of the electorate, the fact that Alison is being various languages, ranked choice voting, under a youth voting, a lot of complications. But the ROV has a very challenging job, but we will be like we do with any of our direct hires, we will be looking at the ROV and discussing this moving forward. And I don't want to say more than what I should say at this point in time, but I just wanted to make sure people understand that your concerns, we're and the supervisor Carson let the effort around us creating the elections commission have not gone on death years. We do hear what you're saying and we will be taking this up in the 2025. Any other board members, Supervisor or kids? I appreciate all of the engagement with respect to this last election cycle. I'm looking forward to working with our elections commission to get feedback. I know they're obviously engaged with the wider community as well. I do think there's opportunity to improve certain components before next election. So I'm looking forward to having those conversations and determining what we could do to improve communication and have more reliability in terms of when updates will be released. I do feel that there's areas that we could do more improvements around. So looking forward to having that discussion in the future. Thank you. President Miley, I would also like to comment. One of the things that I would like to see in working with our Election Commission is perhaps to undertake an audit of our election system and our operations just to make sure that we have the kind of transparency and integrity that our community expects and deserves when it comes to our elections So that's something we will be looking at going forward and I have been working with some groups to make sure that we consider that option I'll let go those comments President Milay I think you hit the nail on the head difficult difficult difficult job We're working on it. I also echo continuous improvement always warranted President Miley, I think you hit the nail on the head. Difficult, difficult, difficult job. We're working on it. I also echo continuous improvement, always warranted, and evaluating the job that we do after we do it, and then making it better in the future is something we're committed to do. So, I was partially have any comments. Okay. And one other thing I just want to say is when the board combined the positions of ROV and information technology, I mean it was at the time that the deep-volt voting machines came out. And we thought at that time that was something very appropriate to do based on the circumstances at that point in time. Now let's fast forward where we are today. We do recognize conditions and circumstances have changed. So once again, we'll be taking this up next year. So if we can have a roll call on the motion. Supervisor Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Marquez. Hi. if we can have a roll call on the motion. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Aye. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Miley. Yes. Motion carries. OK. Now we've got item 48.1. And before I call on county council and the county administrator to make the presentation. Let me just state a few things. Supervisor Halbert and I have been conversing with the County Council and the County Administrator. And the information that's before the board and the public today is information that we've discussed with them. We really wanna have a transparent process of appointing a DA, giving the community and the public an opportunity to weigh in. There'll be at least four occasions counting today when the public can weigh in publicly on the process, the folks we decide to interview, the interviewing, and the ultimate selection. So it will be very transparent and open. Those folks who want to apply can apply. Their applications will be made public. We want to assure the public of this. Once again, this is in alignment with what supervisor Halber and I've talked with the staff about. The board has to approve this. We couldn't take this up prior to today because we had to wait for the election to be certified which took place on last Thursday December 5th. And because this is the appointment of an elected official, we cannot discuss this or take this up in closed session. This has to be an open session matter matter matter. So that's what we'll be doing. You do have in your packet or before the public, the attachment that gives you kind of a timeline because both Supervisor Halbert and I, it's President and Halbert is Vice President. We want to see this accomplished by the first part of February at the latest. So I just want to make some of those opening remarks to kind of frame this. Because people have asked a lot of questions. Prior to the recall of which I was not prepared to take any, make any responses on until the recall took place and we had the results in. So a supervisor, however, do you wanna make any comments before I call on County Council and the County Administrator? I just wanna thank you, President Miley, for your leadership and making sure that this was placed on today's agenda, the soonest possible that we could. I wanna thank our County Administrator for preparing this, that we can now discuss and react to and accept or modify and that today is the beginning of a process that will be open and transparent and serve our county well. Thank you. All right. For someone calling the county council I our County Administrator who if I want to go first Thank you mr. President We will briefly provide an overview of the proposed process Which staff is bringing forward at the request of the board president and vice president to start with Council's gonna read a brief statement just to update on the current status. Thank you, Mr. Murmurney. She, my name is Andrea Wettel and the Chief Assistant County Council. I just wanted to address some of the communications that we have seen in various news articles and otherwise about the role of the chief assistant district attorney in functioning the office. With the vacancy having been certified at the district attorney's office, government code section 24105 provides for the continuing operation of a vacant elected's office by establishing the authority of the officer who is next in line within that office at the time the vacancy occurs to exercise and temporarily discharge the duties of the office. The chief assistant is the individual who is next in line to the former district attorney and he has authorized to exercise those duties. For clarity, he is not acting, he is not an interim appointee, the office is vacant. And your authority as the Board of Supervisors is restricted by our charter in that you cannot appoint someone as acting or interim. Once you make an appointment, that individual is and will be the district attorney until the next general election. The packet before you is requesting that your board approve the proposed appointment process and a schedule to select and appointee to fill the Alameda County District Attorney vacancy by February 4th of 2025. The process is very similar to that which your board utilized for the appointment of the District 2 supervisor in 2023. As you know, under the terms of the charter of vacant district attorney, a position would be filled by the Board of Supervisors and the appointee as council stated, shall hold office until the election and qualification of its successor. The next general election would be scheduled on June 2nd, 2026. So the appointment process provides for submission of applications by those legally qualified to fill the position of district attorney. There is a proposed form of application included in your packet that includes a self certification by any applicant under the proposed schedule. Those applications with your board's approval could be available as soon as tomorrow to meet your board's deadline. We are suggesting that the deadline for submission of completed applications back to the clerk of the board be December 30th of 2024. After submission of the applications, those would be made available to the public within 48 hours. They would also be provided to your board. And then the next steps for the board at either a regular or special meeting would be to first select the candidates to be interviewed based on the applications that were submitted and completed. Secondly, your board would interview those candidates that you select to be considered. Third, you would schedule another meeting to deliberate regarding your appointment. And then finally, your board would make a formal appointment. We have a proposed schedule that provides with given the deadline of December 30th, your board in the week of January 6th could schedule a meeting for selection of candidates to be interviewed. You could interview those candidates the following week and then the following week or at a special meeting in the ensuing period of time, your board could deliberate over the appointment and then make a formal appointment as early as January 28th at your regular meeting or work session. And we know that the deadline at your board desires is to have that occur no later than February 4th, so that would give you an extra week of leeway in terms of the proposed schedule. So what's before you today is the proposed process and schedule as well as the form of application. Thank you. I just want to point out the board has no set policy or procedures for making the appointment. I have had the experience of when supervisor Nadia Lockheer resigned from office and the unfortunate death of supervisor Chan and supervisor Bae and when Don Whitey treasurer resigned early we've had to make appointments. We have no set process but this this process that we've laid out today kind of mirrors what we've done in the past other than when we appointed the person to replace supervisor Wilma Chan when she passed away. So I just wanted to make sure people are aware of that. So any questions from supervisors before we hear from the public? Yes, Supervisor Halbert? Yeah, I just wanted I just would like to note 48 hours after December 30th would be January 1st, a holiday, would it be too much to say January 2nd? We could. We've taken that into consideration. The clerk of the board has graciously indicated that that could be done in the next 24 hours, but certainly there could be some leeway provided. Perhaps no later than a certain time, but the Clerk is super powered to do it in a day. That's great. Okay. Thank you. I want to thank the clerk for stepping up and helping us out. Okay. So if we call the speakers, speakers will get two minutes. We'll go to the person, a person speaker, state your name. You will have two minutes to speak. Virginia, Nishita. Is this on me? Okay. Good morning. I'm Virginia, Nishita and today I'm speaking for myself, murdered victims and their families. We the people are requesting that you appoint a replacement for the DA with urgency. Someone that has compassion for the victims and respect for the Marcy laws. We need experienced attorneys in leadership roles, not the opposite. And this is costing a lot of money to the county when we're all present in court and the accused refuse, they refuse to attend court. We have a family here today that the accused has been refusing 14 times in a row. That's over a year. How could that happen? We're in court because they did something wrong. They murdered somebody, refused 14 times. Enough is enough. We need a DA that will hold offenders, violent criminals, murders, accountable, and go to trial, not plea deals. I beg you, I come to you again, and I beg you to listen to the people and to select someone urgently because in the courtrooms there's crisis. I live it every single month. The people have demanded a mandate, a mandate at 63% of the vote. It's 375,000 residents have spoken, and we have spoken loud. Thank you. Thank you. Alice, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Paula, you have two minutes. Can you unmute? Alice, more? Please unmute. Please unmute please. Um. I did not wish to speak. Thank you. I did not wish to speak. Thank you. Shruti, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Good morning. My name is Shruti Lakshmanan and I serve as the Policy and Government Affairs Manager at Color of Change. Color of Change is the nation's largest online racial justice organization representing millions of members nationwide including approximately 3,000 members in Alameda County. For the past two years, Color of Change has been collaborating with local organizations as a member of the Alameda County District Attorney Accountability Table. As the Board of Supervisors moves forward to appoint a successor to fill the position of district attorney, we urge you to use an open and transparent public process. It's of the most important that residents be allowed to weigh in to ensure that DA price successor shares the community's values and vision for justice and public safety. In reviewing the County Administrator's Office's proposed appointment process and scheduled to select an appointee, we are generally in support of item 48.1. However, we asked two things of the board of supervisors. First is to add specific questions to the application and interrogating each applicant's position on policy issues. And to to publicize a criteria, you will use to determine which applicants will receive an interview and allow the public to weigh in. Thank you. Scott, Scott Sway. Morning members of the board. Thank you very much for allowing me to introduce myself. Thank you. I apologize. I send a letter to the board recently, CEC and County Council, indicating my interest for the honor to the board recently, CEC and County Council, indicating my interest for the honor of the interim district attorney's office appointment. I have a 29 year prosecutor career, spending two counties, and I was a federal prosecutor. I was a trial deputy. I supervised trial deputies, and I managed one of the community and I've been involved in the development of the community and I've been involved in the development of the community and I've been involved in the development of the community and I've been involved in the development of the community and I've been involved in the development of the community and I've been the opportunity for me to join the fight. I want to fight for justice for our county. I have an action plan that's going to be effective and I ask you for the opportunity to give me a chance to help the only place I know that's home. Thank you very much. I won't take up two minutes, but I just want to introduce myself. Thank you very much. Collar, you're on the line. You have two minutes? Hello Board of Supervisors. My name is Merle Lusting. Thank you for listening to what I have to say. I'm a member of Faith in Action East Bay, the Interfaith Coalition for Justice in our Jails, and a long time resident of Alameda County. I'm concerned about the time frame that's been established, particularly concerned that applications are due by the 30th of December, which is during a holiday period. It seems like what's happening is that things are being rushed. And this is such an important election or appointment that rushing the process seems to go against what we all think is important. I really feel like the community has to have some input and some sort of a way, like a town hall or some forum that would be open to the community to get input and to learn more about the candidates who are seeking appointment. I urge the board to take a deep breath and move slower on this process, not slowly, but slower on this process so that all of us in Alameda County feel like we're heard and there's not one group or the other group that gets priority treatment. Thank you. Carl Chan. Well, I guess it's still good afternoon anyway. Once again, I want to thank the Board of Civil Visitors and I also want to thank the service, especially Keith Carson for the years of service. We really appreciate what you guys are doing. And also setting this transparent process for this new DA. So my name is Carl Chan. I'm the founder, but also the principal officer for Safe, Safe Automated for Everyone. We call this a Pamela price. So I just want people to understand that people have spoken. There are over 375,000 voters voted to recall. So on behalf of many people, they also want to see a good process. We call it only at a starting point, but it also about getting a new DA who is qualified, who can lead, who can supporting victims and the families, and which is extremely important. We also want to make sure that the DA is willing and also able to prosecute criminals. They're hurting many, many people, the families, but also businesses. So those are the basic requirement. We also need the DA who is capable to rebuild our district attorney office and who can bring back the trust from the people and who can actually bring back the experience prosecutors and who can do their job. I think that's extremely important. Save our organization will be very happy to work with the countless advisors and the entire public. So that we bring in this new DA. We can make changes. So I want to make sure that the men and women are protecting serve. Not only they can capture criminals, but they can also be prosecuted by our DA. So on behalf of SAFE, I want to say thank you, and we look forward to working with county supervisors. And once again, I want to thank the people they voted, and also people here in support of what we do. Thank you. Thank you. Bob, you're on the line. You have two minutes. I'm Bob Britton. I'm with the Interpreter Coalition for Justice in our Jail. I'm a member of Stark King, Unitarian Universalist Church in Hayward. I've lived in Kusterville for 31 years. I just want to thank you for the process you laid out. It does seem to be an open and transparent process, and I hope it gets enacted that way. I want to remind you that although we saw a recall of a progressive district attorney, we still have liberal values. This is not Trump country. He was defeated in Alameda County by a five to one margin. Our values include not prosecuting children as adults. People with serious mental illness need treatment. They should not be arrested and sentenced to death in the county jail. And those people who are charged with their care and custody should not be permitted to ally and deceive in order to hide their culpability. And those servants of the public should be prosecuted. And I would hope that you would get the candidates to speak to some of these issues and state their positions. We don't want politicians. We want attorneys who understand the criminal justice system and how people can be rehabilitated and not sentenced to death. Thank you for your time. Chris Moore. Hello, Chris Moore. Thank you for letting me speak today and thank you for this very open and transparent process that you're presenting to the public. As you know, I'm with SAFE. And we do see with the 375,000 people that voted to recall. It's 150,000 more people that voted, that voted PAMP price in office two years ago. It's a clear mandate. And it's a clear mandate that says that people do not want a DA in office that is going to be run by pan price or anyone with the same ideology. The people want a DA that's particularly accountable to victims. They don't want a DA, they want a DA that follows Marcy's law. It's their constitutional right. And we did not have that for the last two years. We don't want a DA whose employees are in court, high-fiving, criminal and criminal families when they get them out of jail in front of the victims. That was sick and we don't need DA's like that in our office and that is why she's been recalled. We want a DA that's going to bring safety back to our streets. We want a DA that's going to once again hold violent criminals accountable for their actions. We don't want what's going on in our community today in the decimation we've seen in Oakland. We want a DA that is properly going to manage the office. So they're going to put experienced DAs running the office and running and helping to educate and teach the teams how to properly be a DA in our office. And that's what we need. And we look forward to the very open process. We this has been 16 months so far. So it's been a long process and it's not being rushed at this point. We need to get somebody in and we think the timeline that has been set out in the presentation is appropriate. Thank you. Jackie, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Thank you, Jackie, code of on the line. You have two minutes. Thank you, Jackie Coda Pleasanton. I want to congratulate the people of and the constituents and voters of Alameda County for their success in recalling Assoros DA who is soft on crime and friendly to criminals. We as a mandate, as you can see, the county want our district attorney to actually be hard on crime and hard on criminals to use as a deterrent, not to be like Mr. Moore said, high five being criminals in the courthouse because they're getting them off. A couple of concerns here with regard to the process. You talk about a qualified candidate, but you don't have any of the information in this packet of what that means as far as what does a qualified candidate look like. We're very concerned because of the fact that we currently have second in charge in the DA's office that was hired under a panel of price who didn't even have their law license until July 22nd of 2022. So we now have somebody in charge who has only been an attorney for two years in the county of Alameda. That's terrifying. Not only that it says here in the selection process that the county clerk is not going to be responsible for making sure that the candidates are qualified. Why not? If you're applying for a job, somebody should be who's receiving that application, should be looking over to make sure that you qualify, like, you know, you have your bar license. So these are some concerns that we have. The county does not, the people of this county do not, when any delays, because of the fact that we are being led by a rookie. I certainly hope that you've got some experienced attorneys that you are calling upon to make sure that this office doesn't fall apart like it did when Pamela Price took over. Thank you so much. Oh, and by the way, we're not going to spend a million dollars when the next person comes in to redecorate like you did with Pamela Price. Thanks. Matt Finnegan. Morning President Miley, Board of Supervisors. My name is Matt Finnegan. I'm a teamster from local 8.56 and we help represent the prosecutors that work for the county and for the citizens. Want to comment that there is a balance, and I think the board has, with the help of the County administrator and the clerk come up with a process that tries to balance the need for speed and getting an appointment to replace Pamela Price and also having a open and transparent process. I know there's been a couple of comments about whether the details of how you're going to make the different decisions. I think as we go through the process as outlined, those will become very apparent. You know, people will apply and the supervisors will either have a committee or a team that will review these things, the applications and we will find out what those factors are. Myself, other members of the public will be able to comment and participate in that. So as the representative of the prosecutor's union, I want to state that they and the union are very supportive of the way you've outlined this process. And I do think that it needs to happen in the timeline you've outlined. I've spoken with Royal Roberts. He is going to be leading the office as he has helped do for the last two years. But the citizens have made a resounding vote that they want a new leader, a new policymaker in the District Attorney's Office. And so I think our members and the public need to have that happen as soon as possible. But the balance I was talking about is, is being able to have that open and transparent process. So I and the members are fully supportive of the process outlined. Thank you. Collar, you're on the line. Two minutes. A very pleasant good day. This is Reverend Tania M. Scott Smith. Again, I want to speak as a victim of crime in this county that now, that we have allowed outside agitators to use their unlimited funds to house the DA that we elected. I no longer have