you you you you you you you you you you Is your connective be a zoom right? Can you hear me? Hi, good morning. Yes, I can. Any more? Oh, Brittany? Yes. Can you hear me okay? Can you hear me, Brittany? Hello, can you hear me okay? Hello, do you think you can hear okay. Yes, are they yes? I'm here We're bringing on our Spanish interpreters. Please show by Brittany. You're gonna Do the overview for the For the meeting to tell people which channel and how to do it is that gonna be you? If you'd, sure, I could do it. No problem. You do. I don't know which one from your team will be doing that, but we will need that so that the public will know how to go to the Spanish channel and those that are speaking English will be what to do. OK. No problem. Good morning, everybody. This is Paula. Good morning. So I'm not sure who's doing it, but we need that then. Yes, I can do it myself that is part of the co-hosting. Do you have the this slice? I was hoping that you had it. I have them. Yes, of course, no problem. I will share my screen when the Thank you. Thank you. Of course you're welcome. Thank you. you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you you Testing on two. One, 2. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. Testing 1, 2, 3, 4. I 1, 2, 3, 4. Any year that's the winner? Testing 1, 2, testing 1, 2, 3, 4. Testing 1, 2, 3, 4. Testing 1, 2, 3, 4. Testing 1, 2, 3, 4. Testing 1, 2, 3, 4. Testing 1, 2, 3, 4. 1, 2, 3, 4. I have another one on the side. I can hear you, Claudia. Something's getting interesting. One, two, four, right check. One, two, three, four. That's good. We can hear you testing one, two, three, four, mag number seven. Are you okay? Yep, sounds good. Okay, here we go. Testing. One, two, three, four. One, two, three, four. That's good. All right. I got two mics on. One, two, three, four. I got three mics on. One, two, three, four. Four mics on. One, two, three, four. Four mics on. One, two, three, four. Are we good? Yep. sounds good. Hi this is Paola from ISIS staff and I have the host of the meetings so I can assign interpreters. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. you testing one two one two one two one two Claudio Yes, Sabrina. Go ahead. Sabrina, you're muted. Oh, I'm just letting you know you sound good. Okay, great. We're about to be up and running. Thanks so much for the check. Of course. Hi, this is Paula from ISIS staff. Can I please have the host of the meetings so I can assign interpreters? you Thank you. You're welcome. I'm going to check the interpreters. I'll be in this Spanish book. Mercedes, please. Mm-hmm. Gracias, Brittany. Yes you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. just gave back the host. Thank you so much. I'm sorry. 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 ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask the board to ask next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. I'm going to go to the next room. you you you you you you you you you you you you you Good morning, everyone, and welcome to the Tuesday, January 28th special meeting of our board. Will the clerk please call the roll? Supervisor Marquez, President. Supervisor Tam, excuse. Supervisor Miley. Here. Supervisor Fortenotobas, President Halbert. President, thank you. The Board of Supervisors welcomes everyone to its meetings. We allow in-person and remote observation and participation by members of the public and all of our meetings. We recognize the important and invaluable role of public participation. We reminded that disruptive conduct will not be tolerated. This includes conduct that may occur through public comment. For those attending the meeting who would like to speak on an item on the agenda, please submit a speaker card to the clerk. We also have instructions on how to participate remotely, which the clerk will now go through. Detail instructions are provided in the teleconferencing guidelines. A link to the document is included in today's agenda. If you're joining the meeting, using a computer, use the button at the bottom of your screen to raise your hand to request to speak. When call to speak, please unmute your mic and state your name. If calling in, now star nine to raise your hand to speak. When you're called to speak, the whole school enable you to speak. If you decide not to speak, notify the clerk when your call is unmuted or you may simply hang up and dial back into the meeting. As a reminder, you may always just observe the meeting without participating by clicking on the view now link on the county's web page at acgov.org. When called, you will have two minutes to speak. Please limit your remarks to the time allocated. Public comment will generally alternate between in-person and online speakers as determined by the president of the board and subject to overall time limits. Thank you. Thank you very much. We have also made arrangements for Spanish interpreters for this morning session. Interpreters will now provide instructions on how to participate in the meeting using the interpretation channels. Hi, I am Paula for International Contact, your language host for today. We have Spanish interpreters for this meeting and interpretation channels have been created. One moment while I provide instructions, Agaclique in la esquina con los tres puntitos, seleccione interpretation, Agaclique en el idioma que desea escuchar, español, y opcional para escuchar solo el idioma interpretado haga clic en silenciar audio original. For English participants please go to the English channel go to the world item in the lower part of your screen and select English or EN. If you're using a smartphone click on the three dots and select English. This is very important if you want to hear any interpreted comments in English. A reminder for English speakers is to speak slowly so interpreters can keep up with you. Please keep in mind, keep that in mind. If at any point in this event a Spanish-speaking person has something to present, interpreters will interpret consecutively. So please speak in short phrases and make regular passes so they can interpret. These concludes the multilingual instructions. Thank you. Thank you. And I also would like to note that we will have public comment on closed session items when we go to closed session. We will also have public comment on item number one. It's actually item number. It's listed as number one. Yes. At that time, we'll have public comment taken after the item for public comment on items two through four. That will be taken after the item is called for presentation and discussion. So as we go through other presentations, with that said, I do note that we have a slight change of order, I believe we're going to have the budget and finance updates first. Correct. And then we'll go to the item listed. The session item. Action item. Thank you. CAO, Mary Nishie. So good morning. We wanted to start with an overview about from Washington, BC. We're fortunate to have our federal lobbyists with us today, as you know, they met with board members in department heads yesterday to get a sense of our current issues and priorities. So I wanted to turn it over to Lynn Huck as the principal with CJ Lake to introduce her team and to provide us with an overview of what's happening in Washington as of this morning. Thank you, maybe as of one minute ago. So just stay tuned throughout the scope of this conversation. Linhueke is very pleased to be with you all today. Long time I have the privilege of representing Alameda County for many, many years. I won't share how many, but also I'm extremely fortunate to have just the top notch team that works on this account with John Ascini and Emily Bucket to Silva. So I know that several of you met with with them yesterday and got received some updates. I flew in so that I could address some of the immigration specific policy areas that you may have questions about because that's an expertise of mine as well as the overall implementation of the executive orders and the budget impact we're coming up. So we're going to address it at a very high level but obviously be open and available to try to answer any specific questions you may have. So I will turn it over to Emily to give sort of a high level state of play of where we are and what we're dealing with and then we will go from there. Thanks, Lynn. As Lynn said, I'm Emily DeSol with CJ Legg, been working with the county for a number of years now. And, you know, John and I met with a number of folks yesterday. And we've been talking to people since the election, just on potential impacts, potential impacts to funding, eos that could be coming down, or that did come down on the first day. And we were just talking about it. We are eight days in to this administration and it feels a lot longer. We were talking to you all yesterday, just about concerns related to potential funding cuts. And then late last night, I know several people have already come up to me this morning to talk about this memo related to a funding freeze. And I think we should probably address that first because lots of people have questions. OMB, we've already seen a Q&A that OMB intends to put out. I don't know if it's official yet, but it's been leaked. It does not impact Medicaid. It does not impact SNAP. It does not impact rental assistance. So those are kind of the big things that people were asking us about. Right now the pause is set to go into effect today at 5 p.m. We are urging people if they're still able to get into their portals to do so, to do what you can prior to 5 p.m. Right now, this pause is supposed to last until I believe it's February 10th is what we saw. So that's a couple of weeks. So again, I know you are working with CBOs and others, and we're just urging you for them to go into the portals right now, to go ahead and draw down whatever funds they can prior to 5 p.m. Eastern. And yeah. Sorry for the back of the way. I also wanted to set the stage a little bit for you, which I'm sure was yesterday in sort of the hierarchy. And we see this every transition. I will share this is my seventh. So we've seen a lot, you know, before and work through the process, but to understand that there are several different types of presidential activities, right? There are, there's a presidential action and just as an example, a presidential action is a declaration of emergency, which we saw several of coming out last week. Next to presidential actions, then, are the release of executive orders. And other than federal workforce and federal contracting, the only thing that the executive office can have jurisdiction, those are specific jurisdictions. Other than that, the executive orders are simply directives, instructions, and policy guidance, if you will, to the individual agencies. So nothing happens. A declaration of emergency is significant and allows the imposition of several additional authorities. But an executive order is an instruction and does not accomplish anything immediately until OMB and or the other federal agencies move to follow the guidance and instructions in that executive order. So we saw 46 executive orders and then four more coming in the immediate inauguration day. And what we are seeing now are the agencies that are seeking to implement those executive orders. Hence, the OMB guidance yesterday on federal funding that matches the executive orders on those four specific areas that they are targeting. We anticipate many more agency guidance and other kinds of implementing factors to come out to these executive orders in the next several days and weeks. And then, of course, the final step to implementing many of the policies that are outlined in those executive orders is a regulatory process. And as we shared in the last transition, the regulatory process is governed by the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires public notice and comment. So there are a lot of things, the one thing that the president could do in his presidential action was recall and rescind all of the previous administration's executive orders. But he cannot rescind the regulations that were accomplished in those directives of executive orders without going through the public notice and comment. So it's a process, it is some feeling like immediate and the agencies themselves are trying to adapt to this, but there also is a required step in most instances to actually achieve programmatic changes. And I will note for you all that there were a lot of concerns because this desire to halt federal funding in Green New Deal and in DEI programs and in others was conveyed several weeks before the actual inauguration and concerns about the Empowerment Act were raised. Does the President have the authority to withhold or to revoke or require repayment of Congressional Authorized and Appropriated So I want to clarify that OMB, very specifically stated in their clarification today, that this is not rise to the level of an empowerment because it is simply a pause pending review. So we will see how long this pause lasts and whether it will rise to that level, but I just wanted to kind of give that overview for you all. So we say to pause, what does that mean? Is there funding that we're expecting? It's not coming during the pause? Correct. And it's a pause pending review. So OMB has instructed each of the federal agencies to basically fill out a spreadsheet in specific programs as to what the funding has been, what is supposed to be coming out, you know, in the next before March 15th, any no-fos or any other things that could be coming, and then report that back to the identified political appointee overseeing those programs in that particular agency. And of course the challenge is that it takes a while to get those political appointees in place. We're just still dealing with the cabinet levels. We've got several non-centred confirmed positions filled. And those are the individuals that are going to be reviewing this spreadsheet prior to February 10th. And that's going to be my next question. How long might that pause? It's you who almost accomplish your goal, you are paused by... Correct. And in the pause, it doesn't. Correct. But the pause is at the report is due back in the pause at this point is until February 10th in order to get them the complete review and sign off by the policy makers, if you will, at each of the agencies. I think separate and apart from this memo at what is happening today, we were here to talk about kind of long-term, bigger picture, what Congress plans to do in the next few months and what the administration's priorities are and what those impacts could be to funding that's received by the county. And so, one of the things that we've been talking about is that the previous Congress did not wrap up their FY25 appropriations bills. And so we are currently under a continuing resolution through March 14th. That is top of mind for Congress because they've got to address the appropriations bills prior to March 14th. One of the things we've also been talking about is the Republican majorities will need Democrats to vote for that bill. There aren't enough Republicans in the House or the Senate to pass that package alone. The question is, do they reach a deal and finalize those bills or do they pass other continuing resolution? We honestly don't know what they will do because at the same time they are trying to put together a larger legislative package that you've probably heard they're using a tool called reconciliation. And when you use that tool you only need a simple majority. You don't need to worry about votes from Democrats. And so they're trying to put a larger package together to extend the Trump tax cuts. They want to include some immigration funding in that immigration enforcement funding. Lynn can talk a little bit more about that. And to pay for that program or to pay for that package, they've got to come up with a number of offsets. And so in our conversations with people yesterday, and again, we've been talking with social services and with health care services about kind of the menu of options that Republicans are looking at to pay for those programs. And a lot of that could involve cuts to Medicaid. We've been talking about potential work requirements similar to what they've done with SNAP. We've been talking about TANF. I know John has been kind of focused on this as well, so I could turn it over to John to talk kind of bigger picture there. In terms of that timing, the work is starting now, and there's a very aggressive timeline, but Republicans are hoping that they could send this package to the President for signature in April. So you've got the continuing resolution and the appropriations that they need to wrap up in March. And then you've got reconciliation that they're hoping to send to the President in April. I think we all assume that that's a tight timeline and they may not make that goal. But that is a top priority and they certainly want to get that done at some point this year. Again, there are tight margins. You know, the House Republicans have only two vote, the two vote margin. So they've got to get all their folks on board. And as we were in conversations yesterday, that's going to be difficult to do. But it's a top priority for them to extend these tax cuts. So they will certainly do their best to do that. I can turn it over to John now and he can talk a bit more on specifics. The one thing that I'll add is in addition to the budget reconciliation bill, they first have to pass a budget resolution, which is a piece of legislation that is agreed to by the House and the Senate does not need the signature of the president. That sets the limits and the allocations for each of the committees for how much money they are to save or to spend. The House has a schedule to pass the budget resolution by the end of February. And that will give us the first indication as to how much each committee will be responsible for either spending or cutting. That's done by a committee basis. And we understand the jurisdictions of each of those committees and the programs that fall under each of those. After the budget resolution is completed, then the House will likely be taking up the reconciliation bill first. Speaker Johnson has a very aggressive schedule, but then it goes over to the Senate. In the Senate, the provisions are subject to what's referred to as the bird rule. The bird rule has a number of budgetary provisions that prohibits certain items from being included into budget reconciliation. So the reason why that some of the bills have passed in the past, including the Affordable Care Act, the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, is because they are subject to the bird rule provisions. These are often negotiated between the House and the Senate ahead of time, but sometimes there are instances for some provisions that are included in the House bill are pulled out in the Senate because of the bird bath point of order. I think that's where we're going to see a lot of the slowdown is typically in the Senate when these budget reconciliation bills move through because those points of order are determined by the parliamentarian. The parliamentarian is a non-partisan appointee in the Senate that makes the determinations of whether or not they comply or do not comply with the bird rule. And layered on top of the budget reconciliation bill and the FY25 process, we of course have the FY26 process. We'll be getting started concurrently, basically with the FY25 process. And then we also have to raise the debt ceiling, which is an increase in the amount of money, yes, every 26 yet. And the debt ceiling, which is an increase of the amount of money that the federal government can take on debt-wise, and of course, this money has already been appropriated and spent by the federal government is just simply raising the level. That is often a difficult vote for many Republicans because there are several Republicans in the House conference in particular that have never voted for a debt ceiling increase, meaning that Democrats are going to have to cross the aisle and vote for a debt ceiling increase. That's where they have leverage in order to do that. So politics still have some political gravity that we're looking forward to addressing, and of course, there's any concerns with particular provisions. We're happy to help explain and advocate on your ref. And then I will now, finally, I think maybe, you know, wrap up the conversation with the return to the executive orders. And as you all know, at this point, there were probably four primary areas for those executive orders that dropped. And it was, you know, DEI, federal workforce, energy and immigration. As the president indicated that those were the issues that he ran on and promised the American people that he would deliver on. So that's why we saw a plethora of those. Obviously, federal workforce, the ramifications and dismissal of individuals and removal of the civil service protections and the replacement schedule left all of those kinds of things. They don't impact us maybe directly other than as our neighbors and friends, as we see what proceeds under those DEI, the immediate workforce reduction in that space, the elimination of funding for those programs, and the prohibition on incorporating any of those initiatives at the federal agency contractor level have moved forward. The energy provisions are both acceleration of oil and gas leasing on public lands and then the elimination of offshore leasing for offshore wind production. And remains to be seen yet what's gonna happen with solar. And of course, the ancillary and supportive funding that goes along with accelerating the the provision of renewable energy is also impacted by this pause. The final area of of immigration was dealt with by a presidential action declaring a state emergency at the border followed by four individualized executive orders addressing each one of these. As a result, we have seen the deployment of military officials to the border, 1500, we're sent, we expect some more in order to enforce the entry without inspection between the ports of entry. We also have a suspension of the CBP1 app, which was the orderly presentation at the port of entry in order to submit your claim of asylum. And that process has been halted so that those individuals are no longer able to make their claim. The remain in Mexico policies has been reinstated, which again precludes individuals from presenting themselves at a port of entry for admission. At the same time, I'm sure you've heard all the statistics. We have approximately 11 million undocumented or what I call document challenged individuals in the United States living, contributing to the economy and for the most part, being good citizens and neighbors. 