[00:00:02]
          - MADAM CLERK, ARE WE READY? - YES, WE ARE CHAIR. 
          - OKAY. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER 
          [CALL TO ORDER]
THE DECEMBER 16TH, 2025 MEETING OF THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. 
          UM, MADAM CLERK, WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL ROLL CALL? - CERTAINLY SUPERVISOR DESERPA  - PRESENT - CUMMINGS   - HERE - MARTINEZ  - PRESENT - KOENIG  - HERE - AND HERNANDEZ  - HERE. 
          I'D LIKE TO SEE IF ANY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD WOULD LIKE TO DEDICATE TODAY'S MOMENT OF SILENT. 
          [MOMENT OF SILENCE AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]
- CHAIR. 
          - YES. 
          - UH, WITH GREAT SADNESS. 
          UM, I'VE UNDERSTOOD THAT, UM, OUR FORMER SUPERVISOR, ROBLEY LEVY, PASSED AWAY LAST WEEK. 
          UM, SHE WAS A SUPERVISOR FROM 1980 TO 1992. 
          I WAS HAD THE GREAT PLEASURE OF VISITING WITH HER AT HER HOME ABOUT THREE WEEKS AGO. 
          UM, AND SHE WAS DELIGHTFUL, STILL VERY SHARP AND, UM, GAVE ME A LOT OF GOOD TIPS. 
          SO, UH, OUR HEART SQUAD TO OUR FAMILY AND WE THANK HER FOR HER SERVICE AND HER COURAGE, UH, TO SERVE ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. THANK YOU. 
          - THANK YOU. IF THERE'S NO OTHERS, PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE MOMENT OF SILENCE. 
          PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. 
          I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. 
          I'D LIKE TO ASK OUR COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER OFFICER NICOLE COBURN, IF THERE'S ANY ADDITIONS, LATE ADDITIONS, 
          [CONSIDERATION OF LATE ADDITIONS TO THE AGENDA; ADDITIONS AND DELETIONS TO CONSENT AND REGULAR AGENDAS]
DELETIONS TO THE REGULAR CONSENT, REGULAR OR CONSENT AGENDA. 
          - YES, CHAIR. WE DO HAVE, UM, A CORRECTION. 
          WE HAVE ADDITIONAL MATERIALS FOR ITEM SEVEN. 
          WE HAVE A REVISED MEMO PACKET, PAGE 13, WHICH HAS BEEN REPLACED CORRECT FROM COMMUNITY OVERSIGHT ADVISORY BOARD AND SHOULD READ COMMUNITY CITIZEN OVERSIGHT ADVISORY BOARD. 
          THAT'S ALL. 
          - OKAY. 
          [INAUDIBLE] IF ANY OF BOARD MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE ANY ITEMS FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA. 
          [ANNOUNCEMENT BY BOARD MEMBERS OF ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT TO REGULAR AGENDA]
SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS? - CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO PULL ITEM NUMBER 26. 
          - 26. 
          SO 26 WILL NOW BE 14.1. 
          OKAY, NOW WE'LL OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEMS ON CONSENT AGENDA, OR NOT ON THE AGENDA. 
          - MORNING CHAIR. 
          UH, MY NAME IS STEVE WIESNER, 
          [PUBLIC COMMENT]
ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS. 
          UH, WITH ME TODAY IS ALEX SANDOVAL. 
          HE'S OUR ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT. 
          AND, UM, WE'RE UP HERE THIS MORNING TO HONOR ONE OF OUR LONGTIME STAFF MEMBERS, AUGIE WALTRIP, WHO, UM, IS RETIRING AT THE END OF THIS MONTH. 
          AUGIE'S BEEN WITH THE COUNTY FOR 45 YEARS. 
          - WOW. 
          - HE STARTED AS A FRESHMAN IN HIGH SCHOOL THROUGH ONE OF OUR YOUTH, UM, SERVICE PROGRAMS. AND SO, UM, AUGIE I KNOW FOR ME, UH, WORKED WITH AUGIE FOR A LONG TIME. 
          HE'S BEEN ONE OF OUR GO-TO GUYS OUT IN THE ROAD CREW. 
          UM, HE'S DONE EVERYTHING REALLY. 
          AND, UH, YOU COULD IMAGINE HE'S BEEN THROUGH EVERY MAJOR EVENT WE'VE HAD. 
          DISASTER EVENT FROM THE 82 FLOODS TO THE EARTHQUAKE IN 89, TO ALL OF THE MOST RECENT, UM, STORM EVENTS THAT, UH, WE'VE HAD TO RESPOND TO. 
          AND SO HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY HERE TODAY IN THE ROOM CAN, UH, JUST TAKE A MOMENT TO, TO HONOR THIS GUY'S SERVICE HERE AS EXEMPLARY REALLY. 
          AND, UH, SO I'M A LITTLE EVEN CHOKED UP BY SAYING GOODBYE TO AUGIE. 
          'CAUSE UM, LIKE I SAID, HE'S BEEN HERE HELPING US THIS WHOLE TIME, UM, AND KIND OF IN THE BACKGROUND SOMETIMES, BUT NOT SO MUCH, UH, IN THE FOREGROUND, REALLY HELPING THE COUNTY GET THROUGH SOME OF ITS HARDEST DAYS. 
          UM, SO ALEX HAS GOT A PROCLAMATION. 
          HE'S GONNA READ THAT WE HAVE, UM, AN ORDER TODAY. 
          BUT JUST APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION AND, UH, JUST WANT TO CONGRATULATE AUGIE ON A GREAT CAREER AND, UH, WISH HIM THE BEST IN HIS RETIREMENT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          - GOOD MORNING BOARD. 
          GOOD MORNING CHAIR HERNANDEZ, CEO COBURN, UH, ALEX SANDOVAL, YOUR ROAD SUPERINTENDENT. 
          UM, I'LL BE READING THIS PROCLAMATION. 
          WHEREAS AUGUST AUGIE L WALTRIP HAS WORKED FOR SANTA CRUZ COUNTY FOR OVER 45 YEARS AND HAS DISTINGUISHED HIMSELF AS AN ADMIRABLE EMPLOYEE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS IN THE ROADS AND DRAINAGE MAINTENANCE SECTION. 
          [00:05:02]
AND WHEREAS AUGIE BEGAN WORKING FOR THE COUNTY IN 1979 AS A FRESHMAN WHILE ATTENDING SOCAL HIGH, WHERE HE UTILIZED THE YOUTH EMPLOYMENT SERVICE PROGRAM IN HIS FRESHMAN AND SOPHOMORE YEARS AND WORKED HIS JUNIOR AND SENIOR YEAR AS PART OF THE JOB TRAINING PARTNERSHIP ACT. 
          AND WHEREAS THREE YEARS LATER IN SEPTEMBER 1982, AUGIE BEGAN WORKING IN A PERMANENT STATUS FOR SANTA CRUZ COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AS A PUBLIC WORKS MAINTENANCE WORKER AFTER DEVELOPING ROAD CONSTRUCTION EXPERIENCE DURING HIS YOUTH EMPLOYMENT, AND WHEREAS AUGIE WAS PROMOTED TO ASSISTANT ROAD SUPERINTENDENT IN MAY OF 2022 AND IS CURRENTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OPERATIONS OF ROAD AND DRAINAGE MAINTENANCE CREWS THROUGHOUT SANTA CRUZ COUNTY AND IS THE LONGEST TENURED ACTIVE COUNTY EMPLOYEE. 
          AND WHEREAS AUGIE HAS RESPONDED SWIFTLY AND RELIABLY TO EVERY MAJOR AND MINOR DISASTER IN SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, INCLUDING THE 1982 LOVE CREEK MUDSLIDE AND TOWN OF SOQUEL FLOODING, THE 1989 LOMA PRIETA EARTHQUAKE, THE 20 6 2017 WINTER STORMS, 2020 CZU LIGHTNING COMPLEX FIRES AND THE 2023 WINTER STORMS. AND WHEREAS AUGIE'S DEDICATED HARD WORK DURING EMERGENCY AND DISASTER RESPONSE EVENTS HAS BEEN A SIGNIFICANT SERVICE TO THE RESIDENTS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, AND HE HAS RECEIVED NUMEROUS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS OF RECOGNITION AND THINGS FROM THE PUBLIC AND OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES, INCLUDING LOCAL FIRE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENTS REGARDING HIS ROAD MAINTENANCE, STORM REPAIR WORK, AND EMERGENCY AGENCY ASSISTANCE WHILE WORKING FOR SANTA CRUZ COUNTY. 
          AND WHEREAS AUGIE'S CAREER WITH COUNTY OF THE COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ WILL COME TO AN END ON DECEMBER 30TH, 2025 WHEN HE BEGINS HIS NEW CHAPTER OF RETIREMENT AND HE WILL BE GREATLY MISSED BY AS MANY FRIENDS IN THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS. 
          NOW THEREFORE, UH, CHAIR HERNANDEZ, UH, CHAIR OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DO HEREBY EXPRESS SINCERE APPRECIATION TO AUGUST AUGIE WALTRIP FOR OVER 45 YEARS OF HIS DEDICATED SERVICE AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS AND WISH HIM GOOD HEALTH AND COUNTLESS HAPPY MOMENTS SHARED WITH HIS CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN AND THE YEARS AHEAD. 
          - THANK YOU. 
          - UH, SURE FOGGY WOULD LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS UP THERE ON THE PODIUM. 
          - OH, I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN. 
          IT'S BEEN A LONG CAREER. 
          UM, I REALLY ENJOYED IT. REALLY APPRECIATED. 
          I'VE WORKED WITH A LOT OF THE AGENCIES FROM THE FIRE DEPARTMENTS TO THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT HELPING THEM. 
          UM, LIKE I SAID, IT'S BEEN MY WHOLE LIFE. 
          UM, I'VE WORKED WITH JASON MANY A TIMES. 
          MOST DEPARTMENTS HAVE WORKED WITH SOME FORM OF SOMEBODY FROM 'EM. 
          UM, IT'S JUST HARD TO BELIEVE. 
          UH, JUST YESTERDAY MORNING THIS MORNING IT'S STARTING TO HIT ME STARTING TO REALIZE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S TIME. 
          UM, I JUST CAN'T BELIEVE THAT IT'S COMING TO THAT POINT. 
          'CAUSE YOU KNOW, YOU THINK IT'S GONNA KEEP GOING. 
          AND I MEAN, I WOKE UP THIS MORNING AT EARLY AND IT'S LIKE, OH, I'M GOING TO WORK EARLY. 
          YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF GETTING HERE EARLY, LIKE I ALWAYS DO. 
          I WAS WIND UP EVEN EARLIER, YOU KNOW. 
          AND MY WORST, MY WORST THING IS I'M GONNA WAKE UP THURSDAY MORNING AND WIND FIND MYSELF IN MY OFFICE AT WORK. 
          SO, BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE EVERYBODY, I'LL MISS EVERYBODY, ESPECIALLY PUBLIC WORKS WHERE I PRETTY MUCH SPENT MOST OF MY LIFE. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          - BEAUTIFUL. 
          - UH, GOOD MORNING, UH, BOARD, PUBLIC AND STAFF. 
          MY NAME IS SAM FILSON. 
          I'M DIVISION CHIEF FOR CALFIRE IN THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT. 
          TODAY WE ARE HONORED TO RECOGNIZE AND CELEBRATE CHRIS WALTERS AS HE RETIRES AFTER MORE THAN TWO DECADES OF DEDICATED SERVICE, AS THE DEPUTY FIRE MARSHAL FOR PAJARO VALLEY FIRE PROTECTOR DISTRICT AND THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT. 
          BEFORE JOINING THE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE, CHRIS BEN, OVER 10 YEARS IN THE FIRE SERVICE AS A SANTA CRUZ COUNTY VOLUNTEER FIREFIGHTER ONE AND FIRE APPARATUS ENGINEER. 
          FROM THE START, HIS CAREER HAS BEEN DEFINED BY A STRONG COMMITMENT TO PUBLIC SAFETY AND SERVICE. 
          CHRIS IS A LIFELONG RESIDENT OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, BORN AND RAISED IN THE COMMUNITY IS WHERE HE HAS WORKED SO HARD TO PROTECT. 
          BEYOND HIS PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES HE'S GENEROUSLY VOLUNTEERED COUNTLESS HOURS BUILDING AND MAINTAINING TRAILS THROUGHOUT THE SANTA CRUZ MOUNTAINS, HELPING PRESERVE AND SHARE THE NATURAL BEAUTY OF OUR REGION. 
          MANY ALSO KNOW CHRIS IS AN AVID GAR-, GARDENER, 
          [00:10:02]
FAMOUS FOR HIS OUTSTANDING TOMATOES AND HOMEMADE PICKLES, SMALL BUT MAKING FULL REFLECTIONS OF HIS CARE FOR THE LAND AND THE COMMUNITY HE LOVES. 
          THROUGHOUT HIS CAREER, CHRIS BROUGHT FIRE PREVENTION PROFESSIONALS TOGETHER ACROSS THE COUNTY, HELPING UNIFY PRACTICES, STRENGTHEN COLLABORATION, AND CREATE POSITIVE LASTING CHANGE. 
          HIS LEADERSHIP AND STEADY PRESENCE HAVE MADE OUR COMMUNITY SAFER AND MORE RESILIENT. 
          ON BEHALF OF CALFIRE, THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT, PAJARO VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT, AND OUR ENTIRE COMMUNITY, WE CONGRATULATE HIM ON A WELL-DESERVED RETIREMENT AND THANK HIM FOR THE LASTING IMPACT HE HAS MADE ON SANTA CRUZ COUNTY. 
          CONGRATULATIONS, CHRIS. 
          - THANK YOU. 
          - UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY. 
          - THANK YOU. 
          - ESTEEMED MEMBERS OF THE BOARD MY NAME IS MAX OLKOWSKI-LAETZ AND I'M THE CHAPTER PRESIDENT OF SCIU 521. 
          I WOULD LIKE TO OPEN TODAY BY STATING MY STRONG SUPPORT FOR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 17.10. 
          OUR MEMBERS NEED STABLE, AFFORDABLE HOMES CLOSE TO WHERE THEY WORK, AND THIS POLICY MOVES THE COUNTY CLOSER TO THAT NOBLE GOAL. 
          CURRENTLY, WE HAVE COMMUNERS OR WE HAVE MEMBERS COMMUTING MULTIPLE HOURS EVERY DAY TO COME AND SERVE THIS COUNTY. 
          OTHER COUNTIES HAVE ALREADY PANICKED AND IMPLEMENTED BLANKET RETURN TO WORK POLICIES IGNORING THE AVAILABLE RESEARCH IN FAVOR OF WHAT FEELS EASIER FOR MANAGEMENT. 
          SANTA CRUZ DOES NOT NEED TO BLINDLY JOIN THEM IN THIS MISTAKE. 
          I WANT TO THANK SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS FOR PULLING THE BLANKET CHANGES FROM WORK, FROM HOME POLICY FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA, AND ENCOURAGE MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS FREE OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THIS COUNTY EXCEPTIONAL. 
          MAINTAINING AND EVEN STRENGTHENING A FLEXIBLE HYBRID WORK FROM HOME POLICY WILL NOT ONLY SUSTAIN YOUR CURRENT HEALTHCARE WORKFORCE, IT WILL MAKE RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION EASIER IN COMPARISON TO OUR IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS. 
          THE CURRENT REGIME IN WASHINGTON BEING WHAT IT IS, THE TIMES ARE ONLY GOING TO GET TOUGHER, AND THE BUDGETS ARE ONLY GOING TO GET LEANER AND MEANER. 
          THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO TAKE CARE OF YOUR PEOPLE, YOUR PUBLIC SERVANTS, A CHANCE TO IMPROVE THEIR LIVES AT NO COST. 
          PLEASE DON'T LET IT SLIP. 
          THANK YOU. 
          - GOOD MORNING. CHAIR AND SUPERVISORS. 
          I'M EX-, KATIE THOMPSON. 
          I'M EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF SAVE OUR SHORES, AND I'M HERE TODAY TO SUPPORT ITEM 34 ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TO PROVIDE FUNDING TO SAVE OUR SHORES TO ASSIST IN UPDATING OF THE LAND USE ORDINANCE THAT GOVERNS OFFSHORE OIL INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          BY DEDICATING RESOURCES TO THIS EFFORT, SANTA CRUZ COUNTY IS BEING PROACTIVE IN ITS FIGHT AGAINST THE CURRENT FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION'S PLAN TO OPEN ALL OF THE CALIFORNIA COAST UP TO OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING. 
          THANK YOU PARTICULAR TO SUPERVISORS CUMMINGS AND DESERPA FOR YOUR ABILITY TO SUPPORT THIS WORK. 
          AS PART OF THIS WORK, WE HAVE ALREADY BEGUN RESEARCHING HOW TO STRENGTH-, STRENGTHEN THIS ORDINANCE AND MAKE IT LESS VULNERABLE TO LEGAL CHALLENGES. 
          WE ARE ALSO LOOKING AT A HOW TO INCORPORATE ADDITIONAL THREATS SUCH AS SEABED MINING, WHICH IS ANOTHER PRIORITY OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 
          THIS IS PART OF A STRATEGY TO STRENGTHEN SIMILAR ORDINANCES ACROSS THE STATE TO CREATE A BLUE WALL. 
          SANTA CRUZ WILL BE THE FIRST IN THE STATE TO UPDATE THEIRS. 
          IN GENERAL, I WANT TO EXPRESS GRATITUDE FOR THIS COUNTY'S LEADERSHIP IN THIS FIGHT AGAINST OFFSHORE OIL DEVELOPMENT. 
          SOS IS PART OF A STATEWIDE NGO AND BUSINESS COALITION AND THE MONTEREY BAY REGION IS CLEARLY A LEADER. 
          THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP. 
          IT WILL MAKE A DIFFERENCE FOR THE MONTEREY BAY AND OUR COAST FOR GENERATIONS TO COME. 
          THANKS. 
          - HELLO EVERYBODY. MY NAME'S GORDON RUDY. 
          UM, I'M A LIFELONG RESIDENT OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY. 
          I'M A BUSINESSMAN AND REALTOR, AND I'M HERE TO TALK ABOUT ASSEMBLY BILL 25 33, WHICH WE WERE THE FIRST PEOPLE TO EXPERIENCE THE PILOT PROGRAM OF TRYING TO LEGALIZE AN ADU. 
          AND, UH, THAT IS A SUPPOSED, UH, STREAMLINING PROCESS THAT WAS CREATED BY THE STATE TO MAKE EXISTING STRUCTURES LEGAL. 
          UM, WE'VE BEEN HELPING THE BAKER FAMILY AT 116 WILDROSE TERRACE. 
          UH, JAY BAKER WAS THE FORMER ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF IN BOULDER CREEK FIRE COMMISSIONER AND LIFELONG, UM, IMPORTANT PERSON IN BOULDER CREEK. 
          AND WHEN HE BOUGHT THAT PROPERTY IN 1956, 57, THEY CREATED A STRUCTURE OUT OF A GARAGE AND MADE IT A LIVING SPACE THAT HIS, HIS IN-LAWS LIVED IN UNTIL THEY EXPIRED, UH, AT 103 YEARS OF AGE. 
          SO SOMEBODY HAD LIVED IN THIS HOUSE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. 
          THE PROBLEM WE'RE HAVING IS THE COUNTY DOES NOT RECOGNIZE HIS LEGAL STRUCTURE SO WE STARTED GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS. 
          THE PROCESS IS CLUMSY, IT DOESN'T WORK, AND WE ARE APPROACHING ABOUT 40 TO $50,000 OF EXPENSES 
          [00:15:03]
OF TRYING TO GO THROUGH THIS LEGALIZATION PROCESS. 
          THE LEGALIZATION PROCESS SAYS IT MEETS HEALTH AND SAFETY. 
          HEALTH AND SAFETY IS WHAT WE USE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE SECTION 8 RENTERS, FOR EXAMPLE. 
          WE GO THROUGH AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE WINDOWS IN THE HOUSE THAT HAS FIRE, FIRE PROTECTION, THAT IT HAS HEAT AND SO ON. 
          BUT WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW IS WE'RE ASKING, WE'RE ASKING FOR MORE THAN THAT FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO SELL A HOUSE THAN WHAT THE COUNTY ALLOWS FOR SOMEBODY TO MOVE INTO A HOUSE. 
          SO WE'RE JUST ASKING THAT THINGS GET CHANGED IN HOW THEY'RE DEALING WITH AB 25 33. 
          THE STRUCTURE SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANDFATHERED IN REALLY BECAUSE IT WAS THERE FOR SO LONG AND IT WAS JUST MISSED ON THE TAX RECORDS BECAUSE THE CABIN SITS BEHIND THE MAIN HOUSE AND NOBODY SAW IT FOR 70 YEARS, AND FOR 70 YEARS SOMEBODY ACTUALLY LIVED IN THAT HOUSE. 
          SO, UM, I'M ASKING FOR ASSISTANCE THERE TO GET THINGS CHANGED AND TRY AND HELP THESE PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY'RE SPENDING AS MUCH MONEY AS IF THEY'RE BUILDING THIS HOUSE NEW RIGHT NOW. 
          THANKS SO MUCH. 
          - MY NAME IS JOYCE RUDY AND I'M A REALTOR EMERITUS, AND THIS... I'M STARTING MY 58TH YEAR IN REAL ESTATE AND I'M IN THE PROCESS WITH MY SON OF ASSISTING THE BAKKERS IN THAT THEIR ENDEAVOR TO LEGALIZE THE THAT UNIT. 
          THERE'S A LOT OF CONFUSION ON HOW TO DEFINE HEALTH AND SAFETY. 
          WE HAVE ASKED TO ESTABLISH WHAT THE WE, WELL, HE'S COVERED HOW MUCH MONEY'S GONE INTO IT. 
          WE'VE JUST BEEN ASKED TO BORE DOWN 25 FEET INTO THE DIRT TO ESTABLISH WHAT WE'RE SITTING ON. 
          I FEEL THAT WE SHOULD CONFINE HEALTH AND SAFETY TO THE SAME THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR A SECTION 8 TENANT. 
          THE SECTION 8 TENANTS, VERY SIMPLE. 
          I'VE RENTED TO MANY SECTION 8 FOLKS. 
          AND IF YOU MAKE THE STANDARD THE SAME AS SECTION 8 IT WOULD MOVE THINGS ALONG AND GIVE THE LOCALS A PATH TO SERVE THE PUBLIC. 
          THEY SEEM VERY CONCERNED THAT THEY MAY MISS SOMETHING AND THEN THERE WILL BE A LAWSUIT. 
          BUT IF WE HAVE A STANDARD THAT IS THE SAME AS OUR TENANTS, UH, ARE HELD TO THEN IT WOULD BE VERY CLEAR. 
          BECAUSE IF WE HAVE A HIGHER STANDARD FOR AN OWNER TO OCCUPY  ADU, THEN WE'RE SUGGESTING THAT TENANTS ARE LESS VALUABLE THAN THE OWNERS. 
          I SPOKE TO MY SUPERVISOR, MONICA, WHEN THIS FIRST STARTED, AND SHE SAID, I'M SORRY, WE DON'T INTERFERE WITH ANY OF THE DEPARTMENTS. 
          AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, THAT YOU GUYS DON'T TRY TO RUN ANY OF THE DEPARTMENTS. 
          BUT I DID PULL UP WHAT YOUR JOB IS, AND IT SAYS THAT THE COUNTY SUPERVISORS HAVE THE POWER TO ENACT LOCAL ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTIONS, WHICH ARE LAWS SPECIFIC TO THIS COUNTY. 
          THEY CAN COVER A WIDE RANGE OF ISSUES, INCLUDING LAND USE, PUBLIC HEALTH, AND SAFETY. 
          UH, ALSO THEY WORK TO IMPLEMENT STATE AND FEDERAL PROGRAMS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. 
          AND IF WE HAD THIS PUT INTO USE THEN OUR COUNTY DEPARTMENTS... 
          - THANK YOU. 
          - ...CAN QUIT WORRYING ABOUT BEING SUED, SO I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT HAPPEN. 
          I'D LIKE YOUR HELP. 
          - HI, GOOD MORNING. 
          UH. UH, HELLO, CHAIR, SUPERVISORS AND STAFF. 
          IT'S GOOD TO SEE ALL OF YOU. 
          MY NAME IS TONY NUNEZ. 
          UM, I AM THE BOARD CHAIR FOR THE PAJARO VALLEY HEALTHCARE DISTRICT. 
          WE OVERSEE WATSONVILLE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL. 
          AND I'M, I'M HERE TODAY TO SPEAK ABOUT ITEM NUMBER 38 ON YOUR CONSENT AGENDA. 
          I JUST WANNA THANK, UM, THE BOARD AND FOR, UH, THE CHAIR FOR PLACING THAT LETTER OF ADVOCACY REGARDING THE RURAL HEALTH TRANSFORMATION FUND GOING UP TO OUR STATE, UH, LEGISLATURE, REPRESENTATIVES, AND ALSO THE, AND ALSO HQIUM, AND I JUST WANNA THANK YOU FOR YOUR ONGOING SUPPORT OF WATSONVILLE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND OF THE HEALTHCARE DISTRICT. 
          AS ALL OF YOU KNOW, WE ARE THE ONLY ACUTE CARE HOSPITAL SERVING A POPULATION OF ABOUT 93,000 RESIDENTS IN SOUTH COUNTY AND IN NORTH MONTEREY COUNTY AS WELL. 
          EVERY YEAR WE HAVE ABOUT 35,000, UH, PATIENTS VISIT OUR, UM, OUR EMERGENCY ROOM, AND WE HAVE, UM, 800 BIRTHS AT WATSONVILLE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL EVERY SINGLE YEAR THAT'S THE MOST ACROSS THE COUNTY AND OF ANY HOSPITAL IN THE COUNTY. 
          UM, YOU ALSO LIKELY KNOW THAT 85% OF THE PEOPLE WHO RELY ON WATSONVILLE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL RELY ON GOVERNMENT INSURANCE. 
          AND SO YOU'LL GET A REPORT LATER TODAY ABOUT THE SORT OF IMPACTS THAT YOU'LL SEE, YOU'LL BE SEEING, UM, ACROSS THE COUNTY AS A RESULT OF THE CHANGES TO, UH, FEDERAL POLICY FOR GOVERNMENT INSURANCE AS WELL. 
          UH, UM, SOME MORE INFORMATION IN YOUR PACKET ABOUT THE RURAL HEALTH TRANSFORMATION FUND, 
          [00:20:02]
BUT, UH, THE BASICS ARE THAT THERE IS GONNA BE BETWEEN A HUNDRED TO $200 MILLION COMING FOR THE ENTIRE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. 
          UH, THAT SOUNDS LIKE A LOT, BUT ALL OF YOU KNOW THAT IT IS NOT AND SO IT'S GONNA BE A VERY COMPETITIVE PROCESS. 
          AND SO JUST THANK YOU, UH, TO THE CHAIR AND THANK YOU TO THE BOARD FOR YOUR CONTINUING ADVOCACY AND FOR LENDING YOUR VOICE, UM, TO HELP US, UH, THROUGH THIS REALLY COMPETITIVE PROCESS. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          - HI. UM, MY NAME'S AMY MESA. 
          I'M A PUBLIC HEALTH NURSE. 
          I WORKED FOR THE COUNTY FOR OVER 20 YEARS, AND, UM, I, JU-, JUST WANTED TO STAND UP BECAUSE IN APPRECIATION FOR SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS FOR, UM, MAKING A LITTLE BIT OF ROOM FOR US TO TALK ABOUT THE CHANGES TO OUR HYBRID WORK SCHEDULE. 
          UM, IT WAS, IT'S BEEN REALLY CONFUSING BECAUSE WE UPDATED ALL OF OUR REMOTE WORK AGREEMENTS WITH OUR, OUR WORKERS IN SEPTEMBER AT THE, UM, PROMPT OF THE CEO'S OFFICE, WHICH WE DO EVERY YEAR IN SEPTEMBER. 
          I'M ALSO A SUPERVISOR, AND SUDDENLY, UM, A MONTH OR SO LATER IT CHANGED AND WE HAVE TO GO BACK AND REDO ALL OF OUR, UM, THINKING ABOUT HOW WE STRUCTURE OUR REMOTE WORK WITHIN THE DEPARTMENTS. 
          AND, UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT YOU KNOW, THAT THIS, THIS BODY APPROVED THE ORIGINAL REMOTE WORK AGREEMENT DURING THE PANDEMIC IN 2021 AND THEN RE-APPROVED IT IN DECEMBER OF 2023. 
          IT'S BEEN WORKING REALLY WELL AND THE WAY THAT IT'S WRITTEN, IT, IT ALLOWS A LOT OF LEEWAY FOR THE DEPARTMENTS TO DETERMINE HOW THAT'S GONNA WORK BEST WITHIN THEIR DEPARTMENT. 
          AND NOW, UM, THE, THERE'S CHANGES THAT ARE TAKING IT OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE DEPARTMENTS. 
          I JUST WANNA ENCOURAGE ALL OF YOU FOLKS TO GO BACK AND READ THE REMOTE WORK AGREEMENT IT'S REALLY WELL WRITTEN. 
          AND I WANNA ASK IF YOU TRUST US YOUR WORK WORK POPULATION. 
          BECAUSE THE COUNTY HIRED US FOR OUR SKILLS AND QUALIFICATIONS. 
          WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS JOB FOR A LONG TIME. 
          WE KNOW HOW TO DO IT, AND WE WANT YOU TO TRUST US TO INTERPRET THE REMOTE WORK AGREEMENT IN A WAY THAT IS EQUITABLE AND ALLOWS US TO SERVE THE COUNTY IN THE BEST WAY POSSIBLE. 
          WE WANT TO WORK, WE WANT TO DO OUR JOBS, AND WE WANT TO SERVE THIS COUNTY. 
          WE CARE ABOUT THE RESIDENTS HERE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          - I LIKE THE TIMED, UH, SPEECH. OKAY. 
          UH, GAVIN NEWSOM HAS STARTED A PROGRAM CALLED CARE COURT. 
          UH, GAVIN NEWSOM HAD STARTED A PROGRAM CALLED CARE COURT. 
          UH, MY BEAUTIFUL STELLA IS A SOCIAL, UH, SHE WANTS TO SORT A SOCIAL REHABILITATION NON-PROFIT CARE COURT WITH PEER COUNSELING. 
          IT'LL BE LG. 
          UH, SHE'S A LICENSED MARRIAGE AND FAMILY THERAPIST. 
          SHE HAS EIGHT YEARS OF ART THERAPY GROUPS FOR PROCESS FOUNDATION. 
          UH, UH, SEVERE AND PERSISTENT MENTAL ILLNESS. 
          SHE SPECIALIZES IN CHILDREN WHO HAVE BEEN ABUSED, SPOUSES WHO HAVE BEEN ABUSED AND TRIES TO WORK WITH THEM. 
          UH, UM, THAT'S ALL, REALLY ALL I HAVE TO SAY. 
          NEXT SATURDAY THERE'LL BE A GRAND OPENING OF HER THERAPY ON 3:40 SOQUEL ROAD AND, UH, IT'S UH, ROUTE ONE O'CLOCK, SHOW UP, THERE'LL BE SOME FOOD AND UM, THERE'LL BE A JUDGE AND A FEW ATTORNEYS THERE, AND SOME OF HER PEOPLE WHO ARE THERAPISTS. 
          I REALLY DON'T NEED ALL YOUR TIME AS FAR AS HOMELESS POPULATION AROUND HERE MY GRANDFATHER WAS THE AG COMMISSIONER, MY FATHER WAS BORN IN WATSONVILLE, AND GEORGE DUKE MAGEN INTERVIEWED ME TO BE ON THE ALRB. 
          I HAD AN INTRODUCTION THROUGH THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF SUN SUITE, UH, SUN DIAMOND CHARLES [INAUDIBLE], AND EHEN I WAS YOUNG, WE, THERE WAS A BUNCH OF RICH KIDS WITH SURFBOARDS ON THE TOP OF THEIR, UH, RIGS. 
          IT'S PRETTY DESPERATE OUT THERE TODAY. 
          IT NEEDS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF. 
          - HELLO. GOOD MORNING. I'M GREGORY ADINO AND I AM REPRESENTING STOP LITHIUM BEST IN SANTA CRUZ COUNTY. 
          [00:25:01]
UM, GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL HERE THIS MORNING. 
          UM, WE, WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, UH, WHAT THESE BEST FACILITIES TRULY ARE AND, UM, THE, THE PICTURE THAT YOU HAVE TO SEE IS, IT'S NOT LIKE CHARGING YOUR ELECTRIC CAR, WHICH HAS A 800 TO A THOUSAND POUND BATTERY. 
          EACH ONE OF THESE CONTAINERS AND THERE WILL BE 188 CONTAINERS OR SO, MAYBE UP TO 300 OUT AT MINTO ROAD. 
          UM, CARRY ANYWHERE BETWEEN 20 AND 30 ELECTRIC CAR BATTERIES INSIDE OF EACH ONE. 
          UM, THAT GIVES YOU THE EQUIVALENCY OF WHAT'S GOING ON. 
          UM, IT GIVES YOU A PICTURE OF WHAT'S THERE. 
          UM, AND THEY ARE CHARGED NOT AT, UM, FAST CHARGING, WHICH IS 800 VOLTS. 
          THEY ARE CHARGED AT 1,500 VOLTS EVERY DAY GOING IN, EVERY EVENING COMING OUT. 
          THEN WHAT HAPPENS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT WHEN THEY'RE EMPTY? WELL, THERE THERE'S SURPLUS, UH, ENERGY AVAILABLE ON THE GRID THEY WILL CHARGE AGAIN. 
          SO THIS BRINGS UP ANOTHER QUESTION. 
          WHO IS REGULATING THE CHARGING OF THESE? OKAY? HAS IT EVEN BEEN LOOKED INTO? UM, THAT WAY THEY CAN BE PREPARED FOR THE MORNING,UU, DISCHARGING OF 'EM AND THEN LATER ON IN THE DAY, CHARGE 'EM BACK UP WITH ALL THE WONDERFUL SOLAR POWER SUPPLIED BY SANTA CRUZ COUNTY. 
          WE ARE A GREAT COUNTY WITH GREAT SOLAR POWER. 
          WE ARE A SOLAR POWER SUPPLIER, AND THAT IS WONDERFUL FOR US. 
          WHAT WE NEED IS SAFETY. SAFETY IS VERY IMPORTANT. 
          HEALTH, WE TALK... PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT HEALTH IN OUR COUNTY AND WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SAFETY. 
          UM, THE UM, UH, THE IMPORTANCE OF, UH, HAVING THESE, UH, UH, A STRONG ORDINANCE IS, UH, REALLY IMPORTANT. 
          EVEN IF IT GOES TO THE STATE, THE STATE WILL FOLLOW THE COUNTY'S ORDINANCE. 
          SO IF THE COUNTY'S ORDINANCE IS REALLY STRONG WITH A LOT OF INPUT AND A LOT OF STRENGTH BEHIND IT, WE WILL, UM, DO REALLY GOOD HAVING ALL THAT. 
          WANTED TO, OF COURSE, UM, WISH EVERYONE A MERRY CHRISTMAS AND, UH, HAPPY HOLIDAYS AND, AND WE'LL SEE YOU IN THE NEW YEAR. 
          THANK YOU. 
          - THANK YOU BECKY STEINBERG. 
          I'M A RESIDENT OF RURAL APTOS. 
          UM, I'M VERY SADDENED TO HEAR OF ROBLEY LEVY'S PASSING. 
          SHE WAS A GREAT SUPERVISOR AND A GREAT PERSON AND I ENJOYED WORKING WITH HER VERY MUCH. 
          UM, I'LL KEEP HER FAMILY IN MY THOUGHT. 
          I WANT TO, UH, FOLLOW UP ON MR. ADINO'S TESTIMONY ABOUT THE COUNTY'S, UH, BEST BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM, GRID SCALE ORDINANCE COMING UP. 
          I THINK IT IS VERY CURIOUS THAT THE VERY NEXT DAY AFTER YOUR NOVEMBER 18TH, UH, MEETING ABOUT THIS, EVERYBODY WENT AWAY THINKING WE WERE GOING TO HEAR AGAIN ABOUT IT IN MARCH. 
          THE VERY NEXT DAY IT WAS ANNOUNCED BY THE COUNTY PIO, THAT THE DATE WOULD BE JANUARY 13TH. 
          THIS SEEMS TO ME LIKE A BROWN ACT VIOLATION. 
          SOMEBODY MADE DECISIONS TO CHANGE THE CA-, THE THING. 
          UH, BUT IT WASN'T DONE PUBLICLY AND I REALLY OPPOSE THAT. 
          I THINK THAT YOU REALLY NEED TO KEEP IN MIND MEASURE J PRESERVING AGRICULTURAL LAND AND IS PART OF THE COUNTY'S CODE, UH, POLICY 17.01.030A. 
          THE COUNTY SHALL HAVE THE POLICY THAT IT WILL PRESERVE AG LANDS FOR AG USE. 
          SO THE 90 MINTO ROAD IS A CLEAR VIOLATION OF THAT, AND IT SEEMS LIKE THE BEST ORDINANCE IS BEING WRITTEN, UM, BUY NEW LEAF TO ACCOMMODATE THEIR, UH, THEIR ZEAL TO PUT IT IN AN APPLE ORCHARD. 
          I WANNA MOVE NOW TO LAST YOUR LAST MEETING. 
          THE RING INTEROPERABILITY RADIO. 
          UM, YOU HAVE A WAY TO FUND THAT, AND IT'S CALLED PROPOSITION 172. 
          YOU, YOUR BOARD HAS THE ABILITY TO CHANGE THE ALLOCATION PERCENTAGES OF THE STATEWIDE PUBLIC SAFETY MONEY. 
          TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT COME IN EVERY YEAR YOU CAN FUND THAT. 
          RING INTEROPERABILITY RADIO SYSTEM WITH THAT. 
          MY LAST POINT IS, UH, ITEM 29. 
          THANK YOU FOR FINALLY GETTING RID OF THE BRIDGE TO NOWHERE AT FARM PARK. 
          OFFER IT TO PUBLIC WORKS. 
          THEY'VE GOT EMERGENCY... 
          - THANK YOU. 
          - ...BRIDGES AND, UM, GOOD RIDDANCE TO THE BRIDGE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          - YES, HELLO. 
          AND, UM, I JUST WONDERED, YOU KNOW, WHY YOU EXPOSED ME TO COME HERE AND TALK ABOUT THE SAME THING ALL OVER AGAIN, AGAIN AND AGAIN. 
          THE PROBLEM THAT I COMING HERE IS HEALTH AND LIFE. 
          AND THAT THIS SHOULD BE PRIORITY FOR BEFORE ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, TO HELP PEOPLE WHO SUFFER OF THAT. 
          NOW OUR SUPERVISOR, MANU KOENIG, 
          [00:30:01]
IT'S ALREADY FIVE YEARS AND I DID NOT GET ANY HELP. ZERO. 
          SO IT'S ABOUT HEALTH AND LIFE. 
          ARTISTIC PERSON WHO IS SPECIAL NEEDS REQUIRED, YOU KNOW, SPECIAL CARE. 
          AND I SEE PEOPLE HERE IN A FIRST ROW MARNI SANDOVAL I MET ALREADY FOUR TIMES, ZERO. 
          ZERO ACTIONS, ZERO HELP, AND TONS OF EMAILS SENT AGAIN, AGAIN, AND AGAIN. 
          SILENCE, NO ANSWERS. 
          WHAT DO YOU WANT ME TO DO? I DON'T KNOW HOW TO WAKE YOU UP, YOU KNOW? I DON'T KNOW. 
          BUT MAYBE FINALLY YOU NEED TO START THINKING WHY YOU HERE? DO YOU KNOW WHY YOU'RE SITTING ON THOSE CHAIRS? BECAUSE IT REQUIRES YOU TO TAKE CARE OF PEOPLE AND THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. 
          IT SEEMS TO ME LIKE YOU DISCRIMINATE ME, DISCRIMINATE MY CHILD, YOU DISCRIMINATE MY FAMILY. 
          SO WHAT IS THAT ABOUT? SO PLEASE I ALREADY CALLED EVEN RESOLUTION CENTER YESTERDAY, AND I ASKED THEM TO HELP ME TO MEET AGAIN THOSE IMPORTANT PEOPLE WHO ON THE FIRST ROW FINALLY TO GET AN ANSWER FROM THEM, WHAT THE PROBLEM? IT'S SO EASY. 
          DO YOU KNOW, JUST GIVE A REFERRAL TO AUTISTIC PERSON TO TREAT BY THE BY REGIONAL CENTER IF THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH DIVISION NOT ABLE TO DO THAT. 
          SO PLEASE DO SOMETHING. 
          - IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE LIKE TO ADDRESS US? - YES, CHAIR. 
          - HI, CAN YOU HEAR ME BOARD? - YES, WE CAN. 
          - THANK YOU SO MUCH. 
          GOOD MORNING EVERYBODY, AND THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY. 
          I WANTED, OH, MY NAME IS ATHENA AND I AM IN JUSTIN CUMMINGS DISTRICT. 
          THANK YOU CUMMINGS FOR TAKING OFF THAT PART FOR SEIU. 
          I DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THAT UNTIL HEARING THE COMMENTS TODAY, AND THAT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT. 
          I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU. 
          WHAT I WANTED TO COMMENT ON TODAY WAS THE DAY SERVICES STAFF REPORT. 
          I WANNA THANK THE STAFF FOR PUTTING THE ENERGY INTO MAKING THAT STAFF REPORT. 
          IT IS SO ESSENTIAL THAT WE MAKE A SOLID PLAN FOR SHORT TERM AND LONG TERM TO SUPPORT EVERYONE WHO NEEDS DAY SERVICES, WHICH IS A CONSTANTLY CHANGING POPULATION THAT REALLY ALL OF US NEED THAT SUPPORT THAT SAFETY NET. 
          THE MOST IMPORTANT THING I WANTED TO BRING UP WAS THAT THE STAFF REPORT ONLY TALKS ABOUT MHCAN AND HOUSING MATTERS, AND IT COMPLETELY LEAVES OUT THE MOUNTAIN SERVICE CENTER IN FELTON. 
          THAT SERVICE CENTER USED TO DO DAY SERVICES UNTIL QUITE RECENTLY. 
          THEY WERE DOING DAY SERVICES IN 2025 UNTIL AT LEAST JULY. 
          THEY HAD SHOWERS AND MAIL AND STORAGE AND YOU COULD COME IN AND TALK TO SOMEBODY THAT DAY. 
          IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT AND IT WAS THE ONLY DAY SERVICES FOR MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY AND THEY STOPPED DOING DAY SERVICES BEFORE MHCAN. 
          DID THEY THAT CENTER REALLY NEEDS DAY SERVICES OPEN BACK UP AND THAT ACTUALLY IS COMPLETELY IN THE POWER OF THE COUNTY 'CAUSE THAT CENTER IS, IS RAN BY ENCOMPASS. 
          SO WHILE THE COUNTY IS TALKING ABOUT TRYING TO TAKE BETTER ACTION, THE STAFF REPORT DOESN'T EVEN ADDRESS THE MOST OBVIOUS ACTION THAT THE COUNTY COULD TAKE, WHICH IS OPENING UP ITS OWN DAY SERVICES CENTER BACK OPEN IN FELTON. 
          THE MOUNTAIN SERVICE CENTER SAVES LIVES FOR A COMMUNITY THAT IS VERY FAR FROM RESOURCES AND VERY FAR FROM THE HOSPITAL PLEASE AS WELL AS SUPPORTING DAY SERVICES IN DOWNTOWN SANTA CRUZ AND IN MIDTOWN, WE REALLY NEED DAY SERVICES IN THE MOUNTAIN AREA. 
          PLEASE OPEN BACK UP THE ENCOMPASS DAY SERVICES CENTER IN FELTED. 
          - CALL IN USER 1 YOUR MICROPHONE'S NOW AVAILABLE. 
          - MARILYN GARRETT. 
          THE PROBLEM IS THE STRUCTURAL DOMINATION OF THE CORPORATE STATE. 
          THAT'S A QUOTE FROM RALPH NADER. 
          WHEN CORPORATIONS RULE AND CONTAMINATE, AS WITH OIL DRILLING, TELECOM INDUSTRY, BROADBAND, RADIATION, TOXIC EXPOSURE, LITHIUM ION BATTERIES, WHERE IS DEMOCRACY THAT TRULY REPRESENTS THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF THE PUBLIC? I WANT YOU TO TAKE THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE CENTRAL WATER DISTRICT HERE IN APTOS ATTORNEYS 
          [00:35:02]
WHEN THEY SAY THE PROPOSED LITHIUM BATTERY PROJECT HERE BY APTOS HIGH IS WHAT THEY'RE REFERRING TO, PRESENTS AN UNACCEPTABLE RISK TO THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF OUR CUSTOMERS AND COMMUNITY. 
          THIS LETTER SERVES AS AN OFFICIAL PROTEST AGAINST THE PROJECT. 
          THE DISTRICT RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS THAT THE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REJECT THE PROPOSED PROJECT LOCATION AND ALL OF THE LOCATIONS IN THE COUNTY SHOULD BE PROHIBITED BECAUSE OF ALL THE HAZARDS THAT YOU ARE WELL AWARE OF. 
          AND I ALSO REFER YOU TO A RECENT ARTICLE BY PAUL ROGERS CALLED NEW STUDY MOSS LANDING BATTERY FIRE DUMPED 55,000 POUNDS OF TOXIC METALS INTO WILDLIFE RICH MARSHES. 
          THIS IS FROM BAY AREA NEWS GROUP, DECEMBER 3RD, AND, OH, AND HE DESCRIBES IT AS LIKE A FINE DUST. 
          - THANK YOU. 
          - CALL IN USER 628 YOUR MICROPHONE'S NOW AVAILABLE? - YES. CAN YOU HEAR ME? - YES, WE CAN. 
          - YEAH. HI, THIS IS, UH, RICH BUCKI AGAIN, I'D LIKE TO READ ANOTHER EXCERPT FROM KEITH. 
          EXCUSE ME, LEON COUNTER BOOK CALLED THE UNFORTUNATE TRUTH ABOUT VACCINES. HE'S A A LOVE AUTHOR. 
          HERE'S WHAT A, A FEW CRITICS HAD TO SAY ABOUT VACCINES. 
          THIS IS DR. WILLIAM HA-, HOWARD HAY SPOKE IN JUNE, 1937 ABOUT THE WORST SMALL TALK EPIDEMIC, EPIDEMIC THAT HAD EVER OCCURRED IN THE PHILIPPINES AFTER 8 MILLION PEOPLE RECEIVED MORE THAN 24 MILLION VACCINE DOSES RESULTING IN THE DEATH RATE QUADRUPLING. 
          HE WROTE "IT IS NONSENSE TO THINK THAT YOU CAN INJECT PUS AND IT IS USUALLY FROM THE PUSTULE OF A DEAD SMALLPOX." THAT IS THE BASIS OF IT. 
          WE USED TO THINK IT WAS COWPOX, BUT THE MANUFACTURERS DENY THAT. 
          SAY THE MOST RELIABLE FORM ORIGINATES IN THE PUSTULE OF SOMEONE WHO HAD DIET FROM SMALLPOX. 
          IT'S UNTHINKABLE THAT YOU CAN INJECT THAT INTO A SMALL CHILD AND IN ANY WAY IMPROVE HIS HEALTH. 
          UH, YOU MAY HAVE HEARD OF GEORGE BERNARD, BERNARD SHAW. 
          HE STATED IN 1944 AT PRESENT "AT PRESENT INTELLECT PEOPLE, INTELLIGENT PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE THEIR CHILDREN VACCINATED NOR DOES THE LAW NOW COMPEL THEM TO THE IS NO, THE RESULT IS NOT AS THE VETERINARIAN PROPHESIED THE EXTERMINATION THAT HE WAS RAISED BY SMALLPOX, ON THE CONTRARY, MORE PEOPLE ARE NOW KILLED BY VACCINATION THAN BY SMALLPOX." UH, HERE'S A, A NOBEL PRIZE WINNER IN 1973, DR. PORTER SAID, MAJOR CONTRIBUTING FACTOR TOWARD IMPROVED HEALTH OVER THE PAST 200 YEARS HAS BEEN IMPROVED NUTRITION. 
          NEARLY 90% OF, OF THE TOTAL DECLINE IN THE DEATH RATE IN CHILDREN BETWEEN 1860 AND 1965 DUE TO WHOOPING CROSS SCARLET FEVER OF THEORY AND MEASLES OCCURRED BEFORE THE [INAUDIBLE] OF ANTIBIOTICS AND WIDESPREAD IMMUNIZATION AGAINST DIPTHERIA. 
          HERE'S A QUOTE FROM RICHARD MOSKOWITZ. 
          UH, IN 2017, HE WROTE, QUOTE, OH, EXCUSE ME, THE BOOK... - THANK YOU. 
          - ...VACCINES OF THE APPRAISED... 
          - DIANA, YOUR MICROPHONE'S NOW AVAILABLE. 
          - HI, GOOD MORNING BOARD SUPERVISORS. 
          MY NAME IS DIANA RASTIKA. 
          I'M A BENEFITS REPRESENTATIVE IN SOUTH COUNTY, CURRENTLY AT THE WEST RUSH LOCATION, AND I COME TO YOU THIS MORNING TO DISCUSS CHANGES TO THE REMOTE WORK. 
          I WANTED TO ATTEND IN PERSON HOWEVER, DUE TO THE FACT OF TRAFFIC, WHICH WILL WORSEN WITH THE ADDITIONAL 2000 CARS THAT WILL BE ADDED TO THE ROAD WITH THE CHANGES TO IN OFFICE DAYS, BUT KEEP IN MIND THAT HIGH TRAFFIC WILL DETERMINE MEMBER ENGAGEMENT IN BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING AND WILL CAUSE ADDITIONAL STRESS TO WORKERS THAT PROVIDE ESSENTIAL SERVICES THAT COMMUTE FROM OUT OF TOWN DUE TO THE HIGH COST OF LIVING IN THIS COUNTY. 
          WHICH ALSO BRINGS ME TO THE SUPPORT OF COUNTY COACH, TO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS OF THE COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 17 POINT 10. 
          UM, BECAUSE A LOT OF OUR COUNTY EMPLOYEES ARE BEING PRICED OUT OF THE VERY COMMUNITY THAT WE SERVE. 
          ANY POLICY THAT STRENGTHENS ONSITE DEED RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTION DIRECTLY SUPPORTS OUR MEMBERS AND OUR WORKFORCE. 
          THIS UPDATE IS IN THE ORDINANCE IS IMPORTANT TOWARDS THAT GOAL, 
          [00:40:04]
THAT BRINGS RENTAL HOUSING REQUIREMENTS INTO ALIGNMENT WITH THE LONGSTANDING RULES APPLIED FOR THE SALE OF RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS AND REINFORCEMENTS IN THE COMMUNITY. 
          WE JUST NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE WORK HERE, WE CAN AFFORD TO LIVE HERE. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. 
          -  OKAY, CHAIR, WE HAVE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS ONLINE. 
          - WITH THAT, I'LL BRING YOU BACK TO THE BOARD FOR ANY QUESTIONS COMMENTS. 
          I'LL START OUT TO MY LEFT, FAR LEFT, UM, SUPERVISOR KOENIG. 
          - THANK YOU. JUST A COUPLE OF BRIEF COMMENTS ON ITEM 29, DECLARING THE BRIDGE FROM FIRE PARK AS SURPLUS. 
          [ACTION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA (ITEMS 16-56)]
I AM HAPPY TO SEE THIS BRIDGE, UH, FINALLY MOVING OUT OF THE PARK SINCE WE'LL NOT BE USING IT. 
          UH, AND I THINK IT DOES SERVE AS A USEFUL LESSON FOR, UH, ONLY UNDERTAKING PROJECTS THAT WE KNOW WE CAN COMPLETE. 
          ON ITEM 45, ACCEPTING THE HEALTH CENTER'S FIRST QUARTERLY REPORT ON STRATEGIES TO ADDRESS PRODUCTIVITY AND REVENUE LOSSES TO MAINTAIN RADIOLOGY SERVICE. 
          THIS IS, UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S... 
          THIS IS A VERY INTERESTING REPORT, THANK YOU TO THE HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY FOR PROVIDING IT. 
          UH, IT'S UNFORTUNATE IT DOESN'T, THAT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO CLOSE THE GAP. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF WE GET REFERRALS FROM ALL THE FQHCS THAT BRINGS IN $139,000 A YEAR, THE DEXUS SCANS OF 295 PATIENTS WOULD GROSS ONLY 9,500. 
          UH, AND YET, UM, WE'RE STILL EXPECTING A LOSS OF OVER $400,000 A YEAR FOR, UH, FOR RADIOLOGY SERVICES, WHILE ALSO FACING POTENTIALLY 4 MILLION OTHER CUTS, UH, FOR THE HEALTH CENTERS OR, OR OTHER LOSSES FROM THE HEALTH CENTER. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I DON'T, I DON'T SEE HOW WE POSSIBLY TURN THIS, UH, SITUATION AROUND GIVEN THE OVERALL, UM, CLIMATE WE'RE FACING, UM, AND I HOPE THAT, YOU KNOW, ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, WE'LL DO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO ENSURE A BROADER RANGE OF SERVICES AVAILABLE FOR EVERYONE IN THE COMMUNITY. 
          THANKS. 
          - SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ. 
          - THANK YOU, CHAIR. GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. 
          UM, I'D LIKE TO START BY THANKING EVERYBODY WHO CAME TO SPEAK WITH US TODAY, AS WELL AS THANKING THE STAFF FOR THE GINORMOUS NUMBER OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS WE HAVE BEFORE US, UM, A LOT OF IMPORTANT GOOD WORK IS BEING PASSED TODAY AND IF IT'S NOT NOTED, IT'S DOESN'T MEAN WE DIDN'T NOTICE IT. 
          UM, LET ME START WITH A FEW COMMENTS ON ITEM NUMBER 25, WHICH IS ACCEPTING AND FILING AN UPDATE ON OUR COUNTY IMPLEMENTATION OF SB 43. 
          SO I JUST WANNA SHARE THAT THIS IS A HUGE BODY OF WORK. 
          IT'S A STATE EFFORT TO EXPAND THE DEFINITION OF GRAVE DISABILITY, SO THAT WAY PEOPLE WITH MENTAL HEALTH DISORDERS OR SUBSTANCE USE DISORDERS CAN GET TREATMENT FASTER. 
          UM, I KNOW IT'S TAKEN A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF COORDINATION BETWEEN A NUMBER OF DEPARTMENTS AND, UM, I WANT TO THANK OUR COUNTY STAFF FOR DOING THE HARD WORK TO IMPLEMENT THIS. 
          UM, I THINK IT WILL HOPEFULLY BENEFIT A LOT OF PEOPLE AND SAVE LIVES. 
          UM, BUT I DO HOPE THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO BE KEPT IN THE LOOP ON THIS IMPLEMENTATION. 
          BECAUSE THERE'S, UM... IT'S NOT A HUGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE WHO ARE IMPACTED, BUT THOSE ARE, UM... 
          IT'S A SIGN SIGNIFICANT PEOPLE, RIGHT? UM, PEOPLE WHO WE'VE KNOWN IN AND OUT OF THE SYSTEM FOR MANY YEARS. 
          AND SO, UM, I WOULD LOVE TO STAY IN THE LOOP ON THE, THE ROLLOUT. 
          UM, ON ITEM NUMBER 34 REGARDING OUR PROPOSAL WITH FROM SAVE OUR SHORES TO WORK ON LOCAL REGULATORY UPDATES, UM, TO IMPROVE OUR REGULATIONS GOVERNING ONSHORE FACIL-, UM, FACILITIES THAT SUPPORT WELL ANYWAYS, RELATED TO BANDING OFF SHORE DRILLING. 
          UM, I WANNA THANK MY COLLEAGUE, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS AND SUPERVISOR DESERPA FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. 
          UM, IT REALLY IS A SHAME THAT POLICIES THAT WE ENACTED GENERATIO-, A GENERATION AGO TO BLOCK OFFSHORE DRILLING FROM OUR COAST ARE COMING BACK UP AND ARE BACK IN QUESTION. 
          UM, WE'RE A COMMUNITY THAT LOVES OUR OCEAN, PROTECTS OUR OCEAN, AND SO I WANT TO, UM, JOIN IN SUPPORT OF THIS EFFORT AND TO, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY DO WHAT WE CAN TO PROTECT OUR, OUR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. 
          SO, SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT FORWARD TO SAVE OUR SHORES. 
          AND THEN FINALLY ON NUMBER 38, WHICH IS RELATED TO SUPPORTING AND ADVOCATING WATSONVILLE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL'S, UH, APPLICATION FOR RURAL HEALTH TRANSFORMATION PROGRAM FUNDING. 
          UM, I JUST WANNA UNDERSCORE THE, THE IMPORTANCE OF THIS LETTER. 
          UM, AS WAS SHARED FROM A PREVIOUS PUBLIC COMMENT THERE'S ONLY ABOUT A HUNDRED MAYBE $200 MILLION AVAILABLE IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR RURAL HOSPITALS, AND WE HAVE A NUMBER OF HOSPITALS IN THE STATE THAT ARE EXTREMELY VULNERABLE BASED ON THE UPCOMING CUTS TO MEDI-CAL. 
          AND SO I DO HOPE THAT WATSONVILLE HOSPITAL CAN BENEFIT 
          [00:45:01]
FROM SOME OF THESE FUNDS. 
          UM, THIS HOSPITAL IS INCREDIBLY IMPO-, IMPORTANT TO OUR HEALTHCARE NETWORK AND OUR SAFETY NET. 
          AND SO I AM, I THANK, UH, CHAIR HERNANDEZ FOR BRINGING THIS LETTER FORWARD AND VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. 
          THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU. 
          - THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - THANK YOU, CHAIR. UM, SIMILAR WHAT'S BROUGHT UP, BEEN BROUGHT UP BEFORE ITEM NUMBER 24 RELATE TO CARE COURTS. 
          I THINK IT'S JUST REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE TRACKING HOW MUCH, UM, IT'S GONNA COST US TO IMPLEMENT SB 43. 
          UH, SORRY, NOT CARE COURTS SB 43. 
          UM, THIS IS ANOTHER UNFUNDED MANDATE AND WE'VE SEEN MANY UNFUNDED MANDATES COME DOWN FROM THE STATE, WHICH PUTS A HUGE BURDEN ON COUNTIES TRYING TO STAND UP THESE PROGRAMS AND FIND OUT HOW WE CAN FIND THE FUNDING TO SUPPORT THE PROGRAMS AND ESPECIALLY DURING A TIME WHEN WE'RE SEEING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CUT A BUNCH OF OUR FUNDING WE'RE STILL REQUIRED TO ROLL THIS OUT. 
          AND IT'S REALLY UNFORTUNATE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH FLEXIBILITY COMING DOWN FROM SACRAMENTO TO ALLOW US MORE TIME JUST GIVEN HOW WE'RE BEING IMPACTED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. 
          UH, BUT MY HOPE IS THAT WE CAN TRACK THESE COSTS OVER TIME SO THAT WE CAN COMMUNICATE THIS TO OUR STATE LEGISLATURE TO LET THEM KNOW, HERE'S HOW WE'RE BEING IMPACTED BY THE FEDS AND HOW, HERE'S HOW YOU'RE IMPACTING US. 
          SO PLEASE, YOU KNOW, SO WE CAN ADVOCATE FOR THEM PROVIDING US WITH FUNDING TO HELP SUPPORT WHAT THE GOVERNOR IS MANDATING THAT WE DO. 
          UM, SO I HOPE THAT MAYBE DURING BUDGET TIMES WE CAN COME BACK WITH, YOU KNOW, AN UPDATE ON COST PER INDIVIDUAL OR JUST OVERALL GENERAL COSTS. 
          SO WE CAN REALLY SEE LIKE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING TREATED, HOW MUCH DOES THIS ACTUALLY COST IN THE COUNTY AND WHAT ARE WE LOSING AS A RESULT OF HAVING TO IMPLEMENT THIS PROGRAM? ITEM NUMBER 34 RELATED TO THE ONSHORE FACILITIES TO STOP OFFSHORE OIL. 
          I REALLY WANT TO THANK DAN HAIFLEY AND, UH, KATIE THOMPSON FROM SAVE OUR SHORES FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. 
          UM, SOME OF US ARE SO FAR REMOVED AND, AND WE WEREN'T AROUND WHEN A LOT OF THE EFFORTS TO STOP OFFSHORE OIL WE'RE TAKING PLACE BACK IN THE EIGHTIES. 
          AND, UM, JURISDICTIONS UP AND DOWN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IF THEY COULDN'T STOP OIL DRILLING IN FEDERAL WATERS, THEY SAID, WELL, LET'S NOT LET THE FACILITIES COME ONTO OUR SHORES. 
          AND SO SAY OUR SHORES MAKING THESE UPDATES HERE IN SANTA CRUZ AND ALSO LOOKING AT OTHER, UM, COUNTIES, UH, ACROSS THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IT'S REALLY GONNA IMPROVE OUR EFFORTS TO NOT ONLY PUSH BACK AGAINST OFFSHORE OIL, BUT NOW WITH THE NEW PROPOSALS FOR DEEP SEA MINING, REALLY FIGURING OUT WHAT UPDATES, ORDINANCES DO WE HAVE TO MAKE IN ORDER TO STOP THOSE TYPES OF PROCESSING FACILITIES ON LAND. 
          IT'S REALLY GONNA GIVE US AN ADVANTAGE WHEN TRYING TO STOP, UM, THESE PROPOSALS FROM COMING FORWARD IN THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. 
          AND JUST RELATED I WILL GIVE AN UPDATE THAT UM, WITH THE COUNTIES WHO'VE JOINED THE, WHO ARE JOINING THE COALITION, UH, WE NOW HAVE HUMBOLDT COUNTY, MENDOCINO COUNTY, MARIN COUNTY, SONOMA COUNTY, SAN MATEO COUNTY, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, SANTA BARBARA COUNTY, SAN LUIS OBISPO HEARING AND CONSIDERING JOINING TODAY, LA'S GONNA PUT ONE ON IN, UH, THE COMING YEAR ALONG WITH MONTEREY COUNTY WHO WILL BE TAKING UP THE PROPOSAL TO JOIN OUR EFFORT TO STOP OFFSHORE OIL AND STOP THE OFFSHORE OIL PROPOSALS. 
          SO WE'RE GETTING REALLY CLOSE TO HAVING EVERY SINGLE COUNTY IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA JOINING OUR EFFORTS TO STOP OFFSHORE OIL. 
          AND I JUST WANNA THANK MY COLLEAGUES ON THE BOARD FOR THEIR INITIAL SUPPORT ON THIS, AND THANK EVERYONE FOR THEIR EFFORTS TO PUSH BACK AGAINST THE PROPOSALS FOR OFFSHORE OIL AND DEEP SEA MINING. 
          LASTLY, ITEM NUMBER 28, AND MAYBE I SHOULD HAVE PULLED THIS, BUT I WANTED TO ADD ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE. 
          UH, THIS IS THE, UM, FLAG SCHEDULE FOR, UH, THE UPCOMING YEAR. 
          AND I'M WANTING TO PROPOSE ADDING THAT WE FLY THE PAN-AFRICAN FLAG FOR BLACK HISTORY MONTH FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, AND THE CHILDREN MEMORIAL FLAG FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL, UH, TO RAISE AWARENESS ABOUT CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION. 
          AND I'LL CONCLUDE MY COMMENTS THERE, BUT I'M HOPING WE CAN ADD THAT, UM, TO THE MOTION WHEN, WHEN WE MOVE THE PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          OH, SORRY. REMOVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. 
          - CONSENT AGENDA. 
          SUPERVISOR DESERPA. 
          - THANK YOU. UM, AND THERE'S, THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA IS JUST PACKED WITH VERY, VERY IMPORTANT THINGS. 
          AND SO I JUST WANNA, AGAIN, LIKE MY COLLEAGUES, THANK THE STAFF FOR ALL THE HARD WORK HERE AT THE END OF THE YEAR. 
          UM, I, I DO HAVE SOME THINGS THAT I'D LIKE, UM, I DON'T WANNA PULL THE ITEMS I, BUT I WOULD LIKE THEM TO COME BACK, UM, BECAUSE I THINK THEY'RE REALLY IMPORTANT. 
          SO ITEM 22, THE UPDATE ON PAJARO VALLEY HEALTH DISTRICT'S TAX RATE ERRORS, UM, IN THE, IN THIS, UM, IT IS HUGELY IMPORTANT IN MY DISTRICT IN, UH, SUPERVISOR HERMAN-, HERNANDEZ'S DISTRICT, BUT REALLY IT'S IMPORTANT TO THE WHOLE COUNTY. 
          SO SOME TYPE OF AN ERROR WAS MADE IN A SOFTWARE WHERE 19,000 OF MY CONSTITUENTS WERE OVERCHARGED ON THEIR TAXES, ON THEIR PROPERTY TAXES AND 5,000 WERE NOT CHARGED AT ALL FOR THE PAJARO VALLEY HEALTH DISTRICT. 
          UM, I WANT TO KNOW, UH, WHAT HAPPENED, HOW WE'RE GONNA FIX THIS AND, UM, PREVENT THIS, UM, FROM HAPPENING IN THE FUTURE. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, ALSO IN THE STAFF REPORT, THE BACKUP SAID THERE WAS NO, UM, FISCAL COST TO THE COUNTY 
          [00:50:03]
BUT THAT, I DON'T THINK THAT'S TRUE BECAUSE THERE'S GONNA HAVE TO BE, PEOPLE ARE GONNA HAVE TO GO IN APPARENTLY AND, UM, FIX THESE ISSUES ONE BY ONE BY ONE. 
          SO TO ME THAT THAT'S A HUGE FISCAL, UM, HIT, UM, IN TERMS OF PRODUCTIVITY OF OUR STAFF. 
          SO THANK YOU FOR BRINGING BACK, THAT BACK FOR, UM, CONSIDERATION OF THE WHOLE BOARD. 
          WE WANNA MAKE SURE THIS IS NOT HAPPENING IN OTHER PLACES IN OUR COUNTY. 
          UM, ITEM 25, UH, SB 43 IMPLEMENTATION. 
          THIS IS REALLY, UM, TO ME UNFORTUNATE THAT THIS IS, UM, JUST A BACKUP AND CONSENT. 
          I DO THINK THIS NEEDS TO COME FORWARD SO THAT WE KNOW HOW WE'RE IMPLEMENTING THIS. 
          WE'VE HAD TWO YEARS TO DEVELOP A PLAN. 
          I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THAT PLAN IS. 
          UM, WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO RELY ON OUR HOSPITALS TO HAVE PEOPLE THAT NEED TO BE CONSERVED IN BEDS MONTH AFTER MONTH, AFTER MONTH. 
          UM, HOSPITALS ARE IN, UM, BAD SHAPE FINANCIALLY NOT JUST WATSONVILLE BUT ALL OF OUR HOSPITALS AND WE NEED TO HELP THEM GET PEOPLE OUT OF THE HOSPITALS, OUT OF THOSE BEDS, AND PLACED APPROPRIATELY, UM, THROUGH, UH, SB 43. 
          UH, ITEM 33, THE BROADBAND STRATEGIC PLAN UPDATE. 
          UM, AS, AS MANY OF YOU KNOW, THIS IS A VERY, VERY IMPORTANT ITEM TO ME, UM, IN MY DISTRICT ALONE AND IT'S... 
          AND IN MANY DISTRICTS IN OUR RURAL AREAS, WE HAVE VERY LIMITED, UM, UM, CONNECTIVITY. 
          UH, WE ARE LANDLINES ARE AT RISK OF GOING AWAY BECAUSE, UM, AT&T, UH, EVERY YEAR TRIES TO GET OUT OF THEIR, UM, CARRIER OF LAST RESORT OBLIGATION. 
          SO AT SOME POINT IN, I WOULD SAY IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS, WE'RE NOT GONNA HAVE LANDLINES OUT IN THE RURAL AREAS. 
          AND, UM, THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF OUR CITIZENS ARE NOT CONNECTED. 
          AND SO, UM, I'D LIKE THIS TO COME BACK, UM, FOR A, A ORAL, UH, REPORT TO THE BOARD ABOUT, UM, HOW, HOW WE PLAN TO FIX THIS ISSUE. 
          AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THE HELP FROM ISD, FROM TAMMY IN PARTICULAR. 
          UM, THANK YOU FOR SENDING OUT THE SURVEY. 
          THAT YOU DID, AND I HOPE, I HOPE THERE WAS, UM, GOOD RESPONSE TO THAT. 
          I HAVEN'T HEARD YET, BUT, BUT I'D LOVE TO HEAR THAT IN THE REPORT. 
          UM, THANK YOU, UH, TO KATIE WHO WAS HERE FROM SAVE OUR SHORES. 
          I WAS VERY HAPPY TO, UH, PUT SOME OF MY DISCRETIONARY MONEY TOWARD THIS INITIATIVE, UM, SO THAT WE CAN, UM, HAVE A COORDINATED EFFORT WITH OTHER COUNTIES, UM, COASTAL COUNTIES, UH, ON OFFSHORE OIL DRILLING TO TRY TO PREVENT THAT. 
          AND THANK YOU JUSTIN, FOR INCLUDING ME IN THAT WORK. 
          AND I THINK I THINK THAT'S IT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          - THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR DESERPA. 
          UM, I JUST WANT TO, UH, TALK ABOUT A FEW ITEMS HERE. 
          UH, FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR BRINGING THE, AND SAVE OUR SHORES, FOR BRINGING THAT ITEM BEFORE US. 
          UH, IT'S IMPORTANT TO PROTECT OUR, OUR NATURAL HABITAT AND OUR, AND OUR OCEANS, OUR BEACHES. 
          UM, IN ADDITION, UH, ITEM NUMBER 38, UH, YOU KNOW, I THINK IT WAS IMPERATIVE TO SEND THIS LETTER TO THE STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO ADVOCATE FOR OUR LOCAL HOSPITAL. 
          WATTSVILLE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL IS NOT JUST, UH, UH, IMPORTANT FOR SOUTH COUNTY, BUT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE ENTIRE COUNTY'S HEALTH SYSTEM, UH, THAT WE HAVE HERE. 
          UH, AND I WANT TO THANK, UH, ALL OF OUR COMMISSIONERS AND TRUSTEES THAT ARE, UH, BEING APPOINTED. 
          UH, THE FIRST ONE IS CLAUDIA, UH, VILLALTA MEJÍA TO THE INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGE MANAGEMENT, TE LOCAL TASK FORCE AND WE HAVE JESSICA MON-, GONZALEZ MONTERO, UH, APPOINTED TO THE ARTS COMMISSION, UH, FOR THE FOURTH DISTRICT. 
          AND WE HAVE, UH, THE REAPPOINTMENT OF DR. NANCY BILICICH, ROBERT TANNER, ED BANKS, TO THE PEARL VALLEY PUBLIC CEMETERY DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES. 
          SO THANK YOU FOR ALL, ALL YOUR COMMITMENT, UH, ONTO THESE BOARDS. 
          YOU GUYS ARE THE, THE KIND OF THE FIRST LAYER OF, OF, UH, DECISION MAKING FOR THE, FOR THE COUNTY AND FOR THIS BOARD. 