any confidence that those that have committed crimes against me will be brought to justice. I just recently was able to rejoice with my family that someone who murdered a close member of my family has finally been convicted under the A price. I have no confidence that the next DA now will cause people to have to come to court so that they can be convicted when they sit up and pretend like they don't want to be held to and pretend to be ill just because they don't want to be held to and pretend to be ill just because they don't want to be held accountable for their crimes. Let's be clear what certain people mean when they say criminals. They mean people who look like me. They don't mean people who actually commit a crime. They mean people who look like me. They mean black people. They mean brown people. They mean working class people. They mean women. They mean black people. They mean brown people. They mean working class people. They mean women. They mean children. I want a DA that's going to come and that's going to hold police accountable for their corruption. That's going to make them prosecute criminals and not give them deals for snitching on worse criminals. I want people that are going to hold officers and ADAs accountable to not give plea agreements and coerce people with plea agreements and force them to purge themself or get more time for crimes they didn't commit. I don't want another DA like the ones that have preceded DA price who forced black people and brown people to go to jail or get more time if they don't lie and say they come in a crime They didn't commit. I'm tired of rich people telling the people of Oakland what to do. We elected the price you want You're using money. You got her recall now. Let's get someone else in there to send a help us and care about us Mirror nurse warts about it. Mayor Nashwarts. Thank you. Good afternoon supervisors and with respect to all of the diversity of opinion that you're hearing. I'm Mernish Schwartz with the Interfaith Coalition for Justice in Our Jails. And I want to question, I want to appreciate the fact that you clearly feel some urgency about getting this done quickly. But I want to point out to you that your deadline of February 1st is arbitrary and that you should be open to considering moving it up a bit, that is to say later a bit. I for one as a resident of district five, I'm wondering why this process that you're all engaged in today is being decided before my supervisor elect Nikki Bass takes office in early January with enormous respect for supervisor Carson and all that he has done. She, Nikki Bass, will be the one to represent our district in the interview and selection phases of this process. And it seems disrespectful not to allow her an official say in the process that she'll have to conform to. And I really don't understand the rush to February 1st. The proposed application is short to begin with and it overlaps with the weeks of Christmas, Hanukkah, and Klanza. But this reason alone, the proposal before you, I think, should be rejected. I think we're all aware of how high the stakes are here, given the history and the power of incomeancy. The person you all appoint is likely to become our DA for a very long time. So I urge you to extend the timeline and for heaven's sake, open it further to the public. When Contra Costa went through the similar process seven years ago, they built in an open form where members of the public could submit questions there to the finalists. I can't see any reason why that's good for Contra Costa and not good for Alameda County residents. Thank you so much for your attention. Sonia, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Hello, supervisors. My name is Sonia Tonas and Casaleno. I'm going to go to the next slide. So, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Hello, supervisors. My name is Sonia Tana and I live in East Oakland. District three. I'm the policy and legal director of communities united for a sort of justice. Also an attorney who's been working in the justice space for the last 15 years. So we work with youth across the county as well as people who are returning home here from incarceration as you know most people do return home who are incarcerated and need to find stability in the community to be able to do better. And many of our young people, many of the people on our team have been failed by the school system, the penal system. They have histories of trauma and poverty, which is its own form of violence. And I also work with families whose loved ones have been killed by law enforcement and police officers. So we do need a new district attorney at this time, but we need to make sure that person has compassion for all people who have been harmed and have caused harm. Realizing we are not talking about two different groups of people as other speakers have spoken about people. As criminals, we don't believe that. People cause harm and people are harmed and we're talking about the same communities and the same people. We all deserve compassion. So I want to thank you to the administrator for laying out a clear process for us to comment on. I wanted to share my three recommendations with my time left on edits to make to that process. First, I think we need to allow more time, again, not be slow, but take a little bit more time to accept applications into the new year to make sure that we provide time to people to get their materials together following a big holiday coming up. There was also no information in the proposal about how the supervisors will weigh their top applications to decide those three to five people to interview. I would like to see those factors that you're going to weigh in the way you will give them be public and to receive first community input and public comment on what those factors should be and how to weigh them. I also want to see more rigorous and specific questions on the application including what are the applicants approaches to the death penalty resentencing racial bias diversion mental health work. I'm for some of the serious misconduct instead of just asking a Thank you. Donna Mendel. Hello. Good afternoon, supervisors. Thank you for holding this hearing and for encouraging an open and transparent process. My name is Donna Mandel. I live in Berkeley and I'm a member of the Interfaith Coalition for Justice and our Jails. I am very concerned that the process that's being proposed is too brushed. The proposal itself wasn't even available to the public until a few days ago and I don't think it was in the packet that was handed out today. So most members of the public haven't seen it and haven't had an ability to look at it to review it. As was mentioned before, the contra costa when it held a similar process seven years ago allowed more time and more public input. In particular, the time frame that we're looking at right now overlaps with the holidays when a lot of people are invocation and this will not be the thing that many people will be looking at right now. I think we also need a lot more opportunities for public input. I think the public should have opportunities to see the job description, to suggest questions to be included, to see a copy of the application form and the criteria for evaluation. I think public should have the opportunity to see all the responses from the candidates. And I think it would be really important, as Contra Costa did, to have an open form for the public, a town hall, where the public can hear the candidates and their answers to the questions that are being posed and what they would do in this job. So for all these reasons, I think the process needs to be extended into the new year. And so I would urge you not to approve the process that's been proposed. Thank you. Cathy, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Hi, this is Cathy Rodriguez. I'm from Alameda County and I would like to speak on the DA. You guys need to really take consideration expanding the time for the DA. The district attorney actually voted for her, but I also voted her out. And the reason being is because I'm going to advocate, I've been advocating for six years for probate court corruption and coming against those who are involved in the probate court corruption, like Donna Ziegler, Jessica Chia, Scott Fadale, and John Malice, and Chanel Sambinda, Sabanda. The reason being is because if you have a voice and you use your first amendment right to speak out, you will get prosecuted. I got prosecuted by the DA's office for speaking out and then Donna Ziegler and Jessica Cachea filed false charges against me. And I actually went to trial and got convicted of something I actually did not do. Here I am. I am a community Service worker I work for the probation apartment. I don't have no criminal record But now I have a pfn number and I've been convicted of a crime that I did not commit and so the DA needs to be evaluated because she was working hand in hand With Donna Ziegler to make sure I got convicted and how I I got convicted is because the false charge that they charged me with, the judge added a charge during jury trial so I would get convicted. So it's a very, very serious with the DA's involved and county council. We need to recall Donna Ziegler as well because she is very corrupt and she'll do anything to convict people of a crime that they didn't commit just because they used their voice, their first amendment right to protect our elderly and what's going on with their elderly within the probate court system. They're taking advantage of our elderly people and if you speak out and you speak the truth, you will get convicted of a crime you didn't commit. Norma Orozco. Hello. My name is Norma Orozco and first I want to thank the County Administrators Office again for putting together a very clear and transparent process. I don't want to be too reiterative, so I'm just going to make a or suggest questions and ensure that we're looking at the DA stance on different issues that our communities are affected by on a daily basis and have voted on not just the selection but previous elections and continues to impact our day-to-day lives. I'm with communication workers of America, local 9415, as well as Ella Baker Center for Human Rights. Thank you. Gene Moses, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Good afternoon. Thank you very much for taking my call. My name is Gene Moses, and I am a member of faith in action East Bay and representing the faith community. I strongly urge your board to redraft the proposals for the appointment of a district attorney because the current proposal does feel like a race and it's way too important a position to rush. We respectfully allow more time for diverse applicants and competent candidates to apply and for the community to and time and a way for the community to be involved in terms of designing questions and hearing the answers. As you've heard this morning, there are very strong feelings about this and a lot of ignorance on both sides of the issues. I think this is a really healthy opportunity for Alameda County to understand what the role of a district attorney is. And I want to thank, sorry, it was, Chris, no. It was like the fellow who said that we need balance. We need balance in the approach of this and we need more time for the community to hear each other. People like NIA and Scott Smith is clearly representing a very important voice in this community, which you do not see in this supervisor meeting. There has to be a way for people who don't know about supervisor meetings and don't come to these meetings to be informed and involved in this important decision. Otherwise, we are going to just set up the future district attorney for failure and disappointment. So please read draft the years and take more time and allow for more community input and more community hearing of the answers. Thank you. Elizabeth Katz. Hi, my name is Elizabeth Katz and I've been living in Oakland and District 5 for 30 years. The voters have spoken, but we don't know exactly what they said. They said, we want to recall Hamill Price, and that's very clear. The recall did not say why, and although the advocate said why, the people did not. Some people criticized her for what she wore. And the way she spoke, some people criticized her for particular policies. Other people criticized her because she didn't take the time to meet with every victim or family member of the victim that wished to speak personally with her. Some people were very well informed. Others had just heard headlines or just knew even less than that. So although the voters have spoken, they have not spoken to tell you what to look for in a new DA. They haven't said that we need to go back to mass incarceration, long sentences, and racist decision points in the process of prosecution. We don't actually know what they said, and therefore I urge you to take the necessary time to find out This is an urgent situation we do need a new DA but we want a DA Not on an urgent basis, but on Not on an emergent basis Okay, the county still has an acting DA. So please move fully deliberately and don't make assumptions of what the people voted for. Cheryl, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Hi, this is Cheryl Dobby, the former council members, City of Berkeley. And, you know, I voted for Pamela Price, as well as many, many, many, many, other people that voted for Pamela Price, our first elected black district attorney for Alameda County who was amazing wore a Queen's outfit every day. African beautiful, African clothes and was so, I was so honored that she was our DA and it was the money, dark money that took her out and convinced another 150,000 voters to vote for the recall because they believed the lies. The same people probably voted in number 45 who's now coming back to 47 and we just heard how there is problems with the whole voting process in Alameda County. I don't know if that's true but it's interesting that there are somewhat, some people said, non-transparent things going on. So how can we even know that the recall was actually accurate? We had the best district attorney and we need to get another one. And yes, they should follow the same kind of path as the last district attorney honorable district attorney panel of price because she was on the right path. It's just that the racist money, people with money and want to see black people go to jail and stay in jail and go under the jail that they want to that occurrence again because that's what happened 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 grateful to be here. Thank you, an item 39. That's for probation. I've been administrative for probation religious services. We're taking our item 48.1. Yes, I'll speak to that one then. That my concern is that everything has been blamed on racism. I run a reentry program thanks to probation, 25 clients. They tell me we just had a meeting. Hey, the DA is gonna get us off and they know their guilty. I work with Nancy O'Malley, a campaign for the panel of the price, its safety meetings. She didn't deliver what she promised related to hiring her friends, a clergyman from Kachakasa County, her friends pastor. Why didn't she hire Alameda County pastors during the work? For as crime is concerned, let's stop blaming it on racism. I live in in Oakland, pastor in Oakland. The Oakland we see today is nothing like what it was years ago and it's not because of racism. You do the crime, you do the time. The guys in my program who's supported by probation are changing their lives, but I'm not letting them blame in everything on racism. I raised two boys, men to many youth that are doing well, but we got to teach them right from wrong. So I'm hoping that the board would stay on track, not blame everything on Donald Trump, racism, I see these out of control. Oakland is an embarrassment across the world because of these liberal DA policies that blame systemic racism does exist but we need to be able to hold people accountable. I can't even live comfortably. Shopped businesses are dying. Hagenberger is like a desert and it's because we have no law in order. Strong d.a. Thank you. Richard, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Hi, this is Richard Speegleman. I'm with the Interstate Coalition for Justice in our Jail. So I've lived in Elmita County for 54 of the last 56 years. I really appreciate this opportunity to speak out. The Interfaith Coalition is concerned among other things about the number of people in jail. We think people as far as possible ought to be in the community getting corporate housing, treatment, support to remain in the community. And so we needed a district attorney who will support that process through a variety of mechanisms, including the proper use of diversion approaches and limiting to appropriate the number of people who are actually prosecuted who are in custody. I think the three points I want to make beyond that. One is I completely agree with, I think it was Murna who said, our new member of the board, Nikki Bass, who also represents my district, needs to be in office and part of this process. So let's slow it down enough to wait for that to happen. Secondly, I want to support all possible ways, and I'm not too much for the public to have input on policy relevant questions that DA candidates ought to be asked. And I don't see a mechanism for that in the proposal in front of you. And third, and related to the last one, there needs to be public opportunity to hear and to inquire of the candidates in a town meeting or a meeting of the board of supervisors or whatever it might be called. Maybe more than one night and all of a night working working people can attend and can participate. Thank you so much Allison you have two minutes Hello, Allison Monroe. I'm with families advocating for the seriously mentally ill We endorsed Pamela Price because she understood something about the seriously mental Yale. That serious mental illness is not a crime, whatever it is, it's something else. And I was grateful to her because she filed criminal charges against the people that worked in Santa Rita who let Maurice Monk die there. Maurice Monk was seriously mentally ill and he was neglected to death by people at the jail. And she opposed that publicly and I will be grateful for that. And you know it's ignorant to say that Pamela Price was pro-crime. That is just ignorant. How is anybody pro-crime? And it's not well informed to say she's anti-victim. And this rhetoric has been damaging and has caused a lot of trouble. I don't know why people don't understand the details of these things at all. You don't need to prosecute everybody, jail everybody, and execute everybody. There's a middle ground, and I liked where she was going. And for that reason, I'm hoping the process is not going to be used to install a career politician who wants to make a career about being anti-crime. We shouldn't provide a forum for those people. And I'm hoping if the process is extended a little bit and has room for discussion and that things, you know, gives time for things to work out that we can avoid that. That's my main concern about the process. I don't want somebody come in who's going to run for office, going around saying they're anti-cry and other people. Collar, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Hi, my name is Lawrence. I am the Regional Advocacy and Organized and Associate with LSPC. I'm system impacted. I'm also born and raised and open. I work in Oakland and I live in open. I really want to impress upon our members that rushing to make a decision that has so much weight and can affect our communities in so many different ways is not going to be beneficial. I think it's very important that this process remains transparent and that the community actually has a lot of say their selves and they're uplifted and their voices uplifted. I think it's sad that our community has been torn apart by individuals with money that don't even belong in this county or not in this. I think it's sad how our media is used to sensationalize and mislead our public and miseducate those who are not sure or don't know themselves. I think the selection of our next DA is imperative. I mean, we all want public safety, but what does public safety look like? Does public safety doesn't look like not rehabilitating those that you send away to be incarcerated? Public safety does not look like oversimsentencing individuals, especially those that are targeted in communities of color to access to sentencing and then blocking them for rehabilitating access. Our statistics has shows that violence has decreased, despite what our media is sensationalizing and shows our community. I think it is very imperative that we realize, like someone said earlier, that we recall, but why did we recall? There are so many people that didn't appear to the polls. There are so many people that we couldn't reach because of the lack of education, because of the lack of funding, who voices are really believed should be uplifted and should be heard. I appreciate you guys in this opportunity. I appreciate the work that you do. Just press upon you that is very imperative that we make sure that we choose the right VA for the right reason. We all want public safety. John Guerrero, you're on the line. You have two minutes? Yeah. Tackle the last speaker. Yeah, we all last speaker yet. We all want public safety. The job one, most important job for any government at any level is to keep your electorate safe, job one. You know, you can say, well, you know, the people are going to have the whole school and you're going to have to sweep your own streets. Maybe you're going to have to take out your own guard, but you got to keep them safe. And it's a failure of not the Sheriff's Office or the DA's office that they have to go and protect the people of the county. You know, people mentally ill, they're addicted, they need to be helped by, you know, the community, their churches, the family, relatives, they need to do that. They need to, you know, make sure these people are taking care of. It's the last line of defense when the government has to come and stop them. That's the last line. You gotta get them if everything else fails. If you look to the government to keep the people safe, so you have to get the criminals off the street. Now that doesn't say you don't go and rehabilitate them. Of course you do. Of course you take care of them mentally. Of course you try and clean up, get the drug addicted sober. And of course you take care of their problems. But you got to get them off the street first and make sure they don't get back on the street until they are rehabilitated. You have to protect your electorate. You have to protect your citizen's street. That is job one of any government at any level. Thank you. Collar, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Dear supervisors, thank you for this hearing. My name is Willem Vandekamp and I'm a long time resident of Elamida County in District 3. My member of the Interface Coalition for Justice in our Jails as a representative of the first congregational church in Berkeley, and I'm also a member of the Care First Community Coalition. In August of this year, you adopted the recommendations of Care First Jails last. And it seems imperative to me, therefore, that you select a new district attorney who will be dedicated to implementing the recommendations of Care First and JL's last. Thank you. Natasha, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Good afternoon. My name is Natasha Baker. I'm a district five resident. Also a member of the Care First, Hills Ask Coalition. And I'd like to echo some of the earlier speakers' comments. You're most importantly asking for more time to select a new DA. Clearly, there are a lot of strong feelings about this, and the public needs more time to be able to vet a new district attorney, particularly because we know that via the special election whoever is elected for this in Terram period is very likely because of name recognition, et cetera, to win whatever then the next full term election is. So it makes sense for us to spend more time in this process. In addition, as another speaker mentioned, we had recent elections. I have a new supervisor now, a supervisor for Toronto Bass. I would like her to be able to be involved in this process. I support Hamiya