8.5 million of those have been identified on the non-detention list by ICE, which means that their information, their locations are known, and 5.6 million of those have entered post-pandemic. So ICE and DHS are currently prioritizing the individuals that they are going to identify for removal, for investigation, and for enforcement purposes. And understand there's a distinction between border enforcement that is conducted by CDP and now elements of our military and interior enforcement which is conducted by ICE. So and also there is an anti-trafficking investigatory unit within DHS that has also now been deployed to handle interior enforcement. And I think that Mr. Holman, who is the borders are that's pointed in the domestic policy council and others that are implementing this have indicated a prioritization for removal proceedings, which will focus on those convicted of crimes. There are about 600,000 that are currently in detention facilities, locals, detention facilities based upon their convictions. And those are the first targets. Because again, as Emily indicated on the reconciliation package and others, we, there are currently 5,000, roughly 5,000 ICE and CBP enforcement officials, which is very difficult stretching resources, right? So there are three elements to accomplishing this immigration integrity process, which is one resources in order for additional officers and additional adjud to couture processing. Number two is a detention space. We've only got roughly 44,000 detention spaces at this point in time where individuals can be held. And if they are family members, it's important to remember that minor children cannot be detained in a detention facility longer than 20 days. So that also creates some challenges there. And the third element beyond the resources is the acquiescence of a returning country, right? Is a third country to accept these individuals back? And we've seen a little bit of that challenge in the last couple of days between Columbia and Brazil. So those challenges are something that the White House and DHS are currently grappling with, but we do expect, we expect, definite additional apprehensions, although apprehensions have fallen quite significantly over the last year. We do expect a great deal of attention on the border along with this executive order was a suspension of all USAID funding for foreign assistance, which includes sometimes visa processing in the assistance in third countries, particularly Mexico, as individuals are waiting to present themselves at a port of entry. We have also contracting out for additional detention space that is coming. of the executive orders, I think it's important to note, also removed the safe space prohibition on enforcement, interior enforcement that was in place under the previous administration, which allows ICE officers to enter. I think it's also important that an ICE officer cannot enter open land, meaning agricultural land for the purposes of enforcement without a warrant. And so all workers and everybody in these spaces are advised to ask for a warrant, they're advised to respond, and they do not need to respond. So there are a lot of advice and best practices, if you will, going out for both workers, individuals, family members, and employment sites of how to address the interior enforcement activities. We do expect to see more. We expect to see as a significant increase in the I-9 audit process, which will perhaps impact a lot of workers in a lot of different ways and impact employers as well. Not to mention just the basic fear that exists even before the Iceman come with. So we have a lot of resources. This is an area that I practice in and happy to answer questions, provide input and guidance as the enforcement activities increase. Thank you very much for a wonderful thorough, complete comprehensive review of our federal agenda items, especially the most recent one, which we will take up our own immigration committee item later this morning. But for now, I'm going to ask my colleagues any questions. I'll start with supervisor Miley. Thank you. I'm going to drill down to one specific thing. The Social Services Committee we met yesterday, and we are focused on refugees. So all refugees that have fights to bring refugees in that's been halted. But in Alameda County, we presently have about 300 refugees that have entered. And they haven't been connected to social services yet to receive services, so there's that gap. And I think what's happened is the refugee resettlement offices, nonprofits, have been, as if yesterday I think, have been informed that they can no longer process these folks. They can no longer receive federal funding to process these folks over the 90-day period so they could get connected with social services. So what we decided in the Social Services Committee, this was a crisis. And we're bringing to the board next week a request for $800,000 so that we can pay the relocation agencies so they can do the processing over the 90 days so that they can then be connected to services, social services, and maybe healthcare services. So I just wanted to drill down on that and get your perspective. Yes, so yeah, I mean, sadly having drafted the last refugee act amendments too many years ago, and we haven't had any revisions to it. It is the refugee admissions program has been suspended. It is again paused. And as you know, annual refugee admissions are set annually unlike other kinds of role programs, which is based on like Asylis, which present themselves at the border. So refugees have to go through an extensive process. The State Department funds the State Department, not USAID. The State Department funds resettlement agencies and has for since 1980. And the prohibition on federal assistance to the nonprofits has gone out from the State Department in addition to any USID. I will, however, I will also share that the State Department set up a very active program which called the Welcome Corps and established a network of private individuals that assist in refugee resettlement. I actually happened to head one in Northern Virginia. And so I think that is something that you might want to engage your community with because I think that is it cannot replace this. Also understand that these nonprofit agencies that like Catholic resources, Catholic researchers, Lutheran social services, Catholic relief, the ones that fund the refugee resettlement that with dollars from the State Department basically receive about $275 per refugee for their assistance and rely on a significant other network. So, you know, kudos to recognizing that issue, but I also think that there again is a mechanism that has been set up perhaps fearing that this might happen where the community can help out as well as county services. Okay, because the concern is obviously the refugees that are presently here, the 300 or so who haven't been processed and can't be communicated with by the resettlement staff. I mean, there are no tales that could become homeless. I mean, any number of things that happen to those 300 or so. And so we feel at least to brothers and gentlemen, I'm just recommending this to the board. This is an immediate crisis that needs to be addressed. And the other aspect of this is the refugee organization said that their understanding is that the contract, the agreement that they have with the federal government stage department requires that the state department provide resources. So they're going to litigate it probably, but the point is in the intro, what are we going to do with H300 or so that are here presently? That, I mean, you need to be, there's some systems exactly, there's some systems, needs and things like that. And that's why, again, there is the mechanism for the public private partnership under welcome core that then connects these resources together. Welcome core. So, hopefully you remember that. Okay. Yeah. And it's important to note as well is that unlike the individuals that were granted admission to the country based upon their credible fear, claim of asylum and our interjudication, our could very well lose their status and ability to be in the United States pending adjudication, refugees at least are protected, the ones that are here, right? Not the ones that didn't make it before the suspension of flights and admissions, but they have lawful status as a refugee. So protect them, but it's the subsistence of it that they need. Thank you. Thank you for the question, Supervisor Marquette. And the answer, I'll go now to Supervisor Marquette's. Thank you. Good morning. Good to see you, Lynn. A couple of questions you mentioned this pause, and you said that CBOs can draw down from the portal. Is that something that the county officials could do as well to secure that funding before the pause goes into effect at five. Russian everywhere before five, right? And then also understand, as we said, that there is some clarification on the nature of the funds that would be handled. But I think it's also, we don't have all of the, we don't know, you know, how they're going to be handling some of this. We're just trying to keep up with it like on a minute by minute basis. And the agency folks don't know. And the other thing that has happened as well is that there's been a directive to halt external communications for the time period by the agencies with external individuals without approval from a supervisor that is in a political position. So I don't know how I feel about that free speech, you know, impediment, but having said that, it's difficult to get then information from the, you know, federal workers and contractors that are working in this space to understand what they're trying to do. So there are differing interpretations by different agencies, but five o'clock is the deadline? Get it in. I mean, why not? Right? And then draw down as much as you can and wait till they say no. Okay. And technical advice, but that's practical advice. Right. Do we know the fiscal impact to element of county? I mean, I don't think we do yet. I mean, this memo just came out last night. So, okay, I think we're all just trying to see if we were talking with department heads a little bit earlier. I mean, we don't. I'll just put a finer point on not knowing how we'll be impacted, how the county will be impacted. We still don't know which programs are impacted by the executive order, the OMB memo, and the now two clarifications that OMB has issued in response to the executive order and the subsequent OMB memo. So there was a lot of confusion last night. That continued well into this morning. OMB has not issued the clarification Q&A yet. There's been a leak from the Washington Post that we have circulated, but they don't know which programs are affected yet because they have not yet made that determination. There's a review process that would be undergone by OMB that will conclude on February 7th. All the agencies are responsible for providing certain amount of information on all federal programs to OMB. From there, OMB will then assess which programs grant and loan programs by the federal government fall into this category of being incongruent with the goals and objectives of the current administration. So, the long way of saying that a lot of these decisions that have been made, that have been instigated by the executive order and subsequent memo have just not yet been determined by the administration. And we should know more over the next couple weeks. And a lot of this will also be then determined by the expiration of the current continuing resolution and on March 14th, we only have to engage in the FY25 appropriations process. And of course, FY26, which is still not officially kicked off. So a lot of unanswered questions that we are still kind of grappling with right now. Okay, thank you. And then Lynn with your expertise related to immigration issues, what guidance can you give this county? What are the top two, three things we should be focusing on in terms of rapid response? Can you give us in terms of giving out accurate information to the public and trying to reassure them of what isn't again, the fear and unease in the potentially impacted community is the one, perhaps, that the county can focus from a reassuring perspective on. It's not to dismiss the potential consequence of it, but it is to remind them of the procedures and processes that are in place. It is to advise them that the, I guess, investigation or deportation of those that just have undocumented status versus have encountered local law enforcement activity in some fashion need not be as concerned immediately because of the resources issue. It is to have a plan right is it is to know where your family members are is to be able to call on someone. And it is also perhaps the ability of the county to provide some legal services activities because the legal services corporation at the federal level has been suspended as well in the immigration executive order. So I think it is, and just know that we are spending as well in the immigration executive order. So I think it is, and just know that, you know, we are providing, again, best practices, know your rights, employers who are very concerned, you know, about their workers, obviously, and what to do in a work site investigation and how to respond to that, and how to basically remain calm and don't run. So, thank you. Very good. Indeed, we're already getting calls of concern and the way in which we can respond to them is very important to us. The know your rights, topics, and we've already stayed and even federal leaders have already had some of those sessions on this plan for our own. So really important. Another question or comment? To present, by the way, before I do have a question of mine. But so I would like to say with regard to the March 14th funding and the appropriations and all of that. I know that we have lodged with our congressional representative several projects. If we could get set sent to us a list of those projects that relate to Alameda County, a project name and a number and if we have any guesstimate as to it'll happen or not or if it's at risk if we need to mobilize to sort of keep top of mind the importance of these projects it would be very helpful. I just think I know off the top of my head of a couple in my district but we all have the seats on the couple. Anyway that's my question. I'm getting a head nod we can get a list. We can certainly give you a list. I think at this point we honestly just the members and members have not on the other side. To reach a final agreement. I don't know. Right now, we think the funding will still be there. Okay. Maybe not necessarily to the levels that it was included, because usually in a final bill, the numbers come down. But at this point, we have no reason to believe that the projects are going to be pulled out. Okay. Just a list would be great. Yep. Thanks. Supervisor Monaco. Yes. As we focus on some of these recent actions, I mean, I'd like to get your feedback on this, because I've also heard that potentially the administration is looking to curtail any funding in sanctuary counties or cities or jurisdictions any funding. So I need to understand that because that has broader implications obviously if they cut off all funding. So you're thinking on that, legally, where potentially where we might stand on that and further more in the health committee, we talked about talked about the fact, we have health back, and we've used local county resources to fund immigrant services. And I think the administration's also looking to challenge our ability to use our own resources. So any feedback, any thing you can, words of, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any, any program with Department of Homeland Security and that also in the executive order which will be legally challenged as a deputization of local law enforcement to pursue immigration related activities. As you know now, they are not able to do so if they come across a suspected status individual despite laws in Texas and other places. They must prosecute on their local crime and then call an ICE officer and they cannot arrest solely based on status. Again, the directive in the executive order to do that will definitely be legally challenged for the sanctuary city issue. And again, the sanctuary is a deeply, deeply rooted concept and primarily around religious space and activity for refuge purposes. And it's been, you know, for centuries, right? So the declaration of sanctuary, you know, cities has a definition attached to it and most of these situations. And so the withholding of funds is, again, if you don't do the 287G, it's a question of what funds could be withheld. And presumably there will be a list of those entities, which is why the mayor of Chicago and other places have stopped short of declaring themselves a sanctuary space. Nevertheless, are encouraging the same kind of protective measures, if you will. And it really can only be in the discretionary grant process, to some extent, because the formula funds are set. And you can't, it would be subject to legal challenge by picking out a non-grant criteria element for the refusal of that grant. So it is a, as is a, as we, as we see, you know, the approach is one of, you know, stern admonition of what's going to happen in this space and how it will be accomplished. And I think that, you know, again, there will be some local jurisdictions that will be very eager to engage in enforcement activities that will and have welcomed to the presence of the military, especially along the border cities in order to address those entries. And there are other local jurisdictions that are going to continue the practices that they have been continuing. And such as advising on rights and protection and and lack of cooperation with ICE officers as they present themselves in different places within those jurisdictions. I find a thing is what about our ability to use our own local general funds for services. Yeah, you, I mean, again, I don't say that, you know, the executive branch can't try, you know, to do these things. It is a question of whether it would withstand any kind of legal challenge and to the extent that they are state tax revenue and or local jurisdiction revenue raised entities that the federal government has no control over, very difficult to define a legal basis for doing that and I don't think that that will stand. Very good thank you. We'll keep the meeting moving by seeing if there's anybody with public which make public comment only on. So I can. We'll ask the public that have their hands raised. If indeed you wish to speak on this item. Listed as item number one. I'm not sure which item they're speaking on. So I can. We'll ask the public that have their hands raised. If indeed you wish to speak on this item, listed as item number two, budget and finance update, it is an update from our federal lobbyists, then raise your hand. Otherwise, please take your hand down if it's for another item. And do we have any in-person speakers for this item? No in-person. No in-person we'll see about online. Seven now. Very good. One minute each, please. Two minutes each, I'm sorry, too. It's frozen again. So, allow. Oh, you're in the computer. Can I have a moment here? Guys, this is for item number two, the budget and finance update. It is not on item one, which is the Alamedic County together for all ad hoc committee. It is for the item that is our federal lobbyist. So lower your hand if you unless you are wanting to speak on the topic we just discussed as a board and I realize we need time for our interpreters to interpret. Thank you. Frankie, you're on the line. You have two minutes to speak. Hello. We can hear you. Oh, great. Hi, my name is Frankie Ramos. I work at Courage based in the Fruville community. And I'm speaking today on behalf of our staff and our larger community. And I want to express my strong support for the creation of the Alameda County together for all ad hoc community. So that's a different item, ma'am. I'm sorry. We're going to ask you to lower your hand. We'll go to the next speaker. Gerald, you on the line, you have two minutes to speak. Gerald, you on the line, you have two minutes to speak. Gerald, please unmute your mic. Thank you. John, you're on the line. You have two minutes to speak. Thank you. This is John Lindsay Poland of the American Friends Service Committee. If you saw the news this morning, the office was going to be on the line. Thank you. This is John Lindsay Poland of the American Friends Service Committee. If you saw the news this morning, the Office of Management and Budget has issued a directive, and I'm sorry if this was mentioned previously, I came in a little late, to all federal agencies suspending all federal grants and loans with the exception of Medicare and social security payments. This obviously has enormous impact. This is indefinite while Trump's people review all of these things. There's no end date for it. And I'm sure some things will be restored, but it will be very difficult to determine at a county wide level what has been restored and what has not been. I'd like to urge the whether it's through PAL or some other mechanism could be the free for all ad hoc, it could be something else. For the board to mandate an assessment of the impacts of this suspension. I mean, I think that just in UC Berkeley alone, the number of federal grants that have been suspended as of this afternoon must be enormous. And what are the alternatives? What are other avenues to meet the needs, both during the suspension, but clearly this is a way for the presidency to exert some power. These are all funds that were approved by Congress and signed by the executive branch. You know, I really do believe this is a step towards dictatorship. So in any case our county I think really needs the work to assess what this means, what the alternatives are, who is being impacted and have a way of publicly tracking that. Thanks so much. Okay, you're on the line. Thank you. Jane Garcia with La Clinica. Really appreciate you focusing on this issue. Very quickly, I just wanted you to know that the portal to be able to access existing federal grants is not accessible. So I don't know if it's just flooded with attempts or whether they purposely closed it, but just wanting you to know that is not an option at this time. Thank you. Mindy on the line. Mindy, please unmute your mic. Yeah, this is Gerald. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. My computer wasn't functioning. So my wife, let me let me let me your computer as Shakespeare might say. So yes, speaking on the issue of number two, the funding question. The first thing is that this approach, I really want to thank the person you had from the federal, because that was a terrific, clear perspective. And I think the funding that you're looking to get should not in any way shape or form, take away, like here in Oakland, Mindy and I talked to many people in the last 24 hours, and their response on this situation is, my business was broken into and I had $100,000 stolen. And if this was by someone who came into this country illegally, it is important for the safety and health of the residents and citizens of Oakland. I've never seen a president come in so quickly and make good on what he said he would do. Their support for Trump is actually going up. And I think this committee, you should invite President Trump like he came into LA to help when the fires hit. Invite him to Alameda County. I'm more than willing to do it for you. I've talked to the man. He's more than willing to come and help. Hi, you on the line. You have two minutes to speak. Hi, my name is Todd Benson. I'm executive director of faith and action. I'm speaking on my capacity as a private citizen just as a point of information refugees through the Welcom Core program just on our own and that program has been suspended as well for 90 days so I don't know if that was covered in it but I just wanted to make sure that folks were aware of that thanks. Jackie you on the line. Thank you. I strongly oppose the misuse of county resources to establish the ad hoc committee. Alameda County together for all. That'll be a different item. We're going to take that item up next. Right now we're simply talking about item two, the federal legislative, so that'll be next. Okay, very good, thank you. I'll speak then. That was the last speaker. Okay, very good. So that closes public comment. I'll thank our representatives from the federal lobbying effort and any closing comments you might have before we move on to the next item. Sure. I mean, again, I think all of this is happening so quickly. I think we just kind of need to take a step back. I think you're right. I think the portal is probably being overwhelmed. And so we may not be able to even get in. Again, that's kind of in the short term, but I think for the longer term in when we're looking at what potential funding cuts could look like, I would just say, we will pass along information as we get it. I don't think anything's gonna happen again on the reconciliation front where you'd see the big potential cuts impacting Medicaid and some of those mandatory spending programs. We're going to have a better idea in the coming months what those potential cuts would look like. And so I would just say I think as we've been trying to tell most people is like let's take a step back and again be concerned but you know not to get to We're all very anxious, but I'll just say let's try and take a pause as we can and we will provide information as it becomes available I also do want to add to and it's you all are the Experts the decision makers in this space, right? But representing a lot of entities that seek federal funding and that also can fall back, if you will, and count on state and local funding in certain areas, that lets the federal government off the hook. And so I just urge measured response if if you will, from rushing to backfill and we don't want any pain or harm or anything obviously on our, you know, county citizens. But we also don't want to let the agencies completely off the hook by saying, oh, we can take care of this ourselves. We will continue, as your representatives, to fully demand the federal all of government and partnership given that we are a donating state, if you will, to the federal coffers and demand a fair return on those resources. So just know that that's kind of the way that we also approach some of these funding challenges. And I would say today's memo, or yesterday's memo in the clarifications, it's impacting not just us, right? I am hearing, we are all hearing from folks that are in red states as well. And so their governors are reaching out to, they're having the same concerns that we are all hearing from folks that are in red states as well. And so, their governors are reaching out to you. They're having the same concerns that we are. And so, I think, let's just tell people our concerns and what those impacts could be, but agree with Len. I mean, it's a federal state partnership. So. And I think the one thing that I'll just add to that is is we're going to see this similar cycle take effect over and over again in the first six months of this administration. The House during their issues conference which took place on Monday and Tuesday have a calendar which we will share with you all on what the legislative calendar will look like. So we anticipate that as we see the provisions that are included at the committee level for reconciliation for how they are drafted in the FY25 and the FY26 appropriations bills with the proposed cuts that are included for various programs that we rely on very heavily, we're going to see this similar cycle of response, reaction, and advocacy. And I think that as we kind of enter the second term, we have to remind ourselves that the laws of political gravity still do apply. And then we still have a voice in this process, and then we're still able to lend our voice in the political process in Congress and with the administration. So as we kind of get through day eight, as we enter day nine tomorrow, we still have to to, you know, pound the pavement to talk to our representatives, communicate our message, share data, and explain the impact of these policies on our residents. Very good. With that, we're going to move on. Thank our guests. By the way, if you want to stay, our next item is directly on point with that topic, but I know you have flights to catch. So with that said, we're going to move on to item number one listed as item number one. It is a supervisor, a fortune auto bass bringing an item to create the Alameda County together for all ad hoc committee. This will essentially be very similar if you read this report back up to 2017 committee that was created by then supervisor Chan and Surazaar Baye. This item committee ad hoc anticipated to be shared also with supervisor Marquez. So I will ask if supervisor Fortinato Bass and supervisor Marquez would like to make any comments, we'll then go to public comment and then we'll come back for deliberation and discussion. Supervisor Fortinato Bass. Thank you,bert. Colleagues and members of the public. Good morning as the daughter of Filipino immigrants in a lifelong advocate for marginalized communities. I'm deeply concerned about the federal policies and budget decisions on Alameda County's most vulnerable residents. And I think that the federal report that we just heard really underscores the need to act. Many of us are hearing from immigrants and refugees across the county who are fearful of going to work, going to school, seeking health care or other social services because they could be singled out and torn apart from their families. And we're also very shocked about these harsh policies that we are hearing about each day, as well as the rhetoric coming from the White House that seeks to take away the hard, one-accessed immigrant and refugee rights, to reproductive justice, to equitable health care, and due process. And it's simply not acceptable that some of our residents would live in fear in the shadows and without basic human dignity. And so with this item, I believe it's our responsibility to uphold our collective vision of a welcoming Alameda County that prioritizes inclusion, equity, and opportunity for all of us. So today I am seeking the Board's approval of the community. And the community will be in the community. And the community will be in the community. And the community will be in the community. And the community will be in the community. And the community will be in the community. And the community will be in the community. And the community will be in the community. And the community will be that we act now, that we act together as a county with our community and our government partners. So as you briefly heard, the committee would be modeled after the work of late supervisors Wilma Chan and Richard Valle who in 2017 launched our county's efforts to protect immigrant and refugee communities. They did this work through the creation of an ad hoc committee on immigrant and refugee rights and it culminated in the report, a very comprehensive report, and set of recommendations to be implemented throughout the county. The committee would continue this important work and we would also address a broader range of issues that would impact our community, not only service provision, but also budget, as we discussed earlier, as well as other communities, in addition to immigrant and refugee communities who may be impacted. So the outcomes we are seeking include effective coordination and information sharing among the county community and government agencies protection and access to critical health programs and social services. Establishment of a fund similar to the one in 2017 with county city state and philanthropic resources to support deportation defense for individuals in need, establishment of a fund to protect county initiatives and programs similar to the one advanced by supervisor Chan in 2017. And the process for this committee will be determined by the board members who serve with input from those participating in the meetings, act would meet regularly to advance the work proposed with me as chair as well as Supervisor Marquez as vice chair. And this would ensure geographic representation. We have in fact heard as we have sought lessons from 2017 and forward that South County has to be better represented this time around. In addition, there would be informational meetings in each district with community-based organizations, partner agencies, county departments and elected officials at the local, state, and federal levels. It's critical that we share accurate, accurate information. As at this time, there's so much information that's evolving. And then finally, we'll work together with our partners to advance policy changes, resource allocations, and program implementation, as well as educational and legal support. Action items from this committee could be heard by our standing board committees, as well as the full board. And we have planned the first meeting of Act for Thursday, February 6th at 10 a.m. And then finally, I do want to recognize that our county staff has already been engaged in this important work, as has both of our lobbyist teams at the state and federal level. So we want to partner with you. We want to on the work that everyone is doing, as well as learn from lessons of the past. I also want to thank our government partners who are already taking action, Senator Eragon in particular, and also want to thank the leadership of a host of organizations that work in the immigrant and refugee community, as well as the queer and trans community, the women's organizations who are engaged because this is critical work and we want to make sure that the county is acting in partnership with those who are most impacted. So with that I'll turn it over to you Chair Halbert for the next comments. Supervisor Marquez. Thank you, President Halbert, and thank you, Supervisor Fretinato Bass for your leadership on bringing this much needed ad hoc committee together. I am honored to serve as Vice Chair alongside with you and many other community members. I just really want to uplift and acknowledge all the CBOs that have been working tirelessly since election night and getting services up and running. So this is an opportunity for the entire community to weigh in on these sensitive and critical issues. And just to be clear, this is in the North or South County. This is all Elimita County. We are committed to ensuring that town hall and engagement is done in every part of our county, not just north and south, so I don't want district two, three or four to fill neglected. You have my word that this is going to be a broad coalition to make sure we're hearing from everyone that is impacted from this new administration. So I look forward to getting to work. I believe the commitment is initially we're gonna be meeting twice a month. So our schedules are going to be full. So I wanna thank staff and the clerk and everyone that is gonna make the agenda setting possible and just really ask the community to be respectful and engage in this process and just to acknowledge that a lot of people are living in fear. There's a lot of hurt. So please be respectful with your commentary, respect your views and opinions, but just know that people should not be living in the shadows, but many people are scared to go to school and scared to go to work, and that's unacceptable in our county. So the point of this ad hoc committee is to disseminate accurate and timely information and to strengthen public-private partnerships so we can get the rapid response hotline up and running. It's targeted to launch on February 17th, but if we could do it sooner, we certainly will. So I just want to thank everyone for the opportunity to hear this item, especially this is unique. We typically don't take up action items on a work session day, but this was so important that we wanted to make sure we got this before everyone. And so I think the board president for his willingness to add this. This is a very important day. Just look at our agenda, like at the three o'clock session. But you know, we're here to work and we're here to support and uplift everyone in our county. So I hope that I could count on the support of our colleagues to move this vote forward to adopt and implement the ad hoc committee. Thank you. Greg, I'll recognize supervisor Miley. As I do, I will ask anybody who's in the room who wants to speak in public comment on this item to turn in a speaker slip to the clerk who will then count them up. And if you're listening online, if you wish to speak on this item, now is the time to raise your hand. We will likely cut it off at some point. So now would be the time to raise your hand if you want to speak on this item. I'll now turn to my colleague supervisor Miley. Yes, thank you. I've got a few clarifying questions. If I may, is that okay? Sure, so this ad out committee is patterned after the committee that supervisors, I will chant in supervisors, IA, convened, both of them chaired social services and the other chaired health care. So I need to understand the relationship of this committee with the existing established committees that we have for social services. In health care, our staff has already spread in. And I heard that this committee, it's where could come to the health care and the social services committee could. So I just need to understand how this is being contemplated, particularly in light of the fact that in the past we have the chairs of the two prominent committees serving on this immigration committee. So that's my first question. So I'm happy to answer that question and also just reiterate, you know, I'm bringing this before the board as an opportunity to engage together around how we can create an accurate, how we can create the appropriate response and a timely response to what is happening. And I think having the federal update was really helpful. So the idea is that this could be a committee that really focuses on partnering with the community with our lobbyists, with our state and federal legislators on issues that are very timely and coming up literally every day, every week. And as appropriate, chairs of other committees could bring items to this committee and for action items, we could ensure that those items are heard in the appropriate place, whether it's the committee level or the full board. So I do imagine that there could be a lot of sort of synergy and integration between this committee and the others. And, you know, I'll say for myself that I am very much willing to, and my staff is very much willing to do as much work as possible, to lead this effort in collaboration with my colleagues as well as our staff. I'm not currently sharing a committee and so I do feel like I have the time and energy to collaborate with all of you to move this forward and ensure that for those of you who chair health social services as well as public protection that we go through the appropriate channels, whether it's through this committee or your own committees. Yeah, I raised it because I need to have this thing clarity on the jurisdiction of this ad hoc committee because we could be doing duplicated work and our staff could be moving in a lot of different directions. We have a power committee. We have a health committee. We have a public reduction committee, we have a social service committee, all of which are standing committees, the Board of Supervisors. Now, I'm not opposed to this committee because I understand how Richard and Woma fashioned the prior committee, but I don't understand the jurisdictional authority that you're trying to undertake by a staff seat. This particular committee, so I just think that we need to be very clear on the role of this committee so that it doesn't supersede the responsibility of standing committees and confused staff and get staff running all over the place, Elder Skeleton. And I see our county council as her hand raised. I can wait wait to see what's the bottom. Oh, is it not related to related to the general? Yeah, Supervisor Marquez. Thank you, President Helbert. So I will, I feel strongly that it's important that we have a committee dedicated to these time sensitive issues. And as Supervisor Frentzanova said, we are committed to doing this work. It is going to be extra work, but just having a specific committee that the public knows on a set schedule and the agenda will be published in advance. It's going to be a brown act. So it's in a way to engage the community. We already know social services at healthcare committee. Those agendas are already impacted. So this is a way to solely focus on the issues that are coming down from the Federal Administration for us to make any type of allocation authority decision making that has to come back to the full board. So we're all going to have the ability to weigh in. This is strictly going to be recommendations to bring to the full board. We're not going to have the authority to make any budget allocations. Those final decisions will have to come to the five of us. I understand. But I don't want to, you know, you'll see on the first agenda I can guarantee you, we're going to have a lot of community engagement. If we couple that with the other committees, I think it's just going to make it really difficult to give the time and dedication that these issues deserve. It is a hat ad hoc committee for a limited basis because hopefully in a year or two things will slow down. We don't want to meet this frequently, but right now it's necessary that we have these frequent touch points. If I can ask a question, so I know when we concluded the last committee, as was pointed out, there was a series of recommendations. Well, this committee, looking at those recommendations and seeing whether those recommendations were implemented and whether it needs to be, you know, we're in this, let's, let's be clear we're in this dilemma because we didn't implement recommendations and we didn't maintain them. So we're playing catch up here. This is why this committee is needed. And I will say that the first meeting we do plan to look at the report and recommendations and highlight the ones that are still relevant and timely. You know, we've already engaged with the community and there's a lot of, there's a lot of need for accurate information and making sure that we as a county, especially given our service provision are proactive and putting that information out there and working in partnership with the community. I heard supervisor Halbert expressed his desire to have know your rights workshops, for example. And we do hope to host those again with community partners in each of our districts. County Council. So the Supervisor Mark has essentially said what I wanted to say was, but just to clarify that policy, ultimate policy decisions on behalf of the county and any funding, those do have to come before the board of supervisors. So it doesn't always quite work the way it should, but to speak on behalf of the county, the board would need to adopt whatever came out of that committee work as the board's policy or and address that funding. So committees can't make those decisions they can you know do the sort of staff work so to speak and then it must come back to the board. I know that on other topics that we have in my committee, if we want to make a simple definitional change is a pool of structure or not, it has to go through a series of MAC committee meetings and something as small as that goes through a very significant process people can weigh in. we talked about budget. If budget is discussed and needs to come back to the board, maybe even through the planning committee. In my mind, and a question that I have is there's a lot of information discussion. There's a lot of, I think, maybe information gathering and listening to the community, while that takes staff time and resources, it's not a huge budget item. And so is this contemplated, and I know you haven't gotten there yet, but you've thought somewhat of it through. Is this meant to be more of a communication and dialogue and community engagement versus a large budget item? Like what are we talking about in order of magnitude on the budget side? Or do we not even know yet? Because I completely agree with having the conversations. I completely agree with having the engagement. I completely agree with listening to the community and explaining to them what is already in place for their rights. I'm just not understanding what kind of budget we're talking about. And then this follow- question to that is, are we contemplating complying with state and federal laws? I'm assuming, but we're not contemplating doing anything that may violate state or federal laws, just to be clear on a policy standpoint. I would be very hesitant to support something like that, but totally on board with what I think we're planning to do. I just have to ask that question. Thank you, President Halbert. I will say that in terms of budget, it will be developed as we move forward. However, I know that at the Public Protection Committee back back in December, the public defender did talk about the importance of our immigration unit. And there could be consideration of a proposal to make sure that we have the resources to ensure due process for immigrants who might be going through court proceedings. That's just one example of what we could consider. In addition, if any of our county programs are impacted, we could also consider a fund similar to the one in 2017 that sort of supplemented resources to county programs that were reduced in terms of federal funding. And again, those decisions in terms of action would go to either the appropriate committee and consultation with the committee chair or to the full board but this could be a space to consider those types of things and then I think there's also going to be a lot of attention to raising the resources needed and so I know that I plan to leverage my relationships with foundations to explore where we could potentially do some public-private partnership and raise additional dollars to supplement whatever the county might be able to consider. So I concur with all those comments. The only thing I'd like to add is it's really important that we as a county contribute to Alameda County's immigration legal education partnership a seal that is the hotline that many CBOs are fundraising to launch on February 17th. So it's really important as I said earlier that we get accurate information out to the public. This is the hotline that will be operated 24 days, seven days a week by volunteers. If there are any issues with ice rains or people just needing referrals for legal services, this is the hotline that they can call to get accurate information. So to me, I see this is something that touches every part of our county. So this will absolutely be likely on our first or second agenda. Okay, so I also