          SO THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR WORK. 
          WITH THAT, I'LL BRING YOU BACK TO THE BOARD, UH, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - YEAH, I'LL MOVE, UH, CONSENT WITH THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTION ON ITEM NUMBER 28 TO ADD FLYING THE PAN-AFRICAN FLAG FOR BLACK HISTORY MONTH IN THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY, AND THE CHILDREN MEMORIAL FLAG FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL. 
          - AND THE REPORT ON THE HOSPITAL THAT SUPERVISOR DESERPA. 
          - WELL, I THINK WE GAVE EXTRA DIRECTION... - OKAY. 
          - ...JUST TO BRING... - OKAY - ...REPORTS BACK ON, ON SOME OF THE CONSENT ITEMS HERE, I HOPE. 
          - YEAH. - YEAH. 
          - I THINK SOMEBODY... - THAT'S FINE. 
          - I DON'T THINK YOU. 
          I, I'VE ALREADY NOTED WITH A DEPARTMENT THAT WILL PRESENT ON THE BROADBAND... - YEAH. 
          [00:55:01]
- ...IN MARCH WHEN... 
          - OKAY. - ...THEY REPORT BACK SO I DON'T THINK YOU NEED TO MAKE ADDITIONAL DIRECTION. 
          - OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION. 
          - I'LL SECOND. 
          - SO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS AND A SECOND FROM SUPERVISOR DESERPA. 
          MADAM CLERK, IF WE COULD TAKE ROLL CALL. 
          - SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS.   - AYE. 
          - KOENIG  - AYE. 
          - MARTINEZ.  - AYE. 
          - DESERPA.  - AYE. 
          - AND HERNANDEZ. 
          - AYE. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY WITH ADDITIONAL DIRECTION. 
          NEXT, WE MOVE ON TO THE REGULAR AGENDA. 
          THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS NUMBER SEVEN. 
          - [INAUDIBLE] - OKAY. 
          UH, NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS NUMBER SEVEN. 
          CONSIDER THE DRAFT GUIDELINES OF THE INAUGURAL MEASURE Q IMPLEMENTATION FOR FISCAL YEARS 2025 AND 2026, AND TAKE ALL RELATED ACTIONS. 
          I'LL TURN IT OVER TO DAVID REED, DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF RESPONSE RECOVERY AND RESILIENCE, AND REBECCA HURLEY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PARKS, OPEN SPACE AND CULTURAL SERVICES FOR THE PRESENTATION. 
          [7. Consider draft guidelines for the inaugural Measure Q Grant Program implementation for Fiscal Year 2025-26, and take related actions]
- GOOD MORNING. - GOOD MORNING. 
          - SO, UM, WE ARE HERE TO PRESENT TO THE BOARD THE, UM, INAUGURAL YEARS DRAFT GUIDELINES FOR THE MEASURE Q GRANT PROGRAM. 
          THIS IS AT THE DIRECTION OF THE BOARD WHEN WE WENT AND, UM, PROVIDED TO YOU THE PROPOSED ALLOCATIONS, WHICH WERE APPROVED FOR THE COUNTY FUNDING AND THEN WE WERE ASKED TO COME BACK AND GO OVER THE GRANT GUIDELINES WITH YOUR BOARD. 
          SO WE HAVE SINCE THEN GENERATED AGAIN, INAUGURAL YEAR GRANT GUIDELINES, AND, UH, THEN TOOK THAT TO THE CITIZENS OVERSIGHT ADVISORY BOARD. 
          WE HAD PROFUSE FEEDBACK FROM THEM. IT WAS REALLY GREAT. 
          REALLY APPRECIATED THAT. 
          UM, AND SO NOW WE ARE, WE'VE, WE'VE MADE CHANGES AND WE'RE PRESENTING THOSE REVISED GUIDELINES TO YOU NOW. 
          DO YOU HAVE THE POWERPOINT? - THEY'RE WORKING ON IT. 
          - OH. 
          WELL... 
          - WHICH? - I THINK WE'RE WAITING FOR THE POWERPOINT QUICKLY. 
          - [INAUDIBLE] - [INAUDIBLE] - YES, I GUESS SO. - OKAY. 
          - UM, I CAN, I'LL, I'LL START KIND OF SPEAKING TO WHAT WE'RE INITIALLY GONNA GO OVER, WHICH IS THE TIMELINE. 
          UM, SO IT'S BEEN A YEAR SINCE MEASURE Q WAS PASSED BY THE CITIZENS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY. 
          SO WE ARE REALLY TRYING TO, UM, BUILD THE AIRPLANE AS WE'RE FLYING IT IN THIS INAUGURAL YEAR. 
          UM, AND SO HOPEFULLY WE WILL GET, UH, FEEDBACK FROM YOUR BOARD TODAY, GO BACK AND WE HAVE A, UH, SPECIAL MEETING WITH THE COAB THAT'S SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 14TH AND WILL HOPEFULLY THEY WILL APPROVE THE GUIDELINES THEN. 
          WE... PART OF THE DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD AT THE COAB ON NOVEMBER 19TH WAS MAKING SURE NOT TO HAVE ANYTHING THAT'S TOO FINITE, BECAUSE WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO LEARN A LOT THIS YEAR DURING THE INAUGURAL YEAR. 
          SO WE WANNA OPEN THE GRANT, UH, PROGRAM... 
          HERE IT COMES, UH, WE WANNA OPEN THE GRANT PROGRAM IN JANUARY AFTER IT'S APPROVED BY THE COAB, UH, GO AHEAD AND DO PUBLIC OUTREACH, DO PUBLIC OUTREACH, SOME WEBINARS, UM, THROUGH MID-JANUARY, AND THEN THE APPLICATION PERIOD WOULD BE JANUARY UNTIL END OF FEBRUARY. 
          THEN WE WOULD BE WORKING WITH A THIRD PARTY REVIEWER TO DO AN EVALUATION AND RANKING OF THE APPLICATIONS. 
          UM, AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IT'S THAT INAUGURAL YEAR, SO WE'RE NOT QUITE SURE. 
          HERE'S THE, HERE'S THE TIMELINE. 
          YOU'LL SEE THAT WE'VE, UM, FOR MARCH AND APRIL, WE DON'T KNOW HOW MANY APPLICATIONS WE WILL RECEIVE, SO WE START GETTING A LITTLE FUZZY, SHOULD YOU SAY, UM, ABOUT HOW LONG THAT PROCESS MAY TAKE. 
          THEN WE WOULD LIKE TO GO BACK TO THE COAB WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS GO IN IN MAY AND THEN EXECUTE GRANT AGREEMENTS NO LATER THAN JUNE. 
          UM, AND THEN OF COURSE WE HAVE THE, UH, REPORTING THAT WOULD COME BACK TO BOTH THE COAB AND THIS BOARD, UM, A YEAR LATER. 
          SO THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY JUST FOR CONVERSATION SO THAT EVERYBODY IS AWARE. 
          WE HAVE HAD THIS THOUGHT, IF THERE IS AN INFLUX OF APPLICATIONS IN THIS INAUGURAL YEAR, CERTAINLY IF THAT END DATE OF EXECUTING THE GRANT AGREEMENTS IS SO CLOSE TO THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR, WE COULD, UM, POTENTIALLY COMBINE IT AND MAKE IT A TWO YEAR PROGRAM. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          SO THE PROGRAM THAT WE'RE PROPOSING RIGHT NOW IS, UM, TWO TIERED, AND ONE IS FOR SMALLER MINI GRANTS THAT, UM, CAN GO OUT TO, YOU KNOW, LOCAL NGOS AND CBOS AND THAT WOULD BE UP TO $50,000. 
          WE HAVEN'T YET THOUGHT, UM, FIGURED OR ANALYZED WHAT THAT BOTTOM THRESHOLD WOULD BE, BUT WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT IT'S ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROPRIATE, UM, SO PROBABLY MAYBE FIVE OR $10,000. 
          [01:00:02]
THEN THE TIER TWO COMMUNITY IMPACT GRANTS WOULD BE 50, UH, $51,000 OR MORE. 
          AND THOSE WOULD BE FOR PROJECTS, UM, THAT REALLY AIM TO HIT THOSE GOALS OF THE VISION PLAN, MULTI BENEFIT SOUTH COUNTY FACING, UM, PROJECTS THAT ARE READY TO GO. 
          AND OF COURSE THERE'S THE PAJARO VALLEY SET ASIDE, WHICH IS FOR UP TO NO MORE THAN THREE RECIPIENTS IN THE AMOUNT OF $600,000 AND THEN AS WELL THE FUNDS THAT GO TO SAN VICENTE, UH, REDWOODS, WHICH IS UP TO $600,000 SINCE THAT'S DEDICATED TO THE LARGE [INAUDIBLE] CONSERVATION EASEMENT IN SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, THERE'S NOT A, NECESSARILY RANGE OR AMOUNT OF FUNDING THAT WILL BE, IT'S JUST UP TO THE 600,000. 
          - SO THEN BOARD, WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT, UM, A COUPLE DIFFERENT SCORING FRAMEWORKS TO, UH, ADDRESS BOTH THE SMALLER TIER, TIER 1 GRANTS, AS WELL AS THE LARGER TIER GRANTS. 
          SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS CREATE A LOW BARRIER FOR ACCESS TO THOSE LOW, THAT TIER 1 GRANT PROGRAM. 
          AND SO WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A PROPOSED, UH, SCORING FRAMEWORK THAT WE WOULD EVALUATE ALL OF THOSE GRANTS ON. 
          UM, AND THE MAIN POINT IS THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S FLEXIBILITY AND ADAPTABILITY TO THE PROGRAM. 
          SO THIS IS AGAIN AS, AS, UM, REBECCA MENTIONED, THIS IS OUR FIRST EVALUATIVE PROCESS. 
          WE'RE GOING TO RECEIVE THOSE GRANTS, EVALUATE THEM AGAINST A, THIS SCORING FRAMEWORK, AND SEE IF THIS IS THE BEST FIT AND THEN ADJUST AS WE NEED TO, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN GET THE MOST DOLLARS OUT, UM, AND WE CAN, UH, AWARD THE MOST CON- INDIVIDUAL GRANTS AS WE CAN. 
          UM, THE SECOND FRAMEWORK IS, OBVIOUSLY, A LITTLE BIT MORE COMPLICATED. 
          WE'RE, WE'RE INTENDING TO GIVE A HIGHER DOLLAR AMOUNT, SO THERE'S GOING TO BE HIGHER, UM, ELEMENTS TO EVALUATE THOSE GRANT PROPOSALS AGAINST. 
          AND SO THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A LARGER, UM, FRAMEWORK HERE, UH, STILL FOCUSING ON ALIGNMENT WITH MEASURE Q AS IS OUTLINED IN THE ORDINANCE. 
          HAPPY TO DISCUSS ANY OF THESE ELEMENTS AS WELL. 
          UM, THE OTHER THING WE WANTED TO JUST WRAP UP THE PRESENTATION ON IS SOME OF THE, SOME OF THE INITIAL CONVERSATION AS, AS WAS DISCUSSED WITH THE CO-AB IN NOVEMBER. 
          SO WE INITIALLY PROPOSED A, A MUCH LOWER THRESHOLD FOR INDIRECT COSTS. 
          AND I WANT TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT, THAT THE BOARD AND, AND PUBLIC RECOGNIZE THAT THE INDIRECT COSTS WE'RE REFERRING TO HERE, UP TO 15%, IS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE STAFF DELIVERY OVERHEAD COSTS THAT MIGHT BE ASSOCIATED WITH A STAFF POSITION TO DELIVER ANY GIVEN PROJECT. 
          SO WHAT WE'VE DETERMINED DURING OUR CONVERSATION WITH THE CO-AB IS THAT THIS IS A KIND OF FEDERALLY, UM, APPROVED OR ADOPTED STANDARD OF 15%. 
          SO WE'RE, WE'RE ALIGNING THAT INDIRECT THRESHOLD AT 15%. 
          UM, THERE WERE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT MAKING THAT COMPETITIVE, UH, IN THE TIER 2 GRANT PROGRAM. 
          RIGHT NOW WE'RE, WE'RE PROPOSING TO KEEP THAT AS A CAP FOR ALL GRANT APPLICATIONS. 
          THE OTHER THING THAT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE CO-AB, AND WHAT WE FEEL IS THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION IN THIS FIRST YEAR IS, WE DON'T HAVE ANY PROPOSED FUNDING RESTRICTIONS DEFINED IN TERMS OF CONSECUTIVE GRANT CYCLES. 
          SO WE REALLY WANT TO SEE IN THIS FIRST GRANT CYCLE WHAT IS PROPOSED, IN TERMS OF GRANTS, IN TERMS OF STAFF ALLOCATIONS WITHIN THOSE GRANT PROPOSALS, TO DETERMINE IF IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE A CONSECUTIVE FUNDING LIMITATION. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE WANT TO DO IS, UM, AVOID A DEPENDENCY AND AN EXPECTATION YEAR OVER YEAR OR GRANT CYCLE OVER GRANT CYCLE THAT AN INDIVIDUAL NON-PROFIT WILL ALWAYS GET THAT MONEY. 
          THERE ARE, THERE MAY BE GRANT CYCLES WHERE WE WANT TO FOCUS ON A SPECIFIC THING, AND A LARGE AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT GOES INTO THAT SPECIFIC THING, PERHAPS AFTER A NATURAL DISASTER AS AN EXAMPLE. 
          SO WE DON'T PROPOSE ANY OF THAT, AND IT'S AGAIN A LEARNING PROCESS IN THIS FIRST YEAR. 
          THE, THE OTHER POINT OF CONVERSATION IN THE CO-AB AND AGAIN IN ALIGNMENT WITH COUNTY POLICY WAS ADVANCES. 
          SO WE RECOGNIZE THAT FOR PARTICULARLY SMALLER ORGANIZATIONS AN INITIAL ADVANCE ON A GRANT FUNDING IS CRITICAL. 
          OUR COUNTY PROCUREMENT POLICY ALLOWS UP TO A 25% OF AN ADVANCE FOR NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS. 
          UM, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT THAT TYPE OF AN ADVANCE STRUCTURE IN THE SMALLER GRANTS UP TO 25% AND LIKELY UP TO, UM, 15% FOR THE LARGER GRANT CYCLES. 
          AND AGAIN, IT'LL BE ON A REQUEST BASIS, AND WE'LL EVALUATE THAT, UM, ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. 
          SO THOSE WERE SOME OF THE ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS THAT HAVE EVOLVED, WHAT WE PRESENTED. 
          I THINK AS, AS WAS MENTIONED, THIS IS AN EVOLVING PROCESS. 
          WE'RE LITERALLY IN THE PROCESS OF BUILDING, UM, THE GRANT APPLICATION FRAMEWORK. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME UP RECENTLY, I WAS NOTICING A GRANT SOLICITATION 
          [01:05:01]
FROM THE RIVERS AND WATERSHED CONSERVATION ORGANIZATION IN LA COUNTY, AND THEIR APPLICATION HAD A GREAT CEQA SECTION WHERE THERE'S JUST RADIO BUTTONS ON ARE YOU, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE THE PERMIT REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU NEED? DIVISION OF DRINKING WATER, CALIFORNIA FISH AND WILDLIFE, AND ALL THESE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT YOU WOULD CHECK THE BOX IF YOU THINK YOU NEED THOSE AND WHERE YOU ARE IN A CEQA OR NEPA PROCESS. 
          SO WE'RE LITERALLY CHANGING THE APPLICATION TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE THINGS THIS WEEK, IN OUR GOAL OF TRYING TO GET TO A JANUARY, MID-JANUARY LAUNCH. 
          SO I JUST WANTED TO SHARE A COUPLE OF THOSE OTHER ELEMENTS THAT ARE IN PROCESS, AND THEN HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. 
          - WITH THAT, I'LL TAKE IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC TO SEE IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS US ON THIS ITEM? - MORNING AGAIN, KATIE THOMPSON FROM SAVE OUR SHORES. 
          UH, FIRST, I WANT TO THANK THE CITIZENS OVERSIGHT ADVISORY BOARD FOR ALL OF THE TIME YOU'VE PUT INTO THIS. 
          IT'S A LOT OF WORK IN A LITTLE BIT OF TIME, SO, SO THANK YOU. 
          UM, AND WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR THOUGHTFUL APPROACH AND YOUR WILLINGNESS TO RECEIVE FEEDBACK THROUGH THIS PROCESS. 
          FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF A SMALL COMMUNITY-BASED NON-PROFIT, WE'RE ENCOURAGED BY THE TIER 1 SMALL GRANTS, AND I WAS PARTICULARLY HAPPY TO SEE THE REASONABLE REPORTING REQUIREMENT, NO MATCHING REQUIREMENT, ALSO THE INCREASED INDIRECT OF 15%. 
          UM, I ALSO WANT TO SUPPORT THE DECISION OF A LOWER INDIRECT NOT BEING PART OF A COMPETITIVE PROCESS JUST BECAUSE INDIRECT COSTS SUPPORT ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS LIKE COMPLIANCE, REPORTING, AND GENERAL ORGANIZATIONAL SYSTEMS, PARTICULARLY FOR SMALLER NON-PROFITS. 
          AND SO WE ENCOURAGE EVALUATING BUDGETS BASED ON CLARITY AND APPROPRIATENESS RATHER THAN, UM, THE EXACT INDIRECT AMOUNT. 
          WE ALSO ENCOURAGE THE COUNTY TO EXPLORE MULTI-YEAR GRANTS IN FUTURE CYCLES. 
          UH, MANY MEASURE Q GOALS, SUCH AS RESTORATION, WILDLIFE RESILIENCE AND STEWARDSHIP, REQUIRE LONG-TERM INVESTMENT, AND THIS MULTI-YEAR FUNDING, UH, WOULD INCREASE THE IMPACT WHILE REDUCING ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN THAT THESE GRANTS PLAY BOTH FOR THE APPLICANTS AND THE COUNTY. 
          ALSO, UM, AS THE THIRD-PARTY REVIEWERS PLAY A CRITICAL ROLE IN THIS PROCESS, TRANSPARENCY WILL BE ESSENTIAL, CLEARLY COMMUNICATING HOW THE REVIEWERS ARE SELECTED, TRAINED, AND HOW SCORING CONSISTENCIES ENSURED WILL HELP BUILD TRUST. 
          AND THEN FINALLY, I ALSO WANT TO ENCOURAGE THAT THIS PROCESS TO USE, UM, TO PROMOTE COLLABORATION AMONG NON-PROFITS BY INCENTIVIZING PARTNERSHIPS OR JOINT APPLICATIONS SO THAT THESE MEASURE Q FUNDS SUPPORT STRONG COORDINATED OUTCOMES ACROSS OUR COMMUNITY. 
          UM, BUT AGAIN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP AND YOUR WORK ON PUTTING THIS TOGETHER. 
          - GOOD MORNING, BECKY STEINBRUNER. 
          I'M A RESIDENT OF RURAL APTOS IN DISTRICT 2. 
          UM, IT IS AMAZING TO ME JUST STEPPING BACK TO SEE THE, UH, BREADTH OF THE WORK THAT OR3 IS NOW DOING WHEN INITIALLY THAT DEPARTMENT WAS SET UP TO FILL IN FOR THE COUNTY OFFICE OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT THAT WAS SHORTLY BEFORE THEY WERE, UH, OR3 WAS FOUNDED, WENT AWAY BECAUSE THEY NEEDED, THE COUNTY NEEDED TO SAVE MONEY. 
          SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT COMMENT. 
          UM, WHAT I WANT AS A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC IS TO KNOW THAT THIS MONEY WILL BE SPENT, UM, EFFECTIVELY WITH VERIFIABLE RESULTS AND BENEFIT. 
          AND SO THAT'S WHAT I'M GOING TO BE WATCHING FOR. 
          UM, I THINK THAT IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO NOT ALLOW THE SAME NON-PROFITS TO BE ABLE TO APPLY AND RECEIVE GRANT MONEY YEAR AFTER YEAR, CONSECUTIVELY. 
          I, I DON'T THINK THAT SHOULD BE ALLOWED. 
          I THINK THERE SHOULD BE A FIVE-YEAR SPAN FROM WHEN A, A, A NON-PROFIT IS ALLOWED TO, UH, IS GIVEN MONEY BEFORE THEY CAN BE CONSIDERED AGAIN. 
          AND I DO NOT WANT TO SEE THEM TOGGLE BETWEEN TIER 1 AND TIER 2 IN CONSECUTIVE YEARS EITHER. 
          I THINK THAT, UM, WE NEED TO BE TRANSPARENT WITH THE PUBLIC. 
          I THINK THAT THE APPLICATION SHOULD BE VERY PUBLICLY AVAILABLE. 
          UM, MAYBE MY LITTLE FIREWISE COMMUNITY WANTS TO TRY TO APPLY THROUGH THE COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL. 
          SO HOW DO WE FIND OUT ABOUT THIS? AND WE NEED TO SEE A LIST OF WHO APPLIED, FOR WHAT PROJECTS, FOR WHAT AMOUNTS, AND WHO WAS AWARDED. 
          IN TERMS OF, UM, FUTURE REPORTS, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE, THE GRANT RECIPIENTS ALL GIVE A PRESENTATION TO YOUR BOARD PUBLICLY, SO WE KNOW WHAT HAS HAPPENED AND WHAT IS HAPPENING. 
          [01:10:03]
AND TO GIVE POINTS FOR PEOPLE WHO HIRE LOCAL WORKERS. 
          THANK YOU. THANKS FOR REMINDING HIM. THANK YOU. 
          - GOOD MORNING, CHAIR HERNANDEZ AND SUPERVISORS. 
          UH, ERIC LOMBARDO FROM THE LAND TRUST OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY. 
          UH, JUST HERE TO MAKE A VERY BRIEF COMMENT IN APPRECIATION, UH, AND SUPPORT FOR THE STAFF HERE TODAY. 
          UM, PARTICULARLY REBECCA FROM PARKS AND DAVE FROM OR3 AND EACH OF THEIR TEAMS. IT'S BEEN A LOT OF WORK THAT WE'VE BEEN FOLLOWING ALONG AS THIS GRANT PROGRAM GETS GOING AND, UM, I FEEL THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS CHANGES, UH, THAT HAVE BEEN MADE FROM THE DRAFT THAT WAS INITIALLY PRESENTED TO THE CITIZENS OVERSIGHT ADVISORY BOARD AND, UH, THINGS ARE REALLY HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION FOR TRANSPARENCY, ACCESS TO FUNDS FOR SMALLER ORGANIZATIONS UH, AND REALLY NUMEROUS OTHER TOPICS. 
          SO JUST WANT TO EXPRESS THAT GRATITUDE. 
          I KNOW THERE ARE SEVERAL OTHER COMMUNITY AND ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS THAT, UH, CAN'T BE HERE IN PERSON TODAY AND, UH, I CAN'T SPEAK ON BEHALF OF ALL OF THEM, BUT CERTAINLY THE LAND TRUST IS, UH, APPRECIATIVE AND LOOKING FORWARD TO CONTINUED WORK ON THIS TOGETHER. 
          - THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE? - I SEE NO SPEAKERS ONLINE, CHAIR. 
          - OKAY, I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. 
          STARTING WITH, ON MY RIGHT OVER HERE, SUPERVISOR DESERPA? - UM, I, THIS IS A LOT OF WORK AND, UH, I WANT TO THANK, THANK THE STAFF FOR ALL OF, UM, THE THOUGHTFULNESS THAT WENT INTO THIS. 
          UM, AND ALSO, UM, THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE, THE VOLUNTEERS. 
          UM, MY, UH, COMMISSIONER, OUR PERSON ON THAT IS DENNIS WEBB, AND THANK YOU, DENNIS, FOR EVERYTHING. 
          UM, I'M ALSO, UM, VERY GRATEFUL THAT DISTRICT 2 WAS CHOSEN FOR ONE OF THE FIRST ALLOCATIONS OF MONEY, AND I LOOK FORWARD TO, UM, SEEING THE TRANSFORMATION OF FREEDOM LAKE. 
          SO I THINK THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. GOOD JOB. 
          - THANK YOU, CHAIR. ALSO, JUST WANT TO APPRECIATE, UM, ALL THE HARD WORK THAT'S GONE INTO, UM, TO WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY. 
          SO JUST WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR THEIR WORK. 
          I KNOW IT'S NOT AN EASY TASK TO TAKE A BALLOT MEASURE AND THEN IMPLEMENT IT. 
          AND SO, JUST WANT TO APPRECIATE ALL THE HARD WORK. 
          AND I WANT TO THANK, UM, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO SUPPORTED THIS MOVING FORWARD, OR SUPPORTED THE, THE BALLOT MEASURE AND ALSO ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, UH, WHO HAVE HELPED NAVIGATE THIS PROCESS. 
          UM, I DO HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS AND, UM, SOME COMMENTS AND ALSO SOME RECOMMENDATIONS, UH, WHEN THE TIME COMES FOR THE MOTION TO BE MADE. 
          UM, FIRST QUESTION I HAD, UM, REGARDING THE, UM, ALLOWABLE COST, UH, THERE WAS AN ISSUE AROUND EQUIPMENT RENTAL WAS OKAY, BUT EQUIPMENT PURCHASE WAS NOT INCLUDED. 
          I'M JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE IF, FOR EXAMPLE, THIS IS POTENTIAL ONE-TIME FUNDING FOR SOME OF THESE ORGANIZATIONS, UM, FOR SPECIFIC PROJECTS, WHY WE WOULDN'T ALLOW FOR EQUIPMENT PURCHASES AND IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S POSSIBLE? - WE'RE STILL IN THE PROCESS OF EVALUATING THAT PIECE. 
          SO ONE OF THE THINGS IN TERMS OF AUDITING, UH, AND VERIFICATION THAT WE AS COUNTY GOVERNMENT HAVE TO DO IS KIND OF WHAT'S CALLED A SINGLE AUDIT. 
          SO ANYTIME WE PURCHASE A PIECE OF EQUIPMENT, UM, WE HAVE TO BE ABLE TO REPORT THAT FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME. 
          SO WE'RE JUST GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS TO DETERMINE WHETHER PURCHASING IS BOTH ALLOWABLE AND WHAT THE PROCESS OF ACCOUNTABILITY WILL BE FOR THAT, SO THAT THERE IS DOCUMENTATION IN TERMS OF HOW LONG THEY KEEP THAT PIECE OF EQUIPMENT, UM, AND HOW THEY DISPOSE OF THAT PIECE OF EQUIPMENT AFTER ITS USABLE LIFE. 
          SO THERE'S ALL KINDS OF KIND OF GOVERNMENTAL PROCUREMENT PROCESSES THAT WE JUST HAVE TO EVALUATE AND CONFIRM, BUT WE'RE OPEN TO THAT OPTION FOR SURE. 
          - GREAT. 
          UM, UNDER THE GUIDELINES, I, I DO THINK, I AGREE WITH MANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT, UH, IT SHOULD BE MADE CLEAR THAT THE APPLICATION PROCESS IS AN INFORMAL ONE AND NOT A FORMAL RFP. 
          I MEAN, WE'VE SEEN IN THE PAST HOW THAT CAN COMPLICATE PEOPLE BEING UNDERST- PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS HAVE APPLIED FOR, WHY WEREN'T SELECTED, AND I THINK TO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN HAVE IT BE AS TRANSPARENT AS POSSIBLE, HAVING THIS BE AN INFORMAL RFP MAKES THE MOST SENSE. 
          UM, IN TERMS OF CEQA, I JUST WONDER IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO WHY CEQA DOCUMENTATION IS REQUIRED? THERE'S A NUMBER OF PROJECTS THAT ARE KIND OF UNDERWAY THAT DON'T, HAVEN'T NECESSARILY GONE THROUGH CEQA, BUT WILL NEED TO GO THROUGH CEQA AT SOME POINT. 
          AND SO I'M WONDERING KIND OF WHY THAT'S A REQUIREMENT. 
          - YEAH, SO, SO THAT'S, THAT'S AN AREA OF EVOLUTION BOTH IN THE GUIDELINES AND IN THE APPLICATION. 
          SO, AS I HAD MENTIONED IN THE PRESENTATION, THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA RIVERS AND MOUNTAINS CONSERVANCY GRANT APPLICATION WHICH JUST SEEKS TO IDENTIFY WHAT PERMITS WILL BE REQUIRED OR YOU ANTICIPATE BEING REQUIRED, AND IF YOU HAVE STARTED A PERMITTING PROCESS, A CEQA PROCESS, WHERE YOU ARE IN THAT PROCESS. 
          THAT'LL HELP US AS EVALUATORS DETERMINE WHERE THIS PROCESS, WHERE THIS GRANT APPLICATION FITS INTO. 
          [01:15:01]
IS IT SHOVEL-READY AND READY TO BE DELIVERED? AND, OR IS IT IN THE PLANNING STAGE, YOU KNOW, THE PERMITTING PROCESS CAN OFTEN TAKE 12, 18 MONTHS. 
          SO WE JUST WANT TO BE THOUGHTFUL IN UNDERSTANDING THAT ASPECT AS WE EVALUATE THE GRANT APPLICATION. 
          SO IT'S NOT A REQUIREMENT, UM, BUT IT'S AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND AS PART OF THE GRANT APPLICATION. 
          - GREAT. BECAUSE I THINK, AS WE HAD BEEN DISCUSSING THIS WITH MY OFFICE, WE WERE THINKING THAT MAYBE CEQA STATUS WOULD BE A BETTER WAY TO PHRASE IT, SO THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THEY'VE GONE THROUGH THE CEQA PROCESS THEY CAN, YOU KNOW, PROVIDE THAT INFORMATION BUT IF THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS, I THINK TO YOUR POINT, UNDERSTANDING WHERE THEY'RE AT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. 
          UM, IN TERMS OF THE, UM, APPLICATION REVIEW, I'M JUST WONDERING, IT SEEMED LIKE THE BOARD WAS EXCLUDED FROM APPROVING THE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          I'M JUST WONDERING WHY THAT'S THAT'S NOT THE CASE. OKAY. 
          - NO, NO, THE PLAN IS ABSOLUTELY TO BRING, UM, WORK WITH THE CO-AB ON, UH, AFTER WE GET THE RANKINGS FROM THE THIRD PARTY, AND REVIEW, UM, WHAT, HOW THEY'RE RANKED, AND THEN THE, UM, PUT TOGETHER A STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO BRING BACK TO THE BOARD. 
          - GREAT. UM, LAST ONE, UM, IN TERMS OF PUBLIC ACCESS, IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE UNDER THE WILDLIFE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT THAT WAS GETTING ANY POINTS. 
          IT SEEMED LIKE, UM, THAT WILDLIFE AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS GETS 15 POINTS, UM, AND RECREATION AND PUBLIC ACCESS WERE NOT REALLY GIVEN AS MANY POINTS. 
          AND I'M JUST CURIOUS, UM, WHY THAT MAY BE THE CASE. 
          MAYBE I, AND MAYBE I MISREAD THIS PORTION. 
          - YEAH, SO, IN, YOU'RE REFERRING TO IN THE SCORING RUBRIC FOR TIER 2, THE WILDLIFE AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT COMPONENT AND THINKING ABOUT ADDING PARKS, UH, YOU KNOW, ACCESS TO OPEN SPACE AS A, AS A SCORING FRAMEWORK. 
          I, I THINK WE CAN TAKE THAT FEEDBACK AND FIGURE OUT IF, IF THAT AREA OF THE SCORING FRAMEWORK MAKES THE MOST SENSE, BUT MAKING SURE THAT WE RECOGNIZE THAT IF, IF A PROJECT IS ENHANCING ACCESS THAT THERE'S, THERE'S A VALUE ADD OR A POINT REFLECTED IN THAT. 
          - I'LL ALSO ADD THAT IT WAS, UM, IT'S, YOU KNOW, LIKE I SAID WE'RE, WE'RE KIND OF STILL BUILDING THIS OUT AND, UM, WE'RE TRYING TO BE VERY THOUGHTFUL AND, UM, THAT THE VISION PLAN, FOLLOWING THE VISION PLAN ALSO IS TO INCREASE PUBLIC ACCESS, ENHANCE WILDLIFE, AND THAT IS WEIGHTED THE HEAVIEST AT THE TOP. 
          SO WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WEREN'T, YOU KNOW, SOMEWHAT DOUBLE-DIPPING IN POINTS, SO THAT'S WHY, I APPRECIATE THE FEEDBACK. 
          - AND THEN, AND THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT. 
          AND SO THEN THE LAST COMMENT I HAVE, UM, IS AROUND TIER 2 GRANT SCORING. 
          UM, IT SEEMS LIKE, UM, ALIGNMENT WITH Q, UM, GETS POINTS, BUT PROJECT FEASIBILITY AND PARTNERSHIP AREN'T GETTING AS MANY POINTS. 
          AND I GUESS THE, YOU KNOW, THE ISSUE I HAVE IS IT SEEMS LIKE ALIGNMENT WITH MEASURE Q SHOULD BE A REQUIREMENT. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN AN APPLICATION IS COMING IN, THAT ALIGNMENT WITH MEASURE Q, RATHER THAN GIVING IT POINTS, IT SHOULD ALREADY BE A REQUIREMENT. 
          AND THEN, IN TERMS OF FEASIBILITY AND PARTNERSHIPS, THAT THAT SHOULD BE WHAT GETS POINTS VERSUS, UM, THE ALIGNMENT WITH MEASURE Q. 
          I'M WONDERING IF YOU ALL CAN SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT. 
          - SURE. THERE'S, THERE'S LOTS OF ELEMENTS. 
          SO JUST FROM A NOMENCLATURE, ALIGNMENT WITH THE VISION PLAN, MEASURE Q VISION PLAN. 
          SO THERE'S LOTS OF WAYS THAT SOMEBODY CAN BE ALIGNED WITH THE VISION PLAN, AND HOW ALIGNED YOU ARE, WHETHER THE PROJECT IS PROVIDING WILDFIRE RESILIENCE AND HABITAT ENHANCEMENT, OFTENTIMES THOSE THINGS GO HAND IN HAND. 
          BUT YOU COULD HAVE A TRAIL PROJECT THAT PROVIDES ACCESS, PROVIDES WILDFIRE RESILIENCE, AND IMPROVES HABITAT. 
          THAT WOULD BE A PROJECT THAT HITS ALL THREE OF THOSE PRIORITIES AND SCORES DIFFERENTLY. 
          IT IS MORE ALIGNED WITH THE VISION PLAN THAN A PROJECT THAT MIGHT JUST, UM, PROVIDE PARKS ACCESS FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD TO AN EXISTING PARK, AS AN EXAMPLE. 
          SO I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IN THAT FIRST SPACE IS TO GIVE OURSELVES THE ABILITY TO HAVE SOME DISCRETION TO SAY HOW ALIGNED WITH THE VISION PLAN IS THIS APPLICATION? HOW MANY MULTI-BENEFIT IS IT PROVIDING, UM, AND AND GIVE THAT A VALUE, SO NOT JUST A BINARY YES, IT IS IN ALIGNMENT OR NOT. 
          - OKAY. THANK YOU. 
          THAT CONCLUDES ALL MY QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. 
          - SUPERVISOR, I, I WANTED TO ADD TOUCH ON ONE THING THAT I, I HEARD IN YOUR COMMENTS AND MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S CLARITY ON IT. 
          UM, I'VE HEARD THE TERM RFP USED A COUPLE OF TIMES, AND THIS IS NOT AN RFP PROCESS. 
          UM, THIS IS A GRANT PROCESS. 
          UM, RFP IS A, IS A DIFFERENT ANIMAL, AND I KNOW IT CAN GET CONFUSING BECAUSE AS PART OF THE CORE PROCESS, THE BOARD ADOPTED RFP PRINCIPLES INTO THE CORE PROCESS. 
          THAT IS, THAT IS A DIFFERENT, UM, YOU KNOW, KIND OF PROCESS. 
          THERE ARE NO CONFIDENTIALITY PROVISIONS REGARDING ANYTHING, UM, THAT I'M AWARE OF WITH REGARD TO THE GRANT APPLICATIONS, INCLUDING THE SCORING RUBRIC, INCLUDING WHO'S ON THE PANELS, EVERYTHING SHOULD BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. 
          AND THAT MAY BE ONE OF THE THINGS FROM AN OPERATIONAL PERSPECTIVE THAT, UH, ONE WANTS TO CONSIDER IS WHETHER THE SCORERS, UH, WHETHER THE SCORING SHEETS, FOR EXAMPLE, SHOULD NOT IDENTIFY WHO IS ACTUALLY DOING THE SCORING 
          [01:20:03]
BECAUSE SOMETIMES THAT CAN LEAD TO PEOPLE NOT BEING AS, UM, AS, UH, FORTHRIGHT AS THEY OTHERWISE WOULD BE. 
          BUT THOSE ARE OPERATIONAL THINGS THAT WE CAN WORK OUT WITH STAFF AS WE MOVE FORWARD. 
          UH, TO GET THE BEST PROCESS IN PLACE, BUT, UM, ALL OF THIS MATERIAL SHOULD BE AVAILABLE PURSUANT TO THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT OR, OR OR WHATEVER OTHER PROCESS THAT, UH, PEOPLE ARE LOOKING AT. 
          - WELL, I THINK, I, ALIGN MYSELF WITH THE COMMENTS YOU MADE, ESPECIALLY AROUND THE REVIEWERS' NAMES NOT BEING PRESENT, BUT THAT THIS IS A GRANT, UM, APPLICATION PROCESS, AND SO IT'S GOING TO BE TRANSPARENT AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. 
          I THINK THAT'S APPROPRIATE. SO, THANK YOU. 
          - THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION AS WELL, UH, COUNTY COUNSEL. 
          UH, SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ? - THANK YOU. 
          UM, I WANT TO START OFF JUST BY THANKING THE STAFF FOR GETTING US TO THIS POINT. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN INTERESTING FOR ME TO SEE MEASURE Q'S IMPLEMENTATION PROCESS. 
          I'VE NEVER BEEN A PART OF A, UM, TAX MEASURES ROLLOUT. 
          AND SO JUST SEEING THE TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK FROM CREATING A VISION PLAN, CREATING THE CITIZENS OVERSIGHT ADVISORY BOARD, SHEPHERDING ALL OF THE MEETINGS AND PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS, AND NOW WE'RE IN THE POINT OF DESIGNING THE APPLICATION PROCESS. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, I-I CONTINUE TO BELIEVE THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT ON THE FRONT END TO GET THIS PART RIGHT AND TO DO THIS, UM, THOROUGHLY, BECAUSE ON THE TAIL END, WE'RE GONNA BE GIVEN RECOMMENDATIONS ABOUT VALUABLE FUNDING GOING OUT TO THE COMMUNITY AND ENSURING THAT THE BOARD HAS ALIGNMENT ON THE DECISIONS THAT ARE MADE AT THE FRONT END IS REALLY IMPORTANT. 
          UM, SO WITH THAT, I JUST HAVE A COUPLE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS. 
          UM, I-I REALLY LIKE THE SCORING RUBRIC, THE-- WHAT YOU'VE GOTTEN TO SO FAR. 
          UM, I HAVE-- I HEARD THE INPUT ABOUT THE INDIRECT COST, AND I UNDERSTAND THE IMPORTANCE OF ENSURING THAT INDIRECT COSTS FOR ORGANIZATIONS ARE COVERED. 
          AND ALSO MAYBE AS YOU LOOK AT THE TIER TWO, THE LARGER APPLICATIONS, UM, IF WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A MATCH IN THE FUTURE, WHETHER IT'S THE CYCLE OR THE NEXT ONE, AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONSIDER COMPETITIVE, UM, BONUS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE ABLE TO REDUCE THOSE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS SIMPLY BECAUSE THAT'S A PLACE FOR THEIR, UM, COMMUNITY SUPPORT, THEIR FUNDRAISING EFFORTS TO PITCH IN. 
          AND IT JUST IS ANOTHER DEMONSTRATION OF KIND OF COMMUNITY BUY-IN FOR THE TYPE OF PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I'M NOT ATTACHED TO WIN, BUT THAT'S JUST A FRAMEWORK THAT I THINK YOU MAY WANNA CONSIDER. 
          UM, SAME THING WITH THE, UM, CONSECUTIVE GRANTS. 
          YOU KNOW, LET'S LEARN FROM THIS FIRST CYCLE, BUT IT'S-- I AGREE THAT IN THE FUTURE YOU MAY WANNA HAVE THESE GAP YEARS. 
          UM, I ALSO THINK TIER ONE'S NAME COULD USE AN UPGRADE BECAUSE WE CALL THEM MINI GRANTS, BUT $200,000 IS NOT MINI, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A GOOD AMOUNT OF MONEY GOING OUT IN THE COMMUNITY. 
          SO, I WOULD LOVE TO GET CREDIT FOR THE GREAT WORK THAT'S GONNA BE DONE WITH, UH, THOSE, I DUNNO, SMALLER SIZE TIER ONE GRANTS. 
          UM, ONE THING, AND I KNOW THAT IT'S NOT-- I DON'T EVEN RECOMMEND, UM, INCLUDING THIS AS PART OF THE SCORING RUBRIC, BUT AS A PRACTICE AS, UH, WE HAVE IN THE APPLICATION KIND OF GEOGRAPHIC REGION, NORTH, SOUTH AND MIDCOUNTY, AND I DO THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE BENEFIT TO START CALLING OUT THE SAN LORENZO VALLEY REGION AS A SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHIC REGION. 
          UM, BECAUSE OFTEN WE KIND OF MIX, YOU KNOW, NORTH COUNTY, YOU'VE GOT DAVENPORT, THERE'S 300 PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE, VERSUS SAN LORENZO VALLEY THAT HAS 30,000 PEOPLE. 
          AND JUST ENSURING THAT WE ARE TRACKING, YOU KNOW, THE DATA. 
          AND FOR- FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION, I MIGHT CALL OUT GEOGRAPHIC REGION, UM, JUST SO WE CAN HAVE THE INFORMATION. 
          AGAIN, IT'S NOT A SCORING, UM, CLASSIFICATION FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN. 
          UM, A QUESTION, UM, I WANT- WANNA GO INTO THE- THE REVIEW PROCESS. 
          UM, THE STAFF REPORT REFERENCES A THIRD-PARTY REVIEWER, AND WE'VE HEARD A LITTLE BIT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHO ARE THE NAMES AND, UM, I-I THINK THAT YOU ARE RECOMMENDING, UH, MAYBE HIRING AN EXTERNAL REVIEWER. 
          CAN YOU JUST TALK TO ME ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING? - SURE. SO ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK WE RECOGNIZE IS THAT WHETHER IT'S IN THIS FIRST GRANT CYCLE OR FUTURE GRANT CYCLES, THAT THE- THE COUNTY OR DEPARTMENTS WITHIN THE COUNTY COULD BE APPLICANTS OURSELVES TO SOME OF THIS MONEY, OR IN COLLABORATION IN PARTNERSHIP WITH OTHER ORGANIZATIONS. 
          SO, WE FELT IT WAS REALLY IMPORTANT IN THAT FIRST REVIEW TO HAVE A THIRD-PARTY PERSON OR ORGANIZATION TAKE A LOOK, SCORE THEM, AND THEN WE WILL ADD TO THAT SCORING FRAMEWORK AS WE EVALUATE ALL THOSE GRANT APPLICATIONS AS WELL. 
          [01:25:03]
BUT IT WAS AN ATTEMPT TO CREATE, YOU KNOW, A CLEAR FIRST-ORDER REVIEW BY AN IMPARTIAL REVIEWER. 
          THAT WAS THE INTENT. 
          - IS THIS-- IS THIS LIKE A- A PRIVATE COMPANY, OTHER GROUPS THAT DO THIS? - WE HAVE-- YEAH. IN THE MANY, UH, TASK ITEMS THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING, THIS IS CERTAINLY ONE THAT'S ON OUR LIST, BUT WE HAVE NOT GONE THROUGH THE FORMAL, LIKE RFP, UM, RFQ PROCESS TO SEE WHO WOULD BE OUT THERE. 
          UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE'RE GONNA TRY AND KEEP THE DOLLAR AMOUNT OF THAT LOW. 
          SO IT'S A STAFF PERSON AND AN ORGANIZATION OR A SOLE PROPRIETOR IS HOW IT'LL PROBABLY PLAY OUT. 
          - GREAT. THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          UM, AND I THINK JUST FINALLY TO UNDERSCORE WHAT MY FIRST POINT WAS, WHEN THE COUNTY HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISTRIBUTE FUNDS TO THE COMMUNITY, ULTIMATELY THERE ARE GOING TO BE PEOPLE WHO ARE HAPPY [LAUGHS] AND THERE ARE GONNA BE PEOPLE WHO ARE UNHAPPY AT THOSE DECISIONS. 
          AND MY HOPE FOR THIS-- THE BOARD, IS THAT WE ARE ABLE TO APPROVE A PROCESS TODAY THAT WE ARE SO COMFORTABLE WITH THAT WHEN WE RECEIVE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, WE CAN- CAN SUPPORT THE PROCESS THAT WE DECIDED. 
          UM, WE WILL GET FEEDBACK ABOUT UNHAPPY APPLICANTS LIKELY. 
          UM, I JUST ANTICIPATE THAT. 
          AND RATHER THAN LOOKING BACK AT A PROCESS ISSUE, UM, I WOULD-- AT THAT TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT, YOU KNOW, FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS, BUT I REALLY WANT TO JUST EMPHASIZE THAT THIS IS THE TIME. 
          IF OUR BOARD HAS THOUGHTS OR INPUT, LIKE LET'S- LET'S SHARE IT, LET'S GET IT OUT THERE, SO THAT WAY, THE STAFF CAN COOK THAT INTO THE PROCESS. 
          SO WE SET FORTH A PROCESS THAT WE CAN STAND BEHIND WHEN THOSE DECISIONS COME. 
          THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS. 
          - THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR KOENIG. 
          - THANK YOU, CHAIR. 
          AND, UH, THANK YOU FOR THIS ROBUST PROCESS. 
          I THINK IT LOOKS GREAT, UH, AS A STARTING POINT. 
          UM, I MEAN, I DO THINK THAT ULTIMATELY YOU CAN'T FULLY JUDGE A PROCESS UNTIL YOU SEE THE OUTCOME. 
          AND IT WILL BE AN ITERATIVE PROCESS. 
          I MEAN, YOU CAN'T, UH-- YOU KNOW, YOU FIND SOMETHING, YOU SEE WHAT YOU GET, IT MIGHT NOT BE EXACTLY WHAT YOU EXPECTED, AND THEN YOU CAN GO BACK AND, UM, WE'LL HAVE YEAR AFTER-- YEAR AFTER YEAR TO IMPROVE THIS. 
          UM, I KIND-- JUST A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS. 
          SO ONE- ONE OF-- PARTICULARLY IN TERMS OF, UH, WILDFIRE RISK REDUCTION, PROBABLY THE-- ONE OF THE BIGGEST SUCCESS STORIES IN OUR COUNTY HAS BEEN THE EXPANSION OF FIREWISE NEIGHBORHOODS. 
          UM, AND NOW WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE MAINTAIN THAT MOMENTUM NOW THAT THEY'VE ESTABLISHED, UM, AND THAT THEY HAVE RESOURCES AND PROJECTS, ENTHUSIASM TO KEEP, UM-- TO ACTUALLY DO WHAT THEY SET OUT TO DO. 
          UM, WOULD FIREWISE GROUPS BE ELIGIBLE FOR ANY OF THIS FUNDING? - YEAH, SO- SO AS- AS IN STATUTE, THE ELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS ARE A PUBLIC AGENCY, A NONPROFIT, OR A TRIBAL ORGANIZATION. 
          SO, THERE ARE SOME FIRE SAFE COUNCILS THAT HAVE ACHIEVED NONPROFIT STATUS. 
          UM, I-I HAVE HEARD THAT THERE ARE SOME FIREWISE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE EXPLORING A 501C3 STATUS. 
          AND THEN I KNOW THAT THERE'S AN ACTIVE CONVERSATION ABOUT WHETHER THE FIRE SAFE COUNCIL OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY OR ANOTHER ORGANIZATION SERVES AS A FISCAL SPONSOR FOR, UH, OR ON BEHALF OF FIREWISE COMMUNITIES. 
          I THINK OUR HOPE IS THAT THERE'S AN UMBRELLA PROGRAM THAT IS CONTEMPLATED BY A THIRD-- YOU KNOW, BY A CBO OR AN ELIGIBLE APPLICANT, AND THEN THEY'RE DETERMINING WHICH FIREWISE COMMUNITIES MAY GET FUNDING THROUGH KIND OF WHAT IS THE LOWEST HANGING FRUIT TYPE MODEL. 
          UM, MAKING A DETERMINATION AT THE GRANT LEVEL TO APPLY, UH, AN AWARD TO A SINGLE FIREWISE COMMUNITY, UM, COULD BE REALLY COMPLICATED, RIGHT? YOU'RE- YOU'RE AWARDING A- A SPECIFIC SET OF FUNDS TO JUST ONE NEIGHBORHOOD VERSUS AWARDING IT TO A PROGRAM THAT HAS THE DISCRETION TO AWARD IT TO MULTIPLE ORGANIZATIONS. 
          SO I THINK WE JUST HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT AND SEE, AS YOU SAID, HOW MANY COME IN AS STANDALONE FIREWISE COMMUNITIES OR IF THERE'S A PROGRAM THAT IS PROPOSED OR CONTEMPLATED THAT CAN DISTRIBUTE MONEY TO FIREWISE COMMUNITIES AT LARGE. 
          - ALRIGHT. SO IF THERE ARE FIREWISE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE INTERESTED IN GETTING MONEY FOR PROJECTS, YOU'RE SAYING MAYBE THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION WOULD BE FOR THEM TO CONTACT THE FIRE SAFE COUNCIL OR THE RCD AND SORT OF ENCOURAGE SOME KIND OF A GROUP APPLICATION, UM, THAT WILL-- WOULD PROVIDE FUNDING FOR- FOR NEIGHBORHOOD PROJECTS. OKAY. 
          UM, I'M JUST CURIOUS, SO WITH THIS-- WITH THE GRANTS AND THE ELIGIBILITY THAT WE'VE OUTLINED HERE, UM, WOULD ACQUIRING PROPERTY OR EASEMENTS THAT PROVIDE NEW PUBLIC ACCESS OPPORTUNITIES BE INELIGIBLE USE? 
          [01:30:01]
- YOU KNOW, WE'VE READ THE ORDINANCE MANY TIMES, AND I CAN'T RECALL. 
          UM, SO WE CAN COME BACK TO YOU ON THAT FOR SURE. 
          - YEAH, I MEAN, I'M CURIOUS, I MEAN, EVEN AS- AS FAR AS, UM, YOU KNOW, I THINK FRIENDS OF STATE FORESTS IS CONSIDERING ACQUIRING SOME PROPERTY TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO, UM, THE DEMONSTRATION FORCE-- [INAUDIBLE] DEMONSTRATION FORCE THAT ARE JUST-- YOU KNOW, WOULD THAT BE AN ELIGIBLE USE? - I- I'M-- WE'RE MOST LIKELY SURE THAT- THAT YOU COULD USE THE FUNDS FOR THAT, BUT WE- WE CAN SPECIFICALLY GET BACK TO YOU. 
          - OKAY. GREAT. 
          UM, AND THEN I THINK YOU HINTED AT THIS, BUT IS OUR OWN PARKS DEPARTMENT OR OR3 CONSIDERING, UH, APPLYING FOR, YOU KNOW, WITH ANY PROJECTS FOR THESE FUNDS? - UH, UH, IT-- YES, OF COURSE, THE, UM, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT PROJECTS GO BY, AND WE THINK ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR MEASURE Q. 
          UM, MAYBE NOT NECESSARILY THIS YEAR, THE INAUGURAL YEAR, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'RE FORTUNATE ENOUGH THAT WE GET TO HAVE THIS PROGRAM YEAR AFTER YEAR. 
          SO I THINK ULTIMATELY WE WILL PROBABLY BE AN APPLICANT. 
          - OKAY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          - THANK YOU. I WANT TO ECHO MY, UH, COLLEAGUE SENTIMENT. 
          UH, I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR ALL THEIR HARD WORK. 
          UH, THANK THE LAND TRUST, OF COURSE, AND ESPECIALLY THANK THE VOTERS THAT PASSED MEASURE Q THROUGHOUT OUR COUNTY, AND ALSO THANK THE- THE [INAUDIBLE]. 
          YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THEY'VE DONE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK IN A SHORT AMOUNT OF TIME TO PUT THIS ALL TOGETHER. 
          UH, AND GIVEN IT WAS A BRAND NEW BOARD THAT HAD JUST BARELY MET AND DID IT WITHIN, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL MONTHS, SO THANK THEM AS WELL. 
          AND WELL, COMMISSIONER ON THERE TOO, JULISSA ESPINDOLA. 
          UM, I ALSO, UH, WANT TO ECHO THE SENTIMENT OF-- UH, OR THE-- MY COLLEAGUE'S COMMENT ABOUT, UH, ACCESS TO OPEN SPACE AND PARKS AS WELL TO BEING PART OF THE LANGUAGE THAT'S ON THERE. 
          AND, UM, THE ONLY SUGGESTION I-I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT DOES HAPPEN IS THAT MAYBE AT THE NEXT [INAUDIBLE] MEETING OR A SEPARATE MEETING, THAT THERE IS LIKE A FORMAL PRESENTATION OUTLINING THIS PROCESS THAT WE'RE OUTLINING HERE TODAY TO ANY POTENTIAL APPLICANT SO THAT THEY'RE AWARE OF THE TIMELINES OF THE PROCESS, UH, JUST EVERYTHING, RIGHT, SO THAT THEY CAN GET- GET READY PRIOR TO ACTUALLY DOING THE APPLICATION OF WHAT THE-- UH, WHAT THIS PROCESS IS THAT WE'VE OUTLINED. 
          UH, WITH THAT, UH, I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE, UH, BOARD. 
          SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - THANK YOU, CHAIR. I DID HAVE ONE, UH, MORE QUESTION THAT I MISSED. 
          UM, ON THE APPLICATION TEMPLATE IN THE STAFF REPORT UNDER PROGRAM PURPOSE AND AUTHORITY, IT INDICATES THAT 2.5 MILLION OR ABOUT 40% OF THE FUNDING WILL BE FOR THE GRANT PROGRAM, BUT THE APPLICATION TEMPLATE SAYS THE ANNUAL ALLOCATION OF THE PROGRAM WILL BE A MILLION. 
          JUST WONDERING WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH THAT DISCREPANCY? - YEAH, SO THE TOTAL- THE TOTAL GRANT PROGRAM IS THAT 40% NUMBER, AND THEN I THINK INSIDE EACH APPLICATION WILL PROBABLY MAKE CLEAR WHAT THE TIER ONE ALLOCATION IS VERSUS THE TIER TWO ALLOCATION. 
          SO, SORRY, THERE'S... YEAH. 
          - SO THE TOTAL WILL BE 2.5 MILLION, AND ACROSS THE DIFFERENT TIERS, THE DIFFERENT TIERS WILL HAVE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF ALLOCATION? - YEAH. SO INSIDE THE APPLICATION PROCESS AS WE'RE BUILDING IT, YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SELECT TIER ONE, TIER TWO PAJARO AS THREE DIFFERENT GRANT OPPORTUNITIES, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE A-A BACKEND PROCESS FOR OUR LAND STEWARDSHIP IMPLEMENTATION PARTNER TO IMPLEMENT WHAT GRANT-- YOU KNOW, WHAT PROJECTS THEY'RE PUTTING SO THAT WE HAVE A- A SIMILAR REPORTING REQUIREMENT FOR EVERYBODY, BUT- BUT THEY WON'T, YOU KNOW, THEY WON'T HAVE TO APPLY PER SE. 
          - GOT IT. ALRIGHT, WELL, WITH THAT, I'LL MOVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND WOULD LIKE TO INCORPORATE, UM, ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE UNDER APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS, CLARIFY THAT THE APPLICATION PROCESS IS A GRANT PROPOSAL PROCESS, AND REVIEWERS' NAMES SHALL BE CONFIDENTIAL, BUT APPLICATION SCORES AND COMMENTS WILL BE PUBLIC. 
          UNDER CQA REVISED REFERENCES FROM CQA DOCUMENTATION TO CQA STATUS. 
          UNDER ALLOWABLE COSTS, CONTINUE EXPLORATION OF THE ALLOWABLE COST TO PERMIT EQUIPMENT PURCHASES. 
          UNDER PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION OVERSIGHT, CLARIFY THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WILL MAKE FINAL GRANT AWARD DETERMINATIONS AND ENSURE AGAIN, THAT ALL APPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE BOARD AND TO THE PUBLIC. 
          UNDER NUMBER TWO, APPLICATION TEMPLATE REVISIONS, FEASIBILITY TIER ONE, UM, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE INCLUDE LEVERAGING OPPORTUNITIES AS A FACTOR AND EVALUATING PROJECT FEASIBILITY. 
          UNDER WILDLIFE AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT, ENSURE THAT PROJECTS THAT PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATIONAL BENEFITS ARE NOT DISADVANTAGED UNDER THE CURRENT 15-POINT WAITING SYSTEM. 
          AND THAT CONCLUDES MY RECOMMENDATIONS, AND I'LL SEND A COPY OF THOSE OVER TO THE CLERK SO THAT THEY CAN BE DISTRIBUTED - SUPERVISOR, UM, ONE THING ABOUT YOUR MOTION IS WE- WE CAN'T, UM, MAKE THE REVIEWERS-- UM, WE- WE- WE CAN'T, UH, MAKE THE REVIEWERS CONFIDENTIAL, THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ACTUALLY DOING THE REVIEWING. 
          I MEAN, WE COULD, FOR EXAMPLE, NOT HAVE THE REVIEWERS PUT THEIR NAMES DOWN ON INDIVIDUAL SCORING SHEETS SO THAT THE REVIEWERS CAN'T BE IDENTIFIED WITH A PARTICULAR SCORING SHEET. 
          BUT, UM, THIS IS A PUBLIC PROCESS, SO... 
          - I-I WAS TRYING TO JUST ALIGN MYSELF WITH THE COMMENTS THAT YOU HAD MADE EARLIER. 
          - OH, OKAY. YEAH. 
          SO THE COMMENT- THE COMMENT I WAS REFERRING TO WAS- WAS- WAS JUST WHAT I JUST SAID, THAT- THAT THERE'S WAYS THAT WE CAN, UM, UH, DISAGGREGATE IF YOU WILL, 
          [01:35:03]
THE- THE, THE INDIVIDUAL REVIEWERS FROM THEIR PARTICULAR SCORES, BUT IN YOUR MOTION, UM, THE WAY I HEARD IT, IT WAS- IT WAS TO KEEP CONFIDENTIAL THE NAMES OF THE REVIEWERS. 
          AND SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO. 
          - OKAY. SO HOW- HOW ABOUT THIS FOR THAT PART OF THE MOTION TO CLARIFY THAT THE GRANT-- THE APPLICATION PROCESS, IT'S A GRANT PROPOSAL PROCESS AND, UM, APPLICATION SCORES AND COMMENTS AND REVIEWERS' NAMES WILL BE MADE PUBLIC. 
          HOWEVER, THERE'S [INAUDIBLE] THAT. 
          I THINK THAT'S UP FOR YOU ALL TO DECIDE, BUT JUST ENSURING THAT ALL THE INFORMATION'S PUBLIC. OKAY. 
          THAT CONCLUDES MY MOTION. 
          - JUST ONE- ONE CLARIFYING PIECE. 
          I WOULD DEFINITELY HEAR THAT PARKS ACCESS IS AN IMPORTANT SCORING FRAMEWORK. 
          IF YOU CAN IN THE MOTION, JUST MAKE US-- GIVE US THE FLEXIBILITY TO FIND THE RIGHT PLACE IN THE SCORING RUBRIC TO ENSURE THAT PARKS ACCESS IS PART OF IT, OR ARE YOU REALLY FEELING LIKE IT NEEDS TO BE IN THE WILDLIFE AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS SECTION? - I THINK WE ARE WILLING TO PROVIDE THE FLEXIBILITY. 
          - OKAY. 
          - YEP.   - THANK YOU. 
          - TO PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY OF WHERE PARKS, UM, AND PUBLIC ACCESS, AND RECREATIONAL BENEFITS CAN BE... - OPEN SPACE. 
          - ... [INAUDIBLE] TO THE SCORING PROCESS. 
          - OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. 
          - I'LL SECOND. 
          - AND A SECOND. MADAM CLERK, COMMENTS? SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ? - THANK YOU. UM, THERE WAS A LOT IN THAT MOTION. 
          I'M NOT SURE THAT I CAUGHT AT LEAST THE SECOND HALF OF IT. 
          UM, IN PRIOR AGENDA ITEMS WE'VE HELD, UM, WHEN A MOTION WAS PROPOSED, AND KIND OF A LIST OF ADDITIONAL DIRECTION WAS ADDED, WE CHOSE INSTEAD TO ASK THE STAFF TO FOLLOW UP BASED ON THE COMMENTS THAT THEY HEARD TODAY, UM, AS OPPOSED TO LISTING OUT ALL OF THE PARTICULAR ADDITIONAL DIRECTION. 
          I THINK EACH OF US PROBABLY HAD SOME POINTS THAT WE WOULD'VE ADDED TO THAT AGENDA ITEM OR AS ADDITIONAL DIRECTION. 
          AND SO I MIGHT ASK... - SO... 
          - ...AT LEAST TO REPEAT WHAT YOU SAID, BUT THEN... 
          - I'LL-- I CAN ALSO ADD IN ANY FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS AS HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED BY THE BOARD. 
          - CAN YOU PLEASE REPEAT THE REST? - SURE. - YOUR MOTION. 
          - BECAUSE I-- ALSO, BASED ON SOME OF THE COMMENTS I-- EARLIER, GETTING EVERYTHING OUT TODAY, I THINK IS SOMETHING THAT YOU SUGGESTED THAT WE DO. 
          SO WHEN THE-- WHEN IT COMES BACK THAT IT REFLECTS THE BOARD'S DIRECTION. 
          SO I'VE PREPARED ALL THAT PRIOR TO COMING IN, SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S INCLUDED. 
          I DO THINK AS WELL, AND-- YOU KNOW, AND THAT THIS HAS COME UP BEFORE IN OTHER MEETINGS, THAT, UM, I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, UM, THAT IF OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS HAVE COME UP THAT IT'S CLEAR-- IT'S CLEAR TO THE-- TO THE STAFF SO THAT WHEN THEY'RE MOVING FORWARD THAT THEY CAN INCORPORATE THAT OTHER DIRECTION. 
          SO I DON'T WANT TO EXCLUDE ANY OF THE FURTHER RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE, UM, BUT I DID HAVE SOME VERY SPECIFIC THINGS THAT ACTUALLY CAME UP TODAY IN THE PUBLIC, SO I'M HAPPY TO READ IT AGAIN IF THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. 
          OKAY. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS. 
          CLARIFY THAT THE APPLICATION PROCESS IS A GRANT PROPOSAL PROCESS, UM, AND THAT THE APPLICATION SCORES AND COMMENTS WILL BE MADE PUBLIC. 
          REVISED REFERENCES FROM CQA DOCUMENTATION TO CQA STATUS. 
          UNDER ALLOWABLE COST, CONTINUED EXPLORATION OF THE ALLOWABLE COST TO PERMIT EQUIPMENT PURCHASES. 
          PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION OVERSIGHT CLARIFY THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MAKE FINAL GRANT AWARD DETERMINATIONS AND ENSURE THAT ALL APPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE BOARD AND TO THE PUBLIC. 
          UNDER NUMBER TWO, APPLICATION TEMPLATE REVISIONS. 
          UNDER FEASIBILITY TIER ONE PROJECTS INCLUDE LEVERAGING OPPORTUNITIES AS A FACTOR IN EVALUATING PROJECT FEASIBILITY. 
          AND UNDER WILDLIFE AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT, AND I THINK WE'RE GONNA TAKE THAT OUT OF WILDLIFE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT, BUT IN GENERAL, ENSURE THAT PROJECTS THAT PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATIONAL BENEFITS ARE NOT DISADVANTAGED UNDER THE CURRENT SYSTEM. 
          AND IF ANYBODY ELSE HAS RECOMMENDATIONS... 
          I MEAN, I THINK THAT-- AND- AND THEN I THINK IN ADDITION TO THAT, INCORPORATE THE OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN PROVIDED BY THE BOARD THROUGH OUR DISCUSSION. 
          - YOU GOT IT, SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ? IT'S A CQA STATUS, OPEN SPACE AND PARKS EQUIPMENT PURCHASE. 
          A LOT OF TRANSPARENCY STUFF AND THE LEVERAGING OF FUNDS. 
          - YES. UM, I MIGHT ASK, UH, FOR SOME FURTHER CLARIFICATION ON YOUR INTENT RELATED TO, UH, THE BOARD MAKING THE FINAL DETERMINATION. 
          WE HAVE-- WE HAVE A PROCESS. 
          AND I KNOW RECOMMENDATIONS WILL COME TO THE BOARD. 
          WHAT DO YOU IMAGINE FOR THAT BOARD MEETING THAT MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR STAFF OR FOR... 
          - THERE WILL BE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE'VE HAD IN THE PAST. 
          WE WILL RECEIVE A RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF FOR APPROVAL AND AWARDING OF THE FUNDS. 
          THEY'RE GONNA HAVE THE DIFFERENT SCORES, THEY'LL HAVE THE COMMENTS AND UM, AND THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE PUBLIC. 
          AND SO THAT WHEN IT COMES TO THE BOARD, IF WE-- IF- IF- IF THIS-- IF WE DON'T AGREE WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THEN WE'LL NEED TO MAKE OUR OWN RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          IF WE DO AGREE WITH THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THEN WE CAN MOVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. 
          [01:40:01]
BUT I THINK THE WHOLE POINT OF THIS IS THAT CERTAIN TIMES IN THE PAST, CERTAIN PROGRAMS HAVE NOT BEEN FUNDED, AND IT'S BEEN DIFFICULT AND CHALLENGING FOR US TO UNDERSTAND WHY THOSE PROGRAMS WEREN'T FUNDED. 
          BY HAVING ACCESS TO ALL THE APPLICATIONS, ALL THE COMMENTS, IT GIVES US AN ABILITY. 
          IT'S PRIOR TO MAKING THOSE DECISIONS, BEING ABLE TO HAVE COMMUNICATIONS WITH STAFF, UNDERSTAND WHERE-- HOW THE [INAUDIBLE] GOT TO THEIR DETERMINATION. 
          IF THEY'RE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO ARE GONNA COME TO US, WHO DISAGREE, SINCE WE'LL HAVE THE COMMENTS AND THE SCORES, WE'LL HAVE THE APPLICATIONS, WE CAN GO THROUGH IT AND DISCUSS WHY MAYBE THEY DIDN'T GET-- UM, THEY WEREN'T AWARDED THIS YEAR. 
          WE CAN DISCUSS THAT WITH STAFF, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THE STAFF AND THE [INAUDIBLE] AREN'T THE ONES MAKING THE DECISION, IT'S THE BOARD. 
          I MEAN, WE WERE GIVEN THE AUTHORITY TO OVERSEE THIS-= THESE FUNDS. 
          AND THE OBJECTIVE HERE IS THAT WE'RE THE ONES WHO ARE GONNA MAKE THE DECISIONS ON HOW THIS MONEY IS GONNA BE SPENT. 
          - SO, QUICK CLARIFICATION. 
          UM, SO THIS IS REFERRING TO THE GRANTS THAT-- OR THE PROJECTS THAT THE COUNTY'S PUTTING FORWARD? CORRECT? NOT THE COMMUNITY ONES? - YEAH. SO LET ME-- LET- LET- LET'S TALK THROUGH THE PROCESS JUST ONE MORE TIME, JUST FOR CLARITY AND I THINK REBECCA MENTIONED IT. 
          SO THE FIRST PROCESS WILL BE WE RECEIVE THE APPLICATIONS. 
          WE'LL HAVE A THIRD PARTY REVIEWER REVIEW THEM, STAFF WILL ADD TO THAT REVIEW PROCESS. 
          WE WILL COLLATE ALL OF THAT IN A PRELIMINARY FUNDING RECOMMENDATION TO THE COAB. 
          WE WILL RECEIVE THE COAB FEEDBACK, INTEGRATE THAT FEEDBACK RETURN TO THE COAB WITH A FINAL FUNDING RECOMMENDATION. 
          DURING THAT WHOLE PROCESS, OUR RECOMMENDATION TO YOUR COAB MEMBERS WILL BE TO BE IN CLOSE CONVERSATION WITH YOU SO THAT IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, CONCERNS, ISSUES WITH PRELIMINARY OR FINAL RECOMMENDATION, WE TRY TO ADDRESS IT AT THAT STAGE THEN IDEALLY, WE'RE BRINGING A FINAL COAB APPROVED FUNDING RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD. 
          IDEALLY, WE'VE GONE THROUGH THE, THE CONVERSATION PROCESS BEFORE WE GET TO YOU AND IT'S, AND IT'S IN SUPPORT, BUT IT WILL ULTIMATELY BE YOUR AUTHORITY AT THAT TIME TO THEN APPROVE THAT FUNDING ALLOCATION AND MOVE FORWARD WITH AWARDING GRANTS. 
          - CORRECT. SO IS THAT PROCESS WITHIN THE... 
          - BYLAWS OF THE COAB. WE WILL ADD THAT. 
          - OKAY. - WE WILL... 
          - QUITE SHOW THE CLARITY. 
          - WE WILL ADD THAT TO THE GRANT FRAMEWORK CONTENT AND, AND IT IS INSIDE THE, THE COAB BYLAWS. 
          - OKAY. - THAT IS PART OF THE PROCESS. 
          - THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION DIRECTOR REED. 
          UM, I THINK WHAT I AM HOPING FOR, UM, AND WHILE I'LL, I'LL SUPPORT THE MOTION TODAY IS BECAUSE WHAT I AM, I'M HOPING WE'RE DOING IS CLARIFYING THE CRITERIA BY WHICH DECISIONS ARE MADE, UM, THROUGH THIS THOUGHTFUL PROCESS. 
          AND WE EACH HAVE SELECTED COAB MEMBERS WHO WE ENTRUST TO NAVIGATE THE STAFF, THE, THE RECOMMENDATIONS, THE REVIEWER RECOMMENDATIONS TO REFLECT THE NEEDS OF OUR DISTRICT AND TO BRING US A SET OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT HOPEFULLY MATCH THAT CRITERIA. 
          UM, WHAT I HOPE TO AVOID IS AN 11TH HOUR FOOD FIGHT WITH SUBJECTIVE CRITERIA BECAUSE WE ARE GETTING A LOT OF FRUSTRATION FROM THE PUBLIC. 
          AND SO I JUST WANNA BE REALLY TRANSPARENT ABOUT WHAT I HOPE WE'RE AVOIDING. 
          UM, BUT WITH THAT, I THINK THAT THERE'S NOTHING PRECLUDES THAT FROM THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE. 
          AND SO I, I, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THE MOTION TODAY. 
          - SO IS THAT, THAT'S A SECOND OR? - NOT A SECOND ALREADY. 
          - YEAH, THERE ALREADY WAS. 
          - OKAY. SORRY. ALRIGHT. 
          UM, SO IF THAT'S CLEAR ENOUGH, WE DO HAVE A MOTION THEN AND A FROM SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS AND A SECOND FROM SUPERVISOR KOENIG. 