candidate town hall so that members of the public can hear from the candidates. I support transparency in the questions that the board is going to be asking of each of the candidates. And it is important that among that includes the importance of continuing the death penalty work that the DA was working on and showing that there is a lot of racial bias that has been happening in death penalty cases in Alameda County and as the last speaker said to ensure that whoever is the new DA is also committed to actually implementing the Care First Jail's last resolution that this board passed. So we need more time. Please do not rush this process. Please provide more opportunities for the public to weigh in, more transparency over the criteria and questions being asked of the candidates and ensuring that criminal justice initiatives that have already been approved and that are in progress, continue to be implemented. Thank you. Leslie, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Hello, thank you. I'm a retired law professor and a member of the Wellstone Democratic Club. I agree with the calls to delay the process a bit so that our new supervisor can participate and so that the public has the opportunity weigh in. A recall appears to be a democratic process, but to oust somebody without choosing their replacement is really undemocratic. So it's really critical that the public be allowed to submit questions and weigh in. I also hope that in evaluating the candidates, you look for somebody who commits to not charging the death penalty and who understands the research that long sentences do not reduce crime. And someone who was strong enough to not be cowed by some of the wealthy who were exploiting crime victims for their own purposes. Thank you. Holly, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Hello, my name is Teresa May and I have a bit of a call so I'm hoping that you can understand me. I've been tuned in here for quite a while just listening to the comments. I'd like to echo one or two. One is the the woman who came up and she spoke for the victims. People whose families have been victimized by criminals. I think that she's right. I think we do have to expedite the process to replace the prosecutor. I think that we have a number of excellent candidates that can step in as an interim prosecutor. I see no reason to delay this process unnecessarily. I think that also it's going to be important to have a prosecutor who has both existing relationships with all the parties. I'm an attorney myself and I know that the morale in the Alameda County prosecutor's office is probably at an all-time low. There were a lot of internal divisions within that office, and you have to have someone who is both an experienced prosecutor, who is an experienced litigator, who is a leader. There are a number of things, a number of qualities this person is going to have to have. It's not going to be a person who's a politician who comes in for a short period of time using Oakland as the next stepping stone for the next place that they're going to be. This is going to be, it's going to have to be someone who is actually committed to the city, committed to correcting what has happened and has balanced. We are losing businesses like Forty-Gorn North. We have people getting off their victims everywhere. We need to do some and I see my time is running out here, but I just want to say for the record, I want to encourage the board to not delay the process any further because we have candidates that we know this is not a wide open session for who's qualified to do this job. We know we have a good idea of who those people are. Thank you. Christina, you're on the line. You're our last speaker. There are no more speakers. Sorry. She raised her hand again. If you want to speak raise your hand now, because I'm going to be closing off public comment. So if there's anyone else out there who want to speak, raise your hand. You'll be the last speakers. OK. Four more speakers. Thank you. OK. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Christina Miesho and I'm urging you to ensure a fair transparent and inclusive process for selecting Alameda County's next district attorney. This decision will shape the future of justice in our community and it's vital that the process prioritizes public input, clear criteria, and accountability, a rushed or inciter driven process would undermine trust in our system. Please adopt a timeline that ensures transparency and meaningful community engagement. Thank you for your time and leadership. Thomas, you're on the line. You have two minutes. Hello, I hope everyone's well. I've been listening to the comments as well. And I just wanted to comment on what we're calling crime. Crime is defined as willful injury. So any system should do this little injury to people and as much possible to make them well. Jail is by nature harmful and injurious to those who are warehouses and not even charged with the crime, which is the majority of those who are in jail. We can incentivize community service and healing with funding and getting people off the street means giving them a place to feel safe, not giving them a jail cell. Countries such as Finland and counties, such as Hanupin County, have a successfully met and addressed homelessness by helping those with housing first, even those with disease and those struggling with substance abuse. The solutions are available and they're not out of reach. They need to be funded. Our money should not, should be redirected into community and nonprofits not further punitive measures. You know, it's your responsibility to act with informed compassion. And that won't happen unless we value a life over a jail contract dollars or a property. People can heal and they'll return to the community and it is more expensive to jail them and hurt them further. Thank you. Rick, you're on the line. You have two minutes. All right, this is Rick Grimes. I'm advocating for the Board of Supervisors to actually extend the timeline on selecting the right DA. This is not a fast food process. This is a process that needs to be well-ledged. Make sure we have quality applicants and is not sped through according to the safe coalition. This is how they won the election. Unipulation. And also trying to put their candidate in office. I think the proper person needs to be vetted through the community through an open form. Also, right now people are traveling for the holidays, traveling for school, and are not paying attention to what's going on in their cities and counties. So for this process to be credible, what we really need to do is wait until January to have this discussion and have an open form where everyone in the community can listen and vet the candidates. Thank you, Board of Supervisors. You guys are doing a great job. I know this is the daunting task, but like I said, it is not fast food. It's not something to be rushed. The next person that will be selected will be the board on the board. So it will be the district attorney possibly for the next four to six years or longer. Thank you. Pamela, you're on the line. You have two minutes? Okay, thank you. Board of Supervisors. Glad to talk to you. I have a cold, so I hope you understand me. I find it oddly ironic that this process seems to be moving so quickly when it's been at least two years that this same board has continued to discuss social justice issues of paramount importance to the population in the county, like Sheriff Oversight and protection for renters. So I'm not sure why the rush but I do agree with it folks that said let's slow it down and let's have some public forums in the evening. This position will end up being like all the super like all the DAs before Pamela Price permanent until they want to retire. We know this is how DAs are elected all over the country. This is the first time we have actually elected a DA independently, and this is what happened. They say, oh, the voters have spoken. You know, the voters spoke for the price of eggs too, and the national election, and now they're going to get eggs twice the price. So I'm not sure what that tells you. They also elected progressives to the City Council in Oakland. And the idea that a DA is in fact in charge of crime, whether it increases or decreases is nonsense. And most of you all know that's nonsense, that the DA does not cause crime or cause a decrease. But what we want is an open process that gives time to the voters to actually get to know who this person is, it's going to end up being our DA for a long time in the future. And I'm also with the Wellstone Democratic Renewal Club and about to finish 12 years with the Alameda County Democratic Central Committee. And thank you for listening. There are no additional speakers. Okay, I wanna thank all of the speakers and before I recognize board members and board members, I wanna speak to this process. We've heard a lot of speakers and I just wanna point out a few things that hopefully will be helpful. This all the applications will be public. All information on this that submitted to the county will be public. Item 3.3 in the process allows for every application ultimately to be made public. There will be nothing left that the public will not be able to see then under item 4.1. The minimum qualifications at BDA, can the County Council just speak to the minimum that? Yes, Supervisor, the minimum qualifications to be a district attorney in the state of California are few. The first one is that they must be admitted to practice law before the California Supreme Court. So that is one item and does not have an extended time period or anything of that nature just currently admitted to practice law. The second one is for elective county offices. The individual must be a registered voter at the time of their appointment and to be a registered voter in the county. Of course, you must reside in the county. So each of those three items are specific questions that are asked in the application. Are you a registered voter? Do you presently reside in the application. Are you a registered voter? Do you presently reside in the county? Are you admitted to practice in the Supreme Court of the state of California? A fourth criteria is also one of the questions in the application and that involves conviction for a particular felon, for which you have not received, a felony violation, for which you have not received a felony violation, which you have not received a pardon and those violations involve offering giving a bribe in bezel and public money's extortion or theft of public money, perjury or conspiracy to commit any of those crimes. Those are the minimum of qualifications. Those are the minimum. And then the board will take up Those are the minimum of qualifications. Those are the minimum and then The board will take up whether or not Applications are complete and to determine if an application complete it just has to do what? Well, it has to be certified by the applicant that it is complete and then we will you know verify that by just looking at the form Are Are there words on paper that respond to the questions? We're not delving into anything underneath that or underlying that. Right. So in the public, we'll have access to see all of that, right? All of the applications will be posted on the website. They'll also be in a binder at the Clerk of the Board's office. And the board will then take up a meeting to determine whether or not an application is complete and then to determine how many of the completed applicants we would like to interview that we take up that board meeting. That will be at an open meeting. Yes. That your board will make a decision about which applicants to consider and how many you want to interview. And the public and weigh in on that. At that board meeting, it's an open regular meeting or special meeting of the board. Regular or special meeting, but it is a notice to open item. Then, after we've done all of that in an open meeting with the public's weighing in, we will then have another meeting where we'll interview the candidates. Once again, either in a regular meeting or a special meeting, we'll interview all the candidates that we've decided we want to interview and then each board member will have a Luxury the freedom the progative to ask whatever questions they want to ask within the confines of legality So for instance if members of the public want to have specific questions as board members get asked those questions, right? Yes, that's correct. Okay And once again after we've gone through that entire inappropriate interview process If it could be a half a dozen could be more could be less the public will be able to weigh in. Once again, at that particular board meeting, right? As well as they do and other communications with your board, via email or other communications that you receive on a regular basis. Then when the board does finally decide on who we'd like to select to be the DA, that appointment will be placed on a board agenda for that person to be selected and voted upon and the public and once again, way in again. Is that correct? So you would not have to repost that individual appointment as long as your agenda properly gives notice that you may make an appointment at the time you do the interviews. Okay. And I think that is a process you have done. So we could make the appointment after the interview at that particular board meeting or we could wait and post it for another board meeting and then officially make the appointment. As long as we properly brought Browne heck to notice the potential. Okay, and then in terms of the. So the present schedule provides that you would interview at one regular and or special meeting and then at a subsequent regular special meeting you would deliberate. Right. That's what is that's what is. That's what is. Yeah, yeah, flexibility, but that's what is proposed. That's what is proposed. You would have flexibility, but that's what staff is proposing. I just want to, because there's been a lot of conversation about the public weighing in. Well, the public will have sufficient time to weigh in. No one will get any more time than anyone else. Now, if the public, the community, which is 100, I mean 1.6 million people in Alameda County, are roughly 100 million voters, multiple stakeholders from labor to political parties, you know, Green Party, labor, Democratic, Republican, Freedom Party, Liberation, all the parties to community groups, to whatever women voters if you want to hold Town Hall meetings forums do that That's your prerogative, but the board will conduct our meetings around this selection Under the auspices of the brown act so everybody gets a fair opportunity to speak away in. But as a result of your town halls or whatever you do, you can give that information to any one of the five of us. Now, it's important to recognize Supervisor Carson, it's a part of this process up until the time he's no longer a board member. So the new supervisor will have the opportunity to weigh in when she is officially sworn as a board member. So the new supervisor will have the opportunity to weigh in when she is officially sworn as a board member, which doesn't occur until after January 6 or thereabouts. I think it's also important to recognize the process that we've laid out here, at least surprised how and I in concert with County Administrator and County Council. This process can be made a little more lame here, but our concern was both around stability in the office, around dealing with all of them, many factors, now that come into run into DA's office, with the upcoming budget that needs to be put before the board and a pass for the new fiscal year 2526. Around any number of factors that we want to consider in terms of stabilizing the office. If board members have particular positions around what a DA should do, not do values what they should be, they can ask those questions at the time of the interview. So if nothing will be hidden in the public and also provide their input on that. The DA is the top law enforcement officer in the county So the DA sets the standard step. I mean, it's like the Attorney General for the state of California the top law enforcement officer in Alameda County and in any county is the DA. So those are some things I just wanted to state based on what I was hearing, just so people understood. We tried to take the consideration, all of your concerns, but Supervisor Albert, no, Colonel Supervisor Carson. Yes, thank you, President Miley. Indeed, I want to thank all the speakers that came and spoke. This is a very, very important position. As you mentioned, the top law enforcement officer of our county, county-wide, 1.7 million people. We do take this process very seriously. I know there's been also a lot of concern around making this decision quickly because concern about how the office is currently being run. I took it upon myself to reach out and speak with Mr. Royal Roberts, and I'm confident that he's going to do a fine job in the interim. That said, I've also heard people say that this is the holiday season and that we shouldn't rush this and I think in listening to the community and while we designed, I think, a very good process, if we were to push back the submission of applications by one week that would get us past the holidays and I think that would be a wise thing to do and it wouldn't extend too long but would give us one week extra to submit applications. And I also want to respect and uplift the comments that our union representative made. Because he also took it upon himself to meet with Mr. Roberts and his comfortable that he'll be able to lead the office. So if we could indulge for one extra week, I would appreciate that. With regard to the other comments, I think you hit the nail and the head. The public will have lots of opportunity to weigh in, either at the public meetings or with us directly email, as our county council mentioned, and ability to meet with us. We're all very accessible. And if they want to submit questions, it's incumbent upon us to then ask them. I think you hit the nail on the head with that. So I would just request one extra week and keep, just push back a week. That's all. I just would say if we extended one week of which I'm not opposed to, I think everything has to be moved back a week. One week for everything. Yeah, super. It's Carson. Thank you very much. And for all the people participated in putting together the process and the time frame. Really appreciate it. A couple of comments. At least two of us on the board have gone through a selection process before, unfortunately, in which we tried to make sure that it was an honest, open, transparent process. A couple of us on the board have gone through a number of cycles in which, unfortunately, a lot of things seem to happen around the holiday season. And understand how disruptive it can be, even though it's vital that we continue to make sure that the people's business operates on a 24 hour, seven day a week, 365 day period, that we have to also take into consideration that rushing through things doing a holiday season may not necessarily always give us the best results. The other thing that I wanna underline in terms of the time foring is the fact that it will be a little disruptive because a part of the process will take place during the transition in which we won't have fully participating in this process a successor to District 5 and I'm deeply concerned about that disc and having not having continuity on that. I guess one could argue after January 6th, you can get caught up to speed. I guess one should say on our own, you can do the interviews as they take place. But sitting here as a full compliment of the five members of the board, I think, is essential for us to have a real consideration of the time frame in which that individual, in this case, Nikki Bass, participates in this process. So I would implore that people would deeply consider that. This is a critical position on a number of scales. And I didn't support the recalls because of two things. And this is both the mayor's recall and the district attorney's recall. My not supporting the recall had less to do with the job and the performance of the two individuals. The timing on moving towards a recall for both of those individuals in my opinion appeared to be pretty premature, if not within 10. For those of us who've been fortunate enough to been elected by the electorate, regardless of just how much you've been involved in politics until you're in the seat. There is a time period in which you have to go through a learning process. You have to get some understanding of what your position is, what you're supposed to do. I'm not too sure that after one year in office, an active campaign to remove people gave them the opportunity to focus on the job they were elected to do, and to make every attempt to become educated and engaged in performing that. That was one aspect of it, but the other aspect of it is when I step back from looking at recall efforts and efforts to take individuals who have been elected to office out of office across this country. And I hear from my friends on the east coast and the Midwest and the South across the Bay in Los Angeles, it seems like we're starting a trend of attacking individuals the very first time, the first year that they're in office. That's very destabilizing to the running of government in any level. So for us to now have to go through a destabilizing environment, when Nancy O'Malley was in office, the PAM price in office, to an interim person in office, to an elected person in 2026, to whatever after that, that's very destabilizing to the office and the office operations, especially for such an important position as the district attorney's office. I'm saying that because of the fact that as we consider the person who will serve from the time they're appointed until the next election in June of 2026, once again, that individual will have to go through a learning curve even if they worked in that office for a number of years, even in many positions in that office for a number of years, once they're appointed as they're going to take a little time to do that. And the impact that that has to the operations of the office, the impact that it has to the ecosystem that surrounds that office, meaning the sheriff's office, the chief probation's office, operating with the law enforcement is very critical to make sure that we try to have someone in there who is going to be able to come in, deal with a destabilized situation, work with the compliments that are important for them to work with, including the court system, in order to make sure that things get to a smooth transition or smooth place of operation. That's why I'm saying, why do we have to rush this at the moment if we're saying that a reasonable period in time would be allowing at least the incoming person to be able to sit through this process and do legal through the exercise that their colleagues go through should be deeply considered. The ultimate part of this is that we want to make sure that the criminal justice system works as smoothly as it possibly can in all parts, so that justice can be administered. And we have to keep that backdrop in mind as we go through this process, even for a person who's going to serve a year or a year and a half in the office. I want to end by again saying, and I've said this before, I've had the privilege of serving here in California on this in CSEC, the California State Association of Counties. And talking with my colleagues, some from rural from suburban some from conservative some from liberal areas Some who have been formerly prosecutors themselves some who've been formally sheriff themselves some who admitted to be staunch Republicans Republicans are feeling that even they are under siege In this environment at some point we got to stop back We got to step back from what it seems to be in place at this point and say how do we get back to running government in a Same way our only ability to do that might be the process that we choose today in order to have the interim person selected. Thank you for giving me that time. Thank you, Mr. Fertz Carson. Let me just say that, and I'm going to recognize you guys more. If we approve the process that's laid out today, if we alter the timeframe, you'll have the benefit of at least providing us with the wisdom of the process going forward. Under any circumstance of what we approve, the new supervisor, Alexa, the supervisor, BAS will have an opportunity to do everything. The rest of us will be able to do because she'll be part of that implementation of that process. So I just want to point that out. And I do think, as you pointed out, and I know my colleagues to my right, not that they're from the right, but to they're from the right, but to my colleagues from the right. You know, there's a learning curve. So even though Supervisor Basel can on board, it's gonna be a learning curve. And I don't think we have the luxury of waiting, you know, of waiting because we have to do this though we don't have a timeframe, we have to be reasonable, county council. Our timeframe has to be reasonable. It does, there is no express timeframe, unlike when you are appointing a member to the Board of Supervisors, where the charter requires that to occur within 60 days. This process does not have an explicit timeframe, but it must be a reasonable time. Yeah, and so what is reasonable? Well, that's for the reasonable person to figure out, but the point is that it's reasonable. So I just want to make sure my colleagues to my right are pondering that. So supervising our kids. Thank you, President Miley. 