note a lot of our discussion has been timely in that it's upon us as a country right now. But we've already been working at Sue Reiser, Miley mentioned the discussion recently around refugee rights and in social services department. And so I want to just make sure that this is not just immigration needs of the day, it's also to include refugees who for years, the last several years, when we pulled out of Afghanistan, we have Afghan refugees. Alameda County is home to a large, large number. We have refugees from other countries that are here that need services that have needed services long before the topic of today. This is a committee that's going to be focused on both. Okay? That's absolutely correct, Supervisor President Halbert, and that's in the board member of the memo, so it's codified that we will support immigrant and refugees and other communities that may be impacted by federal policy or budget decisions. I do wanna make sure I answer your question regarding state and federal law. Of course, we will comply with state and federal law. We'll follow the advice of our county councils, we take action, and I also want to underscore that years ago, Alameda, took action to become a welcoming county. And so that is sort of how we describe ourselves. And then lastly, recognizing that Supervisor Tam was not able to join us today, I do wanna share that she joined us last week when there was a press conference among immigrant and refugee organizations. And of course, representing District three, her community is very very important given the immigrants and refugees that she serves so I want to underscore what supervisor Marquez said the intention is to support our entire community across the county thank you. Thank you President rather supervisor Miley. Sure yes so once again I'm just not clear. So clearly, County Council mentioned a committee cannot find the county. But I'm just not clear. I said clearly, County Council mentioned a committee cannot find the county, but I'm not clear on the scope of this committee because once again, healthcare is working on stuff of a protection of our federal stuff. So quite frankly, we want to advance the more funding for the public defender of social services is advancing the refugee peace. So I'm just not clear on what this committee is gonna do. It's around community engagement, getting funding for legal services. I think there are with this committee can definitely serve a function. But if the committee is black on the better word, moving into areas that are already for responsibility of standing committees, I just don't understand the role of this committee beyond what I think would be some specific things that you're trying to steal, Topel, that are urgent in nature. Yeah. Supervisor Mayor, are there items that are listed in this board letter that you would think in fringe on the standing committee? Or are there clarifying guidelines that we could add to this if there's a motion made to establish this that would further clarify the delineation between or should we perhaps take the time to do that delineation? I think if we want to approve this committee today, once again I'm not opposed to the concept because I supported Richard and Wilma Whitney. Initially I did the committee. Maybe... I'm not opposed to the concept because I supported Richard and WOMA when they initially did the committee maybe Policy items that come out of the committee Budget area items and come out of the committee go to our standing committees. We have a budget committee We have a pal committee. We have a public reflection committee. We have so-so-service committee without committee But those items go to those committees before they go to the full board. Unless there's a sense of urgency. Unless there's a sense of urgency. Fair enough. I would question Brown Act violation. It's a serial meeting, right? No, it would not be a Brown Act pop because those committees are publicly noticed, Brown Act compliant. So the no, no, because it is a public and noticed meeting, that's the key distinction is that those discussions are occurring in a Brown Act compliant public and notice meeting. They're not occurring behind the source. Okay. So I think think for me the biggest takeaway is our community is dealing with a lot. And to be quite frank, we at the county do not make it easy to engage and access our information. It's really complicated to figure out what agenda is this on? Where do I find the special meeting? What's this meeting? We need to figure out a way to be more open and clear and consistent about how we conduct our meetings even today's confusing. I have people go across street. So the fact that this is a committee dedicated to addressing that the federal administration and potential threats and impacts on all vulnerable communities that include immigrants, refugees, women, our LGBTQ community members. This is the place if people want to weigh on these issues. It's really simple to just look at that information. And I know my office, Supervisor Forte-Tonobasis office does an amazing job in putting updates on social media to make it clear for people to access that information. So this is just a way to know that it's a dedicated space to address these issues. And I think that's what our community needs right now to know that we take these concerns seriously and they have a time and a place to come and engage with us. We are not making a final decision. The full board will adopt policy and budget decisions. President Milo, I definitely encourage you to supervise your markets. And I just think maybe I think the board president, hopefully will work with the county administrator on this, when we have a board retreat, and I know we're supposed to have taken up our operating procedures and policies as a board, the supervisors over the last two years. We didn't quite accomplish that or finish that, but I think that's what you're talking about. In these type of matters, could be appropriately addressed if we modify operating procedures and policies. Going forward, because once again, I'm working on, I mean, 24 years of being here and maybe that's not the best thing to be working on. New members want to change things, then let's have that conversation. Let's go to public comment and let our discussion settle in and we'll deliberate after public comment. For those in the room in person, how many speakers let's do we have? Four in person, 27 online. Okay, we'll start with all four in person and then we'll allow for one minute each. Thank you. The first in-person is Carla. And we'll ask everybody to raise your hand now if you can. The clerk will be recording names. If your hand's not raised, then you might not get to speak. Thank you. First items in-person. you call all four if you want. Yes, I'll add Lisa. Nate Diego. Welcome and thank you for being here. Thank you. Good morning members of the board. And thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I am speaking on behalf of the unit of council as 60 year old community development preparation in Oakland. As community leaders in an immigrant serving on an organization who would like to express a strong support for the creation of the Alameda County together for old at-hut community. Alameda County is home to over 1.6 million immigrants making it the first most diverse county in the United States, nearly one in three Alameda County residents as an immigrant. And more than 60% of immigrants in Alameda County have been living in the U.S. for 17 years or more. This means that immigrants through their hard work and resilience have shaped and contributed to Alameda County's economy, taxes and history. They are our social workers. They are the people who put their own lives at risk for all of us, the our teachers or nurses, farmers, merchants, neighbors, friends, family and workers. Alameda County has a history of standing with immigrants. And this committee will continue the legacy and work started in 2017 as a provider's will, a chance and reach our buy-a as well as the work of the previous at-hat committee to protect immigrant rights. This committee represents hope and shows your commitment to looking out for our residents regardless of their immigration status or skin color will value your partnership and leadership. Thank you. Hello and thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Lisa Hoffman and I'm co-executive directors of East Bay Sanctuary Covenant. EBSC expresses its strong support for the creation of the Alameda County together for all ad hoc committee. This ad hoc committee's goals align with our mission and values, and we are ready to partner with the many elected officials, community-based organizations, and faith communities in Alameda County to provide a coordinated response and protection for our communities. It is critical that the County establish a fund, similar to the 2017 initiative, to support immigrant rights, which can also serve as a safeguard for safety net programs under attack. EBSC provides legal and social services, community organizing and education, to refugees and immigrants seeking safety in the Bay Area, reaching over 12,000 people every year. Most of the people we serve live in Alameda County. Many people we serve have experienced a trotious violence and deserve to be welcomed and supported, not demonized and forced into the shadows. In this moment, our neighbors, friends and and colleagues are scared and confused and understandably so. Parents are worried about sending their children to school and whether they will be protected from deportation rates. In the past two weeks alone, EBSC has received dozens of new requests to conduct know your rights, presentations, and schools. Thank you for your support. Morning members of the board. Thank you for the opportunity speak today. My name is Diego Rodriguez. I am speaking on behalf of homies empowerment government, a grassroots organization dedicated to fostering safety, dignity, empowerment for all, especially for our most vulnerable populations. For our vital contributors, as I mentioned, by our other relatives here, contributors to the backbone of Alamita County. We've seen challenges arise when communities are left unsupported. We've seen the challenges arise when communities are led on to be divided. We've lived through it during the unprecedented times of recent years, and we know the importance of decisive action. This committee represents the essential step in the right direction, and homies empowerment is committing to collaborating and supporting these efforts in any way we can. Today, thank you for your leadership, and for taking a step to ensure that we, as accounting stand together, I guess, no, no, we're here, and we're not going anywhere. All I ask is that we have the will to act thank you and stand in the front for those who currently have no base to stand on. Thank you. Christopher, you're on the line? You have one minute to speak. Thank you. My name is Christopher Martinez and I am proud to represent the East Bay Spanish peaking citizens foundation serving the diverse communities of Alameda County since 1965. And given what we have just heard, I am here to express my strong support for for the creation of the Alameda County together for all at-hut committee, this initiative is not just timely, it is essential. Our immigrant and refugee communities are facing unprecedented challenges and we must act with urgency to protect and empower them. As Spanish speaking, we hear firsthand the fears and concerns of our students and families. Many are living in uncertainty fearful about sending their children to school, about going to work, about what the future holds. They are turning to us for trusted information about their rights, resources, and most importantly, reassurance that they are not alone. Alameda County has long been a beacon of resilience and inclusion. The formation of this committee will reaffirm that commitment sending a clear message that we stand by all our residents no matter where they come from. Thank you for your leadership and for allowing me to speak today. Alba, you're on the line. You have one minute to speak. Good morning, members of the board. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Albert Hernandez. And I'm speaking on behalf of faith and action East Bay and a concerned citizen of Alameda County. I want to express my strong support for the creation of the Alameda County together for all ad-how committee. It is crucial that we take immediate action to protect our immigrant and refugee committees. These individuals are taxpayers that contribute to the economy of the county and the country. Therefore, we should find ways to protect them. The fear that is being instilled at this time is very disheartening. Children not being sent to school, people not going to work, or to the doctor, because of the fear that exists. This issue is impacting health, mental health, social services, and our economy. I also urge the county to consider funding the rapid response work as well. It is the responsibility of our county to protect our people. Thank you so much for listening. Marina, you're on the them. the item number one. I work closely with the community and with the most vulnerable in our community and deliver services and promoted health and living for them. So I can see the impact is massive. The rotation is going to lead to our families. They live in the shadow now. They're living in fear for so long. So this, we just left the pandemic and we can see the impact that mental health had in our families and brought to our community. Our children are in fear. My own children are in fear of not seeing their friends again in school. Let me ask you this question. How will you feel as a parent to be afraid to even go get groceries for your family and then your children telling you that they are in fear that you might not come back, that they might not see you coming back with those groceries. Please support the item number one in the hotline to give our community the information that they need and their rights. Thank you. Courtney, you're on the line. You have two minutes to speak. Thank you. My name is Courtney Reedus and I am a resident, longtime resident of North Oakland and also a member of Faith in Action East Bay. My son who's a middle schooler at Claremont has experienced firsthand that children have a fear of going to school and not having their family, your parents at home when they get back from school. I've heard in this meeting really important questions from Supervisor Miley about exactly how this ad hoc committee will work in relationship to other committees that are already in place and what I have heard and when I believe and when I trust is that this specific ad hoc committee makes specific and immediate priority and especially community engagement in this ad hoc committee. So I feel that given that it's time limited, it's hyper focused and it includes community engagement makes it really necessary and critical. It will be by all and for all and and I strongly support the ad hoc committees formation. Thank you. Caller, are you on the line, please state your name. President Haber, honorable supervisors. My name is Brian Hofer, I'm the executive director of Secure Justice. I also chair the City of Oakland's privacy advisory commission. I ask that you support this critical ad hoc effort. I really appreciate Supervisor Boss' leadership introducing the item and Supervisor Marquez for joining and support. Last month before public protection, I teased an area about potential data risk on the joint terrorism task force. Just last week, they were ordered to increase their participation in immigration enforcement. ICE is the second largest component. You also have a data risk responding to the lawful demands under 8 USC section 1373 and 1644, UNTV says. So whether you work for secure justice or others, I really hope you include a data privacy expert in this conversation. Secure justice would be more than willing to help you relieve the burden working with you folks at no cost. Thanks for listening. Hall, are you on the line? Please state your name. Morning, Supervisors. I am Valeria Traa, Community Organizer with Faith and Action, He's Bay and they've been hailed. I am in strong support of the creation of the Alameda County together for all at Haq committee. It is crucial that we take immediate action not only to protect our immigrant and refugees, but our trans community, our women, our black and brown folks because in reality, we are all under attack if we are not rich white men. Alameda County has a history of supporting and protecting our vulnerable communities. The proposed committee will be the first step towards stepping up and fighting with us and for us. Thank you and we hope to see you stepping up for all. Collar, you're on the line. Please state your name. Hi, supervisors. My name is Juliana Weissleon. I work at Eden, United Church of Christ in Terrelland. Our congregation serves both the unincorporated communities in South County. One of the reasons why misinformation thrives is when there are no coordinated efforts to disseminate accurate information. Alameda County is behind when it comes to coordinator response to support immigrant community members. All of our surrounding counties are already doing this type of work. Having an ad hoc committee where the supervisors are near to the needs and voices of community sensibios would make a huge impact on our communities. I want to specifically lift up the need to offer coordinated support and information for unincorporated community members who do not have a city government. Our county has a municipal responsibility to unincorporated communities and I urge you and behalf of all unincorporated residents across our county to support this effort. Thank you. How are you on the line. Please state your name. Good morning, Board of Supervisors and Alameda County Community. My name is Yeliza Peña and I'm the proud daughter of Mexican immigrants and work in education in Hayward. 40% of Hayward residents are born outside of the US and we're extremely proud of the diversity of our community. I'm calling to express my strong support of the Alameda County together for all Adhaal Committee. It's important that our families feel safe and supported. It's vital to protect healthcare, social services, and the rights of immigrants and refugees in Alameda County. This committee is essential for safeguarding our community and ensuring access to essential services for all residents. I strongly support its work and I urge support to support this critical ad hoc committee. Thank you. Color, you're on the line. You have one minute to speak. Please state your name. My name is Stephen Murphy. I'm the president of Christo Ray. Daela Sal East Bay High School, formerly Santa Elizabeth. High school in the fruit bail district. I'm calling to support. funding of the Alameda County together for all at HOT Committee. A lot of the speakers have said extraordinary things, so I want to speak quickly about the funding aspect of this. As you can tell, we have a lot of experts in the community that are on the ground working with our undocumented community and our immigrant families. And I would hope that you would establish a funding structure that would have the flexibility in order to immediately support the needs of our community in response to this regime and their policies. I hope that in your later conversations regarding the funding that you will keep this in mind, it needs to be flexible enough to be able to immediately support and have funds on hand in order to respond quickly. Thank you. How are you on the line? You have one minute to speak. Please state your name. Please unmute your bike on behalf of Faith and Action in the East Bay. And there were two things I want to make clear on terms of our current residents who live with us including young children who go to school. That's important, but I'm also want us to remember the general principle that applies to all three of the desert religions that if if a strength from Leviticus, we say that if a stranger lives with us in our land, we should not bex him. But the stranger that dwelleth with us should be unto us as if you were a born here in your country. And you shall love him as yourself for you were strangers in the land of Egypt. I also want to say that because of the location of the graduate theological union that attracts students from all over, from all religions, that they would be just as vulnerable as any middle school or high school. Thank you. Colle here on the line, please state your name. Yes, this is Mindy Pechenuk. I am a candidate for mayor of Oakland, and this committee should not be established. The very people on the board of supervisors who are pushing for this are the very people who created the problem. You should welcome Donald Trump's leadership, and you should welcome the fact that he wants to help rebuild Oakland, Alameda and all of California. Look what he did for the fire victims down in Southern California just this week, where he waived the financial and means, you know, and he opened the permits. And I think you're supposed to be a body that represents all people. And I am a mayor for all people. But this kind of approach is destructive. We have hundreds and thousands of people in our community who have born here, who live here, who are living on the streets, who live in fear of crime, are being murdered. We have to have a different solution and it's not this committee. Thank you. Paj on the line please state your name. You have one minute to speak. My name is Todd Benson. I'm also with faith in action. East Bay. I want to share a story that we heard because there's so much fear in our immigrant communities. A story of an eight year old boy came out from school. The citizen boy told his parents that he thought the family would need to be deported. And he was terrified. The family calmed him down the next morning. I woke up and found that he had packed a suitcase and said, we need to get go because we're going because we're being reported. So I want to emphasize the urgency of this issue. How much fear is out there? And this is why it's important that this committee be formed this ad hoc committee and be formed as soon as possible. We might get reports from all over. Oakland, Union City, Hayward, Livermore, Dublin, all over the county of how much fear there is, how much for misinformation there is, there especially after the Kern County raid a couple of weeks ago. Thanks for your attention. All right, you're on the line. Please state your name. Hi, my name is Rebecca Gurney. I work with East Bay Sanctuary Covenant and I am a resident of Alameda County. I am here today to express sorry I'm here today to express my support for the Alameda County together for Hall ad hoc committee. As my colleague has shared we are hearing dozens of concerns from community members, from schools, churches, and other spaces that immigrants are concerned to show up and be members of our community. And we must have a coordinated response to this fear. The Alameda County Rapid Response Hotline is crucial to this. We are the only county in the Bay Area that does not have an active rapid response hotline. And so we really