          CLERK. 
          - SUPERVISOR DESERPA.  - AYE. 
          - CUMMINGS.  - AYE. 
          - MARTINEZ.  - AYE. 
          - KOENIG.  - AYE. 
          - AND HERNANDEZ.   - AYE. 
          MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          SORRY. I GOT CHICKEN SCRATCH HERE. 
          - ALL RIGHT. UM, NOW I WILL BE CALLING ITEM NUMBER EIGHT 
          [8. Consider report on the impacts of federal and State policy and budget changes, authorize the Board Chair to sign a Letter of Interest to the County Medical Services Program, and take related actions]
WHICH IS CONSIDERING A REPORT ON THE IMPACTS OF FEDERAL AND STATE POLICY AND BUDGET CHANGES. 
          AUTHORIZE THE BOARD CHAIR TO SIGN A LETTER OF INTEREST TO THE COUNTY MEDICAL SERVICES PROGRAM AND TAKE RELATED ACTIONS OR REPORT FROM OUR COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICE. 
          - HI BOARD. WE'RE GETTING OURSELVES ORGANIZED UP HERE. 
          - CAN I SIT HERE? - GOOD MORNING. 
          I KNOW WE ARE WANTING TO BE VERY MINDFUL OF TIME, SO I AM BEING VERY MINDFUL OF TIME. 
          WE ARE HERE NEARLY 90 DAYS FROM OUR FIRST MAJOR BRIEFING ON THIS TOPIC ON SEPTEMBER 30. 
          UH, WITH ME AT THE TABLE TODAY IS RANDY MORRIS FROM HSD, CONNIE MORENO-PERAZA FROM HSA, AND WE HAVE ANDREA CARLOS WILLIE FROM PVUSD REPRESENTING OUR COMMUNITY PARTNERS TODAY. 
          [01:45:03]
WE'LL BE PROVIDING OUR UPDATE ON FEDERAL AND STATE POLICY SHIFTS REALLY FOCUSED AGAIN ON THE SAFETY NET PROGRAMS MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE. 
          AND THIS JOINT PRESENTATION REALLY REFLECTS OUR CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO WORK ACTIVELY, PROACTIVELY WITH OUR PARTNERS AS WE DEAL WITH THE NEW ENVIRONMENT WE ARE OPERATING WITHIN. 
          REALLY, WE'RE WORKING TOGETHER TO MONITOR, COORDINATE, COLLABORATE AND YOU'LL HEAR MORE ADVOCATE BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GONNA BE GOING. 
          AND I'M GONNA TRY AND MAKE THIS WORK, AND I CANNOT. 
          ALRIGHT, VERY QUICKLY, YOU KNOW THIS, THIS IS THE BIG CONCEPT PICTURE. 
          WHAT CHANGED IN 2025. I DIDN'T EVEN START THE TIMER. 
          I JUST STARTED THE TIMER. 
          UH, REALLY WE SEE OUR RESIDENTS AND COMMUNITY IN OUR COUN IN OUR COUNTRY LOSING SAFETY, UH, SAFETY NET SERVICES AND PROTECTIONS, AND WE'RE WATCHING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHIFT AND MORPH INTO SOMETHING VERY DIFFERENT. 
          AND THAT'S LEADING US TO THE PLACE OF WHERE... 
          WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO DIFFERENTLY IF WE CANNOT RELY ON THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN THE WAY WE HAVE HAD HAD HISTORICALLY WE HAVE TO REALLY MOVE TO A, A DIFFERENT MODEL IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE. 
          I'M GONNA TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THAT I'M TRYING AGAIN, JULIETTE, HELP ME OUT. 
          THERE WE GO. WE'RE GOOD. WE'RE GOOD. 
          IT WORKED. ALRIGHT. WHAT DOES THAT ACTUALLY MEAN? SO, AND I'M NOT GONNA GO THROUGH THIS SLIDE IN DETAIL, BUT WHAT WE'VE TRIED TO DO IN THIS SLIDE IS REALLY CAPTURE NOT JUST AT THE COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ LEVEL BUT AT THE LARGER COMMUNITY LEVEL. 
          WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THESE RESTRUCTURING AT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT LOCALLY? AND YOU SEE AT THE BOTTOM THAT THE, THE SHIFT IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SYSTEMS IS IMPACTING MULTIPLE SYSTEMS HERE. 
          SO JUST AGAIN, THIS IS TO SORT OF GROUND US IN THE SYSTEMIC CHANGE THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH. 
          NEXT SLIDE. 
          DID IT DO IT? THERE WE GO. 
          THIS IS OUR FAVORITE, FAVORITE OVERWHELMING SLIDE. 
          AND WE ARE, AGAIN, NOT GONNA GO THROUGH THIS IN DETAIL, BUT THIS IS REALLY TO REMIND ALL OF US THAT WITH HR 1 AND STA SOME STATE BUDGET, BUDGET IMPACTS, WE HAVE A, A SORT OF ROLLING SET OF CHANGES THAT WILL BE, UM, COMING INTO PLAY OVER THE NEXT FOUR YEARS. 
          AND, AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S GONNA COME IN WAVES AND SO WE'RE GONNA BE WORKING IN WAVES AND SOME OF THOSE THINGS WE CAN SEE REALLY THE SHAPE AND STRENGTH OF THE WAVE. 
          WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THOSE SPECIFICALLY. 
          WE KNOW WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IN THE NEXT SIX MONTHS. 
          BUT SOME OF THE STUFF IN THOSE OUTER YEARS, WE DON'T KNOW REALLY THE SHAPE AND THE STRENGTH OF THE WAVE YET. 
          SO IT'S, IT IS AN ABSOLUTELY ADAPTIVE CHALLENGE THAT WE ARE DOING, DEALING WITH. 
          ALL RIGHT. THIS IS PROBABLY A SLIDE WE COULD, WE COULD SPEND A GOOD 20 MINUTES ON, BUT WE WILL NOT BE DOING THAT TODAY. 
          THIS SLIDE PRESENTS OUR BEST, UH, ESTIMATES OF THE GENERAL FUND IMPACTS FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. 
          AND I KNOW IT'S NOT VERY SATISFYING TO SEE THAT WE HAVE A RANGE OF 15 TO 50. 
          THAT'S A BIG RANGE. 
          AND I'M NOT GONNA GO INTO THE DETAILS OF THE ASSUMPTIONS WITHIN EACH OF THOSE BUCKETS HEALTH CENTERS, BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, MEDIC CRUZ, SOCIAL SERVICES, AND THERE WE REALLY MEAN, FM, FOOD SECURITY, CALFRESH OR HOUSING FOR HEALTH. 
          BUT I'M GONNA TALK ABOUT THE REASON FOR THE RANGE, AND THEN IF Y'ALL HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE, RANDY AND CONNIE CAN SPEAK TO THOSE MORE, AS WELL AS SOME OF OUR DIVISION DIRECTORS WHO ARE HERE IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY TO REALLY TALK ABOUT HOW THINGS ARE LANDING. 
          REALLY THE FRONT, THAT TOP HALF AND HALF IN HEALTH SERVICES THAT'S WHERE A LOT OF THE CHANGES BE, BE IT IN CALAIM AT THE STATE LEVEL OR IN HR 1. 
          THEY'RE SORT OF, THEY'RE AT THE BACK END OF THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR. 
          IT'S REALLY IN, IN CALENDAR YEAR 2027 WHERE WE REALLY START TO SEE IMPACTS IN, UH, MEDI-CAL AND SO THAT'S WHY YOU'RE, WE HAVE THESE RANGE AND IT'S GONNA DEPEND WHO FALLS OUT OF SYSTEMS, WHO FALLS INTO SYSTEMS. SO THAT'S WHY YOU'RE SEEING SUCH A RANGE THERE, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK ON THAT. 
          WHEN WE GET MORE INTO THAT HUMAN SERVICES SPACE, THAT IS WHERE WE'RE WE, UH, I THINK HAVE MUCH GREATER CLARITY OF WHERE THE IMMEDIATE HITS WILL BE. 
          [01:50:03]
AND RANDY'S GONNA TALK THROUGH SOME OF THOSE THINGS. 
          SO I JUST WANNA HIGHLIGHT FOR THAT FOR Y'ALL. 
          WE... IN SEPTEMBER STARTED, YOU KNOW, WE PUT A BIG NUMBER OUT AND WE'RE STARTING TO SORT OF GET INCREASED CLARITY, WHETHER IT'S THROUGH MORE INFORMATION FROM THE FEDS OR STARTING TO GET SPECIFICITY FROM THE STATE IN TERMS OF HOW THEY WANT US TO IMPLEMENT SOME OF THOSE THINGS. 
          AND RANDY AND AND CONNIE WILL TALK MORE ABOUT THOSE ITEMS COMING FORWARD. 
          AND I THINK WITH THAT WE'RE GONNA SWITCH OVER TO RANDY TO START GETTING INTO THAT. 
          - NEXT SLIDE. 
          - AND NOW I CAN DO MY MAGIC. ALRIGHT. 
          - OKAY. 
          UM, GOOD AFTERNOON, BOARD AND COMMUNITY LISTENING. 
          RANDY MORRIS, HUMAN SERVICE DIRECTOR. 
          I HAVE TWO TOPICS. 
          ONE IS FOOD SECURITY BECAUSE OUR DEPARTMENT ADMINISTERS THE CALFRESH PROGRAM, FEDERALLY KNOWN AS SNAP, SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. 
          FORMERLY KNOWN AS FOOD STAMPS. 
          AND A SECOND TOPIC, WHICH IS HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS BECAUSE WE ADMINISTER THE HOUSING FOR HEALTH DIVISION. 
          SO IN THE TOPIC OF FOOD SECURITY, UH, ON THE SLIDE, IT TALKS ABOUT WHAT'S COMING 2026 AND 2027. 
          THOSE ARE PREDOMINANTLY HR 1, WHICH WE SPOKE ABOUT IN SEPTEMBER, BUT I WANNA PAUSE AND JUST RECOGNIZE WHAT HAPPENED WHEN THE GOVERNMENT SHUT DOWN AND IN NOVEMBER ACROSS THE COUNTRY. 
          ALMOST A PURPLE STROBE LIGHT ON A POLITICAL CRIME SCENE, IF YOU WILL, AT THE RISK OF DRAMA. 
          BUT I THINK THE COUNTRY SAW, AND MANY PEOPLE DIDN'T REALIZE HOW MUCH SNAP OR FORMALLY FOOD STAMPS, CALFRESH AND CALIFORNIA HELPS PEOPLE NOT BE HUNGRY. 
          AND SO WITH THIS, THAT DISRUPTION AND THE FEDS REFUSING TO ADMINISTER THOSE BENEFITS DURING THE SHUTDOWN, YOU SAW ALL OVER THE COUNTRY INCLUDING HERE IN OUR BACKYARD PEOPLE GO TO THE FOOD BANK AND MANY, MANY OTHER FOOD DISTRIBUTION SITES WHO WERE HUNGRY. 
          AND I THINK THAT JUST EXPOSED HOW IMPORTANT THE CALFRESH PROGRAM IS IN CALIFORNIA. 
          TO PUT THIS IN SCALE, WE HAVE ABOUT 33,000 PEOPLE ON CALFRESH IN SANTA CRUZ COUNTY. 
          THAT BRINGS ABOUT $77 MILLION OF BENEFITS INTO THE POCKETS OF LOW INCOME PEOPLE WHO THROUGH MEANS TESTING AND ELIGIBILITY ARE GETTING CALFRESH. 
          THAT'S ABOUT SIX AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS A MONTH OF MONEY THAT COMES INTO THE POCKETS OF LOW INCOME PEOPLE WHO GO BUY FOOD IN OUR COMMUNITY WHOSE BENEFITS WERE SUSPENDED. 
          THE GOOD NEWS, IF THERE IS ANY, IS ALL BENEFITS WERE RESTORED IN THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER AND THE PROVISIONS WHEN THE CONTINUAL RESOLUTION OF THE FEDERAL LEVEL WERE PASSED PROHIBITS THOUGH THIS FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS NOT SHY ABOUT DOING SOMETHING NEW, PROHIBITS THE SHUTDOWN OF THE BENEFITS DISTRIBUTING AGAIN. 
          SO WE BELIEVE THAT CALFRESH BENEFITS WILL CONTINUE TO BE ADMINISTERED. 
          I DO WANNA RECOGNIZE CALFRESH IS PROBABLY THE BIGGEST PIECE OF AN ECOSYSTEM, BUT THERE ARE MANY, MANY, MANY OTHER SERVICE PROVIDERS WHO DELIVER FOOD, AND THE MOST NOTABLE ONE IS THE FOOD BANK. 
          AND THAT'S THE PARTNERSHIP THAT CAME OUT. 
          UM, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES ENCOURAGED LOCAL BENEFICIARIES TO GO TO THEIR LOCAL FOOD BANKS. 
          THANK YOU TO YOUR BOARD FOR APPROVING DISTRIBUTION OF MONEY TO HELP THE FOOD BANK. 
          IT WASN'T ENOUGH, BUT I ALSO WANT TO SAY IT HELPED, AND THE FOOD BANK ALSO TAKES SOME OF THOSE MONIES AND GIVES IT TO OTHER PROVIDERS WHO DELIVER FOOD TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          SO WHAT'S UP ON THIS SLIDE AND LIKE ELISE, I WILL NOT GO THROUGH EACH ONE, BUT I WANNA JUST DELINEATE WHAT'S HAPPENING IN 26 AND WHAT'S HAPPENING IN 27. 
          UH, TWO THINGS IN 2026 THAT ARE LANDING. 
          ONE IS WORK REQUIREMENTS. 
          THAT IS A WHOLE COMPLEX CONVERSATION IN THE SECOND AND LAST SLIDE ON FOOD SECURITY, I'LL TALK ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING LOCALLY TO PLAN AROUND THAT. 
          LITERALLY, AS I WAS SITTING HERE IN UM, CHAMBERS RIGHT NOW WAITING TO GIVE THIS PRESENTATION, WE GOT AN EMAIL FROM THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES. 
          THEY ARE PLANNING TO IMPLEMENT THE ROURKE REQUIREMENTS EFFECTIVE JUNE. 
          IT HAS BEEN A FLOATING TARGET. 
          THERE IS A WEBINAR ON THIS THURSDAY MORNING WHERE WE ARE GONNA HEAR FOR THE FIRST TIME SOME DETAILS. 
          WE'VE BEEN CONSTRAINED IN TALKING HOW TO IMPLEMENT WORK REQUIREMENTS 'CAUSE WE HAVE NO INSTRUCTIONS. 
          THE STATE'S WAITING FOR THE FEDS. 
          THE FEDS AREN'T GIVING INSTRUCTION. 
          WE NOW HAVE THE BEGINNING OF SOME CLARITY, WHICH WE'LL ROLL OUT THIS WEEK, AND WE THINK OFFICIAL NOTICE WILL BE OUT NEXT WEEK, AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT HOW TO IMPLEMENT THAT. 
          AND THEN THE SECOND IS THERE ARE CHANGES TO ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS WITH WORK REQUIREMENTS. 
          THIS INCLUDES, UM, PEOPLE WHO ARE CONSIDERED UNSATISFACTORY, IMMIGRATION STATUS, REFUGEES AND ASYLEES WHO WERE ELIGIBLE WHO ARE GONNA BE INELIGIBLE. 
          THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ARE DEEMED EXEMPT FROM WORK REQUIREMENTS LIKE VETERANS, FORMER FOSTER YOUTH, AND TO THE TOPIC I'LL TALK ABOUT NEXT UNSHELTERED WHO ARE EXEMPTED FROM WORK REQUIREMENTS WHO THIS ACTION MAKES THEM NO LONGER EXEMPT. 
          IT'S GONNA BE HARDER FOR PEOPLE TO GET, UM, CALFRESH. 
          IF YOU SEE THE RISK TO THE RESIDENT, IT'S ANTICIPATED THAT OVER 7,000 OF THE 33,000 MORE THAN 20% ARE GONNA BE IMPACTED BY WORK REQUIREMENTS AND TO THE FISCAL IMPACT AND THIS TOUCHES THE SLIDE THAT ELISA SPOKE TO WE KNOW THAT THERE IS A SHARE OF COST SHIFT AS DISCUSSED IN SEPTEMBER. 
          IT'S VERY PUBLIC THAT STATES ARE GONNA PICK, HAVE TO PICK UP, UH, AN ADDITIONAL SHARE OF COST TO ADMINISTER THE PROGRAM, THAT'S THE STAFFING TO MANAGE THE PROGRAM. 
          AND FOR OUR COUNTY, THAT'S ONE POINT 
          [01:55:02]
ACTUALLY CLOSE TO $6 MILLION ANNUALLY. 
          BUT FOR NEXT FISCAL YEAR, IT'LL BE 1.2 'CAUSE IT'S THE, THE OCTOBER FORWARD. 
          IN 2027, YOU REALLY START TO SEE A CHANGE IN BENEFITS. 
          UM, THIS IS INSIDE BASEBALL, BUT THRIFTY FOOD PLAN IS A CALCULUS THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT USES TO BASICALLY DO A COST OF LIVING, INCREMENT INCREASE EVERY YEAR TO MAKE SURE THE COST OF FOOD IS CALCULATED AND HOW MUCH BENEFITS PEOPLE GET. 
          HR 1 FREEZES THE USE OF THAT CALCULUS, WHICH IN ESSENCE MEANS FOOD COSTS WILL GO UP, BUT PEOPLE'S BENEFITS WILL NOT GO UP AS IT USED TO WITH THE FREEZING OF THIS. 
          AND THEN ALSO, THIS IS WHEN THE BIGGEST FINANCIAL IMPACT HITS THE COUNTIES AND THE STATES AND THAT IS THERE ARE NOW GONNA BE PENALTIES FOR ERRORS. 
          THAT'S A WHOLE COMPLICATED ISSUE. 
          SHORT STORY, WE ARE NOT FUNDED WELL ENOUGH TO HAVE ENOUGH STAFF TO ADMINISTER THROUGH THE PROGRAM PERFECTLY, BUT WE'RE NOW GONNA BE PENALIZED WHEN WE DO NOT ADMINISTER THE PROGRAM PERFECTLY. 
          I DO WANNA LET THE BOARD AND COMMUNITY KNOW OUR PRIMARY ERRORS ARE ACTUALLY GIVING PEOPLE MORE MONEY THAN THEY'RE DUE AND THEN HAVING TO CORRECT IT. 
          SO, UM, WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IS THOSE ERROR RATES, IF THEY WERE APPLIED TODAY AT THE ERROR RATE IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, IF THAT ERROR RATE IS APPLIED TO COUNTIES, WE WOULD HAVE TO COME UP WITH 11.5 MILLION IN NEW GENERAL FUND TO PAY FOR THAT ERROR. 
          IF THE STATE ABSORBS IT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME UP WITH $2 BILLION OF NEW STATE REVENUE TO PAY FOR THE ERROR RATE. 
          SO THIS 2027 FINANCIAL IMPACT IS PROFOUND. 
          SO NEXT SLIDE IS WHAT WE ARE DOING ABOUT IT. 
          UM, THIS IS BASICALLY WHAT ARE WE DOING LOCALLY, WHAT ARE WE DOING INTERNALLY, WHAT ARE WE DOING IN ADVOCACY WITH THE STATE. 
          WHAT WE'RE DOING LOCALLY, THANK YOU TO, UM, FOOD BANK AND MANY OTHER COMMUNITY PARTNERS WHO BEGAN HUDDLING WITH US IMMEDIATELY ON A RECURRING BASIS TO START PREPARING FOR WHAT THIS IMPACT WILL BE, BOTH ELIGIBILITY, RENEWAL, AND THE WORK REQUIREMENTS. 
          WE HAVE A WORKFORCE OF ELIGIBILITY STAFF WHO ARE GONNA HAVE TO BE RETRAINED ON HOW TO APPLY ALL THESE NEW RULES. 
          A LOT OF INTERNAL WORK BEING DONE, AND A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF ADVOCACY WITH THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES TO TRY TO MAKE THESE RULES GET IMPLEMENTED A WAY THAT MAKES SENSE AND MINIMIZE IMPACT. 
          SO THIS LEADS TO MY SECOND AND LAST TOPIC, WHICH IS, UM, ARGUABLY... I'M WAITING FOR THE, THE SHIFT. 
          - SORRY ABOUT THAT. - THANK YOU. THAT'S OKAY. 
          THIS IS NOW MY LAST TOPIC, WHICH IS HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS. 
          UM, DO WANNA MAKE NOTE THE NEXT ITEM, UM, OUR DIVISION DIRECTOR, ROBERT RATNER AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH DIRECTOR MARNI, WILL BE PRESENTING ON AN ISSUE AND I JUST HOPE YOU WILL HOLD THE FINANCIAL IMPACT OF WHAT WE ARE GONNA BE MANAGING ON A LARGE SCALE AS YOU CONSIDER THE TRADE OFF ISSUES THAT YOUR BOARD'S GONNA HAVE TO CONSIDER GOING FORWARD. 
          SO IF YOU LOOK HERE, UM, HR 1 IS NOT REALLY THE DRIVER OF MUCH OF THIS, BUT I DO WANNA MAKE THE NOTE, AS SAID AT THE SEPTEMBER HEARING, HR 1 DOES IMPACT THE MEDICAID PROGRAM, MEDI-CAL AND CALIFORNIA. 
          THAT IS THE PRIMARY FUNDER OF SERVICES, AND IT'S THE WAIVERS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GIVES TO THE STATE THAT ALLOWS FOR VERY PROGRESSIVE WORK THAT OUR COMMUNITY IS DOING TO HELP PEOPLE WHO ARE UNSHELTERED. 
          SO THERE ARE GONNA BE, UH, ADVERSE IMPACTS ON OUR SORT OF HOMELESS RESPONSE SYSTEM BECAUSE OF HR 1. 
          BUT THE DIRECT IMPACTS FINANCIALLY, WHICH I'LL SPEAK TO, ARE REALLY TIED TO THE FEDERAL BUDGET PROCESS. 
          AND THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE CURRENT CONGRESS AND SENATE'S VERSION OF THE FEDERAL BILL THAT HAVE BEEN PUSHED FORWARD THROUGH THE CONTINUING RESOLUTION DETERMINES HOW SEVERE SOME OF THESE INFACT WILL BE, WHICH IS IN PART WHY, AS ELISA SAID, WE DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBERS. 
          SO IN 2026, UM, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, THE FEDERAL, UM, DEPARTMENT THAT OVERSEES FUNDING THAT COMES OUT TO, UM, LOCAL JURISDICTIONS, HAS DONE A COUPLE OF THINGS. 
          NUMBER ONE, IS THEY'RE CHANGING THE CRITERIA FOR MUCH OF THE FUNDING THAT PAYS FOR, UH, PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, AND THEY'RE SHIFTING INTO THINGS THAT ARE NOT PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING, WHICH WILL IMPACT PEOPLE'S ABILITY TO STAY HOUSED. 
          AND THEY'RE ALSO DOING A REDU-, PROPOSED DRAMATIC REDUCTION IN HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS, WHICH IS OFTEN REFERRED TO AS SECTION 8. 
          WE ALSO KNOW THAT EFFECTIVE DECEMBER, 2026, THE EMERGENCY HOUSING VOUCHERS THAT HELPED US BE SO EFFECTIVE IN MOVING PEOPLE OUT OF PROJECT ROOM KEY COVID RELATED SHELTERS INTO PERMANENT HOUSING WAS THROUGH THE EMERGENCY HOUSING VOUCHERS. 
          THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HAS SUNSET THEM SIGNIFICANTLY, OR THEY WERE, THAN THEY WERE GOING TO. 
          IF YOU LOOK TO THE RIGHT, THE RISK, THAT IS A DRAMATIC NUMBER, BUT IT'S A REAL NUMBER. 
          THERE IS UP TO 6,000 HOUSEHOLDS, WHICH YOU CAN ALMOST DOUBLE THAT IN TERMS OF THE PEOPLE WHO COULD BE AT RISK. 
          WORST CASE SCENARIO, THIS HAS TO DO WITH PEOPLE BEING INELIGIBLE FOR THE FEDERAL VOUCHERS, THE EMERGENCY HOUSING VOUCHERS CUTS OR HAVING TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF VOUCHERS THAT GO TO EACH FAMILY TO BE, UH, STAY HOUSED. 
          SO THIS IS GOING TO BE ONE OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT, UH, IMPACTS IN OUR COMMUNITY AND THROUGHOUT CALIFORNIA AND THIS COUNTRY WHEN PEOPLE LOSE THE ABILITY TO BRIDGE THE COST OF RENT AND THE AMOUNT OF INCOME THEY HAVE. 
          SO THIS IS GONNA BE VERY, UH, SIGNIFICANT. 
          [02:00:03]
AND THEN YOU LOOK TO THE FAR RIGHT, YOU CAN SEE THE ACTUAL NUMBERS OF THE FISCAL IMPACT, WHICH LEADS TO THE LAST SLIDE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          UM, SO I WANNA RECOGNIZE THAT IN TERMS OF JURISDICTIONS, UM, IT IS OUR PARTNERSHIP WITH THE LOCAL HOUSING AUTHORITY WHO RECEIVES THE HOUSING VOUCHERS DIRECTLY. 
          WE HAVE AN EXCELLENT RELATIONSHIP WITH COUNTY HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY. 
          BUT THEY ARE THE ONES, THEY ARE THE JURISDICTION THAT IS WORKING HARD TO MOVE EVERYBODY OUT OF EMERGENCY HOUSING VOUCHERS INTO OTHER FUNDING SUPPORTS TO MINIMIZE PEOPLE ON THOSE VOUCHERS, UM, LOSING THAT VOUCHER AND HAVING TO BECOME UNHOUSED AGAIN. 
          'CAUSE SO MANY OF THEM WERE HOUSED FOR THE FIRST TIME WITH THOSE VOUCHERS. 
          UM, THIS IS A BIT OF A COMMENT ABOUT THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS YOUR BOARD. 
          I ANTICIPATE, IS GONNA HAVE SOME DIFFICULT TRADE OFF DECISIONS TO MAKE ABOUT FOCUSING THE LIMITED AND DEGREASING MONEY WE HAVE TO KEEP PEOPLE HOUSED ON ISSUES THAT MONEY THAT DOESN'T PAY TO KEEP PEOPLE HOUSED. 
          ALMOST AN IMPOSSIBLE HURDLE TO SOLVE, BUT THAT IS OUR PROPOSAL IS TO MAINTAIN THE FOCUS ON LONG-TERM HOUSING. 
          AND THEN LAST BUT NOT LEAST, I MENTIONED MEDI-CAL. 
          WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO ALL WE CAN WITH THE STATE AND WITH THE FEDS AS MUCH AS THEY'RE WILLING TO ENGAGE TO MAXIMIZE MEDICAID FUNDING, TO KEEP THIS-- THE FUNDING SOURCE FOR SERVICES. 
          AND SO THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS - AND I THINK WE'RE PASSING OVER TO DIRECTOR MARIO PEREZ. 
          - GOOD MORNING. 
          [INAUDIBLE] MARIO PEREZ, DIRECTOR OF HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY. 
          UM, THANK YOU, RANDY. 
          AS YOU CAN HEAR, UH, BOTH ELISA AND RANDY, UH, HSD, THEIR IMPACTS AFFECT HEALTH SERVICES IMPACTS. 
          SO WE'RE ALL WORKING ON THIS TOGETHER. 
          UM, ON THAT SLIDE-- ON THIS SLIDE, UH, THE MAIN THINGS, AS YOU'LL HEAR THROUGH OUR REPRESENTATION FOR HSA, UH, THE BIGGEST-- THE BIGGEST IMPACTS ARE GONNA BE ON HEALTH CENTERS AND OUR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, AND OF COURSE OUR INDIGENT CARE, UH, MEDI-CRUZ PROGRAM, UH, WITH ALL THESE CHANGES. 
          AND WE'RE LOOKING AT THE TWO TO THREE-- IN TWO TO THREE YEARS THAT WE'LL SEE THESE, UH, MAJOR IMPACTS. 
          THAT'S WHY IT'S SO IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE MITIGATING AND WORKING TOGETHER ALONG WITH OUR PARTNERS. 
          YOU'LL SEE HERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT'S CHANGING IS THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT SUBSIDIES, UH, EXPIRING, MEDICARE RESTRICTIONS, UM, WITH SIGNIFICANT IMPACT, UH, WITH OUR PEOPLE WHO ARE NON-CITIZEN STATUS, THE ADDITIONAL MEDI-CAL, UH, RESTRICTIONS, AND LESS FUNDING FOR HEALTH, SAFETY, AND INFRASTRUCTURE. 
          UM, WE WANNA TALK ABOUT PEOPLE, HUMAN BEINGS BEING IMPACTED. 
          UH, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE RISK TO OUR RESIDENTS, WE'RE TALKING 13,570 MIDDLE-INCOME RESIDENTS WILL BE MORE, UM-- WILL HAVE, UM, MORE EXPENSIVE PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE. 
          UM, I THINK THAT'S WHY THEY'RE COMING ALSO TO OUR INDIGENT PROGRAM. 
          AND OVER 40,000 RESIDENTS IMPACTED BY MEDICAID ELIGIBILITY CHANGES. 
          AND THEN, WITH THE DEFERRED PREVENTIVE HEALTHCARE THAT IS HAPPENING. 
          UM, SO THE SYSTEM IMPACT IS WITH THE LESS FEDERAL AND STATE FUNDING FOR SAFETY NET AND CRITICAL HEALTH SERVICES IS GONNA BE HIGHLY IMPACTING THE SERVICES WE CURRENTLY PROVIDE, UH, THE MEDICAID EXPANSION PRESSURES, AND THEN OF COURSE, OUR SAFETY NET HEALTH AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH DEMAND. 
          UH, WE ARE-- WE ARE SEEING THE INCREASE IN OUR YOUTH CRISIS PROGRAMS AND OUR STABILIZATION SERVICES, OUR CLINIC ACCESS. 
          WE ARE SEEING THOSE IMPACTS, UM, UM, IN OUR PROGRAMS. UM, SO WHAT WE'RE DOING, UM, UH, WE ARE PREPARING WITH OUR-- AS BEEN MENTIONED EARLIER, WITH A LOT OF CROSS-SYSTEM, UH, PLANNING AND STRENGTHENING AND NAVIGATION. 
          UH, WE ARE EXPLORING THE, UH, AS YOU HAD ONE ITEM ON YOUR CONSENT AGENDA, THAT COUNTY MEDI-CAL, UM, SERVICES PROGRAM, CMSP, UM, AS AN OPTION FOR OUR INDIGENT CARE SUSTAINABILITY. 
          UM, THIS IS THE PROGRAM THAT MANAGES, UM, INDIGENT CARE PROGRAMMING FOR COUNTIES WITH POPULATION UNDER 300,000. 
          UH, SO WE ARE GOING TO BE, UH, LOOKING INTO THAT SO WE CAN REEXAMINE IT. 
          UH, THIS COUNTY HAS CONSIDERED BECOMING CMSP DESIGNATED IN THE PAST, UH, BUT RIGHT NOW SEEMS TO BE THE RIGHT TIMING FOR US TO- TO REALLY LOOK INTO IT AND CONSIDER IT. 
          UM, SO, UM, AGAIN, EXPLORING ALTERNATIVE, UM, INDIGENT, UH, HEALTHCARE ALTERNATIVES. 
          UH, WE'RE WORKING TOGETHER WITH OUR PARTNERS TO ENROLL INDIVIDUALS, UM, WHO MAY HAVE SATISFACTORY IMMIGRATION STATUS BY 1/1/26. 
          WE'RE WORKING WITH OUR HEALTHCARE PARTNERS TO STRENGTHEN THOSE PARTNERSHIPS AND DEFINITELY, UH, COORDINATING ON STATEWIDE, UH, MEDI-CAL MESSAGING AND ADVOCACY. 
          AND WITH THAT, I'LL TRANSITION BACK TO ELISA. 
          - I THINK I'M GONNA PASS IT TO ANDREA. 
          - THANK YOU. THANK YOU, BOARD AND STAFF, FOR WELCOMING COMMUNITY PARTNERS TO THE TABLE FOR THE IMPORTANT PRESENTATION. 
          UM, AND THANK YOU TO THE BOARD FOR YOUR DIRECTION EARLIER THIS YEAR TO WELCOME US INTO THIS PROCESS. 
          WHAT YOU SEE UP HERE IS IMMIGRATION AS ONE OF THE CENTRAL CONCERNS AS OUR FAMILIES AND RESIDENTS IN THE COUNTY WILL BE FACING IMPOSSIBLE CHOICES IN THE MONTHS AND, UH, YEAR AHEAD. 
          [02:05:02]
THE IMMIGRATION IMPACTS ARE SEVERE AND INCREASING. 
          WE HAVE BEEN FORTUNATE NOT TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF ICE ACTIVITY IN THE COUNTY, BUT WHEN IT DOES COME, WE SEE IMMEDIATE IMPACT IN TERMS OF PEOPLE DESIRING TO SEEK SERVICES, UM, IN VARIOUS PROGRAMS. UM, IN FACT, WATSONVILLE COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, WITH THE FISH AND GAME ACTIVITY THAT HAPPENED IN SOUTH COUNTY, SAW A- AN IMMEDIATE TWO-WEEK 25% DECLINE IN PEOPLE SHOWING UP TO THE EMERGENCY ROOM. 
          SO THESE IMPACTS ARE REAL. 
          WE ARE GRATEFUL FOR THE $100,000 IN SUPPORT FROM THE COUNTY TO SUPPORT, UM, ACTIVITIES THAT CONTINUE TO ELEVATE AND SAFEGUARD OUR, UM, IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY. 
          NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. 
          AND LGBTQ, AGAIN, ANOTHER, UH, GROUP OF VULNERABLE, UH, CITIZENS AND RESIDENTS WHO ARE SEEING SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. 
          AND THE RESULT IS TO DECREASE TRUST IN SERVICE AND SYSTEMS. UM, IN FACT, AT PVUSD, ONE OF THE THINGS WE ARE DOING IS WE HAVE A COMMITTEE THAT IS SUPPORTING SCHOOL WALKTHROUGHS, ENSURING THAT SCHOOLS HAVE SIGNAGE AND BEST INCLUSIVE PRACTICES THAT AFFIRM LGBTQ, UH, PLUS YOUTH. 
          UM, THERE IS SOME CONFUSION BECAUSE FEDERAL DEFINITIONS VARY FROM STATE DEFINITION, AND WE ARE GRATEFUL, AGAIN, TO PARTNERS IN THE COUNTY SEEKING ALIGNMENT, UM, AND CLARITY AROUND THOSE. 
          AND AGAIN, THE $100,000 FUNDING TO SUPPORT PARTNERSHIPS. 
          UM, ONE OF THE WONDERFUL THINGS THAT HAPPENED AS A RESULT OF OUR COLLABORATION WAS THERE WAS A 40-PARTNER CONVENING THE COUNTY HELD IN PAJARO VALLEY, UH, PARTNERS NOT ONLY SERVING THE PAJARO VALLEY, BUT IN FACT RESIDENTS ACROSS YOUR COUNTY. 
          AND WE EMERGED, UH, THREE THEMES IN CONVERSATION AFTER LOOKING AT DATA. 
          THE THEMES OF CONCERN ARE AROUND FOOD, NAVIGATION, AND HOUSING AS AREAS OF GREATEST STRAIN, UH, RESIDENTS ARE STRUGGLING TO FIND SERVICES AND ACCESS THEM. 
          AND WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ALL ALIGNED IN OUR MESSAGE, THAT WE ARE COORDINATING OUR ACTION AND RESOURCES, BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, THAT WE CONTINUE TO LISTEN DEEPLY TO UNDERSTAND IMPACTS AND ALIGN OUR RESOURCES, UM, AND OUR ADVOCACY EFFORTS. 
          AND THIS SLIDE I WILL NOT GO THROUGH, BUT THIS JUST GIVES YOU A SCOPE AND BREADTH OF THE WAYS IN WHICH WE WILL COLLABORATE AROUND ADVOCACY. 
          WE DO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS PERHAPS OUR MOST POWERFUL TOOL IN THE MOMENT, UM, AS WE SEEK TO SEE, UM, AND UNDERSTAND BETTER THE IMPACTS OF HR1 AND OTHER FEDERAL, UH, POLICY AND FUNDING ACTIONS. 
          THIS TRULY IS AN UNPRECEDENTED MOMENT FOR COORDINATED AND COLLECTIVE ADVOCACY AT THE STATE AND LOCAL LEVEL. 
          - OKAY. I THINK I AM GONNA WRAP US UP. 
          UM, AS WE'VE DISCUSSED, UM, WE ARE GETTING INCREASED CLARITY IN THE OPERATING ENVIRONMENT AROUND WHAT IS HAPPENING AT THE STATE TO MEDIATE SOME OF THE FEDERAL ACTIONS. 
          AND- AND THE FEDERAL ACTIONS THEMSELVES CONTINUE TO SORT OF MORPH, WHETHER IT'S THROUGH COURT ORDERS OR THROUGH ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIVITY. 
          AND WHAT WE KNOW IS WE NEED TO KEEP CONNECTED AND WORK TOGETHER WITH OUR- WITH OUR COMMUNITY PARTNERS, COZ REALLY THE- THE SAFETY NET THAT WE HAVE IS ONE THAT IS PROVIDED THROUGH THAT COMMUNITY-- THAT COMMUNITY STRUCTURE. 
          BUT OUR MOST, YOU KNOW, CRITICAL ASPECT IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE IS WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR AND HOW ARE WE GOING TO CONTINUE TO GET INPUT TO UNDERSTAND HOW THESE IMPACTS ARE PLAYING OUT FOR MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY. 
          SO WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN TERMS OF THIS CONTINUED CONVERSATION IS WHAT WE'RE CALLING A COMMUNITY CALL IN JANUARY. 
          WE'RE NOT GONNA BE DOING ANOTHER IN-PERSON CONVENING IN JANUARY, BUT JUST AS WE GO INTO THE, UM, LEGISLATIVE SESSIONS AS- AS WE WANT TO REALLY BUILD THAT MUSCLE AS A COORDINATED COUNTY COMMUNITY. 
          SO WE, UM, WE STAY FOCUSED ON WHAT'S MOST IMPORTANT AS HARD CHOICES ARE MAKING-- MADE AT THE STATE LEVEL TO PRESERVE SERVICES FOR OUR MOST VULNERABLE. 
          WE'LL THEN DO ANOTHER COMMUNITY CONVENING IN FEBRUARY. 
          AND THE SORT OF DISCUSSION WITHIN STAFF AND-- AND COMMUNITY PARTNERS IS GIVEN THE PREVALENCE OF THAT DISCUSSION OF HOUSING RISK IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE, WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT WILL BE A- A LARGE FOCUS IN THE FEBRUARY CONVERSATION. 
          AND I'M JUST SHARING THAT NOW. 
          THAT'S NOT A SET AGENDA, BUT AS- AS RANDY DISCUSSED, IT'S- IT'S VERY REAL. 
          WHAT IS GONNA BE HAPPENING TO FOLKS' HOUSING SECURITY IN THE NEXT 12 MONTHS? AND AGAIN, JUST THAT CROSS-SYSTEM COORDINATION 
          [02:10:02]
THAT WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO HAVE EACH OTHER'S BACKS, WHETHER THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THE- THE GENEROSITY AND THE DECISION OF THE BOARD TO PUT CONTINGENCY DOLLARS OUT INTO COMMUNITY TO ADDRESS IMMEDIATE NEED. 
          WE KNOW WE CANNOT CONTINUE TO DO THAT. 
          WE- WE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO FULLY ADDRESS THE GAPS THAT ARE HAPPENING, BUT WE ALSO CAN JUST COME TOGETHER AND SUPPORT EACH OTHER. 
          WE CAN VOLUNTEER, WE CAN BE AT-- WE CAN BE HELPING SECOND HARVEST AT THE FAIRGROUNDS WITH FOOD. 
          WHATEVER IT IS, WE'RE GONNA CONTINUE TO TRY AND- AND DO THAT. 
          UM, WE WILL BE COMING BACK IN, UH, OUR-- AT MIDYEAR OR, UH-- IN A LITTLE BIT INTO THE EARLY 2026 TO CONTINUE TO REFINE THAT NUMBER. 
          WHAT'S THE REAL NUMBER OF IMPACT FOR OUR NEXT FISCAL YEAR? AND AGAIN, JUST-- WE REALLY WANNA TAKE THAT OPPORTUNITY TO REALLY ALIGN AND STRENGTHEN A STRATEGIC ADVOCACY AGENDA. 
          SO WE ARE SUPPORTING EACH OTHER'S ASKS, UM, AS WE MOVE FORWARD INTO THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION. 
          WE ARE-- I'M GONNA SAY IT ONE MORE TIME. 
          MONITOR, COORDINATE, COLLABORATE, ADVOCATE. 
          THAT IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO, AND THAT'S WHAT CAME OUT OF THAT WONDERFUL GROUP PHOTO RIGHT THERE. 
          WASN'T PLANNED, BUT WE DID IT. 
          SO I'M GONNA BRING YOU TO YOUR RECOMMENDED ACTIONS. 
          I WILL NOT READ THAT TO YOU, BUT I WANNA FOCUS THAT, UM, IN PARTICULAR, RECOMMENDED ACTIONS 3, 4, AND 5 ARE REALLY THE- THE- THE NON-STANDARD THINGS THAT ARE UP THERE. 
          IT IS AGAIN ASKING FOR YOUR- YOUR AUTHORIZATION AND APPROVAL TO KEEP MOVING THE COMMUNITY CONVERSATION FORWARD. 
          DEVELOPING THAT SHARED UNDERSTANDING AND DATA, BUT ALSO THAT COMMITMENT TO LIKE, WHAT ARE WE GONNA DO LONG TERM TO BUILD RESILIENCY HERE IN OUR COMMUNITY? UH, THERE IS ALSO JUST THAT- THAT ASK-- THAT ASK ABOUT ADVOCACY THAT WE WANT YOUR- YOUR SUPPORT FOR US TO REALLY LEAN INTO COORDINATED ADVOCACY. 
          SO THAT IS THERE AS WELL. 
          AND THEN FIVE IS IMPORTANT COZ IT'S- IT IS EXPLORING THE COUNTY MEDICAL SERVICES PROGRAM AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO MEDI-CRUZ. 
          AND THAT IS-- I-I-I KNOW WE HAVE OUR TEAM HERE. 
          THAT IS A LONG RUNWAY, SHOULD THAT BE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO CONSIDER AS WE WATCH PEOPLE SHIFT, BASICALLY FALL OUT OF DIFFERENT, UM, HEALTHCARE PROGRAMS AND- AND THEN PROVIDING OPTIONS TO ADDRESS THOSE HERE AT HOME. 
          SO, UH, THAT'S OUR RECOMMENDED ACTIONS. 
          HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND, OF COURSE, HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT. 
          - WITH THAT, WE WILL TAKE IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC, SEE IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS US ON THIS ITEM. 
          SEEING NONE HERE... OH - YEAH. THANK YOU. 
          SO I WOULD- WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT, UM, THERE IS NO ACCOUNTABILITY IN COUNTY AND IT'S VERY IMPORTANT. 
          IN ORDER TO PROGRESS, IT HAS TO BE ACCOUNTABILITY. 
          IS IT POSSIBLE TO SET UP FOR EVERYBODY, YOU KNOW, AUTOMATED RESPONSE WHEN THEY GET EMAIL, SO IT SENT BACK, SENT AUTOMATED, UH, RESPONSE, YOU KNOW, THAT THE EMAIL WAS RECEIVED, YOU KNOW, AND AT THAT POINT, AT LEAST PERSON WHO, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO CONTACT KNOW FOR SURE THAT THAT PERSON GOT EMAIL AND GOT TO READ IT. OKAY? AND, UM, THE SOUND IS VERY GOOD, WHATEVER WAS SAID HERE, BUT IT'S STILL A LOT OF, UM, WORK, NEED TO WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE IT IS NO COORDINATION FOR GOOD, YOU KNOW? IT'S LIKE A LOT OF COORDINATION FOR BAD. 
          LIKE I CAN GIVE AN EXAMPLE EVEN WITH-- BUT PROBABLY LATER, NOT IN THAT POINT. 
          BUT, UH, IT IS HOPE THAT FINALLY, YOU KNOW, IT'LL BE BETTER. 
          IT IS A HOPE. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          - IF THERE'S ANYONE PLEASE COME UP TO THE- TO THE FRONT THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK. 
          - IT'S NICE TO SEE SOME PEOPLE I KNOW. 
          UH, HEALTH DOESN'T START IN THE HOSPITAL. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR REPORT. 
          UM, I'M A LOOSE CANNON ONE BLOCK, ONE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WHAT'S COMING UP NEXT? THAT'S WHY I AM HERE. 
          UM, THOSE WHO DON'T KNOW ME, I WAS GREETED WITH GRANDPA BY ONE OF THE SUPERVISORS AS I CAME IN. 
          I'M AN ACTIVIST, AND I'LL BE 90. 
          SO I MIGHT HAVE JUST GOOD IDEAS, AND WHAT IS IN THIS COMMUNITY ROOM, WE COULD SIT IN CIRCLES AND GET TO KNOW EACH OTHER. 
          NOT THAT WE NEED THIS MEETING. 
          SO PLEASE THINK ABOUT WHAT ONE COULD DO. 
          [02:15:01]
BUILDING ON WHAT YOUR PRESENTATION WAS. 
          UM, I DID FEEL A- A NEED TO SPEAK, BUT THE KEY IS WHERE ARE OUR YOUNG PEOPLE. 
          WORK WITH THE COUNTY, WORK WITH WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THOSE THAT ARE HIGH SCHOOL, MIDDLE SCHOOL. 
          SO 10 YEARS FROM NOW, THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT HAS GOT BETTER RESULTS. 
          - THANK YOU. ANYONE ONLINE? - YES, CHAIR. 
          CALL IN USER ONE. YOUR MICROPHONE'S NOW AVAILABLE. 
          - MARILYN GARRETT. 
          THANK YOU FOR THAT VERY DISTURBING, COMPREHENSIVE REPORT. 
          I FEEL LIKE WHAT WE'RE WITNESSING IS A WAR ON THE POOR BY THE BILLIONAIRE RULERS OF THIS CAPITALIST SYSTEM AND THE DISMANTLING OF ANY FORM OF REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT THAT IS PROVIDING SOME SERVICES AND HOUSING AND FOOD, ET CETERA. 
          YOU SPOKE OF ADVOCACY. 
          WE NEED TO FIND A WAY TO ADVOCATE FOR KEEPING OUR MONEY IN THIS COUNTY AND NOT PAYING THE 50% APPROXIMATELY. 
          THAT GOES TO MILITARY BASES, ICE RAIDS, BOMBING SHIPS IN THE CARIBBEAN OFF OF VENEZUELA COAST, ET CETERA. 
          THIS IS REALLY OUTRAGEOUS. 
          AND TYRANT TRUMP IS LARGELY RESPONSIBLE, AND THERE WERE ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT BROUGHT. 
          HE-- THIS IS A WHOLE OWN DISASTROUS SYSTEM, AND SAYING WE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO FULFILL THE GAPS THAT ARE HAPPENING IS TRUE. 
          WE NEED TO KEEP THE MONEY HERE SOMEHOW AND, UM, RESCIND THIS KIND OF LEGISLATION, THE CRUELTIES OF VICIOUSNESS, THE INCREASED POVERTY THAT WILL OCCUR. 
          AND THERE AREN'T JOBS AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE ANYWAY. 
          THIS IS REALLY [INAUDIBLE] - THANK YOU. 
          - THANK YOU. 
          - WE HAVE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS ONLINE, CHAIR. 
          - OKAY. I'LL BRING YOU BACK TO THE BOARD FOR ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS. 
          SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - I MEAN, WE'VE BEEN HEARING ABOUT THIS ALL YEAR, AND SADLY, YOU KNOW, OUR DAYS ARE NUMBERED IN TERMS OF WHEN THESE IMPACTS ARE REALLY GONNA START HITTING OUR COUNTY. 
          SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT YOU ALL ARE CONTINUING TO BRING THIS INFORMATION TO THE FOREFRONT SO THAT PEOPLE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BETTER UNDERSTAND, UM, WHAT THESE DECISIONS MEAN FOR SANTA CRUZ COUNTY. 
          AND REALLY, YOU KNOW, HOW WE'RE GONNA BE IMPACTED SO THAT WHEN THE IMPACTS ARE FELT, WE DEFINITELY HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF US TRYING TO MAKE SURE THE COMMUNITY IS AWARE. 
          AND SO THE PEOPLE ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND THAT THESE AREN'T DECISIONS THAT WE WANNA MAKE AT ALL. 
          THESE ARE DECISIONS THAT ARE COMING DOWN FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT ARE HAVING THE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS ON PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          AND IT'S REALLY GONNA TAKE FOLKS IN OUR COMMUNITY TO REALLY STEP UP. 
          UM, I DO HOWEVER THINK, UM, WHEN IT COMES TIME FOR MAKING A MOTION, UM, I DO WANT TO ADD THAT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, I'VE MENTIONED THIS BEFORE, THAT WE'RE GETTING UPDATES FROM COUNTY COUNCIL ON THE VARIOUS LAWSUITS THAT ARE TAKING PLACE. 
          AND I THINK THAT WE DO NEED TO STEP UP AND STEP INTO SOME OF THESE LAWSUITS AND BE A PART OF THEM. 
          I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S GONNA COST MONEY, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO SAVE MONEY. 
          YOU KNOW, IF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S SAYING, FOR EXAMPLE, WE'RE NOT GONNA GIVE YOU X AMOUNT OF FUNDING UNLESS YOU REMOVE YOUR DEI POLICIES, WHICH WAS A CHALLENGE BY ONE OF THE STATES. 
          I BELIEVE IT WAS THE STATE OF ILLINOIS CHALLENGE THAT, AND THEY WON. 
          AND SO THEY WERE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THEY WERE STILL GONNA GET FUNDING COMING IN WITHOUT HAVING TO COMPROMISE THEIR VALUES. 
          AND I THINK THAT THE PEOPLE OF SANTA CRUZ WANNA SEE US STEP INTO THAT SPACE. 
          WE DON'T HAVE TO JOIN EVERY SINGLE LAWSUIT OUT THERE, BUT I THINK IF WE HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT LAWSUITS ARE BEING FILED, UM, HOW THAT ALIGNS WITH HOW IT CAN SUPPORT OUR COMMUNITIES AND, YOU KNOW, WHAT IT'S GONNA COST US TO JOIN AND SUPPORT OTHER JURISDICTIONS. 
          I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO BE TAKING THAT INTO ACCOUNT. 
          SO THE EXTENT THAT WE CAN, UM, HAVE COUNTY COUNCIL TRACKING THOSE LAWSUITS, GET UPDATES FROM THEM, AND- AND HAVE ITEMS FOR US TO CONSIDER JOINING LAWSUITS DURING CLOSED SESSION. 
          I THINK IT'LL REALLY HELP US, UM, FIGURE OUT WHERE WE CAN STEP IN AND- AND HOW WE CAN BEST SUPPORT 
          [02:20:02]
OTHER JURISDICTIONS THAT ARE FIGHTING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AS WELL. 
          SO WITH THAT, I'LL LEAVE MY COMMENTS AND THANK YOU, CHAIR. 
          - THANK YOU. AND I THINK THAT, UH, JOINING AMICUS BRIEFS IS SOMETHING WE CAN DO INDIVIDUALLY AS A BOARD AS WELL TOO, RIGHT? WE CAN HAVE THAT DIRECTION SEPARATELY FROM THIS. OKAY. 
          THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          UH, SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ. 
          - THANK YOU, CHAIR. 
          AND THANK YOU FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE UPDATE ON WHERE WE ARE TODAY. 
          UM, I WANTED TO USE THIS AGENDA ITEM TO UPDATE MY COLLEAGUES ON THE BOARD, AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC, ABOUT SOME OF THE ACTIVITIES THAT MY OFFICE HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN RELATED TO THE VARIETY OF ITEMS THAT WERE REPORTED OUT TODAY. 
          UM, TO BEGIN WITH, UM, IN THE SEPTEMBER MEETING, I OFFERED TO TAKE THE LEAD ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD IN SUPPORTING THE CONVENING THAT WAS-- UM, THAT HAPPENED IN NOVEMBER. 
          UM, I WANNA THANK MY COLLEAGUES FOR ALLOWING ME TO DO THAT. 
          IT REALLY WAS AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE AN IMPORTANT OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR BOARD TO COLLABORATE WITH THE COMMUNITY. 
          AND I'M GRATEFUL TO THE STAFF FOR THEIR, UM, LEADERSHIP AS WELL AS THE COMMUNITY PARTNERS OVER 40 WHO ATTENDED THAT MEETING. 
          AND- AND FOR ME, THERE WERE A FEW TAKEAWAYS THAT I DIDN'T HEAR MENTIONED THAT I WANTED TO JUST REFLECT ON THAT- THAT I REALLY HEARD. 
          UM, THE FIRST WAS THAT IT WAS CLEAR THAT THERE'S A TREMENDOUS INTERCONNECTION BETWEEN EACH OF THE AGENCIES. 
          SO WHILE WE SOMETIMES GET FUNDING REQUESTS SORT OF INDIVIDUALLY ORGANIZATION BY ORGANIZATION, IT REALLY IS A SET OF DOMINOES OR HOUSE OF CARDS. 
          AND AN IMPACT TO ONE ORGANIZATION OR ONE AREA IS GOING TO TRICKLE INTO EVERY OTHER, UM, PART OF OUR COMMUNITY. 
          UM, AND I THINK OUR COMMUNITY PARTNERS REALLY CAN SEE THAT SINCE THEY PARTNER ON THE GROUND. 
          ANOTHER THING THAT I HEARD WAS REALLY A SPECIFIC CALL TO SUPPORT THOSE WHO ARE MOST VULNERABLE, MOST ON THE FRINGE. 
          SO THAT COULD BE OUR, OUR SENIORS OR YOUTH, IT'S THOSE WHO ARE UNDOCUMENTED, IT'S THOSE IN THE RURAL COMMUNITIES. 
          UM, THE, THE FOLKS WHO ARE GENERALLY GONNA SLIP THROUGH THE CRACKS THAT WE NEED TO KIND OF TAKE A TRIAGE APPROACH AND, AND FOCUS ON THOSE SUB-, SUBPOPULATIONS, WHATEVER THEY MAY BE, UM, THAT, THAT CAN BE FORGOTTEN. 
          UM, I HEARD A KIND OF, YOU KNOW, LEAVE IT TO OUR COMMUNITY PARTNERS TO BE SO INSPIRING THAT THEY SEE OPPORTUNITY IN CHALLENGE. RIGHT? I DEFINITELY HEARD, UH, EXCITEMENT ABOUT, WELL, MAYBE NOT EXCITEMENT, BUT INTEREST IN DOING THINGS DIFFERENTLY AND TRYING NEW THINGS, BEING INNOVATIVE WHERE WE CAN. 
          AND I THINK THAT REALLY REFLECTS THE SPIRIT OF OUR COMMUNITY-BASED NETWORK. 
          UM, I THINK THERE CONTINUES TO BE A STRONG DESIRE TO ALIGN ACROSS OUR VARIOUS ORGANIZATIONS, PARTNER TO COLLABORATE, AND FINALLY REALLY A RESPONSIBILITY TO EDUCATE OUR PUBLIC, BOTH ABOUT THE CHANGES THAT ARE HAPPENING AT THE FEDERAL AND STATE LEVEL, BUT ALSO IN SOME REGARD THE FRAMING. 
          WHY IS THIS HAPPENING TO US? THIS ISN'T BECAUSE OUR COMMUNITY PARTNERS HAVEN'T WORKED SO HARD TO DEVELOP A SAFETY NET. 
          THIS IS A POLITICAL ATTACK THAT'S HAPPENING AND IT, AND IN SOME REGARDS THERE IS A ROLE FOR OUR COUNTY TO BE MORE BOLD IN NAMING WHAT'S HAPPENING TO OUR COMMUNITY AND, AND SETTING THE TONE. 
          UM, THAT'S THE REQUEST THAT I HEARD FROM OUR COMMUNITY PARTNERS. 
          SO I PLAN TO CONTINUE TO BE A PART OF THE JANUARY CALL AS WELL AS THE FEBRUARY CONVENING, UM, AND LOOK FORWARD TO REPORTING BACK TO THE BOARD ON, ON PROGRESS AND ALLOWING THAT INFORMATION TO HELP INFORM SOME OF THE DECISIONS THAT WE MAY HAVE MOVING FORWARD. 
          ON THE NEXT ITEM THAT WAS REPORTED, UM, I WANT TO THANK THE CEO'S OFFICE AND HSA FOR BRINGING FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION TO SUBMIT A, UM, I GUESS IT'S A LETTER OF INTEREST TO JOIN THE COUNTY MEDICAL SERVICES PROGRAM. 
          WHILE I WAS AT, UM, THE CSAC ANNUAL MEETING A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, I ATTENDED THE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SUBCOMMITTEE AND HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO MEET THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE STATEWIDE CMSP PROGRAM. 
          UM, SHE, UH, LET US KNOW THAT THERE ARE FOUR COUNTIES IN THE STATE THAT ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS PROGRAM THAT HAVEN'T OPTED IN YET, AND WE WERE ENCOURAGED BY OTHER COUNTIES WHO ARE PART OF THE PROGRAM TO AT LEAST EXPLORE THE PROCESS. 
          IT WILL BE A PROCESS AS A COUNTY WE'RE GONNA NEED TO LEARN MORE AND DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT IT'S THE THE RIGHT ALTERNATIVE TO MEDICRUZ. 
          HOWEVER, UM. I THINK REALLY WE NEED TO EXPLORE ALL OF OUR OPTIONS. 
          AND SINCE THIS IS SOMETHING THAT IT HAS WORKED FOR OTHER RURAL COUNTIES OR SMALLER COUNTIES, I, I STRONGLY SUPPORT SUBMITTING THIS LETTER AND AT LEAST STARTING THE DIALOGUE. 
          SO THANK YOU TO OUR HSA DIRECTOR FOR TAKING THE LEAD ON THIS. 
          [02:25:01]
UM, AND I HOPE YOU'LL KEEP US POSTED BECAUSE, UM, THERE, AS WE KNOW, UM, ACROSS THE STATE AND LOCALLY, WE'RE GONNA SEE SUCH A HIGHER DEMAND FOR, UM, HEALTHCARE SERVICES FOR THOSE WHO, WHO ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING. 
          UM, I ALSO JUST WANT TO SHARE THAT ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD I DO SIT ON THE HOUSING FOR HEALTH, UH, COMMITTEE AND WAS ABLE TO ATTEND THE LAST MEETING WHERE WE WERE DISCUSSING THE NOFO, UM, THAT WAS PROPOSING SOME DRAMATIC CUTS TO FUNDING AVAILABLE FOR THOSE WHO ARE PERMANENTLY HOUSED. 
          THESE ARE THE FOLKS WHO ARE THE HARDEST TO HOUSE WITH MULTIPLE CHRONIC CONDITIONS WHO HAVE DECADES OF FORMER HOMELESSNESS UNDER THEIR BELT, CHRONIC HOMELESSNESS. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T KNOW THE CURRENT STATUS OF THE NOFO TODAY DUE TO SORT OF SOME, SOME LAST MINUTE CHANGES AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. 
          BUT WHAT WE DO KNOW IS THAT THE FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION IS THREATENING, UM, THESE... 
          THE, THE LONG TERM FUNDING FOR PERMANENT HOUSING. 
          AND SO, UM, YOU KNOW, I, I KNOW WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THAT AT THE NEXT ITEM. 
          UM, BUT I ALSO AM GONNA UNDERSCORE JUST THE IMPORTANCE OF SUPPORTING THOSE WHO, WHO ARE HOUSED TO STAY HOUSED. 
          BECAUSE, UM, THE, THE CONSEQUENCES OF, OF LOSS OF VOUCHERS OR HOUSING IS IT'S VERY SEVERE. 
          AND FINALLY, UM, MYSELF AND SUPERVISOR HERNANDEZ REPRESENT SANTA CRUZ COUNTY IN A NINE BAY AREA COLLABORATIVE OF COUNTIES CALLED BELONGING IN THE BAY. 
          UM, WHERE WE DISCUSS PRACTICES AND, UM, POTENTIAL POLICIES TO SUPPORT OUR COMMUNITIES IN THE EVENT OF AN ICE RAID. 
          UM, WE ARE LEARNING MORE ABOUT WHAT OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE DOING. 
          UM, WE ARE REALLY USING THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HOPEFULLY ALIGN OUR EFFORTS WITH THE REGION AND, UM, HOPEFULLY BE PREPARED IN THE EVENT THAT OR WHEN, UM, THERE IS MORE ICE AND ENFORCEMENT IN THIS COMMUNITY. 
          SO, UM, I, I'D BE HAPPY TO WORK WITH SUPERVISOR HERNANDEZ TO PERHAPS REPORT BACK, UM, IF AND WHEN THERE'S, THERE'S SOME PRACTICES THAT WE CAN BRING FORWARD TO THE BOARD. 
          UM, WITH THAT, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THIS PRESENTATION AND, UM, I LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING THE CONVERSATION. 
          - THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ. 
          I THINK THOSE REGIONAL COLL-, COLLABORATIONS ARE REALLY IMPORTANT. 
          UH, A LOT OF TIMES SMALLER CITIES AND COUNTIES, UH, OUT HERE IN SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, MONTEREY COUNTY, SAN BENITO COUNTY, UH, GET LEFT OUT OF WHAT HAPPENS IN THE BAY AREA. 
          SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO BE PART OF THAT AS WELL, UH, TO FIND OUT WHAT THESE BIG DECISIONS ARE, COURT CASES THAT WE CAN ADD OURSELVES AS AN AMICUS BRIEF, UH, DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          BUT IS THERE ANY OTHER COMMENT FROM, OR QUESTIONS FROM, UM,. SUPERVISOR KOENIG. 
          - UH, YEAH. THANK YOU CHAIR. THANK YOU FOR THE REPORT. 
          UM, 15 TO 54 MILLION IN STATE FEDERAL IMPACTS. 
          IT'S A PRETTY BIG RANGE, UM, CERTAINLY. 
          I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE A LOT OF THAT WAS IN BEHAVIORAL HEALTH. 
          UM, BUT I GUESS WHAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND IS, IS THAT ALL IN ANTICIPATED COST THAT THE COUNTY WILL HAVE TO PAY OR IS THAT LOST REVENUE OR IS IT BOTH? - SUPERVISOR, UH, WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO COME UP MARNI? - AS MARTY COMES UP, I'M JUST GONNA SAY IT'S BOTH. 
          - RIGHT. 
          - IT'S, IT'S BOTH, BUT I THINK SHE'S GOT, UM, COMING. 
          OH, SHE'S THERE. 
          - YEAH. IT, IT. IT ABSOLUTELY IS BOTH. 
          IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT FOR US TO PREDICT THE IMPACT ON OUR ELIGIBLE POPULATION. 
          WE KNOW THAT FOLKS ARE GONNA LOSE ELIGIBILITY. 
          AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE DILEMMA THAT WE'RE DEALING WITH IS NOT KNOWING EXACTLY WHAT THAT'S GONNA LOOK LIKE NUMBERS WISE, AS WELL AS THE FACT THAT LOSING ELIGIBILITY DOESN'T ALSO MEAN THE LOSS OF THEIR MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE CARE NEEDS. 
          SO AS THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT LOSE ELIGIBILITY CONTINUE TO HAVE ESCALATING SYMPTOMS, WE KNOW THAT THAT'S GONNA ULTIMATELY IMPACT OUR CRISIS SERVICES SYSTEM AND WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO PROVIDE THE CARE THAT'LL GO UNCOMPENSATED. 
          SO IT, IT'S JUST THIS REALLY DIFFICULT DILEMMA OF TRYING TO PIN A NUMBER ON THE IMPACTS OF THESE CHANGES IN THE POLICIES AND STILL HOLDING TRUE TO THE FACT THAT THE PEOPLE NEED OUR HELP AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DO THAT. 
          - YEAH. YEAH, I MEAN, I, I HEAR THAT, UM, I MEAN, I GUESS IT WOULD JUST, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO UNDERSTAND LIKE WHAT THE AMOUNT IS THAT WE ANTICIPATE IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, OUR DISCRETIONARY GENERAL FUND DOLLARS THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE, UM, SPEND ON, ON, UM, THESE SERVICES AND WHAT IS SIMPLY, YOU KNOW, MEASURING THE SUCKING SOUND OF THE STATE AND FEDERAL DOLLARS COMING OUT OF OUR COMMUNITY. 
          RIGHT? UM, RIGHT. 
          [02:30:01]
SOMETHING LIKE THE 13 TO $19 MILLION REDUCTION IN HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHERS THAT WERE CITED. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S TRAGIC. IT'S HORRIBLE. 
          WE OBVIOUSLY ARE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO STEP IN AND SPEND 13 TO $19 MILLION OUT OF OUR GENERAL FUND TO BACKFILL THAT. 
          UM, AND SO I GET, YOU KNOW, AS WE GET INTO THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF HOW WE RESPOND TO THIS CRISIS, I JUST THINK IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO REFINE THAT NUMBER AND SEE.. 
          - MM-HMM - ...OKAY, WHAT ARE WE ACTUALLY TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF WHAT, YOU KNOW, WHERE WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO DIVERT MONEY FROM OTHER PLACES TO, TO, TO DO THE, UM, TO FILL GAPS AND, AND WHAT WE HAVE TO DO VERSUS WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO. 
          I MEAN, THE REALITY IS, I, YOU KNOW, I, I DON'T KNOW IF I WOULD CALL IT A WAR ON THE POOR, BUT I DON'T DISAGREE THAT, UH, WE HAVE A SERIOUS PROBLEM WITH INCOME INEQUALITY IN THIS COUNTRY. 
          I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S GETTING TO A REALLY CRITICAL POINT. 
          UM, AND THAT NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED AT THE STATE AND FEDERAL LEVEL. 
          WE JUST DON'T HAVE ALL THAT MANY OPPORTUNITIES TO CREATE THE GREAT EQUAL SOCIETY WITH COUNTY POLICY ALONE. 
          I MEAN, WE'VE GOT A FEW LEVERS AS FAR AS MAYBE PROPERTY TAXES GO, BUT WE DON'T HAVE INCOME TAX AUTHORITY, WE CAN'T, YOU KNOW, THERE'S JUST NOT THAT MANY TAXES THAT WE COULD LEVY TO TRY TO TAX THE RICH AND PROVIDE MORE SERVICES TO THE POOR. 
          A A FEW, BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO COME UP WITH $54 MILLION TO PROVIDE MORE SERVICE FOR THOSE IN NEED IF THAT'S, IF THAT'S WHAT GETS SUCKED OUT OF OUR COMMUNITY BECAUSE OF STATE AND FEDERAL POLICY CHANGES. 
          SO, UM, YOU KNOW, WE... 
          - SUPERVISOR KOENIG, IF I MAY, THANK YOU, DR. SANDOVAL. 
          SO AFTER THE JANUARY 10TH BUDGET, WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING TOWARDS THOSE, THAT INFORMATION, BUT INTERNALLY IN HSA WE HAVE BEGUN TO LOOK AT THE FUNDING, UH, THAT WE HAVE AVAILABLE THAT WE CAN LEVERAGE. 
          WE ARE HEAVILY LOOKING AT BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES ACT. 
          UH, UH, DR. SANDOVAL AND I ARE MONITORING THAT WE'RE MONITORING THE CASE LOADS, WE'RE LOOKING UP OUR WORKFORCE, WE'RE, WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING WE CAN INTERNALLY. 
          SO WE HAVE, UH, DECISIONS TO MAKE LATER TODAY AS WE REVIEW SOME OF THE, UH, SERVICES THAT WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT. 
          SO THAT THERE'S SOME, UH, FUNDING SOURCES THAT WE'RE GONNA BE LOOKING AT LEVERAGING. 
          - YEAH. I I'M GONNA TAP INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT. 
          SO, UM, KOENIG TALKED ABOUT THIS JANUARY 10TH DATE. 
          JUST SO YOU KNOW, AS PART OF OUR BUDGET ROLLOUT, WE'RE DOING SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THIS YEAR IN TERMS OF BUDGET DEVELOPMENT. 
          WE ARE ASKING ALL OUR DEPARTMENTS, AND THIS IS HITTING THE H IS HARD TO, BY JANUARY 10TH, REALLY DO THEIR BEST VALIDATION OF THEIR LOCAL, STATE AND FEDERAL REVENUES AND WHAT THAT MEANS FOR COST. 
          SO THAT'S GONNA REALLY, LIKE, WE'RE TRYING TO SORT OF, YOU KNOW, LEAN INTO THESE, THIS TO SORT OF GETTING IT SHARPER. 
          SO THE INTENTION IS WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER REFINED RANGE WHEN WE COME TO YOU IN MIDYEAR IN FEBRUARY. 
          SO THAT, SO THAT'S, I THINK, I MEAN THIS IS A VERY ACTIVE PART OF WHAT WE'RE DOING AND AS I SAID, THIS IS A DIFFERENT SEQUENCING THAN WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST. 
          WE ARE PUSHING... SORRY, Y'ALL WE'RE PUSHING OUR DEPARTMENTS LIKE WE NEED TO KNOW THAT NUMBER SOONER SO WE CAN UNDERSTAND EXACTLY THAT QUESTION YOU'RE ASKING. 
          LIKE, WHERE IS IT HITTING, LIKE LITERALLY IN THE FISCAL YEAR? SO WE WILL... I, I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR YOU OTHER THAN WE WILL HAVE A, A BETTER IMPERFECT ANSWER IN FEBRUARY. 
          - GREAT, THANK YOU. 
          UM, I'LL PIVOT A LITTLE BIT AND ASK ABOUT THE, UM, HUD NOFO. 
          MY UNDERSTANDING, AT LEAST IN ALL THE HEADLINES, UH, WERE, YOU KNOW, THAT DID TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WANTS TO PIVOT FROM FUNDING PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING TO FUNDING TRANSITIONAL HOUSING AND, UM, YOU KNOW, REQUIRED ADDICTION TREATMENT. 
          UM, AND WHILE THAT OBVIOUSLY WILL DESTABILIZE MANY OF THE PROGRAMS WE CURRENTLY HAVE, I MEAN, I ALSO UNDERSTAND WE'RE BRINGING MULTIPLE TRANSITIONAL HOUSING FACILITIES ONLINE, UH, BRIDGE HOUSE, LIVE OAK LANDING, THE WATSONVILLE TINY HOMES PROJECT. 
          IS THERE ANY OPPORTUNITY HERE THAT EVEN IF WE NOW HAVE AT LEAST A, YOU KNOW, NEGATIVE IN THIS COLUMN, THAT WE CAN SHIFT IT TO A POSITIVE IN THE OTHER COLUMN AND, UM, STILL ROUGHLY GET THE SAME AMOUNT OF FUNDING FROM THIS SOURCE? OR ARE WE ACTUALLY SEEING THIS, THE TOTAL FUNDING FROM THIS SOURCE, UH, POTENTIALLY DECLINE? - I I'M GONNA MAKE A GENERAL COMMENT AND DR. RATNER'S HERE IF YOU WANT MORE SPECIFICS. 