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, 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 important that we have a public process that is not rushed. I think this the fact that it's no secret. I went through a very public process to fill a vacancy. It was extremely challenging, but it was one where anyone who wanted to weigh in had the opportunity to do so. So that's what I would like to see in this process, replicating that to a certain extent. So with all the comments that I've heard and I am prepared when we're going to be able to share my thoughts with my colleagues. Number one, as a county, we need to do a better job communicating information. So I'm very concerned that two item 2.4 page two of the board letter says legal qualifications earlier county council was asked specifically what those were going to do. So I'm going to be able to share my thoughts with my colleagues. that item 2.4 page 2 of the board letter says legal qualifications earlier County Council was asked specifically what those were. So I think we need to call those out specifically. So everyone has the same information. So I want to see those legal requirements added to section 2.4. So it's explicitly clear. In addition, in the application, I know those qualifications are captured in the application, but maybe we need to highlight it even more and put an asterisk so people could be very clear that this is a legal requirement in terms of being a member of the California Bar Association, residing in Alameda County. The question number 11, 11 with respect to have you been convicted of a felony involved in accepting or giving, or offering to give any bribe, then bezzlement of public money, extortion or theft of public money, perjury or conspiracy to commit any of these crimes. So I just want it to be very clear to the public that there is a legal criteria to apply for this position. I think it was mentioned minimum qualifications. So I want to see that spelled out. This is one of the most impactful decisions we're going to make. So I think it's really important that we do approach this carefully and not rush it. I think it's imperative that we have our newest colleague, Nikki Fortinado Bass, weigh in in this process. Not only is she going to be elected on January 6th, we have a new in a coming board president, supervisor, how it's going to take on that responsibility, starting in January. So we're in this time of transition. And for me, most importantly is I want the public to be able to review these applications. And as President Miley said, everyone in anyone could weigh in. They could send us an email. They could coordinate with the legal woman voters, community forums, with different organizational groups. But they need to have access to that information for more than a few days. So what I would like to propose is that the application deadline moved to Friday, January 3rd by 5 p.m. with the applications posting for everyone to review by close of business day by 5 p.m. on Tuesday, January 7th. Our newest colleague will be sworn in on the six. Our new board president will take the helm on the six or in the seventh and presuming. Yeah, that's a Tuesday, right? And then I'm also going to ask that these special meetings not be held on a Tuesday. Let's just carve out Wednesday. It's just we're always rushing. There's too much that we're trying to address here at the county level. So if it's a designated day and we don't have to decide until the following Wednesday, which applicants we want to interview, we would have from the seventh once the applications post online, until the following Wednesday, the 15th. That gives the public plenty of opportunity to review the applications, to give suggestions on who should be interviewed, and then the following week, the week of the 20th, hopefully on the 22nd, we could conduct the interviews, which is again, another public process. Everyone in anyone could speak in public comment, send a letter, send an email, and then we would be deciding on the 29th, 30th or 31st. So I'm wondering if others would support that approach. And this is really to allow the public ample time to form an opinion. I think we'll have to look at schedules. I don't know what our other regional bodies meet sometimes on Wednesdays. This is going to have to take precedent. Sure. So it's ironic though, because I think I was looking for a whole extra week. And what you proposed gives us a few days, but you want to provide more time. But I think I've provided more time. I have to look at the calendar. So let's be clear. I want the applications to you on the second, rather than the 30th. And I had the six. The six. But anyway, I could support that. Essentially, a week it looks like you were doing and we will want to coordinate with board members including the new supervisor in terms of the meeting. So our intent would be to come back if your board approves this today. We would work with each of your offices to actually schedule and we would publish that schedule, but rather than try to set dates now. So I think it sounds like you could accomplish by bumping a week on the, if you look at the schedule that we had prepared where deadline for submission of the applications, we had Monday, December 30th. We would actually bump that to the week of January 6th, which would provide additional time. The selection of the finalists to be interviewed by your board would be scheduled sometime during the week of January 13th. The following week, your board would publicly interview those that you selected to be considered and that would be the week of January 20th. And then your board could schedule your deliberations and selection of a candidate for the week of January 27th. Yes, that works. Does that work? And that still provides that if your board can want to move forward with an appointment as early as February 4th, you could do that. Yeah, and I strongly encourage the selection of candidates, the interviews, the deliberations, not be on a Tuesday. We never have enough time to get through all this business. We'll work on scheduling a special meeting and coordinating that with all five board members. Okay, thank you. Yeah, so we have them, Mark, just so you know, I've talked to Supervisor Howard about that and the County Administrator because interviews will take a good bit of time that we do that at a special meeting, and that'd be the only thing we do. And then what about adding the minimum criteria, just making it explicitly clear in 2.4? Adding that into the procedures that we post as well as adding some clarification to the application. Okay, thank you. Now, I guess the other question just so the board knows the way we have this scheduled was that if your board approves today that we would actually have the application period open as early as tomorrow and have everything posted online within the next 48 hours. If that's the direction the board is. I think that's fine because people that are interested, I mean the question to responses are 250 words. You could carve out board of six hours and knock out this application. So I think that's fine. Just want to be clear on that. The other thing is we did indicate based on your prior process that it's your board's intent to consider three to five candidates. Your board has flexibility. That doesn't preclude you from changing that, but I just wanted to point that out. Yeah, there was a cap. I think it's up to five. Well, it said the board's intent was to interview three to five. You're going to go through a process that's outlined and making a determination of which and how many candidates you'll be interviewing. So you have some flexibility but I just wanted you to be aware that that was in the draft procedures. I think we need to decide on that though today though before it posts officially so it's clear to the public. I think if the intent is to do three to five, it's just the intent. We can modify that when it comes to our attention after the number of applicants are submitted and we see how many are, you know, meet the minimum qualifications. If it's five, then we decide to do five, if it's eight, and we decide you're five or do five, if it's eight, and we say we wanna do eight, there's no reason why we can't do eight, right? Is that my accurate with that? I think that's right. Reading the attachment to, it speaks to a vote, orally by a roll call vote for as many as five. So we may need to restructure that language because that is a capitation at the level of five. All right, because I think the at least I think based on what I mean, suffice Mark Kess, we want to have the flexibility of interviewing as many as we choose. So maybe if that language restricts us, then you have to remove the cap. Yeah. Yeah. That is the language in round one. It's in the attachment to page one of two, where it says each super-reservable vote orally by a row call vote for as many. Well, that's how many you vote for. My apologies. Yeah. That doesn't mean that there will be that many. I think the CAO is correct. That it a tie for yeah, so it's up to five members. I apologize. Yeah, it is intent. You can you can do five or more. It does say in subsection three, the board made a decision to conduct an additional round or to interview all of the applicants who tied or to interview less than five at this time. I think the discretion is built into the process. So to repeat that, you feel the discretion in terms of how many people we interview is built within these procedures that we're approving. If we approve them today. Yes, I believe the language is there for you to have discretion to have more than five candidates, but the voting limitations might, you'll limit how many you can vote for as opposed to how many that you intervene. It does, the board members understand that. So we can interview as many as we want, but we can only after the interviews, both for only three to five. I think that's the cap. I think that's what county council say. Is that clear? Speaking tonight. I would recommend we add language to make that clear that we're not limited, limiting ourselves on the amount of candidates we are going to interview. Yeah, there is some language that will have to be slightly modified. And in some instances, it is limited to by the number of votes. But in A1, the last sentence says it is the intention of the board to interview at least three, but no more than five candidates. So if you want to increase that, then now is the time to do so. But that may then flow through the voting because at each round there's a provision that says you're going to interview the three applicants who have the greatest number of votes. So can we just remove no more than five, just leave it at least three candidates. And then the voting will then act as its own limiting. So they need at least three supervisors to advance to an interview to vote? Well, because you each have the ability to vote in the first round for five applicants. If you all vote for the same applicants or first same three applicants, then that will ensure that you will have three interviews. But if the votes are spread widely, then the highest, we need to potentially look at changing that it be the high, the high three and increase that number as well. So if you'll take a look at attachment too that walks you through those rounds, the votes themselves control who moves to each round. And you each have a limited number of votes. It's somewhat like rate choice voting but not. And so we would have to change the first paragraph, the lessons in the first paragraph which you currently say but no more than five candidates. And then the CIO says- And then we can adjust the other voting as before we post the process. The residents try to do that from the floor. I think we need, I mean, if the board, your intent is to increase the maximum number, I think we would need to know that. And then to the extent we need to adjust the process, we can do that. We have the same process, but we may need to make some adjustments since it is designed or you to have a maximum of five right? Correct. Yeah. So at what juncture would we receive proposed language and vote on the actual process? When would that occur? I would suggest that if the board wants to increase the upper limit that you make that decision and then provide direction to staff to adjust the voting procedures and to go ahead and post them as opposed to trying to bring them. So I would support not putting a cap, not limiting us to only interviewing five candidates that would be my preference and then the corresponding language to support that and I know we can't do that on the fly so that would have to come back to us but that's where I would like to see us. Would you want to keep the at least three? At least three minimum with three and no cap. I don't want to prolong the, but I think with the county administrator was saying we'll give authority today and they'll go ahead and make the adjustments so that people can begin to submit to applications as soon as tomorrow if they'd like. So this wouldn't be coming back to us in terms of the process. So if you want to, I don't know if super as a tab wants to make any comments before we have a motion. I'm concurring with what's on the table moving at the January 6th, not limiting it to more than five. And obviously being very clear about the qualifications that are in the process description. And also this would give us the opportunity to have the new supervisor in D5 be a participant. And I understand that it's important to do this right and to balance it with doing it in a way that provides the stability in that office. And you know we're learning, my first meeting here wasn't even a regular meeting, was a special meeting to deal with the recount on the vote in Oakland over the registers calling of the election in OUSD. So I think we're kind of going through uncharted territory and we're doing the best we can. All right, thank you, suffice him. So, who, suffice my kids? Do you wanna make a motion or suffice, however? Thank you for a line, right? I'm going to make a motion to do my best. Okay. Step one is adding the minimum qualifications to section 2.4, which is on page two of three of the application. And then on the bottom of page one of the application, which says attachment one, if we could do an asterisk that denotes what the asterisk is referring to, the minimum qualifications, and making sure that that corresponds with the items on the application, which from what I'm seeing is number eight. Do you presently reside in Ellemont County? And for how long? Number nine, are you admitted to practice in the Supreme Court of State of California and question number 11? I won't reread. And then there's a follow up to question number 11, I won't reread. And then there's a follow up to question number 11 that says, if yes, have you received a pardon for that crime? So is that clear so far to everyone? So question seven is actually a minimum qualification, registered voter as well. So add that as well. Being a resident is not a minimum qualification, but you must be a resident to be a registered voter voter as well so add that as well. Being a resident is not a minimum qualification but you must be a resident to be a registered voter. Okay so it's seven versus eight or is it seven and eight? Yeah so they work together but technically only seven is a minimum seven nine and eleven and the two parts of eleven are the minimum qualifications. Okay whichever ones are legally required for the minimum qualifications, if we could spell that out in section 2.4 and then make sure the asterisk and the definition of what the asterisk is referring to is included on the application. And then I've heard agreement for my colleagues that we're gonna change the timeline. So applications would be due on Monday, January 6th, by 5 p.m. And then everything else is adjusted by one week according to me. That's the motion. And in my missing sentence, we're going to move the motion. Oh, and Am I missing something? Move the cap. Oh, thank you for reminding me and we're going to remove the cap of only interviewing up to five candidates So minimum up three and remove the cap With direction for staff to modify those yes and direct staff to modify the language that corresponds with that, which is on. It's attachment to paragraph a one. Is it attachment to want to make sure. Attachment to a and then the corresponding subsection is referring to round to modify the language to ensure that we don't have a cap. I think the direction is just that staff be directed then to make the appropriate adjustments. Yes. Direct staff to make other areas that we need to adjust. But just so the public is clear, we're eliminating the cap of interviewing only up to five candidates. That's the motion. Any? You're leaving in a minimum of three. You are not stating your intent to, to cap it at five. Correct. So is there a second? Second. Second, my surprise, however, everybody understands the motion and I think staff understands the intent behind The items that are in the motion So it's the clerk you call the role Supervisor Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Marquez. Hi. Supervisor Tam. Hi. Supervisor Carson. Yes I'm going to be the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the mayor of the end of the day tomorrow as possible, and then we'll make the other adjustments as well. Okay, all righty, so we are now going to recess back into closed session. We have a sit matter at four o'clock. If we get out of closed session before four o'clock, we will be back up here to take up the regular agenda. you you you you you you you you you you you Recording in progress. Okay. Rebecca, could the clerk please take the role? Supervisor Halbert. Supervisor Marquez. Here. Supervisor Tam. Supervisor Carson. President Miley. to the rise of Tam, to the rise of Carson, President Miley. President, we have a form. Thank you. So, County Council, is there any reportable actions from close session? Yes, President Miley, there is a reportable action regarding the conference's real property negotiation, negotiators can't even talk today, it's a long day. Item A, then the ongoing negotiations with the AASIG and Oakland acquisition company entities. At the request of OAC, your board has agreed to not vote on the consent to the assignment at your meeting on December 17th and to delay that vote until a time in the future. In the interim staff will continue to negotiate the remaining open deals with those parties. Okay, thank you. All right, so I think the board can now take up the regular agenda. So do we have a motion on consent? That's items 52 to 61. Mr. President, I move consent. Okay. I'll second. We'll buy. Tam second by my kids. There's no more questions or comments on consent. We have a local supervisor Howard. Hi. I'm going to be the president. I'm going to be the president. I'm going to be the president. I'm going to be the president. I'm going to be the president. I'm going to be the president. I'm going to be the president. I'm going to be the president. I'm going to be the president. I'm going to be the president. I'm going to be the president. I'm going to be the president. regular agenda item 21 is being pulled by the department and item 49 and 50 both set matters are both continued until December 17 as announced earlier. President Miley, you're ready to make the mass motion here. I would move items two, three, four, five, six. I note that item seven is a recused item. Yes. Eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve. Noted in that twelve point one is a recused item. And the mass motion again will be twelve point2, 13, 13.1, 14, 15, 15.1, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34. 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 questions on 34 Items 35 35.1 36 36.1 37 38 comment oneight, please a Good I note that um thirty-nine is a recused item Item 41 in the mass motion 42 43 44 45 46 47 the three, 44, 45, 46, 47. And that concludes the mass motion. Correct. Is there a second? I'll second. Okay. Right. So let's take up the items that have questions. First is item 34, then item 38. Thank you. Vice President Howber. With respect to item 34, we do have a board letter from the CAO's office. I was wondering if the county administrator can just elaborate on the reason why this request to fund the special capital construction fund is being made for $300 million. Thank you, Supervisor Marquez. In 2023, your board approved a long-term capital financing plan to be in setting aside funds for your over $1 billion in unmet capital needs. This action before you simply appropriates funds that have already been set aside, consistent with your board's policy and what this will do is enabled the general services agency to access these funds during the current fiscal year to address life safety and other critical projects primarily due to the facility assessment. So it's appropriation of existing funds that have been set aside for your board's policy. And then Director Gasway, can you just highlight what some of those key projects might be just for public's knowledge? Kimberly Gasway, Director General Service Agency, the majority of the funds are related to the projects, priority projects on the Fairmont campus for healthcare services, probation, and I'm sorry, I'm gonna get the behavioral health probation, there's some other funds associated with AHS on a different board letter. And a countywide solar project, I think that's also a good idea. That's correct, your board has already approved the solar project. So, and some energy services contracts that are coming forward in January. Okay, thank you. Yes. Next Supervisor Marquez comments on 38. Must be excited for this. I am, I've toured our juvenile justice facility and just wanted to support item 38. This is probation department's recommendation that the county adopted resolution to rename the Juvenile Justice Center's Technology Lab after past Public Protection Committee Chair. The late supervisor Richard Valle. Supervisor Valle was a tireless champion for youth, especially those who are most at risk in our community. It was his vision and advocacy to bring the last mile coding program, originally developed in San Quentin State Prison to Elimitie County's juvenile justice center. After first learning about this innovative program through a newspaper article, supervisor via asked, my now public safety advisor, Brenda Gomez, to research on how to bring this workforce opportunity to our county. So I want to acknowledge the work of previous chief Marcus DeWall, as well as thank current probation chief Brian Ford for your continued support for the Richard via technology lab. And just want to thank everyone for eliminating barriers to employment and supporting our young people's talents in the next generation. So I hope that there's future festivities for my colleagues to join us with this. Renaming ceremony, but I'm happy to support this item. Thank you. Very good with that. We have no other questions on this portion of the mass motion. All right. So a mass motion was made by Hal Burton, second by Tam. So if there are no other questions or comments from board members on the mass motion, would the clerk please call the roll. Supervisor Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Mark Hens. Hi. Supervisor Tam. Hi. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Miley. Yes. Very good. We have four items for which Supervisor President Miley. Yes. Very good. We have four items for which Supervisor President Miley will recuse himself, maybe make a comment or two, and we know how to do it. Okay. Alrighty. So I have to recuse myself on four items today. The first item is item seven, John Bliss. Now I'm think I know one John Bliss, and I'm hoping it's seven, John Bliss. Now, I'm think, I know one John Bliss, and I'm hoping it's the same John Bliss, because the John Bliss, who lives in Oakland, that donated to my campaign, and I'm recusing myself under the Divine Act. I made a contribution in January of this year to my campaign in the amount of $500. So I'm hoping it's the same. John Bliss, I was looking for an address or something, but I didn't necessarily see it. So that's the first item, recusing on item seven. Then say after recusing myself on item 12.1 because 12.1 B2, Leneas Jones, has made contributions to me and this is under the vine act once again and for and contributions were made in January of this year as well in the amount of $1,000. Okay, the next recusal is item 23, 23, 23 23 Oh 23 Recuse myself not because I have a An actual conflict I consider it a Perception conflict because the TC I T.C. I too and 1700 Bankroft LLC, they provide in kind off of space to the United Seniors at Eastmont and though I received no remuneration from the United Seniors I always like to recuse myself out of Reception and then item 39 I'm recusing myself a George Matthews, once again under the Vine Act, George Matthews has made a contribution to me this year in January and then also in February and also November in the amount of $1,700. So I think those are my four recusals, and I'll leave the room. Very good. Noting that President Miley has recused himself to the left of the room, I'll move items seven, 12.1, 23, and 39. Is there a second? And second by supervisor Tam, roll call vote please. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Aye. President Miley recused himself from discussing or voting on the item and left the room. Supervisor Carson? Yes. Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Those items pass unanimously. We'll invite President Miley back and head on to our ordinances. Your first ordinance is item 24 from the Human Resource Services Department and second reading of salary ordinance amendments. The first is an ordinance approving the September the 17th 2023 through September the 25th 2027 Memorandum 2025, County of Alameda, Salary Ordnance. Move to wave the full second reading and move for its adoption. Second. Move that, Albert, seconded by Tam. And this is for both. Yes. Okay. All right. There are no questions or comments on the board. by Tam and this is for both. Yes. Okay. All right. There are no questions or comments on the board. Could the clerk call the roll? Supervisor Halbert. Aye. Supervisor Marquez. Aye. Supervisor Tam. Aye. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Meile. Yes. Item 25 is from the Human Resource Services Department. It's the first reading and introduction of the 2425 County Valimita Salary Ordinance is consistent with the final budget adopted by your board. An ordinance providing the compensation and designating the number of officers, boards and commissions, and of assistance, deputy clerks, attaches, and other persons employed in the offices and institutions of the county and providing rules and regulations relative there too. Moved away of the full first reading of the item and moved for its introduction. Second. With my halver, seconded by Tam. No poor comments or questions, call the roll. Supervisor Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Marquez. Hi. Supervisor Tam. No port comments or questions call the roll. Supervisor Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Marquez. Hi. Supervisor Tam. Hi. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Meiley. Yes. Item 26 is the first reading and introduction of an administrative code amendment relating to lead balances. An ordinance abending certain provisions of the county of Alameda administrative codes moved away the full first reading of the ordinance and move for its introduction second move my halberts at my tab no more comments or questions call the room supervisor Halbert I supervise a mark as I supervise a I'm not sure if you're going to be able to see the comments. I'm going to be covered. I'm going to be covered. Supervisor Marquez. I'm going to be covered. I'm going to be covered. Supervisor Marquez. I'm going to be covered. Supervisor Marquez. I'm going to be covered. Supervisor Marquez. I'm going to be covered. Supervisor Marquez. related to pace so it's adoption of the MOU as well as related salary ordinance amendments to implement. The first is an ordinance approvinging certain provisions of the 2024 2025 County of Alameda Salary ordinance. Move to wave the full first reading of item 27 and 27B and move for their introduction. Second. Move by Halbert, second by the meeting of item 27a and 27b and move for their introduction. Second. Move by Halbert, second by Tam. Any more comments or questions? Okay, please call the roll. Supervisor Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Marquez. Hi. Supervisor Tam. Hi. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Meiley. Yes. Item 27.1 is the first reading of salary ordinance amendment related to 5% salary adjustment for unrepresented and designated and non-management related classifications An ordinance amending certain provision to the 2024 2025 County of Alameda salary ordinance Moved away the full first reading of item 27.1 and move for its introduction second move to the full first reading of item 27.1 and move for its introduction. Second. Move a halver second by Tam. Any more comments or questions? If they're none, let's have the roll call. Supervisor Halbert. Supervisor Marquez. Hi. Supervisor Tam. Hi. Supervisor Carson. Yes. President Miley. Yes. Item 40 is a second readings from the sheriff and adoption of an ordinance restating in a mending county ordinance 02024-2 to incorporate changes to general order 221.02. An ordinance reinstating in a mending title 9 chapter 9.45 of the general ordinance code concerning the military equipment use policy. Moved away the full second reading and move for its the ordinance's adoption. Is there a second? I'll second. Excuse me. Move by. Howbertick by 10. Many board comments. Question. Yes. I'm going to continue to be a no vote as I was in the motion. I'm going to continue to be I'll second. Excuse me. How about 10? I'm going to continue to be a no vote as I was during the first reading and then just wanted to flag for the public that as the chair of the public protection we do plan to bring the policy discussion with respect to using less lethal munitions back to public protection for discussions sometime in the spring. Thank you. Okay. Other questions or comments? Call the roll please. Supervisor Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Marquez. No. Supervisor Tam. Hi. Supervisor Carson. No. President Miley. Yes. That concludes our ordinances. Right. That's your last regular item before your four o'clock step matter. So we've done everything up until four o'clock. Okay, so I think I'll go ahead and take public comment on non-agentized items. So if there's anybody who wants to speak on an item, I mean, an item that's not on the agenda today, non-agentized items from the chambers or online, please indicate to the clerk, this will be items that are in the jurisdiction of the Board of Supervisors that are not on the agenda for today. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. I'm going to go to the next slide. We have any speakers. We do. We have an in person and online. We'll go to the first in person. What up people. These are the people in the audience. Please. We're in session. If you want to take your comments, please take them out of the chambers. Thank you. We're're in session. If you want to take your comments, please take them out of the chambers. Thank you. We're still in session. Go ahead. On public comment, items not on the agenda. Shikiba Sharifi. There is a Sylvester. Cherry Tolentilo, Zaza Zang, Vicky Galvon, Nehas Singh, Christina Lanusa. Cynthia Lang. And these are people who want to speak to an item. That's not on the agenda. Okay, okay. I see, okay. All right. Go ahead. Janet Corbrew. Lee Hanson. Julia Wynn. Karen No. I'm not going to be able to hear you. Karen, no. We have one online. Berkeley, here on the line, you have two minutes to speak for on items not on the agenda. Oh. I'm for item 51. Nope, we're not on that item yet. No more speakers for public comment. All right, so we've taken public comment on non-agentized items with a board of supervisors at this point in time. So now we will recess until four o'clock for the four o'clock set item, which is item 51. So we're now in recess. you you Recording in progress I would like to reconvene the board of supervisors meeting. Thank you. With the clerk, please take the role. Supervisor Halbert. Present. Supervisor Marquez. Present. Supervisor Tam. Present. Supervisor Carson. Present. Present Miley. Present. We have a quorum. Right. We want to take up our four o'clock set item. Did you want to say anything, my Carson on this item? I'll introduce it. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Today we're kind of bringing forth a recommendation that the treasurer, let me kind of back off and say what we're doing more specifically. We're going to propose and the board would have to take an action on it to direct the treasure to develop an ethical investment policy and consultation with community stakeholders including but not limited to communities of color unions and local organizations. organizations submit the ethical investment policy, the Board of Supervisors within 35 days, and then return to the Board of Supervisors with six months of submitting the ethical investment policy with an implementation plan and subsequently report on implementation on an annual basis. We're presenting this because the community that we live in Alameda County has a long time history of aligning our investment decisions with our values. Many people point to South Africa, but also Burma in 1996. So this is not a new endeavor. Matter of fact, a number of institutions that deal with investments are looking and revisiting their investment policies on multiple levels, including in terms of environmental impact. And so that's not new. is also a focus here is that this community, which has been an extremely diverse ethnic community here in the Bay Area and here in Alameda County in particular, has gone through many struggles of learning to coexist and to also try to figure out where there is commonality and common ground. Last year at this time, right after the uprising that took place in Israel, I was in the Middle East, attending an international conference regarding the Middle East in Africa. And since then, there are untold numbers of individuals who have died, who have been named and whose lives have been abrooted, whose communities have been destroyed. That has gone beyond just the Gaza area. It's now including Syria. it's now including Syria. It's now including Lebanon. It's including a lot of other places as well. And as we are experiencing this, this is not new. This is unfortunately in that area of the world has been taking place for quite some time. But this latest uprising has caused us to say, how do we participate along with others to slow down if not stop what's happening in this area? And so our attempt today in directing it to the treasurer is because all of the investment policy and the authority that the county has is with the county treasurer. And to work with the county treasurer regarding the investment policy statement is a part of what we're asking. At the moment, I'll conclude on this note. I said that last year at this time, I attended an international forum in the Middle East. Last week at this time, I was physically in the Middle East attending a follow-up to that forum. The information that came, and there was a lot of US presence at the forum, a lot of official US presence at this forum, matter of fact, attendance from the White House was at this forum. But the information that was shared there is clearly different than the information that we are receiving on a regular basis at home. And despite who's right or who's wrong with the numbers and what's happening, this is an attempt for us to pump the brakes if not continue to start to show that at some point in time we all have to coexist. So with that I'll stop and open it up for some discussion. Okay, at some point I'll do a board action. And I'm not sure if the county treasure wants to make a statement at this time, but I'll turn it over to Hank Levy. So the treasure's here, and I think he does have a presentation. I do. And remarks he'd like to make. I'll turn it over to the treasurer. Thank you. You are being asked today to direct me as a treasurer to develop an ethical investment policy. I support you during this with two small qualifications, which I will explain later. The County of Alameda has already been on the road to creating an ethical investment policy, but most of you were not on the board when this process started. The main job of our investment policy is to define the objectives of our investments, governance and structure of how investments shall be made. We review this policy on an annual basis. We present it first to the Treasury Oversight Committee, the TOC, for discussion and approval, and then we send it to you, the Board of Supervisors, who must affirm it each year. This annual review is mandated by state law. Governmental funds, as opposed to pension funds, are highly restricted under state law. The California Government Code permits only 17 specific types of investments. And it also states that the objectives of investing are safety, liquidity, and yield in that specific order. Safety, liquidity, and yield. State law largely governs what are the main components of our investment policy. So it only leaves each public jurisdiction to supplement those main provisions. In October of 2019, we presented to the TOC and then the County Finance Committee, and then to you, a completely rewritten policy statement. The rewritten policy was originally drafted by this new rewritten policy, was drafted by our consultant that finalized by me and other staff in our office. The new statement contained references to law, made explicit internal practices, which had been applicable for many years, but which were never fully explained. The old 2019 policy was 11 pages long, the new 2020 statement, which is now basically the 2024 statement, is 17 pages long, including a table of contents. It's on our website. The revision included two major changes. One, the new policy included the ability to accept and run nonmandatory deposits from local agencies. Right now, the schools are mandatory deposits. We have no other nonmandatory depositors. So that, while we allowed it, it hasn't occurred. Number two, the new policy inserted a responsible investment provision using criteria which considers the risk factors for environmental, social, and governance factors. We subtitle that socially responsible investment objectives. Our policy reads, in addition to and subordinate to the objective set forth in the county's primary investment objectives, the treasurer seeks to implement the policy and responsible investment, which is a strategy and practice to incorporate environmental, social and governance factors in investment decisions. Investments will be made with responsible investment goals to the extent that such investments achieve substantially equivalent safety, liquidity, and yield compared to other investment opportunities available at the same time. The Treasurer will actively incorporate ESG factors in its investment analysis and decision making process and will work to enhance its effectiveness in implementing the principles of responsible investing. Within the guidance for responsible investing, the treasurer will consider additional, socially responsible, and impacted investing criteria. Such criteria shall be consistent with values promulgated by the County of Alameda." unquote. The board letter in front of you asked you to ask you to direct me to consider some new criteria and to perform this consideration in a more open and transparent way. It also asks you to direct me to develop an implementation plan to carry out the policy. Well, this may not this will not be easy. I think it's important and necessary. You may be asking yourselves if we already have language addressing social-responsible investment, why do we need something different or more? I believe one reason is the vagueness of our language, presently. The second reason is that we don't have an implementation plan. We purposely put into our investment policy that the investment criteria should be consistent with values promulgated by the county valamita. By this we meant our vision. Credit to Emily Saad dig of our GSA Sustainability Division, who noticed that the vision of the county parallels United Nations sustainable development goals, which is a standard used by responsible investors around the world. Think about our vision in 2026. Safe and livable communities, prosperous and vibrant economy, healthy environment, thriving resilient population, etc. Now think about the UN SDG sustainable development goals. No poverty, zero hunger, good health and well-being, quality education, gender equality, affordable and clean energy, decent work and economic growth, reduced inequality, sustainable cities and communities, et cetera. Now finally refer to supervisor Carson's letter asking me to consider the following key elements, social responsibility, inclusion and equity, sustainability, community impact. These things all align. When recreated the 2020 Investment Policy Statement, we purposely avoided putting the type of wording common in many investment policy statements that prohibited investments in certain things. Those statements prohibit certain products, certain practices, etc. This is called negative screening or divestment. We did not want a list of these bad things. We felt it wasn't good for investment policy or institutional investors. Because issues tend to come and go is one reason why I personally do not like investment policies which center on divestment. We were more interested in positive screening. And to that end, we have become increasingly interested in what is called impact investing, the subject of which I have presented to you on previous occasions regarding our programs with local banks, which set Japan, my role as tax collector in the ability to sell tax-evalent properties, etc. We currently have over $200 million deployed through local banks, which represents over 2% of our portfolio, which investments touch our needs for housing, local economic development, and job creation. These investments truly touch the goals of our vision. Should policy include any negative screening or any divestment language? I think if written broadly it's a useful tool and if implementation plan is created that is understood and able to be followed this would be a large step forward for the county. A fellow investment professional has discovered that, but it's not the end all. A fellow investment professional has discovered in some jurisdictions which have policies which contain large amount of negative screening, their portfolios do not reflect that policy. One of the largest international organizations which promotes sustainable investing, the UN principles a responsible investing, proposes a framework for active investment on a variety of issues. While it generally believes in asset stewardship, it does prescribe heightened due diligence when conflict is occurring. The PRI states, it is possible that even if divestment has little direct effect on individual companies' decision-making, it may contribute to broader normative shifts that shape public perceptions of a given industry and increase the likelihood of public policy interventions targeting that industry. Many proponents of divestment will leave this as the key impact of such a strategy, though it's effective this is speculative and difficult to measure. The New York State Controller, Thomas the Napoli, who's the sole trustee of the New York Common Retirement Fund, said recently, as a last resort, the investment is one tool, but on a very carefully evaluated basis. We think having a voice as an investor is important. One of the negatives of divestment is you lose your place at the table. For Alameda County, I do see divestment as a useful tool in some selected cases. And like any other tool the county uses, there should be a clear policy about how and when it is used. There was no financial penalty for divesting. There was no penalty for selling a bond on the secondary market. If the sale of a bond is sold for less than its purchase price, thus creating a realized loss, the reinvestment of those proceeds will be at a higher interest rate and they'll call to they'll cause the pool to recover whatever money it may have lost in a short period of time. Selling bonds, even at a loss, can achieve financial goals along with community goals. Therefore, I speak in favor of the directive that two providers of car send is asking you to pass. I request two modifications, however. One is that I'd like to have the right to suggest whether or not the new ethical investment policy should be a guideline which stands alongside the county's investment policy statement or is fully incorporated into that investment policy. Second, instead of 35 days to create a new policy, I would like 90 days, but the right to request additional time if needed. This policy will influence more than just a single issue and engaging its individuals and organizations will take work. My plan is to hire a consultant to help me do this work. Also, I will need to present the new policy or guidelines at the Treasury Oversight Committee than bring it to you, the board, after that. And it is possible that as we did in 2019 that you or the CIO may also want me to present it to the Finance Committee. You are likely to hear today from many people who have strong opinions on the issue of divestment. As I have said, divestment crosses many issues, many products, many industries, many companies, many geographical locations. However, today the issue will be focused on one particular issue, which is weapons manufacturing that the Israeli government may be using against the Palestinians. Because of the volatility of this issue, especially since the Hamas raid in killings last October, and because of this involves the issue of Israel and Judaism, I would like to have a moment of personal privilege as the only Jewish elected official for the County of Alameda. There will be numerous speakers today, many of them Jewish, who will describe to you how products are used in an unlawful way in the Middle East. They will tell you how such products are not only used in activities of war, but also in more unjustifiable actions that go against the principles of humane conduct. They might tell you how this practice violates the spirit and written values of Alameda County. There will also be a number of speakers today, many of them also Jewish, who will speak to you against div speakers today, many of them also Jewish, who will speak to you against divestment with three main reasons. One is that Alameda County should have nothing to do with international politics, second that any particular divestment will harm the county's finances, third that any action against companies who supply weapons for Israel as an act of anti-semitism. In my opinion, today's discussion should be about creating better investment policy, not about divestment. However, it is on the table, so let's get it out. I have initiated the sale of three bonds of the Caterpillar Corporation. 