welcome the opportunity for our organization and for community members' voices to be heard. And it is crucial for that this ad hoc committee is in place for that coordination to happen on a county level. So thank you for all of your support in making that happen. Paul, will you on the line please state your name. Morning Supervisors. My name is Leo Esclomato, I'm the second generation for the Pinot American Immigrants and Co-Director of Maiden Voice. Our members have voiced the urgent need to coordinate coordinate, know your rights, trainings, tools, amidst this climate of fear, especially in the unincorporated area in District 4. I want to express my strong support for the creation of the Alimita County Together for All Committee to protect immigrant and refugee families. This is akin to disaster crisis response. You know, we need to centralize clear information and engagement body during the the past Trump administration, we saw hundreds of chairland families leave, local social service programs, and during this fear we need county leadership to combat this fear and protect and defend our safety net of county residents. So I want to express my strong support. We need a coordinating body to fully understand the impact of healthcare access, social services, public safety net, and to defend immigrant refugee rights in an unincorporated area. Thank you, supervisors, we're fortunate to have a bus and mark as for your leadership. Appreciate it. Paul, are you on the line? Please state your name. Good morning. Keep brown Alameda Labor Council. Good morning supervisors and staff. The Alameda Labor Council. Believes that all working families regardless of their birthplace, gender, or ethnicity deserve access to fundamental rights, including health care, education, and social services. In alignment with our values, we urge you to approve the Alameda County together for all ad hoc committee of the board of supervisors. We believe that this committee will play a critical role in supporting our most vulnerable communities and workers. We look forward to collaborating with the board of supervisors to achieve these shared goals. Thank you so much. Collar, please state your name. You have one minute to speak. Good morning, members of the board. My name is Gabriella Galicia. I'm the executive director of street level health projects since 2002. Street level is an Oakland based community center dedicated to improving the well-being of undershirt, uninsured and recently arrived immigrants in Alameda County. I want to express my strong support for the creation of the Alameda County together all ad hoc committee. It is crucial that we take immediate action to protect our immigrant and refugee communities. As a daughter of immigrant parents and living most of my childhood with an undocumented mother, I saw first-hand that fear and fear and no child should live this way, no one should live this way. We are here already on the ground hearing stories of people afraid to go to work, take their children to school, access health care, or even leave their house. We are fielding many of these stories, questions, concerns, and hearing they appear in anxiety. It's going to take all of us to support. The Referee Reform Network is a lifeline to many. It is critical that county established funding similar to 2017 to support immigrant rights and we are able to provide accurate verifiable information and education and legal and general resources to the community. Thank you. Collar, please state your name. You're on the line. Good morning, members of the board. And thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Monique Berlanga, and I'm the executive director of San Theralega de La Rasa. I'm here to express my strong support for the creation of the ad hoc committee, which builds on the work initiated by supervisors Shannon Viay in 2017 to protect immigrants rights. Many crucial recommendations remain unimplemented and initiatives like a CLIP were left at fade. I'm deeply concerned about how prepared Alameda County is to respond to the increasing threats to immigrant and refugee communities. At Santhano, we are working tirelessly to revive a CLIP as a rapid response network to provide critical support for our community. Yet we are doing so with no resources and our relying on volunteers to go live on February 17th, if not sooner. The CBO stepping up to fill this gap are under attack on all fronts. We desperately need the county's partnership to build and sustain these support networks. We hope this committee will facilitate effective coordination between county community and government agencies to protect Alameda County communities and the programs that support them. We cannot afford to wait. Thank you for your time and consideration. Paula, are you on the line? Please state your name. You have one minute to speak. Yes, good afternoon. My name is Victoria Madre, the student of the Condado de la Meda and the community worker of the same area. I support services to be able to be able to work on the productive health services, to protect the community worker, the work that has been done by this state, which are the immigrants, to be able to serve for the students with all these red notes, to have and the Thank you. Holly, you're on the line. Hello, can you hear me? Yes. Okay, thank you. Holly, you're on the line. Hello. Yes. Okay, thank you. My name is Marissa. I am the thank you members of the board for giving us this opportunity to speak today. My name is Marissa and I work as a community organizer for the East Bay Sanctuary. But I'm speaking on my behalf right now. I want to express my strong support for the creation of the Alameda County together for all at pop committee. It's crucial that we take immediate action to protect our immigrant and refugee communities because the extraordinary measure times call for extraordinary measures. And that committee is obviously needed when we have a president who is a felon and has proudly stated that what he's done might not have been moral but it's legal. We have the new administration that has based its campaign and program on scapegoating several groups of people in the most fascist fashion. The circumstances couldn't be more out of the ordinary. So please support the creation of the Alameda County Together for all at Hawk Committee so that people like me that are giving know your rights, workshops day in and day out and have to see people crying with fear can feel supported and and and know that time is up. Thank you. Collar you on the line please state your name. Hi, good morning. My name is Isaiah Jackson and I'm calling on behalf of Oakland tribe, the community-based nonprofit rooted in the San Antonio community in Oakland, California. On behalf of tribe, I would just like to strongly voice our support for the creation of the ad hoc community, of the ad hoc committee. As a community-based organization, we are rooted in a diverse Spanish and mom-speaking community and we think it's important to protect all of our residents. We believe that, sorry, I'm sick, but we believe it is important to protect all of our residents regardless of citizenship and we look forward to the county's support. Thank you. I'll call you on the line. Please. Did you name? Hi, Jackie Coda. I strongly oppose the misuse of county resources to establish a deceptively titled ad hoc committee. There's no demonstrated need for this committee beyond fear mongering rhetoric created by the media and groups rely on federal funding. The county already has committees addressing immigrant services. There's no justification for additional resources being redirected from legal residents. It is even more deeply concerning that this committee is being proposed by a newly elected supervisor with a history of fiscal mismanagement that contributed to Oakland's financial distress. The misleading initiative manipulates public sentiment while intent on obstructing federal deportation efforts for criminal offenders. If no laws are being broken, why the fear or urgency of a new committee? The federal government is enforcing existing laws to prevent taxpayer dollars from funding illegal criminal border crossings. Is Alameda County actively supporting these efforts? Title 8, U.S.C. 1324 makes it a felony to harbor those unlawfully present in the U.S. And any policy institutionalizing defiance of immigration laws is both irresponsible and illegal. The public firmly opposes this committee and will report any misuse of taxpayer funds to the federal authorities. We will also advocate for federal review of Alameda County's funding like actions taken against the Colombian government for failing to comply with deportation policies elected officials must uphold the law and undermine it. Colle, are you on the line? Good morning, Board of Supervisors. My name is Alina Ferruc. I like to speak on behalf of resources for community development or CD. I am here today to strongly support the creation of the Alameda County together for all ad hoc committee. Okay. I'm calling on the line. You have one minute to speak. Please state your name. Okay. My name is is Miss McClinton and I'm calling in on another item, but listening to some of the comments, it reminds me of that episode in the Twilight Zone when the man had to walk and other people choose to understand their reality. And I also would like to say, if funds are going to be mismanaged, let them be mismanaged in our favor. I support together for all, we gotta stop isolating into our eagles and work on humanity. We're not here just to be entertained. We're here to support where it needs to be supported. And if you disagree, I respect that. OK. I ain't got no issues with that. But let's try to put some justice and love and love and justice. Thank you so very much for listening. That was the last caller that we were taking. Thank you very much. We'll bring it back now for discussion. I'll recognize supervisor bass. Thank you. President Miley, I would like to make a motion to approve the creation of the Alameda County together for all ad hoc committee to respond to anticipated federal policies and budgets that will impact vulnerable communities across our county. I'll second. Okay, motion's been made and seconded. We'll have discussion on the motion. President Milo, it's super. That's right. Just don't call me layful. Let's see here. Yeah, I mean, I want to support this. But I would basically state that it's important that we have any policy decisions and budget decisions that are coming out of this at our committee. Either go. important that we have any policy decisions and budget decisions that are coming out of this at our committee, either go to the respective standing committees unless it's an urgent item. I think there's some things like the hotline, for example, that lift that up, that's urgent. But there are other things that are not necessarily as urgent that I think having a committee that a people can rely on that's hearing the voice of concern and what's the word, struggling with approaches to address any injustices. I think it's sufficiently important. But I do think the standing committees that the board have should not be relegated. It feels subsurrent position in them. Policy matters, budgetary matters coming out of this body should go to the standing committees of the board of supervisors unless the emphasis is on unless it's a sense of urgency. So I'd like to ask our county administrator to weigh in because there is a process that we have for budgeting and we'll be going through that. Or to further clarify, some providers of Miley maybe, can you mention a hotlineline that seems like a pretty sense of urgency. Community engagement meetings, especially sharing what legal rights are. That seems like a real sense of urgency. It doesn't cost maybe a lot, but needs to get done. Whether there are town hall meetings that our community can participate in, I'm assuming remotely as well as in person. So hybrid that can be staffed. I know that staff time and that's resources and time and money, but it's not exorbitant. I go think, but I think those are timely and time-sensitive and sense of urgency but to reiterate because it says in here no net cost to the county that that any budgetary items of significance would come before through a committee and that could be any what one of committees. I think I would note that also, what was the other thought that I had that was going through besides budgetary, oh, if there are items that are going to be cut from the federal government, that are mandated services that we are mandated to provide, that those from a budgetary standpoint, if we're losing money that we would typically have to spend in this area, that we would have a budgetary discussion on how to backfill those items. And so I think we'll have to lean on our staff to really understand the buckets of money that we typically get and with our federal partners to know if cuts are made that we need to find alternatives. Again, going through our process. I think I'm saying the same thing that supervisor Miley was saying, but maybe just with a little bit more specificity. No, specificity. And I think he's seen head nods from my colleagues that were kind of saying the same things. So if those are agreeable to be and sort of incorporated into your motion, and I see County Council wants to weigh in, but I think we're all headed in the right direction. County Council, please. I just wanted to say for transparency and so that people don't leave the room with confusion about what will happen and what won't happen. Some of the things that you summarize, supervisor, Albert, happen now. And they don't go to multiple committees and board members. Now what I can't speak to and I'll defer to you all in the county administrator about where the money comes for those things. But, you know, as supervisors, schedule, meetings in the community all the time. And they do things like seminars or know your rights and those kinds of things. And they typically, the approval to do those kinds of things don't go through multiple committees. And committees at times have held meetings at different locations. So I just want to make sure you're not sweeping a new policy into a place that would apply to this committee that doesn't apply to committees generally. Well, said, I think we indeed have some of those policies in place already. Capabilities to do already. I'm hoping that I can rely on this committee to make some of the content that would be presented. So that we have a dedicated group to work with staff to groove the content of what a know your rights. on our might look like that I can then bring to district one. It references in here that all districts, we've talked about it, all districts applicable. And while we can do that on our own anyway without a formal committee, the fact that we have one will ensure that Eyes are on it that effort is sincere effort is put against it and that it will actually get done and indeed working with our staff because we can kind of do that already this formalizes that that's about it and it doesn't seem to cost a lot. That's how just to clarify, supervise my link. Yeah, I just wanted to once again emphasize, because it hasn't been emphasized. I mean, our county agencies, the departments, they need to have a sense of direction. Otherwise, they'll be spread, health or shelter. We found that when we initially tried to start addressing the issue of homelessness, it was all over the county in terms of responsibility. We eventually crowd that to the healthcare services agency. But if county agencies and departments are going in various directions, it's not an effective use of their time. So that's why I'm just trying to say if this committee is kind of harnessing kind of focused on the concerns of immigrants and if the stuff comes out of that, that requires immediate attention. And I think that should go to the board directly. But otherwise, that's why we have standing committee to try to address the whole mirror of responsibilities we have as a county to serve the needs of the needy, to serve the needs of marginalized populations, et cetera. I didn't think this up. County felt this up a long time ago before I was even here before any of us were here. So just to add a couple of comments I think it's been clear that the committee itself will not be making a budgetary or financial decisions. Any recommendations would come through your boards. Adopted processes as well as your adopted policies and your board knows that you have budget policies with regard to the reallocation of resources during the year. You also know we're about to embark on next year's or we are in the beginning stages of development of next year's budget. So I expect that some of these issues will emerge as part of those discussions before your board adopts the final budget, which was exactly what occurred the last time that this committee was established and any funding set aside was part of your board's final budget reduction process and just you know as a reminder very different from cities counties are heavily reliant on state and federal funding. So I think we need to be mindful of that over 60% of our funding comes from the state and federal government a lot of federal money comes comes through the state. So I think we need to wait to get solid information before making some of these decisions. And I think we need to be strategic because backfilling is not always the best solution. And I think that we're going to see unintended consequences in other areas if we're not thoughtful and strategic about that process. President Meyling. Sorry, I just want to, I'm sorry to prolong this, but our lobbyists and the county administrator all kind of mentioned this and I'm just going to import this information as well. I learned from prior supervisors how in the past when we did do things to shore up the safety net. When the state and federal government came in to provide resources, we were often penalized for the work we did in terms of not receiving resources, just for what they said. We took action to deal with it, and they felt, well, if Alameda County can take action to deal with this in terms of resources, they're, we don't have to give resources to Alameda County. Let's give it to all the other counties and jurisdictions that didn't take action with me resources. Because Alameda County is the capability of handling it on its own. So just to be mindful of that, I wanna emphasize that, because that's something I had to learn as a supervisor. I'm going to go back to the room. I'm going to go back to the room. I'm going to go back to the room. I'm going to go back to the room. I'm going to go back to the room. I'm going to go back to the room. I'm going to go back to the room. I'm going to go back to the room. I'm going to go back to the room. I'm going to go results to take about. Rock'll take about roll call. Please. Supervisor Marquez. I see. Supervisor Tamick. Excuse. Supervisor Miley. Supervisor Furtonato. I. President Halberg. I. Very good. That concludes items one and two. I'm going to ask that we take a five minute recess break recess five minutes. Thank you. I'm back here. Thank you. one proposed Alameda County housing plan. The next will be measure C children's health and child care initiative implementation and then followed by item four electronic health records. There will be public comment at each. Is there a brief staff report now on item 3.1 proposed Alameda County housing plan? Thank you. Thank you. I would like to thank the community development agency director Sandy Rivera. Thank you, Susan. Sandy Rivera Community Development Agency Director. I'm going to give you just a brief background. There have been other aspects of this housing plan that you've seen before. And then Michelle Starratt, our housing director will give the overall presentation. So in 2022, your board gave direction to the community development agency to explore renewing the measure A1 general obligation bond for affordable housing. And subsequently, staff developed a housing needs study, which was also presented at your board work session. And at the same time, the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority, Bafa, as you know, them began exploring the regional housing bond and a regional housing bond for the November 2024 ballot. As you know, that did not move forward, but staff continued working on this housing plan and your board at your July 23 board work session. You heard a presentation from Kate Hart, the Bafa Executive Director, and from Michelle Starritt, about the regional housing bond and measure A1 status, and your board supported proceeding with the regional housing bond and delayed the possibility of having an Alameda County general obligation bond. And so with that we continue with this housing plan because the housing plan was one of the requirements for the regional housing bond. And staff has moved this forward to help with the strategy for the overall county plan. And with that general obligation bond remains the preferred funding source here and for capital projects. But we also note various funding options in the presentation. But we do look forward to your board's feedback on the housing plan as well as guidance in renewing the exploration of a general obligation bond for for Alameda County and with that I'll hand it over to Michelle. Thank you very much supervisors I appreciate the time. As you know we are in the midst of a pretty significant housing crisis but so is the rest of the nation. Right now in the state of California, the housing wage, which is what it takes to afford a two-bedroom apartment at Fair Market Rent, is $47.00, and what it is in Alameda County is $49, almost $50 an hour. That's what it takes to live here and live here with sufficient income to cover all of your additional costs like childcare, transportation, and healthcare food. We were directed to go ahead and identify new sources of funding. We came back to you with the idea that we extend measure A1 in the 2032 and that between now and then we come up with another funding source. At that time, the regional housing bond was being discussed and we basically went ahead and used that as the method that we were going to be using to build new affordable housing and homeless housing for our community. With the end of the regional housing bond last summer, we've had to explore other options. I do want to say that this is the first housing plan of its kind, not just here in Alameda County, but from anywhere that I was able to find. There are plenty of regional funding agencies that do countywide plans, but in California, generally housing plans are city specific and they don't really go above the city level. So this is really the first of its kind and it rolls up all of the countywide housing needs of all of the different cities. We examine income versus the cost of housing locally, it evaluates financing implications and options, and even more specifically, it really digs into the nuts and bolts of why affordable housing requires subsidy and what types of financing exist across the nation in the state of California to support the development of affordable housing. This is a really important infographic that we have developed