          UM, I WANNA MAKE A GENERAL COMMENT AS TO WHAT I'M WATCHING AND THE ARC OF MY CAREER. 
          UM, THE FLOODING OF THE ZONE OR THE FIRE HOSE, IT'S OFTEN THE VOLUME OF INFORMATION AND CHANGE COMING IS SO HARD TO TRACK. 
          SO WHEN I HEARD YOUR QUESTION, SUPERVISOR KOENIG, IS IT REVENUE LOSS OR THAT IS PART OF WHAT APPEARS TO BE ORCHESTRATED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SO MUCH CHANGE THAT AS STAFF WE HAVE TO TRY TO UNPACK DELINEATE DETAIL AND EACH ITEM IN AND OF ITSELF IS A LONG DISCUSSION. 
          UM, WHAT I WOULD SAY, AND THEN I CAN TURN IT TO, TO ROBERT IS, UM, THE NOFO IS CURRENTLY ON PAUSE. 
          I BELIEVE THERE'S SOME LAWSUITS. 
          SO I THINK THE REAL ANSWER IS UNKNOWN. - MM-HMM. 
          [02:35:02]
- BUT I THINK, I DON'T THINK THIS IS CYNICAL, BUT PRACTICALLY THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY, NO WAY ANY COUNTY IN CALIFORNIA CAN BACKFILL THE VERY LIKELY CUTS THAT ARE COMING. 
          SO I THINK IT'S BACK TO WHAT I SAID AT THE FIRST, HOW DO WE AS STAFF BRING FORWARD WHAT WE'RE SEEING, UNPACK EVERYTHING AND HELP YOU AS BOARD AND COMMUNITY MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS ABOUT TRADE OFFS, BUT THEY ARE GONNA BE PAINFUL TRADE OFFS? UM, MY FINAL COMMENT, I'VE LEARNED THIS FROM ROBERT, SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR, A LONG TIME LAST FIVE YEARS HOUSING FOR HEALTH. 
          THE HOMELESS CRISIS OFTEN GETS NAMED MANY THINGS, BUT IF YOU CANNOT AS A COMMUNITY, AS A SYSTEM, IDENTIFY THE ABSOLUTE GUT OF THE PROBLEM, WHICH IS THE DISTANCE BETWEEN PEOPLE'S INCOME AND THE COST OF RENT, ALL OF THESE HOUSING PROGRAMS THEY REQUIRE SOMEBODY TO BE ABLE TO PAY FOR THE COST OF BEING THERE. 
          THAT IS PREDOMINANTLY DONE BY HOUSING VOUCHERS. 
          THE MILLIONS OF STORIES I'VE HEARD IN MY FIVE YEARS HERE OF WHY HOMELESSNESS IS REDUCED, THANK YOU FOR SHARING. 
          ITS HOUSING VOUCHERS AND, AND, AND, AND THE REST IS IMPORTANT. 
          SO TO ME, HOUSING VOUCHERS, THIS IS ONE OF THE SORT OF SECRET ELEPHANTS OFF ON THE CORNER 'CAUSE IT'S NOT HR 1 THAT IS PROBABLY GONNA HAVE THE MOST VISIBLE IMPACT THAT'S GONNA START HITTING AND PEOPLE ARE GONNA BE UNPACKING MEDIA, ELECTED OFFICIALS, COMMUNITIES, WHAT HAPPENED WHEN POINT IN TIMES GO OUT GO UP, IT'S PROBABLY BECAUSE HOUSING VOUCHERS HAS BEEN PULLED OUT FROM PEOPLE. 
          AND THERE IS NO WAY TO, WHAT I THINK YOUR QUESTION IS, SUPERVISOR KOENIG, A COUNTY CAN BACKFILL THAT. 
          SO I'LL PAUSE THERE AND I DON'T KNOW IF ROBERT, YOU WANNA SHARE SOME MORE, BUT I JUST HOPE I CAN HIGHLIGHT AS STAFF, HOUSING VOUCHERS IS PROBABLY THE MOST IMPORTANT THING WE COULD ARGUE FOR WITH FEDERAL ADVOCACY TO MINIMIZE PEOPLE LOSING HOUSING. 
          - YES. ON YOUR SPECIFIC QUESTION, SUPERVISOR KOENIG, UH, YES. 
          WE ARE GONNA LOOK AT ALL KINDS OF FUNDING SWAPS TO TRY TO KEEP THE PROGRAMS WHOLE. 
          AND RANDY IS ALSO CORRECT THAT THE HUD CONTINUUM OF CARE MONEY HAS BEEN A STABLE PREDICTABLE SOURCE OF MONEY TO SUPPORT PEOPLE IN SUBSIDIZED HOUSING FOR LONG PERIODS OF TIME UNTIL THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION. 
          AND THE MONEY THAT WE WERE PLANNING TO USE FOR SUPPORTING THESE NEW TRANSITIONAL HOUSING PROJECTS THEY'RE ONE TIME DOLLARS FROM THE STATE. 
          SO WE'D BE REPLACING WHAT WAS A STABLE SOURCE WITH UNSTABLE MONEY FROM THE STATE. 
          SO I THINK THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO DO SOME ADVOCACY AT THE STATE LEVEL. 
          YOU'VE ALL HEARD ME SPEAK ABOUT THIS. 
          STABLE SUSTAINED PREDICTABLE FUNDING, UM, AT THE STATE LEVEL CAN HELP US WEATHER SOME OF THESE STORMS. BUT THE AMOUNT OF CUTS WE'RE GONNA EXPERIENCE ARE PROBABLY MORE THAN US AND THE STATE CAN HANDLE A LOAN. 
          AND WE ARE GONNA BE AS CREATIVE AS POSSIBLE TO DO FUNDING SWAPS AND BRAID MONEY. 
          - MM-HMM. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU. 
          UH, MY LAST QUESTION IS ACTUALLY ABOUT THE VOUCHERS, UH, THE HOUSING VOUCHERS. 
          I MEAN THE LOSS OF, UH, THE 250 EMERGENCY HOUSING VOUCHERS. 
          I MEAN, IT'S, 'CAUSE THOSE ARE SUPPOSED TO GO ON FOR LIKE ANOTHER FEW YEARS, RIGHT? FIVE MORE YEARS. UM, RIGHT. 
          SO GETTING THOSE PULLED OUT SO QUICKLY IS, IS REALLY SAD. 
          I MEAN, AS YOU POINTED OUT, UM, DIRECTOR MORRIS, THEY WERE, UH, A KEY TOOL IN OUR ABILITY TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS IN OUR COMMUNITY OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. 
          UM, AND WHAT'S SCARY IS THE IDEA OF THEN EXTENDING THAT TO THE LARGER SECTION 8 PROGRAM. 
          I MEAN, WHERE, WHERE'S THAT 13 TO $19 MILLION IN POTENTIAL CUTS COMING FROM? AND ARE WE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, IS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT GONNA TAKE ISSUE WITH JUST OUR HIGH RENTS AND SAYING THEY'RE NOT GONNA PAY AS MUCH TO EACH INDIVIDUAL FOR, YOU KNOW, FOR RENT OR WHATEVER. 
          THEY'RE NOT GONNA SUPPORT LIKE $4,000 FOR A TWO BEDROOM OR SOMETHING. 
          'CAUSE IT JUST SHOULD COST LESS. 
          ARE THEY GOING TO REQUIRE INDIVIDUALS TO UH, YOU KNOW, JUST PAY A LARGER SHARE OF THE OVERALL RENT? IS IT ELIGIBILITY? ANY COLOR YOU CAN PROVIDE THERE? - MAYBE I CAN INVITE ROBERT UP AGAIN, BUT I JUST WANNA RECOGNIZE THE JURISDICTION ISSUE THAT THIS IS WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, UM, AND WE HAVE A VERY CLOSE PARTNERSHIP. 
          BUT ROBERT, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANNA SPEAK TO THE SPECIFIC POINT ABOUT HOW WE'RE COLLABORATING WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY UNDER THEIR LEADERSHIP ON THIS ISSUE. 
          - SURE. AND ALSO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, SUPERVISOR KOENIG. 
          SO THE CONCERNS ABOUT THE FUNDING ARE BASED ON A PROPOSAL IN THE HOUSE AND IN THE SENATE TO JUST CUT HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM BUDGETS NATIONALLY. 
          - MM-HMM. 
          - SO, LEAVING ASIDE YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT ELIGIBILITY, JUST THE FUNDING CUT TO LOCAL HOUSING AUTHORITIES WILL HAVE IMPACTS ON ALL THE VOUCHER HOLDERS. 
          THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE EMERGENCY HOUSING VOUCHER PROGRAM, WE'RE WORKING VERY CLOSELY TO FIND OTHER OPTIONS FOR INDIVIDUALS. 
          AND I WANNA BE CLEAR WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT WE'RE FOCUSING ON PREVENTING PEOPLE FROM BECOMING HOMELESS WHICH MEANS WE CAN'T FOCUS ON HELPING PEOPLE WHO ARE HOMELESS NOW TO GET INTO HOUSING. 
          SO WE'RE HAVING TO REDIRECT RESOURCES THAT WE'RE GONNA SUPPORT PEOPLE WHO ARE CURRENTLY HOMELESS TO PREVENT THIS COHORT FROM LOSING THEIR HOUSING. 
          SO I THINK THAT MEANS FOR US LOCALLY, 
          [02:40:01]
WE'RE GONNA NOT SEE THE KIND OF PROGRESS WE'VE BEEN SEEING IN SERVING PEOPLE WHO ARE CURRENTLY HOMELESS. 
          - MM-HMM. 
          - AND THEN IN ADDITION TO THE BUDGET CUTS, THERE'S LOTS OF CONVERSATIONS AMONG, UM, THE, THE FEDERAL LEGISLATIVE, UH, BRANCH AROUND CHANGES TO ELIGIBILITY, UM, IMMIGRATION STATUS LIMITING, UH, THE AMOUNT OF FUNDS THAT GO TO HOUSING AUTHORITIES. 
          SO ALL THE THINGS YOU MENTIONED ARE PART OF THE POLICY DISCUSSION, BUT THE BIGGEST CONCERN THAT I'VE HEARD FROM THE HOUSING AUTHORITIES IS THIS STRAIGHT BUDGET CUT. - MMH - WHICH WE'LL KNOW MORE ABOUT IN JANUARY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A FEDERAL BUDGET THAT'S BEEN APPROVED HERE AROUND. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO WAIT TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS IN JANUARY, WHAT THOSE PROPOSALS. 
          THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE THEY'RE RECONSIDERING THE BUDGET FOR US AT THE, JUST ECHOING WHAT FOLKS HAVE SAID TO ORGANIZE AND SAY, THIS IS CRITICAL FOR US IN THE COUNTY, AT THE STATE LEVEL AND NATIONALLY TO CONTINUE THESE PROGRAMS. BOTH THE HUD FUNDING FOR THE CONTINUUM OF CARE PROGRAM, BUT ALSO THE HOUSING VOUCHER. 
          SO I TH-, MY EXPERIENCE IS IF THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION HERE IS FROM FOLKS THAT THEY DON'T NORMALLY HEAR FROM, LIKE THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, UM, HOTEL ASSOCIATIONS, DISTRICT ATTORNEYS, UM, THEY'RE GONNA BE MORE LIKELY TO LISTEN, UM, WHEN WE BRING NEW PLAYERS INTO THE VOICES WE'RE TRYING TO RAISE UP. 
          SO TO THE EXTENT THAT ALL OF YOU CAN HELP WITH THAT, I THINK IT'LL BE HELPFUL AND WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AGAIN IN JANUARY. 
          - GREAT. THANK YOU. I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE ACTIONS TODAY. 
          THANK YOU FOR THE REPORT. 
          UM, AND HOPEFULLY THEY'LL MAKE US SLIGHTLY, THESE ACTIONS WILL MAKE US A LITTLE BIT MORE PREPARED TO DEAL WITH WHAT'S COMING. THANKS. 
          - THANK YOU. SUPER- SUPERVISOR DESERPA. 
          - THANK YOU. UM, I, AT CSAC, I ACTUALLY SAT NEXT TO, UM, I DON'T THINK SHE'S THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE CMSP PROGRAM, BUT, UM, SHE WAS ONE OF THE PRINCIPALS. 
          AND WE, UM, STARTED TALKING ABOUT HOW SANTA CRUZ IS ONE OF THE ONLY COUNTIES THAT DOES NOT PARTICIPATE AND THAT THEY, UM... FOR A WHILE THAT WE, I THINK WE MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE ONLY COUNTY NOT PARTICIPATING WHO WAS ELIGIBLE. 
          SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW, UM, FROM SOMEONE ON STAFF, I DON'T KNOW WHO TO DIRECT THE QUESTION TO, BUT, UM, HOW, UM, ENTERING INTO CMSP WILL DIFFER THAN, UM, OUR, OUR, UH, MEDICRUZ PROGRAM. 
          - JENNIFER, YOU WANNA COMMENT? [INAUDIBLE] - BECAUSE I KNOW THERE IS SOME INVESTMENT, RIGHT? TO JOIN THE, THE RISK POOL. 
          AND I SAW IN THE BACKUP THAT IN, UM, YEARS PRIOR, LIKE 2004 WHEN, WHEN WE WERE THINKING ABOUT IT BEFORE WE DECIDED NOT TO. 
          SO IF YOU COULD JUST TALK ABOUT THAT A MINUTE. 
          - YES. AND, UH, THIS IS IN A PUBLIC BOARD ITEM. 
          IT WAS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD, I THINK IT WAS 2008 WHEN HSA HAD EXPLORED JOINING CMSP AT THAT TIME. 
          BASED ON OUR UTILIZATION AND, UM, HAVING TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE RESERVE, IT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EXPENSIVE, AT LEAST THE UPFRONT COST THAN JUST MAINTAINING THE PROGRAM. 
          UM, SO AT THAT TIME, UH, THE AGENCY RECOMMENDED AND, AND IT WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD TO JUST MAINTAIN THE MEDICRUZ PROGRAM. 
          UM, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? - IN PART, SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW, DO WE KNOW WHAT THE COSTS WILL BE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS OR IS IT, UM... 
          - WE DON'T KNOW THE COSTS AND THAT IS WHY WE WERE ASKING FOR THIS LETTER OF SUPPORT THAT ALLOWS US, UM, TO HAVE THE FORMAL CONVERSATION WITH CMSP ON WHAT THOSE COSTS WOULD LOOK LIKE. 
          - OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          IN THE PAST, IF YOU COULD JUST STAY THERE ONCE, A FEW, FEW MORE QUESTIONS. 
          UM, I KNOW THAT THE MEDICRUZ PROGRAM, LIKE, UM, HAS DIMINISHED, UM, SIGNIFICANTLY SINCE, UH, AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE ACT AND WHERE PEOPLE BECAME ELIGIBLE FOR BOTH, UM, MEDI-CAL AND UM, THE EXCHANGE INSURANCE. 
          UM, SO WE HAVEN'T... SO THAT PARTICULAR, UM, BUDGET, WE HAVEN'T NEEDED TO EXPAND IT IN RECENT YEARS, CORRECT? - CORRECT. YES. 
          - UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS ALWAYS, UH, CONCERNING TO ME IS THAT HOSPITALS WERE NOT, I DON'T THINK WERE REIMBURSED FOR CARE IT WAS MORE ABOUT SPECIALTY CARE IN THE OUTPATIENT SETTING THAT, UM, THAT THE MEDICRUZ PROGRAM PROVIDED FOR. 
          SO THE HOSPITAL STILL HAD UNCOMPENSATED CARE. 
          IS THAT RIGHT? - UH, YES. I THINK, UH, HOSPITALS HAVE THEIR OWN SET OF REGULATIONS TO PROVIDE CARE FOR WHOEVER COMES THROUGH THEIR DOOR. 
          - OKAY. SO THAT IS A QUESTION I HAVE FOR THIS NEW PROGRAM. 
          WILL HOSPITALS BE, UH, REIMBURSED AT ALL, UH, IF ANYTHING AT ALL? - WE'LL EXPLORE THAT WITH THEM. 
          - YEAH, THAT WOULD BE GREAT. UM, THANK YOU. 
          AND THEN, UH, JUST REGARDING THE REST OF IT, I, I, I WON'T BELABOR, UM, THE BAD NEWS, BUT WHAT I WILL SAY IS IN CELEBRATION OF OUR PARTNERS IN THE PAJARO VALLEY, WHOM I HAVE HAD THE PLEASURE OF SERVING ALONGSIDE FOR MANY YEARS, UM, WE DIDN'T WAIT, UH, FOR THE COMMUNITY 
          [02:45:03]
OR THE, OR THE COUNTY TO HELP THE PARTNERS THERE, COMMUNITY, BRIDGES CAB, PVPSA, UH, THE SISTERS AT CASA DE CULTURA, THE SCHOOL DISTRICT, THE HEALTH TRUST, JACOB'S HEART, DIGITAL NEST, SALUD, MONARCH AND OTHERS WHO ARE PART OF THIS COLLABORATIVE HAVE BEEN DOING THIS WORK FOR YEARS. 
          AND, UH, I, I JUST, ANDREA, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY, UM, TO REPRESENT THAT GROUP OF PEOPLE, THEY'RE AMAZING, AND THE WORK THEY DO IS INNOVATIVE. 
          AND, UM, AND I JUST CAN'T SAY ENOUGH ABOUT THE SAFETY NET THAT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TOGETHER TO IMPROVE PEOPLE'S LIVES AND, AND ACTUALLY LAUNCH THEM TO A HIGHER PLACE. 
          SO, UM, FOR, FOR ALL OF THE WORK THAT EVERYBODY DOES TOGETHER, THANK YOU. 
          - THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR DESERPA. 
          THESE ARE CERTAINLY UNCERTAIN AND TURBULENT TIMES THAT WE'RE FACING. 
          UM, ANYTHING WE COULD DO TO ALLEVIATE THIS PRESSURE, I THINK WE SHOULD, YOU KNOW, TAKE ACTION, BUDGET PERMITTED. 
          WITH THAT, I'LL BRING BACK TO THE BOARD, UH, SUPERVISOR, UH, MARTINEZ. 
          - I'LL MOVE THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS. 
          - I SECOND. 
          - I HAVE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. 
          - OKAY. 
          - SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THROUGH DIRECT COUNTY COUNCIL TO TRACK LAWSUITS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND BRING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SANTA CRUZ COUNTY TO JOIN LAWSUITS TO CLOSE SESSION FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION. 
          I WANNA SEE IF THAT'S AMENABLE TO THE MAKER IN THE SECONDARY. 
          - I PROBABLY HAVE MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT IN THE PROCESS UM, I THINK FOR THIS ITEM IT'S, YOU KNOW SPECIFICALLY ON THESE FEDERAL IMPACTS. 
          UM, SO I THINK NO, I'M, I'M NOT WILLING TO MAKE THAT AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. 
          - CAN WE ACCEPT IT AS NOT PART OF THIS MOTION? JUST... 
          - I MAKE, I CAN MAKE A SEPARATE MOTION.  - OH. 
          - SO WE CAN MAKE THE MAIN MOTION THEN I CAN FOLLOW UP WITH THE SEPARATE MOTION. 
          - OKAY THAT WILL WORK. 
          OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND. 
          UH, MOTION FROM SUPERVISOR DESE-, UH, SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ AND A SECOND FROM SUPERVISOR, WAS IT DESERPA? OKAY. 
          - SUPERVISOR DESERPA.  - AYE. 
          - CUMMINGS.  - AYE. 
          - KOENIG.  - AYE. 
          - MARTINEZ  - AYE. 
          - AND HERNANDEZ.  - AYE. 
          MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - YEP. SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE ANOTHER MOTION, UM, THAT WE DIRECT COUNTY COUNCIL TO TRACK LAWSUITS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND BRING OPPORTUNITIES FOR SANTA CRUZ COUNTY TO JOIN LAWSUITS TO CLOSE SESSION FOR BOARD CONSIDERATION. 
          AND I'LL JUST SAY, THIS DOES NOT COMMIT US TO JOINING ANY LAWSUIT. 
          IT'S JUST GETTING INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT LAWSUITS ARE COMING OUT OF DIFFERENT JURISDICTIONS AGAINST THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION AND REALLY DURING CLOSED SESSION, WE CAN CONSIDER WHETHER WE WANT TO FILE AN AMICUS BRIEF TO JOIN THE LAWSUITS. 
          BUT JUST STAYING, STAYING ON TOP OF AND TRACKING WHAT LAWSUITS ARE OUT THERE, I THINK IS WHAT OUR COMMUNITY WANTS US TO SEE DOING. 
          - I'LL SECOND IT. UH, IT'S FEDERAL AND STATE, CORRECT? - CORRECT.  - OKAY. 
          - ALRIGHT. 
          - WE HAVE, UH, ADDITIONAL DIRECTION A MOTION FROM SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. - YEAH. 
          - I, I'D LIKE TO ASK IF... 
          - ME TOO. 
          - ...UH, OUR COUNTY COUNCIL COULD JUST COMMENT ON... 
          - YEAH, THAT'S EXACTLY. 
          - ...YOU KNOW, THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF, OR, YOU KNOW, WORKLOAD ASSOCIATED WITH THIS. 
          - YEAH. SO THERE'S A, THERE'S A TRACKER. 
          THAT TRACKS EVERY ONE OF THE LAWSUITS AGAINST THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT RIGHT NOW. 
          AND SO I CAN PROVIDE YOUR BOARD WITH ACCESS TO THAT TRACKER. 
          AND IT'S ESSENTIALLY A MENU AND YOU CAN LOOK, YOU CAN LOOK AT, UH, THINGS THAT INDIVIDUALLY YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN, AND THEN YOU AND I AS YOU AS INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBERS, AND I CAN DISCUSS THOSE ITEMS IN GREATER DETAIL. 
          AND IF YOU FEEL LIKE, HEY, THIS IS ONE THAT I WOULD WANT TO TAKE TO THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION, THEN YOU AND I TOGETHER COULD TAKE ONE TO THE BOARD FOR CONSIDERATION. 
          UM, THAT'S THE WAY I'M INTERPRETING THE INTENT OF THE, OF THE, OF THE MOTION, UM, UH, RATHER THAN HAVE ME USING MY OWN DISCRETION TO THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN AND THEN JUST BRING THINGS TO CLOSED SESSION. 
          SO I, UM, IF THAT'S, IF THAT'S CONSISTENT WITH, WITH THE MOTION, I'M... YEAH, TOTALLY ABLE TO DO, TOTALLY ABLE TO DO THAT. 
          AND IT'S A, THAT IN AND OF ITSELF IS NOT, UM, A LARGE RESOURCE ASK. 
          UM, WHAT MAY BE A LARGER RESOURCE ASK IS THE INDIVIDUAL ASKS TO JOIN SPECIFIC LAWSUITS OR JOIN AN AMICUS BRIEF. 
          JOINING AN AMICU-, YOU KNOW, SIGNING AN AMICUS BRIEF IS NOT A, NOT ANY KIND OF A RESOURCE PROBLEM. 
          JOINING A LAWSUIT MAY BE A, A MUCH DIFFERENT, UM, ANIMALA ND THEN THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER CONSEQUENCES AROUND JOINING A LAWSUIT THAT I WOULD WANT TO TALK WITH THE BOARD ABOUT. 
          UM, AND IT DEPENDS ON THE INDIVIDUAL MATTER, RIGHT? - YEP.  - YEAH. 
          - INDIVIDUAL MATTER. 
          [02:50:02]
ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER QUESTION BEFORE WE TAKE ROLL CALL? ALRIGHT, MADAM CLERK. 
          - SUPERVISOR KOENIG.  - AYE. 
          - MARTINEZ  - AYE. 
          - CUMMINGS.  - AYE. 
          - DESERPA.  - AYE. 
          - AND HERNANDEZ.  - AYE. 
          MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO... 
          ALL RIGHT MOVING ON TO NUMBER NINE. 
          UH, CONSIDER A REPORT ON THE ON HOUSING MATTERS DAY SERVICES AND MENTAL HEALTH CLIENT ACTION NETWORK PROGRAM CLOSURES, AND TAKE ALL RELATED ACTIONS. 
          I'LL TAKE, TURN IT OVER TO DR. MARNI SANDOVAL, 
          [9. Consider report on Housing Matters’ “day services” and Mental Health Client Action Network program closures, and take related actions]
DIRECTOR OF BEHAVIORAL HEALTH AND DR. ROBERT RATNER, DIRECTOR OF HOUSING FOR HEALTH FOR THE PRESENTATION. 
          - THANK YOU CHAIR. I'M GONNA KICK US OFF. 
          WE JUST HAVE A FEW SLIDES TO GO THROUGH MATERIAL THAT WAS PRESENTED IN THE BOARD PACKET AND WE WANNA SAVE TIME FOR QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD MEMBERS RELATED TO THE MATERIAL. 
          I ALSO WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THAT SUPERVISOR DESERPA HAD ASKED, UH, NOVEMBER 18TH IF WE'D BE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND HAVE MORE DISCUSSION ABOUT SAITH-BASED HOUSING EFFORTS AND SAFE PARKING. 
          SO I WANNA PUT OUT THAT NOW IS THE TIME THAT WE ARE HERE TO DO, TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS AS WELL. 
          UH, IF YOU COULD GO ONTO THE NEXT... 
          OH, RIGHT HERE. THANK YOU. 
          SO, UH, WE'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT TWO SPECIFIC PROGRAM CLOSURES. 
          ONE THAT THE BOARD HAS ALREADY BEEN MADE AWARE OF AND ONE THAT HAS COME UP MORE RECENTLY. 
          AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT WE'RE HIGHLIGHTING THESE PARTICULAR PROGRAMS AT THE REQUEST OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. 
          THERE ARE OTHER PROGRAMS THAT ARE IMPACTED BY A LOT OF THE FEDERAL CUTS AND CHANGES IN OUR COMMUNITY, BUT TODAY WE'RE FOCUSED ON THESE TWO. 
          UH, IN PART BECAUSE THEY HAVE OVERLAPPING NATURES IN TERMS OF THE TYPES OF SERVICES AND PEOPLE THEY SERVE. 
          SO I'M GONNA START WITH HOUSING MATTERS AND THEIR DAY SERVICES PROGRAM. 
          HOUSING MATTERS IS A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION THAT SERVES PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS AND THEY RUN A RANGE OF DIFFERENT PROGRAMS. THEY SENT OUT A PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT, UH, RECENTLY ARTICULATED THEY WANTED TO END THEIR DAY SERVICE PROGRAMS ON THEIR CAMPUS ON CORAL STREET. 
          THEY'RE PLANNING TO CLOSE AND END THOSE SERVICES, UM, END OF MARCH. 
          AND ON THE CHART HERE, LIST THE DATA WE RECEIVE FROM HOUSING MATTERS ON THE SERVICES THEY PROVIDED AND CALENDAR YEAR 2024. 
          THOSE INCLUDE MAIL ROOM SERVICES FOR FOLKS WHO ARE UNHOUSED, WHERE THEY CAN PICK UP PUBLIC BENEFITS AND OTHER MAIL CLOSE TO 1700 PEOPLE PER YEAR WHO ARE USING THAT SERVICE. 
          THEY HAVE, UH, BATHROOMS AVAILABLE 24/7 365, OVER 2000 PEOPLE USED THE BATHROOMS. UM, THEY HAVE SHOWERS ON THEIR CAMPUS WHERE FOLKS CAN TAKE SHOWERS ROUGHLY 330, NOT ROUGHLY 335 PEOPLE PER MONTH WHO ARE USING THE SHOWERS ON AVERAGE. 
          THEY ALSO OFFER CLEAN WATER AND CHARGING SERVICES FOR CELL PHONES AND OTHER ITEMS THAT FOLKS HAVE. 
          UM, MOST OF THOSE SERVICES HISTORICALLY HAVE BEEN FUNDED BY PRIVATE CONTRIBUTIONS AND VOLUNTEERS. 
          AND THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ OWNS THE PROPERTY IN WHICH THOSE SERVICES ARE PROVIDED AND FUNDED A REHAB OF WHAT'S CALLED THE HYGIENE BAY ON THE CAMPUS SEVERAL YEARS AGO. 
          UM, OUR COUNTY CONTRIBUTION TO THOSE SERVICES HAS BEEN IN THE PAST FEW YEARS, AROUND $280,000 PER YEAR. 
          A HUNDRED THOUSAND OF THAT IS FOR MAIL SERVICES THROUGH OUR EMPLOYMENT AND BENEFIT SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND THE OTHER 180,000 IS PART OF OUR OVERALL EMERGENCY SHELTER SERVICES CONTRACT WITH HOUSING MATTERS. 
          SO, UH, WE'LL GET TO RECOMMENDED ACTIONS LATER, BUT WE'RE PROPOSING SOME ACTIONS RELATED TO THAT CLOSURE. 
          AND THEN IN A PREVIOUS MEETING, I'M GONNA PASS IT ON TO DR. SANDOVAL IN A SECOND. 
          UH, THE MENTAL HEALTH CLIENT ACTION NETWORK IS A DROP IN PEER SUPPORT PROGRAM FOR PEOPLE WITH SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS. 
          THEY HAD AN UNPLANNED CLOSURE IN AUGUST OF 2025. 
          THE BOARD PROVIDED SOME DIRECTION RELATED TO ADDRESSING THAT. 
          THEY PROVIDE A SIMILAR SET OF SERVICES FOR A SMALLER NUMBER OF PEOPLE. 
          WE DON'T ACTUALLY HAVE THE KIND OF DATA WE HAVE FROM HOUSING MATTERS FROM THAT PROGRAM, BUT THEY'VE ALSO SERVED PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS. 
          UH, THE COUNTY THROUGH USE OF STATE FUNDS HELP THEM ADD LAUNDRY FACILITIES AND SHOWER FACILITIES. 
          THERE WAS A PROGRAM CALLED THE HOMELESS EMERGENCY AID PROGRAM, UM, ON THEIR CAMPUS. 
          AND THROUGH THE LAST YEAR'S BUDGET PROCESS THE COUNTY DECIDED TO ALLOCATE ONE TIME FUNDS, GENERAL FUNDS OF CLOSE TO $380,000 TO TRY TO SUPPORT THE ORGANIZATION'S CONTINUATION OF SERVICES THAT WAS DEPENDENT ON A VIABILITY ASSESSMENT BY THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT. 
          AND THIS IS WHERE I'M GONNA PASS IT OVER TO DR. SANDOVAL TO TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHERE THINGS ARE WITH MHCAN. 
          - YEAH. THANK YOU ROBERT. UM, GOOD MORNING FORWARD. 
          UH, I WANTED TO JUST FOLLOW UP AND PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ABOUT WHAT HAS BEEN GOING ON 
          [02:55:03]
WITH THE MENTAL HEALTH CLIENT ACTION NETWORK OR AS WE REFER TO MHCAN. 
          UH, WE DID LEARN IN LATE AUGUST OF THIS YEAR THAT, UM, MHCAN HAD RELEASED ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND WAS PLANNING TO CLOSE ITS DOORS. 
          THEY CITED FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATION PROBLEMS AS THE REASONS BEHIND THEIR CHALLENGES. 
          AND BY NOVEMBER OF THIS YEAR THE FULL BOARD HAD RESIGNED. 
          UH, SO THAT IS A LITTLE BIT OF THE BACKGROUND OF WHAT WE'VE BEEN DEALING WITH IN, IN BETWEEN THOSE DATES THE COUNTY, INCLUDING OUR CEO'S OFFICE, HAS ENGAGED IN QUITE A BIT OF ACTIVITY TO TRY TO ENGAGE WITH MHCAN. 
          AS SOON AS I LEARNED OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT THEY WERE INTENDING TO CLOSE, HAD REACHED OUT TO THEIR THEN BOARD CHAIR AND HAD A CONVERSATION. 
          OUR GOAL WAS REALLY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS HAPPENING IDEALLY TO HELP THEM NOT HAVE TO CLOSE THE DOORS. 
          UM, THE ISSUES WERE TOO GRAVE AND THEY DID NEED TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THAT. 
          BUT WE CONTINUED AS A COUNTY TO PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE REGARDING THE CLOSURE, THE THINGS THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO CONTINUE TO INVOICE FOR SERVICES THAT HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO ENSURE THAT CONTRACTED INCOME WOULD BE ABLE TO COME IN. 
          AND OUR CEO'S OFFICE ALSO MADE SUGGESTIONS AROUND BRINGING IN A FINANCIAL AUDITOR OR A BOOKKEEPER TO HELP THEM. 
          WE... MYSELF AND MY STAFF MAINTAINED ONGOING WEEKLY COMMUNICATION WITH THEM. 
          AND AT, AT A CERTAIN POINT IN THE PROCESS, THE BOARD WAS REALLY DEALING WITH QUITE COMPLEX ISSUES AND THEY HAD REACHED A POINT WHERE THEY WERE REALLY UNWILLING TO TALK WITH US AT THAT POINT. 
          AND THANKFULLY, UH, EARLIER THIS MONTH, UM, WITH THE SUPPORT OF DISTRICT THREE, WE WERE ABLE TO REENGAGE WITH MHCAN, AND WE DID HAVE A MEETING WITH THEM YESTERDAY WITH SEVERAL OF THE PRIOR BOARD MEMBERS, UH, COUNTY, UH, DISTRICT THREE. 
          AND REALLY THE GOAL THERE IS TO SUPPORT MHCAN IN THEIR DESIRE, AS THEY INDICATED YESTERDAY, TO REESTABLISH THE PROGRAM. 
          THERE ARE MANY CHALLENGES THAT THEY'RE DEALING WITH, THEY'RE WORKING THROUGH SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL ISSUES, SOME INSURANCE CONCERNS. 
          BUT AGAIN THEY'VE RESTATED MULTIPLE TIMES THEIR DESIRE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO REESTABLISH THE PROGRAM. 
          SOME POSSIBLE OPTIONS, UM, INCLUDE POTENTIAL, UH, FISCAL SPONSORSHIP BY ANOTHER NONPROFIT ENTITY, UH, OTHER FINANCIAL, UH, SOLUTIONS TO ADDRESS THEIR CURRENT DENT AND THEN DETERMINING SOME OPERATIONAL APPROACHES THAT WILL SUPPORT IN REESTABLISHING MHCAN SERVICES THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE SUSTAINABLE OVER TIME. 
          SO, WHAT WE'RE REALLY DOING RIGHT NOW IS TRYING TO ENGAGE WITH THE COUNTY, WITH COUNTY AND MHCAN TO EXPLORE OPPORTUNITIES TO GET CREATIVE ABOUT HOW WE MIGHT ENSURE THAT THESE SERVICES COULD CONTINUE, UH, TO SUPPORT THE COMMUNITY. 
          IN, IN THE MEANTIME OF THAT EXPLORATION WHAT I CAN ALSO SHARE WITH YOU IS THAT BEHAVIORAL HEALTH'S, UH, INTEGRATED HOUSING AND RECOVERY TEAM, REFERRED TO AS OUR IHEART TEAM, UM, DOES CONTINUE TO SERVE A, A PORTION OF THE POPULATION THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN RECEIVING THEIR SUPPORT SERVICES THROUGH MHCAN. 
          UM, THE PROGRAM IS, IS A SMALL BUT MIGHTY TEAM AND REALLY GREW OUT OF THE HEALING THE STREETS INITIATIVE THAT WAS SAMHSA FUNDED AND THE INTENTION OF THIS SMALL INTERDISCIPLINARY TEAM THAT INCLUDES CLINICIANS AND OUR PSYCHIATRY STAFF REALLY IS FOCUSED ON COLLABORATIVE ACCESS FOR, UH, WORKING IN COLLABORATION WITH HOUSING FOR HEALTH, WITH HUD, WITH THE CITY, UH, AS WELL AS HOUSING DEVELOPERS TO REALLY TRY AND SUPPORT EASY ACCESS, UH, LOW BARRIER ACCESS REALLY TO SERVICES AND STRENGTHEN ENGAGEMENT OF THESE CLIENTS. 
          SO THOSE THAT ARE UNHOUSED WHO ALSO HAVE MENTAL HEALTH, SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS ISSUES AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE CONDITIONS GET ACCESS INTO MENTAL HEALTH CARE. 
          BECAUSE WITH THE CLOSURE OF THIS FACILITY, I MEAN, CERTAINLY WE'VE, UH, MANY OF US HAVE BEEN VERY CONCERNED THAT THAT WAS A VERY CRITICAL SPACE WHERE THEY WERE RECEIVING SUPPORT THAT WAS HELPING THEM TO REMAIN AT HIGHER LEVELS OF FUNCTIONING. 
          SO THE TEAM CONTINUES TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES. 
          OF COURSE, THE, THE IS THE ITEMS THAT WERE BROUGHT FORWARD IN THE PRIOR PRESENTATION AROUND THE IMPACTS TO FUNDING WE'RE CERTAINLY GONNA HAVE TO LOOK AT HOW THAT MAY IMPACT THIS TEAM AS WELL. 
          BUT IN THE MEANTIME, AS WE WORK WITH MHCAN AND POTENTIALLY OTHER COMMUNITY. 
          UH, BASED ORGANIZATIONS WHO OPERATE IN THIS SPACE TO TRY AND COME UP WITH A CREATIVE SOLUTION OUR, OUR IHEART TEAM WILL CONTINUE TO DO THE OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT TO ENSURE THAT THOSE IN THE GREATEST NEED THAT ARE UNHOUSED WITH MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE ISSUES CONTINUE TO GET SUPPORT AND ACCESSING THE CARE. 
          UH, WE'RE HOPING THAT WE COULD COME BACK TO YOU ON OR BEFORE MARCH 24TH AND GIVE YOU AN UPDATE OF ANY PROGRESS THAT WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO MAKE IN COLLABORATION WITH MHCAN COUNTY CITY TO TRY AND BRING THESE SERVICES BACK ONLINE. 
          - THANK YOU DR. SANDOVAL. 
          JUST WANTED TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT FOR WHAT'S HAPPENING AND, UM, OFTEN IN DISCUSSING APPROACHES 
          [03:00:05]
TO HELPING PEOPLE WHO ARE UNHOUSED. 
          I FEEL THAT PEOPLE GET INTO A EITHER THIS OR THAT CONVERSATION. 
          SO I WANTED TO PRESENT THIS TO THE BOARD 'CAUSE I THINK WE WILL ALL BE FACED WITH SOME REALLY DIFFICULT TRADE OFF DECISIONS GIVEN ALL THE BUDGET CUTS AND THE CHALLENGES THAT PROGRAMS ARE FACING. 
          SO WHEN PEOPLE ARE LIVING WITHOUT HOUSING, THEY'RE STILL HUMAN BEINGS THAT HAVE BASIC NEEDS FOR SURVIVAL. 
          UM, A NEED TO BE SOMEWHERE WHERE THEY CAN BE SAFE, A NEED TO HAVE ACCESS TO CLEAN WATER, A NEED FOR A PLACE TO GET CLEAN. 
          SO THOSE BASIC SURVIVAL NEEDS DON'T DISAPPEAR WHEN SOMEONE DOESN'T HAVE A HOME. 
          QUESTION IS HOW DO WE TRY TO HELP MEET THOSE NEEDS GIVEN LIMITED RESOURCES. 
          UM, HISTORICALLY MY, UH... 
          I'VE BEEN WORKING IN THE ACCOUNTING FOR FIVE YEARS AND MY, UM, PERSONAL ASSESSMENT IS THAT A LOT OF THE DROP IN DAY SERVICES PROGRAMS HERE, UM, HAVE RELIED VERY HEAVILY ON FAITH-BASED INVESTMENTS AND SUPPORT PRIVATE DONATIONS, AND THEY HAVE NOT BEEN INTEGRATED INTO LARGER SYSTEMS WHERE THEY CAN DRAW DOWN AND ALBEIT THEIR SHRINKING FEDERAL AND STATE RESOURCES DAY SERVICE PROGRAMS, IF THEY'RE NOT FOCUSED ON HELPING PEOPLE LONG TERM TO ACCESS INCOME, PUBLIC BENEFITS, LONG-TERM HOUSING SUPPORTS, THEY TYPICALLY DON'T QUALIFY FOR THE LARGER SOURCES OF FUNDING. 
          SO I THINK AS WE EXPLORE OPTIONS I RECOMMEND THAT WE REALLY CONSIDER HOW TO LINK THESE TYPES OF BASIC NEEDS SERVICES WITH PROGRAMMING THAT HELPS GET PEOPLE ON A PATH TO STABILITY, ACCESS TO ONGOING HEALTHCARE SERVICES, STABLE INCOME, CONNECTIONS WITH COMMUNITY. 
          AND ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WILL BE A CHALLENGE AS WE EXPLORE THIS IS LOCATION AND HOW THESE SERVICES ARE OFFERED. 
          MY EXPERIENCE HERE IN OTHER COMMUNITIES IS WHEN SERVICES ARE MORE INTEGRATED IN WITH A RANGE OF OTHER SERVICES FOR UNHOUSED AND, UM, HOUSED INDIVIDUALS, THERE'S LESS, UH, NEIGHBORHOOD OPPOSITION AND CONCERN COZ IT'S PART OF A GENERAL SERVICES PACKAGE FOR LOWER-INCOME PEOPLE. 
          WHEN WE ISOLATE AND SEGREGATE SERVICES FOR PEOPLE BASED ON THEIR HOUSING STATUS, WHICH IS IDEALLY A TEMPORARY SITUATION, UM, I THINK IT CREATES SOME MORE CONCERNS AND CHALLENGES WITH LEVERAGING FUNDING AND GETTING NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT. 
          SO I WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT THOSE THINGS AS THINGS WE WILL NEED TO CONSIDER, UM, IN EVALUATING APPROACHES TO ADDRESSING SOME OF THESE CUTBACKS IN THESE PARTICULAR PROGRAMS. AND I WANTED TO GET TO OUR RECOMMENDED ACTIONS AND THEN GET TO QUESTIONS. 
          SO, DR. SANDOVAL AND I, AND IN YOUR BOARD PACKET, WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE PARTICIPATE IN CITY OF SANTA CRUZ-SUPPORTED WORK GROUPS TO HELP PLAN FOR THE CLOSURE OF THE HOUSING MATTERS DAY SERVICES, AND IF AND HOW THE MHCAN CLOSURE CAN BE RELATED TO ANY PLANS WE COME UP WITH. 
          WE HAVE EXISTING CONTRACTS WITH HOUSING MATTERS, UM, THAT GIVEN THEIR DECISION TO CLOSE THOSE SERVICES, WE'RE REQUESTING THAT WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO AMEND ONE OF THOSE CONTRACTS, REMOVE THOSE SERVICES, AND TERMINATE THE OTHER ONE WHERE THEY'RE GONNA END THOSE SERVICES. 
          UM, DR. SANDOVAL TALKED ABOUT THE WORK THAT WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO DO TO HELP SUPPORT MHCAN WITH A TRANSITION. 
          UM, WE ARE GONNA MOVE FORWARD WITH PLANS IN OUR DEPARTMENT TO HAVE OUR EMPLOYMENT AND BENEFITS SERVICES DIVISION SUPPORT MAIL SERVICES FOR PEOPLE WHO, UM, RECEIVE PUBLIC BENEFITS, WHETHER IT'S FROM THE HOUSING AUTHORITY, SOCIAL SECURITY, OR FROM OUR OWN DEPARTMENT, AT LEAST GETTING THOSE GOVERNMENT-RELATED MAIL ITEMS, UM, WHERE THEY CAN PICK THEM UP. 
          AND THEN, AS DR. SANDOVAL SAID, WE WANNA COME BACK NO LATER THAN MARCH 24TH WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT DEVELOP OUT OF OUR WORK GROUPS-- WORK GROUP CONVERSATIONS. 
          SO THAT'S THE END OF OUR FORMAL PRESENTATION. 
          DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD? - NOPE. 
          - QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? - OKAY. FIRST OF, WE'LL TAKE IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC TO SEE IF ANYBODY WISHES TO ADDRESS US ON THIS ITEM. 
          OH, YOU DROPPED THE PHONE THERE. 
          - UH, HI, GUY-- UH, MEMBERS. UH, MY NAME'S TYLER STARKMAN. 
          I'M THE PAST EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF MHCAN. 
          UH, HI. UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR REPORT, DR. SANDOVAL AND DR. RATNER. 
          UM, THANK YOU GUYS, UH, AND HAPPY HOLIDAYS, HAPPY HANUKKAH. 
          UM, YOU GUYS DO A LOT OF WORK, AND I APPRECIATE YOU ALL. 
          UH, I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT, UM, YOU GUYS WANTED TO WORK WITH US, UH, UH, TO- TO CONTINUE THE SERVICES THAT MHCAN DOES PROVIDE. 
          UM, AND I WANT TO NOTE THAT I WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES FOR 13 MONTHS PRIOR TO BEING LIKE A-- FROM MHCAN, AND THE COMMUNITY, UH, THERE. 
          AND I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT I WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE ALL OF THESE SERVICES AND I CAN CONTINUE TO PROVIDE THEM SERVICES IF GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO. 
          UM, THE BOARD WAS FAIRLY INCOMPETENT. 
          IN FACT, IF, YOU KNOW, TAKE NOTICE THAT NOT A SINGLE MEMBER OF THE BOARD IS HERE, UM, AND YOU GUYS HAVE A-- HAVE ABSOLUTELY, 
          [03:05:04]
UM, IMPOSSIBLE JOB AHEAD OF YOU, RIGHT? I FEEL THAT BECAUSE I HAD AN IMPOSSIBLE JOB WHEN I STARTED. 
          I STARTED AND- AND I WAS BEING AUDITED IMMEDIATELY. 
          SO I-I WAS IN THE BOARD. 
          I WAS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, RIGHT? FOR MHCAN. 
          SARAH LEONARD LEFT IMMEDIATELY. 
          UM, AND- AND WITHOUT, UH-- WE WERE UNABLE TO FIND SOMEBODY TO REPLACE HER. 
          SO I TOOK OVER AS PART OF OUR BYLAWS THAT THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD HAS TO TAKE OVER AS THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. OKAY? AND SO I DID. I STEPPED UP AND DID THAT. 
          NOW THEY FI-- THEY-- THEY ESSENTIALLY FIRED ME, AND THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD NOW, DANETTE LAWRENCE, HASN'T STEPPED UP AND IS NOT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND HASN'T FOUND A WAY TO WORK WITH YOU GUYS IN ORDER TO GET THE SERVICES PROVIDED TO THE COMMUNITY. 
          UM, SO SHE- SHE WAS-- UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE THEY WERE UNABLE TO DO SO, THEY LOST OPPORTUNITIES TO FUNDING THAT I WAS APPLYING FOR, ROUND TWO FUNDING, UNMET NEEDS THROUGH THE SHIP, UH, YOU KNOW, RESOURCES. 
          AND BECAUSE OF THAT, NOW YOU GUYS ARE STUCK TRYING TO HELP A BOARD THAT IS NOT REALLY-- IS FAIRLY INCOMPETENT. 
          THEY DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING. 
          UM, AND SO I-I-I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT YOU GUYS WAIT AND MAKE A DECISION ON HOW TO ALLOCATE THESE FUNDS. 
          I REALLY DO BELIEVE THAT I CAN HELP YOU GUYS GET THESE SERVICES BACK ON BOARD. 
          YOU GUYS DID NOT REACH OUT TO ME AT ALL. 
          YOU KNOW, UM, YOU GUYS SAID YOU WERE TRYING TO WORK WITH THEM TO TRY AND GET THIS-- THESE SERVICES, YOU KNOW, GIVEN TO THE-- TO THE MENTALLY ILL AND- AND YOU DIDN'T EVEN REACH OUT TO THE ONE PERSON THAT SIGNED THE CONTRACT BACK IN-- 12 MONTHS AGO. 
          I SIGNED THAT CONTRACT, AND I CAN CONTINUE THOSE SERVICES, PLEASE. 
          - THANK YOU.   - THANK YOU. 
          - VERY GOOD JOB. 
          - AND I'M GONNA PASS THESE OUT. 
          - YOU ARE?   - YES. 
          - OH, ALL RIGHT. 
          WE'RE FROM THE ROCKLAND FRIENDS MEETING, UM... 
          - MOVE THE MIC. CAN YOU MOVE THE MIC A LITTLE CLOSER? - YES.   - THANK YOU. 
          - UH, WE'RE THE-- FROM THE ROCKLAND FRIENDS MEETING THE QUAKERS. 
          I'M ALICE COULOMBE. THIS IS MARILYN PATTON. 
          AND, UH, WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE SHOWERS AND- AND THE OTHER-- THE OTHER, UH, ISSUES. 
          UM, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO- TO, UM-- WE'VE BEEN SUPPORTING THIS LIKE FROM, UH, THE ASSOCIATION OF FAITH COMMUNITIES AND SO ON. 
          WE'VE BEEN SUPPORTING THIS OVER TIME. 
          WE WANNA CONTINUE TO, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO BE INCLUDED IN THE-- IN THE WORKING GROUP, UH, TO, UM, TO COORDINATE SERVICES. 
          WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'LL BE ABLE TO DO, BUT WE'D LIKE TO BE IN ON IT. 
          OKAY. 
          MARILYN PATTON. ACTUALLY, I'M DR. MARILYN PATTON. 
          EVERYBODY'S CALLING PEOPLE DOCTOR, SO, OKAY. 
          [LAUGH]. 
          ANYWAY-- AND MY HUSBAND USED TO BE ON THIS BOARD, AND I NOW THINK THAT HE WAS NEVER PAID ENOUGH. 
          THERE'S NOT ENOUGH MONEY TO PAY YOU TO BE ON THIS BOARD. SORRY. 
          SO, UM, SO ANYWAY, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THIS PART OF THE LETTER, WHICH WE ALREADY SENT TO YOU, WHICH IS ASKING, AND WE'RE ASKING THE CITY TO, FOR CLARITY ON THE- THE TWO NUMBERED THINGS. 
          CLARITY ON THE TRANSITION PLAN FOR SHOWERS, RESTROOMS, AND MAIL SERVICES, AND THE COMMITMENT TO CONTINUE-- CONTINUITY OF SERVICES. 
          AND WE ARE, UM, UH-- WE WORK WITH LOTS OF THE OTHER CHURCHES, UM, WITH, AND OF COURSE WITH EVENING HOUSING, EVENING MEALS, AND OTHER KINDS OF RESOURCES. 
          AND, UM, WE'RE DEEPLY COMMITTED TO THE, UH, FAITH-BASED HELP FOR THE-- FOR PEOPLE. 
          BUT WE ALSO NEED, UM, THE-- SINCE WE HAVE THE- THE, UH, HOUSING MATTERS PROBLEM, THAT WE NEED MORE HELP. 
          AND WE THANK YOU FOR WHATEVER ASSISTANCE YOU CAN GIVE US, AND APPRECIATE YOU VERY MUCH. 
          - I'M JUST HAPPY I, UH, CAME TODAY, AND MY NAME IS UNIMPORTANT. 
          MY BACKGROUND AND THE TIME I SPENT THERE, I BELIEVE THAT MY FRIEND HERE NEEDED HELP WAY, WAY BACK. 
          BUT NOW THAT I HAVE THIS PLAN, YOU KNOW, I'M GONNA SHOW UP WITH THE MENTAL HEALTH, UH, COMMITTEE, AND I'M GONNA HOPEFULLY BRING GRANDMA, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR WHY THE CHAIR CHOSE TO CLOSE MHCAN. 
          IT'S A DIAMOND IN- IN SANTA CRUZ. 
          HOW ABOUT WHAT WE COULD DO? SO WHAT I NEEDED WAS TO LEARN WHAT THE PLAN WAS, AND IT WASN'T EASY. 
          I WAS WATCHING FOR ARTICLES, AND THERE WASN’T ANYTHING EXCEPT OUR LITTLE LOCAL PAPER THAT ALLOWED ME TO KNOW THAT THIS WAS COMING UP. 
          I KNOW YOU HAD MEETINGS. 
          I KNOW I COULD CALL YOUR STAFF, BUT I AM, UH-- IF I CAN, IF YOU CAME IN AND WE LOOKED AT SOME VIDEOS, I WANNA SEE WHAT WE CAN DO BETWEEN NOW, AND I HAVE IDEAS. 
          SO ONE OF THOSE IS THAT WHAT WE DID BEFORE WAS TALK ABOUT 
          [03:10:01]
WHOSE HOUSE, OUR HOUSE. 
          BE OPEN. 
          THAT- THAT CAN COME TO BE WITH THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE FOR THE FIRST TIME, THE IDEA OF FISCAL. 
          BUT IF I WAS TO HAVE MONEY IN MY POCKET, I'D BE HIRING THIS CEO WHO STAFF TURNED ON HIM. 
          AND WE WOULDN'T HAVE HAD THAT CLOSURE. 
          I DON'T HAVE THAT MONEY, BUT ONCE I BOUGHT STARBUCKS COFFEE. 
          I-I BROUGHT THEM PIZZA BECAUSE I BELIEVE THOSE OF YOU WHO KNOW ME, I GO BACK TO SERVING THE HOMELESS MORE THAN MOST PEOPLE, PARTICULARLY WATSONVILLE. 
          - THANK YOU. 
          - HEY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LETTING ME TALK. 
          - HI BOARD. MY NAME IS ATHENA. 
          I DO MUTUAL AID WITH PEOPLE'S AID. 
          WE MOSTLY WORK IN THE POGONIP, BUT WE ALSO GO DOWN TO CORAL STREET. 
          I'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN MHCAN. 
          I HOPE SOME OF YOU GUYS HAVE SAT ON THOSE COUCHES AND SEEN HOW LOVING THE ENVIRONMENT IS AT MHCAN WHEN IT'S RUNNING. 
          I, ONE, WOULD LOVE IF THERE WAS SOME SORT OF WAY FOR THE PUBLIC TO INTERACT WITH THE CITY AND COUNTY, UM, BOARD THAT IS WORKING ON THIS, BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF INTELLECT EXPERTISE AND INFORMATION THAT PEOPLE THAT DON'T USE THESE SERVICES IS GOING TO BE MISSING OUT ON. 
          IN ANY WAY, FOR THE FRIENDS THAT ARE HERE TODAY THAT WROTE THAT LETTER, AND FOR PEOPLE USING SERVICES TO INTERACT WITH THE GROUPS THAT ARE MAKING DECISIONS, WILL MAKE THOSE DECISIONS MUCH MORE INTELLIGENT AND- AND ROUNDED. 
          I ALSO JUST WANTED TO EMPHASIZE THAT THE SERVICE CENTER IN THE MOUNTAINS IN FELTON IS THE MOUNTAIN SERVICE CENTER IS FUNDED BY THE COUNTY. 
          IT'S AN ENCOMPASS-RUN SERVICE CENTER. 
          AND THEY LOST ENOUGH FUNDING TO CLOSE DAY SERVICES BEFORE MHCAN CLOSED DAY SERVICES. 
          I'M PRETTY SURE THE FUNDING COMES FROM ENCOMPASS. 
          YOU GUYS ARE SHAKING YOUR HEAD. 
          I DON'T KNOW WHY THAT INFO IS OUT THERE IF IT'S INCORRECT. 
          THEY NEED MORE FUNDING TOO, AND THE PEOPLE IN THE MOUNTAINS NEED DAY SERVICES AS WELL. 
          I WOULD LOVE IF THERE WAS A WAY FOR THE PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO HELP IN THESE CHOICES. 
          AND THANK YOU. 
          - I-I AM, UH, GREG BANKSONI HANG OUT A LOT IN MONICA'S AREA. 
          I'VE GOT FRIENDS OUT IN THE POGONIP. 
          I'VE BEEN-- WHERE I WAS HOMELESS FOR ABOUT 12 YEARS, UM, AFTER VENTURE CAPITAL STUFF IN SILICON VALLEY. 
          BUT IT'S BETTER BEING HOMELESS. 
          BUT, UH, MAN, THIS IS SOME STRANGE TIMES, AND UH, I KNOW MY FRIENDS ARE THERE-- STILL OUT THERE. 
          DON'T-- THEY KNOW SOMETHING'S COMING DOWN THE PIPE. 
          UH, THEY'RE NOT READY. 
          UH, WE NEED TO HAVE SOME SORT OF INTERIM TWO-PHASE THING BECAUSE THE CITY'S NOT GONNA EVEN MEET TO PLAN STUFF UNTIL FEBRUARY, I THINK IT IS. 
          I WENT TO THE-- I WENT TO THE HOUSING MATTERS, UH, BOARD MEETING AND LATEST CITY COUNCIL MEETING. 
          THE ONLY POINT I'D LIKE TO MAKE IS THAT, UH, THERE IS EXPERTISE THAT NEEDS TO BE GUIDED. 
          I MEAN, IT- IT CAN COME FROM THE PEOPLE THAT ARE OUT THERE. 
          UM, THEY HAVE WONDERFUL, BRILLIANT IDEAS IF- IF, UH, IF THEY CAN BE, UH, GIVEN A, GIVEN SOME STRUCTURE TO FOLLOW. 
          AND, UH, UH, JUSTIN, I DO HAVE A PHONE THAT ACTUALLY WORKS. 
          I'LL SEND YOU AN EMAIL WITH MY NUMBER. 
          ANYBODY CAN CONTACT ME. 
          I PUT THE OFFER OUT TO, UH, CITY COUNCIL AND TO, UM, UH, LARRY AND WALL AND STUFF LIKE THAT. 
          AND- AND, UH, DR. RATNER, UM, I'VE HEARD GOOD THINGS ABOUT YOU AND- AND, UH, YOUR PROFESSIONALISM AND YOUR, UM, YOUR CARE FOR OUR COMMUNITY. 
          UM, I APPRECIATE THAT. UH, WE'RE GONNA MAKE IT. 
          IT'S INTERESTING TIMES. THANK YOU. 
          - YEAH, IT IS A HUGE PROBLEM WITH THE MENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT AND, UM, [INAUDIBLE], YOU SEEM LIKE INTELLIGENT PERSON AND NICE PERSON, BUT, UH, I BELIEVE IT'S VERY DIFFICULT, YOU KNOW, TO GET THAT, UM, INHERITANCE FROM THE PREVIOUS, UM, LEADERSHIP. 
          AND, UM, I'M REQUESTING, YOU KNOW, ALREADY MANY TIMES, YOU KNOW, TO, UM-- FOR HELP TO COORDINATE, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY THIS ONE PERSON. 
          AND I STILL CANNOT GET IT. 
          AND THIS IS VERY FRUSTRATING BECAUSE IT CANNOT WAIT. 
          PSYCHOSIS IS DANGEROUS. 
          AND WHEN IT'S NOT TAKEN CARE OF ON TIME, IT COULD BE NO RETURN. 
          AND THIS IS WHAT I FEEL RIGHT NOW. 
          DO YOU KNOW, THERE IS NO RETURN. 
          AND WHEN AUTISTIC PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE VERY EASILY INFLUENCED, VERY EASILY MANIPULATED, 
          [03:15:03]
ESPECIALLY BY BAD PEOPLE. 
          AND, UH, IT IS A LOT OF BAD PEOPLE IN BEHAVIORAL HEALTH DIVISION BECAUSE WHEN I TRY TO GET CONSERVATORSHIP FOR MY DAUGHTER, YOU KNOW, AND PROTECT HER AND, UM, DO, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER SHE NEEDS TO DO, THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH DIVISION COACHING HER TO SAY, "I'M NOT AUTISTIC, I'M ADULT. I'M NOT AUTISTIC, I'M ADULT." AND THAT WORD ADULT WAS PUT IN EVERYBODY HEAD. 
          YOU KNOW, THEY BEGIN TO COACH EVERYBODY, INCLUDING LAW ENFORCEMENT. 
          DO YOU KNOW THAT ADULT HAS TO TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES, YOU KNOW, AND-- UH, BUT WHAT IF THAT ADULT CANNOT TAKE CARE OF-- ON HER OWN? YOU KNOW, IT IS A DIFFERENCE. 
          SO NEED MORE INSTRUCTIONS ALSO, YOU KNOW, TO LAW ENFORCEMENT, EDUCATE THEM. 
          AND WE HAVE STILL A LOT OF MENTAL HEALTH WORKERS WHO DOES NOT HAVE LICENSE. 
          THIS SHOULD BE UNACCEPTABLE. 
          EVERYBODY HAS TO HAVE LICENSE, BUT IT'S PLENTY OF THEM. 
          THEY DO NOT HAVE LICENSE. 
          AND, UH, ALSO THE SOCIAL WORKERS, SAME THING. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          - IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE? - YES, CHAIR. 
          TIM, YOUR MICROPHONE'S NOW AVAILABLE. 
          - COOL. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HEARING ME TODAY. 
          I HOPE YOU-- ALL OF YOU HAVE A WONDERFUL HOLIDAY PERIOD. 
          UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT, UH, I AM 100%- 100% SUPPORTIVE OF WHAT YOU ARE ALL DOING TODAY. 
          YOU KNOW, IT IS A STRESSFUL JOB. 
          UM, THE OTHER FOLKS THAT MENTIONED THAT-- THOSE SORT OF ANGLES, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE- THEY'RE A HUNDRED PERCENT CORRECT, YOU KNOW? UM, I-I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IS THINKING. 
          THERE'S SO MUCH CRUELTY. 
          YOU KNOW, HOW DOES IT HELP ANY OF US IN SOCIETY, WHETHER WE'RE LOWER, MIDDLE, OR UPPER INCOME PEOPLE HERE, IF WE'RE SURROUNDED BY A BUNCH OF HOMELESSNESS AND POVERTY AND MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES, YOU KNOW? AND THEN TO TOP IT OFF, TO SPEND ALL THIS MONEY ON ICE. 
          WELL, THAT'S ILL-SPENT MONEY. 
          THAT DOESN'T HELP OUR MILITARY POSTURE AT ALL. 
          SO, RUSSIA'S LAUGHING AT ALL THIS. IT'S HILARIOUS. 
          SO I AM CONCERNED. 
          THERE ARE MANY THOUGHTS IN MY MIND AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I JUST GOTTA SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, REAL MEN DON'T HARM THE VULNERABLE, SERIOUS. YOU KNOW, THAT'S HOW I LOOK AT IT. 
          UM, THERE'S THAT ANGLE, UH, GOSH. 
          AND, UH, I'M ALSO CONCERNED THAT STEPPING STONES IN SOCIETY WILL BE REMOVED. 
          SO PEOPLE THAT ARE HOMELESS THAT HAVE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES AND STUFF LIKE THAT, THEY'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO CLIMB OUT OF THEIR SITUATIONS AND IMPROVE THEIR SITUATIONS FOR-- AND THAT BENEFITS EVERYBODY. 
          SO, UM, I JUST WANTED TO SAY I'M VERY, VERY SUPPORTIVE AND SUPPORTIVE ALSO OF YOUR INVESTIGATING OTHER LAWSUITS AT THE FEDERAL AND STATE LEVEL IN REGARDS TO THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION. 
          AND I-I-I UNDERSTAND IT'S DIFFICULT, AND I REALLY DON'T LIKE WHAT'S GOING ON. 
          ANYWAYS, UH, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HEARING ME, AND I WISH YOU ALL THE BEST AND, UH, I-I SUPPORT ALL OF YOUR EFFORTS HERE AND YOUR HARD WORK TODAY. 
          THANK YOU SO MUCH. BYE-BYE. 
          - CALL IN USER ONE, YOUR MICROPHONE'S NOW AVAILABLE. 
          - MARILYN GARRETT. 
          I'D LIKE YOU TO SUPPORT DR. MARILYN PATTON'S, UH, SUGGESTIONS TO YOU ON THIS MATTER. 
          YES, HOUSING MATTERS. EVERYBODY HAS A RIGHT TO HOUSING. 
          I AM-- SHOULD HAVE. 
          I'M LOOKING AT THE UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS FROM 19-- WHAT, 48, ARTICLE 25. 
          EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO A STANDARD OF LIVING, ADEQUATE FOR THE HEALTH AND WELL-BEING OF HIMSELF AND HIS FAMILY, INCLUDING FOOD, CLOTHING, HOUSING, AND MEDICAL CARE AND NECESSARY SOCIAL SERVICES, AND THE RIGHT TO SECURITY IN THE EVENT OF UNEMPLOYMENT, SICKNESS, DISABILITY, WIDOWHOOD, OLD AGE, OR OTHER LACK OF LIVELIHOOD IN CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND HIS CONTROL. 
          ARTICLE 25, OF COURSE, NOWADAYS IT WOULD SAY HIS OR HER. 
          [03:20:03]
THIS SYSTEM WE'RE LIVING IN, AND THIS AUTOCRATIC GOVERNMENT IS FAILING IN PROVIDING HUMAN RIGHTS, BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS. 
          AND THERE NEEDS TO BE A SHIFT IN THE PRIORITIES IN THIS COUNTRY TO PROVIDE FOR THE RIGHTS TO HOUSING, FOOD, CLOTHING, ET CETERA, FOR EVERYONE. 
          NOT THE RIGHT FOR THE MILITARY AND GESTAPO ICE RAID AND THE $300 MILLION BALLROOM TO PROCEED. 
          THOSE ARE NOT... 
          - THANK YOU. - ...RIGHT. 
          - I SEE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS ONLINE, CHAIR. 
          - OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          I'LL START OFF TO MY FAR LEFT, UH, SUPERVISOR KOENIG. 
          - UH, WELL, I WAS GLAD TO HEAR DR. RATNER TALK ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVE, UH, ULTIMATELY THE DELIVERY OF DAY'S SERVICES AND FURTHER INTEGRATE THEM IN, UM, YOU KNOW, OUR OVERALL, UM, EFFORTS TO- TO PROVIDE COMPREHENSIVE CARE AND LONG-TERM SOLUTIONS TO PEOPLE TO EXIT HOMELESSNESS. 
          SO THAT'S-- IT'S, UH, A GLIMMER OF HOPE, I GUESS, IN THIS DISCUSSION. 
          AND I'M ALSO GLAD THAT WE'RE GONNA, UM-- WE HAVE A SOLUTION IDENTIFIED TO OFFER MAIL SERVICES, UH, TO- TO FOLKS WHO, UH, ARE ENROLLED IN MEDI-CAL SO THAT WE CAN, UH, ENSURE THAT THEY RECEIVE THE NEEDED NOTICES, UH, TO STAY THAT WAY. 
          UM, AND I HOPE THAT WE'RE ABLE TO WORK WITH OUR VARIOUS COMMUNITY PARTNERS TO ULTIMATELY, UH, FILL- FILL THE SERVICES GAP, PARTICULARLY ON THINGS LIKE SHOWERS AND- AND CHARGING AND OTHER, UM, DAY-TO-DAY NEEDS. 
          THANKS. 
          -  SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ. 
          - THANK YOU FOR UPDATING US ON THESE, UM, PRETTY CRITICAL CHANGES THAT ARE HAPPENING IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          UM, I WANNA START OFF BY THANKING THOSE WHO CAME TO SPEAK TODAY. 
          UM, THESE ARE REALLY IMPORTANT SERVICES. 
          THIS IS A VERY VULNERABLE POPULATION, AND, UM, YOU KNOW, MY HEART REALLY GOES OUT TO EVERY PERSON WHO'S IMPACTED BY THESE CHANGES. 
          IT'S A, IT'S A DIFFICULT TIME AND, AND PEOPLE ARE STRUGGLING. 
          UM, I... TO THE SPEAKER WHO WAS SPEAKING ABOUT, UM, MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY RESOURCES I JUST... I CAN'T SEE YOU. 
          UM, BUT I DO JUST WANNA MENTION THAT THE REASON YOU WERE GETTING A HEAD SHAKING IS BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S OPERATED BY COMMUNITY BRIDGES NOT ENCOMPASS. 
          UM, AND SO WE, SORRY ABOUT THE BODY LANGUAGE UP HERE. 
          WE WERE, UM, WE WEREN'T TRYING TO SCARE YOU AWAY. 
          JUST CLARIFYING. 
          - I WILL SAY- NO, NO PROBLEM. NO, NO. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. 
          UM, SO, SO, BUT THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. 
          UM, I AM APPRECIATIVE OF OUR COUNTY STAFF CONTINUING TO HAVE CONVERSATION WITH ALL OF THE PARTNERS ON HOW TO ADDRESS THESE GAPS. 
          UM, I'M SUPPORTIVE OF WORKING WITH MHCAN LEADERSHIP IF THEY ARE AVAILABLE TO PARTNER WITH US TO CONTINUE WHATEVER THAT LOOKS LIKE. 
          SO I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT REPORT BACK. 
          THANK YOU FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS TO ENGAGE BECAUSE PEER SERVICES ARE CRITICALLY IMPORTANT AND WE WANT THOSE TO CONTINUE TO OPERATE IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          UM, I ALSO AM VERY APPRECIATIVE THAT, UH, HSD IS GONNA SUPPORT SOME OF THE MALE SERVICES PARTICULARLY, PARTICULARLY FOR THOSE WHO ARE RECEIVING PUBLIC BENEFITS. 
          UM, AS SOMEBODY WHO OPERATED HOUSING MATTERS OVER A DECADE AGO, I RECOGNIZE THAT THE MAIL SERVICE, WHAT WAS MOST IMPORTANT ABOUT THAT WAS THE BENEFITS THAT PEOPLE WERE RECEIVING WHEN THEY, UM, ACCESSED THEIR MAIL AT THAT LOCATION. 
          SO I'M GLAD THAT WE'LL HOPEFULLY CONTINUE BOTH AT NORTH AND SOUTH COUNTY LOCATIONS AND THAT WE WORK REALLY HARD TO COMMUNICATE TO THE... 
          THOSE PARTICIPATING IN THE PROGRAM ABOUT THAT CHANGE. 
          UM, AS IT RELATES TO THE FUNDING, FOUR DAY SERVICES. UM, THE FIRST THING I WANNA CLARIFY THAT THE DECISION THAT'S BEFORE THE COUNTY SUPERVISORS TODAY LIKE WE CAN'T, WE CAN'T MAKE HOUSING MATTERS CHANGE THEIR DECISION. 
          THEY ARE AN INDEPENDENT ORGANIZATION. 
          THEY'VE MADE THEIR DECISION. 
          UM, IT IS A DECISION THAT I UNDERSTAND AND I'M SUPPORTIVE OF THE REASONINGS FOR THEM MAKING THOSE DECISIONS ALBEIT IT'S A VERY DIFFICULT DECISION. 
          UM, BUT WE'RE NOT IN A POSITION TO CHANGE THAT DECISION. 
          THAT'S NOT WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY. 
          UM, WE ARE IN A POSITION TO LOOK AT THE FUNDING THAT HAD BEEN ALLOCATED FOR THOSE SERVICES FOR THIS YEAR AND JUST, UM, ENSURE THAT WE'RE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PUBLIC FOR THOSE FUNDS AND RECOGNIZING THAT, 
          [03:25:02]
UM, THERE ARE SUCH HUGE CHANGES ON THE HORIZON. 
          UM, I THINK WHAT'S RECOMMENDED IN THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS TODAY MAKES SENSE TO ME AND I'LL BE, UM, SUPPORTIVE OF THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          UM, AND I AM SUPPORTIVE OF US JUST CONTINUING TO FILL GAPS IN ANY WAYS THAT WE CAN, UM, PARTICIPATING WITH THE CITY AND, UM, AND REPORTING BACK AS NECESSARY. 
          SO APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU FOR THE REPORT BACK. 
          - THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR DESERPA. 