2 of our three positions have already been sold. I want to reassure everyone that this decision and any future divestment decision that our office may make is about adhering to the values of Alameda County and to the principles of a more profound understanding of socially responsible investing. Within the investment objectives of the county, the values of the county should and must be pursued. I would never want my actions to create fear among my fellow Jews or harm any other group. I would do everything I could to help them understand to make this world a safer place for them. And I would do everything I could to help them understand to make this world a safer place for them. And I would do everything I could to make discussions around sensitive topics, a safe place for people to discuss it. I feel a great sorrow that long histories of trauma have triggered fear, still trigger fear, and other emotions when issues like this emerge. I am committed to working with community members to ensure the fiscal policies of our county create safe and sound impacts within the county and the communities are investments impact. I recommend supportive supervisors or Christens letter with the two amendments requested above. Thank you. Any board members have any questions or comments? Thank you. I just want to thank you so much, Treasurer, for being here and for your presentation. I appreciate your thoughtfulness and preparation for this meeting. Can you please repeat what you're requesting in terms of amendments just so we're all clear? I would like that you give me the authority to recommend whether the ethical investment policy or guideline should be separate from the investment policy statement or part of it, integral to it, which is something you would be voting on every year. And the second thing is I would like that the development of the policy itself that you give me 90 days with the right to come to you and ask for an extension. And I still, I'm okay with the 180 day implementation plan. Okay, and then can you just, one question I have for you, since you've had time to look at this item, since I believe it was initially going to be heard on November 12th, I think it was. So can you just let us know what your plan is in terms of outreach? How do you anticipate to get feedback from the wider community or input, I should say? Good question. I've identified a few people who I think might give me some feedback on the policy. I intend to, I've already interviewed a couple professionals to help write this, who are generally in the spirit of what we want to do. So I don't have a plan. I'm waiting for the vote today. And that'll let you know. Thank you. I appreciate that briefing on our existing policy and how it was developed. I also looked at some of our neighboring counties like San Francisco, San Mateo, and Contra Costa and Marin when it comes to their investment policy with respect to how they do with ESG criteria and then some of them use like the investor's responsible research center and their ratings of certain investments. The question I had is when you developed this policy annually, you said you go through the finance committee before it comes to the full board, no? No, normally the process is that we review it annually. Oftentimes there's no changes. We bring it to an oversight, the Treasury oversight committee, which meets twice a year. We don't normally go to the finance committee. That was I think because we had rewritten the whole policy. So the social responsibility investment section under our existing investment policy That has been a carryover is that what you're saying correct and there was no opportunity To vet it during the time that we basically adopted it Well, you get the vet at every year right want to So what I'm supposed to comes to you for for once a year. That's man-data by state law. Just to clarify, Supervisor, your board takes a couple of actions. Each year, you're asked to consider delegation of your investment authority to the Treasury Tax Collector. So that comes before you, I believe, as an ordinance for two readings. And then the policy actually also comes forward for your boards approval each year. So it's an annual process. I recall seeing those items on the agenda. What I'm trying to get from you is because you said that it would be helpful if you had 90 days and you would consult with certain experts. Is there a way to structure it so that it is before, like a board committee meeting so that there's more opportunities for public engagement? Like I said, I haven't really thought through the process. If anybody's interested in- Like the finance committee, for example. Okay. Like I said, I haven't really thought through the process. If anybody's interested in- Like the Finance Committee, for example. Okay. The Treasury Oversight Committee are those publicly open meetings? Yes. So publicly open their Brown Act committees. Presumably, the language we currently have has been vetted by the public. They've been able to visit those twice a year, okay? And isn't it the case that oftentimes our policies make it first to a committee for discussion and then come to the board? We're talking now about hearing it from the board level and remanding it back to the Treasurer and the Oversight Committee and or the Finance Committee and then come back to the board is what I'm hearing. This is the request. That's why it's here before us and that's fine. We should be giving direction for the committees to be working on. But I also heard you say that this discussion is meant to revolve around the use of weapons in the Middle East is real and Gaza. But I also see written here at pretty broad investment policy, not any one topical point of discussion. Is it your intent that we would just raise individual topics of discussion when they occur, or it feels like we're trying to create, by the board letter, a policy that is longstanding, living on, goingly. And yet, you described the discussion of a point in time. Which is it? Let me try to explain. I tried to say in my remarks that I am looking forward. And I agree with, I want you to vote to direct me to do this. I think it's needed, it's necessary, that the language we have needs work, and it needs an implementation plan. I also said that I generally, as an institutional investor, and as you know, I'm not only the treasurer, but also on the board of our pension plan, and also around our deferred compensation plan, so I consider myself steeped in institutional investing philosophy that a positive plan for investment is the key thing. And the county has given me a roadmap. It's given me its vision. So that's there. And I think that Supervisor Carson's letter or the letter is asked you to vote on, it's directing me more specifically to think about other things, including divestment. That's what I want the discussion about. What I meant, and then one reason I don't like the policy that focuses on divestment, the focus is on what's called negative screening. It's because then you begin to put this laundry list of bad things to back up, private prisons, weapons. You begin to put this long list of things on it. And I don't think that's a good way to write policy. So I was just pointing out, as you can see in the audience, people hear for one particular issue. But next year there might be a different issue. And I don't want to write a policy specifically to issues. I want to write a policy about policy. Fair enough. So what I'm hearing you say, policies that deal with one particular point in time, and specifically policies that deal with negative screening on one particular point in time and specifically policies that deal with negative screening on one particular point in time are not exactly what you're hoping to accomplish. Exactly. Okay. That said, I think you mentioned there are already examples of negative screening policies, policies that have been made with negative screening, with point in time examples, i.e. divestment, and I know when you shared with me examples of other counties, it was more of the positive screening, positive ESG values. Have you shared with us or can you share with us or where would you point us to? For examples of negative screening, point in time, investment policies. I would like to take a look at them. I don't think I'll support them, but I'm open to looking at them. I don't intend I'll support them, but I'm open to looking at them. Well, I don't, I don't intend to have, have a policy which has negative screening in it. Or I'd wait, I'd need to think about it. Okay. I mean, there are, like I said, divestment is, is a tool. So I've got to figure out a way to write that in a way that not only explains it, but also has a way to implement it. Okay. Then I also heard you say, because we talked about tools of weaponry used currently today. But then you said you divested from caterpillar, or you sold some bonds earlier. And I'm trying to understand that because Cappill is not a weapon. Well, and, but here's the thing that I'm trying to get at. I don't believe that caterpillar said, please go use our tractors in this way. Did they? Well, and then I'm open to hearing that, but my fear is if it's not one tractor, it's another tractor. And where do you draw the line? And if we divest from all tractors, then how are we gonna build homes and make food? Yeah. The question has often come when we talk about divestment is where to stop. As an institutional investor, and it's December 10th today, and money is rolling into the county, as we speak downstairs, we've got to invest our money somewhere. And the issue has come up, where do we stop, and where do we invest in, and is there a good quote, a good, unquote, corporation out there. And basically also the treasury, hardly, corporation out there. And basically, also the Treasury, hardly, there's very little investment in corporations. Most of our investments ironically enough, and I think this audience would probably appreciate it, is in the government of the United States. And so, you know, I can't divest, I can't, we can't divest from that, you know. So it's a good question, it's a a theoretical question that I think we're going to have to, this is where an implementation plan is how bad. And so, I think that in my thinking about caterpillar, is that I think I was convinced that they've been engaged with for so many years, for 20 years. They've been engaged with and it's a company that has been put on the block and asked to stop what it kind of, I think, is common knowledge. Not that there aren't companies, I've seen pictures of just looking at a picture of bulldozer, bulldozing of Palestinian home, it was a John Deere tractor. We don't hold any John Deere. So yeah, it's true. I don't know where to stop is a good question. Thank you for your thoughtfulness. Thank you. Just wanted to give a little clarity because Hank is really answerable to the Treasury Oversight Committee. And I know that the board is not as familiar with the Oversight Committee because it meets only twice a year. It meets soon. We don't need to say with. But it meets twice a year, that body is made up of the pool participants, those who are directly responsible around investments for them, such as Alameda County Board of Education, right, and there are others. But that's why, and it is a brown acted meeting. So it follows the protocols that it's supposed to follow. I just wanted to say that because what the policy aspect may come here, the responsibility still lies with the Treasury oversight committee. Thank you. So with the Treasury oversight committee, would you have to get authorization to implement the policy. And it's composed of how many entities? How many entities? How many entities are in? Well, let me just say this. In the pool. On Hanks behalf, we do have a board member spot. I happen to be that board member spot. But that is a spot board member to serve along with the other entities. Sure. Yeah, go ahead. So, but just let me tell you about the proposition of the pool itself. So the county owns is about 40% of the pool's assets. The 14 school districts collectively, in the county own about 50%. And about 10% is owned by other funds, custodial funds and things like that. The county has some representatives, the supervisor, the board selects one super one member, represents them. We have a county council, we have auditor controller, you know, our office. And then on the school side, the superintendent of education has a representative. And then the schools have a representative. And I think the special districts are supposed, there's some special districts that I think have a representative, but no one's ever showed up from them. And there's also at least one member of the public. And this is all sort of statutorily written. So I just want to understand, so in terms of developing the policy, you'll bring the policy here, will do whatever we're going to do at the posse then does it go to the Treasury oversight committee? If you know I you know I think I was asked why don't have a plan quite yet I thought I would I would write it I would you know anybody wants to a pine on it, that would be great. Okay, so, I mean, I was, the normal, the normal thing is to we write it, any change which we haven't done since 2019. We write it, we bring it to the Treasury Oversight Committee, because of the major changes, somebody in 2019 asked me to give it to the Finance Committee first but that's not usual normally and because we have made changes there was really no reason to show it to anybody so the Treasury Oversight Committee would review it and then send it on to you. Okay. Okay. So we can change that but that's- I'm just asking the question. Yeah. So typically you bring it to the Treasury of oversight committee first and bring it here. Okay. Okay. Okay. Anybody else have any questions? Okay. How many speakers do we have? 115. I'm going to give a time and I'm going to give a time and I'm If you have a comment to make and someone's already made that comment, you might want to just Dido what he or she said because it's 445 now at 550 I will cut off of the comment. Speakers will get a minute. So we'll give speakers a minute. And if some speakers don't speak, that'll allow more people to speak for one minute and we'll be cutting off comment at 5.50. So that's in 65 minutes. Okay. President Mele, you said that if people have spoken already that they would be allowed to speak again or not. Yes. Okay. If you've spoken already last time, you can speak again. I'm just advising you. It might be good. If we've heard from you before, do let somebody else speak or once again, don't take up a minute just say I support what this person has said gets after a while things do just get repetitive so 65 minutes we've got over 100 speakers let's go let's start and call a number of speakers so they can queue up okay so we'll start with the first speaker please speak state your name you will have one minute to speak Rock of oil E. Hurst, Susan Schall. The podium and then you could adjust the mic. Can you hear me? We're going to call the next three speakers. We want you to be on deck ready to speak after these first three Janet Cobran stand woods body locks Okay. My name is E. I am a resident of Dictus III of Supervisor Lena Tam and a member of the East Bay Democratic Socialists of America. I want to thank Supervisor Carson for bringing forward this letter and for Supervisor Mark Tam and Marquez for your votes to hear that agenda item at the last meeting. Supervisor Howard and Miley, I am furious for your votes to hear that agenda item at the last meeting. Supervisors Howbert and Miley, I am furious at your votes to delay the hearing of this item at the last meeting. I urge all of you to vote in favor of an ethical investment policy that is incorporated into the base policy, and I implore you to add negative screening language as well. I don't want to hear you say that adopt the ethical investment policy. And I expect if any changes to the timing are made, they will be to make this language stronger in the timeline shorter. 35 days has already almost passed since the last meeting and six months to adopt the policy is better than nothing, but far too long for the people living in Palestine. I want to look you each in the eyes as you vote for against this, and I will never forget any of these votes. I will not forget whose voices, whose position, and whose power champion for the bit we can do that is long overdue and I will not forget those who use their power to stand in the way and force Palestinians to endure the swore. Thank you. Berkeley, you're on the line. Berkeley, are you there? You have a minute to speak. Yes, Marguerite resident of Berkeley. I support the idea of positive investment and not divestment. Here's an example. China's ethnic cleansing, first labor, and apartheid towards Tibetans and wiggers, plus widespread human rights violations are well documented. Yet Mr. Carson traveled to China more than once as a county official, to fortify relationships and explore new avenues for cooperation, does directly promoting and increasing unethical investments in China. Well, divesting from China will hurt county's bottom line, but not divesting creates a conflict of interest for the county officials. Mr. Carson is departing, but they are not. Thank you for your time. Great. Hello. Great. Hi. My name is Raga. I'm a fourth year resident in emergency medicine at Highland Hospital and live on Wood Street in District 3. I'm speaking today in support of item 27, the development of an ethical investment policy. As a physician in our county ED, I witness violence every day. Young men of color robbed of life, safety, and limbs by gunshot wounds, overworked humans who do not speak English, whose bodies hurt everywhere all at once and don't know where else to look for respite. The wet socks and skin infections of chronic homelessness. My emotional and psychological attachment to the pain felt by the Palestinian people is intimately tied to my daily clinical practice as a physician. It is the indiscriminate bombing and disruption of Palestinian lives, homes, and ways of being that makes the symmetric displacement and degradation of certain kinds of bodies in our community here in Oakland possible. By naming this, by seeing it, we make a commitment to the deeper, more invisible machinations that make poverty, pain, and pulselessness possible. Without nodding toward these deeper systems and the sublime interconnectedness on Earth today, meaningful change is impossible. To speak to a Marx today about divestment and negative versus positive screening, I'd like to echo the statement and concept that such a policy should be dynamic and should be prepared to respond to the world as it changes around us. I would also argue that certain principles are timeless and should be timeless. We should not invest in military arms used against vulnerable persons. We should not invest in companies that poison local environments. We should not invest in companies that do not scrutinize their financial relationships with apartheid regimes. This requires sophistication and conversation, but also lands on principles that I know could be called common ground for this community and the sport. I absolutely refute the idea that there is gray area when it comes to investing in caterpillars financial policies and ties. Lastly, it gives me unending pride. We've got a policy. We're working out of the health system. We've got 700 signatures. Your work on this will help us with the work that we're doing in the health system. And thank you for your time. Hannah, you're on the line. Good afternoon, supervisors. My name is Hannah. I'm an Alameda County resident living in Alvin and I'm a mother of a public school child. I'm here asking you to reject this proposal. It is clear that this proposal is a thinly veiled attempt to target Israel specifically, the only Jewish country in the world, and the only country in the Middle East in which Jews, Muslims, and Christians coexist, which is what you said you strove for. The introduction of the supervisor himself makes it clear that this is about Israel. I would encourage this board to look at the totality of voters, including those who aren't available to join this meeting during a work day. You say that you want to align investment decisions with the values of our Alameda County, while our Alameda County voters have time and again rejected these kind of device of politics. Local politicians from the county to the state level who have engaged in the cyber performative identity politics have been overwhelmingly voted out of office and moderate voices have won. Please represent the county and reject this proposal. We'll go to the overflow room. We have a parents. You have. Hi, my name is Caris. I live in Berkeley. I'm a constituent of the college chemistry and a member of the UAW. I'm speaking in support of item 51 and the efforts to develop an ethical investment policy. Given the short amount of time, I think it's important that we think about who we are as people and who we want to look back on when this is over. We often want to believe that if we were alive during slavery or during Holocaust, that we would have been on the right side of history, we are showing ourselves in this moment what we would be doing if we were alive. And I think it's really important that we just take that to heart and do something that we can honestly be proud of when this all settles. Thank you. Hi, Ashallam. My name is Dottie and I will say that many of us are scared to speak because we feel like we might be in informed or uninformed on this topic. Like Mr. Carson here, I went to the Middle East, I spent three months in the West Bank, June, July and August of this year. And during that time, not only did I see immense brutalization of Palestinian people, but I saw 17 homes demolished, not only using caterpillar bulldozers, but Hyundai and Volvo as well. So to speak on when does it stop, we divest in all forms always. This is not only affect Palestinians, although that is my main focus, of course, but this affects Americans. We spoke about Rachel Corey earlier in here who was murdered by the I Israeli forces using a caterpillar vehicle. But also, Aishnor Agu was shot dead just a few months ago. And these are things are all done using American products. I saw with my eyes. Thank you. Paula, you're on the line. Is that me? Yes, it is. Yes. Hi. My name is Trish Monroe. I'm a resident of Livermore, where I served as council member from 2018 to 2022. In that role, I came to understand the critical role of Board of Supervisors in providing health, human services, and other resources across the county. The first responsibility of any governmental body is to ensure fiscal stability in order to take care of its residents. The energy put into Supervisor Carson's flawed proposal for a new ethical investment policy would be better put into improving those hospital schools and housing here. It is also clear from the words of Supervisor Carson in many speakers that this proposal is nothing more than an attempt to continue the double-standarding, delegitimization, and demonization that is the essence of anti-zionism as anti-semitism. I urge you to reject it. Thank you. Overflow room. Peter, do you have one minute to speak? Well, Board of Supervisors, my name is Natter Corey. I'm a resident of O. I'm here to speak about item 51. Everyone in both of these rooms does business in some paper fashion. And it's we all have a choice of which direction to move forward. Some of us have lost a lot of a lot of our quote-unquote investments or our clients or our business because we took a stand. And we also have gained tremendous amount of support and community by our beliefs. And so I'm asking you, you have a choice of which way we want to take the world. Do you want to take it more towards militarism and supporting the US as a settler colonial imperialist entity? Or do you want to support treating the rest of the world like they deserve to be treated? Don Saran, David Shorn, hopes, Jonathan Mincer. My name is Janet Cobrin and I live in District 3. Palestinians continue to be genocided at the hands of Israel with US support as we speak. Let me remind you that the ICJ is built into the UN charter. A treaty to wish the US is a signatory based on the