essentially a good 60% of our population is doing just fine from a housing perspective. That's the green. We know that a large portion of our population is in really good shape. And that includes, as you can see, on the outer ring, moderate income and above, as well as very low, low, and extremely low income households, who are receiving subsidy of some kind, either in an affordable housing project, with a project-based voucher or a tenant-based voucher from one of the housing authorities, or because they're living in a naturally occurring affordable housing project. When you get into the Brown section, you're looking at folks who are paying more than 30% of their income in rent. That includes a big chunk of moderate income, some low and some very low income and some extreme low income. Folks who are paying more than 30% of their income in rent are not as vulnerable as the next section which is that brighter red section. These folks are paying more than 50% of their income and rent. The vast majority of them are extremely low income or very low income. And you can see that from our perspective these are the households that are at risk of homelessness. One One problem, one financial catastrophe like a broken down car is what is going to land them in a viction court and or homeless. The last little section is blue. Those are our actual homeless individuals here in Alameda County. They are living in cars on the streets in shelters but essentially most of them are living in places that are not fit for human habitation. We need about 100,000 new units of affordable housing for lower income households and about 2200 new shelter beds or transitional housing units for a healthy ecosystem. We say this because when we evaluate the costs and what people are able to pay, we're running short on the units that are subsidized and or lower cost. In order to end homelessness, essentially, what we can see is we need 17,000 new units. This is directly from our home together plan. We worked very closely with H&H on their plan and the refresh that they're working on on the home together plan. There's another 37,000 units that are needed just to meet the rena obligation of all of the jurisdictions, just the low income units, and then alleviating severe cost burden is another 47,000. So that's how we're breaking this down. And obviously that number is out of reach. We're not going to be able to build that. But we do want to be clear about what the actual cost is. The other option, of course, as if the federal government was to increase HUD's budget and actually allocate another $800 million annually to Alameda County Housing Authorities and increase our vouchers. That's not going to happen as we heard earlier today. I wanted to just quickly provide some of the job statistics here. Now in my county, a lot of this came out of East Bay EDA's dashboard, which if you haven't seen it is wonderful. And I encourage everyone to take a look. But what you can see here is that some of our, the largest number of jobs we have in Alameda County is really in the medical field, which is way at the top, but that the average salary up there, whoops sorry, isn't quite sufficient to cover our housing wage. So if our housing wage in Alameda County is $49 an hour, or $102,000 annually, the average wage in the medical field is 86,000. So even folks who have degrees and who have worked really hard to get into a professional job still struggle to pay these housing costs. So it is not just our lower income service sector workforce like our retail clerks or our preschool teachers. It is also our professional folks. So this is important data. The conclusion of our housing needs assessment, you know, essentially we have overbuilt on our moderate or above income level housing units by a significant number and we have underbuilt on our lower income units. That is the key driving factor. That means that when new units are built, they are luxury units. They are units that are geared towards the higher income households. That makes sense. When you are selling a home, you want to sell it for as much as you can. And if you're building a single family tract, the goal is to make it a subdivision that will attract those higher income earners. However, our ability to build rental housing hasn't been wonderful. For the first time, we started seeing an increase in rental development that's not affordable in the mid 2010, 2014 through 2018. A lot of new projects came on the market. We have almost 5,000 new rental units, but they are all geared towards the higher income So we still don't have enough lower income rental units. We do know that to reduce street homelessness right away we need new funds for encampment resolution. We do think that the state and the governor's budget that was released recently has almost a hundred million dollars set aside for encampment resolution. But we really do need to focus on ready to launch projects, projects that are either safe sleeping, safe parking or buildings that we can immediately house people. Our but our homeless system needs over 2,000 interim housing units. So even if we're able to fund some pool of funding that would allow us to quickly move forward in this area, we still do need prominent structures that will house people on an interim basis for a very long time. Safe sleeping, safe parking, our short term, they're not going to be there forever versus being able to buy a building and make it a homeless shelter. I did just want to share very quickly that we had a lot of outreach and engagement for this plan. We both went out with the data from the Housing Needs Assessment. We also took public comment. We had online surveys. We held multiple community meetings. we took these comments, we then formulated the plan and then we rolled the plan out in community meetings as well and then we opened it up for public comment. I think the plan is pretty well developed at this point. We've delivered copies to all of you. This is the very close to final draft. There are some statistics that we're still double checking, but we're quite excited to do this first of its kind plan. Our priorities came directly from the community as well as public comments and from what we've heard from you. And the number one is to address homelessness, build more affordable housing units and preserve the existing affordable housing that we have. This is also in alignment with the regional housing plans, goals and objectives, which is really to build more housing, preserve the housing that we have, and support our community. There's also concerns from the community about protecting tenants and families at risk of displacement and homelessness, promoting equity, expanding affordable developer pools, essentially providing funding sources that will allow other developers to get into the development jobs, not just the existing five non-profit affordable housing developers that we have, and then investigate sustainable funding models because as we know, if we don't have an ongoing regular source of funding, we're going to see fits and starts and we're not going to be able to achieve the goals of this plan. We've set a pretty large goal. We want to build 20,000 units over the next 10 years, 10 to 15 years. And that's going to cost about 3.8 billion of local subsidy, not just Alameda County subsidy, but subsidy from all of the cities in the county as well. But we're really clearly tying, we were originally really, really tying this to the regional bond, which would have brought about $2 billion to Alameda County. So coming up with another source that will be that lucrative is something that we're going to have to explore in more detail. On-going annual operating subsidies needed for extremely low income households are outlined in the home together plan and we mentioned them here but we didn't dive that deep into that in our plan. So what are the possible funding sources? One-time funding sources, we were able to actually accomplish quite a bit with a one-time ARPA funding that came to the Unincorporated County. We found two affordable housing projects and one childcare center that we were able to build. So making note that one-time funding sources actually are an excellent source of funding for capital development. New taxes, ballot measures, all of these would require a vote of the people. So So general obligation bond is how we did measure A1, a sales tax measure, a transient occupancy tax, a residential vacancy tax, transfer tax. These are all things that need to be voted on. There are other options as well, enhanced infrastructure, financing districts, inclusionary housing in lieu fees. That would be at a city level capacity to be in the city's capacity to be in the city's capacity to be in the city's capacity to be in the city's capacity to be in the city's capacity to be in the city's capacity to be in the city's capacity to be in the city's capacity to be in the city's capacity to be in the city's capacity to be in the city's capacity to be also want to receive direction to raise new funding and work on that initiative. We also want to build emergency interim housing as quickly as possible with any available one-time funding that the board identifies and ensure consistent ongoing funding to expand access to our most vulnerable. Happy to answer any questions. Very good. Before we go to public comment, I'll see if there are questions from my colleagues. I recognize supervisor Marquez. Thank you, President Haber. Thank you for the presentation. Can you please repeat? Have the regional housing bond been successful and been able to stay on the ballot? What would have Elimita County received from that? Two2 billion. And annually? No, a total for approximately 10 years. And Oakland would have received almost 900 million. Okay. And so that was very close to that $3 billion number we were originally planning for. Okay. And congratulations on measure A1 know everyone that our talk to has been very pleased with the outcome of that initiative and what we've been able to do here in Elimita County. So if you could put back the slide that shows all of the different funding options. Your expertise has been in the space for so long which one do you feel we should focus on, like top two or three? In terms of your conversations with cities, leaders in this space. It seems to me that we really do need to follow multiple paths, quite frankly. I think that it's incumbent upon the cities to adopt inclusionary housing in every city of the county. That's something that we talk about at the All City Housing Call. I do think that, you know, and that's one way, Berkeley is currently looking at a transfer tax. I think Oakland already has a residential vacancy tax. These are things that we have to explore in more cities than just Berkeley and Oakland. As far as what the county could or should do, we should be looking at a general obligation bond. But I would hope that one of the committees would pick this up as something to receive reports from us and do a little bit of a deeper dot. looking at a general obligation bond, but I would hope that one of the committees would pick this up as something to receive reports from us and do a little bit of a deeper dive. I did also really wear away that done last time was that on health committee or social services? I believe we went to the health committee and sometimes also to the social services committee. Okay. And sometimes joint. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Can I also just say really quickly? A very quick email survey went out to all of the cities. We have in our pipeline needing local funding over 4,000 units and a need of almost 422 million dollars right now. These are projects that are actually ready to go and but for another funding source are stocked. And many, many of them have homeless housing units in them. Okay, so with that in mind, definitely would be open to exploring the general obligation bond. You could definitely start, I think we should just nip it and do a joint health and social services committee. I don't sit on either one of those but care deeply about this issue. I've said this in the past two. I also think it's time that we're very clear on which cities in our county are doing their part to address the three piece. And that needs to be really from conversation. I'm really disappointed that the last count point in time count for Hayward, the number of un sheltered population went up when the prior count was 22% decrease. And I don't feel like Hayward's responsible for that. I think the entire region is responsible for that, because other cities did not do their part. Hayward has just caused, just causing eviction protections, rent stabilization, inclusionary housing ordinance, just drive up and down Hayward, you will see all the affordable housing units. My third month in this office, I went to numerous ribbon cuttings because of measure A1. We were able to provide the city match to get those housing units online. So they are the blueprint. They are the model in my opinion. And we need to have a very firm conversation with every city. There's no city that's immune to this. You don't get to take a free pass. You don't get to just focus on senior housing. I love my seniors, but it's not just our elders that are struggling. So I think we need to face that harsh reality. So, Riser Miley, so thank you. So having the benefit of being here and It's essentially working on a number of countywide measures from the Central Healthcare measure to measure C to measure A1 having a leading role in all of those. I think once again when it comes to the housing piece it should stay with healthcare. I wasn't on healthcare at the time, so as a Carson so if I just Chan led that but I know I was very much involved in helping to successfully achieve that. I think as a result of A1 we leveraged was it 4 to 1 or 7 to 1? It was 6 and a half to 1. So for every dollar we raised we had another $6. So measure A1 was extremely successful. We need to keep in mind that, given I'm also on Bafa in MTC, we need to keep in mind that at the moment, throughout the region, the focus is on transit. They're trying to deal with the fiscal cliff. That potentially could be on the ballot in June of 2026 or November of 2026. And we don't want to compete with that. But the point is we need to be mindful of that. But also we need to move ahead with our own effort because we can't wait to address this. We help off, as Michelle pointed out, because of the regional housing bond, thinking that was going to be the viable option, but knowing that the region might not be able to get it to act together around the housing need. I think we need to just forge ahead. I do believe that we need to be thinking big in terms of a general obligation bond. I do think there need to be multiple approaches to help us get to that 4 billion that we need. But in terms of a general obligation bond, we need to think big in terms of that bond. Now, the thing is, and I know Sufai's Carson allocated funding to say, say, mayors to do polling. We need to hear the results of that because we need to determine whether or not the county will put a measure on the ballot, whether or not it will be a citizen driven initiative. If it is a citizen driven initiative, we need to make sure we steer clear of any of those challenges that occurred as a result of measure C. When that was the C's citizens' initiative, we need to be very cognizant of that. Then we need also determine, are we going in June of 2026 or November of 2026. But we need to move because people get to ballot 15 months from now for June. If we're going to put something on the ballot, we need to do that by March, I think, of 20-26. I think March. So we have got to move. And I think time is of the essence. So I would once again want to be kind of, what's the word, all knowing, but the point is I think based on our track record in the past, you know, we successfully achieved this, I would keep this in the health committee, in the health committee made a very strong case that housing is a health issue because if people are in house, then how can they be healthy? I mean, that's just obvious. In the men and women's, so I would stay, keep it there. And my final question, I've made statements, that question, but my question for Michelle and maybe Nico or Colleen, I think I heard that the feds are also looking at cutting the continuing funding for the continuing healthcare. Is that correct? I think that they're looking to cut lots of programs. Right now, they cut off access to the eSnap's program, which is how the continuum of care programs get funded. So even though we can still draw down funds in IdaS, which is for community development block grants and home and other federal programs, as of yesterday, the continuum of care programs were locked out. So with regards to this freeze, funds that the county has already expended to reimburse our contractors if we've not drawn those funds down, the county's out, those funds until they can access the funds again. So I believe that that is probably part of the political goal. Okay. And the thing is we also have to be very mindful. We've got to take action and we can't wait for the federal government. But the point of the matter is if the federal government has been so pointed out out, was funding HUD, might get used to, let's say, 20, 30, 40 years ago, we probably wouldn't be in this dilemma, but they aren't. And this has just happened under Republican administrations. This is definitely under Democratic administrations. In fact, I've heard that we lost more money under Democratic administrations than we have under Republican administrations. So the point is we need to move ahead and deal with this despite the fact that we might be, I use this word lightly, penalize for taking steps to deal with our own problem financially, but we've got to do that when it comes to this housing crisis. So those are my comments at the moment. And I just want to thank the staff for even putting we're even for this presentation for six months. And I know it's not your fault. We just couldn't queue it up. Thank you. Yes, I'll recognize Supervisor Ford to not have asked. Thank you, Chair Halbert. And congratulations to the staff for this tremendous work. I certainly look forward to digging in and reading the plan. It was good to hear that this plan is an alignment with the home together plan. I am curious to hear more about how knowing that we're operating in an ecosystem, how this plan relates to the work that cities might be doing. You know, just understanding the need, the rena goals as well as the need for shelter bed in, you know, most of our cities here in the county, how does the county's plan relate to those needs and goals? Thank you. Yes, we waited until all of the cities had adopted their housing elements and then we scanned all of those housing elements and took the goals and objectives of the cities into consideration when we formulated this plan. We meet with the cities once a month to talk about housing policy. It is a online phone call. The city housing staff tells us what their highest needs are. them pretty regularly about what's in their pipeline, but just like the county, you cannot build affordable housing in a city without some local resource. And unfortunately, to access state resources, the amount of local resource is often the tiebreaker, which means that the more local resource you have, the better able you are to leverage or access state and federal tax credits and other funding sources. So we work quite closely with the cities. We are working in partnership around the homeless housing units, but I will say that without an operating resource, without the money to cover the cost of operating the building, homeless individuals are most of them are homeless because of their income and because of their lack of resources rather than because of a mental health issue or a drug and alcohol issue. It really does have to do with income and the cost of housing. And so we are still stuck in that place that without more operating resources, it is very difficult to house the extremely low income individuals. Thank you. And I definitely concur with that. I worked on Oakland's affordable housing infrastructure on that's 300 million for affordable housing. And even that is in catching up with our pipeline and the need for construction and definitely can curve what the need for operating funds. I am supportive of another version of Measure A1. From my view, it's been very successful. And so another Geobahn, I think, would be definitely something I'd be interested in pursuing and then I am very interested in hearing a little bit more about a potential residential vacancy tax and transfer tax. What could that look like for the county? Well, those are options that we could explore in more depth and I'd be happy to be reporting out on all of these options at the Health Committee or the Social Service wherever it goes. But generally, for example, the city of Sacramento has a transfer tax at $75 for every time a property transfers within the city and those go into an affordable housing pool and they're spent countywide. So, or they spent city-wide. I don't think that the county of Sacramento has the same. So, it just depends on where you look as to whether it is city-level tax or a county-level tax. And the other one you asked about was the hotel, the residential vacancy. That's a tax on residential properties that purposefully left vacant. Generally, that's a little bit more difficult to track, and I'd have to do a little bit more research on that. Thank you. So I know coming from Oakland, that Oakland has a real estate transfer tax residential and I believe commercial vacancy tax and a TOT tax. So maybe a scan to understand what cities already have and what the county's potential options are would be helpful. We could report on that. Thank you. Questions I have if you could go to slide. Well actually on this one EIFDs, Where are we contemplating those or where would they likely come from? I'm sorry, I might have seen that. Yeah, and in terms of infrastructure financing, just works very much like the former redevelopment agencies. There's a base year set and then as properties increase in value, some portion of that increased value that would go into the county's coffer is frozen and placed into a coffer for a special use. It can be any kind of special use. The last time the county, the last time I'm aware that the county heard a presentation on this was when the A's were asking the county to give up some of its tax revenue in West Oakland around the proposed A Stadium. So it's obviously a very controversial subject. We can explore the options in more detail. There's currently a West Los Angeles EIFD in place that is funding affordable housing, as well as other important infrastructure improvements. And I'm happy to report out on what I know about that as well. It's something that was put into place by California State law after redevelopment went away, but there aren't a lot of them. And none here in Alameda County that I'm aware of. Are you thinking that might be an unincorporated? No. No. be an unacorporated to benefit the unacorporated county. It could be county wide to benefit everyone