          - THANK YOU. UM, SO IN TERMS OF THE FAITH-BASED PORTION, UM, IS THERE ANYBODY AT THE COUNTY LEVEL LIKE COORDINATING WITH THE CHURCHES TO EVEN DISCUSS THE BUILD OUT OF EXTRA HOUSING? AND I KNOW THAT SEEMS LIKE A WEIRD QUESTION BASED ON THE PRESENTATION THAT WE ALREADY HAD. 
          BUT I, I AM HOPEFUL THAT, THAT THERE IS SOME COORDINATION. 
          - YEAH. UM, SO OUR OFFICE HOUSING FOR HEALTH AND COLLEAGUES IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INFRASTRUCTURE, UM, DEPARTMENT WORK CLOSELY WITH FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE REALLY INTERESTED IN PURSUING DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES. 
          WE'VE HOSTED, UM, IN PARTNERSHIP WITH HOUSING SANTA CRUZ COUNTY IN, IN ANNUAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING MONTH AND WE HIGHLIGHT INTENTIONALLY OPPORTUNITIES FOR FAITH-BASED ORGANIZATIONS TO CONTRIBUTE TO THE ADDRESSING THE HOUSING NEEDS IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          AND WE WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH I, I FEEL VERY FORTUNATE THAT WE HAVE THE ORGANIZATION ASSOCIATION OF FAITH COMMUNITIES, AS MENTIONED EARLIER THAT HELPS WITH THAT EFFORT TO BRING FOLKS TOGETHER AND WE PARTNER CLOSELY WITH THEM. 
          THEY ARE A CONTRACTOR WITH OUR DIVISION PROVIDING SAFE PARKING AND SAFE SLEEPING SERVICES. 
          THEY'VE ALSO GROWN AS AN ORGANIZATION. 
          I ALLUDED TO THIS A LITTLE BIT EARLIER. 
          THEY'VE LEARNED HOW TO BUILD MEDI-CAL, UM, AND THEY'RE HELPING MAKE THAT BRIDGE THAT I DISCUSSED EARLIER BETWEEN THE KIND OF HELPING WITH BASIC NEEDS AND HELPING WITH LONG-TERM CARE. 
          SO DEEP APPRECIATION FOR THE WORK THAT THEY DO. 
          AND WE ARE GONNA GET INTO A RITUAL OF EVERY AFFORDABLE HOUSING MONTH. 
          WE'RE GONNA HIGHLIGHT THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR FAITH-BASED COMMUNITIES. 
          THERE'S MULTIPLE PROJECTS THAT ARE REALLY EXCITING THAT ARE GOING ON. 
          ONE THAT I THINK I HIGHLIGHTED IN THE REPORT ON NOVEMBER 18TH, GOOD SHEPHERD OF CATHOLIC SCHOOL, MIDPEN HOUSING WAS ABLE TO ACQUIRE THAT PROPERTY. 
          THAT'S A TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL OF US IN SANTA CRUZ TO EXPLORE EXPANDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING OPTIONS THERE. 
          AND I ANTICIPATE THERE'LL BE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM CDI IN THE FUTURE AS WE WORK TO CREATE MORE OPPORTUNITIES THERE. 
          SO WE'RE ALL IN, WE DEFINITELY WANNA SUPPORT PARTNERING WITH FAITH-BASED GROUPS. 
          - AND UM, DR. RATNER, UM, I DIDN'T SAY THIS BEFORE IN THE LAST PRESENTATION, BUT I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HAVE, UM, JENNY PANETTA, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FROM HOUSING AUTHORITY TO COME HERE AND, AND TALK WITH US ABOUT THE HOUSING VOUCHER SITUATION. 
          'CAUSE I, I DON'T FEEL COMPLETELY CLEAR, WHAT I THINK I UNDERSTAND IS THAT THE EMERGENCY HOUSING VOUCHERS ARE GOING AWAY, BUT I HAD HEARD THAT, UM, WE WERE TRYING TO TAKE PEOPLE OUT OF THAT PARTICULAR PRODUCT AND PLACE THEM IN OTHER MORE SUSTAINABLE... 
          HI PETER. VOUCHER, UM, PROGRAMS. - PETER DOUGLAS COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICE. 
          I'M ACTUALLY WORKING WITH JENNY TO HAVE HER BE HERE IN JANUARY AND WE CAN HAVE HER SPEAK ABOUT THAT. 
          - THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THANK YOU. 
          SO, SO TO JUST GET A BETTER IDEA OF THE LANDSCAPE. 
          UM, AND, AND I KNOW IT'S IMPOSSIBLE 'CAUSE THINGS CHANGE FROM DAY TO DAY AT, AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. 
          SO I'M UNDER NO, YOU KNOW, ILLUSION THAT, UM, WHAT, WHAT IS A THING TODAY IS, IS GOING TO BE IN PLACE TOMORROW. BUT. 
          - I THINK JANUARY, DEPENDING ON WHAT TIME IN JANUARY 'CAUSE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S GONNA BE REVIEWING THE BUDGET AGAIN IN JANUARY. 
          SO I THINK, UM, JENNY PANETTA WILL HAVE MORE INFORMATION ON, YOU KNOW, POTENTIAL CUTS AND WHAT THE CONVERSATION IS AND IF THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES FOR ADVOCACY. 
          SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD TIME TO COME IN JANUARY. 
          AND THEN WE'LL ALSO HAVE MORE DETAILS ON WHAT OUR SPECIFIC PLANS ARE TO HELP THE EMERGENCY HOUSING VOUCHER PARTICIPANTS NOW AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING TOGETHER TO SUPPORT THEM TO TRANSITION. 
          - YEAH. I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT DAY SERVICES ARE ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY, UM, FOR PEOPLE. 
          UM, LIKE I CAN'T REMEMBER THE STATISTIC BUT THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE USING THE TOILETS AND, AND WASHING UP, ET CETERA. 
          AND IN TERMS OF THE MAILS, THE MAIL SITUATION, EVEN IF WE CHANGE IT FROM WHERE IT IS NOW, RIGHT? CORAL STREET TO LIKE THE COUNTY BUILDING, I MEAN, THAT'S A HUGE UNDERTAKING. 
          AND SOMEBODY... ONE OF... SOMEBODY HAD WRITTEN US THE BOARD, UM, ABOUT THAT YOU CAN'T, SOMEHOW, THERE'S A PROBLEM WITH CHANGING FROM A BUSINESS ADDRESS TO A DIFFERENT ADDRESS. 
          SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE LOOKED INTO THAT WITH THE POSTAL SERVICE, BUT... 
          OH, HERE COMES TROUBLE. 
          - WELL, THE, THE DEPARTMENT... 
          THE DIVISION WITHIN HSD... - YEAH. 
          - ...BEING DISCUSSED IS ROBERT'S COLLEAGUE IRMA MARQUEZ. 
          THE SHORT ANSWER IS WE'RE ON TOP OF THIS. 
          UM, TO MY KNOWLEDGE THIS PREDATES ME BEFORE THE CONTRACT 
          [03:30:01]
WITH PROBABLY THEN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF WHATEVER HOUSING MATTERS WAS CALLED. 
          UM, THE MAIL WAS SENT TO THE HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT. 
          SO WE'RE JUST RETURNING TO A PAST PRACTICE. 
          UM, YOUR COMMENT ABOUT GENERAL DELIVERY TO MY, UM, EDUCATION I DIDN'T KNOW THIS. 
          UH, US POSTAL SERVICES HAVE THE OPTION TO ACCEPT GENERAL DELIVERY OR NOT. 
          SOUTH COUNTY, WATSONVILLE DOES, NORTH COUNTY, SANTA CRUZ DOES NOT. 
          SO WHEN BENEFICIARIES OF OUR PUBLIC BENEFITS, UM, SIGN UP FOR BENEFITS OR RENEW THEIR BENEFITS, THEY'RE GIVEN THE OPTION TO SAY WHERE DO YOU WANT YOUR MAIL TO GO? FOR THE LAST DECADE MANY PEOPLE HAVE CHOSEN THE CORAL STREET ADDRESS THROUGH THIS CONTRACT WE HAVE. 
          GOING FORWARD AND I THINK THIS IS PART OF YOUR QUESTION, WE ARE ON TOP OF AND WORKING WITH THERE'S NO LEGAL BARRIERS. 
          WE JUST HAVE TO GIVE INFORMED CHOICE. 
          THEY CAN CHOOSE TO ACCEPT THE PO BOX THAT WILL SEND THEIR MAIL TO EITHER NORTH COUNTY 1020 M LINE OR SOUTH COUNTY 500 WESTRIDGE, OR IF IT'S SOUTH COUNTY, THEY CAN CHOOSE GENERAL DELIVERY THEY CAN'T NORTH COUNTY. 
          OR IF THEY BY CHANCE HAVE SOMEBODY IN THEIR PERSONAL LIFE THAT THEY CAN NAME AN ADDRESS THEY CAN GIVE THAT THAT'S THEIR CHOICE, AND WE'RE GOING THROUGH THAT PROCESS BETWEEN NOW AND WHEN THE TRANSITION OCCURRED. 
          - THAT'S A HUGE AMOUNT OF WORK. YEAH. 
          - IT, IT IS. AND ACTUALLY I'LL JUST USE YOUR COMMENT TO MAKE A POINT WHEN WE COME BACK IN MARCH, UM, I CAN TELL YOU OUR DIVISION THAT'S MANAGING THIS IS ACTUALLY ASKING TO USE THE CLAWBACK MONEY FROM THAT CONTRACT TO PROGRAM THE CALS SAUCE SYSTEM TO AUTOMATICALLY PROGRAM SOME OF THESE CHANGES SO WE DON'T HAVE TO MANUALLY CASE BY CASE DO IT. 
          THAT'S TRADE OFF DECISIONS. 
          SO THESE ARE THINGS WE HAVE TO WORK THROUGH IN DETAIL THAT WE'LL REPORT BACK WHEN WE COME BACK IN, UH, MARCH. 
          BUT DOES THAT RESPOND TO YOUR QUESTION SUPERVISOR? - YES. THANK YOU SO MUCH, RANDY. 
          - WELL, PROBLEM SOLVED THERE. 
          WE'LL SEND ALL THE MAIL TO, UH, DIRECTOR RANDY MORRIS. 
          KIDDING. 
          SO WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD. 
          UH, SUP-, OH, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS SORRY. 
          - THANK YOU, CHAIR. UM, I I DID HAVE A QUE-, ONE QUESTION THAT I HAVE A FEW COMMENTS TO MAKE, UH, UM, ON THIS ITEM. 
          SO, UM, DR. SANDOVAL, YOU BROUGHT UP THE IHEART TEAM PROGRAM. 
          I'M JUST WONDERING IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE IN TERMS OF HOW THAT PROGRAM OPERATES. 
          - OH. YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. 
          SO WE HAVE THE, THE TEAMS LOCO-, CO-LOCATED BO-, BOTH IN NORTH AND SOUTH COUNTY, AND THEY PARTNER WITH OUR CLINICS, UH, WITH THE CLINIC STREET MEDICINE TEAM TO PROVIDE OUTREACH AND THEN WE ALSO HAVE, UM, SUPPORTIVE CONTRACTS WITH FRONT STREET, UM, TO HELP ROUND OUT THE PROGRAM, AND THROUGH FRONT STREET, THEY'RE PROVIDING THAT ADDITIONAL OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT. 
          SO, WE'VE GOT FOLKS OUT IN THE STREET THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY REALLY TRYING TO ENGAGE WITH FOLKS AND GET THEM ENROLLED IN MEDICAL. 
          THE MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION THAT WE'RE SERVING IN THIS PROGRAM, ABOUT 85 TO 90% ARE CHRONICALLY UNHOUSED AND HAVE A CO-OCCURRING, UH, MENTAL HEALTH OR A SUBSTANCE USE, UH, CONDITION WITH THEIR, UM, SITUATION OF BEING UNHOUSE. 
          SO WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON TRYING TO ENGAGE THEM, GET THEM ENROLLED IN SERVICES, CONNECT THEM TO THAT, AND THEN PARTNER WITH OUR HOUSING PARTNERS TO GET THEM INTO A MORE STABLE HOUSING SITUATION. 
          - OKAY, THANK YOU. 
          UM, SO I GUESS I'LL JUST START WITH, UM, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S HAPPENED THIS YEAR I THINK HAS COME AS A SURPRISE TO ALL OF US. 
          UM, WITHIN THE PAST I GUESS, SIX MONTHS NOW, ESPECIALLY IN WITHIN MY DISTRICT, WELL WITHIN THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ BECAUSE THERE'S A LITTLE OVERLAP WITH SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ'S DISTRICT. 
          UH, BUT WE WENT FROM HAVING MULTIPLE DAY SERVICES PROGRAMS TO ALMOST HAVING ZERO. 
          WE LOST THE DOWNTOWN STREETS TEAM. 
          AND I WILL SAY THAT I SERVE ON THE, THE ONE BY ONE, UM, AND WE MEET MONTHLY WITH COUNTY STAFF, CITY STAFF, UH, THE MAYOR AND MYSELF AND MY STAFF. 
          AND THERE HAD BEEN CONVERSATIONS THERE, THERE HAD BEEN A MENTION THAT THERE WAS SOME CONVERSATIONS ABOUT, UM, HOUSING MATTERS, POTENTIALLY CLOSING THEIR SERVICES, BUT THERE HAD NEVER BEEN ANY OUTREACH TO OUR OFFICE. 
          AND WHEN THAT DECISION WAS MADE, IT CAME AS A SURPRISE TO ALL OF US. 
          AND WE CONVENED A MEETING WITH, UM, HOUSING MATTERS IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE... 
          WE FOUND OUT TO REALLY GO THROUGH LIKE, WHERE DID THIS COME FROM? HOW IS THIS DECISION MADE? BECAUSE WHEN I WAS ON THE SANTA CRUZ CITY COUNCIL AND WHEN WE DECIDED TO INVEST A MILLION DOLLARS IN THEIR SHOWERS, THIS WAS A LONG-TERM INVESTMENT WITH THE, YOU KNOW, WITH OUR UNDERSTANDING. 
          I THINK THE PUBLIC'S UNDERSTANDING THAT THE, THOSE SHOWERS WERE GONNA BE MADE PUBLIC FOR PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS MOVING FORWARD. 
          AND WHEN WE FOUND OUT THAT THEY WERE GONNA ELIMINATE THE MAIL SERVICES AND THE SHOWERS, IT'S LIKE WE'RE NOW TAKING WHAT WAS GONNA BE A PUBLIC BENEFIT AND PRIVATIZING IT. 
          AND THEY NOW ARE THE ONES WHO CAN DETERMINE WHO CAN ACCESS THOSE SHOWERS OR NOT. 
          AND BY NOT HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH US BEFOREHAND ABOUT THAT DECISION, IT REALLY PUTS US IN THIS SCRAMBLE MODE TO FIGURE OUT HOW ARE WE GONNA PROVIDE HYGIENE TO PEOPLE WHO ARE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS IN OUR COMMUNITY? WHICH IS A BIG DEAL BECAUSE WHEN WE TALK ABOUT COMMUNICABLE DISEASES, WE REALLY WANNA MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE HAVE ACCESS TO HYGIENE. 
          AND SO WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO SORT ALL THAT OUT MOVING FORWARD. 
          BUT IT'S AT A HUGE LOSS THAT THAT DECISION WAS MADE ABSENT. 
          UM, ANY INPUT FROM ELECTED OFFICIALS, ANY ABILITY FOR US 
          [03:35:01]
TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THOSE IMPACTS WERE GONNA BE AND TRY TO WORK THAT OUT BEFORE THAT DECISION WAS MADE. 
          AND SO MOVING NOW TO... AND, AND I AND I, YOU KNOW, CONCUR WITH, UH, SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ, I MEAN, SINCE THAT DECISION WAS MADE BY THEIR BOARD THERE'S NOTHING WE CAN DO AS A COUNTY TO FORCE THEM TO OPEN THOSE SERVICES. 
          BUT I, I DO SHARE A LOT OF THE FEELINGS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE TODAY, PEOPLE WHO'VE REACHED OUT TO US THAT IT'S REALLY DISAPPOINTING THAT THAT DECISION WAS MADE WITHOUT US HAVING ALTERNATIVES LINED UP. 
          WHICH LEADS US TO MHCAN. 
          UM, AND, YOU KNOW, BACK DURING OUR BUDGET I STRONGLY ADVOCATE AND I WANT TO THANK THE BOARD FOR PROVIDING FUNDING TO MHCAN. 
          UM, AND AGAIN, CAME IS, CAME TO US AS A REAL SHOCK IN AUGUST WHEN THEY JUST, UM, WE FOUND OUT THERE WAS A LETTER ON THE DOOR SAYING THAT THEY WERE CLOSED AND WE HAD NO CONVERSATION TO UNDERSTAND WHY THAT WAS THE CASE, HOW THAT HAPPENED? AND SO MY OFFICE HAS BEEN WORKING VERY CLOSELY, UM, WITH COUNTY STAFF. 
          WE'VE MET WITH THE, UM, SOME OF THE FORMER CHAIR MEMBERS TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S BEEN HAPPENING THERE AND THE FACT THAT THEY'RE IN THIS SITUATION WHERE THERE'S A LACK OF, UM, DOCUMENTATION AROUND PEOPLE'S SALARIES AND NEEDING TO KIND OF PAY DOWN THE DEBT THAT THEY HAVE AND GET THEM TO PROCESS SOME OF THE OUTSTANDING, UM, INVOICES IT'S... 
          WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO WORK WITH THEM TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN GET THEM, UM, IN A STABLE PLACE. 
          AND AS A RESULT OF THEIR ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSURE DUE TO FISCAL ISSUES, THEY'VE NOW LOST THEIR INSURANCE. 
          AND WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN GET THEM INSURANCE SO THAT THEY CAN REOPEN LIABILITY INSURANCE. 
          AND SO WE'RE DOING EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN AND TO TRY TO, UM, SUPPORT, UH, THE, THE MEMBERS THAT ARE LEFT OF THEIR BOARD AND TO REALLY SUPPORT THESE SERVICES OPENING. 
          BECAUSE, I MEAN, I THINK IT WAS CALLED OUT TODAY. 
          I MEAN, IF WE'RE LOSING ACCESS TO SHOWERS AT, UH, HOUSING MATTERS. 
          MHCAN NUMBER ONE, THEY OWN THEIR BUILDING. 
          THEY HAVE SHOWERS. 
          THEY HAVE A COMMERCIAL KITCHEN. THEY PROVIDE MAIL. 
          THEY PROVIDE LAUNDRY. 
          THEY PROVIDE FOOD TO PEOPLE, BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, THEY PROVIDE A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. 
          AND I APPRECIATE THAT THERE'S A LOT OF PROGRAMS WHERE WE MEET PEOPLE ON THE STREETS, BUT BEING ABLE TO GET PEOPLE OFF THE STREETS AND GET THEM INTO A SAFE ENVIRONMENT WHERE THEY CAN BUILD TRUST, BUILD A SENSE OF COMMUNITY ACCESS RESOURCES, THAT'S REALLY WHAT WE NEED TO BE STRIVING FOR. 
          AND THIS IS ONE OF THE FEW LOCATIONS THAT WE HAVE AT OUR DISPOSAL IN THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ TO PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES. 
          WE KNOW THAT MANY PEOPLE WHO MAY BE ON THE STREETS, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S ON THE LEVY OR IN THE DOWNTOWN, SOME OF THE DOWNTOWN OUTREACH WORKERS HAVE REACHED OUT TO THEM AND HAVE BEEN ABLE TO BRING THEM TO MHCAN SO THEY CAN PROVIDE... TO HAVE ACCESS TO SERVICES. 
          AND ULTIMATELY, YOU KNOW, UM, WE NEED TO REALLY BE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN GET PEOPLE OFF THE STREETS AND NOT JUST INTO SERVICES BUT THEN ULTIMATELY INTO HOUSING. 
          AND SO I JUST WANNA THANK, UM, COUNTY STAFF, UH, FOR BEING WILLING TO HELP US WORK THROUGH THIS. 
          IT'S NOT EASY, UM, AND IT REALLY CAME AS A SHOCK TO ALL OF US, BUT I THINK THAT WE NEED TO REALLY TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW IT CAN, YOU KNOW, MOVE FORWARD AND HAVE THE SERVICES PROVIDED IN A WAY THAT ARE SUSTAINABLE AND ONGOING. 
          UM, AND ALSO, UH, JUST REALLY, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT LOSING ALL THE SERVICES THAT SUPPORT PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS AS WE'RE BEING FEELING THESE IMPACTS FROM THE FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION. 
          UM, AND SO WITH THAT, UM, WHEN THE TIME'S READY I'M HAPPY TO MOVE THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS. 
          - ALRIGHT, WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR ACTION. 
          - OH, WELL, I'LL MOVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. 
          - SECOND. 
          - WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          UH, MOTION FROM SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS, SECOND FROM SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ. 
          MADAM CLERK TAKE ROLL CALL. 
          - SUPERVISOR KOENIG.  - AYE. 
          - MARTINEZ.  - AYE. 
          - CUMMINGS.  - AYE. 
          - DESERPA.  - AYE. 
          - AND HERNANDEZ. 
          - AYE. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          AND SO WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA TAKE A SMALL RECESS FOR LUNCH BREAK AND CLOSE SESSION. 
          UH, WE WILL RETURN. 
          WE DO STILL HAVE SIX ITEMS LEFT, SO WE'RE GONNA DO 01:30, 40 MINUTES. 
          - AND THERE'S NOTHING REPORTABLE. 
          - OKAY. 
          - RECORDING. 
          - WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE THE BOARD MEETING, UH, WITH ITEM NUMBER 10. 
          HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE 2021 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT AND TAKE ALL RELATED ACTIONS. 
          I'LL TURN IT OVER TO PORCILA WILSON PLANNER, UH, FOUR, AND SUSAN ISE, PRINCIPAL PLANNER FOR THE PRESENTATION. 
          - GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR AND SUPERVISORS, PRISCILLA WILSON WITH CDI. 
          UM, CDI ADMINISTERS VARIOUS HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT GRANTS THAT ARE ISSUED THROUGH THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, INCLUDING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT OR CDBG. 
          IN 2022 THE COUNTY WAS AWARDED A CDBG GRANT OF HALF A MILLION DOLLARS FOR A STREET OUTREACH PROGRAM PROPOSED BY THE COUNTY'S HOUSING FOR HEALTH DIVISION, UH, PART OF THE HUMAN SERVICES DEPARTMENT. 
          THIS PROGRAM OBSERVED PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS OF THE COUNTY. 
          THE STATE REQUIRES CDBG GRANTEES TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING 
          [03:40:01]
AFTER THE GRANT PERIOD ENDS TO PRESENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE GRANT. 
          SO TODAY'S HEARING INTENDS TO PRESENT THOSE ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE PROGRAM. 
          THE PROGRAM WAS IMPLEMENTED BY HOUSING MATTERS THROUGH A CONTRACT WE WERE HOUSING FOR HEALTH. 
          THE PROGRAM PROVIDED STREET OUTREACH WITH FOCUS ON ENGAGEMENT SERVICES, CONNECTIONS, AND PATHWAYS TO HOUSING. 
          DURING THE CONTRACT TERM STREET OUTREACH TEAM MADE OVER 300 SERVICE CONTACTS SERVING A TOTAL OF 157 UNDUPLICATED CLIENTS. 
          BUILDING TRUST THROUGH CONSISTENT FIELD-BASED ENGAGEMENT. 
          SERVICES INCLUDED ENROLLMENT IN THE COUNTY'S COORDINATED ENTRY SYSTEM, HOUSING PROBLEM SOLVING INTERVENTIONS, LINKS TO BENEFITS, BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SERVICES, AND OTHER CRITICAL RESOURCES TO PROMOTE HOUSING STABILITY. 
          THESE ACTIVITIES TOOK PLACE IN THE INCORPORATED AREAS INCLUDING FELTON, BEN LOMOND, BOULDER CREEK, FREEDOM DAVENPORT, AND CORRALITOS A LOT OF TIMES IN COLLABORATION WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE. 
          RESULTS OF THE PROGRAMS INCLUDED 16% OF PARTICIPANTS OBTAINED PERMANENT HOUSING, 22 WERE CONNECTED TO SHELTER AND OTHERS WERE REFERRED TO RESOURCES FOR LONGER TERM STABILITY AND HOUSING OUTCOMES. 
          AT THIS TIME, STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT YOUR BOARD HOLDS UP PUBLIC HEARING ON THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE 2021 CDBG GRANT, ACCEPT AND FILE THIS REPORT AND AUTHORIZE THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE TO EXECUTE AND SUBMIT THE CDBG GRANT COMPLETION REPORT TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. 
          UM, AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. 
          - I'LL... THIS IS A PUBLIC OR, UH, I WILL OPEN UP THE HEARING. 
          IS THERE ANYONE IN PUBLIC IN THE PUBLIC WISHING TO ADDRESS US ON THIS ITEM? SEEN NONE I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD. 
          ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? - CHAIR, WE DO HAVE A SPEAKER ON LINE. 
          - OH. 
          - CALL IN USER 135 YOUR MICROPHONE IS NOW AVAILABLE. 
          CALL IN USER 135 YOUR MICROPHONE IS NOW AVAILABLE. 
          YOU MAY BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS. 
          AS A REMINDER IT'S STAR SIX TO MUTE OR UNMUTE YOURSELF ON ANY CALL IN DEVICE. 
          - I'M GONNA COMMENT ON THE NEXT ITEM. 
          - OKAY. THANK YOU. 
          CHAIR WE HAVE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS. 
          - NOW I'LL BRING YOU BACK TO THE BOARD. 
          SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. - I'LL MOVE RECOMMENDED ACTION. 
          - WE GOT A MOTION. 
          - SECOND. 
          - AND A SECOND. 
          THERE'S NO FURTHER COMMENT, THEN WE'LL MOVE ON. 
          UH, MADAM CLERK FOR ROLL CALL VOTE. 
          - SUPERVISOR KOENIG.  - AYE. 
          - MARTINEZ.  - AYE. 
          - CUMMINGS.  - AYE. 
          - DESERPA.  - AYE. 
          - AND HERNANDEZ.   - AYE. 
          MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 
          NEXT WE HAVE ITEM NUMBER 11. 
          CONSIDER APPROVING A CONCEPT IN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 7.130110H OF THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CODE REGARDING GROUNDS FOR LICENSE REVOCATION OF RETAIL COMMERCIAL CANNABIS LICENSE AND ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 7.138.090F OF THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, UH, CODE REGARDING GROUNDS FOR LICENSE REVOCATION OF THE CANNABIS FARM RETAIL LICENSES. 
          THAT ALLOW LICENSE RE-, REVOCATION ASSOCIATED WITH PATRONS WHO ENGAGE IN INTOXICATED DRIVING AND TAKE ALL RELATED ACTIONS. 
          I'LL TURN IT OVER TO SAM LOFORTI CANNABIS LICENSING MANAGER AND MELODYE SERINO, DEPUTY COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER FOR THE PRESENTATION. 
          - GOOD AFTERNOON BOARD. 
          UM, ON MARCH 25TH, 2025, FOLLOWING THE APPROVAL OF THE CANNABIS LOUNGE ORDINANCE AND RETAIL FARM ORDINANCE, THE UH, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DIRECTED THE DIRECTED STAFF TO RETURN WITH PROPOSED ORDINANCE LANGUAGE, ALLOWING DISCIPLINARY ACTION SUCH AS LICENSE SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION IF A PATRON WHO CONSUMED CANNABIS, UM, AT A LICENSED DISPENSARY OR RETAIL FARM IS FOUND, UH, BY LAW ENFORCEMENT TO HAVE DRIVEN UNDER THE INFLUENCE AND, UH, CAUSED INJURY OR DAMAGE. 
          UH, BASED ON THAT BOARD MOTION STAFF WORKED WITH COUNTY COUNCIL, UH, TO DRAFT THE, UH, PROPOSED, UM, ORDINANCE LANGUAGE THAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY. 
          UM, THIS ORDINANCE LANGUAGE WOULD, UM, LEAD TO LICENSE REVOCATION FOR EITHER OF THESE TYPES OF BUSINESSES IF A PERSON IS FOUND GUILTY BY LAW ENFORCEMENT, UM, FOR, UH, DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE AND THERE'S A CAUSE OF DAMAGE OR, OR PERSONAL INJURY. 
          [03:45:01]
AND, UM, STAFF HAS PROVIDED THIS PROPOSED LANGUAGE, UM, BASED ON THE BOARD MOTION AND THERE'S, UH, NO FURTHER INFORMATION FROM STAFF, UH, FOR THIS PROPOSAL AT THIS TIME. 
          UH, WE'RE HERE AND AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE IN REGARDS TO THE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE. 
          - OKAY. FIRST OF ALL, TAKE IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC TO SEE IF ANYONE WISHES TO ADDRESS US ON THIS ITEM. 
          - ARE YOU VEGAN? - OH. NO. 
          - YEAH, I'M READY WHENEVER YOU ARE. 
          - OKAY. 
          - OKAY. MY NAME'S DARREN. 
          I'M WITH COASTAL SUN STRONG AGRONOMY IN WATSONVILLE. 
          UM, OBVIOUSLY THIS, THIS DOESN'T SEEM LOGICAL, UH, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. 
          UM, IT'S NOT, THESE, THIS TYPE OF, UH, DISCIPLINE ISN'T APPLIED AND IT, FIRST OF ALL, IT'S VERY OPEN. 
          IT WOULD BE HARD TO PROVE ALL KINDS OF DIFFERENT MATTERS, UM, ESPECIALLY IF THE PERSON LEFT AND THEN THEY STARTED DRINKING ALCOHOL, OR EVEN WORSE TAKING OPIATES. 
          UM, MY RESEARCH ON THIS TOPIC SUGGESTS THAT DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ONLY CANNABIS IS MUCH LESS RISKY THAN DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL AND IN PARTICULAR OPIATES. 
          SO WITH THE SAME LOGIC, WE WOULD, WE SHOULD BE GOING AFTER CVS AND WALGREENS IF, UH, THE PHARMACIST PROVIDES OPIATES TO A PATIENT AND THEN THE PATIENT GOES AND HURTS SOMEBODY DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF OPIATES, WHICH HAPPENS QUITE A BIT. 
          UM, I'VE, I'VE COME TO FIND OUT. 
          SO, YOU KNOW, IF WE'RE GONNA APPLY THIS TYPE OF, UM, UNEQUAL, UH, PENALTIES. 
          LIKE IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, IT'S GONNA OPEN UP ALL KINDS OF, UM, POTENTIAL LITIGATION. 
          THAT'S JUST MY SUGGESTION. 
          ALL RIGHT, THANKS. 
          - GOOD AFTERNOON BOARD. MY NAME IS BRYCE BERRYESSA. 
          I'M THE CO-FOUNDER OF TREEHOUSE. 
          I'M ALSO THE CHAIR OF THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY BUSINESS COUNCIL. 
          UM, I'M ASKING YOU TO REMOVE ITEM 21 BECAUSE IT IS NOT AN OVER SERVICE RULE. 
          IT'S A BLANKET REVOCATION TRIGGER THAT MAKES AN OPERATOR VULNERABLE TO LOSING THEIR LICENSE FOR THE ACT OF A PATRON. 
          HERE IS WHAT IT SAYS, IF A PATRONED, A RETAILER WITH A CONSUMPTION LOUNGE IS LATER FOUND GUILTY OR LIABLE OF DUI CANNABIS AFTER LEAVING AND CAUSING INJURY OR PROPERTY DAMAGE THAT BECOMES GROUNDS TO REVOKE THE OPERATOR'S LICENSE. 
          WHAT'S MISSING FROM THIS IS THE ENTIRE ABC STYLE CONCEPT. 
          ALCOHOL AND BEVERAGE CONTROLLED DISCIPLINE IS BUILT AROUND AN OPERATOR'S CONDUCT, LIKE SERVING SOMEONE WHO IS OBVIOUSLY INTOXICATED OR SERVING A MINOR. 
          THAT'S A BEHAVIOR STANDARD TIED TO WHAT THE LICENSEE DID ON SITE. 
          YOUR CLAUSE DOESN'T REQUIRE ANY FINDING THAT THE PERSON CONSUMED AT THE LOUNGE, DOESN'T REQUIRE OVER SERVICE, DOESN'T REQUIRE A VIOLATION BY THE OPERATOR AND DOESN'T REQUIRE PROOF THE LOUNGE CAUSED THE IMPAIRMENT. 
          IN FACT, EVEN THOUGH THE ORDINANCES WHERE TALKS ABOUT A PATRON CONSUMING AT A LOUNGE, THE ACTUAL OPERATIVE CLAUSE DOES NOT SAY THAT. 
          SO UNDER THIS WORDING, TECHNICALLY SOMEONE COULD GO THROUGH MY DRIVE THROUGH, ALREADY HAVE THC IN THEIR SYSTEM FROM CONSUMING EARLIER, GET IN A CRASH LATER AND MY ENTIRE LOCAL LICENSE IS NOW AT RISK DESPITE ANY VIOLATION BY ME OR MY STAFF OR HAVING THAT PERSON EVER COME TO THE LOUNGE. 
          ONCE YOU ADD THIS AS GROUNDS REVOCATION IS EFFECTIVELY EXISTENTIAL. 
          COUNTY CODE TREATS REVOCATION OF A LICENSE AS A FINAL ACTION WITH NO FURTHER ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY BESIDES A WRIT OF MANDATE IN COURT. 
          IF YOU WANT PUBLIC SAFETY REGULATE WHAT WE CAN ACTUALLY CONTROL. 
          IMPAIRMENT PROTOCOLS, SERVICE LIMITS, STAFF TRAINING WHICH THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH IS ACTIVELY WORKING ON RIGHT NOW, TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS AND ENFORCE ONSITE VIOLATIONS. 
          BUT PLEASE DON'T ADOPT AN OUTCOME BASED CLAUSE THAT PUNISHES COMPLIANT OPERATORS FOR OFFSITE CONDUCT THEY CANNOT CONTROL. 
          THANK YOU. 
          - HELLO, UH, JEFF NORDAL. 
          UH, I PLAN TO OPERATE A RETAIL FARM, UM, UH, LOUNGE OUT IN BOULDER CREEK. 
          UH, I AGREE. 
          ACTUALLY EVERYTHING BRYCE SAID WAS PERFECT. 
          I'M JUST GOING TO PROVIDE A FEW OTHER, UH, EXAMPLES OF SORT OF A DOUBLE STANDARD HERE. 
          AND I THINK WE HAVE DECADES AND DECADES AND DECADES OF LEGAL PRECEDENTS WITH ALCOHOL. 
          UM, SO LET'S JUST TAKE A FEW SCENARIOS. 
          UH, LAST NIGHT I WAS AT A RESTAURANT SITTING THERE AT A TABLE, NEXT TO ME THERE'S A FAMILY DRINKING WINE WHILE THEY'RE EATING, THEN THEY GET UP, GO GET IN THEIR CAR AND DRIVE AWAY. 
          SO IF THOSE PEOPLE CRASH SOMETIME DOWN THE LINE, ARE WE GONNA REVOKE THAT RESTAURANT'S LICENSE AND PUT THEM OUT OF BUSINESS? WE ALSO HAVE... WHEN I DRIVE THROUGH THE SANTA CRUZ MOUNTAINS, WE HAVE SIGNS. 
          ALL OVER SAY, HEY, JOIN THE, UH, SANTA CRUZ WINE TASTING TRAIL. 
          [03:50:03]
SO WE'RE ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO DRIVE TO ALL THESE WINE TASTINGS AND SAMPLE AND DRINK, BUT, UH, THERE'S NO THREAT TO, TO THOSE OPERATORS THAT THEIR ENTIRE BUSINESS IS GONNA BE SHUT DOWN IF SOMEONE WHO VISITS THEIR WINE TASTING HAPPENS TO GET IN AN ACCIDENT. 
          MYSELF... SO ANYWAY, I THINK WE ALREADY HAVE A PRECEDENCE WITH, WITH ALCOHOL, LET'S JUST STICK WITH THOSE LAWS INSTEAD OF REINVENTING THE WHEEL HERE. 
          BUT, UM, FOR OUR FACILITY, WE'RE PLANNING ON DOING ACTUALLY SHUTTLING PEOPLE IN, OR IF WE DO HAVE PEOPLE DRIVE IN, WE'RE GONNA DO A DESIGNATED DRIVER SYSTEM WITH BRACELETS AND EVERYTHING. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA DO EVERYTHING RESPONSIBLE AS POSSIBLE, BUT PUTTING OUR ENTIRE BUSINESS AT RISK OR FOR HAVING OUR LICENSE REVOKED AFTER 10 YEARS OF FIGHTING THIS IS, IT'S SO MUCH TO PUT ON THE LINE AND IT'S NOT IN IN LINE WITH OTHER INDUSTRIES, ESPECIALLY ALCOHOL AND WINE TASTING AND SUCH. 
          SO JUST ASK THAT WE STICK WITH THAT PRECEDENCE. 
          IT, IT DOESN'T MEAN WE'RE GONNA BE RECKLESSLY SERVING PEOPLE, UH, BUT YEAH. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          - HELLO, MY NAME IS VALERIE CORRAL. 
          I'M THE DIRECTOR OF, UH, WHAM PHYTO THERAPIES. 
          AND BEFORE I CRITICIZE THIS, I CONCEIVED, UH, PLAN I WANTED TO TELL YOU THAT I APPRECIATE YOUR ALIGNMENT AND SUPPORT OF MHCAN 'CAUSE IT IS CRITICAL. 
          MANY OF OUR MEMBERS, UH, USE THE SERVICES THAT ARE PROVIDED, WERE PROVIDED. 
          UM, SO I THINK TO INSTITUTE PUNITIVE MEASURES AGAINST A PROVIDER IS ILL-CONCEIVED IT'S KIND OF DADDY POLITICS. 
          AND, UM, THERE'S NO STANDARDIZED ONSITE TEST THAT'S AVAILABLE TO, UM, TO MEASURE WHEN SOMEONE HAS USED CANNABIS, HOW LONG AGO THEY'VE USED IT, WHETHER THEY'RE IMPAIRED BY IT, IT STAYS IN YOUR BLOOD AND YOUR FAT OF YOUR BODY. 
          SO IT'S REALLY QUITE LUDICROUS TO BE PUNITIVE WHEN YOU CAN'T REALLY SUBSTANTIATE AND PROVE THE FACT THAT YOU'RE PUTTING FORTH. 
          UM, IT CREATES KIND OF A, A PERFECT ENVIRONMENT FOR PROFILING BECAUSE ANYONE WHO'S LEAVING IT MAY WELL HAVE SOME CANNABIS IN THEIR BODY, BUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE IMPAIRED IS DIFFICULT TO PROVE. 
          AND I THINK YOU HAVE TO DO THAT BEFORE YOU BEGIN THESE PUNITIVE MEASURES. 
          IT'S COMMON THAT PATIENTS WILL ALWAYS TEST POSITIVE FOR CANNABIS BECAUSE AS PART OF THEIR MEDICAL PROTOCOL IT IS OFTEN DAILY CONSUMPTION. 
          ESPECIALLY FOR PAIN, FOR, UH, APPLICATION FOR CANCERS AND OTHER LIFE-THREATENING ILLNESSES. 
          SO IF YOU DECIDE TO PASS THIS VERY POORLY CONSTRUCTED BILL, HOW ABOUT TAKING SOME OF THE TAX REVENUE TO PROVIDE SCHEDULED TRANSPORTATION FOR PATIENTS? THAT IS COVERED UNDER THE TAXES THAT ARE BEING NOW BROUGHT IN TO, UH, THROUGH TAXATION. 
          THANKS SO MUCH. 
          - HI, UH, PAT MALO. 
          I'VE HAD THE PLEASURE OF WORKING WITH ALMOST ALL OF YOU FOR YEARS AND YEARS ON THESE CANNABIS POLICIES. 
          UM, SOME OF THE, YOU KNOW, AMAZING THINGS THAT I FEEL LIKE EVERYBODY'S GOTTEN OVER THE LINE, LIKE THE, YOU KNOW, OPPORTUNITIES TO HAVE CONSUMPTION LOUNGES AND THE, UH, ONSITE, YOU KNOW, WINE TASTING MODEL FOR SOME OF THE SURVIVING FARMS IS, IS WONDERFUL. 
          AND IT SEEMS LIKE ALWAYS WHENEVER WE TAKE THESE STEPS FORWARD TOGETHER, WE'RE ALSO TAKING ATTEMPTED STEPS BACKWARDS. 
          AND I, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE THE VOTES FOR WHAT WAS PASSED, OBVIOUSLY, AND IT WAS A LONG MULTI-YEAR PROCESS WITH PUBLIC INPUT. 
          YOU KNOW, I WENT TO THREE OR FOUR OF THESE SESSIONS THAT HAPPENED OF THIS. 
          AND IT SEEMS LIKE AFTER THE FACT WE'RE ALWAYS TRYING TO ADD SOMETHING ELSE. 
          AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT'S ANY REASON, EXCEPT THAT WE'RE CANNABIS AND THAT FOLKS ARE OPPOSED IN A SENSE. 
          AND YOU KNOW, I... WHEN WE FIRST STARTED THIS CONVERSATION, OR THE RECENT ITERATION OF THIS CONVERSATION 12, 13 YEARS AGO, YOU KNOW, CANNABIS EMPLOYED MORE PEOPLE IN THIS COMMUNITY THAN THE COUNTY DID. 
          THE COUNTY, YOU KNOW, TOOK IN LARGE AMOUNTS OF REVENUE FROM THIS INDUSTRY THAT WAS ESTIMATED TO BE THE SIZE OF TOURISM. 
          AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO DO SMALL THINGS TO GET A LITTLE BIT OF THAT ECONOMIC VITALITY BACK. 
          WE'RE TRYING TO GET, PRESERVE THE CULTURE OF EXCELLENCE THAT REALLY IS ONE OF THE ONLY THINGS THAT EXISTS THAT'S WORTHWHILE IN SANTA CRUZ. 
          YOU KNOW, THESE CULTURAL CULTURES OF EXCELLENCE, NOT JUST IN CANNABIS, BUT ALL SORTS OF THINGS. 
          AND YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT MAKES ME JUST FEEL LIKE THAT 
          [03:55:02]
IF WE'RE OPPOSED TO CANNABIS, LET'S JUST BE OPPOSED TO CANNABIS AND THAT IF WE'VE GOT THE VOTES TO BE FOR IT, LET'S GO FOR IT. 
          AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE THE VOTES TO BE FOR IT. 
          WE'VE INCLUDED THE PUBLIC FOR YEARS AND YEARS, UH, YOU KNOW, ON THIS VERY ISSUE AND NOW AFTER THE FACT WE'RE GOING BACK. 
          JUST LAST THING IS I'M ALSO A WHAM BOARD MEMBER AND A WHAM HAS HAD TO PARTNER WITH RETAILERS TO BE ABLE TO GIVE AWAY FREE CANNABIS. 
          AND IF ONE OF THOSE LICENSES GETS LOST, THEN WE'RE JUST THROWING THESE PATIENTS OUT. 
          SO THANK YOU. - THANK YOU. 
          - HI, MY NAME'S CHEYENNE KENWOOD AND I'M ALSO WITH COASTAL SUN. 
          UM, AS SOMEONE THAT'S BEEN COMING HERE AND TRYING TO ADVOCATE FOR THESE ONSITE RETAILS. 
          I THINK IT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT THING TO OFFER UP TO OUR COMMUNITY. 
          WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT USE CANNABIS IN THIS AREA THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE AREN'T BARS THAT ARE SET UP TO DO ANYTHING BUT DRINK AND WE SEE THE SAME PEOPLE WALK IN AND OUT OF THESE PLACES AND NOT HAVE REPERCUSSIONS FOR WHAT THEY'RE DOING. 
          WE JUST WANNA BE TREATED LIKE ANY OTHER COMPANY. 
          WE SHOULDN'T HAVE ANYTHING PUNITIVE AGAINST US JUST 'CAUSE WE ARE CANNABIS. 
          IT IS A NEW OBVIOUSLY COMMUNITY THAT IS EMERGING BECAUSE IT IS LEGAL NOW, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT HAS ANY REASON TO BE LOOKED AT AS MORE NEGATIVE THAN ALCOHOL. 
          UH, LIKE SOMEONE STATED EARLIER, IF YOU START LOOKING AT THE DATA OF THE PEOPLE GETTING DUIS FROM CANNABIS VERSUS ALCOHOL, THEY'RE TREMENDOUSLY DIFFERENT. 
          AND YOU'RE NOT SEEING AS MANY OF THESE IN CANNABIS USERS, UH, NORMAL'S DONE SOME PRETTY BIG STUDIES AND I'D JUST LOVE TO SEE WHY IT SEEMS THAT WE'RE ALWAYS BEING LOOKED AT AS SOMEHOW THE HEROIN WHEN IT IS SOMETHING THAT'S ACTUALLY A MEDICINAL PURPOSE AND HAS A LOT MORE BENEFITS THAN ALCOHOL DOES, AND WE CAN ACCEPT IT INTO OUR COMMUNITY AND DO THE SAME MEASURES AS ABC DOES FOR PROVIDING TRAINING SO THAT SERVERS ARE NOT OVER SERVING. 
          AND KIND OF LIKE VAL SAID, IT'S VERY HARD TO TEST SOMEBODY AND ACTUALLY TEST FOR CANNABIS THAT WASN'T THERE ALREADY. 
          IT'S STORED IN YOUR FAT CELLS, SO IT'S NOT GONNA BE SOMETHING THAT'S JUST LIKE A BLOOD ALCOHOL LEVEL. 
          SO IT'D BE REALLY HARD TO MEASURE THAT AND REALLY PUT IT AGAINST A LICENSEE. 
          UH, IT'S GONNA BRING UP A LOT OF LEGALITIES THAT AREN'T EASILY PROVED. 
          BUT I THINK WE OWE IT TO OUR COMMUNITY TO AT LEAST START THIS PROGRAM AND SEE THAT IT DOESN'T CAUSE AS MUCH DAMAGE AS ALCOHOL DOES TO OUR COMMUNITY. 
          - MADAM CLARK, ANYONE ONLINE? OH, WAIT, WE GOT ONE MORE. 
          - HI, GOOD AFTERNOON. 
          UH, ALSO WITH COASTAL SUN. 
          MY NAME'S PHIL ENGFER. 
          UM, BEEN WORKING WITH A LOT OF YOU AND OUR COMMUNITY FOR YEARS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A VIABLE PLATFORM FOR CANNABIS BUSINESSES AND CONSUMERS TO BE ABLE TO ENGAGE WITH IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE, WE INVITED THE EIR COMMITTEE OUT. 
          WE'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS, AND I FEEL LIKE THE COMMUNITY HAS ALREADY REALLY VOICED THEIR OPINIONS AND VOTED ON THESE ISSUES. 
          AND, UM, I DON'T SEE MANY OTHER COMMUNITY MEMBERS OPPOSING THIS. 
          IT FEELS LIKE SOMETHING THAT HAS MAYBE BEEN BROUGHT AS A, A PERSONAL THING. 
          UM, AND CANNABIS PRESENTS A, UH, VIABLE, SAFE, AND, UM, I THINK A, A HEALTHIER ALTERNATIVE TO CANNABIS. 
          UM, IT... AND I, I, I, MANY COMMUNITY MEMBERS HAVE EXPRESSED INTEREST IN BEING ABLE TO HAVE A SIMILAR EXPERIENCE TO WINE TASTING. 
          UM, WE, WE HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY HERE. 
          THIS IS A COMMUNITY THAT EMBRACES THAT. 
          WE'VE BEEN PUSHING FOR, UH, TOURISM AND, AND OPEN POLICIES FOR OUR WINERIES. 
          I THINK WE SHOULD EMBRACE OUR CANNABIS COMMUNITY AND, AND PROVIDE A, A PLATFORM FOR CANNABIS BUSINESSES TO BE SUCCESSFUL AND, AND, YEAH, PROVIDE SAFE SPACE FOR CONSUMERS TO DO THAT. 
          THANK YOU. 
          - IF THERE'S NO ONE ELSE, THEN WE'LL SEE IF THERE'S SOMEONE ONLINE. 
          - YES, CHAIR. 
          - OKAY. 
          - CALL IN USER 135 YOUR MICROPHONE IS NOW AVAILABLE. 
          - UH, HI. MY NAME IS ROB MORGAN. I'M A RESIDENT OF SOQUEL. 
          UH, I THINK WE ALL SUPPORT DUI ENFORCEMENT AND PUBLIC SAFETY. 
          INDIVIDUALS WHO DRIVE IMPAIRED BY ANY SUBSTANCE SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE. 
          UH, THIS AMENDMENT, HOWEVER, CREATES AN UNFAIR STANDARD THAT COULD SHUT DOWN CANNABIS LOUNGES OVER ACTIONS THEY DON'T CONTROL. 
          THIS STANDARD IS NOT APPLIED TO ALCOHOL SERVING BUSINESSES. 
          BARS, RESTAURANTS, BREWERIES, AND WINERIES DO NOT LOSE THEIR LICENSES BECAUSE A CUSTOMER LEAVES AND LATER GETS A DUI. 
          [04:00:03]
HOLDING CANNABIS LOUNGES TO A TOUGHER STANDARD THAN OTHER LICENSED BUSINESSES ISN'T FAIR. 
          ONCE A PATRON LEAVES A LOUNGE, THE BUSINESS HAS NO CONTROL OVER THAT PERSON. 
          A DUI COULD HAPPEN MUCH LATER AFTER ADDITIONAL CONSUMPTION ELSEWHERE OR DUE TO FACTORS COMPLETELY OUTSIDE THE LOUNGES CONTROL. 
          PENALIZING A BUSINESS FOR SOMETHING THAT CANNOT CONTROL ISN'T FAIR OR EFFECTIVE REGULATION. 
          JUST LIKE WITH ALCOHOL LIABILITY NEEDS TO STAY WITH THE INDIVIDUAL DRIVER. 
          WE DON'T SHUT DOWN BARS BECAUSE SOMEONE MAKES A BAD DECISION AFTER LEAVING. 
          THE CANNABIS BUSINESS SHOULDN'T BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY. 
          I'D ASK THE BOARD TO CONSIDER WHETHER THIS LANGUAGE IS REALLY ABOUT SAFETY OR WHETHER IT EFFECTIVELY UNDERMINES AND KILLS A MEASURE THAT WAS ALREADY APPROVED BY ADDING AN UNWORKABLE STANDARD AFTER THE FACT. 
          THANKS. 
          - I SEE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS ONLINE CHAIR. 
          - OKAY. I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD, STARTING FROM MY, UH, RIGHT AND FOLLOWING DOWN THE LINE, SUPERVISOR DESERPA. 
          - UH, I AM GONNA, I'M GONNA, I THINK I'M GONNA LISTEN TO, UM, OTHER QUESTIONS HERE ON THE BOARD AND DEFER FOR NOW. 
          - OKAY. 
          - AND I MIGHT HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AT THE END. THANK YOU. 
          - SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - THANK YOU CHAIR, AND, UH, JUST WANNA THANK THE STAFF FOR, FOR THEIR, UM, THE WORK THAT THEY'VE DONE ON THIS AND WHAT THEY BROUGHT FORWARD TO US TODAY. 
          AND REALLY WANT TO THANK THE PUBLIC FOR BEING HERE ENGAGING. 
          AND WHILE I APPRECIATE THE, UM, INTENT OF, UM, MOVING FORWARD WITH THESE REGULATIONS, YOU KNOW, I DON'T THINK THAT AT THE TIME WHEN WE HAD, UM, PROVIDE THE DIRECTION, MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS, THAT MANY, MANY OF US ARE AT LEAST SPEAK FOR MYSELF THAT I WASN'T CLEAR WITH WHAT THE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE WAS THAT WE CURRENTLY HAD ON THE BOOKS. 
          AND WHAT I WILL SAY IS THAT, UM, I THINK THAT WHAT IS BEING PROPOSED HERE, UM, IS A LITTLE BIT UNFAIR TO THE CANNABIS BUSINESSES ESPECIALLY WHEN WE COMPARE IT TO WHAT, UM, WE... THE STANDARDS THAT WE HOLD WINERIES, BREWERIES, BARS, DISTILLERIES TOO IN THIS COMMUNITY. 
          I MEAN, WE JUST MOVED FORWARD WITH, UM, APPROVING A WINE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT WHERE WE'RE GONNA BE DOING ADVERTISING AROUND WINE IN SANTA CRUZ COUNTY AND TRYING TO BRING PEOPLE INTO OUR COUNTY TO CONSUME WINE. 
          I MEAN, THAT MEANS THAT WE'RE LIKELY GONNA HAVE, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY MORE DRUNK DRIVERS ON THE ROAD FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE DRIVING TO THE VARIOUS WINERIES MANY OF WHICH ARE SPREAD OVER VERY LARGE GEOGRAPHIC AREAS. 
          AND SO THEN TO COME FORWARD AND HAVE THIS STANDARD ON RETAILERS WHERE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE LOUNGE PORTION IS A PART OF THE RETAIL LICENSE. 
          AND SO IF SOMEONE WERE TO LE-, BASED ON THIS LAW, WHAT THIS MEANS IS THAT, UM, IF SOMEONE WERE TO ENGAGE IN THESE ACTIVITIES, THEN THAT COULD SHUT DOWN THE ENTIRE BUSINESS. 
          AND I ACTUALLY JUST READ EVEN FURTHER ON F21, UM, WHICH ISN'T EVEN RELATED TO CONSUMPTION LOUNGES. 
          AND IT JUST STATES THAT A PATRON AT A RE-, IF A PATRON AT A RETAILER IS FOUND GUILTY OR LIABLE VIA A JUDICIAL FINDING OR VERDICT UNDER ANY APPLICABLE CRIMINAL OR CIVIL LAW, DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE CANNABIS AFTER LEAVING THE LICENSEES BUSINESS AND CAUSING INJURY TO PERSONS OR PROPERTY, THEY CAN LOSE THEIR LICENSE. 
          THIS DOESN'T EVEN MEAN THEY HAD TO CONSUME IT ON SITE. 
          THEY COULD HAVE DRIVEN ON THEIR OWN INTOXICATED, GONE INSIDE, BOUGHT SOME PRODUCT LEFT, NOT EVEN CONSUMING IN THE CAR, GET AN ACCIDENT, AND THEN THAT RETAIL LOSES THEIR LICENSE. 
          AND THAT'S JUST NOT FAIR. 
          UM, AND I, AND I DO WANNA JUST TELL A PERSONAL STORY TOO BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I, I PERSONALLY HAVE HAD A SITUATION THAT'S SIMILAR TO WHAT COULD HAPPEN WHERE WHEN I WAS IN COLLEGE, UM, THERE WAS A GROUP OF PEOPLE WHO SHOWED UP AT MY HOUSE. 
          THIS ONE GIRL WHO I KNEW, THEY CAME IN, SHE WAS SUPER DRUNK. 
          UM, SHE DIDN'T CONSUME ANYTHING AT MY HOUSE. 
          BUT THEN LATER ON SHE LEFT AND WAS WALKING WITH HER FRIEND, FELL AND HIT HER HEAD. 
          THEY HAD, SHE HAD TO BE PICKED UP, UM, AND TAKEN TO A HOSPITAL. 
          AND NEXT THING I KNOW, THE POLICE ARE AT MY HOUSE AND WE'RE GETTING CHARGED WITH SERVICE TO, UH, SALE OF ALCOHOL AND SALE OF ALCOHOL TO A MINOR WHEN WE NEVER, WHEN SHE NEVER CONSUMED ANYTHING AT OUR HOUSE. 
          AND SO, UM, WHILE THAT CASE ENDED UP BEING LOST IN THE ETHER, I COULD SEE THAT HAPPENING TO SOME OF OUR RETAILERS HERE TODAY. 
          AND SO I AGREE THAT THE ACCOUNTABILITY SHOULD BE ON THE INDIVIDUAL FOR BEING IRRESPONSIBLE. 
          I MEAN, WE ALL KNOW THAT YOU SHOULD NOT BE DRINKING OR DRIVING YOU SHOULD NOT BE SMOKING WEED AND DRIVING ON THE ROADS. 
          AND SO IT REALLY, THE ACCOUNTABILITY NEEDS TO BE HELD ON THE INDIVIDUAL. 
          I ALSO DO SEE THE LOUNGES AS SERVING AS A PUBLIC SAFETY, UM, PER UH, ROLE. 
          BECAUSE CURRENTLY, UM, UNDER OUR CURRENT LAWS, YOU CAN ONLY TECHNICALLY SMOKE MARIJUANA OR CONSUME MARIJUANA IN YOUR HOUSE IF YOU ARE THE OWNER OF THE HOUSE. 
          SO IF YOU'RE A RENTER, YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO SMOKE CANNABIS IN YOUR HOUSE, YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO SMOKE CANNABIS OUTSIDE, YOU CANNOT SMOKE CANNABIS IN HOTEL ROOMS. SO IN TERMS OF EXPOSURE TO YOUTH AND OTHER PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT TO HAVE BE EXPOSED TO CANNABIS, THERE AREN'T THAT MANY OTHER OPTIONS. 
          AND THIS MEANS THAT PEOPLE ARE LIKELY CONSUMING CANNABIS OUTSIDE, THEY'RE POTENTIALLY CONSUMING CANNABIS WHILE THEY'RE DRIVING, OR IN THE VEHICLES. 
          AND I THINK LIKE THE LOUNGES PROVIDE LAW ENFORCEMENT 
          [04:05:02]
WITH, YOU KNOW, MORE OF A TOOL TO SAY, WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS IN YOUR VEHICLE? WE HAVE LOUNGES HERE WHERE YOU CAN, YOU KNOW, TAKE AN UBER OR YOU CAN TAKE THE BUS AND GET TO THEM. 
          MR. NORDAL HAS HIS FACILITY WHERE THEY'RE GONNA SHUTTLE PEOPLE IN AND OUT. 
          I THINK THAT WE'RE DOING OUR BEST TO REALLY TRY TO, YOU KNOW, ENSURE THAT, UH, AS THIS ROLLS OUT, IT'S DONE AWAY THAT'S SAFE AND WE'RE NOT THE FIRST COUNTY TO DO SO. 
          BUT ALSO I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER PIECE OF THIS TOO THAT WE MISSED, WHICH IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE INTENDED ON HAVING THE LOUNGE JUST BE SOMETHING THAT WAS SET ASIDE, WHERE PEOPLE, WHERE EMPLOYEES WOULDN'T BE EXPOSED TO SECONDHAND SMOKE OR, OR WHAT HAVE YOU. 
          THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE OF THAT THOUGH, AS WE'VE BEEN THINKING THROUGH, THROUGH THIS MORE THERE'S NO WAY TO MONITOR HOW MUCH PEOPLE ARE CONSUMING IN THAT ROOM. 
          IF THERE'S NO EMPLOYEE ON SITE TO ACTUALLY MONITOR SOMEONE'S CONSUMPTION, THEN THAT COULD LEAD TO OVERCONSUMPTION IN AND OF ITSELF. 
          AND I THINK A BIG PART OF THE CONSUMPTION LOUNGES WAS HAVING THEM BE AN EDUCATIONAL SPACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN LEARN ABOUT THE EFFECTS OF CANNABIS AS THEY'RE TRYING TO TRY THESE PRODUCTS FOR THE FIRST TIME. 
          BECAUSE WHEN CANNABIS FIRST BECAME LEGAL, I REMEMBER HEARING ABOUT HOW MANY PEOPLE, SENIOR CITIZENS WHO ARE ENGAGING IN CANNABIS FOR THE FIRST TIME WERE OVER CONSUMING AND ENDING UP IN THE HOSPITAL. 
          AND SO TO HAVE A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE CAN LEARN ABOUT THE EFFECTS OF CANNABIS, I THINK, AND UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF PEOPLE WHO ARE TRAINED, UH, SEEMS ALMOST APPROPRIATE. 
          AND I ALSO DO WANNA SAY ALONG THOSE SAME LINES, MY UNDERSTANDING AS PART OF THE DIRECTION WAS THAT WE PROVIDED, THAT WE PROVIDED TO STAFF, WAS THAT THEY WORK WITH THE INDUSTRY ON CREATING AN EDUCATIONAL MODEL FOR THE PEOPLE WHO WILL BE, UM, UH, DISTRIBUTING THE CANNABIS FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE CONSUMING ONSITE. 
          MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THAT WORK IS ONGOING AND THAT THERE, YOU KNOW, THERE THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF COLLABORATIVE WORK ON HOW WE CAN DO THIS AND BE MOST EFFECTIVE AT EDUCATION AND MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE DON'T, UM, OVER PROVIDE OR PRESCRIBE CANNABIS TO FOLKS WHO ARE COMING INTO THE LOUNGES. 
          AND SO I THINK THAT WE REALLY NEED TO BE FOCUSING ON THOSE SAFETY PIECES, THE EDUCATIONAL PIECE. 
          I THINK THAT IT'D BE IMPORTANT FOR US TO CHANGE OUR LANGUAGE, TO ALLOW FOR, UM, NOT TO REQUIRE THAT SOMEONE BE IN THE LOUNGE, BUT TO ALLOW FOR EMPLOYEES TO BE IN THOSE LOUNGES SO THAT THEY CAN MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE AREN'T OVER CONSUMING. 
          THAT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, PROVIDING THE APPROPRIATE EDUCATION AND, UM, REALLY JUST SEEING HOW THIS GOES AS A, AS A FIRST STEP IN A LONGER PROCESS. 
          I MEAN, WE'VE SEEN THIS ROLLED OUT IN OTHER COMMUNITIES. 
          SAN FRANCISCO HAS A GREAT ORDINANCE, IF WE WANNA REVISIT SOME OTHER ASPECTS OF IT. 
          BUT THE FACT THAT THERE'S NO APPEAL PROCESS, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT IF THERE WERE SUSPENSION PROCESS OF, OF LICENSE FOR BAD ACTORS, THAT MIGHT BE ONE THING. 
          BUT REALLY FOCUSING ON NUISANCE BEHAVIORS, I THINK WOULD BE MUCH MORE APPROPRIATE THAN WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US TODAY. 
          SO, UH, I'M GONNA BE, YOU KNOW, RECOMMENDING THAT WE NOT MOVE FORWARD WITH, UM, WITH H AND F21, AS HAS BEEN, UH, PROPOSED BY STAFF. 
          AND I'LL SAVE THE REST OF MY COMMENTS. 
          THANK YOU. 
          - SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ. 
          - THANK YOU, UH, CHAIR. 
          UM, AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS TO US. 
          UM, I JUST WANNA START OFF, I MEAN, I THINK I'VE BEEN CLEAR IN OTHER MEETINGS THAT I AM NOT IN SUPPORT OF CANNABIS CONSUMPTION LOUNGES. 
          UM, BUT THAT'S NOT THE ITEM THAT'S BEFORE US TODAY SO I'M NOT TRYING TO READ, LITIGATE THE REASONS WHY I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOULD EXIST, UM, OR RE-LITIGATE CANNABIS BEING LEGAL. 
          THAT'S NOT WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY. 
          WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY IS A POLICY REQUEST THAT CAME FROM THE BOARD, 5 0. 
          WE ALL SUPPORTED THIS COMING BACK TO US. 
          UM, AND IT'S ABOUT SAFETY AND ACCOUNTABILITY AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT GOOD POLICY MAKING IS. 
          IT'S ABOUT TAKING THE POLICY THAT'S BEEN SET AND TRYING TO ITERATIVELY IMPROVE IT TO ENSURE PUBLIC SAFETY, UM, THAT IT'S OPERATION AND THAT, UM, WE ARE DOING BEST BY THOSE WHO ELECTED US. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, I DO GET QUESTIONS OFTEN IN... 
          FROM MY CONSTITUENTS ABOUT, UM, IMPAIRED DRIVING AS WELL AS THE FUTURE OF CONSUMPTION LOUNGES. 
          UM, SO GIVEN THAT, GIVEN THAT THIS WAS A REQUEST TO THE, UH, CLO TO COME BACK, YOU KNOW, FIVE, FIVE OF US VOTED, UM, I DO WANNA ASK JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE FROM THE STAFF ABOUT YOUR PROCESS FOR BRINGING THIS BEFORE US. 
          UM, JUST QUICKLY, DO YOU CURRENTLY, ARE DUIS, UM, RESULTING FROM CANNABIS CONSUMPTION CURRENTLY REPORTED TO THE CLO'S OFFICE? IS THAT DATA THAT YOU COLLECT? - WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN ANY REPORTS OF THAT FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT. 
          WE DON'T ACTIVELY PURSUE THAT, THAT DATA. 
          [04:10:04]
- OKAY. 
          AND IS THERE ANY OTHER OFFICE TRACKING HOW MANY CANNABIS RELATED DUIS THERE ARE IN THE COUNTY? DO YOU KNOW? DOES ANYBODY KEEP THAT DATA? - WE'VE LOOKED INTO DATA WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND, UM, THE INFORMATION THAT WE WERE PROVIDED IS THE CHP ACTUALLY DOES ALL OF THE, UH, DUI MONITORING. 
          SO, UM, WE TRIED TO OBTAIN THAT DATA FROM THE CHP, UH, PRIOR TO PREVIOUS ORDINANCE UPDATES BUT WE HAVEN'T, DIDN'T LOOK INTO IT AGAIN, UM, SINCE PROBABLY FEBRUARY. 
          - SO IN THE DRAFTING OF THIS ORDINANCE, DID YOU SPEAK WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT IN PREPARATION FOR THIS? - NO, WE WORKED DIRECTLY WITH COUNTY COUNSEL AND FOLLOWED THE BOARD MOTION AS, UM, STRICTLY AS POSSIBLE. 
          - SO DID YOU, YOU DIDN'T TALK TO THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, DID YOU TALK TO THE CHP? - NO. THAT WAS NOT PART OF BOARD DIRECTION. 
          - UM, OR THE DA'S OFFICE BY ANY CHANCE? - NO. 
          - I MEAN, I THINK THE BOARD DIRECTION WAS FOR YOU GUYS TO GO BACK AND COME BACK WITH A POLICY. 
          I DON'T THINK WE TELL YOU HOW TO COME UP WITH THE LANGUAGE. 
          SO I THINK, UM, I, I THINK THAT THERE IS QUITE A BIT THAT OF HOMEWORK THAT HASN'T BEEN DONE, UM, GIVEN THAT FIVE OF US ASKED FOR THIS TO COME BACK. 
          - IS THERE A QUESTION YOU'D LIKE ME TO RESPOND TO? I'M SORRY. 
          - I, I GUESS I WAS... CAN YOU TELL ME ANY MORE RESEARCH YOU DID IN, IN PREPARATION FOR, UM, THIS. 
          - UM, WE WORKED DIRECTLY WITH COUNTY COUNCIL TO FULFILL THE BOARD MOTION. 
          AND THE BOARD MOTION FOR THE RECORD WAS THAT STAFF RETURN WITH PROPOSED ORDINANCE OF LANGUAGE, ALLOWING DISCIPLINARY ACTIONS SUCH AS LICENSE SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION IF A PATRON WHO CONSUMED CANNABIS AT A LICENSED DISPENSARY OR RETAIL FARM IS FOUND BY LAW ENFORCEMENT TO HAVE DRIVEN UNDER THE INFLUENCE AND CAUSED INJURY OR DAMAGE. 
          SO WE WORKED WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE BOARD MOTION DIRECTLY WITH COUNTY COUNSEL TO PROVIDE YOU WITH ORDINANCE LANGUAGE THAT VERY CLEARLY MEETS THE BOARD'S INTENTION AND DOES NOT ALLOW FOR THE CANNABIS LICENSING OFFICE TO BE AN ARBITRATOR OR A DECISION MAKING BODY. 
          THE DECISION MAKING BODY WAS VERY CLEAR TO BE LAW ENFORCEMENT PER THE BOARD MOTION. 
          SO WE TRIED, UM, WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF COUNTY COUNCIL, UH, AND WE'RE VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THAT, TO DRAFT THIS LANGUAGE, TO MEET THE BOARD'S MOTION, UM, WITHOUT ANY FURTHER, UM, ANY, ANY ADDITIONAL, UM, FLUFF OR INTERPRETATION. RIGHT. 
          WE'RE TRYING NOT TO INTERPRET WHAT THE BOARD WANTED. 
          WE'RE TRYING TO DO AS EXACTLY AS WE WERE TOLD, AND THAT'S WHY, UH, THAT'S WHAT WE'VE COME UP WITH TODAY TO PRESENT TO YOU. 
          - OKAY. THAT'S HELPFUL FOR ME TO KNOW FOR FUTURE DIRECTION. 
          UM, SO I THANK YOU FOR HELPING ME UNDERSTAND THE CONSTRAINTS BY WHICH YOU HAVE WHEN IT COMES TO FOLLOWING UP ON BOARD DIRECTION. 
          UM, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK OUR SHERIFF, CHRIS CLARK TO COME UP, IF YOU DON'T MIND. 
          UM, BECAUSE I THINK AS THE BOARD CONSIDERS THE POLICY THAT'S IN FRONT OF US, IT'S HELPFUL TO DO THAT KIND OF DUE DILIGENCE OF JUST WHAT WOULD IT TAKE TO OPERATIONALIZE THIS IF IT WERE PASSED. 
          - YEAH. THANK YOU. 
          AND GOOD AFTERNOON, UH, BOARD CHRIS CLARK, SHERIFF CORNER. 
          SO IN ESSENCE, AS I SEE OUR POSITION WE'RE, WE'RE OF A POLICY COMPLIANCE PIECE, AN ARM ESSENTIALLY OF THE COUNTY INTERPRETING WHATEVER THE LANGUAGE MAY BE, UH, FOR THE SAKE OF, YOU KNOW, FORWARDING THAT ON TO WHAT EVERYBODY OVERSEES, UH, THE BUSINESS ITSELF. 
          AND I'LL PUT THIS IN PERSPECTIVE OF LIKE OUR ALCOHOL, UH, AND COM, OUR ALCOHOL AND TOBACCO COMPLIANCE TEAMS. AND WE'VE HAD, AND WE'VE DONE WORK WITH THE CLOS OFFICE AS WELL, WHEN IT COMES TO COMPLIANCE. 
          SO FOR US, REALLY IT'S JUST IN HAVING, LIKE WHAT IS BEST PRACTICE WITH, WHEN IT COMES TO, UH, INTERPRETING THE POLICY THAT YOU, YOU, THAT YOU AND YOUR COLLEAGUES PUT FORWARD FOR THE SAKE OF, IS THE BUSINESS COMPLYING WITH THAT POLICY AT LARGE? SO, UM, THAT ULTIMATELY WOULD BE WHAT WE WOULD DO. 
          SO YOU, IN THIS CASE, IF YOU TOOK A DUI ACCIDENT, AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE DO NOT INVESTIGATE DUI CRASHES. 
          UM, THAT IS, UH, THAT IS UP TO CHP BY BY MOU WITH US, BUT IT WOULD BE OUR POSITION GIVEN IF YOU ALL TOOK ACTION ON THIS TO TAKE THAT REPORT, TO TAKE THAT INFORMATION AND THEN TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS A POLICY COMPLIANCE RELATED ISSUE WITH REGARDS TO THE BUSINESS THAT COULD BE ASSOCIATED TO THE CRASH. 
          - SO, I MEAN, CAN JUST, UM, BREAK IT DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL.  - YEAH. 