supremacy clause in Article 6 of the US Constitution. It is not OK for the US or other governing bodies like this one to thumb its nose at treaties the US has ratified. In January, the ICJ found that Israel has been conducting a plausible case of genocide. And the US and this board of supervisors are obligated to take measures to present such a crime. Adopting supervisor Carson's recommendations to implement an ethical investment policy is a way to do just that. Vote yes on 51. Free Gaza, free Palestine. the next . . . . . . . . . . . . . Hi, can you hear me? We can hear you. Thank you. My name is Sima Bother, and I want to thank Treasure Hank Levy for his leadership in divesting from the Alameda County Funds from Caterpillar Company that's complicit in the destruction of Palestinian homes and lives. Caterpillar's bulldovers are used to perpetuate genocide and apartheid. And Alameda County should not be complicit in these human rights violations. I urge you to go further and ensure that all county investments align with our values. Instead of funding companies profiting from violence abroad, we should invest those dollars in critical local needs, such as housing, healthcare, and homeless solutions. Let's use our resources to lift our community and uphold human rights at home and abroad. Thank you. Conference Center. Thank you. Mr. Speake. Hi. My name is Sarah Zabahar. I live in District 5 and I'm a constituent of Supervisor Carson. I'm a proud anti-signist you and a member of SEIU-1021. I want to thank Supervisors, Hank Levian Carson. I'm speaking in support of Item 51 and the efforts to develop an ethical and a member of SEIU-1021. Wanna thank supervisors, Hank Levy and Carson. I'm speaking in support of Item 51 and the efforts to develop an ethical investment policy. I work in our public libraries as a library and city worker. I cannot support our county being invested in companies like Caterpillar, Cisco, and Toyota companies that support the defamation of Palestinian communities, including city services like libraries. I'm so happy to hear that that process has begun. Investing away from these companies that have a history of supporting a brutal genocides and supporting the climate crisis make me feel safer as a member of the community and as a Jew. When we continue to be invested in these companies, this sends a message to our community that we don't support them and their families and that we can go and genocide. We can be a leader today with this vote, vote in favor of item 51. Thanks, appreciate it. My name is David. I am a resident of Alameda County and a proud Jew. For the last 14 months, I felt unwelcome by many of my neighbors, with whom I had experienced no problems, prior to the disgusting attacks on October 7, 2023. It was painful enough to learn about what had happened halfway across the world, that these Alameda County neighbors felt the need to rub salt in the wound has made me question the decision to live here. There are so many conflicts all over the world. Why is there an obsession with this one? There are also so many problems that Alameda County should be focused on. Why can't we work on making our cities safer? There's violence right here in Oakland. How about we fix that before we judge complicated conflicts in places that the overwhelming majority of Alameda County residents have never stepped foot in? The concept of ethical investment is fine. The problem is that this is not about guns and tobacco and human trafficking. It's a blatant attempt to divest from Israel, never other countries. I'm disappointed that we are even here today to talk about this when every one of us could actually be doing good in our community and the phone. You're on the line. Can you hear me? We can hear you. Okay, very good. Dear honorable supervisors, last night I attended a swearing in ceremony for elected officials. What I heard was the oath of office. The affirmation to protect and defend the United States against all enemies both foreign and domestic. All of you took that oath including you Henry Miller. I respectfully remind you that Israel is the only ally that the United States has in the region, and that Hamas is a designated terrorist group. Any attempt to weaken Israel will weaken can barely get tax bills out. Conference center. On you have women's. My name is Dawn and I'm a proud open resident of District 2. And I'm here to speak because I want people to hear and to be mindful of unintended consequences. Since, hate is its own side, and I understand as a black person feeling fear for my family. And since what's happened in the world, I know that there is terrible graffiti around the lake. The menorah was destroyed last year during Hanukkah. And I know friends of mine who are identifiably Jewish because of Sharon Kippah have been confronted just for being who they are so I want people to hear that. Thank you. I'm going to go to the next meeting. Good afternoon. My name is Jonathan Mincer. I'm a resident of Oakland. I serve a senior director of government affairs for JCRC Bay area. The largest collective voice of Bay area Jews representing 65 organizations and an estimated 90,000 Jewish residents. Stop for a second. I would like for everyone to be respectful of all speakers. I mean I know this is a very emotional situation. We're not trying to hit one community against another committee community. What we're looking to do is develop a policy that's balanced and focused on maybe the direction that the treasurer has suggested. So it really asks people to be respectful of all speakers because you want those speakers to be respectful of you. So if you would start over please and please be respectful. Thank you. Thank you, President Meile. As I was saying good afternoon, my name is Jonathan Mincer. I'm a resident of Oakland. I serve a senior director of government affairs for JCRC Bay Area. We are the largest collective voice of Bay Area Jews representing 65 organizations and an estimated 90,000 Jewish residents in Alameda County. Today I'm asking you to reject the currently proposed process and consider a new way forward. There is certainly merit as was discussed earlier to having a nuanced policy discussion about which industries the county should invest in for purposes of ensuring safety, liquidity, and future income of our assets, but it is clear that it's not the debate we're having today. Rather, this meeting is being used as a public forum to make performative ask and complain about specific companies for a range of political reasons, including alleged connections to the Middle East. So the question I'm asking you is why? Why are we considering this topic now and in this manner, especially with the range of policy issues that we face? Hopefully it's not to burden the Jewish community to distract from the other issues we're seeing here. Thank you. Carla, you're on the line. Yes, my name is Carla Schick, and I'm from District 5. As a Jewish American and retired teacher, I am grateful to the members of the Board of Supervisors for putting forth this policy. As a teacher, I was often admonished that students learned by what we do, not simply by what we say. For us now, it is not sufficient to say we oppose genocide. We must take concrete action to implement our vision for an equitable and just world. As a Jew, I know there are multiple Jewish narratives. Being an anti-Zionist and criticizing Israel are not the same as anti-Semitism. Stopping genocide and forced removal of people using US weapons is not anti-Semitic. I was in Gaza in 1985 and Palestinian homes were already being bulldozed by U.S. made tractors. As a Jew, I was raised to stand for justice. I am by on-harified by the ongoing genocide. We must stop this genocide now. Not tomorrow is too late. Conference center. Hello. Hi, my name is Marcelo. I'm a resident of Berkeley, board and Berkeley. I'm here to urge the board to adopt the ethical investment policy item 51. Human rights screening and late, sorry, human rights screening and late sorry human rights screening language in order to prohibit future investment and companies that are complicit in human rights abuses such as genocide and apartheid. Public funds should not be invested in companies that are our communities by participating in enabling or profiting from war and military occupation genocide and apartheid, labor exploitation and systematic poverty, mass incarceration and prison labor, border and policy, militarization, mass surveillance and environmental or climate destruction. I also just want to say, I am Jewish. Israel is not Jewish. It cannot be conflated with that. Israel is a policy. For real. Fuck Israel. As a Jew who cares about Judaism, they do not adhere to the Torah or any Jewish values. And this isn't even about that specifically. We should be ethical in our investment policies. Thank you. Ty Gregory, Corinne Stilller, SEMA Badar. Good evening, supervisors. Thank you for this opportunity to speak. Thank you, supervisor Carson, for putting forth this proposal. Thank you, Treasurer Levy, for your words, and for your openness to do something about this particular issue. I'm just going to read a poem. It's a poem by a poet called M. Barry. It's called Because of Us. This morning I learned the English word, Gaws, finally woven medical cloth, comes from the Arabic word, or Gaza, because gaisons have been skilled weavers for centuries. I wondered then how many of our wounds have been dressed because of them and how many of theirs have been left open because of us. I'm a health care worker. I work for the Department of Public Health in San Francisco. I also work at the Native American Health Center here in Oakland. I live in District 4 Native American Health Center here in Oakland. I live in District 4 and my heart breaks with what is happening in Palestine. On our dime, this is our chance to do something different. Long live Palestine. George, you're on the line? Yes, my name is Susan Harmon and I want to thank Hank for taking the first step toward justice in Palestine. I'm done. So once again, we have a lot of speakers and we have a limited time. So if people could keep down the policy and the demonstrations, we could get a more speaker. So please try to be respectful because I'm sure a lot of people want to speak. So keep going. Desmond. Oh, yeah. Go ahead. This one. Go ahead at the conference center. Desmond. Board of supervisors, my name is Desmond Jeffries. I am a D6, 88 delegate, and I'm a resident here in Oakland. I wrote a different more detailed thought and speech, but I always changed it and I want to keep it simple. What if I told you you could change the world? What if we can have peace and have justice and it all started with you and it started with me. It started with we. We can have peace. It starts with all of us, how we spend our money on the organization's that we fund, that you may fund. Everything starts locally supporting funding organizations that do not do no harm. We stand by the ethical investment policy and this is how we change the world from here. The ethical investment policy is how we vote with our feet and how we stand for justice for free Palestine, free Sudan, free Congo and all the other in the Thank you. Board of Supervisors. I am a freemant resident and also a resident of District One. I am asking you to vote no and consider a different process for considering a policy on ethical investment. This is a serious issue and ethical investment is worth considering. However, this is clearly aimed at litigating the conflict in the Middle East. The way that this was introduced shows that. Our county is facing great challenges. I believe it is a great mistake to push through a decision without time for full consideration and fully hearing from the community. Please vote no and consider another process. Thank you. I'm here to urge you to make the right move to support ethical investments in this horrific moment in human history where genocide is being live streamed and public dollars continue to support it. I've worked for the last couple of years to support the public and investments in this horrific moment in human history where genocide is being live streamed and public dollars continue to support it. I've worked for community health centers here in Alameda County serving our unhoused neighbors for more than 10 years. As my colleagues and I worked long hours and struggled to secure even the most basic resources for unhoused community members and loved ones, Our county has been investing in companies contributing to occupation, apartheid and genocide. I implore you to do everything in your collective power to divest from death, divest from occupation, divest from genocide. As a Jew, we're often taught never again, and I'm here to say that I and so many other Jews are saying loud and clear, never again is now. Thank you. Thank you. Conference center. Conference center. Good to see you. Oh, I'm Donna Arkey. I live in district five. And there is a country that in the past Jews, Muslims, and Christians lived peacefully. It's Palestine. There's a country now where Jews, Muslims, and Christians lived peacefully. Palestine. And there's a country that Jews, Muslims, and Christians will live peacefully Palestine. Israel is a Western imperialist entity exploiting the trauma of a multiracial, multiethnic people. Because when you think about it, the process of stellar colonialism will always be violent. Israel is a state using lots of propaganda, lots of affect, it's so painful to watch people being manipulated into killing their own kin. When you learn about race in Israel, you learn that sometimes the people who are ideas soldiers are the same with the city as the people they're killing. And it really makes you not think about them. Thank you. Hello, I'm Zaina. I am a Palestinian Christian from the West Bank, living in district four. But I'm not gonna speak today as a Palestinian Christian. I'm actually just gonna speak as an American citizen. I don't want my tax dollars going to foreign entities that are causing mayhem and destruction period. I think it is a waste of our resources and to be honest our homies at JCRC are saying exactly the same thing. We want to invest here in Alameda County. We're saying the same exact thing. So I know that JCRC is in some of your back pocket and that's okay. I know you can salt with them with everything But when you guys are also talking about opening up the forum to hear public comment and this public comment going to be allowed When talking to the treasure to develop this ethical investment policy. Guess what the public is already here So you as public workers who we voted for it's your turn to do your job. And I agree with the first person who said, I want to look in every each and every one of your eyes today and watch you vote yes on item 51. Thank you. Allyson, you're on the line. Hello, my name is Allison Hamburg and I'm born and raised in Oakland. I'm the granddaughter of survivors of the Nazi Holocaust. And as a Jewish American, it is my moral responsibility to stand for humanity. And I refuse to be a bystander to the genocide in Gaza. Alameda County has the opportunity to ensure that its investments are aligned with its stated values of justice and equality for all. I support the county in developing an ethical investment policy that keeps our public dollars from contributing to companies that participate in, enable or profit from war and military occupation. Thank you. Overflow. I'm going to call three people from overflow, Elliott first, then Toby, and then YAR. Elliott, you see. Good evening Board of Supervisors. My name is Elliott Bernadale Hewey. I am speaking in favor of Alameda County adopting an ethical investment policy. I've been a resident open for over 30 years and raised my family in District 4 of our county. I am also a health care provider who has served and care for residents throughout Alameda County during these 30 plus years. One of the most important concerns and questions I have for any of my patients as they are being discharged, will you be safe if you return to your home? As you all know, God's and Palatine is not a safe place to live. I encourage you, our Board of Supervisors, to be at the forefront of creating a ripple effect in our county to divest any of our county funds that are tied to supporting Israel, the capacity to continue its ongoing genocide. I used to wear a button that said, think globally, act locally. So please, think globally and act locally, and adopt an ethical investment policy. Live into the first day to core value of our county, which states integrity, honesty, and foster respect, fostering mutual trust. The National Investment Policy will enable our county to live into this. integrity, honesty and boss respect, boss spring, mutual trust. The council of Western policy will in the A-Borke County to live into this. Think we. Next up, the art after Toby, please line up. My name is Toby. Am I being heard? And I come from El Serito. I raised my first daughter the early years in Oakland, California. I still consider Oakland one of my dear homes. I commend the county for being an early, presser of a ceasefire resolution. We in Elcerito are shamefully still fighting for a ceasefire resolution else we don't want. And I ask you today to think about the children of Gaza that time I'm here for the people of Palestine in general but I'm here for especially the children. A horrible milestone was reached this last week and that is that Gaza is considered the place in the world that has the highest per capita cases of childhood amputations. This is shameful that we, as citizens, have to come to our county for a supervisor meetings, our city council meetings, and ask for our government to do the right thing. Please be planning for me. I look at that. Thank you. Can you hear me? Yes. I'm Yark Cohen. I live in district five. I'm here to thank Treasurer Levy for his thoughtful divestment policy and urge the supervisors to adopt it as an ongoing policy. Thousands of Palestinians live in our county and many showed up at Lake Merit to support us their Jewish neighbor in Burrow was attacked last year. The movement for Palestine is against all forms of racism. The question is whether we will show up in turn against anti-Palestinian racism. As a Jew, I'm not here because I hate my Israeli family friends and comrades. I'm here because I love my people and I hate that evil illegitimate government which claims to commit atrocities in our names. There are Israelis who are trying themselves to boycott their own government, so I don't see why we can't boycott their government, which should not exist. Thank you. My name is Helen Finkelstein. I am Jewish and I live in Berkeley. And I just want to point out one thing. A lot of the discussion here concerns our moral requirement to oppose exploitation and climate crisis and war and human and war crimes and genocide. And we do have those moral obligations. But there are also practical things. Those things impact us here in our community, labor exploitation clearly, the climate crisis, that's something that we will, we have to deal with. And genocide in other countries is also something that affects us here because history teaches us. But what goes around comes around. We all know this. So I hope that this resolution will be passed. Applause. Now, Michael Lyon, Berkeley, think about the companies that are involved in the genocide and the occupation, making millions and billions on destroying homes, on bombing kids, on amputating them, on burning them alive, on starving them to death. These companies that make billions off this have no right to exist. Someday we will be able to stop them. It won't be allowed. But in the meantime, at least stop investing in them. And put the money into what's really needed. Housing, medical care, jobs, right here. Thank you. Applause. Hi, my name is Pat Schwinn. I live in Oakland, and I want to say that I support 51, and I especially like the adm amendments, if you will, that treasurer Levy suggested. I believe this policy must be completely transparent, which it appears our current policy already is. I believe the policy should be comprehensive with general guidelines. While it can address the issue in the Middle East now, this shouldn't be specifically about the current Israel, a mosque conflict. It should be general enough to cover all similar conflicts and other moral issues that will face going forward. I believe focusing on the positive criteria, but allowing negative screening or divestiture as needed to accomplish the policy goals is appropriate course. Thank you. Josh, when you're on the line. Go Smith, you're on the line. Hi, can you hear me? We can hear you. Hi, my name is Jocelyn. I am a Jewish American of conscience and a member of SDIU-1021 and I'm on the board of my chapter in Berkeley. I want to thank Treasure Levy for all of your thoughtful words and especially for taking a proactive step to removing lessons from Caterpillar who murdered my union sibling from SEIU, Rachel Kori, and is complicit in that. I do think respectfully that the amendments I'm hoping that you all will really reconsider those carefully. Every day we can see how crucial this timeline is and so I'm hoping that you know with that spirit of really expediting things to treasure and leave me that you consider expediting this is what which is we know we need to do. Thank you so much. Mara, you're on the line. Yes, hello. My name is Mary Schechter. I live in Oakland in District 5 and I support the proposal being discussed. Amnesty International just released a 300-page report detailing and naming Israel's genocide of Palestinians. I'm Jewish. I want to say trying to stop U.S. support for this genocide is not anti-Semitic. I find it much more anti-Semitic when people try to conflate all Jews with this nation-state, an ethno state that's committing some of the worst atrocities of our time. I live right by Lake Merit, a couple blocks from Lake Merit. Most graffiti I see is not anti-Semitic. I want to speak to this saying that my Jewish spouse organized a multi-faith, multi-ethnic, multi-racial response last year when the menorah was damaged. We had a beautiful ceremony that evening and we affirmed that our safety comes from solidarity, not through pressing or dehumanizing other people. So as a local Joa Masking to adopt this proposal, I support negative screenings or divestment policies being fully incorporated into the county's investment policy to make sure we're more fully in alignment with our values of equality and justice. Thank you. We have the next three from the conference center. Have a few more speakers and that's it at the conference center. The need is first and Johnny is last. Thank you, Treasures and Supervisors for your openness and courage in bringing forward this policy. I'm a resident of Oakland and also work in the city of Oakland. I want to say because our investments use my tax dollars, this is a local issue for me. Respectfully, I believe we can have a divestment policy because just within any decision requires us to not only say yes to something, but also to say no to something else, particularly with a changing political dynamics in this country and in the rest of the world due to our actions, the moment requires us to be clear about our values. Drawing a line in the sand requires us to say no and saying no is a good thing. If in a few years from now there are new issues we should take a moment to reflect and adapt. This is being responsive, this is what collective responsibility should look like. Let's make a choice to support life and not death, support freedom and not oppression. There's nothing to lose and so much to gain. Vote yes, no amendments. Last speaker at the conference center. Toby, Jody, that was me. Well, that was you. Did you speak? Did you speak? No, would you like to speak? Yes. Or I can speak. Did you mean my name is not OEA? I am a spiritual activist. And when I was a little girl, I used to hear things on the news. And I would go to bed crying every night and praying because it was that empathy within me. I could feel it. Even they were across the world, all over the world, I could feel it when I hear it. That's why you feel it when I hear it. That's why you feel it. Because there's only one energy and that energy is divine love and light. Harmonizing, equalizing, purifying