county wide. However, it's definitely something that would need a lot of discussion. It's shifting tax increment from the county for a specified purpose. Sure. OK. No, I just hear where we're contemplating doing that. If you could go to slide five, the most vulnerable, as you mentioned, the blue, nine and a half thousand people homeless. But then on the next slide, we need 17,000 units to end homelessness. So I'm trying to understand the difference. Yeah, thank you. I think that's an important distinction. It's 9.5,000 people on any given night, and the specific night is January of 2024. But we have over 25,000 homeless individuals that touch our system at any given time over the course of an entire year. So they might be quickly resolving their housing issue or they might be lost in the streets and unable to access services. It's quite a large number of people who actually need the resources. And that's one of the reasons why when we look at the inflow and the outflow, we house more people every year, year over year. We've been doing a great job, especially with the one-time ARPA funds. However, more people are becoming homeless for the very first time every year since essentially 2020. So we are essentially looking at a revolving door. And so we actually, you know, there's actually more than 9,000 homeless individuals. That's just what the point in time counts shows. Which is the only data source we have for that. Okay. Well, I'm supportive as well for especially focusing. My next question though is on averages. Average is, are good because you can quote them. But they're also tricky because an average of a high versus a low. We have a very diverse housing stock. Average is squishy. Some houses are millions of dollars. Some houses are a lot less than that. So when we say that it's $49 is an average hourly rate needed to live in an average cost unit when that average is made up of a very wide variation. I'm trying to understand if I make $100,000 and we like to see $33,000 spent on housing, that's almost $3,000 a month. Are we saying that it's, we don't have any $3,000 a month units to go into? I'm just trying to understand because $100,000 on average in that or whatever it takes, 47, you know what I'm saying? Yeah, so the data that I was referring to comes from the Out of Reach report. Out of reach 2024. I didn't actually present this slide. It's a backup slide. And I'm happy to share the actual report. It's a nationwide report. It covers all of the states, but it also covers all of the statistical metropolitan areas of which Oakland, Fremont, Elmita County is one statistical metropolitan area. Our housing wage is higher than the state, so this is state information. But when we say fair market rent, that is also a statistical compilation of data that HUD does every year, and it is not the average, it's actually the 40th percentile. It's not even the 50th percentile of rents. And it's compiled every single year and it just every year, just like the median income is adjusted every year by HUD. So this is what it takes to afford the fair market rent to bedroom apartment in Alameda County, which HUD presents back to us as the statistical information it compiles. And they do it for every single statistical metropolitan area and for all of the states. And so this is essentially 30% of the income that it would need. So that's where they come up with this dollar. And it's an annual report. They've been publishing this report for over 20 years. So you can go back and look at this report online, year over year, and see the changes. But the report itself is 200 pages long, 300 pages long, and it includes pullouts for every single state in the nation. Okay, thank you, President. And Supervisor Miles, yeah. Yeah just wanted to speak to this. The thing is, I think, you know, former Congresswoman Barbara Lee was suggesting a $50 an hour minimum wage. I mean, that's just incomprehensible. So I don't think we'll get there anytime, the foreseeable future. So obviously we're gonna need shadows of cities. We're gonna need to bring down the cost. Hopefully a building housing, hopefully, with the bottom measure, we're gonna create a public bank or less a financing authority. They could pre-invest dollars back into housing. I think that's something we should be looking at locally for our own county. In the end of addition, there's tax-defaunted properties out there that we can focus on. There's school districts have excess property. I mean, there's any number of strategies we can be pursuing that we didn't pursue with A1 that might help us get posted to those 20,000 affordable housing units that we're going to get to. So it's not, I mean it's not one approach. It's a multiplicity of things. We need to look at doing. And then I just want to caution the board. If the board does anything to in a in a favorite down incorporated area of trans and oxenp tax they can see tax transfer tax remember that's all on the corporate area I'm very protective of the corporate area and we have maxed in a corporate area anything that you do in that in corporate area will go through the max. We shall lose that. Yes, very much. I hope you're welcome. Thank you. Peace be upon you. Sam, you're very welcome. Uh-huh. As you can count. I'll give you a few minutes to get up to the air. And you start to say things to me about the work you working on the extent that he can be, and he's been asked about this issue. Yeah. I don't think, let's get out of here. I think you're thinking this world. I'm not out. And so let's view all of these. I'm all very clear. I, not a fan of the million dollar of these things. So, I'm here. Yep, I'm here. Anyway, if you can get even a short amount of information that you can say, plus, it's part of the state or the government, or the district you have, We'll go on to the top of the state where it can happen for the fiction that has mobile phones. And by understanding the Catholic values, dignified living conditions are unsentient and again this one now, three to five, two, three, this is the biggest thing I've ever seen. Those little starfish, starfish. again, one knot, basically, maybe this should be the next thing up. There was a little stuff, stuffy. I mean, why is this really uncomfortable on getting people to work? You know, you're on a set of dangerous, you get these two little fliers, you're thinking of a knot, that we can places, moving on or not. We can be in the end of the day somewhere in between, because they are the most vulnerable. They are dying in the streets. And if we attack that with all channel supervisor Miley, as if our hair is on fire. And if we move with that sense of urgency, I'm all in. Thank you. So, so, Mr. Reiser, Park, not a best? Did you have more contact? Okay. Thank you. And certainly if the staff wants to respond to Supervisor Halbert, that's great. Building off of that, I am really interested in hearing a bit more about the ready to launch portion of this homelessness slide. I definitely concur with finding ways that we can acquire and stand up units that are much, much more affordable. There's affordable housing developers as well as contractors that have long histories working with the public sector that do modular, so that could be one idea. And then I definitely support more safe parking sites. I think we really have a dearth of that type of intervention and would like to hear a little bit more about those strategies. Thank you. My response, I wanted to just lift up the fact that my staff has been meeting with the city of San Jose. And they a really fabulous all hands on deck approach and they are also very clearly going at it in many different ways. So they are looking at safe parking, they are looking at safe encampments and they are looking at hotel motel purchases, as well as building your standard affordable housing. They are a charter city. They have the ability to sort of convince some of the state contracting rules because they are a charter city. They have a wonderful clause within their charter called the Idle Act. The Idle Act allows them if there's 20% philanthropic funds, they don't have to do an RFP. They don't have to go through procurement. It's really interesting. I don't know that we'll, we would be able to do the same thing, but they are able to jump past a lot of the delays that we obviously have when we are going through our public contracting code processes. However, all hands on deck is very serious. They have 50% of their assistant director of their housing department is on board looking for housing sites every day. It's 50% of his time spent on this. So he has a team and it crosses multiple agencies and departments within the city. So that's basically what we have to be looking at. Very good. Thank you. Seeing no other comments, we'll go to public comment. Is there any in-person speakers? Yes, we have three in-person speakers. Okay. And how many online who would like to speak to this item? Now would be the time to raise your hand. So far you have three. Okay. We'll allow two minutes for each speaker. In person we have Gaylord, Karen, and Hanson. Okay we'll take them in that order. I think that Allie Gaylord had to leave, she had to go and present in front of the Oaklin City Council. Okay. Good afternoon. I'm Sharon Cornu from St. Mary Center. The green one. Good morning. I'm Sharon Cornu from St. Mary Center. Thank you for this opportunity to talk about housing opportunity in Alameda County as the director at St. Mary Center and also as a co-chair of the Housing Capacity Committee of our continuum of care. We have seen the results of measure A1, a fabulous success in creating more than 4,000 new homes, which St. Mary seniors have been able to move into, get off the streets for exactly the recent shared earlier, and continue contributing to our community, which is vitally important to us. The opportunity to renew or revise, we're calling it measure A2, we're calling it measure A2, And to bring a new measure forward to adapt to current conditions is critically important. St. Mary's is working with private partners and raising private funds to do some opinion research, not public funds, but private funds to do opinion research, to understand voter opinion and the next steps that are necessary in what is a rapidly changing environment. And we encourage policymakers to look flexibly at a variety of different options that are focused on meeting the ultimate outcome and needs is outlined in the 10-year plan. We will be strong partners and ready to go to do our share and our part of the heavy lift. We put together an outstanding coalition in 2016 to pass measure A1 that did 18 community outreach sessions. I hope HCD is ready for that again. But also put together a coalition of community organizations, service providers, labor, business, and advocates to do the work that's necessary. This is a critical time, a time with a great deal of confusion, and isn't today a great day to be talking about local money. Thank you the committee. In person speaker. First of all, right? There we go. Hi, Board of Supervisors. My name is Nate Hansen. I'm the manager of government affairs and also Senior Development Associate at Related California. Related California is one of the largest developers of mixed income and affordable housing in the state. We've done roughly 16,000 units throughout the state of California in our 34 years. I'm sure speaking in support of the housing plan and the incredible work that's being done by your staff. We are working with Ebalt C on the 401430 Broadway project, which I'll say if you know the public comment for me, thank you for considering its day in close session, which is submitted for our two buildings for entitlements on the 430 block today. This is an incredibly important time for local funding, for housing, particularly here. We need measure A1, we need measure A2, as my colleague was saying in the original comment before me, and we also need ongoing operating subsidy for particularly permanent supportive housing that addresses the homelessness need in our county. So I appreciate your time and your energy spent on these efforts and I encourage you to continue to explore all of these opportunities. Thank you. You know, you know, yes. All are your online. Please state your name. You have two minutes to speak. Hi, this is Janelle Chan. I'm the CEO of a Balcy. Hello to a board of supervisors. We've served the East Bay for 50 years and are the leading nonprofit verbal housing developer and provider in Oakland. 75% of those we serve make less than 25,000 40% of our households have children. Roughly 40% of our three projects currently under construction will serve the most vulnerable of sighted in the housing plan. We have experience, can we use more scale to get the job done? We all know that Trump administration issued an executive order yesterday to free federal grants and funding. I bring the last point up because, you know, we will be the partners who try to protect and partner where we can DC and want to emphasize that this is a time that we need to count and be partners and partnership amongst. What I've heard in Supervisor Miley's words is an urgency and urgency to control our destiny to have self-determination and really truly community stewardship of our land. And so we're hard at work in Oakland. We even secure federal DOT funding for planning around our fourth and broadway project. That's up in question, but we're here to partner and to make those things a reality. Those resources are a reality for us. And the idea that you are exploring, additional bond measure, it's putting forth a idea and the exploration and partnership and resources for us to make this happen. I want to say that as you're pivoting towards implementation, we're delighted to hear and thankful to hear the leadership that Michelle Sarah has been providing and we'll be providing as you enter into implementation territory. She was instrumental in the 2016 measure A1 and I hope that in your future initiatives you will continue to staff appropriately so we can work with you effectively. Thank you. I'm going to go to the office. How are you on the line? Please state your name. I am the chief housing policy officer for the city of Oakland. I'm with the city deputy director for but today I'm also tagging in for Ali Gaylord, Oakland HCD's deputy director for housing development. And I just like to share that Oakland CAO and HCD fully support Alameda County HCD's housing plan and we really look forward to aligning our resources to provide funding to both interim and permanent affordable housing solutions. Oakland does have a demonstrated pipeline of thousands of affordable housing units that can be moved forward by the alignment of city and county resources. And to that point, we support the ideas discussed here for a general obligation bond just as measure A1 has been enormously successful. Another county level of general obligation bond would be truly catalytic at this time. Because as you as director of Starrad and councilmember boss already referred to city and county funding leverage when another. And so together our proposals are far more competitive for state free sources. What that means is that a new bond measure would not only unlock developments that are stalled out in the county due to lack of funding, but it would also bring more state resources into the county. Thank state your name. You have two minutes to speak. Dean, did you want to speak? We have another impersonal speaker. I hear you busily spending a lot of money. And I'm all in respect of union workers. But you've got a lot of people who are living in substandard housing or whose incomes are overburdened by paying for housing. But they all know how to use a hammer and nails and some women. Why can't these people reconstruct, recondition their housing, the ones that they live in now, with the guarantee that they can maintain their contract with their landlord. You don't have to float a bond. You don't have to get public money from some public agency. That was the last speaker. Okay, very good. Well, thank you for the presentation. We're now going to recess. We have maybe flow session items. And then we'll come back. Supervisor. I'm not sure if you can answer that question. I'm not sure if you can answer that question. I'm not sure if you can answer that question. I'm not sure if you can answer that question. I'm not sure if you can answer that question. I'm not sure if you can answer that question. I'm not sure if you can answer that question. I'm not sure if you can answer that question. we did over the last decade, so it was successful. We're going to recess for now to close session. And I just clarify, I don't think are we going to have time for measure? We have a three o'clock. I don't know. It's already 130. We have things waiting. I'm sorry that it's taken so long. You can blame me for the length of the meeting. But we're going to go to closed session. We're going to come back here and we will hear measure C. As soon as we are able, I don't know exactly how long that would take. I'm going to guess somewhere between 30 and half an hour. Yeah. We'll come back here at two o'clock and we have a hard stop at 2.30 as well. So we'll have 30 minutes to talk about it. We can add more meetings later but we'll have 30 minutes at two o'clock. Time-bound limited. Thank you. All right, the Board of Supervisors is now reconvened to our open session. Will the clerk please call the roll? Supervisor Marquez. President, Supervisor Tam, excuse. Supervisor Miley. Supervisor Fortenadovaz. Present. President Halbert. Present. All right, with that said, we're going to move on to item 3.2, measure C, children's health, and childcare initiative implementation. Go ahead. Okay, great, thank you. My name is Kristen Spano,, I'm the CEO for First 5, Alameda County, and I am joined with Ayano Agawa, who's our chief program officer. I'm going to truncate the presentation in honor of the time, ensuring time that we have today. So just to highlight in terms of the珍しい was passed in 2020, it faced four years of litigation. It's a half percent sales tax that came out successful out of the courts in April and we are in the process of preparing a five-year plan but also in partnership with community. We have worked quickly to develop emergency stabilization fund that you have copies of and we have met with board members as went through the Community Advisory Committee where we saw the Brown Act of Meeting, we saw approval and guidance, and then we brought that forward to the first five commission, which approved it unanimously of what your board has a representative and two members of the department had sits on the nine member commission as well as community leadership member and an ED of an alternative payment provider. We are seeking to have the emergency stable as a stabilization fund proposal put on your agenda for appropriation of funds. So that's just broad context. I'm going to fly through the slides very quickly. When we have that appropriation is that meant to be a set matter item where we have an actual presentation. So this is a get ready for that. Today was intended to be, as I understood it, the opportunity to provide an overview of the emergency stabilization proposal to take and field questions. Okay, in your broad direction. Okay, thank you. And then to have the matter go to the board for a vote in action. So slide I see today we won't see at that or if you want to show it there you don't need to I'm right here bit of technical difficulty, but I know we're getting there. good news and I'm actually just in terms of I appreciated being present for the housing conversation because as and I also appreciated this is a potentially presentation and opportunity for celebration both for the board and for the broader community with With measure C, we have money that we have been collecting as a county since the tax was enacted in 2021. And we are on the precipice of being able to begin programming that money out into the community. And also just recognizing the early childhood as an essential service and important obviously needed for people to be able to work. Also we know 90% of the child's brain develops by the age of five so incredibly tender, important years in addition to how our local residents make ends meet. We heard what the how high it costs, the housing is, and the new layer on top of that childcare, which actually the growth in childcare expenses of outpace the cost of housing, making it almost impossible for families to live in our local beautiful Bay Area. So again, just going, quickly I'm gonna hand it over to Iano, who's going to walk through high level the emergency stabilization proposal. Again, that was developed in a community brown acted process, but just want to know in terms of appreciation both for the early care and education field providers and families who really led the charge in this community initiative. and the generosity of the voters to make this money available to us. The intended presentation was for an overview of measure C, which I provided, and then a high level overview of the emergency stabilization fund, and then of course next steps. So the 80-20 split, as I indicated, you're going to hear about the 20, I think, in a little bit. We're talking about the 80 as it relates to the Child Care Preschool and Early Education Sub-A count. We're the named Administrator, Administrator, First Five. And then there's this really unique kind of governing process as it relates to the measure C of which there's an ordinance mandated community advisory council of which First Five and it's brown active and it's intended to advise us on the program plan and also receive an annual audit. In addition, we have a nine member commission for the first five of which the board appoints all nine members and as I indicated, one of the board of supervisors members is a representative on that commission of which it will be supervisor Nikki Vass going forward. And then in addition we have the Board of Supervisors where you play the role of both approving the five-year plan and really it's an appropriating function to ensure that we can have access to the funding and start implementing as needed. And then you receive and conduct annual independent financial audits. And then, Sir President Miley has a quick question. Sure. I'll let him ask now. Sure. Okay, thanks answer. I'm not sure if you're going to get the right answer. I'm not sure if you're going to get the right answer. I'm not sure if you're going to get the right answer. I'm not the board has the authority to one, you appropriate the funding and the plan goes to you for approval. I would caution in terms of the intention is that there's brown acted community advisory committee of which the board appoints five of the 11 members and that the Board appoints the nine member first five commission that also hears and approves the five year plan or any expenditure plan that's going forward related to measure C. But it has to come up to you for ultimate appropriation of that funding. So, so I don't misinterpret what you said. So the funding that's being recommended, we can potentially modify that. But if we wanna, let's say, I have additional funding, it probably needs