          - UM, LIKE, SO WHAT DOES IT LOOK LIKE WHEN LIKE LAW ENFORCEMENT DOES PULL SOMEONE OVER FOR A DUI. 
          WHAT, UM, QUESTIONS DO THEY ASK? 
          [04:15:01]
ARE YOU, WOULD, WOULD IT EVEN BE FEASIBLE TO DETERMINE LIKE THE SOURCE, LIKE WHERE THEY CAME FROM? - IT, IT COULD BE. AND I'LL, AND I'LL JUST PREFACE THIS BY SAYING THAT OUR DEPUTIES, WE MAKE TRAFFIC STOPS ALL THE TIME. 
          WE DON'T NECESSARILY CONDUCT DUI INVESTIGATIONS, UH, THAT'S HANDLED. 
          WE TURN THAT DUI IF IT, IF IT'S SUSPECTED THAT SOMEBODY'S UNDER THE INFLUENCE THROUGH SOME SORT OF OBJECTIVE, UH, SIGN OR SYMPTOM THAT WE SEE, OUR DEPUTIES WILL CALL FOR CHP TO COME IN AND DO THE OVERALL INVESTIGATION. 
          UM, AND SO THEN IN TERMS OF WHAT COULD, SO AS FAR AS A POLICY COMPLIANCE PIECE, WE WOULD BE NEEDING TO WORK WITH OUR POLICE DEPARTMENTS AS WELL AS CHP TO, TO DETERMINE WHERE, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF WHERE DID THE INFORMATION COME FROM WITH REGARDS TO WHERE DID THAT USE OCCUR. 
          AND I THINK THE BIGGEST PARALLEL I COULD DRAW IS LIKE, IS IT AN OVERSERVING ISSUE ON BEHALF OF A BUSINESS IS SERVING ALCOHOL. 
          UM, BUT THAT WOULD BE A REFERRAL TO ABC ULTIMATELY FOR SOME SORT OF ACTION ON THAT IF WE WERE TO BE IN THAT ARENA, SO. 
          - GOT IT. AND I THINK, UM, IF THIS ORDINANCE WERE TO WHETHER BE IMPROVED OR PASS AS IS, UM, WHAT PROCESS WOULD YOU TAKE TO WORK WITH THE CLO TO IMPLEMENT IT? - YEAH, I THINK WE WOULD, WE WOULD WORK WITH THE HIGHWAY PATROL, WE'D WORK WITH THEIR DA'S OFFICE, WE'D WORK WITH THE OTHER POLICE DEPARTMENTS TO FIND OUT ULTIMATELY IF A, IF A CASE OF A CRASH IS REFERRED TO US FOR THE SAKE OF IS THE BUSINESS OPERATING WITHIN THE COMPLIANCE STRUCTURE THAT IT SHOULD BE, UM, THOSE REPORTS WE GET REFERRED TO US, THAT WORKFLOW WOULD HAVE TO BE WORKED OUT, BUT ULTIMATELY THAT CRASH INVESTIGATION POST-CONVICTION, UH, IN MY OPINION WOULD LIKELY GET FORWARDED THROUGH THE CLOS OFFICE OR THROUGH OUR OFFICE, BUT WE WORK IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CLO TO DETERMINE IS THERE ANY SORT OF COMPLIANCE RELATED ISSUE WITH, ON BEHALF OF THE BUSINESS IF THERE'S AN OSTEN-, OSTENSIBLY, UM, OVERUSE OVER SERVING OR OTHER SORT OF COMPLIANCE RELATED PROBLEM AT, AT THE SITE OF CONSUMPTION. 
          - GOT IT. 
          AND I MEAN, IT DOES, IT PROBABLY GOES WITHOUT SAYING IT IS AGAINST THE LAW TO DRIVE WHILE IMPAIRED BY CANNABIS. 
          - YES.  - CORRECT. RIGHT.  - YES. 
          - UM, SO YOU KNOW WHAT I THINK... THANK YOU SHERIFF. 
          YOU OBVIOUSLY APPRECIATE, APPRECIATE THAT. 
          UM, WHAT I... 
          WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO ME IS THAT WE ARE DOING EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN, IF WE'RE GOING TO PASS A NEW ORDINANCE THAT WE, WE HAVE PASSED A NEW MODEL, A CONSUMPTION LOUNGE MODEL. 
          THIS IS NEW FOR OUR COUNTRY, IT'S NEW FOR OUR STATE, THIS IS NEW FOR OUR COMMUNITY, RIGHT? THAT WE ARE DOING THE DUE DILIGENCE NECESSARY TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE PROTECTING OUR ROADS AND OUR COMMUNITY. 
          AND I HEARD SOME OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT FROM COLLEAGUES, UM, THERE COULD BE LANGUAGE IMPROVEMENT AROUND, UM, PROVING THAT THE CONSUMPTION HAPPENED AT THE LOUNGE RATHER THAN BEFORE OR AFTER, UM, THAT THERE COULD BE POSSIBILITY OF, YOU KNOW, A SUSPENSION FIRST OR, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT FINES OR, OR WHATNOT. 
          I AM, I'M OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS OF IMPROVEMENT. 
          BUT I THINK THAT WHERE I'M COMING FROM IS A POSITION OF SAFETY FOR OUR COMMUNITY AS WELL AS ACCOUNTABILITY JUST IN CASE THERE ARE BAD ACTORS OUT THERE. 
          WE, WE DON'T KNOW. 
          WE, WE CAN'T... 
          WE DON'T KNOW, AND THE STATE DOESN'T HAVE A SYSTEM BY WHICH TO HOLD ACCOUNTABILITY AT THIS POINT. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, I I, I'M SORRY TO KIND OF PUT THE CLO ON THE SPOT OR SHERIFF ON THE SPOT IF YOU FELT ON THE SPOT. 
          I FEEL LIKE THERE IS DUE DILIGENCE TO BE DONE ON OPERATIONALIZING SOMETHING THAT COMES BEFORE US LIKE THIS. 
          AND I FEEL LIKE THERE'S OPPORTUNITY FOR IMPROVEMENT ON WHAT'S BEFORE US, SO THAT WAY WE CAN FOLLOW THROUGH ON OUR MANDATE OF KEEPING OUR COMMUNITIES SAFE. 
          UM, SO WITH THAT, I'M GONNA LEAVE MY COMMENTS THERE. 
          I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM OTHERS, UM, AS WELL AS SUPERVISOR DESERPA AND, UM, AND GO FROM THERE. 
          - SUPERVISOR KOENIG. 
          - THANK YOU CHAIR. 
          UM, WELL, I, I ALSO APPRECIATE WHERE THIS IS COMING FROM AS FAR AS TRYING TO KEEP OUR COMMUNITY SAFE. 
          UM, I THINK LOOKING AT THE LANGUAGE BEFORE US, PARTICULARLY H21, UM, WHICH, WHICH REALLY DOES, I THINK, FOLLOW THE STRICT, UM, DIRECTION OF THE BOARD AND, AND BRINGING BACK AN ORDINANCE. 
          UM, AND WHAT IT DEMONSTRATES TO ME IS JUST HOW HARD IT IS TO DEFINE, YOU KNOW, WHEN THERE HAS BEEN AN INAPPROPRIATE OR EXCESSIVE USE OF CANNABIS AND HOW THAT TIES TO THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE, THE RETAILER OR THE LOUNGE. 
          AND I MEAN, AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE CAN ONLY HOLD THE RETAILERS, UH, RESPONSIBLE 
          [04:20:02]
FOR THE THINGS THAT THEY CAN CONTROL. 
          AND IT'S, IT'S JUST AS SIMPLE AS THAT. 
          UM, AND I THINK THAT WHAT THEY CAN CONTROL IS AT THE POINT OF SERVICE. 
          UM, AND THE REALITY IS WE'RE ACTUALLY NOT THE FIRST IN THE NATION OR THE STATE TO BE PERMITTING CANNABIS LOUNGES. 
          UM, SAN FRANCISCO HAS A FRAMEWORK THAT WE CAN LOOK TO, AND SO DOING THAT, UM, THE LANGUAGE IN SAN FRANCISCO'S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH DIRECTORS RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR CANNABIS CONSUMPTION DEALS WITH THIS ISSUE IN SECTION 19, OPERATING STANDARDS NUMBER NINE. 
          PERMITEE SHALL REFUSE SERVICE TO INTOXICATED PATRONS. 
          UH, THEY DEFINE INTOXICATED AS SOMEONE WHO HAS USED ALCOHOL OR DRUGS AND IS UNABLE TO EXERCISE CARE FOR ONE'S SAFETY OR THE SAFETY OF OTHERS, OR ONE THAT INTERFERES WITH OBSTRUCTS OR PREVENTS OTHERS FROM USING THE ESTABLISHMENT PEACEFULLY. 
          UH, AND THEN TO SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS POINT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A CURRENTLY A BIT OF A CONTRADICTION IN THAT WE WOULD NEVER, UM, THERE WOULD NEVER BE A SERVICE, UH, AT LEAST NOT WITHIN THE LOUNGES OPPORTUNITY, BECAUSE WE HAVE, WE'VE BORROWED EMPLOYEES FROM ENTERING THOSE SPACES. 
          SO THE WAY SAN FRANCISCO ADDRESSES THIS IS BY SAYING, UH, IN SECTION 8A.6, OPERATING STANDARDS OF, OF THEIR ORDINANCE, UH, SECTION J, A PERMITEE WITH A CANNABIS SMOKING PERMIT MAY NOT REQUIRE EMPLOYEES TO ENTER THE DESIGNATED SMOKING ROOM AS A CONDITION OF THEIR EMPLOYMENT. 
          SO, UM, EMPLOYEES CAN'T BE REQUIRED TO ENTER THE SPACES, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY CAN'T DO SO IF THEY'RE, THEY'RE SO WILLING. 
          SO, UM, LOOKING AT THAT GROUP AND ALSO KNOWING THAT WE HAVEN'T HEARD THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, BEDLAM'S BROKEN OUT IN SAN FRANCISCO. 
          I MEAN, I'M HEARING MORE ABOUT, UH, THE NEW YORK CAVINESS OF WAYMO TAXIS THAN, UM, ABOUT, UM, IMPAIRED DRIVING UNDER CANNABIS BECAUSE OF LOUNGES. 
          UM, SO I... THIS SEEMS TO BE WORKING AT LEAST WELL ENOUGH, UM, AND SO GIVEN THAT I WOULD MOVE THAT WE AMEND THIS ORDINANCE TO STRIKE OUT H GROUNDS FOR LICENSE REVOCATION 21 IN BOTH ORDINANCES AND REPLACE IT WITH LANGUAGE SIMILAR TO SAN FRANCISCO'S RULES THAT A PERMITEE SHALL REFUSE SERVICE TO INTOXICATED PATRONS, INCLUDING SIMILAR DEFINITIONS OF INTOXICATION AND PROVISIONS THAT ALLOW BUT DO NOT REQUIRE EMPLOYEES TO ENTER DESIGNATED SMOKING ROOMS. - I'LL SECOND. 
          - AND I'D MOVE THAT THAT COME BACK FOR, UH, A NEW FIRST READ. 
          - UH, DID YOU HAVE THE COMMENTS STILL, SUPERVISOR DESERPA? - UM, WELL, YES AND NO. 
          - DID YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? OKAY. 
          - YEAH, YEAH, I DO. I'M GONNA TALK. UM... 
          - OR SHE SKIPPED HERSELF. 
          - I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION AFTER THIS. 
          - CERTAINLY, IF THERE IS A CANNABIS LOUNGE... 
          LOUNGE THAT WE'RE AWARE OF THAT IS OVERSERVING, THAT WE HAVE MULTIPLE COMPLAINTS FROM, UH IS A NUISANCE BUSINESS, ETC., LIKE I FEEL UM, CONFIDENT THAT THAT POTENTIALLY IF SOMEBODY GOT INTO A WRECK AFTER BEING SERVED THERE, LIKE MAYBE THAT WOULD BE UM, GROUNDS FOR A, A SUSPENDED OR REVOKED LICENSE. 
          HOWEVER, I DO FEEL LIKE WHAT HAS COME BEFORE US FEEL... 
          IT DOES FEEL TOO STRICT FOR ME OUT THE GATE. 
          UM, AS YOU ALL KNOW, I VOTED NO ON UM, ON CANNABIS LOUNGES BECAUSE FRANKLY I DON'T LIKE WHERE THEY'RE SITED BECAUSE THEY ARE ON THOROUGHFARES THAT ARE VERY BUSY, UH, WITH UM, JUST LIKE IN APTOS AND IN HIGHWAY 9, FAMILIES AND CHILDREN AND OLDER PEOPLE AND JUST ALL KINDS OF PEOPLE IN THEIR CARS THERE. 
          SO I DIDN'T FEEL LIKE IT WAS SAFE FOR UM, PEOPLE TO GO GET SUPER HIGH AND THEN TURN OUT, PLAY KIND OF FROGGER, TURN OUT ON THOSE THOROUGHFARES. 
          UM, I STILL DON'T. 
          AND, DESPITE THAT, I DO FEEL LIKE WHAT HAS COME BEFORE US FEELS TOO STRICT. 
          SO, I THINK, UM, AND GIVEN THAT ALSO, I THINK IT'S VERY DIFFICULT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO ASSESS WHETHER SOMEBODY'S SUPER HIGH, ON CANNABIS, UM, DURING A DUI STOP. 
          I MEAN, I DON'T, I DON'T, I DON'T REALLY FEEL LIKE WE HAVE UM, GOOD WAYS TO ASSESS THAT UM, WITHOUT... 
          I MEAN, EVEN WHEN YOU DO A TOX SCREEN, FOR EXAMPLE, UM, I, I DON'T THINK THEY'RE CHECKING, RIGHT, FOR THE, THE LEVEL OF CANNABIS IN SOMEBODY'S BLOODSTREAM LIKE WE CAN WITH ALCOHOL. 
          SO LIKE THOSE THINGS AREN'T EVEN IN PLACE. 
          - YOU GOT TO BE HONEST, SUPERVISOR DE SERPA, I THINK THIS IS KIND OF THE LEAST OF MY EXPERTISE WHEN IT COMES TO DUI INVESTIGATIONS. 
          - RIGHT. 
          - I'M ONLY ASSUMING THAT IN MAJOR CRASHES AND, AND WHERE THEY'RE INVOLVED SERIOUS INJURY OR FATALITY, 
          [04:25:01]
THERE'S GOING TO BE A SUBSTANTIVE BLOOD DRAW OF, OF A PERSON THAT'S IMP... YOU KNOW, INVOLVED AND STUFF LIKE THAT. 
          SO, BUT TO WHAT QUANTITATIVE OR QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S PROOF THAT'S LOOKED AT, I, I COULDN'T TELL YOU. 
          IT'S REALLY KIND OF A NON-ANSWER, RIGHT, I'M JUST UH, I'M JUST NOT CERTAIN HOW CHP MAKES THAT, MAKES THAT DECISION, SO. 
          - RIGHT. SO, FOR US TO PUT A LAW ON THE BOOKS WITHOUT VERY CLEAR DEFINITIVE INFORMATION, DON'T, THAT DOESN'T FEEL GOOD EITHER. 
          I MEAN, WE DEFINITELY WANT A SAFE COMMUNITY SO, I THINK WE UM, THIS WE'RE NOT PASSING ANYTHING TODAY, THIS IS JUST A FIRST STEP, BUT UM, CERTAINLY IF YOU COULD RECOMMEND UM, A GROUP TO GET TOGETHER SO THAT WE COULD LOOK AT THIS CLOSELY AND MAKE A BETTER ORDINANCE, UH, I THINK THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. 
          - ABSOLUTELY. I MEAN I UNDERSTAND UH THE INTENT ON, ON WHAT WHAT'S UH WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT HERE AND I THINK THAT REALLY NEXT STEP, YOU KNOW, FOR THE SAKE OF, YOU KNOW, ADDRESSING COMPLIANCE RELATED ISSUES AS THEY RELATE TO DISPENSARIES OR LOUNGES IS WHAT IS BEST PRACTICE IN THE ARENA OF POLICY ENFORCEMENT, YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF AT, AT THE DISPENSARY LEVEL, AT THE LOUNGE LEVEL. 
          UM, AND THAT'S ULTIMATELY THAT THAT WOULD BE KIND OF OUR BAILIWICK AT THE END OF THE DAY IS JUST DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT, YOU KNOW, THAT THESE BUSINESSES ARE OPERATING WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE POLICY THAT YOU ALL CREATE. 
          UM, AND THAT WOULD, IN MY OPINION, INVOLVE A WORK GROUP, YOU KNOW, WITH NOT JUST UH LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BUT THE CLO'S OFFICE AS WELL AND LOOKING AT BEST PRACTICE, MAYBE IN PARALLEL WITH ABC LAWS AND OTHER RELATED LAWS TO DETERMINE WHAT WHAT IS IT THAT WE'RE ENFORCING. SO... 
          - YEAH, AND LOOK, LOOK TO OTHER COMMUNITIES, SEE WHAT FRAMEWORK THEY'VE PUT INTO PLACE. 
          I DO I WILL NOTE THAT CONGRATULATIONS TO THE COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ PUBLIC HEALTH, WE RECEIVED A BIG GRANT TODAY, OVER $600,000, WITH $280,000 SPECIFICALLY TO EDUCATE OUR COMMUNITY ABOUT IMPAIRED DRIVING. 
          SO, I THINK THAT SHOULD HELP NOT JUST IN, IN ALCOHOL BUT, YOU KNOW, IN CANNABIS AS WELL. 
          AND THERE'S, THERE'S A BIG PUBLIC SERVICE UM, COMMERCIALS RIGHT NOW ON THE RADIO, I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HERE HAS HEARD THEM, BUT IT'S ALL ABOUT DRIVING WHEN YOU'RE HIGH. 
          - RIGHT. 
          - UM, SO... ANYWAY, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU. 
          - UH, SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ, YOU GOT A QUESTION? - THANK YOU. 
          - YEP.   - YEAH - I'LL COME BACK TO... I'LL COME BACK RIGHT NOW. 
          - UM, I, YEAH, I HAVE A COMMENTS AND A QUESTION. 
          UM, SO THANK YOU FOR SUGGESTIONS ON POTENTIALLY SORT OF GETTING US TO SOMETHING THAT'S IMPROVED. 
          UM, I WOULD LIKE, SINCE WE HAVE COUNTY COUNSEL HERE, DO YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS SINCE YOU REVIEWED THIS ON WAYS WE MIGHT IMPROVE OR STRENGTHEN THE PROPOSAL? - YEAH, I, I UM, I, I AGREE WITH MR. MR. LEFORTHY THAT WE WORKED HARD TO TRY TO COME UP WITH WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS THE LANGUAGE THAT THE BOARD WAS LOOKING FOR UM, BASED ON THE MOTION. 
          SOMETIMES, SOMETIMES WE MISS THE MARK, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE, WHEN, WHEN WE DO THAT. 
          AND SO THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW TO GO BASICALLY TO KIND OF ABANDON WHAT THE BOARD'S INSTRUCTIONS ORIGINALLY WERE TO US AND GO IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION. 
          IF YOU WANTED TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS HAD AND SUPERVISOR KOENIG HAD, THERE'S A WAY TO BE MORE SURGICAL AROUND THE LANGUAGE. 
          FOR EXAMPLE, I'LL ADDRESS 2 ISSUES. 
          UH, I HEARD A CONCERN THAT THE ENTIRE LICENSE COULD BE TAKEN AWAY AND THE BUSINESS COULD BE SHUT DOWN. 
          WELL, IT'S POSSIBLE TO SAY INSTEAD OF THAT TO JUST BE MORE SPECIFIC AND SAY THAT THEIR ABILITY TO HOST A CONSUMPTION LOUNGE WOULD BE TAKEN AWAY, BUT NOT THEIR ENTIRE DISPENSARY LICENSE, RIGHT? IT'S ALSO POSSIBLE, UM, UM, TO BE MORE SURGICAL AROUND THE CAUSATION AND SAY, SAY SPECIFICALLY THAT THERE HAS TO BE A JUDICIAL VERDICT OR FINDING THAT THE PROPERTY DAMAGE OR INJURY WAS CAUSALLY RELATED TO OVERSERVICE AT THE PLACE OF ORIGIN TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF WELL MAYBE SOMEBODY SHOWED UP AND UH WAS ALREADY HIGH OR WAS ALREADY... 
          AND THERE'S OTHER WAYS TO PROVE OVERCONSUMPTION OTHER THAN A TOX SCREEN, RIGHT? I MEAN, THEY DO IT, THEY CAN DO IT WITH, WITH, UH, WITNESS TESTIMONY, THEY CAN UH ABOUT HOW MUCH WAS SERVED AND AND UM, THEY CAN ALSO DO IT BY ADMISSION, BASICALLY. 
          I MEAN, SOMEBODY PUT, GETS, GETS INTO A CRASH AND SAYS, "MAN, I WAS JUST OVER AT THE DISPENSARY OVER THERE AND I JUST HAD X, Y, AND Z." UM, REALLY BASED ON A JUDICIAL FINDING, A VERDICT OF SOME SORT THAT'S GONNA BE BASED ON EVIDENCE, WE CAN'T REALLY PREJUDGE WHAT THAT EVIDENCE WOULD BE. 
          IT'S MORE THE IDEA, UM, THAT CONDUCT OCCURRED AT A CONSUMPTION LOUNGE THAT DIRECTLY RELATED TO UH INJURY OR PROPERTY DAMAGE ON THE BACK END. 
          SO MY POINT IS JUST THAT THERE'S UM, THERE'S IF YOUR BOARD WANTED TO CONTINUE TO PLAY WITH THIS LANGUAGE, 
          [04:30:02]
THERE'S THINGS THAT WE COULD DO. 
          OR, WE COULD DEPART AND GO IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, AND STAFF IS, IS WILLING TO DO WHATEVER YOUR BOARD TELLS US TO DO. 
          UM, IN THAT VIA THAT MOTION, IT WOULD ABSOLUTELY BE A FIRST READ BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT, LOOK AT SAN FRANCISCO AND, AND UM, TRY TO TAILOR WHAT THAT IS WITHIN THE SCOPE AND THE CONTEXT OF OUR ORDINANCE. 
          - OKAY. UH, YOU KNOW, FOR ME, THIS REALLY DIFFERS FROM ABC RULES... 
          IT REALLY, IT DRASTICALLY DIFFERS, AND IT REALLY DRASTICALLY DIFFERS FROM STATE UH DUI LAWS UH BEING MORE STRINGENT, AND REALLY, THERE'S NO PARITY ON HOW WE TREAT OTHER ALCOHOL ESTABLISHMENTS WITH THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE. 
          UM, I JUST FOR ME, I AT THIS POINT, UH, MY PREFERENCE IS NOT TO SUPPORT ANY ITERATION OF THIS ORDINANCE. 
          UM, I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S THE RIGHT DIRECTION AT THIS POINT. 
          SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS? - YEAH, UH, JUST A COUPLE THINGS THAT I WANTED TO TOUCH ON. 
          UM, ONE, I WAS GOING TO ACTUALLY, UM, TO, OF OFFER A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO UH THE MOTION THAT WAS BEEN MADE. 
          YOU KNOW, WHEN WE LOOK AT THE ORDINANCE, THE, THE BROAD CATEGORY GROUNDS FOR LICENSE REVOCATION, UM, WAS GONNA SEE IF WE CAN ADD GROUNDS FOR LICENSE SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION. 
          UM, JUST BECAUSE I THINK THAT UM, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE INSTANCES WHERE THERE ARE BAD ACTORS, AND THERE MAY NEED TO BE A, YOU KNOW, PERIOD OF TIME WHERE PEOPLE NEED A TIME OUT. 
          UM, BUT AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW, THE WAY OUR ORDINANCE IS WRITTEN, UM, THE ONLY OPTION RIGHT NOW IS REVOCATION. 
          AND I THINK THAT PUTTING SUSPENSION IN ACTUALLY PROVIDES SOME FLEXIBILITY IF THERE ARE BAD ACTORS OUT THERE. 
          UM, AND I STILL AGREE WITH, AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S CLEAR THAT NUMBER 21 ON BOTH H AND F WOULD BE DELETED. 
          UM, AND THEN FINALLY, I DO JUST WANT TO PROVIDE SOME CLARITY BECAUSE AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW TO WHAT EXTENT EVERYBODY ON THIS BOARD HAD READ THIS ORDINANCE BEFORE THEY MADE SOME OF THE PROPOSALS. 
          I HAD NOT... IT HAD NOT BEEN BEFORE US. 
          BUT I DO JUST WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THAT UNDER BOTH ORDINANCES, H AND F'S NUMBER 19, "VIOLATION OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CODE PROVISION OR STATE LAW RELATED TO THE CANNABIS BUSINESS ACTIVITY, INCLUDING ANY PROVISION OF THE MEDICAL, MEDICINAL AND ADULT USE CANNABIS REGULATION AND SAFETY ACT," THAT THOSE ARE GROUNDS FOR VIOLATION. 
          SO THERE'S ALREADY A MECHANISM WITHIN OUR ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE CANNABIS LICENSING OFFICER SHOULD THE RETAILER OR THE LOUNGE BE IN VIOLATION TO REVOKE THEIR LICENSE. 
          AND I THINK THAT UM, THIS NEXT UH 21'S JUST TAKING A LITTLE BIT TOO FAR. 
          BUT I JUST WANT THE PUBLIC TO BE AWARE THAT THERE IS A MEANS FOR LICENSES TO BE REVOKED. 
          BUT I ALSO THINK THAT IF THIS IS GOING TO COME BACK AGAIN ON A FIRST READING THAT WE ADD UH SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION UM, SO THAT THERE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT JUST ELIMINATING SOMEONE'S ABILITY TO OPERATE ESPECIALLY IF IT WAS BECAUSE OF MAYBE A BAD EMPLOYEE OR WHAT HAVE YOU, BUT THAT WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO BUILD FLEXIBILITY AND FOR UM, IMPROVEMENT. 
          AND UM, AND SO I'LL JUST LEAVE IT THERE. 
          AND, AND I JUST WANT TO, YOU KNOW, STATE THAT I THINK THAT WHAT SUPERVISOR UM, HERNAN I MEAN TO SUPERVISOR HERNANDEZ, I THINK THAT WHAT SUPERVISOR KOENIG IS ADDING TODAY IS ACTUALLY LIKE A, A STEP FORWARD THAT UM, IS SUPPORTED BY MEMBERS OF THE CANNABIS BUSINESS COMMUNITY. 
          UM, THAT IT'S REALLY ALLOWING US TO PROVIDE EDUCATION, OVERSIGHT, UM, IT'S ALLOWING THEM TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR BUSINESSES AND ALLOW SOME, SOME LEVEL OF ACCOUNTABILITY. 
          SO I HOPE THAT UM THAT THAT WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE IN THE MOTION. 
          AND SO I JUST ASK MY MAKER OF THE MOTION IF THIS SUSPENSION LANGUAGE COULD BE INCLUDED AS WELL. 
          - YEAH, THAT'S ACCEPTABLE AND, AND ALSO WITH THE CLARIFICATION THAT IT APPLIES TO BOTH H AND F. 
          - GREAT. 
          - ALL RIGHT, I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD. 
          SUPERVISOR KOENIG. UH... 
          - OH I WAS JUST GONNA SAY I MEAN, I UNDER, I UNDERSTAND UH THE SENTIMENT  CHAIR HERNANDEZ THAT, 
          [10. Hold public hearing to consider accomplishments of the 2021 Community Development Block Grant, and take related actions]
YOU KNOW, MAYBE, MAYBE WE JUST SHOULDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH ANY OF THIS, BUT I, I DO THINK THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE THE ORDINANCE TO ADDRESS THE UNDERLYING CONCERNS UM, AND ULTIMATELY CREATE AN OPPORTUNITY TO UM, IN ENSURE THAT SORT OF UH, YOU KNOW, BAD ACTORS DON'T UH AREN'T OVERSERVING PEOPLE. 
          I ALSO THINK THAT RATHER THAN KIND OF TAKING THE APPROACH THAT COUNTY COUNSEL HAD SUGGESTED WAS AN OP, WAS AN OPTION, OF OF A MORE SURGICAL UM, YOU KNOW, REWORKING OF THE SPECIFIC LANGUAGE HERE, I MEAN, LET'S JUST GO WITH A MODEL FROM ANOTHER JURISDICTION THAT WE KNOW IS WORKING, THAT WE KNOW WILL NOT IN INTERFERE WITH ABILITY UH WITH BUSINESS'S ABILITY TO BIND INSURANCE, UM, AND THAT WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO COME BACK AND, AND, YOU KNOW, COULD HAVE TO REWRITE IN A FEW MONTHS. 
          [04:35:07]
- DID SOMEONE SECOND, DID SOMEONE SECOND THE MOTION ALREADY? OKAY. GO AHEAD. 
          - LAST, THE LAST THING I THINK AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO ADD IS THAT WE SEPARATE THE LOUNGE USE FROM THE RETAIL BECAUSE IF WE ARE TO IF, A, IF, A LOUNGE WAS TO BE YOU KNOW ALLOWING PEOPLE TO OVERCONSUME, THEN THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT ON ITS OWN VERSUS FROM THE RETAILER. 
          AND RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST THE, THE USE OF THE LOUNGE USE IS EMBEDDED WITHIN THE RETAIL LICENSE. 
          AND I THINK WHEN THIS COMES BACK FOR ANOTHER FIRST READ, SEPARATING OUT THAT USE SO THAT IF THERE'S A SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION OF ONE USE, IT DOESN'T IMPACT THE OTHER, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          AND SO IF THAT IS AMENABLE TO THE MAKER OF THE MOTION. 
          - SURE, THAT'S ACCEPTABLE. 
          - OKAY. 
          - CAN I, CAN I JUST ASK IS WOULD THAT BE THE SAME FOR A RETAIL UH GROWER WHO'S DOING A FARM? - YES. - SAME? OKAY, THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. 
          - YES. 
          - AND I JUST HAVE A PROCESS QUESTION, CHAIR. UM, I'M GONNA BE VOTING NO ON THIS MOTION. 
          IT SEEMS LIKE IT WILL LIKELY PASS. 
          UH, COUNTY COUNCIL, AM I ABLE TO MAKE ANOTHER MOTION ON THE SAME TOPIC FOLLOWING THAT VOTE? THAT WON'T IMPACT. 
          I WANT TO, I WANT TO GO BACK TO A CONVERSA, THE PREVIOUS CONVERSATION ABOUT THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE WORKING WITH THE CLO. 
          UM, I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO BE ADDED, TACKED ON TO THIS MOTION. 
          - YEAH, YEAH, YOU CAN DO A SEPARATE MOTION AFTER, AFTER THE FACT. - OKAY. 
          - I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE NOT ATTEMPTING TO DO A SUBSTITUTE MOTION. 
          - NO.  - OKAY, GOT IT. 
          YEAH, YOU CAN DO ANOTHER MOTION ON THE SAME TOPIC. - I'LL BE THE NEXT CHAIR. 
          ONCE THIS VOTE IS CALLED.  - OKAY, YEAH. 
          - ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE A MOTION FROM SUPERVISOR KOENIG AND A SECOND FROM SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          UH, I THINK I'M ON THE FENCE ON THIS ONE, BUT NOT NOT CERTAINLY FOR THE SAME REASONS WITH SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ. 
          UH, BUT MADAM MADAM CLERK, CAN WE HAVE ROLL CALL? - CERTAINLY. SUPERVISOR KOENIG.  - AYE. 
          - DE SERPA. 
          - AYE. 
          - MARTINEZ.  - NO. 
          - CUMMINGS.  - AYE. 
          - AND HERNANDEZ. 
          - MM... 
          AYE. 
          - UM... 
          - WAIT, WAIT, HOLD ON, MOTION PASSES... 
          TWO... TO THREE? NO. FOUR-ONE. 
          - UM... 
          - SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ. 
          - THANK YOU. 
          UM, SO THROUGH THIS DISCUSSION, A COUPLE OF THINGS AROSE. 
          ONE, IT IS, IT DOES FEEL IMPORTANT THAT IF WE HAVE A CANNABIS LICENSING OFFICE THAT THEY ARE WORKING WITH OUR SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO ENSURE THAT OUR LICENSED LOUNGES AND DISTRIBUTORS ARE BEING RESPONSIBLE. 
          AND THERE'S A VARIETY OF UM, CONCERNS WHETHER IT'S DUI-RELATED OR OTHER POLICIES. 
          UM, AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE OR ACTUALLY ASK THAT YOU TWO WORK TOGETHER. 
          UM, THE OTHER PART, HANG ON A SECOND. 
          [11. ​Consider approving in concept “An Ordinance Amending Section 7.130.110(H) of the Santa Cruz County Code Regarding Grounds for License Revocation of Retail Commercial Cannabis Licensees” and "An Ordinance Amending Section 7.138.090(F) of the Santa Cruz County Code Regarding Grounds for License Revocation of Cannabis Farm Retail Licensees" that allow for license revocation associated with patrons who engage in intoxicated driving, and take related actions]
UM, THE OTHER PART OF THAT IS THAT UM, JUST THIS LAST WEEK, THE CHP UM, OPENED A CANNABIS TAX FUND GRANT PROGRAM THAT IS BASICALLY ENCOURAGING LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO APPLY FOR FUNDING AROUND UM, EDUCATION, POTENTIALLY ENFORCEMENT, AND OTHER WAYS TO IMPACT OR TO REDUCE IMPAIRED DRIVING. 
          UM, AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO ASK THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE, IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CLO, TO EXPLORE UM, APPLYING FOR THESE GRANTS AND PERHAPS REPORTING BACK. 
          SO WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO UM MAKE A MOTION TO ASK THE CLO AND THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE TO CREATE A WORK GROUP TO COLLECT INFORMATION RELATED TO UM... 
          I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING MAKE THIS MOTION. 
          RELATED TO UH... 
          - CANNABIS ENFORCEMENT. 
          - CANNABIS ENFORCEMENT, THANK YOU, AS WELL AS EXPLORE UH GRANT OPPORTUNITIES THROUGH THE CHP GRANT PROGRAM. 
          - I'LL SECOND. 
          WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          IS THERE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? - I HAVE A QUESTION.  - SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - I JUST WANT TO, UM, ASK CURRENTLY, THE EXTENT TO WHICH YOU ALL WORK TOGETHER, BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THERE'S NOTHING PREVENTING YOU ALL FROM WORKING TOGETHER AND THAT YOU ALL LIKELY ARE WORKING TOGETHER. 
          SO I'M JUST WANTING TO GET SOME CLARIFICATION ON THAT. 
          [04:40:01]
- YEAH, THANKS, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          WE HAVE WORKED DIRECTLY WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE FROM THE VERY BEGINNING. 
          - THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. 
          - UM, AND IN FACT, WE HAD SHERIFFS EMBEDDED IN THE CANNABIS LICENSING OFFICE FOR THE FIRST 3 YEARS OF THE PROGRAM TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE, TO GET RID OF ILLEGAL ACTORS. 
          THAT WORK GROUP STILL EXISTS AND IS STILL GOING ON. 
          THEY'RE NOT, THEY DON'T SIT IN OUR OFFICE ANYMORE, THEY'RE BACK AT THE, AT THE HEADQUARTERS, BUT THEY CONTINUE TO WORK WITH US DIRECTLY UM TO GET RID OF ILLEGAL ACTORS. 
          WE HAVE A, I THINK PERSONALLY WE HAVE A GOOD WORKING RELATIONSHIP WITH THE SHERIFF'S REGARDING CANNABIS ENFORCEMENT FOR BOTH ILLEGAL AND LICENSED OPERATORS. 
          THEY COME ALONG ON INSPECTIONS, THEY REVIEW SAFETY PLANS, THEY REVIEW NEW LICENSES APPLICATIONS WITH US. 
          SO WE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD WORKING RELATIONSHIP, SO I DON'T SEE THAT THERE'S ANY PROBLEM TO EXTEND THE DISCUSSIONS TO THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC. 
          - THANK YOU. I JUST WANTED IT TO BE CLEAR BECAUSE I THE I JUST THE WAY THAT THAT CAME ACROSS SEEMED AS IF THE CANNABIS LICENSING OFFICE ISN'T WORKING ALREADY WITH THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, AND I KNOW THAT THAT IS THE CASE THAT THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING TOGETHER, SO ADDING UM, YOU KNOW, DUIS AND CANNABIS CONSUMPTION TO THIS, I THINK'S GOOD. 
          AND I ALSO DO WANT TO MENTION THAT SOMEBODY HAD MENTIONED THAT THE CANNABIS AT THE STATE LEVEL THAT THE CANNABIS EXCISE TAX THAT THERE MAY BE FUNDING THERE FOR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS TO UM, DO MORE EDUCATION AND OUTREACH. 
          AND SO THAT MAY BE ANOTHER AREA TO EXPLORE FUNDING UM FOR THAT. 
          I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ON THAT AS WELL. 
          - SO UM... 
          - YOUR MIC'S OFF. THERE YOU GO. 
          - SO SORRY, UM, THE CANNABIS LICENSING OFFICE ISN'T ACTUALLY ELIGIBLE FOR THOSE FUNDS BECAUSE THE FUNDS CAN ONLY BE DIVERTED TO ONE AGENCY WITHIN THE COUNTY. 
          SO THE HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY, UM, ACTUALLY APPLIED FOR THOSE FUNDS TO TO TAKE THAT WORK ON, AND THEY WERE RECENTLY AWARDED THOSE FUNDS. 
          I BELIEVE IT WAS YESTERDAY OR TODAY, UM, AS UH SUPERVISOR DE SERPA MENTIONED. 
          SO WE HAVE NOT APPLIED DIRECTLY FOR THE FUNDS RELATED TO THOSE THINGS OVER THE YEARS BECAUSE WE'VE WORKED WITH HEALTH SERVICES AGENCIES AND, AND THEY'RE THE MORE APPROPRIATE BODY TO OBTAIN FUNDS AND, AND UTILIZE THEM FOR THAT PURPOSE. 
          - THANKS FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. 
          - SO JUST TO CLARIFY, UM, UH, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'D BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE MOTION AND THAT IT'S WORK THAT YOU'RE UM, YOU'VE BEEN DOING, AND SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. 
          UM, AND ALSO FOR THIS CHP GRANT, IT'S A DIFFERENT SOURCE OF FUNDING, SO I THINK IT'S KIND OF COMING BACK TO US TO LET US KNOW WHICH DEPARTMENT WOULD BE I THE BEST FIT FOR APPLYING FOR THESE FUNDS. 
          - SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT ALSO, UH, I STILL THINK THAT EVEN THIS, RIGHT, IS T- IS TREATING DIFFERENT BUSINESSES DIFFERENTLY, RIGHT? SO I'D LIKE TO ASK, LIKE, IF THE WINE DISTRICT HAS MET WITH THE SHERIFFS TO GO OVER BAD CHARACTERS OR STUFF LIKE THAT. 
          YOU KNOW, THEY HAVEN'T. 
          I ALREADY KNOW THE ANSWER AND IT'S BECAUSE IT'S BEEN TREATED VERY DIFFERENTLY. 
          THESE 2 BUSINESSES, AHH SO I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT. 
          BUT, WE DO HAVE A MOTION? AND WE HAVE A SECOND? AHH, FROM SUPERVISOR DE SERPA. WAS THAT CORRECT?  - YES - AND CA- CAN I ASK A CLARIFICATION TOO? IF THE, IF THE MOTION IS FOR YOU ALL TO EXPLORE GRANTS, WHAT I JUST HEARD IS THAT THEY WOULD COME BACK TO US WITH RECOMMENDATION OF WHO SHOULD APPLY. 
          I THINK IF YOU ALL FIND GRANTS OUT THERE THAT YOU ALL SHOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH APPLYING FOR THOSE FUNDS. 
          I MEAN, I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO COME BACK TO THE BOARD. 
          FOR US, FOR YOU ALL TO SAY, "HEY, WE FOUND THESE GRANTS AND, YOU KNOW, WE NOW TELL US WHO SHOULD APPLY FOR IT." AND I THINK THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, SHOULD BE REPORTED OUT TO THE CAO. 
          AND IF THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES FOR US TO APPLY FOR THE GRANTS THAT THE CAO CAN IDENTIFY WHO'S APPROPRIATE AND WE CAN APPLY FOR THE GRANTS, IF THAT MAKES SENSE. 
          - OUR CAO? - SO, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS, SO DEPARTMENTS ARE IDENTIFYING... 
          - RIGHT. - ...AND APPLYING FOR GRANTS ALL THE TIME. - RIGHT. 
          - WE USUALLY GO TO THE BOARD TO AUTHORIZE APPLICATIONS OR RATIFY APPLICATIONS... - RIGHT. 
          - ...BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY APPLY BEFORE DEADLINES, COME AND GO. 
          I ALSO WANT TO NOTE THAT PUBLIC HEALTH IS ALSO LOOKING AT AND APPLYING FOR GRANTS RELATED TO EDUCATION AND TRAINING. 
          SO, THERE MIGHT BE SOME OVERLAP HERE IN TERMS OF WHAT'S HAPPENING. 
          SO, I JUST WANT TO NOTE THEM AS ANOTHER PARTNER IN THIS EFFORT. 
          - APPRECIATE THAT. 
          - MADAM CLERK? - SUPERVISOR DE SERPA.   - AYE. 
          - CUMMINGS?  - AYE. 
          - KOENIG?  - AYE - MARTINEZ?  - AYE. 
          - AND HERNANDEZ.   - NO. 
          WE GOT 4 YES 1 NO, DISSENTING VOTE FROM HERNANDEZ. 
          I- I REALLY WANTED TO VOTE NO ON THE LAST ONE, BUT THIS... 
          A VOTE, NO, ON THIS ONE. 
          [04:45:03]
NEXT ITEM IS NUMBER 12. 
          HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPT RESOLUTIONS AMENDING THE UNIFIED FEE SCHEDULE OF FISCAL YEAR 2025 AND 2026. 
          I'LL TURN IT OVER TO GINA DE MARTINI-KUHNS, SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST AND MARCUS PIMENTEL COUNTY BUDGET MANAGER FOR THE PRESENTATION. 
          - THANK YOU, BOARD CHAIR. I'M MARCUS PIMENTEL, COUNTY BUDGET MANAGER GINA UNFORTUNATELY, WAS UNABLE TO ATTEND TODAY, BUT SHE DID ALL THE WORK. 
          SO, IF THERE'S ANY CREDIT TO BE PASSED AROUND, MAKE SURE SHE GETS ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THAT. 
          TWICE A YEAR, WE COME TO THIS BOARD WITH UPDATES TO OUR UNIFIED FEE SCHEDULE. 
          THEY'RE TYPICALLY DONE WITH PROJECTING REVENUES FOR THE BUDGET YEAR, BUT ALSO AT THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR SINCE SOME OF OUR FEES ARE CALENDAR YEAR BASED. 
          SO, THIS IS A VERY ROUTINE MEASURE TO COME FORWARD TO THE BOARD FOR CHANGES IN FEE STRUCTURE BASED ON PREVIOUS PAST BOARD DIRECTION AND OUR ACTIONS TO KEEP FEES UPDATED. 
          ON 11/04/2025, THE BOARD DID SET A PUBLIC HEARING FOR TODAY'S PROPOSED AMENDMENTS. 
          THE REVISIONS THAT WE HAVE TODAY ARE FOR THE ACCESSORY QUARTER, HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY, PARKS, OPEN SPACES AND CULTURE SERVICES DEPARTMENT AND THE SANITATION DISTRICT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INFRASTRUCTURE DEPARTMENT AND THE PUBLIC WORKS DIVISION WITHIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. 
          IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT YOUR BOARD OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING, HEAR PROTESTS AND OBJECTIONS, IF ANY, AND THEN CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND IF APPROPRIATE, ADOPT THE RESOLUTIONS, REVISING THE UNIFIED FEE SCHEDULE. 
          WE HAVE REPRESENTATIVES AVAILABLE EITHER ONLINE OR HERE IN PERSON FOR ALL THE DEPARTMENTS AND WHO HAVE, WHO CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. 
          THANK YOU. 
          - SEEING [LAUGHING] SEEING THAT THE CHAIR. 
          I DIDN'T NOTICE WHO WAS MISSING. 
          WITH THAT, I'M GONNA OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? ANYBODY ON THE PHONE? - I SEE NO SPEAKERS ONLINE, CHAIR. 
          - OKAY. WITH THAT, I'M GONNA BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD, STARTING ON MY LEFT. 
          - ALRIGHT. NO COMMENTS, HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS. 
          - ALL RIGHT. GOOD. 
          - I JUST HAVE ONE, UM, FOR THE RECORD, THIS IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE FARMER'S MARKET FEES. 
          IS THAT CORRECT? -  RIGHT. THAT'S CORRECT. 
          - OKAY. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS... 
          - OKAY, JUST.. - ...CLEAR. SORRY? -  YES, THAT'S CORRECT. 
          - OKAY. THANK YOU. 
          I'M- I'M HAVING TO MOVE THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS. 
          - SECOND. 
          - ANY FURTHER COMMENTS, SUPERVISOR DE SERPA? - IS IT MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THEY DO, ARE THESE- THESE HAVEN'T BEEN UPDATED IN 5 YEARS? IS THAT WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT? OR IS THIS... 
          - THIS IS A MIXTURE OF FEE UPDATES ACROSS ALL OF THE DEPARTMENTS. 
          AND SO, SOME OF THEM MAY HAVE BEEN UPDATED IN THE LAST COUPLE YEARS. 
          UM, WE WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH EACH ONE. 
          IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT A PARTICULAR ONE, BUT WE OFTEN TRY- WE TRY TO KEEP UP OUR FEES WITH OUR ACTUAL COSTS. 
          - OKAY. THANK YOU. 
          - OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          - SUPERVISOR KOENIG?  - AYE. 
          - CUMMINGS?  - AYE. 
          - DE SERPA?  - AYE. 
          - AND MARTINEZ.   - AYE, - MOTION PASSES. 
          4-2-0. 
          - 4-0 WITH SUPERVISOR HERNANDEZ ABSENCE. 
          - OKAY. 
          LET'S SEE. 
          NEXT UP, I'M GONNA CALL ITEM NUMBER 13. 
          HOLD THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION AMENDING THE UNIFIED FEE SCHEDULE FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT INFRASTRUCTURE, DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FEES BASED ON THE FEE STUDY CONDUCTED BY REVENUE COST SPECIALISTS AND TURN IT OVER TO.. 
          GO AHEAD AND INTRODUCE YOURSELF. THANK YOU. 
          [COUGHING] - GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR, SUPERVISORS. 
          MY NAME IS AMY WILBANKS. 
          I'M THE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES MANAGER OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING DIVISION. 
          TODAY, WE'RE GOING TO PRESENT THE RESULTS OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S FEE STUDY. 
          THE PLANNING DIVISIONS HOURLY RATES HAVEN'T BEEN ASSESSED IN OVER 5 YEARS. 
          I THINK THAT'S WHERE THAT INFORMATION CAME FROM. 
          AND THE HOURS ASSOCIATED WITH SOME OF THE SERVICES HAVE NOT BEEN ASSESSED FOR 5 YEARS PRIOR TO THAT. 
          TODAY, I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE ERIC JOHNSON, PRESIDENT OF REVENUE AND COST SPECIALISTS. 
          REVENUE AND COST SPECIALISTS IS A FIRM IN A STEP-, IS AN EXPERT FIRM IN ESTABLISHING FEES FOR SERVICES FOR MANY MUNICIPALITIES. 
          I'M TURNING THE PRESENTATION OVER TO ERIC TO GIVE YOU THE DETAILS OF THE FEE STUDY. 
          - GREAT. THANK YOU, AMY. 
          GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE, OF THE BOARD. 
          IT'S GOOD TO BE HERE TODAY TO PRESENT THIS TO YOU. 
          MY FIRM'S BEEN DOING THIS, THESE TYPES OF STUDIES 45 YEARS. 
          I, MYSELF HAVE BEEN DOING IT FOR 35 YEARS. 
          [04:50:01]
I WORKED WITH OVER A 150 DIFFERENT AGENCIES AROUND THE COUNTRY, BUT MOSTLY IN CALIFORNIA WHERE, WHERE WE ARE BASED. 
          ALRIGHT. SO WHAT HAVE WE DONE? WE'VE REALLY RECAST THE DEPARTMENT BUDGET WITH THE BUSINESS ORIENTATION. 
          WHILE GOVERNMENTAL ACCOUNTING DOES A GREAT JOB OF IDENTIFYING THE COST AND REVENUES AT THE FUND, DEPARTMENT AND DIVISION LEVEL, IT WAS NEVER REALLY DESIGNED TO TRACK REVENUES AND COSTS AT THE SERVICE LEVEL. 
          SO, WE HAD TO CREATE THIS INFORMATION BY WORKING WITH STAFF. 
          WE IDENTIFY WHAT A COST PROVIDES SERVICES TO PLANNING CUSTOMERS. 
          THERE IS NO BOARD OF COMMISSION OR SERVICE. 
          THERE'S NO FINANCE SERVICE. 
          THESE ARE THE DIRECT COST OF PROVIDING THESE SERVICES. 
          IT'S LIKE WHEN YOU GO TO THE STORE, YOU BUY A CAN OF CORN. 
          YOU KNOW WHEN YOU BUY THAT CAN OF CORN THAT INCLUDES THE GROWER, AND THE CANNER, AND THE SHIPPER, AND THE PERSON THAT YOU'RE TALKING TO AT, AT THE COUNTER. 
          YOU KNOW THAT. 
          WE'VE DONE THAT SAME THING WITH THESE SERVICES. 
          WE'VE IDENTIFIED THAT FULL BUSINESS COST OF PROVIDING SERVICES TO YOUR CUSTOMERS, BECAUSE THAT'S BUSINESS. 
          YOU WON'T STAY IN BUSINESS VERY LONG IF YOU DON'T HAVE THIS INFORMATION. 
          WE'VE ALSO MATCHED UP REVENUES TO THOSE SERVICE COSTS, BECAUSE AGAIN, YOU WON'T STAY IN BUSINESS VERY LONG IF YOU'RE NOT, DON'T HAVE THIS TYPE OF INFORMATION. 
          THIS WAS A THOROUGH PROCESS. 
          WE CERTAINLY WANTED TO UPDATE THE CURRENT FEES AND WE DID THAT THROUGH THIS STUDY THAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT MORE IN A MOMENT. 
          BUT WE, WE ALSO ADDED FEES. 
          WE HAD SOME FEES IN THE HOUSING AREA. 
          WE REDEFINED FEES. 
          WE COMBINED SOME PROJECT SPECIFIC FEES INTO ONE FEE. 
          WE CHANGED A LOWER-LEVEL DISCRETIONARY PERMITS TO FLAT FEES RATHER THAN AT COST FOR BETTER TRANSPARENCY. 
          SOME LEVEL 1 AND 5 APPLICATIONS HAVE LOWER REVIEW REQUIREMENTS. 
          SO, STAFF REALLY DID A GOOD JOB OF IDENTIFYING WHAT ARE WE DOING TODAY AND TRYING TO COME UP WITH A FEE SCHEDULE THAT REFLECTS WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY. 
          WE ALSO GOT, BECAUSE OF THAT, WE ALSO GOT RID OF SOME SERVICES THAT ARE NO LONGER APPROPRIATE FOR HOW YOU'RE OPERATING TODAY. 
          WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE. 
          THEY DO NOT EXCEED THE COST REASONABLY BORNE. 
          YOU CAN'T CHARGE MORE THAN THIS FULL COST. 
          AND WE MADE SURE THAT WAS THE CASE. 
          AND IN SOME CASES, RECOMMENDED LOWERING SOME FEES THAT WERE CURRENTLY EXCEEDING THOSE COSTS. 
          AND WE WANTED TO CONFIRM REVENUE COLLECTION WHERE THAT MADE SENSE. 
          SO HOW DO WE DO IT? WE REALLY, OUR FIRST STEP WAS TO SIT DOWN WITH STAFF AND IDENTIFY WHAT ARE THE SERVICES THAT ARE BEING PROVIDED AND HOW ARE YOU PROVIDING THEM? BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF CHANGE IN THE DEPARTMENT AND, IN FRANKLY, IN-IN-IN THE STATE AS FAR AS HOW THESE SERVICES ARE BEING PROVIDED BECAUSE OF DIFFERENT LEGISLATION. 
          SO WE WENT THROUGH, IDENTIFIED ALL THOSE SERVICES. 
          WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT CHANGES WE WANT TO MAKE TO THE CURRENT LIST TO BETTER REFLECT WHAT YOU'RE DOING TODAY. 
          AND THEN WE WANT TO IDENTIFY WHO'S SPENDING TIME ON IT AND HOW MUCH TIME. 
          AND WE HAD MANY, MANY, MANY MEETINGS TO GO THROUGH THIS INFORMATION BECAUSE WE ALSO LOOKED AT HOW MANY OF THESE ARE YOU DOING. 
          SO WE'RE ALLOCATING OUT 100% OF THE DEPARTMENT STAFF. 
          ONCE WE HAVE THAT INFORMATION, WE THEN CALCULATED A FULLY ALLOCATED HOURLY RATE FOR EVERY POSITIONS, SALARIES, BENEFITS, OPERATING EXPENSES, ALL FROM ACTUAL CITY DOCUMENTS, OVERHEAD, COUNTY WIDE OVERHEAD COSTS COST FROM THE COUNTY COST ALLOCATION PLAN. 
          AND AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, WE ALSO IDENTIFIED DEPARTMENT OVERHEAD, AND DIVISION OVERHEAD, AND SECTION OVERHEAD IN SOME CASES, SO THAT WE HAD A FULLY BURDENED HOURLY RATE OF BUSINESS BILLING RATE FOR EVERY POSITION IN THE DEPARTMENT. 
          WE MATCH IT UP WITH THAT TIME DETAIL AND NOW WE KNOW WHAT A COST PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES. 
          WE THEN, SAT BACK DOWN WITH THE DEPART- THE VARIOUS DIVISIONS AGAIN AND SAID, "HERE'S WHAT IT'S COSTING, HERE'S YOUR CURRENT FEE, HERE'S A FEE TO RECOVER IN MOST CASES 100% OF THOSE COSTS.". 
          AND WE WENT THROUGH THAT AND THROUGH THAT WITH THE DEPARTMENT. 
          ALSO, TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FEE STRUCTURE THAT WE'RE PUTTING FORWARD IS SOMETHING THAT WORKS AND MAKES SENSE BECAUSE AS I MENTIONED, A NUMBER OF FEES, ESPECIALLY LOWER LEVEL FEES ARE CONVERTING FROM AT COST, A BILLING DEPOSIT TO FLAT FEES. 
          AND SO, WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS GOING TO WORK, WHICH LEADS US HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT THIS WITH YOU GUYS, ABOUT WHAT CHANGES WE'RE MAKING. 
          BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE VARIOUS SERVICES PROVIDED BY THE DEPARTMENT, IT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT HOW THESE SERVICES ARE FUNDED. 
          WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO IT IN CALIFORNIA LOCAL GOVERNMENT, THERE'S JUST 2 TYPES OF SERVICES: COMMUNITY SUPPORTED SERVICES, PERSONAL CHOICE SERVICES. 
          COMMUNITY SUPPORTED SERVICES TYPICALLY BENEFITS THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE. 
          100% SUPPORTED BY TAX DOLLARS. 
          SUCH THINGS AS PUBLIC SAFETY AND STREET MAINTENANCE, AND PARK MAINTENANCE. 
          THOSE THINGS WHERE PEOPLE SAY, "WHAT ARE MY TAX DOLLARS PAID FOR?". 
          THIS IS WHAT THEIR TAX DOLLARS PAID FOR. 
          AND THEY'RE GENERALLY SUPPORTED BY TAXES; GENERAL FUND TAXES. 
          THEN THERE'S THE PERSONAL CHOICE SERVICES; THE CUSTOMER IS IDENTIFIABLE, THE SERVICE IS MEASURABLE. 
          MOST IMPORTANTLY, IT BENEFITS AN INDIVIDUAL OR A GROUP AND NOT THE BROADER COMMUNITY. 
          YOU CAN STILL SUBSIDIZE THESE, THESE SERVICES. 
          UM, HE'S OBVIOUSLY CAN'T CHARGE MORE THAN WHAT THE COSTS ARE. 
          PLANNING BUILDING PERMITS ARE GREAT EXAMPLES OF THESE PERSONAL CHOICE SERVICES THAT ARE FUNDED FROM FEES AND CHARGES. 
          BUT TO THE EXTENT THAT THE FEE DOES NOT COVER THE COST OF PROVIDING THE SERVICE, THE SERVICE IS STILL, THE COSTS ARE STILL OCCURRING. 
          [04:55:02]
THE SERVICE IS STILL BEING PROVIDED. 
          SO, IT HAS TO BE BACK FUNDED FROM TAXES. 
          WHICH MEANS, YOU HAVE LESS MONEY TO SPEND ON THINGS THAT ONLY TAXES CAN PAY FOR. 
          BECAUSE THAT'S THE QUESTION OUT, WHO IS GONNA, WHO ARE GONNA PAY OF THESE SERVICES? THE PERSON OR GROUP RECEIVING THE BENEFIT OF THE SERVICE OR THE BROADER COMMUNITY? SO, AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, WE IDENTIFIED ABOUT $2,600,000 IN ANNUAL SUBSIDIES OF PERSONAL CHOICE SERVICES TO, FROM TAXES. 
          WHICH IS BIG NUMBER. 
          SO, LET'S DIVE INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT AND SEE WHAT THAT MEANS AS FAR AS, WHAT DOES THAT TURN TO AS FAR AS ACTUAL NEW REVENUE. 
          SO, WE BROKE DOWN, ON THIS SUMMARY SCHEDULE HERE, THE DIFFERENT CAT-, UM, AREAS WITHIN, UM, PLANNING AND BUILDING, DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, ZONING, ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING, BUILDING, CODE COMPLIANCE, HOUSING, AND ADMINISTRATION. 
          SO, LET'S WALK THROUGH EACH OF THESE TO KIND OF SEE WHAT WE'RE LOOKING IN EACH AREA. 
          SO FIRST ONE, THEIR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CURRENTLY RECEIVING ABOUT $927,000 IN REVENUE BASED ON THE CURRENT FEES, BUT IT'S COSTING ABOUT $1,500,000. 
          SO THERE'S A SUBSIDY FROM TAX DOLLARS OF ABOUT $600,000 CURRENTLY. 
          WE FEEL THAT IF ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS REPORT, YOU CAN RECOVER PRETTY MUCH ALL OF THAT $592,000 FROM THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN THE REPORT. 
          SO, PRETTY 1 TO 1 THERE. 
          SAME THING WITH ZONING. 
          THERE'S A FEW FEES GOING DOWN, A FEW FEES GOING UP, BUT IT'S ONLY ABOUT A $40,000 DIFFERENCE IN SUBSIDY AND THEREFORE INCREASED COST RECOVERY. 
          ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING IS PRETTY CLOSE ALSO. 
          THE REASON WE'RE SHOWING SOME NEGATIVE NEW REVENUE, IN OTHER WORDS, LESS REVENUE IS THAT THERE'S SOME FEES THAT ARE GOING DOWN, ESPECIALLY SOME LOWER LEVEL GRADING FEES THAT AFTER WE STUDIED THIS AND AFTER LOOKING AT HOW THEY'RE DOING THINGS TODAY, IT JUST IS COST LESS. 
          BUILDING, WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING ANY CHANGES TO BUILDING A SAFETY PLAN CHECK OR PERMITS BECAUSE THEY'RE RECOVERING RIGHT AROUND 100% OF THEIR COST. 
          SO, NO NEW REVENUE THERE FOR THAT REASON. 
          THAT'S FANTASTIC. 
          CODE COMPLIANCE, THERE'S A FEW FEES WITHIN CODE COMPLIANCE THAT AREN'T FINE RELATED AND THERE'S SOME 100% COST RECOVERY THERE, VERY SMALL DOLLAR AMOUNT. 
          THEN WE GET INTO HOUSING. 
          SO, WE'RE SHOWING $425,000 SUBSIDY AND ABOUT $150,000 IN NEW REVENUE. 
          AND THAT'S BECAUSE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF FEES IN HERE THAT ARE EITHER LIMITED BY THE STATE OR THERE'S A BROADER SOCIAL PURPOSE TO SUBSIDIZE THE FEES. 
          AND SO YOU'LL NOTICE IN SOME OF THE HOUSING FEES THAT THERE ARE SOME SUBSIDIES AND THERE'S ALSO, THERE'S THE HOUSING MONITORING FEE TO MONITOR BELOW MARKET HOUSING UNITS THAT CURRENTLY HAS NO FEE AND WE ALL FELT THAT THAT SHOULD CONTINUE TO HAVE NO FEE, BUT THAT WAS A SIGNIFICANT DOLLAR AMOUNT. 
          AND THE BI- BIG, BIGGEST REASON FOR THAT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUBSIDY AND POSSIBLE NEW REVENUE. 
          LET ME GET TO ADMINISTRATION. 
          SO, WE HAVE A $1,500,000 SUBSIDY, BUT ONLY $24,000 IN NEW REVENUE. 
          AND THAT WAS BASICALLY FROM TWO SERVICES: GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT SURCHARGES. 
          CURRENT SURCHARGES NOW THAT WE DIDN'T FEEL COULD, WOULD BENEFIT FROM HAVING AN INCREASED FEE BECAUSE ESPECIALLY, IN THE CASE OF THE GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A SIGNIFICANT INCREASED FEE. 
          AND SO WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT THAT CONTINUE TO BE SUBSIDIZED EVEN THOUGH THERE IS A FEE AND IS RECOVERING SOME REVENUE TO INCREASE IT TO EVEN CLOSER TO 100% COST RECOVERY WAS JUST GOING TO BE ONEROUS ON THE APPLICANTS. 
          SO, THAT'S WHY WE'VE GONE FROM $2,600,000 TO ABOUT $800,000 IN INCREASED COST RECOVERY FOR THE VARIOUS DIFFERENT SERVICES AND FEES INCLUDED IN HERE. 
          SO, OUR, OUR PROJECT GOAL AS PART OF THIS WAS TO IDENTIFY THE FULL COST FOR THE VERY SERVICES, AND WE'VE DONE THAT. 
          WE RCS AND DEPARTMENT STAFF MADE FEE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR EVERY SERVICE THAT'S INCLUDED IN HERE. 
          IT'S NOW UP TO YOU, AS THE BOARD, TO DECIDE WHICH SERVICES SHOULD BE CHARGED TO FULL COST AND WHICH SERVICES ARE SUBSIDIZED WITH TAX DOLLARS. 
          AND AS A SIDE NOTE, EVEN THOUGH WE ARE NOT RECOMMENDING CHANGES TO BUILDING AND SAFETY, THERE IS THIS, WE DID DO A FEE COMPARISON FOR CERTAIN TYPICAL PROJECTS WITH SOME SURROUNDING AGENCIES. 
          AND FOR ROOM ADDITIONS, REMODELS, THE COUNTY IS NEITHER THE HIGHEST OR THE LOWEST. 
          SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS ARE SLIGHTLY HIGHER, BUT THERE'S A COUPLE OF CAVEATS IN HERE, WHICH ARE ALWAYS THE CASE WITH FEE COMPARISONS. 
          SCOTTS VALLEY FEES WERE GATHERED IN MARCH 2025 AND THEY ACTUALLY HAD SOME NEW FEES GOING TO EFFECT THIS PAST JULY. 
          CITY SANTA CRUZ FEES WERE UPDATED LAST JANUARY AND ARE POSTED TO GO UP 20%, JANUARY 2026. 
          AND WATSONVILLE FEES WERE POSTED ON THE WEBSITE, WHERE IT LAST UPDATED APRIL 2024. 
          SO BOTH SCOTTS VALLEY AND SANTA CRUZ CITIES FEES 
          [05:00:01]
ARE GOING TO BE INCREASING OVER AND ABOVE THOSE AMOUNTS THERE. 
          SO WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO AMY. 
          - SO, IN CONCLUSION, OH, NOT ON. 
          - OKAY. THERE WE GO. 
          IN CONCLUSION, WE'RE ASKING THE BOARD TO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDED FEE CHANGES TO THE UNIFIED FEE SCHEDULE AS PRESENTED IN YOUR PACKET TODAY. 
          APPROVAL OF THE FEE CHANGES WILL SUPPORT STAFFING LEVELS SO THAT THERE ISN'T A DECREASE IN SERVICES AND WE CAN CONTINUE TO DO THE PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'RE MAKING AND WORKING ON, TO- FOR THE STREAMLINE SANTA CRUZ EFFORT. 
          ONCE ADOPTED, THE FEES WOULD GO INTO EFFECT 60 DAYS AFTER ADOPTION FOR THE GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 66019. 
          THANK YOU, AND WE'RE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
          - THANK YOU. 
          WITH THAT, WE'LL TAKE IT OUT TO THE TO THE PUBLIC, SEE IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS ON THIS ITEM. 
          I SEE NONE? ANYONE ONLINE? - I SEE NO SPEAKERS ONLINE CHAIR. 
          - I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE.. I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - THANK YOU, CHAIR, AND I WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR THEIR HARD WORK ON THIS. 
          OVERALL, I DON'T SEE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF 1 AREA, WHICH IS THE APPEAL FEES. 
          THE APPEAL FEES IS THAT THE INCREASES THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED, THE APPEAL FEES ARE PRETTY SIGNIFICANT. 
          AND, YOU KNOW, UM, I FEEL AS IF WITH ALL OF THE DISCUSSIONS WE HAVE AROUND EQUITY AND MAKING SURE THAT OUR PROCESSES ARE EQUITABLE AND ACCEPT-, ACCESSIBLE, INCREASING THE, FOR EXAMPLE, JURISDICTIONAL HEARING APPEAL FEES FROM $1,800 TO $2,400 TO $2,420 REALLY IS PUTTING A BIGGER COST BURDEN ON PEOPLE WHO MAY HAVE ISSUES WITH A PROJECT THAT MAY BE COMING INTO THE COMMUNITY. 
          AND I THINK ONE OF THINGS THAT'S, THAT'S EVEN MORE CONCERNING IS THAT IF THE BOARD TAKES JURISDICTION ON APPEAL, THE APPELLANTS THEN HAVE TO PAY ANOTHER $2,400 ON TOP OF THAT AND MAKING IT EVEN MORE INACCESSIBLE FOR FOLKS WHO MAY HAVE CONCERNS WITH SOME OF THE PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING FORWARD AND WANTING THE BOARD TO TAKE A SECOND LOOK. 
          AND I KNOW THAT WE JUST HAD ONE SUPERVISOR KOENIG'S DISTRICT, WE'RE LIKELY GOING TO SEE MORE OF THESE KINDS OF PROJECTS DUE TO SOME OF THE CHANGES IN STATE LAW THAT MAKE IT REALLY CONFUSING, ESPECIALLY AS WE SEE SOME OF THESE BUILDERS, HOW MANY PROJECTS ARE COMING IN. 
          SO, I THINK THAT WHILE I'M SUPPORTIVE OF ALL THE OTHER CHANGES, I DO THINK THAT WE SHOULD KEEP THE APPEAL FEES WHERE THEY ARE CURRENTLY, TO ALLOW FOR GREATER PARTICIPATION WITH THE PUBLIC AND GREATER OPPORTUNITIES WITH THE PUBLIC TO APPEAL PROJECTS, UM, TO THE BOARD, UM, AND KEEPING THAT COST AT AN ACCESSIBLE AMOUNT. 
          THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS. 
          - ALL RIGHT. WELL, IF THAT'S ALL THE COMMENTS, I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD. 
          - HAPPY TO MAKE SOME COMMENTS. THANK YOU, CHAIR. 
          UM, IN GENERAL, AND I DON'T THINK YOU SHOWED THIS PIE CHART, BUT IT WAS IN THE MATERIALS. 
          UM, I THINK THERE'S ONE THAT SHOWS PERSONNEL COSTS, BENEFITS, AND THEN OVERHEAD. 
          AND THE OVERHEAD IS LIKE 37%. 
          IT'S IN THE, IT'S IN THE REPORT. 
          IT'S, UH, IN THE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. 
          UM, SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT OVERHEAD, I MEAN, I ASSUME THAT MEANS LIKE THE LONG RANGE PLANNING STAFF, THE BUILDING LIKE HOW MANY TIMES WE TAKE OUT THE TRASH IS, WHAT? CAN YOU... 
          - WELL, NO. NO, IT'S NOT. 
          IT'S, UM, WHAT'S IN OVERHEAD ARE FOUR SUPERVISORS, YOU KNOW, CAO, COUNTY COUNCIL, THOSE TYPES OF COUNTYWIDE COSTS... 
          - CAN, CAN YOU SPEAK INTO THE MIC. 
          - ...FROM THE COST LOCATION PLAN. SORRY. [CROSSTALK] UM, AND SO THERE ARE... 
          - BRING IT IN. 
          - YOU CAN, YOU CAN MOVE THIS MIC ACTUALLY... 
          - MOVE THE MIC OVER. - ...CLOSER TO YOU. 
          - THERE THERE, THERE ARE ALSO DEPARTMENTAL COSTS FOR DEPARTMENTAL ADMIN STAFF. 
          SUPERVISORY STAFF THAT'S INCLUDED AS PART OF OVERHEAD FOR THE ADVANCED PLANNING, UM, GENERAL COUNTER, COUNTER SUPPORT. 
          THOSE ARE NOT PART OF OVERHEAD. 
          THOSE ARE STILL TAX SUPPORTED. 
          SO THERE'S DEFINITELY PART OF THE DEPARTMENT THAT WILL BE TAX SUPPORTED, CONTINUE TO BE TAX SUPPORTED, UM, BECAUSE THAT'S JUST THE NATURE OF, OF PLANNING SERVICES TO RECOVER THAT ADVANCED PLANNING FUNCTION ENTIRELY THROUGH, ON, ON TOP OF NEW DEVELOPMENT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT'S COMMONLY DONE. 
          - BUT WE ARE RECOVERING A PORTION OF THE [CROSSTALK] - THROUGH THE SURCHARGES. 
          - RIGHT. I MEAN, 'CAUSE ULTIMATELY. 
          I MEAN, WHEN I'VE LOOKED AT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S BUDGET IN THE PAST, OR PLANNING DEPARTMENT DIVISION NOW WITHIN THE CDI DEPARTMENT, UM, IT LOOKED LIKE PLANNING IS, OR, OR SORT OF JUST PERMITTING, IS GENERATING MORE REVENUE THAN JUST PERMITTING 'CAUSE IT'S ALSO CONTRIBUTING TOWARDS SOME OF THOSE LONG RANGE PLANNING FUNCTIONS. 
          IS, IS THAT ACCURATE? - AS, AS LONG AS YOU'RE CAPTURING ALL THE OVERHEAD COSTS, THERE ARE CERTAINLY INSTANCES WHERE, UM, ONE CAN BE HELPING TO HELP FUND THE OTHER AS LONG AS THOSE OTHER COSTS ARE RELATED. 
          UM, AND SO IT'S JUST A MATTER OF BEING CAREFUL WITH, IS THAT A SURCHARGE, IS THAT OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT 
          [05:05:01]
IS FUNDING SOMETHING THAT IS, SHOULD BE FUNDED THROUGH FEES. 
          - I SEE. 
          UM, I MEAN, I, I APPRECIATE YOUR SUGGESTING THAT WE LOOK AT PERMITTING LIKE A BUSINESS. 