and healing divine order and maintaining divine order. We are all love. There's only one energy. We are all one spiritual brothers and sisters. Even the cockroach. All God. All one energy. Even this. God. God is the essence of all manifestation. We are all love light. Harmonize it. Equalize it. You're by it. Feel it lands. We feel everyone. Thank you. Conference room, please confirm that's your last speaker. That was the last speaker. Thank you. OK, good evening. My name is Nora Corey. I'm a longtime resident of district three in Oakland and I grew up in district four in In Miley's district in Castro Valley where as a little high schooler our white friends would tell us about how KKK Members would hand them pamphlets as they came onto campus and our Muslim Palestinian neighbors had an upside down cross burned on their lawn. This was in the 80s. The same right-wing nationalist and Zionist violence has been allowed to grow to the extent that it's been unchecked for decades. Corporations like Caterpillar have had a full impunity to commit their crimes and have profited from this violence that we're seeing today locally and internationally. Each day in the Middle East, red line is crossed by Israeli violence and civilians, which includes some of the most horrific crimes against humanity, yet the U.S. refuses to trigger laws withholding military support. We are here to support you today to do the right thing and invest in our community and our people and our planet. Thank you. Nida Lufth, oh why I'm Shamsa Rafa and then Raghavji. And I am a Palestinian district for tax paying Alameda County resident. We must stand by our values as residents of this county and so introducing an investment policy that divests from genocide, destruction and death should not be controversial. We must align not only with our own values, but those of the rest of the entire world who are calling for boycott divestments and sanction of this apartheid project. At a time where our communities find themselves faced with a government that will strip away all our civil rights, Alameda County should join the call to uphold human rights for all. Please approve the development of an ethical investment policy for our county. We need to commit to divestment from the river to the sea. Palestine will be free. Naomi Victoria V. Okay. Hi, I'm Naomi. I live in Kustervalley in District 4, and yours my speech. The great gauge-errish liberation fighter Leslie Feinberg once said that in the late 1960s before the rainbow, their pride flag was North Vietnam's. It is in that lineage as a trans woman and a socialist and anti-Zionist Jew that I speak to you all in international solidarity with my siblings in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Haiti, and all the oppressed masses on this earth yearning and fighting for liberation. A Holocaust is being waged in Gaza by co-conspirators American and Israeli. It is US ports, US factories, US Congress, a collaboration on all levels state and private and particularly here in the both place of the military and industrial complex that enable the sadistic murder and suffocation of an entire people. I think to finish the whole thing, but thank you, Carson, for introducing it. Please pass this resolution. Hi. My name is Victoria. I live in Pleasanton. I'm a constituent of Supervisor Miley and a member of the East Bay Democratic Socialist of America. I would like to start off by some previous speakers before me, thinking the treasure for already divesting us from Caterpillar. I think that's fantastic news. I mean, caterpillar, the equipment is gifted through the US government's like a military weapons program. They often are equipped with weapons. And like, you don't have to just take this from me. Credible human rights organizations, and the international human rights watch, they all agree that they're in violation of international law. I think this is fantastic, but I hope we don't stop here. I hope we go all the way and pass this ethical divestment policy or investment policy to make sure that we don't support genocide in the future. Some people have called this divisive. I don't think there's anything divisive about making sure our money is not actively supporting genocide. Some people have called this, they call this performative. But I mean, there's nothing new about this. We did this with South Africa before this party and South African approach. I'm not around anymore. The pressure generated by this is real. I'm going to ask you to ask your question. I'm going to ask your question. Van J or let J. Jeremy Bresl. I lean your on the line. I lean please a mute your mic. This is your last opportunity to speak. Yes. This is I lean Frankl. I am in I'm going to go ahead and move on to the next slide. This is your last opportunity to speak. Yes. This is Eileen Frankl. I am in district five. And I appreciate the amendments that Treasure Levy has suggested. And while I wanted this resolution or proposed direction to be withdrawn and tabled. If it has to be authorized, I hope that you will also authorize and approve the two amendments by Mr. Levy. Thank you. Laura, you're on the line. Hi, my name is Laura and I am an Oakland resident. I understand the desire to be mindful of investing in companies with politics that align with yours, but right now it feels performative and antagonistic toward the Jewish community with an attachment to Israel, which is over 90% of Jews overall. There's a huge amount of ignorance and medieval blood libel in the room tonight, which is extremely painful, but I don't want to focus on that. I want to focus on the fact that your primary responsibility is to take care of your citizens. Using all the resources you have at your disposal to help make our lives better here at home. We can't afford to reduce Alameda County's access to those resources right now. The elephant in the room and the board's initial discussion is that Alameda County is already implementing cost-saving measures and Oakland is facing layoffs due to $130 million budget deficit. We don't have the luxury to pick and choose where Alameda County's resources come from at this point in time. It's unfair to the workers who are having their hours cut and to the public who already can't access certain services due to budget constraints. And now we're looking at reducing revenue even further. I get going to feel good about where money is coming from, but we can't risk well being of Alameda County for that. Thank you. Cheryl, you're on the line. Thank you. So, this isn't divisive. This is reality. We're going through a genocide. People are dying. We can't, we have to stop investing in murdering children, murdering women, murdering men, murdering Palestinians. We have to divest. We have to. This is the time. People are dying. This is the time to change. And Supervisor Carson, I am so proud of you for putting this forward. Thank you very much. And thank you, Treasurer Hank, for your support on this forward. Thank you very much. And thank you, Treasure Hank, for your support on this item. And thank you to all the people that are in the audience tonight who have spoken up. And it's interesting that the one JCRC representative gets 20 extra seconds. Can I have 21 extra seconds, too, please? That wasn't fair. Don't listen to the Zionist. Hello, supervisors. My name is Arla. I am a resident of Newark and a member leader of SCIU 1021. By the way, labor supports Palestine and is on Palestine side for whoever has any doubt of that. I'm here in the board of item 51. Thank you, Treasurer Levy for your thoughtful input, which included the United Nations standards of ethical investment, as well as an apartheid nation state. I think we should consider negative screening in this ethical investment plan. Our county should reject crimes against humanity. People in this county want ethical investments and to know their politicians are making ethical decisions on their behalf. We cannot fund our county at the cost of violence to others abroad which impacts their relatives who are residents of this county and my friends. If you vote no today you have told your constituents you are untrustworthy and cruel. You have also voted to continue the unconventional complicity with human rights violations, such as those in the current genocide in Palestine. Given these human rights violations and genocide, I ask the treasure to be considered the original 35-day timeline. Thank you. Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo! Woo! Hello'm one of the leaders of East Beak for Seas Byer now, a community-based coalition centered in El Mita County. I'm here to show support for the county's divestment from war crimes and human rights abuses. Over the last year we have seen horrific massacres committed by the Israeli army against the Palestinian people in real time. What has deeply disturbed me has been the way that these massacres mere so precisely those of the Holocaust. I grew up learning about the Holocaust, the research, my school, and from my Pradababja, Ipradjajo, my great-grandparents who were both Holocaust survivors. My Pradababas, 97, I've been speaking with her throughout the past year about what's been happening in Palestine. I've been telling her about how people are being killed on mass and how women and children are seen as collateral damage by the Israeli and United States governments. One of the most heartbreaking things she's told me this year is that she doesn't believe the world will ever know peace. it happen. People built the weapons, built the camps, they transported the tanks, the firework, the paperwork, everything went to it, and all of these tools that they use, whether it's bulldozers, drone tech, weaponry, all of these things are needed to actually carry this genocide out. And these things can be taken away, right? We just need to stop giving these companies the money to be able to carry out this genocide, and all of the countries that commit these fantasies in the future, not just Israel. This is forever. No more. Never again. Woo! Woo! Woo! Thank you for hearing from your constituents on this important issue. My name is Jeremy Russell. I'm a resident of Alameda County. I live in the city of Alameda and I too work for JCRC. I believe we can all agree that there is merit to the concept of an ethical investment policy. However, I have deep concerns about the way that this is being considered and the timing overall. Not even the small sampling of people speaking at this meeting can agree to a single version of what ethical investment can or should be. Notice there are no reason to believe that this is a representative sampling of the community. Also the proposal calls for the treasurer to have a plan ready to review in a matter of just 35 days. We have heard from him that he needs more time. No less than 90 days. It strikes me as a rushed and likely result in policies that triple for pitfalls create backlash, trigger unnecessary complications. And at a time when the county's facial financial issues such rush does not seem prudent. Based on what I've heard today, we already have a policy in place and I don't see the urgency. For these reasons, I strongly encourage the Board to reconsider today's action. I'm sorry, but you can't proceed. Your time is up. Thank you. Caller, you're on the line. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. I'm a student. against me and my family and my ancestor homeland. Okay. What other countries would it be acceptable to say, that's them, to the end of this meeting? And the board would be okay with it. Mexico, China, Uganda, heat against someone based on their national origin is a federal crime. Saying that you hate a country, that saying that you hate someone based on their national origin is a crime, saying that you hate a country is a crime. You should be ashamed to allow this head speech to be used in this meeting. If you wonder why there are so few Jews in this really in this meeting in person, it's because this kind of hate intimidation tactics that are constantly being used against us, I implore the board of supervisors to hold people in its chamber to an even standard so that there's no chilling of speech. And I implore you to vote no on this measure. Thank you. So once again, I let everyone know you know we want to respect everyone's freedom of speech just because someone has profanity doesn't have something to be agree with it. I'm not running the meeting unless I think it's out of order. I will let people speak their mind. But please continue to be respectful. But if I do think it's out of order, I will call somebody on it. So just want that speaker to know. I heard what that person said earlier, but I just let it go. Josh, you're on the line. My name is Joshua Beth. Thank you to Keith Carson for bringing forward this resolution and to Henry Levy for selling off caterpillar investments. As a Jewish-American grandchild of refugees and an Oakland property taxpayer, I support an ethical investment policy integrated as soon as possible into the base county investment policy. I strongly support divestment from any company engaged in severe human rights violations, war crimes, apartheid, and crimes against humanity. As a Jewish American, I state clearly that divesting from apartheid and genocide is not anti-Semitic. In fact, Judaism tasks us with pursuing social justice and healing the world. A core value of our faith is that none of us are free until all of us are free. Please vote yes on item 51 and invest our tax dollars ethically in support of human life, human rights and the health of our planet. Thank you. Caller, you're on the line. Please unmute your mic. Lessa, you're on the line. L-I-E-S-A, are you there? Lisa Mietermike. A, are you there? Please unmute your mic. Hello? Go ahead, you're on the line. Okay, thank you. Hello, my name is Michii and I live in San Francisco. I'm a constituent of Supervisor and Guardian and a member of East Bay DSA. I'm speaking in support of item 51 and the efforts to develop an ethical investment policy and the investment is a highly local issue as it involves removing our tax dollars from industries and companies that contradict our values. While increasing number of cities, prohibit investments in industries and companies that profit off of genocide and apartheid, Alameda County's investment policy contains no such guardrails. As a result, tens of millions of our tax dollars are invested in companies that facilitate and profit from the greatest and most agreeable human rights abuses. I am Florida Board of Supervisors to supervisors to vote yesterday on supervisor Carson's letter to direct the county treasurer to develop an ethical investment policy that would end his investments and assure we can never invest in such companies again without delay. Thank you for your time. Sarah Weaver, Eleanor Levine, Bobbi Haney. Good evening, good afternoon. My name is Lara Kiswani. I'm the Executive Director of the Arab Resource and Organizing Center. I am a Palestinian daughter of refugees. I was born and raised in Alameda County Supervisor Tam on the resident of your district. Ethical investment should be a common sense issue. In a time that we are facing an incoming fascist government who plans on using federal resources to strip the rights of the most vulnerable in our community. In a time where we are now facing an ongoing genocide facilitated by the federal resources of this government. At a time when we may have limited power to control what our federal government does, as decision makers your job is to do what you can with the power you have to be accountable to your constituents, the majority of whom are asking you to support this. If you are a person with a moral compass, there should be a common sense issue. Ethical investment is ethical for those who oppose it. That speaks for itself. Thank you. So I think we have time for one more speaker and then we're at 550. Rachel Vanderwooth. Jonathan. Max Kaji Tatiana Brown. I am a resident of Oakland, a voting resident of Oakland. I am the granddaughter of Holocaust survivors, and it took me until I was 21 years old to know that I could be Jewish and anti-Zionist. I think this is an important thing to think about because a lot of what we've watched play out tonight in this discussion has been indicative of a sea change that's happening because more and more Jewish people are becoming aware of how we are being used as a prop to hold up settler colonialism and an incredibly racist government and an apartheid state. And we feel very passionately about it. And so when we talk about the importance of divestment, thank you very much, Mr. Leverie, thank you very much, Supervisor Carson, for bringing this forward. We talk about the importance of divestment. What we're doing is not just about thinking about a slippery slope. It's about considering what message we are sending about what we care about in this world and who we are going to let puppet us. I think it is incredibly important that we look at our opportunity here to say that we as a government are not willing to allow pressure to force us to perpetuate systems of oppression that have existed. Thank you very much, sorry, for the stress, but thank you very much for letting me speak. All right, well, we've heard from a lot of speakers this evening on this matter. So I'm going to bring it back to the board at this point in time to see if there any board comments. If there's a motion and we'll go from there. Supervisor Carson. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Because of the fact that in 10 minutes we have another scheduled meeting with the Alameda County Health System That we also have a responsibility in oversight. I don't want to get right to it I'm gonna ask that we direct the treasure to develop an ethical pile and investment policy in Consultation with the community stakeholders and to return to the board You asked for what? 90 days of creative policy and 180 days of creative plan. Okay, and I'll incorporate that into this motion. Recognizing that every single day people are dying. Every single day this conflict is getting larger and larger and including other areas. This is an investment policy that may go at some point in time beyond just what people think is the area we're focused on and our overarching responsibility as members of the Board of Supervisors. Because of the continuance that we had the 25-day one that went to from December, whatever date that was, I will incorporate that in 90 day. And then you had another quest which was regarding whether or not it should be part of the investment policy or stand alongside it. And so incorporating both of those giving you that that time frame to come back Is my most in short And I think that in order for us to have something comprehensive we want to make sure that you are given Reasonable time period to do that And even though reasonable is a ticking bomb I want to make sure that we get to a place where we have a policy. On surface, Carson. So are you, because I'm a little confused, are you saying, based on what the treasurer is asking, is this going to be a stand alone policy? Or will it come back as part of the accompanying investment policy? It's not a stand alone policy. Okay. Right. So that's the motion. Okay. Is there a second? I'll second the motion. Yes. Well, it's been moved in a second. All right. Is there any board comments or discussion? So if I was however Hank, you talked about having negative and or positive screening. Is your intention to bring back a policy that includes negative screening? And does this board think that, well, I want to clarify the motion, is the motion made to direct the treasurer to bring back a policy that includes, did you interpret the motion to bring back a policy that includes negative screening. And I would like to say that in my opinion, including negative screening is a matter, I believe that this board should take up each and every time we employ it. We talked about it, it happens very rarely, but when it does, it needs to be implemented. And I don't think we should put that on the backs of our treasurer, but rather it should be on us. And so if you're going to do a policy that's going to live on forever, I believe that we should be clear, is this to be a negative screening or are we going to have a policy that directs that we would initiate that negative screening? I don't know that the motion was that clear on that and I'm not supportive of. We talked about ceasefire a few months ago. We said we would bring it back. We haven't. This seems to be related to getting ceasefire. We haven't done that. But yet we are relitigating cease fire in this policy. And I don't think that's what we were meant to do. And so I'm fine with the policy. I think it's great. I think what Hank laid out earlier about having positive ESG values. Very important. But if we're going to take the step of including negative screening and put that in a policy that lives on forever, I'd rather start with positive ESG value screening. And I hope that's what you bring back. Give us the audible, the option when we decide to, when we decide to take a stance at that level that it would come from us and we're not there yet. We just haven't discussed that. So, policy issue, supportive? We'll talk about, I mean, look, some people have said that we want to step in and stop Israel in their tracks. Other people have said Israel is trying to defend itself. Other people have said this is a proxy war between Syria and Iran and all these other things. We can agree to disagree, guys, that we don't have to be disagreeable. So when we have that discussion, that's above our pay grade right now. I'm all for understanding it more, but to put that on hangs back right now, when this is an investment policy discussion, I think is wrong. So I'm just looking at clarify. Yeah, I respect your position on it, but why don't we just have him come back with the policy? Then we'll know what it says. I agree. So what are you going to do, Hank? I just want to say, I think that's part of what I'm going to come back to you with. I think that's part of what I'm going to come back to you with. I think that that's a good point. I mean, you know, should I, I mean, I don't think I'm the one that should decide this. I think it's you guys should decide this. Should decide negative screening. See you again. I think you're right. So anybody else? I know I'm going to support the motion. I was prepared to support it back when it came before the board and it was continued. Because once again, we're just talking about developing a policy. I've known the treasurer before as a treasurer. And so I do think there's merit to moving this road, and I want to see what's developed as opposed to weighing in on a particular point of view. So I do appreciate the fact that Supervisor Carson's comfortable giving the treasure a bit more time because I do think 35 days was a bit challenging for him. Had we taken it up back in November, we'd be further along, but we didn't. So I'm going to support this. Wait for the treasurer. He's going to run it by the community, many stakeholders, and hopefully we'll get the best of thinking on this. That also recognizes the values. I think we all hold near and dear. So there's no other supervisor when speaking of this, when I have the clerk call the roll. Supervisor Halbert. Hi. Supervisor Mark Hath. Hi. Supervisor Tam. Hi. Supervisor Carson. Yes, and I wanna thank Hank for his overview. Let's see who we take. Yeah. Carson. Yes, and I want to thank Hank for his overview of the presentation. Supervisor Mr. President. Mr. President. Mr. President. Applause Supervisor Carson. Yeah, I know we're about to adjourn. Are we going to adjourn this before we go across the street? I would like to adjourn today's meeting in memory of the three heat-mount youth who lost their life over a week and a half ago. So as we adjourn, I want to adjourn with the memory of these three young lives that were lost as well as the parents and the families that have been affected by it. So we have a moment of silence for the three young people lost their lives. The car accident in P Mont recently. Supervisor Carson asked if we could adjourn in that memory. So if we can have the moment of silence. Okay, the poor supervisors are meeting for December 10th as adjourned. So thank you.