to go back through the whole process. It depending upon how the authority is written and the governing letters, because the first five commission is a brown acted commission. And so depending upon if it requires to go back down to them, I think as we move forward and implement this structure and process, I would like to be in close partnership with the board around how we move and do the planning and the appropriation in a way that is both effective and allows for good public policy. So I can, well, I know you know there's a concern. So maybe I'll wait till we get to that to see what type of flexibility we have. Yeah. So just to note it in terms of we're on a two-phase approach that we we've had as I indicated you seated the Community Advisory Committee. We've had four meetings since August that were again brown acted in participatory to gain insight. In the third meeting everyone coalesced the CAC coalesced around the idea of quick wins because people have been waiting for this funding for four years. So we brought together a proposal, sought input, and then moved that process through the commission for adoption in December and then are bringing it forward to you for appropriation of that funding and seeking board action on that. In addition to that, we are also what we were mandated to do. So the emergency stabilization fund was an initial action that wasn't mandated in the ordinance. We did it to be responsive to community because we know people have been waiting. What is mandated is the development of a five-year plan. And so we are in the process of hosting listening sessions of which we are partnering with West Ed and again using the CAC meetings that are brown-acted to receive feedback and put from the community, we have five listening sessions, each and every board of supervisor district. Then we're hosting three additional ones in the city of Oakland because we have a contractor with the Oakland Children's Initiative and seeking to coordinate that funding with this funding as well. And then leveraging, we've done surveys, we're leveraging existing data and other research that has been done leading up to this event. So we have this two tiered kind of process. One was to be responsive and it was done voluntarily hearing what community needed, which is being brought in front of you for appropriation. The second is the five-year plan that we are in the process of completing and intent to bring that five-year plan to the board. It would probably be in May or June for appropriation of that funding. So with that said, I'm going to hand it to Iano Agawa, who is our chief of program. And just for context and show, I think touch upon this as well. 150 million annually in sales tax is significant. It is profound. It's an incredible investment in early childhood. Unheard of really both in our county but also as national significance, but it is not gonna meet all of the need. It's similar to the housing situation. So there are tough decisions to be made as we go ahead. We know that the workers are not being paid enough. We know that families do not have access to subsidies. We know that we can provide better environmental spaces. We know that we have a teacher crisis. And so all of that is going to have to be addressed in part within the context of 150 million not a billion. So just have that, I just, you know, would want to be a partnership around how to navigate a pretty complicated landscape as we move forward. Thank you. Hi, I know Galatica programs for first slide says, Kristen noted that need that early care and education system, their significant needs, and Alameda County over a billion annually plus an additional one-time investment of two to four billion dollars to successfully meet these needs. Moving from a fragmented system to an integrated one that really works for our families, children, and our providers. You can see the different buckets that this covers in the different investment areas, whether that's increased access to subsidized care, increased compensation, workforce development initiatives, and increasing the quality of early care education facilities. So as Kristin noted, the needs are far greater than the funding available, and there will need to be trade-offs and prioritization around how we invest in Meturacy while we also work across partners to leverage other funding opportunities. So with that backdrop of needing at least $1 billion annually to address the full needs of our early care and education system, the annual sales tax for the Meturacy Child Care account is projected around $154 million. And so the five-year program plan will include proposals for using these annual funds. However, again, we know that there's significant need for short-term relief, which is why we're proposing this emergency stabilization fund. As Kristen noted, the tax has been collected since July of 2021 so we have about 500 million dollars that's been deposited in the childcare account. We're proposing to use about one third of these funds so about 165 million dollars for the emergency stabilization fund leaving around $330 million for long-term sustainability and systems transformation. It seems like someone has questioned. Recognize from the matter. So my question here then is if the board wants to, can we go further than that $116 million and take additional funds out of the money that $330 million. And add to the emergency stabilization, if we, or do we, or will we have to go back through all the questions? So you have the authority to do that. Okay. Why we wrote the commission letter allowing that we could move forward with the adoption of any changes. Then it's a question of, should you go higher than what we propose to trade off and the impacts of what that means in the future? Yeah, I understand. But just want to know if we do that okay, thank you. Thanks. And then do want to note that the emergency stabilization fund investment is greater than the anticipated annual allocation. So, to best prioritize medirecy investments, first five has undertaken a robust community engagement process. We have heard very clearly from community that immediate investments are needed to stabilize the field. But at the same time, community members have raised the need for a thoughtful public process to shape more complex long-term investments. So the Emergency Stabilization Fund is the initial investment that will be incorporated into the five-year plan. And this five-year plan will include per the ordinance requirement setting a minimum wage floor and providing additional subsidies for child care slots. These are administratively complex and require additional planning, deep community engagement to successfully implement, which is why they're not in the initial investments here in the relief fund. For example, we actually just held a three hour public hearing last week on wages and compensation benefits that had over 170 participants come and join us. again,, the wages in the subsidy portion will be part of the five year plan, which will be brought to you this spring in a few months. So a snapshot of the investments for the emergency stabilization fund. It focuses on program and community investments across four key areas, providers, families, facilities, and capacity. And these investments aim to provide immediate stability and relief for the field while I was also laying the foundation for future investments. And based on community feedback, the largest investment is in the immediate relief grants for child care centers and family child care programs to help keep their doors open. And in addition to this funding for providers, we're proposing several workforce development investments to attract and retain educators, such as apprenticeship programs. And then to support families, we have, we're proposing funding for enhanced child care and navigation through a resource and referral partners, increase family supports through family resource centers, and for the development of a coordinated child care eligibility and enrollment system. We also know that many families choose family, friend and neighbor care, such as grandparents. They are key part of the child care system, so we propose relief funds for these caregivers as well. Then as I previously shared, the Early Care and Education System also have significant facilities needs. To begin addressing these needs, we're proposing initial facilities grants to child care centers, family child care programs, family resource centers, and family shelters. And these investments initially will address critical health and safety issues and support the conversion of childcare spaces to serve infant and toddlers because there's a great unmet need there. And then finally, this work requires substantial capacity building for our field and for first five. We're proposing critical investments in data and evaluation, including funding for a metr-c evaluation as mandated in the ordinance and funding to support community engagement. And finally, to support the work of first five staff to plan for an administer metr-c, have included first five staffing and program costs as well as a proposed 15% administrative fee based on the fiscal year 2425 programmatic and community investments. To note that our direct staffing costs does not include our executive leadership team, except for chief of programs, and then administrative fee is consistent with federal direct rates. Now I'll pass it back to Kristen to share our next steps. So quickly in terms of we have we've already touched upon the slide I want to know in terms of in the investments that I just went over. The two critical investments that did not include because we knew it would be administratively more cumbersome is one we know that we are required to implement a minimum wage floor. The ordinance that's written into the legislation is absolutely legally mandated that will come forward with a five year plan. The second is subsidies that we know that we have 90% unmet need in infant and toddler and close to 65% for two and three year olds. So subsidies and access to care is absolutely essential and fundamental and will be part of the five year plan. just to just to know, these are again, we're trying to be responsive and are quick wins because people have been waiting for this funding for quite some time. So here's again, the lineup as related to the listening sessions I have been scheduled. You can see they've been well attended, really have appreciated your offices, including and your newsletters. Of the most recent one, as Iano indicated, those are 171 attendees. We have facilities on February 1st. This gives you a sense of the geographic spread. We've been intentional about where we actually host them. The meetings are translated into six languages and also translation is available on demand. And it's Zoom and in person. Just a sense of the five-year plan, I indicated there's been lots of readying, there's lots of great work that existed before the funding became available and we're just wanting to make sure that we leverage and will also create a really broad engagement process and strategy. And then lastly, in terms of today, for the informational session, it was just to highlight we have this again proposal that was developed. We are seeking appropriation of the funding so that implementation of the implementation of the implementation of the implementation of the implementation of the implementation of the implementation of the implementation of the implementation of the implementation of celebration of an increase in minimum wage floor and more subsidies for families that will be part of the five year plan and we'll be looking for you to appropriate that funding in June to allow us to continue for implementation July 1. So with that, I'll try to move quickly. I think we're within the half hour. I will take any questions that you may have. Is there any specific direction that you're asking us to say this way or that way, yes or no, left or right? Please agenda is the, please agenda is appropriation of these funds to be approved by the board at the most recent board meeting whether that be very important. We'll provide direction to agenda is a future item. Very good. Questions from the board, President Miley then, then certain advice I want to get to colleagues. I was a provide, so, so Christian, you know, we, got some feedback from SCIU. So, have we been able to resolve in reconcile their concerns? I'm sorry, could you repeat your question? Have we been able to address the concerns in the CIO. I, we have brought forward the proposal that we, they sit on the CAC. There's been conversations with them. I don't know if there's specific outstanding issues that they have. There hasn't been a specific specific request or there have been public, some public comments, but not unanimous around the size of the grants. But I, there hasn't, like I said, the proposal was voted on unanimously by the commission and it brought through the CAC of which we actually increased the grants from the initial proposal. It was at 30 and 40. We raised for family childcare. We raised that up to 40 and $50,000. Yeah, I think they want the grants to be higher. And I was thinking that once this comes to the board and we're public comment on it. even if we raise the size of the grants, we could still keep the amount that's been appropriated in that bucket at the same ceiling. And then once the grants are exhausted, then revisit whether or not we need to put more money in that bucket. That's what I was thinking, but I'll wait to hear from the public. The question I have is around that, I believe, a question was, well, a couple of things. One, providers that have been decimated for years. COVID was horrible. COVID ended. These providers are still here. Amazingly they've survived. Are we talking about all child care providers who serve children of low-income families? Or I believe there is a discrepancy around only in certain communities versus serving children of low-income. Like, who is, when you present this to us, or the plan, I guess, that was recently approved, that you will be presenting to us, has that been resolved? That was the big question mark. The last time I heard this presentation, or do we not have an answer yet? So, two things so the proposals and the presentations that were provided were what was approved What one that both received community input and was brought through the CAC and then was responded to and then what was brought to the first five commission and voted upon. So since then, there have been, and in the process of developing it, and all of these needs are valid, all of them. And it was really clear in the ordinance, and there is evaluations, and there are audits, and it is local litigated tax money, that there are pros and cons and balancing that has to be done. So the eligibility that was proposed and again was adopted by the first five commission was one that really centered equity. So it said for these grants that are one time only, it's not the ongoing program. But for these grants, the eligibility is you are either receiving subsidy, so you're a provider that has taken subsidy. For the last two years, we actually widened it. Or you operate within a census track of 5% of poverty or higher. So it's or it's not a end. And in doing that, about 75% of providers in the county actually qualify. And so that was consistent with the language and the ordinance that also prioritized both the socioeconomics of families as well as the place where it calls out, make ensuring that the financial benefits of this money goes to areas that have been disinvested. So the eligibility proposal that was brought forward and adopted is that. There is concerns among providers, again, totally valid because people have been doing incredible work, particularly the family childcare providers who are saying, can we be eligible for these grants as well? And so what was adopted is the eligibility criteria that I identified. The other that was brought up was the size of the grants. Was it if it was going to be at 40,000 and 50,000 for family child care, or if it would go up to $90,000 and $100,000. And what was approved and brought forward were grants at $40,000 and $50,000. Again, with an eye to what are we gonna spend one time money on versus what are we gonna have available to program out over time? There are variations of supervising myle was indicating that we could run scenarios on at your direction but what you had in front of you and what I proposed and presented to you was what was adopted by the first five commission. Very good. Any other questions from my colleagues? I note that we have 3 o'clock set matter. I note that we have a pediatrics portion of measure C presentation that also needs to be made. I note that we have public comment on this item yet to be made. And we, at some point, will have to recess this meeting, go across the street and have a very important set matter. And if we need to come back to this item, may I ask how many speaker slips in the room and online? You have two in-person speakers and 14 online. Yeah, so we're not going to get through the public comment before we have to go to our set matter item. I'll ask the public commenters in the room to speak, but we will recess and have to take online speakers at the conclusion of our set matter item at three o'clock. We can't move the three o'clock. So we'll take in person speakers and I just want to clarify with staff that would need to need to present on the pediatric portion of this. It's coming here. Are we okay with having that? What's your desire for that portion of this very important topic? After our three o'clock set matter, continue to another date. I would defer to your board's decision. I think there are two items that our agency has that are still left on the agenda. I could be fast on the other side of this meeting. I mean, when you reconvene, I could be fast online. But if I had to prioritize the epic item or the electronic health record item. We'll get them both done. We'll get them both. And I can do both of those on the other side. Yeah. So with that said the in-person speakers for this item two minutes each. We have Mary and Nancy are the two in-person on this item, better see, better see. Yes. Hello supervisors. My name is Mary Huckle and I'm the CEO of Hive Lee. We're one of the largest AP distributors of childcare subsidies in the county. We serve all of Elimita County. And I'm here to ask you to include all family child care providers in the county. We serve all of Alameda County. And I'm here to ask you to include all family child care providers in the emergency funding. There are 1200 providers that total in Alameda County, 204 are being left out. The first skate for child care subsidies is not their fault. We have a thousand kids on our wait list and we have exhausted all of our funds in state and county. Many of these providers were very open to having subsidy children and we ran out of funding other agencies were not able to place them. Children, parents did not pick them. It doesn't take away from the fact that they have been struggling as businesses. They have staff that might live in these other track areas to pay. And so you will hear their stories actually in public comment about their struggles and how they may close if they are not given this funding as well. It would be an additional approximately $10 million to fund 204 family child care providers. I remember this isn't a high margin business. No one's getting rich off of this. Every child care provider is struggling in the county. Whether you live in Livermore or Oakland or Fremont. And so that's my request that you include all family childcare providers in this emergency funding so that every area of Alameda County can have access to quality childcare and enough spaces to meet the community need. Thank you. Mary? Can you see? No, I just don't speak for a sin person. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Nancy Harvey. I'm a child care provider from the West Oakland community of 21 years. I'm also the CCPU representative for Alameda County, child care providers, you nine it. I am here to humbly ask for $100,000 for child care providers. Let's go back several years when Godbruster So, our dear Wilma Chan was here fighting along with amazing, our amazing supervisor Nate Miley. We have been on this journey for a very, very long time, 2017, 2018, something like that. Our providers are hanging on like this. We need a hundred thousand. And I know that there are providers all over the Alameda County that are in need, but let's face it, some are in a greater need than others. Many of our providers are single women living in West Oakland, East Oakland, North Oakland that are really truly surviving. And we are serving the most vulnerable communities. So I ask humbly ask that you consider the $100,000 bar large family childcare providers and 90,000 for a smoke child care providers. We keep California working. We keep Alameda County working. we keep us off thriving. Thank you so much for this opportunity. Seeing no more in-person speakers and knowing that we have to take up our set matter item across the street. We're going to recess this meeting. As we do, we're going to step into a separate meeting called the three o'clock special meeting and when that is done, we will resume this meeting. I'm going to ask the county council to explain exactly how that is going to go. So before that we're going to ask the supervisor my legitimate question. I'm going to go. So before that, we're going to ask, you guys, to provide some mileage. Just a question. When we resume this meeting, will we have to come back over here? Or can we do it in the chamber? I'm going to address that. Yes, so the chair has advised that this meeting will be recessed, but it will be continued to our next agenda. So we will not recess, we will not return to this location because the remaining items on this agenda, including the balance of public comment on the item we just heard. All of that will be continued to our special meeting which is currently noticed and set at 3 p.m. and for those appearing in person, it will be at 1221 Oak Street on the 5th floor in the board chambers. For those who want to participate remotely, that agenda is posted on our website online and so this meeting will be formally continued to the balance of this meeting will be formally continued to that agenda. So question there, if you're online and you have the link for this meeting is it a different link for that three o'clock meeting and would they then? Yes, the agenda is posted online and so they will need to consult that agenda and the information for the three o'clock meeting today for the link to participate in that meeting online. And all of the remaining items on this agenda are continued to that meeting. Okay, anybody online can find the link to our three o'clock meeting. You won't need to comment on that item unless you want to, but you will then be able to comment on these items using that link. With that said, we have a few minutes to get across the street. And I'll just say with respect to this meeting, I'm just going to report out that there are no reportable items from closed session today. Thank you. Thank you, everyone.