          BUT WHAT SEEMS TO BE MISSED WITH THAT SUGGESTION IS YOU'RE ACTUALLY IGNORING OUR PRIMARY PROFIT CENTER, WHICH IS THE PROPERTY TAXES. 
          AND THE HIGHER THE PERMIT FEES, THE MORE WE ARE ACTUALLY ENCOURAGE PEOPLE NOT TO GET PERMITS AT ALL, AND THEREFORE WE LOSE, I MEAN, IN SOME CASES, THE THE COSTS ARE GONNA BE HIGH ENOUGH THAT PEOPLE ARE SIMPLY NOT GOING TO COMPLY. 
          I MEAN, THAT IS THE BALANCE THAT EVERY SINGLE REGULATORY SCHEME NEEDS TO FIND, RIGHT? IT'S WHETHER IT'S CANNABIS OR PERMITTING, WHETHER BUILDINGS. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S EASY TO SAY, WELL, YOU KNOW, THE, WE'RE WE'RE JUST COST, CHARGING THE COST, BUT I MEAN, LIKE WE'RE IGNORING THE ACTUAL OPPORTUNITY FOR REVENUE IT SEEMS LIKE DO YOU EVER TAKE FI-, I MEAN, AND YOU'VE WORKED ON THIS PROBLEM FOR A LONG TIME. 
          - YEAH. - I MEAN, IS YOUR... 
          - THERE, THERE ARE... TO A DEGREE, THERE ARE MARKET CONSIDERATIONS. 
          AND LARGELY WHAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO ARE MORE THE BILLING AND SAFETY PERMIT FEES. 
          UH, BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT MORE PEOPLE PAY. 
          THE PLANNING FEES, THEY'RE MORE DEVELOPER ASSOCIATED OR THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, MOST RESIDENTS ARE NOT GONNA PAY A, A PLANNING FEE. 
          BUT YOU'RE MORE LIKELY TO PAY A BILLING AND SAFETY PERMIT FEE. 
          UM, AND SO THERE'S CERTAIN PERMIT FEES THAT THAT ARE TRADITIONALLY SUBSIDIZED, YOU KNOW, HEAT, WATER, HEATER PERMITS. 
          UH, BECAUSE PEOPLE, IF IT'S TOO HIGH, THEY, THEY WON'T COME IN AND GET IT. - MM - AND SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT, YEAH, YOU'RE GIVING UP THE REVENUE. 
          BUT YOU'RE ALSO MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE INSTALLING YOU CORRECTLY AND THEY'RE NOT GONNA BLOW UP THEIR HOUSE. 
          UM, AND SO IT'S YOU, YOU DO WANNA BALANCE THAT, BUT AT THE SAME TIME LIKE I SAID, WE'RE NOT RECOMMENDING ANY CHANGES TO THE BUILDING SAFETY PERMIT FEES HERE TODAY. 
          THEY'RE, THEY'RE WELL WITHIN THE, THE REGIONAL AVERAGES. 
          BUT IT IS SOMETHING TO BE AWARE OF, UM, THAT THERE ARE, UM, IF YOU GO TOO HIGH, ESPECIALLY WITH BUILDING FEES, YOU ARE DRIVING NOT ONLY DRIVING AWAY YOUR CUSTOMERS, BUT YOU'RE MAKING YOUR COMMUNITY LESS SAFE. 
          - MM-HMM. 
          UM, YEAH, I MEAN, IN LOOKING AT SORT OF THE ORIGINAL AVERAGES WHEN YOU SHOWED THE CHE-, DO YOU WANNA COMMENT ON THAT LAST PIECE DIRECTOR MACHADO? - YES. UH, THANK YOU CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBERS. 
          I DO WANNA COMMENT ON THAT. 
          I, UM, I DON'T KNOW IF I WANNA OPEN THIS CAN UP COMPLETELY, BUT I WOULD COMMENT THAT THROUGH OUR STREAMLINED SANTA CRUZ PROCESS AS WE IMPROVE PROCESSES AND WE STREAMLINE OTHER PARTS OF OF WHAT WE DO, I WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE REFLECTED IN OUR FEE STRUCTURE. 
          AND SO WE WILL BE LOOKING AT... 
          WE LOOK AT OUR FEE STRUCTURE ANNUALLY, AND THEN ALSO COMPREHENSIVELY NOW PROBABLY MORE ON LIKE A FIVE YEAR, UM, YOU KNOW, REVIEW. 
          AND SO AS WE IMPROVE OUR OWN PROCESSES AND IN ESSENCE, UH, A SLIGHTLY LIGHTER TOUCH IN LOTS OF WAYS THAT WILL BE REFLECTED IN THIS FEE STRUCTURE IN THE FUTURE. 
          SO JUST SO YOU HAVE THAT. 
          - WELL, I'M GLAD YOU BROUGHT THAT UP BECAUSE I'M SORT OF CURIOUS HOW THAT WORKS, RIGHT? BECAUSE IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE RIGHT NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT, OKAY, HERE ARE THE COSTS OF THE DEPARTMENT BASED ON THIS HEADCOUNT, AND LET'S JUST DIVIDE BY THE NUMBER OF PERMITS. 
          SO IF WE START... 
          - NO. - ...DOING THOSE PERMITS FASTER, WHAT IF WE DO LESS PERMITS, THEN AREN'T THEY ALL GONNA COST MORE? I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE IT DOESN'T SEEM DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO HOW FAST WE PROCESS THE PERMIT. 
          IT'S ACTUALLY DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO THE NUMBER OF PERMITS NOW. 
          - SO, I MEAN, YOU GUYS CAN CORRECT ME, BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT ACTUAL COSTS OF WHAT IT TAKES TO, TO PROCESS A PERMIT. 
          AND SO IF IF IT TAKES LESS TIME TO PROCESS A PERMIT, THEN IT'LL BE LESS COST AND AS WE UPDATE THE PROGRAM IN THE FUTURE, THAT WILL BE REFLECTED. 
          'CAUSE WE'RE, WE'RE, WHAT WE'RE STUDYING TODAY IS ACTUAL COST FOR ALL THESE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF PERMITS. 
          NOT, NOT JUST THE BIG BUDGET PICTURE, BUT RIGHT DOWN INTO EACH CATEGORY AND HOW MUCH TIME WE'RE SPENDING, AND IF WE GET TO A POINT WHERE THERE'S JUST LESS TIME SPENT, THEN THAT WILL BE LESS COST. 
          DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? - THAT'S ACCURATE. 
          I MEAN, WE'RE NOT, LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN YOU LOOK AT, UM, YOU KNOW, PERSONNEL AND BENEFITS, YOU'RE ONLY LOOKING AT LIKE THE SHARE OF TIME THAT EMPLOYEE... 
          - YEAH. - ...IS SPENDING ON... 
          - AND THAT'S WHY WHEN... - ...ON PERMIT REVIEW. 
          - YEAH. THAT'S WHY WHEN WE LOOK AT WHY WE LOOK AT 100% OF THE EMPLOYEE TIME ALLOCATION. 
          BECAUSE LET'S SAY THEY'RE, THEY'RE SPENDING THIS MUCH TIME ON SOMETHING AND THERE'S THIS MANY OF THEM, AND WE NOW WE'VE ALLOCATED OVER A HUNDRED PERCENT OF SOMEBODY. 
          OKAY, NOW WE KNOW WE'VE GOT SOME ISSUES. 
          THE SAME THING, AND THIS IS OFTEN THE CASE THERE, WE ALLOCATE LESS THAN A HUNDRED PERCENT, SO WE TALK... OKAY. 
          IS WHAT WE'RE COMING... LET'S SAY WE'VE ALLOCATED OUT 50% OF A PLANNER ON ACTUAL APPLICATIONS. 
          WE GO, WE TALK ABOUT DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? NO, IT DOESN'T. 
          IT SHOULD BE MORE LIKE THREE QUARTERS OF THEIR TIME ON THIS AND, AND, BUT IF IT DOES MAKE SENSE, OKAY, WHAT ELSE ARE THEY WORKING ON? THEY GOT ADMIN TIME, THEY GOT COUNTER TIME, WE'VE GOT, YOU KNOW, UM, TRAINING TIME AND SO ON. 
          AND SO IT'S LOOKING AT IT AS PART OF A WHOLE AS WELL AS LOOKING AT THE INDIVIDUAL DETAILS TO MAKE SURE THAT BOTH SIDES OF THOSE ARE MAKING SENSE WITH EACH OTHER. 
          [05:10:01]
- MM-HMM. SO WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR UPDATING FOR, FOR, I MEAN, WE, WE HADN'T DONE THIS STUDY IN A LONG TIME. 
          - RIGHT. LONG TIME. 
          - WHAT'S THE PROCESS FOR REVISITING THIS? - WELL, YOU SHOULD BE UPDATING THIS ANNUALLY BY CPI. 
          SO YOU'RE KIND OF KEEPING UP ON IT SO THAT YOU'RE, THERE'S NOT BIG JUMPS WHEN YOU DO A, A FULL STUDY. 
          AND THEN COME BACK EVERY THREE TO FIVE YEARS OR WHEN THERE'S BEEN A BIG CHANGE IN HOW YOU DO THINGS. 
          SO AS PART OF THIS STREAMLINING PROCESS, MAYBE YOU COME BACK IN TWO YEARS, OKAY, NOW YOU GOT A GOOD HANDLE ON HOW MUCH TIME WE'RE TAKING BECAUSE OF THE STREAMLINING, LET'S TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT THE FEES, LET'S TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT OUR PROCESSES. 
          - YEAH, I MEAN, I'M STILL NOT CONVINCED THAT MAYBE YOU CAN, DIRECTOR MASHARTI CAN CONVINCE ME OTHERWISE THAT THIS DOESN'T SIMPLY SAY LIKE, NO MATTER HOW GOOD OR BAD OUR PROCESS IS, I MEAN, IT'S JUST GOING INTO THE NUMBER THAT WE DIVIDE, RIGHT? I MEAN, IF ANYTHING, IF I, THE GOAL WAS TO BRING PERMIT FEES DOWN, WOULDN'T YOU JUST CUT THE DEPARTMENT IN HALF AND THEN YOU HAVE LESS PERSONNEL THAN A SMALLER NUMBER TO DIVIDE BY WITH MORE PERMITS. 
          LIKE HOW DOES THE EFFICIENCY ACTUALLY... 
          - NO, I, I'M, I'M TRACKING YOU. 
          AND I THINK, UH, YOU KNOW, I, I THINK BACK TO OUR, OUR BUDGET HEARINGS THIS YEAR WHERE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT INCREASED WORKLOAD, YOU KNOW, WITH THE NEW HOUSING AND WITH OUR STAFFING LEVELS, WHICH ARE PRETTY FLAT. 
          AND AND, WE'RE ALSO BANKING ON THAT, THAT THE STREAMLINING EFFORT AND TECHNOLOGY AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT WE EMPLOY TODAY WILL ALLOW OUR EXISTING STAFF TO DO, IN ESSENCE MORE WORK. 
          AND SO WE ALREADY ANTICIPATE TO PRODUCE MORE PERMITS WITH FEWER STAFF HOURS, YOU KNOW, PER PERMIT. 
          AND, AND, AND THAT'S BECAUSE OF THE STREAMLINING EFFORTS THAT'S BECAUSE OF TECHNOLOGY AS IT EVOLVES AND, AND ALL THOSE PROGRAMS WE'RE EMPLOYING TODAY. 
          AND SO THAT SUPPORTS THE CONCEPT THAT AS WE DO THESE EFFORTS THE COST PER PERMIT SHOULD GO DOWN BECAUSE OF THE LIGHTER TOUCH AND ALL THE OTHER PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          SO IF, IF WE HAVE MORE PERMITS ISSUED IN A GIVEN YEAR WITH THE SAME AMOUNT OF STAFF COST, THEN THE PER PERMIT FEE WILL GO DOWN. 
          - RIGHT. RIGHT. OKAY. 
          UM, LET'S JUST TALK ABOUT THE COMPARISON OF THE VARIOUS JURISDICTIONS. 
          I MEAN, YOU MENTIONED THAT THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ IS GOING UP 20%, SO THAT DOES MAKE A LITTLE BIT OF A DIFFERENCE. 
          I MEAN, IT SEEMED LIKE SORT OF WE WERE WAY OUT AHEAD OF THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ IN TURN TO THE TOTAL PERMITTING COST. 
          I MEAN, SCOTTS VALLEY'S THE REAL OUTLIER AND THEY KIND OF MAKE US LOOK GOOD. 
          BUT, UM, THAT'S NOT TO SAY THAT WE'RE, WE'RE SORT OF GREAT IN TERMS OF COSTS. 
          I MEAN, UM, AND WHAT STRUCK ME IS THIS SORT OF FLAT PERMIT PROCESSING FEE THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE CHARGING BUT THE OTHER, I MEAN, AND YOU HAVE WATSONVILLE CHARGES, BUT NOT, UH, SANTA CRUZ OR SCOTTS VALLEY, AND THAT'S WHERE IT SEEMED TO JUST GENERALLY LIFT OUR COSTS. 
          AND, AND ALSO I WOULD SAY, I MEAN, AM I RIGHT THAT THIS IS, WE'RE DOING APPLES TO APPLES HERE. 
          I MEAN, I, I UNDERSTAND COUNTY HAS MORE COMPLEX GEOLOGY AND LOCATIONS IN THE CITIES, BUT I MEAN, THERE, AND SO THERE'S APPLICATIONS THAT ARE GONNA REQUIRE, YOU KNOW, THE GEOLOGY REPORT, THE BIOTIC AND ALL THE VARIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS. 
          WE'RE NOT COUNTING THOSE IN THIS COMPARISON. RIGHT? I MEAN, SO THOSE WOULD BE LAYERED ON TOP OF... 
          - THAT'S ALWAYS THE CHALLENGE WITH SURVEYS IS TRYING TO DO AN APPLES TO APPLES. - RIGHT. 
          - AND IT'S, IT'S, IT'S DIFFICULT. 
          SO, WE'RE ABLE TO DO THAT WITH THE, THE ACTUAL FEES, BUT THEN THOSE CAVEATS, OKAY, BUT THEY'RE GONNA RAISE THEIR FEES IN WATSONVILLE WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THE LAST TIME THEY'VE RAISED THEIR FEES, AND SO IT'S HARD TO PUT THAT EXTRA LAYER ONTO IT AS FAR AS THESE MAY BE 10-YEAR-OLD FEES AND THEY'VE JUST DECIDED THEY DON'T WANT TO INCREASE 'EM FOR WHATEVER REASON. - RIGHT. 
          - UM, BUT WE WERE ABLE TO, AS FAR AS THE ACTUAL FEE AMOUNT, SAYING THESE ARE APPLES TO APPLES BUILDING PERMITS, BUILDING PLAN CHECK. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          - RIGHT. SO APPLES TO APPLES, I MEAN, IT SEEMS LIKE WE ARE SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EXPENSIVE THAN AT THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ AND WATSONVILLE, AND THAT THIS FLAT PERMIT PROCESSING FEE HAS SOMETHING TO DO WITH IT. 
          I MEAN WHAT... 
          - I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN BY THE FLAT PER... 
          - I MEAN, IT SAYS IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, AT THE ROWS WITH THE, YOU KNOW, THE COMPARISON AND THE COLUMNS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, CITY OF SANTA CRUZ, CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY, AND THEN THE TOTALS, THE VARIOUS PERMIT PROCESSING PLAN, CHECK BUILDING PERMIT, MECHANICAL PERMIT, ELECTRICAL PERMIT, PLUMBING PERMIT. 
          UM, AND... 
          - I DON'T HAVE IT. 
          - ...IT SEEMS LIKE OTHER THAN CITY OF WATSONVILLE, WE'RE THE ONLY ONE WITH A PERMIT PROCESSING FEE. 
          AND OURS IS ACTUALLY, I MEAN, I'M LOOKING AT UM, NEW SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING. 
          OUR PERMIT PROCESSING FEE, $3,904 AND 83 CENTS ZERO FOR CITY OF SANTA CRUZ, ZERO FOR THE CITY OF SCOTTS VALLEY, $77 FOR WATSONVILLE. 
          - AND I'M SORRY, I DON'T HAVE THAT, THAT DAE. 
          - THIS IS, I THINK THIS WAS ACTUALLY COMPARE, I MEAN, IT'S IN THE PACKET COMPARISON OF... - YES. 
          - IT'S ONE OF THE ATTACHMENTS, UH, IT'S THE FOURTH ONE DOWN. 
          COMPARISON OF FEES FOR VARIOUS PROJECTS. 
          [05:15:14]
- MAYBE WE CAN PUT IT ON THE SCREEN SO WE CAN ALL SEE WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING SUPERVISOR KOENIG. 
          - THIS IS FOR [INAUDIBLE] - MM - UM, SO THE PERMIT PROCESSING, THE PERMIT PROCESSING IS THE, UM, THE COST OF THE PERMIT TEXT IN THE APPLICATIONS, THE PROCESSING OF THE APPLICATIONS, THE CREATING OF APPLICATIONS, THE COMMUNICATIONS THAT GO BACK AND FORTH. 
          SO THAT'S WHAT OUR PERMIT PROCESSING FEE IS ENCOMPASSING. 
          - MM-HMM. 
          - UM, AS FAR AS COMPARING TO OTHER JURISDICTIONS, I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY HANDLE THEIR INTAKES. 
          - YEAH. AND, AND THAT'S WHY WHEN WE LOOK AT, IT'S DIFFICULT WITH SURVEYS TO BEGIN WITH, BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT INDIVIDUAL FEES, IT BECOMES EVEN MORE DIFFICULT BECAUSE EVERYONE DEFINES IT DIFFERENTLY. 
          SO THAT'S WHY WE TRY TO LOOK AT THIS, THIS ADDITION, THIS REMODEL AND KIND OF LOOK AT IT MORE HOLISTICALLY BECAUSE OF, OF, OF THAT. 
          UM, BUT IT IS, IT, IT, IT DOES SCALE UP AND IT'S JUST, AS YOU GET THE, THE LARGER, UM, SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING LARGER SQUARE FOOTAGE, IT SCALES UP EVEN MORE. 
          - BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY PLAN CHECK, IT'S LESS THAN THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ PLAN CHECK, RIGHT? SO HOW WE'RE CATEGORIZING THINGS MAY BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE IF YOU ADD THE PREMISE PROCESSING AND THE PLAN CHECK TOGETHER, THAT'S 26, 2700 FOR THE CITY, AND IT'S 2600 OR SO FOR PLA-, THE SANTA CRUZ COUNTY. 
          - MM-HMM. - RIGHT. 
          - SO WHEN YOU'RE ADDING THOSE TWO TOGETHER, IT'S KIND OF A... 
          - SO RIGHT. SO THEN MAYBE THEY'RE JUST DISTRIBUTING THAT SAME COST DIFFERENTLY. 
          YEAH. 
          OKAY. I MEAN, THIS KINDA JUST GETS BACK TO MY POINT, LIKE, IF YOU JUST HAVE A COMP-, MORE COMPLICATED, MORE EXPENSIVE PROCESS, THEN THAT'S JUST WHAT YOU CHARGE. 
          AND THERE'S LIKE, THERE'S JUST NOT... 
          IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A GREAT INCENTIVE OTHER THAN, YOU KNOW, OUR OTHER POLICY EFFORTS TO TRY TO STREAMLINE, BUT THERE'S NO LIKE COST INCENTIVE TO STREAMLINE. 
          IT'S NOT LIKE WE FEEL THE PAIN AS AN ORGANIZATION OF AN INEFFICIENT PROCESS, RIGHT? LIKE WE JUST CHARGE THE CUSTOMER NO MATTER HOW INEFFICIENT OUR PROCESS IS. 
          - I GUESS THAT WAS A QUESTION. 
          BUT I GOTTA TELL YOU THE UH, UH, I DON'T KNOW THAT THE MONEY WOULD EVER BE THE MOTIVATION FOR CITY BECAUSE WE ARE COVERING THE COSTS BUT UNFORTUNATELY TODAY IT'S WITH THE GENERAL FUND. 
          AND SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TODAY IS TO COVER MORE OF THIS COST OF SERVICE, UH, BY THE CUSTOMER WHO'S NEEDING THE SERVICE. 
          NOW CONCURRENTLY, THE STREAMLINED SANTA CRUZ PROCESS IS MOTIVATION FOR ALL OF US TO MAKE THAT PROCESS BETTER. 
          AND ESPECIALLY WITH OUR HOUSING ELEMENT AND THE NEEDS TO BUILD MORE HOUSING MORE QUICKLY WITH EXISTING STAFF THAT'S MOTIVATION FOR US AS WELL. 
          SO I WOULD, I WOULD SAY THAT THE MONEY ISN'T A GOOD MOTIVATOR ANYWAY. 
          I THINK IT'S YOUR BOARD DIRECTION ON THE STREAMLINING PROCESS IMPROVEMENT AND KNOWING THAT THE WORKLOAD IS INCREASING DRAMATICALLY. 
          WE CAN SEE THAT. WE CAN SEE IN THE PIPELINE. 
          HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS WITH THE EXISTING STAFF. 
          AND SO THAT'S WHAT'S MOTIVATING US TODAY IS THAT COMMUNITY SERVICE, AND HOPEFULLY TO YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THE, THE FEES THAT WE WILL SEE, UH, AN ADJUSTMENT OVER TIME WITH THE PROCESS IMPROVEMENT TO SEE THOSE FEES COME DOWN PER, PER PERMIT. 
          - RIGHT. - THAT'S THE ANTICIPATION - RIGHT. I MEAN, BUT JUST TO YOUR POINT ABOUT THE GENERAL FUND, I MEAN, IT'S ACTUALLY THE OPPOSITE. 
          LIKE PERMITTING SUBSIDIZES THE REST OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AT LEAST A LITTLE BIT. 
          IT SUBSIDIZES THE LONG RANGE PLANNING. 
          AND TO THAT EXTENT WE'RE ACTUALLY PUTTING THE BURDEN OF OUR COMPLEX REGULATORY FRAMEWORK ON NEW DEVELOPMENT. 
          IT'S EXACERBATING THE HOUSING CRISIS BECAUSE WE'RE MAKING NEW DEVELOPMENT PAY FOR THE COMPLEX ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN UPDATES AND EVERYTHING. 
          I MEAN, NOT A HUNDRED PERCENT. - YEAH. 
          - I GET IT. THERE'S THE TWO POINT, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING MILLION, BUT THERE IS SOME AMOUNT OF THAT, BUT... 
          - AND NOT TO BE ARGUMENTATIVE, BUT IF WE CAN PROCESS 10 TIMES MORE PERMITS WE DO A YEAR, THEN THE PER UNIT PRICE WILL GO DOWN CONSIDERABLY. 
          EVEN THOUGH IT'S HELPING PAY FOR SOME OF THOSE LONG RANGE PLANNING AND OTHER EFFORTS, THE PER UNIT PRICE WILL GO DOWN. 
          AND SO THAT'S STILL THE VISION. 
          YOU'RE, YOU'RE CORRECT. 
          YOU'RE CORRECT THAT SOME OF THOSE PERMIT FEES ARE COVERING THE OVERHEAD COSTS, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. 
          BUT IF WE CAN GET THE PER PERMIT FEE DOWN WITH STREAMLINING, THEN, THEN IN GENERAL WE'RE LOWERING THE PRICE TO DO SOME OF THESE OVERHEAD EXPENSES AS WELL. 
          - YEAH. I MEAN, I THINK, I THINK I MADE MY POINT. 
          I, I HONESTLY DON DON'T...  - YEAH, I THINK YOU DID. 
          - I, I'D OBVIOUSLY DON'T, UH, I MEAN, YOU KNOW, 
          [05:20:02]
WE INCREASED PERMIT FEES $760,000, WHATEVER, THAT WE'RE ADDING THAT MUCH COST TO, TO CREATING HOUSING IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          THAT SAID, I MEAN, I, I ACTUALLY LIKE THE APPEAL FEES BECAUSE WE'VE HAD SOME BAD ACTORS ON APPEALS THERE WHERE WE HEAR THEIR DANG APPEALS, UH, MEETING AFTER MEETING, AFTER MEETING. 
          UM, SO I'M GLAD TO SEE SOME OF THAT IN THERE. 
          UM, I ALSO LIKE THE FACT THAT WE'RE MOVING TO FLAT FEES, UH, IN A NUMBER OF PLACES AND, AND HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE DEPENDABILITY AND I ALSO LIKE THE FACT THAT WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY, I MEAN, THE, THE BUILDING PERMITS ARE NOT ACTUALLY INCREASING IN COST, UM, AT ALL. 
          SO THERE'S... LOVE IT. THERE ARE SOME THINGS TO LIKE IN HERE. 
          UM, SO ALSO PORT IT, UM, WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE'RE GONNA KEEP, UH, TRYING TO REDUCE PROCESSING TIME, WHICH WILL REDUCE FEES. 
          AND ALSO THIS KIND OF DOES, I MEAN TO YOUR POINT, GIVES US SORT OF A LEVEL SET WHERE WE CAN THEN GO BACK AND LOOK AT, OKAY, WELL WHAT DO WE WANNA SUBSIDIZE, RIGHT? I MEAN, IF THERE'S, YOU KNOW, IT GIVES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THIS BOARD TO LOOK AT SOME KIND OF, UM, YOU KNOW, AFFORDABLE HOUSING PERMIT SUBSIDY OR SOME, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES GOING FORWARD. 
          SO THANK YOU. 
          - IF THERE'S NO OTHER COMMENTS, UH, I'LL BRING IT BACK TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION. 
          - UH, I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. 
          - SECOND. 
          MADAM CLERK. - SECOND- GOT A MOTION FROM SUPERVISOR... - CHAIR. 
          ...SECOND FROM SUPERVISOR HERNANDEZ. 
          - CHAIR. CHAIR. I'M GONNA ASK AS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT, UM, WE ADD DIRECTION THAT THE APPEAL FEE IS NOT BEING INCREASED. 
          LET'S SEE IF THAT'S AMENABLE. 
          - YOU ARE MAKING A MOTION TO NONE OF THE APPEALS? - NO, I'M JUST SAYING, I'M MAKING, MAKING, I'M MAKING A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT THE APPEAL FEES NOT BE INCREASED. 
          - ALL OF THEM? - YES. 
          'CAUSE IT'S, THERE'S AN APPEAL FEE TO THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR, THERE'S AN APPEAL FEE IF THE, THE, IF A PROJECT WANTS TO GET APPEALED TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AND THEN THERE'S A NEW FEE IF WE TAKE JURISDICTION ON THE APPEAL THAT THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT AS WELL. 
          - YEAH, I'M SORRY. 
          - AND I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S REALLY FAIR. 
          I MEAN, ESPECIALLY THE LATTER PART WHERE IF THE BOARD DECIDES WE SHOULD TAKE JURISDICTION OVER A PROJECT THAT THE APPELLANT THEN HAS TO PAY FOR US TO, TO TAKE JURISDICTION. 
          I MEAN, IF THAT'S THE DECISION THE BOARD'S MAKING, WE SHOULD BE USING OUR GENERAL FUND DOLLARS TO PAY FOR THAT. 
          AND I WILL JUST SAY, I THINK THIS YEAR WE'VE HAD TWO APPEALS. 
          WE HAD THE CELL PHONE TOWER AND WE JUST HAD THE PROJECT THAT CAME BEFORE US RECENTLY. 
          SO WHAT'S THE THIRD? - UH, I, I THINK YOU HAVE SELECTIVE MEMORY AND YOU'RE THINKING OF, OF PROJECTS THAT WERE MAYBE APPEALED BY LIKE CITIZENS, NOT THE APPLICANTS. 
          - THAT'S TRUE. 
          - UH, I MEAN, 'CAUSE WE'VE HAD A A HANDFUL... 
          - EITHER WAY, THAT'S STILL OF GREATER COST THAN THE APPLICANTS AS WELL. 
          I MEAN, I THINK TO A LOT OF YOUR POINTS ABOUT INCREASING COSTS, I MEAN, IF THE APPLICANTS WERE TO APPEAL, THAT'S GONNA BE A GREATER COST TO THEM AS WELL. 
          AND THAT COST WOULD BE EASIER TO BE ABSORBED BY A DEVELOPER THAN IT WOULD BE FOR A PRIVATE CITIZEN OR A GROUP OF CITIZENS WHO WANT TO APPEAL PROJECTS THAT THEY THINK ARE INCOMPATIBLE OR BEING DONE POORLY. 
          AND SO I JUST THINK THAT KEEPING THE FEES, I'M NOT SAYING TO REDUCE THEM, AND THE FEES ARE ALREADY PRETTY HIGH. 
          I THINK LIKE $1,800 FOR AN APPEAL. 
          SO, IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S AN INSIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY, BUT INCREASING THAT TO, YOU KNOW, 2,830, POTENTIALLY $3,200, THAT JUST SEEMS A LITTLE EXCESSIVE TO ME. 
          AND I THINK THAT KEEPING THEM WHERE THEY ARE RIGHT NOW WOULD SEEM APPROPRIATE AND IT WOULD BE EQUITABLE FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE CONCERNS WITH SOME OF THE PROJECTS COMING BEFORE US. 
          - OKAY. IS THE SECOND SECONDER OF THE MOTION, I DON'T MIND - CAN I MAKE SOME COMMENTS TO THAT? - YES. 
          - UH, THANK YOU. 
          I THINK WHY I WAS REMAINING QUIET ON THIS IS THAT THE, THE CONCEPT THAT I SUPPORT IS MOVING IN THE DIRECTION OF COVERING THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS. 
          THAT IS WHAT THIS PROJECT WAS, AND THAT'S THE DELIVERABLE. 
          AND AT SOME... AND WHAT IT GIVES US IS AN OPPORTUNITY DOWN THE ROAD TO SET OUR PRIORITIES. 
          DO WE WANNA SUBSIDIZE SOMETHING? WHERE DO WE WANT TO SUBSIDIZE SOMETHING? UM, SO I WAS GONNA SUPPORT THE ACTION BECAUSE I BELIEVE IN COVERING THE COST OF DOING BUSINESS. 
          I'M NOT SURE I'M READY TO START PEELING OUT WHERE THE SUBSIDIES MIGHT BE, WHERE WE MIGHT ASK THE TAXPAYER TO SUBSIDIZE. 
          I'M NOT SURE THAT APPEALS WOULD BE MY PRIORITY. 
          IT COULD BE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          IT COULD BE ONE OF THE, YOU KNOW, THERE'S HUNDREDS OF ITEMS IN HERE. 
          AND SO I THINK THAT'S, UM, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IS BEING ASKED IN THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT IS, IS, IS KIND OF A, A CHANGE IN SORT OF THE GENERAL ACTION THAT WAS ASKED OF US TODAY. 
          WHICH IS LET'S, LET'S TAKE INVENTORY OF THE COSTS AND LET'S AGREE THAT WE'RE GONNA CHARGE THEM. 
          - CAN I, CAN I RESPOND CHAIR? - SURE. BUT THE MAKE OF THE MOTION HASN'T, UH, ACCEPTED THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT AMENDMENTS. GO AHEAD. 
          - OKAY. I THINK DISCUSSION SHOULD CONTINUE 
          [05:25:02]
BEFORE I CONSIDER ACCEPTING OR NOT. 
          - OKAY. SO JUST IN RESPONSE TO THAT, I THINK THAT TO YOUR POINT OF WHERE DO WE WANT TO SEE TAX DOLLARS SUBSIDIZE, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THESE COSTS. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S THE DISCUSSION TODAY. 
          I MEAN, ALL OF THIS BEFORE US TODAY, THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN. 
          LIKE, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THIS IS SUPPOSED TO COME BACK TO US. 
          IS THIS GONNA COME BACK TO US AGAIN IN THE NEAR FUTURE? - SO WE DO, UH, BIANNUAL UPDATES ON FEES, AND SO, BUT I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DOING AN ANNUAL REVIEW BY STAFF. 
          - RIGHT. AND, AND WE WOULD, AS WE, UH, DISCUSSED A BIT EARLIER, A MORE COMPREHENSIVE LOOK, UH, AND, YOU KNOW, TWO, THREE YEARS. 
          SO NOT AS REGULARLY, BUT YES, WE WILL CONTINUE TO ASSESS THE LEVEL OF FEES. 
          - RIGHT. SO MY POINT IS THIS, WE WILL GET AN UPDATE ABOUT SIX MONTHS FROM NOW AND THEN THERE WILL BE ANOTHER FEE, YOU KNOW, CHANGE NEXT YEAR. 
          THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY RIGHT NOW FOR US TO MAKE A DECISION IF WE WANT TO HAVE CARVE OUTS ON WHAT WE WANNA SEE SUBSIDIZED. 
          AND THAT'S WHY I'VE MOVED FORWARD WITH, I'M CONTENT WITH SUPPORTING EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF, UM, APPEALS. 
          AND IF SOMEBODY ELSE WANTS TO SAY WHATEVER ELSE THEY WANNA SEE US CHANGE AND THEY WANNA HAVE THE TAX-, TAXPAYERS ABSORBED, WE CAN DO THAT. 
          I MEAN, THAT'S WHY, THAT'S WHAT THIS ITEM IS ASKING OF US TODAY. 
          SO THAT'S WHY, YOU KNOW, WE PREPARED, WE REVIEWED THIS AND THE AREA WHERE WE THOUGHT THAT WE SHOULD SEE NO CHANGE IS IN THE APPEALS. 
          OTHERWISE, THE NEXT TIME WE'RE GONNA BE ABLE TO HAVE, HAVE THIS CONVERSATION POSSIBLY, UH, YOU KNOW, MIDYEAR, WHICH AT, AT WHICH POINT THE FEES WILL HAVE ALREADY GONE UP OR IN A YEAR FROM NOW, WHICH, AT WHICH POINT THESE FEES WILL HAVE ALREADY GONE UP BECAUSE WE'RE GONNA PROVIDE THE DIRECTION TODAY TO INCREASE THOSE FEES. 
          AND SO THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING THE BOARD TO CONSIDER, UM, NOT MAKING ANY CHANGES TO APPEAL FEES, UH, BECAUSE THAT'S, IF WE ADOPT THIS, EVERYTHING THAT WE ADOPT TODAY IS GONNA GO INTO EFFECT. 
          - ONE OTHER OPTION WITH THIS IS TO BIFURCATE THE FEE WHERE IF IT'S AN APPLICANT APPEALING IT'S THE FULL FEE. 
          IF IT'S A RESIDENT APPEALING OR NON APPLICANT APPEALING, IT'S UH, A LOWER FEE. 
          SO THAT'S ONE OPTION ALSO. 
          - YEAH, I WOULD HAVE MORE, I WOULD'VE SOME CONCERNS AROUND, AROUND THAT THAT I WOULD WANNA LOOK INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          JUST IF YOUR BOARD WAS INTERESTED IN GOING IN THAT DIRECTION. 
          - I, I'LL JUST SAY I'M, I'M NOT WILLING TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT BECAUSE I KNOW THAT STAFF HAS SPENT CONSIDERABLE TIME DEALING WITH THESE APPEALS, BOTH PLANNING STAFF AND COUNTY COUNCIL'S, UH, TIME, UH, THROUGHOUT THE YEAR. 
          AND I MEAN, TO SOME EXTENT, YOU, YOU KNOW, IF YOU THINK YOU'VE GOT A CASE, YOU SHOULD BE WILLING, YOU KNOW, EVEN IF IT'S AMONG RESIDENTS TO COME UP WITH, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE THOUSAND DOLLARS. 
          I MEAN, THE ONE FEE THAT MAYBE I, I COULD GET ON BOARD WITH STRIKING IS, UH, APPEAL THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, BOARD ACCEPTANCE, WHICH IF I UNDERSTAND WOULD, IS ACTUALLY FOR THE DENO-, LIKE IF WE HAD A DENOVO HEARING AND WE'VE ALREADY ACCEPTED, I MEAN, YEAH, THAT KIND OF... 
          WE, THE BOARD HAS ALREADY AGREED THAT THERE'S AN ISSUE, WE'VE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THE JURISDICTIONAL HEARING AND, AND THE APPELLANT HAS PAID FOR THAT. 
          DO I UNDERSTAND THAT FEE CORRECTLY? THAT, THAT... 
          - YEAH. 
          - YEAH. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. I THINK THAT'S CORRECT. 
          - YEP. - MAY I... 
          - OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. 
          - WAIT. 
          - CAN I, CAN I ASK A QUESTION? - YES. 
          - UM, SO IN YOUR MIND THAT, CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THE APPEALS FEES? - SURE. 
          - UM, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE NEARLY DOUBLING, BUT THEY'RE SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER. 
          - SO OUR EXPERIENCE WITH APPEALS ESPECIALLY IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS HAS BEEN, UH, A LOT OF STAFF TIME SPENT ON IT. 
          SO IT'S JUST THE ACTUAL COST HAS GONE UP CONSIDERABLY. 
          AND I THINK YOU GUYS ARE STARTING TO TALK ABOUT HOW MANY, AND, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE'RE A DOZEN APPEALS A YEAR IS SIGNIFICANT AND, AND SOME OF 'EM ARE JUST A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH WITH THE, UH, APPELLANT. 
          AND, UH, SO THAT'S WHAT WE ASSESS. 
          WE ASSESS WELL, HOW MUCH TIME ARE WE ACTUALLY SPENDING ON THESE APPEALS AND THAT'S THE BASIS OF OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO MORE CLOSELY COVER THOSE ACTUAL COSTS. 
          AND, AND, YOU KNOW, THE APPEALS ARE COUNTYWIDE, BUT I WOULD TELL YOU THE, UM, A LARGE PORTION OF 'EM, A MAJORITY OF 'EM, ARE IN THESE TRICKY AREAS, COASTAL AREAS ON BLUFFS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. 
          THAT'S WHERE WE SEE A LOT OF APPEALS BECAUSE IT'S VERY DIFFICULT AND CHALLENGING IN THOSE AREAS. 
          AND SO, AND THAT'S WHERE WE SPEND A LOT OF OUR TIME. 
          AND SO THAT'S THE BASIS OF THE RECOMMENDATION. 
          BUT THAT SAID, CLEARLY IT'S UP TO YOUR BOARD TO GIVE US DIRECTION. 
          - SO MY UNDERSTANDING, I DIDN'T MAKE A COMMENT BEFORE, I'M GONNA MAKE IT NOW, EVEN THOUGH WE'VE GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE TABLE. 
          MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THESE FEES HAVEN'T CHANGED, 
          [05:30:03]
HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN REASSESSED FOR FIVE YEARS, AND THAT THEY HAVEN'T REALLY EVEN BEEN CHANGED EVEN PRIOR TO FIVE YEARS. 
          - THAT'S CORRECT, EXCEPT FOR JUST A BASIC CPI ON SOME OF OUR, SOME OF OUR HOURLY RATE. 
          BUT, BUT IN GENERAL, THE STRUCTURE AND THE, THE COST RECOVERY HAS NOT BEEN ASSESSED OR EVALUATED FOR MORE THAN FIVE YEARS? THAT'S CORRECT. 
          - OKAY. AND IS THERE ANY DEGREE OF LIKE FEE WAIVER FOR, FOR SOMEBODY WHO'S LIKE TRYING TO MAYBE ADD AN EXTRA ROOM ONTO THEIR HOUSE? LIKE IF THEY'RE A LOWER INCOME PERSON, DO WE HAVE ANYTHING LIKE THAT? - I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT THE... 
          - I THINK. - ...APPEALS ARE USUALLY ABOUT 'CAUSE THAT'S A BUILDING PERMIT... 
          - THAT'S A BUILDING. YEAH. NOT AN APPEAL, BUT JUST IF SOMEBODY, 'CAUSE I SAW THAT THE... 
          - FINANCIAL WAIVER YOU MEAN? - YEAH. 
          - UH, WE DON'T HAVE THAT CURRENTLY. NO. 
          - FOR PERMITTING. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I NEEDED TO KNOW. 
          I THINK I'M GONNA KEEP MY MOTION AS, UM, AS INITIALLY MADE. 
          - OKAY. 
          SO WE HAVE A MOTION FROM SUPERVISOR DESERPA. 
          A SECOND FROM SUPERVISOR MARTI-, NO - I DON'T THINK IT WAS ME. 
          - NO, IT WAS ME. OH, FOR ME. 
          - SUPERVISOR KOENIG.   - AYE. 
          - MARTINEZ  - AYE. 
          - CUMMINGS. 
          - NO. AND FOR THE RECORD, UM, I DO SUPPORT THE MAJORITY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT I CAN'T SUPPORT INCREASING THE APPEAL FEES. 
          - DESERPA  - AYE AND HERNANDEZ.  - AYE. 
          MOTION PASSES. 
          ONE CINDY VOTE, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          MOVING ON TO NUMBER THIR-, NO, SORRY, 14. 
          NEXT ITEM IS NUMBER 14. 
          CONSIDER PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CODE CHAPTER 17.10, RELATING TO THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING REQUIREMENTS FOR ONSITE AFFORDABLE UNITS AND TAKE ALL RELATED ACTIONS. 
          - THAT'S ME. 
          - WE'LL ASK, OH, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - THANK YOU. HEY, CHAIR. 
          WELL, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD TIME AND TIME AGAIN THAT SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, UM, IS COMMITTED TO PROVIDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          WE KNOW WE'RE THE MOST EXPENSIVE RENTAL COMMUNITY IN THE UNITED STATES. 
          AND THAT WE NEED, UM, RENTAL, AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING FOR OUR WORKFORCE. 
          UM, IN 2023 WHEN WE WERE HAVING DISCUSSIONS AROUND THE HOUSING ELEMENT, UM, ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WAS ACCEPTED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE BOARD WAS TO REQUIRE ONSITE PRODUCTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR ANY UNIT THAT WAS SEVEN... 
          THERE WAS SEVEN OR MORE THAT THE 15% INCLUSIONARY WILL BE REQUIRED ON SITE. 
          THAT WAS ADOPTED AND INCLUDED IN OUR HOUSING ELEMENT. 
          UH, COUPLE WEEKS AGO WITH THE 841 CAPITAL ROAD PROJECT WHEN THIS WAS AT THE PLANNING COMMISSION, COMMISSIONERS WERE TOLD THAT THERE WAS THAT WHEN MEASURE, I BELIEVE O PASSED IN 1970S OR EIGHTIES, AFFORDABLE HOUSING MEASURE. 
          - MEASURE J. 
          - MEASURE J SORRY. 
          WHEN THAT PASSED, UM, THAT THE, AND THE 15 INCLUSIONARY, 15% INCLUSIONARY WAS PUT IN PLACE. 
          UH, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS WERE TOLD THAT WAS ONLY FOR FOUR SALE UNITS, THAT THE REQUIREMENT COULD ONLY BE APPLIED TO FOUR SALE UNITS AND COULD NOT BE APPLIED TO, IT WAS NOT REQUIRED TO BE APPLIED TO RENTAL UNITS. 
          AND SO WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY IS A CODE CLEANUP BECAUSE WE HAVE TIME AND TIME AGAIN EXPRESSED THAT WE WANNA SEE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          WE KNOW WE KNOW WE NEED MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          FOR RENTERS THE 15% INCLUSIONARY IS REQUIRED FOR FOR SALE, AND WHAT THIS WOULD DO IS CLEAN UP OUR CODE TO REQUIRE 15% INCLUSIONARY FOR RENTAL, UH, HOUSES. 
          IT DOES NOT, THERE IS A PROVISION THAT THERE, UM, COULD BE IN LIE FEES AND THAT IS STILL AN OPTION FOR CONSIDERATION BY THE WHATEVER THE DECIDING BOARD IS. 
          BUT THIS ULTIMATELY WILL BE ALIGNING OUR CODE TO REQUIRE 15% INCLUSIONARY ON SITE FOR RENTAL HOUSING. 
          AND WE KNOW THAT IF WE DON'T REQUIRE THIS HOUSING ON SITE OFTENTIMES IT DOESN'T GET BUILT. 
          'CAUSE THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT THAT THAT AFFORDABILITY AND THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING GET BUILT AT A CERTAIN POINT IN TIME. 
          AND SO THIS IS REALLY A CODE CLEANUP AND SINCE IT'S RELATED TO AN ORDINANCE, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT'S WHY IT'S ON A REGULAR AGENDA. 
          BUT, UM, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS, UM, AFTER I TURN IT BACK OVER TO THE CHAIR. 
          - TAKE IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC FIRST. 
          IF YOU, ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS US ON THIS ITEM. 
          OH. 
          - REMIND ME TO PUT AGENDA ITEMS ON END OF DECEMBER. 
          UM, SEEMS TO BE A RALLY GROUP AROUND HERE RIGHT NOW. 
          SO, UH, GOOD AFTERNOON, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. 
          UH, MY NAME IS CASEY VAN. 
          I'M IN HERE TO SUPPORT THIS CHANGE IN ORDINANCE. 
          IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DO NOT TO LET THE DEVELOPERS DO IN-LIEU FEES. 
          IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HOLD 'EM TO STANDARDS OF BUILDING THAT AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND INCLUSIONARY HOUSING. 
          THIS, THIS AREA DESPERATELY NEEDS HOUSING. 
          BUT ALLOWING DEVELOPERS TO SKIRT THOSE IN-LIEU FEES AND PAY SOMETHING, OR SAY THEY'RE GONNA PAY SOMETHING AND NEVER BUILD IT, IT IS NOT HOLDING THEM THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE. 
          THIS IS ABOUT KEEPING PEOPLE HERE LOCALLY THAT HAVE LIVED HERE THEIR ENTIRE LIFE THAT ARE NOW GETTING PUSHED OUT. 
          I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THESE STANDARDS. 
          [05:35:01]
UH, YOU MENTIONED THE 831 WATER STREET PROJECT. 
          CORRECT JUSTIN. 
          - FOR 841 CAPITOLA ROAD. 
          - 41 CAPITOLA. 
          WELL, THE, ONE OF THE HOUSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS THAT ARE COMING, UM, BUT, OR MULT, MANY BUILT IN THIS AREA ARE BEING DONE UNDER AB 2011 AND SB 35, WHICH FAST TRACKS THEM TO BEING ABLE TO DEVELOP. 
          AND UNDER THAT THEY USE CALIFORNIA TAX ACCREDIT, UH, ALLOWED TO THEM IN THE TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS BY SAYING THAT THEY'RE GONNA PAY PREVAILING WAGE. 
          YOU LOOK AT THE RECENT ONE, THE 831 WATER STREET PROJECT, UM, THEY SELECTED THAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY SUPPOSED TO BUILD UNDER THE SB 35 SKILLED AND TRAINED. 
          BUT THEY JUST HIRED A CONTRACTOR SOLVENT MECHANICAL THAT HAS BEEN VIOLATED OVER 21 TIMES IN 2024 BY THE DSLE FOR MULTIPLE LABEL CODE VIOLATIONS. 
          SO IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE KEEP BUILDING, BUT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE DOING IT RESPONSIBLY. 
          HOW ARE WE GONNA MAKE SURE THAT WE BUILD WITH A LOCAL WORKFORCE AND THEN ALSO PROVIDE HOUSING FOR THAT LOCAL WORK? SO I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION OF THE SUPPORT OF AMENDING AND CLEANING UP THIS ORDINANCE IN THIS, THIS CHAPTER. 
          THANK YOU. 
          - ANYONE ONLINE, ANYONE ONLINE? - I SEE NO SPEAKERS ONLINE CHAIR. 
          - NO SPEAKERS. 
          - NO SPEAKERS ONLINE. 
          - I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, QUESTION. 
          - SUPERVISOR. 
          - SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ. 
          - THANK YOU, CHAIR. UM, YEAH. 
          AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS TO OUR ATTENTION, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          UM, AND FOR THE COMMENTS, UM, FROM THE PUBLIC, I MEAN, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE A TREMENDOUS NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IS CLEAR AND THAT THIS BOARD IS COMMITTED TO ADDRESSING AND RESOLVING. 
          I THINK WHAT I'M STILL UNCLEAR YET IS, UM, THE TIMING AND THE REQUIREMENTS AS IT RELATES TO THE HOUSING ELEMENT AND NEXT STEPS RELATED TO, UM, OUR NEXUS STUDY, FOR EXAMPLE. 
          SO I THINK FIRST MAYBE IS STEPHANIE HANSON, ARE YOU THE RIGHT PERSON TO ASK? CAN YOU JUST TELL ME THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THE HOUSING ELEMENT? WHO DID THAT? WAS THAT AN OUTSIDE CONSULTANT OR WAS THAT INTERNALLY INTERNAL STAFF LIKE. 
          - OH, UM, IT WAS MOSTLY INTERNAL STAFF WE DID HAVE SOME CONSULTANT SUPPORT, UM, MOSTLY IN ORGANIZING, IN, IN FIGURING OUT WHAT WORKED IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS AND IN, UM, A ROBUST OUTREACH PROGRAM. 
          THIS PARTICULAR POLICY WAS ADDED AT THE VERY END, UM, UH, BY, BY A SUPERVISOR'S MOTION. 
          UM, WHAT'S NOT SHOWING UP IN THE PACKET IS THAT IT WAS, UH, RECOMMENDED TO BE TIED TO THE NEXUS STUDY. 
          SO, UM, THE NEXUS STUDY IS ALSO PART OF THE PROGRAMS IN, UM, IN THE HOUSING ELEMENT. 
          WE'RE WORKING ON IT NOW. 
          WE HAVE A CONSULTANT ON BOARD THAT'S A LITTLE BIT DELAYED, UM, BUT WE WOULD DEFINITELY RECOMMEND THAT YOU SEE THE RESULTS, UM, OF THE NEXUS STUDY BEFORE MAKING ANY CHANGES TO, UM, THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING PROGRAM. 
          YOU NEED THAT, UM, FINANCIAL ANALYSIS TO HAVE A GOOD BASIS FOR MAKING THESE CHANGES. 
          OTHERWISE, IT CAN BE PRETTY CONTROVERT. 
          - CAN YOU... PLAY THAT OUT JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE. 
          UM, JUST FOR THE SAKE OF NEWCOMERS TO THE BOARD AND ALSO THE PUBLIC TELL US WHAT A HOUSING NEXUS STUDY IS, WHAT WE EXPECT IT TO TELL US PERHAPS, AND HOW THIS POLICY MIGHT INTERPLAY WITH IT. 
          - YEAH, SO THE HOUSING NEXUS STUDY IS GOING TO LOOK AT OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT FEE, AND IT'S GOING TO LOOK AT THE INCLUSIONARY PROGRAM, UM, SPECIFICALLY WHETHER WE SHOULD RAISE THE PERCENTAGE OF, UM, THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT NEED TO BE PROVIDED IN A MARKET RATE DEVELOPMENT. 
          SO THAT THIS IS A TANGENTIALLY RELATED TO, TO THAT. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE, THIS IS SUCH A BALANCING ACT. 
          WE ALL KNOW WE NEED THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          UM, HONESTLY, WHAT WE'RE NOT GETTING A LOT OF IS MARKET RATE HOUSING. 
          WE'VE HAD VERY FEW MARKET RATE RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS IN THE PAST 10 YEARS. 
          UM, AND, AND PART OF THAT IS THE REASON IS IT'S REALLY HARD TO MAKE THINGS PENCIL IN THIS ECONOMY AND WITH THE CONSTRAINTS THAT WE HAVE HERE IN THE COUNTY. 
          AND THE MARKET UNITS WILL HELP TO SUPPORT THE AFFORDABLE UNITS BECAUSE THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE GONNA MAKE THE MONEY ON, RIGHT? SO WE, WE WANNA BE REALLY CAUTIOUS WITH THAT, THAT BALANCE. 
          [05:40:02]
WE DON'T WANT TO GET OURSELVES INTO A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE MAKING IT EVEN HARDER TO, TO BUILD RENTAL UNITS. 
          SO THAT'S THE CONCERN. 
          IT MAY BE THE RIGHT THING TO DO I WOULD JUST ASK THAT THE BOARD WAIT FOR THE STUDY TO COME IN 
          [12. Hold public hearing and adopt resolution amending the Unified Fee Schedule for Fiscal Year 2025-26]
BEFORE TAKING, UM, ANY ACTION ON THIS. 
          - AND, AND WHAT IS THE TIMELINE FOR THE STUDY TO BE COMPLETE? - UM, WE'RE DOING STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS NOW AND WE'RE WAITING FOR THE FIRST DRAFT, SO I'M, I'M HOPING WE GET BACK TO YOU BY JUNE. 
          - OKAY. 
          AND DO YOU HAVE A RESPONSE TO THESE QUESTIONS? - YEAH, YEAH. I, I DO HAVE A RESPONSE WITH THEM. 
          'CAUSE WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, THE 15% INCLUSIONARY WHAT I'M PROPOSING TODAY, THAT WAS NEVER TIED TO THE NEXUS STUDY. 
          WHAT WAS TIED TO THE NEXUS STUDY WAS US INCREASING OUR INCLUSIONARY. 
          AND THE PROPOSAL THAT I HAD MADE BACK IN THE DAY, WHICH LED TO THE NEXUS STUDY BEING PROPOSED WAS INCREASING IT FROM 15% TO 20%. 
          THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M ASKING FOR TODAY. 
          WHAT I'M ASKING THE BOARD TO CONSIDER TODAY IS THAT WE HAVE THE 15% INCLUSIONARY HAS BEEN ON THE BOOK SINCE THE 1980S. 
          IT JUST CAME TO OUR ATTENTION WHEN A PROJECT CAME FORWARD THAT WHILE FOR SALE INCLUSIONARY IS REQUIRED TO BE BUILT ON SITE RENTAL INCLUSIONARY IS NOT. 
          AND I THINK TO YOUR THE POINT THAT WAS JUST MADE, YOU'RE RIGHT, MARKET RATE DOES SUPPORT AFFORDABLE UNITS. 
          SO WHY WOULD WE NOT WANNA REQUIRE THE AFFORDABLE UNITS TO BE BUILT ON SITE? IF THEY'RE NOT BUILT ON SITE, THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THEY'LL GET BUILT. 
          AND SO WHAT THIS IS TRYING TO DO IS THAT WHEN WE HAVE MARKET RATE PROJECTS THAT COME THROUGH, WE HAVE 15% INCLUSIONARY ALREADY ON THE BOOKS THAT RATHER BE AN OPTION THEN NOW IT'S A REQUIREMENT SO THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUILT. 
          AND I'LL PERSONALLY JUST SAY, BEING AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING CRISIS, BEING THE MOST EXPENSIVE RENTAL COMMUNITY IN THE UNITED STATES, WE NEED THE HOUSING THAT'S GONNA SUPPORT THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE AND WHAT WE'VE SEEN ESPECIALLY WHAT WE SEE DOWNTOWN, 425 SQUARE FOOT STUDIO, IT'S $3,100 A MONTH. 
          NOBODY WHO LIVES AND WORKS IN THIS TOWN CAN AFFORD THAT. 
          SO I COULD CARE LESS PERSONALLY IF MARKET RATE HOUSING GETS BUILT. 
          WE REALLY NEED THE HOUSING THAT'S GONNA SUPPORT OUR WORKFORCE. 
          AND THIS IS ONE MECHANISM FOR US TO GET THERE. 
          IT'S AN ALIGNMENT. 
          IT'S BRINGING OUR CODE INTO ALIGNMENT AND BRINGING OUR ORDINANCES INTO ALIGNMENT WITH POLICY THAT'S ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. 
          I'M NOT PROPOSING 20% TODAY BECAUSE I AM GONNA WAIT UNTIL THE NEXUS STUDY COMES BACK. 
          BUT WE NEVER SAID, WE SAID THAT IN THE HOUSING ELEMENT THAT WE WERE GONNA REQUIRE 15% INCLUSIONARY. 
          THAT WAS UNANIMOUSLY SUPPORTED BY THE BOARD, AND THIS IS JUST BRINGING OUR 15%, OUR ALREADY EXISTING POLICY INTO ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT WE HAVE ALREADY ON THE BOOKS. 
          - CHAIR. 
          - UH, SUPERVISOR KOENIG. 
          - UH, WELL FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS FOR SEEKING TO CLARIFY THIS ISSUE. 
          I MEAN, I, I WILL ADMIT THAT WHEN I FIRST LEARNED THAT THE 15% INCLUSION AREA WAS NOT BEING DIRECTLY APPLIED TO RENTAL HOUSING, I WAS SURPRISED. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, THAT THAT SAID, IT IS. 
          UM, I CAN SEE THAT THERE'S NUANCE HERE. 
          I THINK AS STAFF IS TRYING TO POINT OUT, UM, IT IS TRUE THAT I HAVE NOT THAT SEEN ANY RENTAL PROJ-, MARKET RATE RENTAL PROJECTS MOVED FORWARD, AT LEAST IN MY DISTRICT, OR WE'RE SEEING A LOT OF HOUSING DEVELOPMENT. 
          WE'RE SEEING TOWN HOMES. 
          WE'RE SEEING A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE PROJECTS, WHICH ARE, YOU KNOW, BENEFITING FROM TAX CREDITS AND ET CETERA. 
          BUT, WELL, THERE, THERE, THERE ARE ACTUALLY, UH, TWO RENTAL, OFF MARKET RATE RENTAL PROJECTS THEY'RE THE BUILDER'S REMEDY PROJECTS. 
          AND WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM THOSE FOLKS IS THIS IS THE ONLY WAY. 
          BASICALLY THROWING THE ZONING CODE OUT THE WINDOW IS THE ONLY WAY WE CAN BUILD RENTAL, UH, MARKET RATE RENTALS. 
          UM, AND SO UNDER YOUR CURRENT ZONING CODE COUNTY, AGAIN, THIS IS JUST, I'M PARAPHRASING WHAT I'VE HEARD WE CAN'T BUILD MARKET RATE RENTALS. 
          SO I THINK THERE IS AN ISSUE THERE THAT WE NEED TO LOOK MORE CLOSELY AT. 
          UM, AND I DO THINK THAT SAYING THAT THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, THAT I CAN ALSO SEE THAT THERE'S BENEFITS TO PUTTING THOSE AFFORDABLE UNITS IN A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE PROJECT. 
          I MEAN, BECAUSE THEN THAT PROJECT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT GOES TO AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPER WHO HAS MORE EXPERTISE IN GETTING THE TAX SUBSIDIES, UH, AND, AND PUTTING TOGETHER A, A PROJECT WHERE, YOU KNOW, 
          [13. Hold public hearing and adopt resolution amending the Unified Fee Schedule for Community Development and Infrastructure Department Planning Division development review fees based on the fee study conducted by Revenue Cost Specialists]
THAT IS THEIR BREAD AND BUTTER THEY KNOW HOW TO DO IT. 
          AND IT'S GONNA BE MORE LIKELY TO BE COMPETITIVE FOR THAT AS A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT. 
          SO, I MEAN, I... THAT'S NOT TO SAY LIKE I WOULDN'T SUPPORT ULTIMATELY POTENTIALLY IF THAT REQUIRING THE 15% INCLUSION AREA OR, OR AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON SITE. 
          I, I WOULD PREFER TO WAIT FOR THE NEXUS STUDY JUST SO THAT WE CAN HAVE A FULLER PICTURE OF, UH, THE POLICY NUANCE HERE. 
          AND SO I'M PREPARED TO MOVE, UH, THAT WE, UH, BRING THE SI-, THIS, THE PROPOSAL BACK, UH, THE TIME THAT WE REVIEW, UH, SAID NEXUS STUDY. 
          - SECOND. 
          - SO WE DO HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, BUT UH, I STILL HAVE, UM, SOME QUESTIONS AND I'M NOT SURE IF, UH, SUPERVISOR DESERPA DOES TOO. 
          UM, I KNOW YOU MENTIONED THAT 
          [05:45:04]
THERE'S, UH... 
          THE MARKET RATE HASN'T COME AROUND VERY OFTEN. 
          BUT I'M... WHAT I'M WORRIED ABOUT IS IF WE GET THE OPPOSITE PENDULUM, WHERE NOW I KNOW A LOT OF DEVELOPERS, ESPECIALLY NONPROFIT DEVELOPERS, UH, HAVE THIS HU-, THE HUD, UH, UH, THE, THE HUD VOUCHERS AS PART OF THEIR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR RENTALS. 
          NOW THAT SOME OF THEM ARE BEING CUT OR THEY'RE BEING DRASTICALLY CUT, WOULD THAT AFFECT HOW THESE, UH, AFFORDABLE PROJECTS BEEN SOLD OUT FOR THEM WITH LESS AFFORDABLE, UH, WITH LESS, YOU KNOW, HUD VOUCHERS? - I THINK ALL THE NONPROFITS ARE STRUGGLING WITH THE CHANGES RIGHT NOW. 
          UM, AND I, I DO IMAGINE THAT THERE WOULD BE AN, AN EFFECT ON, ON ANY OF THEM. 
          IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FROM THIS DISCUSSION. 
          - RIGHT. - RIGHT? BUT, UM, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY DISTRESSING TO SEE ANY SUPPORT GO AWAY FROM THESE, YOU KNOW, HOUSE NONPROFIT HOUSING DEVELOPERS. 
          SO MORE TO COME ON THAT I'M SURE. 
          - SO WHEN YOU SEE THESE PROJECTS COME FORTH, UM, THE AFFORDABLE PORTION OF IT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE THESE PROJECTS NOT PENCIL SO OUT BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF FEDERAL GRANT, THERE'S A LOT OF GRANTS ALSO BESIDES HUD AND... 
          - NO. THE, THE GRANTS ARE FOR THE LARGER AFFORDABLE... 
          - OKAY. - ...HOUSING PROJECTS, THEY, UM... YOU'RE, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SATISFY THE CRITERIA JUST COMING UP WITH A COUPLE OF UNITS. 
          - OKAY. 
          - SO IT'S REALLY GOT A PENCIL WITH HOW YOU ARE RENTING OUT THE UNITS. 
          - HOW DOES WATSONVILLE, UH, THEY HAVE A SLIDING SCALE OR SOMETHING IN THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE, OR HOW'S THEIRS? -  DO YOU KNOW? I'LL TURN IT OVER TO SUZANNE. 
          SHE'S SO MUCH MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE. 
          - UM, SO I AM NOT FULLY UP TO SPEED ON THE CURRENT VERSION OF THE WATSONVILLE ORDINANCE. 
          I AM FAMILIAR WITH, IT'S HAD SEVERAL ITERATIONS AS, AS HAS OUR CODE IN IN RECENT YEARS. 
          AND, UM, AS THE CODE HAS BEEN UPDATED AND CHANGED OVER TIME THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY REACTS TO THOSE CHANGES. 
          SO GENERALLY SPEAKING WHEN THE REQUIREMENTS ARE AMPED UP, YOU OFTEN SEE LESS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED AND WHEN THE REQUIREMENTS ARE DIALED BACK, YOU MIGHT SEE MORE DEVELOPMENTS PROPOSED. 
          I HAVE BEEN STAFF AT THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE FOR SEVERAL YEARS, WHILE BACK, AM, AND THAT WAS IN A PERIOD WHERE THEY HAD DIALED BACK THE PERCENTAGE REQUIREMENTS A LITTLE BIT. 
          THEY ALSO HAD A LOT OF REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUNDS THAT THEY COULD USE BOTH TO SUBSIDIZE AT THAT TIME, BOTH MARKET RATE, MIXED INCOME PROJECTS, AS WELL AS A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE PROJECTS. 
          NONE OF US LOCALITIES HAVE THOSE RDA DOLLARS ANYMORE. 
          UM, GENERALLY SPEAKING WHEN WE SAY MARKET RATE RENTAL PROJECTS, THOSE ARE PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT SEEKING ANY PUBLIC SUBSIDIES NOR ARE THEY GENERALLY ELIGIBLE FOR ANY PUBLIC SUBSIDIES. 
          AND THOSE ARE THE PROJECTS THAT ARE MOST AFFECTED BY THESE ORDINANCES. 
          UM, THE NONPROFIT, A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE THEY'RE NOT REALLY IMPACTED BY THESE ORDINANCES BECAUSE THEY'RE A HUNDRED PERCENT LOW INCOME. 
          THEY ALREADY CHECK THE BOX FOR 15% AFFORDABLE. 
          SO WHILE WE DO WORK WITH THOSE APPLICANTS AND SORT OF SUPPORT THEM THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS THIS CHAPTER DOES NOT IMPOSE ANY ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS ON THEM OTHER THAN WE RECORD A REGULATORY AGREEMENT. 
          BUT THEY WOULD BE DOING THAT ANYWAY. 
          IN MOST CASES, WE ARE ADDING FUNDS TO THOSE PROJECTS AS WELL. 
          SO IT'S SORT OF IT DOESN'T REALLY HAVE MUCH OF AN IMPACT ON THE A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE PROJECTS. 
          - OKAY. 
          UM, DID YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE? - THANK YOU. 
          - I NEED TO RESPOND TO YOU. 
          - OKAY. 
          - SO WHEN, UH, WHEN A BIG PROJECT IS, IS BUILT AND THEY MIGHT USE AN IN LIEU SITUATION, UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, WELL, I'D ACTUALLY LIKE YOU GUYS TO TELL ME WHAT HAPPENED. 
          SO, UM, SO I, I'M... I THINK WHAT I KNOW IS THAT, UM, MONEY GOES, UM, INTO A SPECIAL FUND TO SUPPORT LOW INCOME HOUSING. 
          - IT IS. - AND CAN YOU TALK ABOUT HOW... 
          - SURE. - ...THAT'S USED? - YEAH. SO I THINK THE WORD NUANCE WAS A, A GOOD WORD TO BRING UP FOR THIS ITEM BECAUSE WE USED TO HAVE IN-LIEU FEES IN OUR ORDINANCE AND NOW WE, LIKE MANY COMMUNITIES IN THE STATE, HAVE CHANGED AND RESTRUCTURED OUR INCLUSIONARY CODE TO SHIFT AWAY FROM IN-LIEU FEES AND TOWARDS SOMETHING CALLED IMPACT FEES. 
          UM, IT'S A LITTLE WONKY WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS, BUT IN, IN GENERAL TERMS, IT'S THOSE THE IMPACT FEES THAT WE HAVE NOW ARE APPLIED TO A WIDER VARIETY OF PROJECTS, AND THEY'RE ASSESSED AT A CERTAIN RATE PER SQUARE FOOT OF THE BUILDING THAT IS SUBJECT TO THE FEE. 
          SO, FOR EXAMPLE, NOW WE ASSESS THOSE IMPACT FEES 
          [05:50:02]
ON BOTH NON-RESIDENTIAL AND RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS, RIGHT? THEY'RE ONLY ASSESSED ON RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS IF THAT RESIDENTIAL PROJECT IS NOT PROVIDING SOME PERCENTAGE OF AFFORDABLE UNITS ON SITE. 
          NOW, BECAUSE THE BULK OF OUR RECENT DEVELOPMENT PIPELINE HAS BEEN 100% AFFORDABLE PROJECTS MOST OF OUR UNITS HAVE NOT BEEN PAYING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT FEE. 
          WE HAVE A SMALLER SUBSET OF THE RECENT PIPELINE WHICH IS MORE SMALL INFILL FOR SALE PROJECTS. 
          ALL OF THOSE BUT ONE THAT I COULD THINK OF IN THE LAST SEVEN YEARS OR SO HAVE BEEN PROVIDING THE 15% AFFORDABLE ONSITE, AND WE COORDINATE WITH THE DEVELOPER TO GET THOSE HOMES SOLD TO ELIGIBLE PEOPLE, WE HOLD RANDOM DRAWINGS AND ALL OF THAT. 
          SO THE MOST COMMON TYPE OF PROJECT THAT IS PAYING THESE IMPACT FEES, IT'S ALMOST MORE LIKE A SMALL TRICKLE OF LITTLE FEE PAYMENTS THAN ANY ONE PROJECT SLAPPING DOWN A BIG CHECK TO GET OUT OF THEIR AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENT. 
          THAT USED TO BE THE CASE 20, 30 YEARS AGO WITH OUR CODE. 
          THAT WAS ONE OF THE OPTIONS, BUT IT IS NO LONGER. 
          SO MOSTLY NOW THE FOLKS WHO ARE PAYING THE IMPACT FEES ARE FOLKS WITH REALLY SMALL PROJECTS. 
          MAYBE YOU HAVE A LITTLE PIECE OF LAND AND YOU'RE PUTTING UP ONE NEW HOUSING UNIT. RIGHT? SO THERE'S A FEE, I THINK IT'S LIKE SEVEN OR EIGHT BUCKS A SQUARE FOOT THAT GOES INTO OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IMPACT FEE FUND. 
          AND THEN WE CAN USE THAT FOR THINGS LIKE THE ADU INCENTIVES PROGRAM OR FUNDING, YOU KNOW, PROVIDING FUNDING TO SUPPORT TO ONE OF OUR BIG AFFORDABLE PROJECTS. 
          THE OTHER TYPES OF PROJECTS, UM, IF YOU'RE DOING A BIG ADDITION OF 500 SQUARE FEET OR MORE, LIKE LET'S SAY SOMEBODY'S DOING A GUT REHAB OF AN OLD, YOU KNOW, HOME FROM DECADES AGO, AND THEY WANNA MAKE IT A MUCH BIGGER HOME RENOVATE AND ADD ON, YOU KNOW, DOUBLE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. 
          THEY WOULD PAY A A CERTAIN FEE ON THAT ADDITIONAL SQUARE FOOTAGE. 
          SIMILARLY, IF SOMEBODY'S BUILDING A COMMERCIAL PROJECT, LET'S SAY THERE'S SOME NEW STOREFRONT SOMEWHERE. 
          THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN THESE DAYS, BUT WE HAVE FEES FOR THAT KIND OF PROJECT AS WELL. 
          SO, UM, AGAIN, BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT GOT MANY APPLICATIONS FOR MARKET RATE RENTALS THAT DON'T INCLUDE AFFORDABLE UNITS, BECAUSE THE HANDFUL OF MARKET RATE RENTAL PROJECTS WE HAVE GOTTEN HAVE BEEN USING THE DENSITY BONUS. 
          SO THEY ARE INCLUDING AFFORDABLE UNITS ON SITE, AND OFTENTIMES IT IS 15%. 
          ON A COUPLE OF OCCASIONS, IT'S LESS THAN 15%. 
          THE TWO THAT POPPED TO MY HEAD ARE THE TWO BUILDER'S REMEDY PROJECTS, UM, BECAUSE THEY GOT A LOT MORE BONUS FOR LESS UNITS. 
          BUT THAT'S BECAUSE STATE LAW IS TRUMPING US IN, IN THE BUILDER'S REMEDY. 
          BUT ON AN EVERYDAY BASIS, UM, THE HANDFUL OF TYPICALLY VERY SMALL RENTAL MARKET RATE RENTAL PROJECTS WE'VE GOTTEN HAVE OPTED TO DO THE ONSITE AFFORDABLE UNITS RATHER THAN PAY THE FEE BECAUSE THEY WANT THE DENSITY BONUS. 
          - AND BUT WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT DENSITY BONUSES FOR THE PUBLIC, I MEAN, THAT'S WHY I THINK WE'RE SEEING A LOT OF, UM, MULTI-STORY BUILDINGS IS, RIGHT? BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE GETTING THESE DENSITY BONUSING. 
          - UM, THAT IS CORRECT. 
          I'D SAY MOST OF THE FOLKS WHO ARE EXERCISING THE HEIGHT AND THE REALLY BIG BONUSES ARE THE 100% AFFORDABLE PROJECTS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE TWO OR THREE BUILDERS REMEDY APPLICATIONS THAT WE DID GET IN THAT LIMITED WINDOW OF TIME WHEN THAT WAS AN OPTION. 
          BUT MOST OF THE BIG, UM, PROJECTS WITH THE LARGER SIZES, LIKE FOR EXAMPLE THE ONE ON THE END OF 41ST, THAT'S, WHAT IS IT? 260 OR SOMETHING UNITS THAT'S A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE, LOWER INCOME SUBSIDIZED, YOU KNOW, UH, AFFORDABLE WITH A LOT OF SECTION 8 VOUCHERS THAT ARE GONNA BE IN THERE TO SUPPORT THAT PROJECT. 
          UM, SAME THING WITH THE THURBER LANE PROJECT. 
          THE RENTAL PROJECTS THAT OUR MARKET RATE THAT WE HAVE HAD COME THROUGH ONE WAS A SEVEN UNIT PROJECT. 
          IT WAS A TEAR DOWN REBUILD. 
          THERE WAS A SITE THAT HAD TWO EXISTING UNITS. 
          THEY TORE THOSE DOWN AND THEY'RE IN THE PROCESS OF BUILDING SEVEN UNITS OF WHICH TWO WILL BE AFFORDABLE TO LOW INCOME FOLKS. 
          THAT'S LIKE A 30% AFFORDABLE PERCENTAGE. 
          THEY OPTED TO DO IT THAT WAY BECAUSE THEY WANTED THE DENSITY BONUS CONCESSIONS AND WAIVERS. 
          UM, I CAN'T EVEN REMEMBER WHAT THE OTHER ONE, MAYBE WE HAVE ONE OTHER IN THE PIPELINE THAT'S SIMILAR. 
          UM, BUT REALLY WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN MANY MARKET RATE PROJECTS FOR RENT. 
          UM, THE OTHER THING I JUST WANTED TO MENTION IS THAT, UM, I THINK MAYBE THERE WAS SOME MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DISCUSSION. 
          - MM-HMM.- UM, WE DID NOT SAY THAT THE MEASURE J SINCE 1978 HAS NOT IMPOSED THE 15% REQUIREMENT ON RENTAL, BUT RATHER THAT WHEN THE PRIOR NEXUS STUDY WAS DONE 
          [05:55:01]
ON THIS PROGRAM AROUND 2013, 14, UM, AND ALSO THERE WAS A CRITICAL COURT CASE THAT CHANGED STATE LAW AND REQUIRED ALL THE LOCALITIES. 
          IT BASICALLY MADE IT ILLEGAL FOR US TO IMPOSE BMR REQUIREMENTS ON RENTAL PROJECTS, THAT WAS CALLED THE PALMER COURT CASE. 
          SO ALL THE COMMUNITIES HAD TO TAKE THOSE CODES OFF THE BOOKS AND BASICALLY COME UP WITH ANOTHER WAY TO IMPOSE AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS ON RENTAL PROJECTS. 
          AND THE LEGAL GUIDANCE THAT EVERYONE WAS GETTING AT THAT TIME WAS, YOU CAN IMPOSE A FEE ON THEM AND LET THEM PROVIDE THE UNITS ON SITE AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO PAYING THAT FEE. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT, WHAT... THAT'S THE CHANGE THAT WAS MADE TO OUR CODE AS WELL AT THAT TIME. 
          UM, AND ANYWAY, I'LL LET STEPHANIE FILL IN. 
          - THERE'S [INAUDIBLE] YEAH. 
          - OKAY. THANK YOU. 
          - SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - YEAH, I'M HOPING TO BE DONE IN THE NEXT 10 MINUTES. 
          UM, BUT JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE THINGS. 
          UM, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE THINK ABOUT, AND WE TALK ABOUT WHY THAT CERTAIN HOUSING WASN'T BUILT OR WAS REALLY DIFFICULT TO BUILD IT, A LOT OF THAT WAS DUE TO THE FACT THAT MANY PARCELS WITHIN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS WERE NOT ZONED FOR MULTI-RESIDENTIAL HOUSING. 
          THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED WITHIN OUR NEW HOUSING ELEMENT. 
          WE REZONED A BUNCH OF THE COUNTY TO NOW ALLOW FOR HIGHER DENSITY, AND THAT'S WHAT REALLY CHALLENGED US BACK IN THE PAST IN TERMS OF BEING ABLE TO BUILD MULTI-UNIT HOUSING. 
          AND I WILL JUST HIGHLIGHT THAT WHEN THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ HAD ITS NEXUS STUDY DONE AROUND 2016, 2018, RIGHT BEFORE I GOT ON THE CITY COUNCIL, THAT NEXUS STUDY SAID THAT YOU COULDN'T DO MORE THAN 15%. 
          AND IN FACT, YOU NEEDED TO DO LESS AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          AND IN 2020, WE INCREASED THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING TO 20%. 
          AND ALL THE NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU SEE GOING ON IN SANTA CRUZ, THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ, SINCE 2020, HAS THE 20% INCLUSIONARY HOUSING APPLIED TO IT. 
          IT HAS NOT SLOWED DEVELOPMENT AT ALL WHATSOEVER. 
          AND SO WHAT I'M ASKING FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER TODAY IS THE FACT THAT, YOU KNOW, REALLY WHAT THIS IS, IS ALLOWING FOR, IS THAT THE DISCRETION OF THE DECISION TO REQUIRE ONSITE HOU-, AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS WITHIN THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S JURISDICTION AND WITHIN THE BOARD'S JURISDICTION. 
          RIGHT NOW IT'S UP TO THE DEVELOPER. 
          THE DEVELOPER CAN DECIDE DO THEY WANNA PAY A FEE OR DO THEY WANNA PROVIDE IT ON SITE? THAT SHOULDN'T BE A DEVELOPER'S DECISION. 
          THAT SHOULD BE THE THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION AND THE BOARD'S DECISION. 
          BECAUSE WE KNOW WHAT WE NEED IN OUR COMMUNITY. 
          AND THAT IS REALLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING OURSELVES TO DO TODAY. 
          DO WE WANT TO LEAVE THE, THE PRODUCTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, THE DECISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO BE UP TO THE DEVELOPER, OR DO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT IS A DECISION THAT'S UP TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE BOARD. 
          WE COULD ALLOW FOR THE FEES BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE IT MIGHT MAKE SENSE. 
          BUT, YOU KNOW, REALLY AT THE END OF THE DAY, LIKE WE WANT TO TRY TO REQUIRE AS MUCH AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS POSSIBLE. 
          WITH THE 841 CAPITAL PROJECT, 57 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND THEY ONLY WANTED TO PROVIDE FOUR. 
          15% WOULD'VE BEEN EIGHT AND A HALF TO NINE, AND THE DEVELOPER CHOSE TO PROVIDE FOUR AFFORDABLE UNITS. 
          AND I THINK THAT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TRYING TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, OVERCOME A HOUSING CRISIS IT'S... 
          THIS IS THE, THE OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO BE ABLE TO TAKE SOME CONTROL OVER WHAT WE'RE HAVING BUILT IN OUR COMMUNITY AND MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE MEETING OUR ARENA NUMBERS. 
          I THINK IT'S HIGHLY LIKELY WE'RE GONNA HAVE A LOT MORE MULTI-UNIT MARKET RATE HOUSING COMING FORWARD, JUST BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT NOW WE HAVE THE ZONING TO ALLOW IT TO HAPPEN AND BEFORE ALL THAT HOUSING COMES BEFORE US, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE TAKING CONTROL OVER HOW THAT, HOW THE DECISIONS ARE MADE ON WHETHER THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS BUILT ON SITE OR NOT. 
          AND THAT'S WHAT I'M PROPOSING HERE. 
          AND SO I'M GONNA MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THE RECOMMENDED ACTIONS. 
          - SO WE HAVE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION ON THE TABLE. 
          - GIVE ME A SECOND. 
          - WE NEED A SECOND. 
          UH, LET ME SEE. 
          WHAT'S THE, WHAT'S THE MINIMUM NUMBER FOR THIS... 
          IT'S ANY PROJECT IT COULD BE TWO, TWO. 
          - NO, IT'S ANY PROJECT OVER SEVEN UNITS. 
          - OKAY. 
          - AND THAT'S, THAT'S ALREADY BY LAW. 
          - SORRY, WE'RE JUST, AS STAFF, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO, UH, BE CLEAR HERE. 
          THERE'S NOT AN ORIGINAL MOTION ON THE FLOOR WITH A SECOND. 
          IS THERE, WHO WHO... 
          - IT WAS ON CONSENT. WE MOVED IT TO 14.1. 
          - I, I DID MOVE THAT WE TABLE THIS ITEM FOR THE TIME BEING, BRING IT BACK AT THE TIME THAT WE CONSIDER AN NEXUS STUDY FOR CONSIDERATION. 
          - THANK YOU. AND THAT MOTION WAS SECONDED. 
          THANK YOU VERY MUCH. 
          - AND IF WE COULD TAKE A LOOK AT IT FROM A YEAR FROM NOW AND SEE HOW IT'S WORKED OUT. 
          IF YOU DON'T MIND. 
          I MEAN, A REVIEW. 
          - THERE'S... I DON'T KNOW WHAT THERE WOULD BE TO REVIEW. 
          I MEAN... - JUST THE NUMBERS. 
          - WELL, WELL, EXACTLY. 
          I MEAN, WE'RE, WE'RE ARGUING ABOUT 15% OF NOTHING. 
          WE, WE ARE LITERALLY ARGUING ABOUT 15% OF NOTHING RIGHT NOW. 
          [06:00:02]
THERE ARE, I MEAN, OTHER THAN THE BUILDERS ITY PROJECTS, WHICH TAKE ADVANTAGE OF STATE LAW, EVEN UNDER OUR NEW HIGHER DENSITY ZONING THERE ARE NO MARKET RATE RENTAL PROJECTS. 
          - AND THAT, AND THAT, AND THE PRO- - THEY CHANGE BUT WE'VE HEARD FROM... 
          AGAIN, I'M JUST REPEATING WHAT I'VE HEARD FROM HOME BUILDERS. 
          THEY CANNOT MAKE OUR ZONING WORK. 
          AND SO I'M, I BELIEVE THIS IS AN IMPORTANT DISCUSSION. I DO. 
          I WANT 'EM TO HAVE IT AT THE TIME THAT WE CONSIDER OVERALL VIABILITY OF OUR CURRENT ZONING CODE. 
          WE MAY NEED TO LOOK AT AN AREA WHERE WE GO, YOU KNOW WHAT, THREE STORIES, NOT ENOUGH WE NEED TO GO TO FOUR. RIGHT? IN SOME AREAS. 
          BECAUSE THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN GET THOSE ADDITIONAL TWO STORIES IS WITH A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE PROJECTS, RIGHT? THAT UNDERSTATE DENSITY BONUS LAW. 
          THAT'S WHAT'S MAKING THE A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE PROJECTS PENCIL. 
          THEY CAN GET TO FIVE STORIES, THEY CAN GET TO SIX STORIES. 
          A STANDARD MARKET RATE RENTAL PROJECT CANNOT UNLESS THEY GET UNDER BUILDER'S REMEDY WHICH THESE TWO PROJECTS HAVE. 
          BUT WE'RE NOT SEEING OTHER PROJECTS SHOW UP. 
          NOW, I'M ALSO CURIOUS ABOUT LIKE HOW THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ IS 20% HAS WORKED OUT. 
          MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THAT WAS, I MEAN, FIRST OF ALL THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ DOES HAVE A DOWNTOWN PLAN WHERE THEY ALLOW LARGER HEIGHTS, THEY ALLOW, WHAT IS IT, 80 FEET? RIGHT? I MEAN, THAT'S A HECK OF A LOT HIGHER THAN THREE STORIES. 
          HECK OF A LOT. 
          AND, UH, I BELIEVE THAT ALSO SECTION EIGHT UNITS ARE ALLOWED TO BE, OR, OR, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, PROJECT SPECIFIC VOUCHERS ARE ALLOWED TO BE COUNTED TOWARDS THAT. 
          THOSE ARE PRECISELY THE VOUCHERS THAT EARLIER IN THIS MEETING WE WERE TALKING ABOUT GOING AWAY. 
          SO I'M NOT ACTUALLY NOT SURE THAT THE 20% IS GONNA CONTINUE TO BE VIABLE IN THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ. 
          I WOULD LOVE, I MEAN, AND THIS COULD... 
          I'M HAPPY TO ADD THIS AS ADDITIONAL DIRECTION TO MY MOTION THAT WHEN WE CONSIDER THE NEXUS STUDY AND THIS PROPOSAL, THAT WE ALSO LOOK AT WHAT THE CITY OF WATSONVILLE HAS DONE AND WHAT THE CITY OF SANTA CRUZ HAS DONE AROUND INCLUSIONARY THEIR INCLUSIONARY ORDINANCE FOR RENTAL HOUSING. 
          - LET ME... I, I DO WANNA RESPOND TO THAT 'CAUSE I DO THINK THAT THERE'S A COUPLE OF INACCURACIES THERE. 
          DENSITY BONUS LAW ALLOWS FOR BUILDINGS TO EXCEED THE LOCAL HEIGHT LIMITS IF THEY PROVIDE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE OF VERY LOW AND LOW AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          AND SO THIS NOTION THAT THE, THE, THAT THE A HUNDRED PERCENT AFFORDABLE PROJECTS CAN EXCEED THOSE HEIGHT LIMITS, THE DENSITY BONUS LAW ALLOWS FOR MARKET RATE PROJECTS TO EXCEED OUR HOUSE, OUR, OUR HEIGHT LIMITS. 
          SO IF WE HAVE A THREE STORY LIMIT THE DENSITY BONUS PROJECT COMES IN AND SAYS THEY WANT TO EXCEED THAT LIMIT, UM, AT WHATEVER, 50% OR A HUNDRED PERCENT. 
          UM, AND THEY WANT TO... AND THEY WILL INCLUDE THE, INCLUDE THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          RIGHT NOW STATE LAW I BELIEVE IS AT 10% OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS. 
          AND WHAT THIS IS TRYING TO DO IS MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE, THAT IT'S 15%. 
          AND AGAIN, ALL THIS IS DOING IS SAYING THAT WE HAVE THE DISCRETION TO EITHER REQUIRE THE UNITS BE BUILT ON SITE OR ALLOW FOR THE FEES. 
          AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY I THOUGHT THAT BRINGING THIS FORWARD TO ALIGN IT WITH COUNTY CODE MADE THE MOST SENSE. 
          SINCE WE ALREADY INCLUDED THAT WITHIN OUR HOUSING ELEMENT. 
          - SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ. 
          - UM, AGAIN, YOU KNOW, I'M, I'M... THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD AND BRINGING IT TO MY ATTENTION. 
          I'M NOT SAYING NO EVER, I'M JUST SAYING NOT YET. 
          BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE FULL PICTURE. 
          I'VE HEARD A RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF TO SEE THE NEXUS STUDY. 
          UM, I, I WANNA GET IT RIGHT. 
          UH, LIKE YOU, I WANT TO SEE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPED. 
          AND I THINK THERE COULD BE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES BY MAKING A DECISION NOW WITHOUT THE FULL PICTURE, UH, OR WITHOUT THE FULL ROADMAP TO ENSURE THAT WE MEET OUR- ALL TYPES OF HOUSING GOALS THAT NEED TO BE MET IN ORDER TO MEET THE GOALS IN OUR HOUSING ELEMENT. 
          SO, UM, I, I LOOK FORWARD TO CONSIDERING THIS AGAIN WITH ALL THE INFORMATION. 
          UM, AND, UH, THAT'S WHY I, I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION, UM, AND SEEING WHERE THAT GOES, I'LL BE SUPPORTING THE FIRST MOTION. 
          - OKAY. UM, IF YOU DON'T... NO MORE COMMENTS. 
          UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, UH, MANU SAID THAT I, I, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS LIKE, UH, I KNOW IN WATSONVILLE THEY HAVE THE 15 TO 20% THAT THAT STARTS AT SEVEN. 
          AND I KNOW THAT THEY'VE HAD, I MEAN, TWO HOUSING UNITS THAT WERE TWO RENTAL UNITS IN DOWNTOWN THAT ARE, UH, MARKET RATE BUT THEY HAD THE 15% AS WELL. 
          I, I READ THAT THEIRS HAS FOR BOTH. 
          IT'S, IT APPLIES TO BOTH THE, THE, UH, APARTMENTS, RENTALS, AND, UH, HOUSES AS WELL. 
          BUT I ALSO SEE THAT BELOW SEVEN THERE'S SOME WIGGLE ROOM WHERE THEY CAN NEGOTIATE WHAT THE BREAKDOWN IS. 
          - WE'RE HAPPY TO PROVIDE A SUMMARY OF BOTH JURISDICTIONS WHEN WE... - OKAY. 
          - ...RETURN AND MAYBE WE CAN EXPLORE SOME OF THE NUANCES ABOUT WHY THINGS WORK IN SOME AREAS AND WHY THEY DON'T WORK SO WELL IN OTHER AREAS. 
          - CHAIR. 
          - YES. 
          - CAN I JUST SAY ONE MORE THING. 
          [06:05:02]
UM, I THINK IT HAS BECOME INCREASINGLY HARDER TO, TO ATTRACT DEVELOPERS BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT MANY OF THESE PROJECTS DO NOT PENCIL OUT. 
          I KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, IN APTOS VILLAGE, I DON'T THINK THAT, UM, THAT NEW DEVELOPMENT THERE, I DON'T, I DON'T THINK A LOT OF MONEY WAS MADE THERE, IF ANY, AT ALL. 
          UM, THE THING THAT.. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH IN, IN WHAT JUSTIN, AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD. 
          I THINK WE ALL APPRECIATE YOU FOR, FOR DOING THAT BECAUSE WE ALL DO WANT THE SAME THING. 
          BUT I, I DO WORRY THAT, UM, BRINGING THIS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION WILL MAKE THINGS MORE DIFFICULT, UM, AND HONESTLY, PEOPLE ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION, OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE APPOINTED, BUT THEY HAVE DIFFERENT LEVELS OF CONTENT EXPERTISE IN BUILDING OR DEVELOPMENT OR ARCHITECTURE OR WHATEVER THEIR SPECIALTY AREA IS. 
          AND SO TO ALLOW IT TO BE A POLITICAL DECISION INSTEAD OF A, UM, CONSISTENT RELIABLE DECISION, UM, I THINK IS GOING TO MAKE DEVELOPERS EVEN MORE CONCERNED ABOUT, UM, TRYING TO GET THINGS DONE. 
          SO I THINK I, I MEAN, I'M... WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IS, UM, ATTRACTING DEVELOPERS THAT ARE WILLING TO COME INTO OUR COUNTY AND BUILD THE HOUSING THAT WE NEED. 
          UM, WHAT I'M NOT INTERESTED IN IS, IS HAVING A LOT OF SEVEN STORY, EIGHT STORY, 10 STORY DEVELOPMENTS, UH, IN APTOS FOR EXAMPLE. 
          I MEAN IF THAT'S WHAT SANTA CRUZ WANTS TO DO, THAT'S OKAY, BUT THAT, THAT'S NOT GONNA WORK IN OTHER AREAS. 
          AND SO THIS DENSITY BONUSING, UM, I, UM, I AM CONCERNED THAT WE'RE GONNA GET A LOT OF BIG DEVELOPMENTS THAT AREN'T, DO NOT FIT INTO THE NEIGHBORHOODS, UM, AROUND THE COUNTY. 
          SO, UM, AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT FORWARD. 
          I, I WON'T SUPPORT THIS TODAY, BUT, UM, LOOK FORWARD TO THE NEXUS STUDY AND A FURTHER CONVERSATION. 
          - SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - YEAH. LAST THING I WANNA SAY, AND I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE, BUT I JUST WANT TO GIVE A SENSE OF TIMELINE ON THIS. 
          WE'RE GONNA BE WAITING UNTIL JUNE FOR THE NEXUS STUDY TO COME OUT. 
          AND BY THE WAY, I JUST WANNA LET THE BOARD KNOW WHEN I FIRST GOT ON THIS BOARD, I ASKED FOR THAT NEXUS STUDY TO BE DONE, IT HAS TAKEN US FOUR AND A HALF YEARS FOR THE NEXUS STUDY TO COME FORWARD. 
          WHICH I THINK IS PRETTY UNACCEPTABLE. 
          SO IT'S GONNA COME BACK IN JUNE. 
          AT WHICH POINT, IF THE BOARD WERE TO DECIDE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH MAKING THE AMENDMENTS, WHICH AT THIS, AT THAT POINT WE MAY WANT TO CONSIDER 20% AS WELL, IT WOULD THEN NEED TO GO OUT AND GET DRAFTED BY STAFF. 
          THEN WE COME BACK TO THE BOARD FOR A FIRST READING, BUT NOT EVEN THE FIRST READING. 
          IT WOULD COME BACK TO THE BOARD FOR US TO JUST REVIEW IT. 
          THEN WE GET SENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. 
          THEN WE COME BACK TO THE BOARD FOR FIRST READING AND THEN COME BACK FOR A SECOND READING. 
          SO I JUST WANNA PUT OUT THERE THAT THAT'S ABOUT PROBABLY A YEAR OUT, I WOULD SUSPECT. 
          AND WITHIN THAT TIME PERIOD, THERE ARE GOING TO BE DEVELOPERS COMING IN AND PROPOSING PROJECTS. 
          AND THERE WILL BE NO MECHANISM FOR A PLANNING COMMISSION OR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO REQUIRE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO THE 15% TO BE BUILT ON SITE. 
          AND WHAT I'VE SEEN IN THE PAST IS IF THERE IS A WAY FOR DEVELOPERS TO GET OUT OF BUILDING THE FULL AMOUNT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING THEY TAKE IT. 
          THE REASON WHY THEY CAN'T DO THAT WITH FOR SALE IS 'CAUSE IT'S A REQUIREMENT. 
          AND WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING TO DO TODAY WAS MAKE OUR HOUSING POLICY CONSISTENT WITH FOR SALE HOUSING AND RENTAL HOUSING. 
          AND SO AS WE SEE PROJECTS COME IN, I JUST WANT US TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACT THAT WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET IN FRONT OF THAT. 
          WHICH IS, THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO BE PROACTIVE. 
          SO WE DON'T HAVE A BUNCH OF PROJECTS THAT ARE COMING IN AND THEN WE'RE SAYING, OH MY GOD, THEY'RE NOT PROVIDING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          WE SHOULD DO SOMETHING. 
          'CAUSE IT WON'T APPLY TO THOSE PROJECTS WHO ALREADY HAVE APPLICATIONS IN. 
          IT'LL ONLY BE FOR THE ONES AFTER THAT. 
          AND SO I HOPE THAT THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCE IS THAT WE MISSED AN OPPORTUNITY TO BUILD AS MUCH AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS POSSIBLE IN THIS COMMUNITY. 
          - OKAY. I'LL BE, UM... WE WILL BE TAKING A ROLL CALL VOTE BUT I DO WANNA SAY THAT I, I WILL SUPPORT THIS SIMPLY FOR THE 15%, UH, AFFORDABLE HOUSING. 
          BUT DO I WISH THAT IT WAS MORE NUANCED, LIKE WATSONVILLE? YES, I DO UH, THAT'LL TAKE TIME THOUGH BUT I WILL BE SUPPORTING THIS JUST SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE 15%. 
          - CAN I ASK POINT OF ORDER? WHAT'S ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW? - WHAT'S THAT?   - WHAT'S ON THE FLOOR. 
          - BUT I DID NOT HEAR A SECOND TO THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. 
          - I SECONDED IT.  - OH, YOU DID? - DID. 
          - OKAY. 
          - SO GO AHEAD AND YEAH, PLEASE... 
          - OKAY. - ...CALL THE QUESTION. 
          - IF WE CAN TAKE ROLL CALL VOTE. 
          - JUST FOR A MOMENT. - AND THIS CLARIFICATION IS ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. 
          - ON THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION. YES. 
          [06:10:01]
- SUPERVISOR DESERPA. 
          - NO. 
          - CUMMINGS   - AYE. 
          - KOENIG.  - NO. 
          - MARTINEZ.  - NO. 
          - HERNANDEZ.  - YES. 
          MOTION FAILS. 
          TWO AYE VOTES. UH, HERNANDEZ AND CUMMINGS, NO VOTES MARTINEZ, KOENIG AND DESERPA. 
          MOTION FAILS. 
          - RECALL THE QUESTION ON THE PRIMARY MOTION PLEASE. 
          - CAN YOU REPEAT IT ONE MORE TIME REALLY QUICK? - IT WAS, UH, TO, TO TABLE THE PROPOSAL, BUT BRING IT BACK AT THE TIME OF THE, UH, THE NEXUS STUDY IS PRESENTED TO THE BOARD. 
          UM, YEAH. 
          - OKAY. 
          WHO SECONDED IT? DID YOU SECOND IT? - I HAVE RECORD OF SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ SECONDING THE ORIGINAL MOTION. - OKAY. THANK YOU. 
          ALRIGHT, MADAM CLERK, IF WE COULD TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE - SUPERVISOR KOENIG  - AYE. 
          - MARTINEZ  - AYE. 
          - DESERPA.  - AYE. 
          - CUMMINGS.  - NO. 
          - HERNANDEZ.  - AYE. 
          MOTION PASSES WITH ONE NOAND I I... JUST FOR THE RECORD, I DO, I, I DO REMEMBER THAT THE NEXUS WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT 20% TOO, LIKE UH, CITY OF WATSONVILLE. 
          ALRIGHT, MOVING ON TO 14 POINT, WAIT, 14.1, WHICH WAS ITEM NUMBER 26 ON THE CONSENT. 
          SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ. 
          - NO, I PULLED IT. 
          - NO. - I PULLED IT. - SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - THANK YOU CHAIR. YEAH. SO ITEM NUMBER 26. 
          I REALLY WANNA APPRECIATE, THESE ARE SOME UPDATES TO COUNTY POLICY AND ONE OF THE POLICIES, HR TITLE, UH, SEVEN WAS INCREASING THE REMOTE WORK DAYS FROM THREE TO, SORRY, DECREASING THE REMOTE WORK DAYS FROM THREE TO TWO. 
          UM, WE'VE BEEN GETTING A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF EMAILS FROM, UM, COUNTY WORKERS ABOUT THIS POLICY CHANGE AND, UM, WHILE I HAVE CERTAIN OPINIONS ON IT, I THINK THE CONCERN THAT I HAD WITH HOW THIS MOVED FORWARD WAS THAT I REALLY FELT LIKE IT SHOULD BE A STANDALONE ITEM THAT SHOULD HAVE A, AN AGENDA REPORT THAT PROVIDED SOME BACKGROUND ON WHY THESE CHANGES WERE BEING MADE. 
          UM, SOME INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT OTHER JURISDICTIONS ARE DOING, IS THERE ANY FLEXIBILITY BUILT IN, YOU KNOW, JUST KIND OF CAME IN AS THIS IS THE POLICY CHANGE. 
          AND SO A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE BEEN CONCERNED, MYSELF INCLUDED WITH, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS MOVING FORWARD? IS THERE ANY FLEXIBILITY AROUND REMOTE WORK WITH, UM, WITH DEPARTMENT HEADS OR SUPERVISORS. 
          AND SO I REALLY WAS HOPING TO SEE THIS COME BACK WITH A MORE FLUSHED OUT, UM, AGENDA REPORT THE NEW YEAR. 
          WE ALSO GOT CONTACTED BY SIMA, WHICH IS THE UNION GROUP THAT REPRESENTS, UM, MID-MANAGERS, I BELIEVE. 
          AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY POINTED OUT WAS THAT NOT ALL THE UNION GROUPS HAD BEEN CONTACTED. 
          AND I WAS HOPING THAT BETWEEN NOW AND IF THIS COULD COME BACK, THAT THERE WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REACH OUT TO THE UNION GROUPS. 
          GET SOME FEEDBACK FROM THEM, LET THEM KNOW THAT THIS IS HAPPENING, AND THEN RETURN TO THE BOARD, UH, FOR US TO TAKE ACTION BECAUSE THIS IS GONNA, FOR SOME, IT'LL BE A DRAMATIC SHIFT. 
          UM, AND HAVING SOME CLARITY AROUND LIKE WHAT ARE THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR FLEXIBILITY REALLY MAKES, WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR THE WORKFORCE TO KNOW IF THIS IS GONNA BE ONE SIZE FITS ALL. 
          LIKE NO FLEXIBILITY KIND OF ISSUE, OR WOULD THERE BE FLEXIBILITY AROUND, UM, PEOPLE BEING ABLE TO HAVE MORE REMOTE WORK DAYS DEPENDING ON THE CIRCUMSTANCE. 
          THAT WASN'T REALLY FLESHED OUT. 
          AND SO THAT'S WHY I PULLED THIS, UM, AFTER BEING CONTACTED BY MANY, UM, MEMBERS OF OUR WORKFORCE. 
          - SO, UH, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS, NICOLE COBURN, COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER, UM, OUR HR DIRECTOR, GITA PATEL IS ALSO HERE. 
          UM, SO THIS ALL BEGAN THIS PAST SUMMER, UM, WHEN THE FORMER CEO CARLOS PALACIOS WAS STILL HERE, WE HAD NOTED THAT THERE WERE ONLY A FEW DEPARTMENTS THAT HAD NOT MADE THE CHANGE TO FEWER REMOTE WORK DAYS. 
          AND SO, UM, CURRENTLY, UM, THE ONLY DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE NOT AT WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IN TERMS OF THREE DAYS IN THE OFFICE AND TWO REMOTE ARE THE ASSESSOR RECORDER, UM, COUNTY COUNSEL FOR ATTORNEYS, UM, HEALTH SERVICES, HUMAN SERVICES, AND THEN PUBLIC DEFENDER AND DISTRICT ATTORNEY HAVE BEEN UTILIZING, UM, THEIR REMOTE WORK, THE CURRENT BASED ON HOURS, NOT DAYS. 
          SO WE, UM... EVERY OTHER DEPARTMENT HAS TRANSITIONED. 
          MOST DEPARTMENTS ARE AT TWO DAYS REMOTE OR LESS. 
          WE HAVE A COUPLE DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE AT ZERO DAYS REMOTE. 
          THOSE ARE ANIMAL SERVICES AND THE SHERIFF CORON, THE MAJORITY OF DEPARTMENTS ARE AT ONE OR TWO DAYS REMOTE, INCLUDING MY DEPARTMENT. 
          AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO ALIGN THE, THE COUNTY DEPARTMENTS, UM, UNDER ONE POLICY. 
          [06:15:02]
UM, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO US ESPECIALLY IN TIMES LIKE THIS WHERE WE'RE HAVING TO NAVIGATE REALLY DIFFICULT PROBLEMS TO HAVE PEOPLE WORKING TOGETHER IN PERSON IN THE OFFICE TO BUILD TRUST, TO SPARK IDEAS, TO COLLABORATE WITH EACH OTHER A LOT WHILE WE RECOGNIZE, UM, THERE ARE TOOLS FOR MANAGING EMPLOYEES OUTSIDE OF DEPARTMENTS AND COUNTY FACILITIES, UM, THERE'S A LOT THAT HAPPENS IN IN-PERSON COORDINATION AND COLLABORATION. 
          AND YOU NEED TO LEARN HOW PEOPLE OPERATE, WHO TO CONTACT, UM, HOW TO NAVIGATE REALLY THE COMPLEX THINGS WE'RE DOING EVERY DAY AS A COUNTY. 
          UM, SO IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US, UM, TO MAKE THIS CHANGE. 
          UM, WE WANNA KNOW ALSO THAT WE SURVEYED SOME OF OUR COUNTY NEIGHBORS AND, UM, WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE WITH MANY OF OUR NEIGHBORS IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING. 
          SAN FRANCISCO ALLOWS ONLY ONE DAY REMOTE, SAN MATEO COUNTY IS TWO DAYS REMOTE, BUT THEY'RE STARTING DISCUSSIONS TO GO TO ONE DAY REMOTE. 
          MARIN COUNTY IS MAKING THE CHANGE FROM THREE DAYS TO TWO DAYS REMOTE IN JANUARY. 
          MONTEREY COUNTY IS CURRENTLY AT TWO TO THREE DAYS REMOTE. 
          SANTA CLARA IS ALSO AT TWO TO THREE DAYS REMOTE, BUT THAT IT'S FOR LIMITED NUMBER OF DEPARTMENTS. 
          THE DEPARTMENTS THAT, THAT ARE AT THREE IN THOSE, UM, LAST TWO COUNTIES. 
          UM, WE ARE NAVIGATING A FEW UNIQUE ISSUES THAT IF THE BOARD DECIDES TODAY TO APPROVE THIS REMOTE POLICY. 
          UM, MS. PATEL AND I ARE MEETING ON FRIDAY TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT HAVE COME UP IN TERMS OF THE ATTORNEYS WHO ARE IN COURT IN THE MORNING AND CURRENTLY WORK REMOTE, UH, FIVE DAYS A WEEK. 
          SO WE NEED TO ADDRESS THE COURT SCHEDULES AND HOW THAT MIGHT LOOK IN TERMS OF WHEN THEY WORK REMOTELY. 
          SO WE'RE GONNA BE DISCUSSING, DISCUSSING THAT. 
          THAT'S A VERY UNIQUE OPERATIONAL SITUATION. 
          AND CURRENTLY MYSELF AND DEPARTMENT HEADS BASED ON, YOU KNOW, UNIQUE SITUATIONS, UM, WE CAN APPROVE, UH, DIFFERENCES TO THE BASE POLICY BUT WE REALLY WANT, FOR THE MOST PART TO HAVE THAT BASE POLICY AND NOT HAVE A LOT OF VEERING. 
          BUT WHEN THERE COMES A SITUATION THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS SOMETHING, WE WILL. 
          UM, I KNOW THIS MORNING THERE WAS TALK ABOUT THE REMOTE WORK AGREEMENTS BEING UPDATED IN SEPTEMBER. 
          THERE WAS AN EMAIL THAT WENT OUT IN SEPTEMBER FOR ALL COUNTY STAFF TO UPDATE THEIR AGREEMENTS. 
          UM, WE HAD BEEN WORKING ON THIS SINCE THE SUMMER AND THE DEPARTMENT HEADS NEW. 
          SO, UM, I WANNA APOLOGIZE THERE WAS PROBABLY SOME CROSS COMMUNICATION GOING OUT FROM OUR OFFICE AND DEPARTMENT HEADS AND THE DEPARTMENTS THAT NEEDED TO MAKE CHANGES WHERE THERE WASN'T CONSISTENCY. 
          SO WE SHOULD HAVE BETTER ALIGNED THOSE COMMUNICATIONS TO NOTE THE DEPARTMENTS THAT HAD TO MAKE SOME CHANGES. 
          UM, IN THE FUTURE, I THINK, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO ALIGN THE REMOTE WORK AGREEMENT UPDATES ON A CALENDAR BASIS SO IT, IT'S OCCURRING. 
          BUT I ALSO WANNA NOTE THESE ARE AGREEMENTS THAT CAN BE CHANGED AT ANY TIME. 
          STAFF IN MY OFFICE FREQUENTLY COME TO THEIR SUPERVISORS ASKING FOR SOME SORT OF CHANGE IN THEIR REMOTE WORK AGREEMENT IN TERMS OF THE DAY THAT THEY'LL BE AT HOME, AND WE ACCOMMODATE THAT CHANGE. 
          JUST BECAUSE IT'S ENTERED INTO AT ONE TIME A YEAR DOESN'T MEAN THAT IT CAN'T CHANGE. 
          UM, AND IN ADDITION, UH, IT HAS TO BE BASED ON OPERATIONS. 
          SO THE WHOLE POINT OF THE, WHILE WE WANNA SUPPORT REMOTE WORK, WE ALSO SERVE THE PUBLIC AND WE NEED TO BE PRESENT FOR SERVING THE PUBLIC. 
          AND SO THERE COME TIMES WHEN EVEN THOUGH SOMEONE IS WORKING REMOTELY, WE HAVE TO CALL THEM IN BECAUSE WE'RE SHORT STAFFED OR WE NEED TO CONDUCT A REALLY IMPORTANT MEETING. 
          JUST BECAUSE A WORK AGREEMENT IS IN PLACE DOESN'T MEAN THAT THERE DOESN'T COME THE TIME TO HAVE SOMEONE REPORT TO THE OFFICE. 
          UM, WITH THAT, YOU KNOW, AJITA AND I ARE HERE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS AND, UM, ADDRESS ANY CONCERNS YOU HAVE. 
          - TAKE [INAUDIBLE]. 
          - GO AHEAD. 
          YEAH. OKAY. 
          WE'RE GONNA TAKE IT OUT TO, I WASN'T SURE WHERE WE'RE AT 'CAUSE I CAME IN FROM THE RESTROOM. 
          IF WE COULD TAKE IT OUT TO THE PUBLIC TO SEE IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS ON THIS ITEM. 
          - CHAIR, I DO SEE A SPEAKER ONLINE. 
          - OKAY. 
          - JONATHAN, YOUR MICROPHONE IS NOW AVAILABLE. 
          - THANK YOU. 
          UM, CAN EVERYBODY HEAR ME OKAY? - YES.  - YES. 
          - GREAT. THANK YOU. 
          SO GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND SUPERVISORS. 
          [06:20:02]
MY NAME IS JONATHAN BROWN. 
          I'M SPEAKING TODAY ON BEHALF OF SIMA OE 3, WHICH REPRESENTS THE MILL MANAGERS OF THE COUNTY. 
          I WANT TO THANK SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS FOR REMOVING THIS ITEM FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND ALLOWING FOR GREATER DISCUSSION AROUND THIS. 
          I ALSO APOLOGIZE THAT I'LL BE SPEAKING QUICKLY AS THIS IS OUR ONLY OPPORTUNITY WE'VE HAD TO DISCUSS THIS WITH THE COUNTY IN ANY FORM AS IT COMES WITH ALSO A TWO MINUTE TIME LIMIT. 
          SO IT IS ALMOST 2026 AND REMOTE WORK IS NOT JUST A FRINGE BENEFIT, IT'S PART OF THE WORKPLACE TODAY THE WORKERS KNOW HOW TO NAVIGATE. 
          AND JUST AS A QUICK NOTE HERE IN THE COMMENTS EARLIER, WE ALSO REPRESENT, UH, THE MANAGERS IN MONTEREY COUNTY, WHICH IS NOT SET A LIMIT ON REMOTE WORK. 
          SO I JUST WANT TO, UH, CHECK THAT VERY QUICKLY. 
          ALSO, IF WE ZOOM OUT FOR A SECOND, WE CAN LOOK AT THIS YEAR'S STATE AUDITOR'S REPORT, WHICH IN SUMMARY STATED THAT WORKING REMOTELY THREE OR MORE DAYS PER WEEK COULD SAVE THE STATE ROUGHLY $225 MILLION ANNUALLY. 
          AS WE HEARD EXTENSIVELY THROUGHOUT THIS MEETING, ALL COUNTIES ACROSS THE STATE WILL NEED TO IDENTIFY COST SAVING MEASURES DUE TO THE FEDERAL CHANGES AND PROMOTING REMOTE WORK IS ONE CLEAR OPTION THAT BENEFITS THE COUNTY AND ITS BUDGET PLUS ITS WORKFORCE THE POLICY ALREADY HAS AN INDIVIDUAL ASSESSMENT COMPONENT THAT ALLOWS DEPARTMENTS TO DETERMINE WHAT'S BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY AND THE BUSINESS NEEDS OF THE COUNTY. 
          WE'RE ASKING TO MAINTAIN THE INTEGRITY OF THE CURRENT POLICY TO MAKE THOSE DECISIONS. 
          TO ADD CONTEXT BY ALLOWING THOSE WHO CAN WORK REMOTELY TO DO SO, WE WILL REDUCE TRAFFIC, REDUCE SAFETY CONCERNS, REDUCE PARKING CONGESTIONS, WHICH IS A CONCERN FOR WHERE YOU ARE ALL AT TODAY FROM THE WORKFORCE AND FROM THE PUBLIC AT 701 OCEAN. 
          WHILE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN, MAXIMIZING REMOTE WORK HAS SHOWN STATISTICALLY BY SEV-, SEVERAL STUDIES TO REDUCE COST TO THE EMPLOYER ON MULTIPLE LEVELS, INCREASE PRODUCTIVITY BY WORKFORCE, INCREASE JOB SATISFACTION, AND INCREASE WORK-LIFE BALANCE AMONG OTHER BENEFITS. 
          THE CONCERNS WE BRING TO YOU TODAY ARE TANGIBLE AND IDENTIFY TOPICS BY OUR MEMBERS. 
          YOU'RE MID MANAGERS AND WE'RE APPROACHING THIS ISSUE IN THE SAME WAY THE MID MANAGERS ARE TASKED WITH THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES, WITH DATA-DRIVEN FACTS, PROFESSIONALISM, AND WITH RESPECT. 
          - THANK YOU. 
          - I SEE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS ONLINE CHAIR. 
          - OKAY, I'LL, OKAY I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD. 
          SUPERVISOR MARTINEZ. 
          - YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION. 
          UM, WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY IS A SET OF POLICY UPDATES, PROCEDURE UPDATES, UM, IF PASSED TODAY, AND THERE ARE STILL SOME OUTSTANDING, YOU KNOW, UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES WHETHER IT'S THE ATTORNEYS IN COURT OR SOME OF THE OTHER, UM, SITUATIONS THAT WE'VE BEEN EMAILED ABOUT, WHAT IS YOUR PROCESS? DO YOU HAVE THE DISCRETION TO MAKE INDIVIDUAL EXCEPTIONS? UM, WHAT WHAT WOULD EXIST IF PASSED TODAY? - GOOD AFTERNOON, AJITA PATEL, HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR. 
          SO IF YOU PASS THIS TODAY, THE POLICY ITSELF PROVIDES THE CEO THE DISCRETION TO APPROVE A HUNDRED PERCENT REMOTE WORK FOR CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. 
          AND OTHER THAN THAT, THERE IS NO OTHER DISCRETION. 
          BUT MS. COBURN, THE DISCRETION THAT SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT IS THE FACT THAT THIS COUNTY HAS ALWAYS ALLOWED FLEXIBLE WORK SCHEDULES, WHICH IS A DEPARTMENTAL OPERATIONAL ITEM. 
          AND TO SOME DEGREE SOME OF THE ISSUES ARE GETTING CONFLATED. 
          THERE'S A REMOTE WORK POLICY WHICH ALLOWS FOLKS TO START THEIR DAY AT A DIFFERENT LOCATION, WHICH CAN ONLY BE SOMEONE'S HOME. 
          IT CAN'T BE A COFFEE SHOP, IT CAN'T BE, YOU KNOW, SOME RANDOM MALL, BUT THEIR HOME. 
          THERE'S ALSO FLEXIBLE TOOLS THAT WE ALLOW. 
          AND I THINK THAT'S THE REFERENCE THAT MS. COBURNMADE AS TO THERE ARE OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES, SO SHE CAN WORK WITH DEPARTMENTS TO ADJUST WHAT FLEXIBLE SCHEDULES CAN BE, AND DEPARTMENTS ALSO HAVE THAT DISCRETION. 
          SO I THINK THERE'S THAT ISSUE AROUND THE ISSUE OF ATTORNEYS WHO CAN'T HAVE FULL DAYS, BUT ALSO NEED SOME BALANCE WITH, UM, LIFE, RIGHT? LIFE ISSUES. 
          SO I THINK THAT'S- THAT'S THERE. 
          SO IF YOU ADOPT THIS TODAY AND WE WANT TO COME BACK AND MAKE CHANGES TO HOW MANY DAYS, WE WOULD NEED TO BRING THAT BACK TO YOUR BOARD BECAUSE IT'S A PROCEDURES MANUAL. 
          - GOT IT. - OKAY. 
          I HAD A QUICK FOLLOW-UP QUESTION TO THE SAME QUESTION. 
          UM, SO I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME FOLKS THAT ARE PROBABLY INDEPENDENTLY IN THE FIELD WORKING, SO THAT WOULDN'T COUNT AS REMOTE, BUT THAT IS THEIR PLACE OF WORK IF THEY'RE DOING LIKE... 
          - SO ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT I THINK HAS BECOME CHALLENGING FOR SOME DEPARTMENTS IS THAT STAFF ARE ASKING THEM, "IF I GO OUT IN THE FIELD, WHETHER I'M A SOCIAL WORKER OR WHETHER I'M AN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SPECIALIST 
          [06:25:01]
OR I'M DOING SOME OTHER FIELD WORK, IS THAT MY REMOTE DAY OR IS THAT MY OFFICE DAY?" - THAT'S WHAT I'M... 
          - ACTUALLY, IT'S NEITHER, BECAUSE THE POLICY VERY CLEARLY STATES THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IN YOUR WORK IS THE FACT OF WHERE YOU START YOUR DAY. 
          SO IF YOU START YOUR DAY IN YOUR HOME, YOU STILL MIGHT HAVE TO LEAVE BECAUSE MAYBE SOMEBODY'S IN CRISIS AND YOUR JOB REQUIRES YOU TO GO OUT IN THE FIELD AND HANDLE THAT. 
          OR PERHAPS YOUR JOB REQUIRES HOME VISITS, OR PERHAPS YOUR JOB REQUIRES YOU TO GO OUT ON AN EMERGENCY TO THE ROADS. 
          THERE-- IT SHOULD BE NO DIFFERENTIATION BECAUSE OUR CURRENT POLICY VERY CLEARLY DEFINES REMOTE WORK AS AN ARRANGEMENT THAT ALLOWS AN EMPLOYEE TO PERFORM COUNTY WORK AT AN APPROVED ALTERNATE WORK SITE. 
          IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHETHER YOU'RE IN THE FIELD OR IN THE OFFICE. 
          IT'S JUST WHERE YOU START YOUR MORNING, AND YOU NEED TO BE ABLE TO DO YOUR WORK AT ALL TIMES. 
          I HOPE THAT HELPS. 
          - SO THEY WOULD NEED TO COME INTO THE OFFICE AND THEN GO DO THEIR FIELD WORK ALL DAY? - WELL, THAT WOULD DEPEND IF THEY NEED TO COME INTO THE OFFICE TO PICK UP A CAR OR TO PICK UP TOOLS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. 
          - NO, JUST A REPORT TO MAKE IT A-A... 
          - THEY DO NOT NEED TO DO THAT. - OH, OKAY. 
          - IF YOU ARE STARTING YOUR DAY AND YOU ARE DOING YOUR JOB FROM YOUR HOME, AND SOMETHING HAPPENS THAT REQUIRES YOU TO GO INTO THE FIELD, YOU MUST GO INTO THE FIELD, AND THEN THERE SHOULD BE NO DISCUSSION OF WHETHER THAT'S MY OFFICE DAY OR MY REMOTE DAY BECAUSE THE WORK IS THE WORK. 
          - SO, LIKE IF ONE OF THE ATTORNEYS HAD A COURT CASE AT 07:00, 8:00, 7:30 A.M., 
          [14. Consider proposed amendments to Santa Cruz County Code Chapter 17.10 relating to inclusionary housing requirements for on-site affordable units, and take related actions]
08:00 A.M. COURT CASE MET IS - CASE MET IS THE CLIENT'S THERE AT 7:30, AND THEY STAYED THERE TILL 5:00, 6:00. 
          IS THAT CONSIDERED A HOME? - WELL, THIS- THIS HAPPENS, ALL THIS HAPPENS ALL THE TIME WITH...  - I KNOW... 
          - ...WITH- WITH MY FOLKS IS, UM-- WE ARE NOT THE ONES THAT HAVE THE ISSUE OF THE FIVE-DAY COURT SCHEDULES, BUT LIKE MY ATTORNEYS HAVE CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCES, UH, WITH THE-- WITH THE COURT AND THEY'RE AT 8:30 IN THE MORNING. 
          SO IF- IF IT'S ON SOMEBODY'S REMOTE DAY, THEY START THEIR DAY AT HOME, THEN THEY COME FOR THEIR COURT HEARING, THEN THEY RETURN TO THEIR HOME, AND THEY'RE JUST--  THAT'S-- THAT'S THEIR-- THAT'S THEIR REMOTE DAY. 
          YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T-- THEY DON'T GET-- THEY DON'T GET AN OFFICE DAY BECAUSE THEY SPENT ONE HOUR COMING TO A COURT HEARING. 
          DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? - IT DOES, BUT... - OKAY. 
          - ...A LITTLE UNFAIR, I GUESS, BUT YEAH. 
          SUPERVISOR, DID YOU FINISH YOUR QUESTIONS? SORRY. 
          - UM, I THINK I-- MAYBE LESS QUESTIONS, BUT JUST SORT OF A- A REFLECTION. UM, YOU KNOW, WE- WE HAVE HEARD A LOT FROM EMPLOYEES ABOUT THIS CHANGE. 
          UM, AND I-- AND I DO IN SOME REGARDS SYMPATHIZE WITH IT COZ CHANGE IS DIFFICULT. 
          UM, DURING THE PANDEMIC, WE-- I AM REALLY GRATEFUL THAT WE HAD THE TECHNOLOGY TO BE ABLE TO WORK REMOTE AND RESPOND IN A WAY THAT MET PUBLIC HEALTH MANDATES. 
          AND, UM, WE GOT THROUGH THAT REALLY DIFFICULT TIME. 
          UM, BUT LIKE MANY OTHER JURISDICTIONS, WE ARE STARTING, YOU KNOW, OR HAVE STARTED THE PROCESS OF BEING-- OF HAVING PEOPLE BACK IN THE OFFICE FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS. 
          AND, UM, GIVEN THAT THIS IS COMING FROM THE RECOMMENDATION OF OUR NEWLY HIRED CEO, UM, AND IT REALLY IS AN OPERATIONAL AND A MANAGEMENT DECISION, I KIND OF-- I'M GOING TO, UM, DEFER TO THE CEO AND IF THIS IS THE RECOMMENDATION THAT YOU'RE BRINGING TO US TODAY, THAT THIS IS WHAT'S BEST TO SERVE OUR PUBLIC, UM, THEN I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT. 
          - CHAIR [INAUDIBLE] - YEAH. KOENIG. 
          - THANK YOU. UH, I MEAN, I'LL ALSO AGREE WITH THAT. 
          I MEAN, WE DEFER TO THE OPERATIONAL DECISION OF OUR CEO AND I ALSO OUR HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR, UM, AND ALSO POINT OUT THAT WE, IN ADDITION TO, I MEAN, TWO REMOTE DAYS BUILT INTO THIS, WHICH IS GENEROUS, UM, THAT THERE'S ALSO 500 WESTRIDGE AND THAT, UM, THERE'S THE OPPORTUNITY FOR DEPARTMENTS TO MAKE THAT TO BE, YOU KNOW, A WORKPLACE SO THAT SOMEONE CAN REALLY AVOID THE- THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IN OUR COUNTY AROUND, UH, EXTREME TRAFFIC THAT FOLKS COMMUTING FROM SOUTH COUNTY EXPERIENCE IF THEY'RE TRYING TO GET TO THIS 701 OCEAN STREET GOVERNMENT BUILDING. 
          AND SO WE- WE-- BASICALLY, BECAUSE WE'VE REQUIRED THAT BUILDING, BECAUSE WE HAVE A SOUTH COUNTY GOVERNMENT CENTER, UM, THERE IS OPPORTUNITY FOR REPORTING TO THE OFFICE NOT TO REQUIRE [INAUDIBLE] THE TRAFFIC. 
          - SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          - I JUST WANNA APPRE-- I DO WANNA APPRECIATE ALL THE COMMENTS AND I APPRECIATE THE INTENT BEHIND WHAT'S BEFORE US TODAY. 
          I WAS HOPING TO DO IS TO HAVE A MORE-- 
          [06:30:01]
BECAUSE THE INFORMA-- LET ME START OVER. 
          APPRECIATE WHAT YOU ALL SAID TODAY, BECAUSE THE INFORMATION THAT YOU PROVIDED IS HELPFUL FOR OUR UNDERSTANDING, BUT IT WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE AGENDA REPORT. 
          AND SO, YOU KNOW, ABSENT HAVING, YOU KNOW, A CONVERSATION WITH NICOLE BEFOREHAND, UM, YOU KNOW SOME OF THIS INFORMATION IS REALLY IMPORTANT FOR THE PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE MAKING THIS DECISION AND HAVING AN AGENDA REPORT THAT KIND OF PULLS TOGETHER, YOU KNOW, WHERE'S THE FLEXIBILITY, YOU KNOW, WILL- WILL DEPARTMENT HEADS BE ABLE TO, YOU KNOW, ALLOW PEOPLE TO WORK MORE REMOTE DAYS THAN REQUIRED. 
          I MEAN, THIS WOULD'VE ALL BEEN REALLY HELPFUL FOR US TO- TO SEE. 
          AND THAT'S WHY FOR ME, I-I THINK THAT IT'LL BE IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, THIS [INAUDIBLE] AND- AND AGAIN, THIS WAS PUT ON CONSENT. 
          I MEAN, THIS REALLY IS, YOU KNOW-- BECAUSE OF THE IMPACT THAT IT'S GONNA HAVE ON EMPLOYEES, I REALLY THOUGHT IT WOULD'VE BEEN APPROPRIATE TO HAVE IT ON A REGULAR AGENDA SO THAT THE PUBLIC IS AWARE OF WHAT WE'RE DOING AND THE RATIONALE BEHIND WHAT WE'RE DOING. 
          AND OUR EMPLOYEES CAN UNDERSTAND THAT. 
          UM, BECAUSE THE WAY THAT IT WAS PRESENTED, IT- IT CAME ACROSS, I THINK FOR SOME PEOPLE AS IT KIND OF GETTING SLIPPED INTO THE AGENDA. 
          AND SO I ACTUALLY WOULD PREFER, AND I WAS HOPING NOT GO INTO SO MUCH CONVERSATION BECAUSE I THINK IT'LL BE GOOD IF WE HAD THIS COME BACK ON THE IRREGULAR AGENDA SO THAT PEOPLE ARE AWARE AND IT'S ON THE-- YOU KNOW, IT'S- IT'S PUBLICLY NOTICED WHY WE'RE DOING THIS, THE RATIONALE BEHIND IT, AND REALLY SO THAT IT PROVIDES US WITH, YOU KNOW, AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHY THESE DECISIONS ARE MADE. 
          THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS WHY THESE DECISIONS ARE MADE. 
          SO WHEN WE MAKE THE DECISIONS, WE CAN JUSTIFY WHAT WE'RE DOING. 
          I MEAN, I DON'T THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE REALLY PAYING ATTENTION RIGHT NOW BECAUSE IT WAS THE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA RIGHT BEFORE WE'RE GOING OFF TO CHRISTMAS, AND, YOU KNOW, IT WAS PULLED FROM CONSENT. 
          SO, I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING, AND I'D BE MORE SUPPORTIVE IF WE WERE ABLE TO HAVE AN AGENDA ITEM COME BACK THAT PROVIDES, UH, YOU KNOW, THE JUSTIFICATION AS TO WHY WE'RE MAKING THESE DECISIONS. 
          AND THAT'S THE MOTION THAT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE. 
          - I-I JUST WANNA NOTE ONE MORE THING. 
          UM, I FORGOT TO STATE EARLIER, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS, AND THAT IS, UM, THE DEPARTMENT HEADS AND THE AFFECTED DEPARTMENTS HAVE BEEN COMMUNICATING WITH THEIR STAFF, UM, FOR A WHILE NOW. 
          AND SO THERE HAS BEEN SOME AWARENESS AND COMMUNICATION OF THE CHANGE. 
          UM, AND I WAS JUST LOOKING AT THE DEPARTMENT. 
          SO, TWO-THIRDS OF OUR DEPARTMENTS HAVE ALREADY MADE THE CHANGE. 
          AND SO IT'S- IT'S, YOU KNOW, ONLY FOUR OR FIVE OF OUR DEPARTMENTS THAT HAVE NOT MADE THE CHANGE. 
          AND SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DIFFERENCES IN OPERATIONS ACROSS THE COUNTY AT THIS POINT, AND WE'RE REALLY TRYING TO BRING THEM UNDER THE SAME UMBRELLA, UM, SO THAT WE CAN ENSURE THE MOST EFFECTIVE COUNTY OPERATIONS, PARTICULARLY AS WE'RE MOVING INTO THESE CHALLENGING TIMES. 
          - AND I'D LIKE TO JUST ADD ONE THING THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT, WHICH IS THAT, UM, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS, YOU MADE NOTE OF THE FACT THAT PERHAPS LABOR GROUPS HADN'T BEEN NOTIFIED BEFORE WE BROUGHT THIS ITEM TO YOUR, UM, AGENDA. 
          SO THE TWO BIGGEST DEPARTMENTS, HSA AND HSD, ARE ONE OF THE ONES THAT ARE ALIGNING FROM THREE DAYS TO TWO DAYS. 
          AND A FEW MONTHS AGO, AS THESE CONVERSATIONS BEGAN, AS A COURTESY, I DID NOTIFY, UH, OLIVIA MARTINEZ, REGION TWO EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR BY PHONE TO LET HER KNOW THAT CONVERSATIONS WERE HAPPENING AND THAT I WANTED HER TO BE AWARE THIS IS WHERE THE COUNTY WAS LEANING TO. 
          AND AS FOR ALL OTHER GROUPS, THEY-- IN PASSING AND IN CONVERSATION, THERE ARE SOME THAT ALSO KNEW THAT WE WERE MOVING THIS WAY. 
          BUT WHAT IS REQUIRED UNDER STATE LAW IS THAT WHEN THERE IS AN OPERATIONAL DECISION TO BE MADE, WE DO NOT HAVE TO BARGAIN THAT, WHICH IS WHY WE CAME TO YOU ALL FIRST, BECAUSE IT'S A POLICY DECISION. 
          AND TO DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT WOULD ACTUALLY SET A NEW PRECEDENT HERE, WHICH I THINK I DO NOT RECOMMEND, AND NEITHER DOES THE CEO. 
          BUT WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF YOUR BOARD TAKES ACTION TODAY, I WILL BE NOTIFYING ALL LABOR GROUPS THAT THERE HAS BEEN A POLICY CHANGE, AND THEY WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK FOR A MEETING TO DISCUSS THE IMPACTS OF THE DECISION ON ANY LEGITIMATE WORKING CONDITIONS. 
          SO, THERE WILL BE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THEM TO HAVE A CONVERSATION, AND THAT FEEDBACK WILL BE BROUGHT BACK AND SHARED WITH THE CEO. 
          AND IF, FOR ANY REASON, WE DECIDE THAT WE DO NEED TO GO BACK, THEN THERE'S ALWAYS THAT AVENUE BY COMING BACK TO YOUR BOARD. 
          BUT STATE LAW DOESN'T REQUIRE US TO BARGAIN A MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVE. 
          - THANK YOU. AND I-I JUST WANNA SAY, I-I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, THE STATE LAW DOESN'T REQUIRE US TO- TO BARGAIN IT, AND I WOULDN'T RECOMMEND US BARGAINING IT, BUT I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT PRIOR TO US MAKE A DECISION THAT THE LABOR GROUPS HAVE MET WITH AND WE LET-- THE STAFF LETS THEM KNOW WHAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE SO THAT THOSE CONCERNS CAN BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT PRIOR TO THE BOARD TAKING ACTION. 
          I MEAN, WE TAKE ACTION, THE LABOR GROUPS CAN GET FREAKED OUT, 
          [06:35:04]
OUR EMPLOYEES CAN GET FREAKED OUT-- THOSE-- COZ IT SOUNDS LIKE SOME DO KNOW, BUT MAYBE SOME DON'T. 
          AND IF THEY, YOU KNOW, HEAR ABOUT THIS AND THEN IT'S AFTER THE FACT OF US TRYING TO, YOU KNOW, FIX A PROBLEM THAT WE POTENTIALLY COULD HAVE CREATED, IF WE COULD GET IN FRONT OF THAT IN THE FIRST PLACE, I THINK THAT'S A BETTER WAY FOR US PERSONALLY TO BE ABLE TO HELP ADDRESS, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE PROBLEMS THAT MIGHT COME THROUGH THIS. 
          AND YEAH, AGAIN, SOMETIMES THINGS AREN'T REQUIRED, BUT IT'S- IT'S IN THE BEST INTEREST OF MAINTAINING GOOD RELATIONSHIPS WITH FOLKS TO SOMETIMES GO AND HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS, UH, BEFOREHAND. 
          AND, UM, AND AGAIN, I'M NOT-- IT'S NOT-- I UNDERSTAND THE- THE THE NEED THAT'S COMING FORWARD, AND I DON'T DISAGREE WITH THAT AT ALL. 
          AND I THINK THAT IT'S-- AND- AND I-I DO THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE CAN BE MOST EFFECTIVE AND MOST EFFICIENT. 
          BUT MY BIGGEST CHALLENGE HERE IS IN TERMS OF TRANSPARENCY AND THE INFORMATION BEING PUBLIC. 
          A LOT OF WHAT WAS DISCUSSED TODAY WAS NOT INCLUDED IN OUR MEMO. 
          UM, AGAIN, IT WAS ON CONSENT, AND IT TOOK US HAVING TO PULL THAT ITEM FOR US TO GET ALL THIS INFORMATION, WHICH REALLY MAKES SENSE. 
          BUT I THINK THAT BY HAVING THIS PUT INTO A MEMO, BE MADE PUBLIC BEFORE WE TAKE ACTION, I THINK THAT HAVING HR MEET WITH SOME OF THOSE LABOR REPS BEFORE WE TAKE ACTION WOULD REALLY PROVIDE OUR BOARD WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO- TO SAY TO FOLKS WHEN THEY COME THAT THEY'VE HAD OPPORTUNITIES FOR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT WITH HR, WE HAVE OUR RATIONALE THAT'S BEEN CLEARLY LAID OUT TO THE PUBLIC, AND SO THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS AS WELL THAT'S- THAT'S THE BASIS FOR THIS. 
          AND UM, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION THOUGH. 
          IF TWO-THIRDS OF THE DEPARTMENTS HAVE ALREADY MADE THE SHIFT, THEN WHY DOES THE BOARD NEED TO MAKE THIS POLICY DECISION TODAY? BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE IS A MECHANISM FOR DEPARTMENT HEADS TO MAKE THESE CHANGES, WHICH WASN'T INCLUDED IN THE- THE AGENDA REPORT FOR US TO UNDERSTAND THAT AS WELL. 
          AND SO I'M JUST WONDERING IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO THAT. 
          - YEAH, UM, IT IS A MANAGEMENT PREROGATIVE THE AMOUNT OF REMOTE WORK. 
          AND SO WE'VE WORKED WITH DEPARTMENT HEADS TO-- BECAUSE WE NEEDED STAFF IN THE OFFICE MORE STREAMLINED SANTA CRUZ COUNTY, THERE WAS A WHOLE DISCUSSION ABOUT HAVING STAFF IN THE OFFICE MORE TO HELP WITH- WITH THE INCREASED PROCESSING OF PERMITS. 
          SO, WE MADE THAT CHANGE, UM, PURSUANT TO BOARD DIRECTION. 
          UM, BUT WE CAN ALSO MAKE CHANGES, YOU KNOW, OPERATIONAL ANYTIME WE NEED. 
          AND SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO BRING EVERYONE ELSE BECAUSE WE SEE A NEED TO HAVE PEOPLE IN OFFICE TO WORK ON EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE ON OUR PLATES, UM, AT THIS TIME. 
          - SO MY FINAL QUESTION IS, I THINK YOU WERE ADDRESSING- ADDRESSING THIS WHEN I STEPPED OUT WHEN I WALKED BACK IN, BUT IN TERMS OF THE- THE- THE PUBLIC DEFENDER'S OFFICE, THE DA COUNTY COUNCIL, BUT ALSO WHAT I WAS MENTIONING, RIGHT, JUST FOLKS THAT- THAT IF THERE'S ANY SORT OF DISCRETION AROUND FOLKS THAT ARE WORKING IN THE FIELD AND WHAT EXACTLY TWO DAYS MEANS FOR THEM, DO WE HAVE THAT DISCRETION OR WILL WE HAVE THAT DISCRETION WITH THEM? DOES STILL WORK SOMETHING OUT WITH THEM? - [INAUDIBLE] AND I ARE GONNA DISCUSS THAT ON FRIDAY FOR THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES. 
          SO, UM, WE'LL-- WE CAN GET BACK TO YOU ON WHAT THAT ENDS UP LOOKING LIKE. 
          - OKAY. 
          - I CAN MAKE A MOTION. 
          - OKAY. 
          - ALRIGHT. WE'LL SEE WHERE THIS GOES. 
          SO I'M GONNA MOVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION WITH- WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE REMOTE WORK POLICY AND DIRECT STAFF TO BRING BACK A MORE COMPLETE ITEM TO BE PLACED ON THE REGULAR AGENDA FOR CONSIDERATION THAT, UM, REALLY COVERS HOW THIS POLICY IS GONNA IMPACT WORKERS, THE BENEFITS, UM, AND HOW, UH, THE CHANGES POLICY WOULD COMPARE TO OTHER JURISDICTIONS. 
          AND ADDITIONALLY, WHAT FLEXIBILITY WILL BE BUILT INTO THE POLICY, UM, THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR POTENTIALLY MORE REMOTE DAYS IF NECESSARY. 
          - WHO WOULD MAKE THE- THE DECISION ABOUT THE REMOTE DAYS IF NECESSARY, MORE REMOTE DAYS? IS THAT WHAT I WAS SAYING? LIKE THE-- IT'S AT THE DISCRETION OF... 
          -  YES. YES. IT'S TO CLEARLY-- TO, CLEARLY OUTLINE THAT SO THE BOARD UNDERSTANDS AND SO THE PUBLIC AND WORKERS UNDERSTAND. 
          - WELL, PART OF ME SAYS, YOU KNOW, THAT BANDAID HAS TO AT SOME POINT, BUT I'LL SECOND IT. 
          - OKAY. 
          - SO IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, WE'LL TAKE OVER. 
          - I JUST NEED TO SAY SOMETHING. 
          AS SOMEBODY WHO WORKED-- WHO WORKED IN HEALTHCARE ALL OF MY CAREER, WHO WORKED EVERY SINGLE DAY, SIX DAYS A WEEK DURING THE PANDEMIC UNTIL OFTENTIMES 10:00 AND 11:00 AT NIGHT WITHOUT ANY EXTRA PAY, LIKE, IT'S HARD-- THIS IS JUST A HARD DISCUSSION FOR ME. 
          YOU'VE GOT LAW ENFORCEMENT; THEY CAN'T WORK REMOTELY. 
          YOU'VE GOT OUR ROADS CREW AND PUBLIC WORKS; THEY CAN'T WORK REMOTELY. 
          OUR CLINIC STAFF CANNOT WORK REMOTELY. 
          WE ARE-- WHAT WE ARE ASKING HERE IS FOR STAFF 
          [06:40:01]
TO COME IN ONE EXTRA DAY A WEEK. 
          THAT IS NOT TOO MUCH TO ASK. THIS IS A JOB. 
          ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, UM, WAS VERY DIFFICULT, UM, WHEN I WAS WORKING ALL DURING THE PANDEMIC, IS TRYING TO GET A HOLD OF SOMEBODY AT CHILD WELFARE AND NOT IN THIS COUNTY. 
          SO I- I DON'T WANNA POINT FINGERS, BUT FOR-- I THINK FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC WHO NEEDED TO MAKE REPORTS OR NEEDED TO CALL PUBLIC HEALTH OR NEEDED FOR WHATEVER REASON, IT WAS REALLY HARD TO LIKE, A, NOT BE ABLE TO GET AHOLD OF PEOPLE WHEN YOU NEEDED THEM, B, SOMETIMES YOU COULD GET AHOLD OF THEM AND YOU'D HEAR TONS OF RIGHT NOISE IN THE BACKGROUND, INCLUDING CHILDREN AND DOGS AND ET CETERA, ET CETERA, WHILE- WHILE YOU'RE SITTING NEXT TO DYING PATIENTS TRYING TO GET THE RESOURCES THAT YOU NEED FOR THEIR FAMILIES. 
          SO I-I JUST-- IT'S JUST HARD FOR ME TO- TO NOT JUST PASS THIS TODAY. 
          LIKE IF YOU WANT PEOPLE-- IF YOU WANNA PUT THIS ON THE AGENDA AND HAVE A ROOM FULL OF PEOPLE AND SIT HERE AND LISTEN FOR TWO HOURS TO PEOPLE TELLING YOU WHY THEY SHOULDN'T COME BACK ONE EXTRA DAY A WEEK WHEN THEY STILL GET TO WORK REMOTELY TWO DAYS, THAT'S LIKE A-- THAT'S UNBELIEVABLE BENEFIT TO PEOPLE. 
          SO I- I'M GONNA VOTE NO ON THIS AND, UH, IF IT DOESN'T PASS, I HOPE WE CAN JUST PASS THIS TODAY AS PROPOSED BY ADMINISTRATION. 
          - SOMEBODY [INAUDIBLE] MAKE THAT MOTION. 
          MADAM CLERK. 
          - OH, CAN I ADD-- I JUST ALSO WANT TO ADD THAT THIS SHOULD COME BACK NO LATER THAN THE SECOND MEETING IN JANUARY. 
          - SUPERVISOR KOENIG?  - NO - DE SERPA.  - NO. 
          - CUMMINGS.  - AYE. 
          - MARTINEZ.  - NO. 
          - AND HERNANDEZ.  - AYE. 
          MOTION FAILS TO THREE DISSENTING VOTES ON THE MOTION. 
          - I'LL MOVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. 
          - SECOND. 
          - THERE'S NO QUESTIONS, SO WE WILL TAKE ROLL CALL VOTE ON THIS. 
          - SUPERVISOR KOENIG.  - AYE. 
          - DE SERPA.  - AYE. 
          - CUMMINGS?   - NO. 
          AND FOR THE RECORD, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE CHANGE IN THE POLICY. 
          I JUST THINK THAT THERE NEEDED TO BE MORE TRANSPARENCY, ESPECIALLY SINCE THIS WAS BURIED IN AN ITEM ON CONSENT, AND IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SOMETHING BROUGHT ON THE REGULAR AGENDA WITH MORE OF AN EXPLANATION AS TO WHY WE'RE MOVING THIS DIRECTION AND THE FLEXIBILITIES THAT ARE BUILT IN FOR DEPARTMENT HEADS TO ALLOW FOR MORE DAYS. 
          - MARTINEZ. 
          - I WAS LISTENING. 
          - THIS-- THE MOTION, THIS IS PASSING THE RECOMMENDED ACTION. 
          - YES. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS IS INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT - AYE - AND HERNANDEZ. 
          - SO JUST FOR CLARITY, YOU DID SAY THAT THERE IS GONNA BE SOME DISCRETION WITH SOME OF THE DEPARTMENTS THAT ARE KIND OF UNIQUE IN NATURE FOR THEIR JOB, RIGHT? - YEAH. I NEED TO REVIEW THAT WITH [INAUDIBLE] ON FRIDAY. - AYE. 
          MOTION PASSES. 
          UH, ONE [INAUDIBLE] VOTE, UH, SUPERVISOR CUMMINGS. 
          AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING TODAY AT 4:40, 20 MINUTES BEFORE I THOUGHT I WE’RE GONNA FINISH. 
          WE'RE DOING GOOD. 
          [END]
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.