[CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:03]
>> GOOD MORNING. TODAY IS THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SHASTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
THE TIME IS 9:00 A.M. WE HAVE ALL BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT ALONG WITH CEO DAVE RICKERT COUNTY COUNSEL, TRICIA WEBBER, FILLING IN FOR JOE, WHO MAY BE HERE LATER TODAY.
AND THEN FROM THE CLERK OF THE BOARD, STEPHANIE BLANKENSHIP, MARCI WINSTED, AND THE FOYER MIRANDA ANGEL.
WE ENCOURAGE THOSE WHO WISHES TO PARTICIPATE IN PUBLIC COMMENT.
FLOAT OF SPEAKER REQUEST CARD AND SUBMITTED TO THE CLERK OF THE BOARD.
IN THE FOYER SPEAKER REQUEST CARDS MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE CLERK BEFORE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR EACH REGULAR ITEM BEGINS.
WITH THAT, I'LL TURN THINGS OVER TO MISS BLANKENSHIP
>> THANK YOU.THROUGH THE CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND EVERYONE IN ATTENDANCE TODAY OF THE BOARD ROOM RULES OF ORDER AS OUTLINED IN ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY 1-101.
THOSE CAN BE FOUND ONLINE THROUGH THE CLERK OF THE BOARD'S WEBSITE.
THE POLICY INCLUDES SIGNAGE RESTRICTION, ATTENDEE SEATING, AND OVERALL CONDUCT TO ENSURE BUSINESS IS DONE IN AN ORDERLY FASHION AND THAT ALL HAVE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO OBSERVE AND PARTICIPATE.
UNLESS ADDRESSING THE BOARD, ALL THOSE IN THE AUDIENCE SHALL REMAIN SEATED IN THE CHAIRS PROVIDED.
STANDING ALONG THE BACK WALL OF THE BOARDROOM IS ACCEPTABLE, SO LONG AS NO PERSON BLOCKS THE INGRESS OR EGRESS.
MEMBERS OF THE MEDIA WHO WANT TO OBSERVE, RECORD, OR OTHERWISE DOCUMENT AT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING ARE REQUESTED TO SET UP EQUIPMENT ALONG THE SOUTH WINDOWS.
SHASTA COUNTY REMAINS COMMITTED TO CONDUCTING BUSINESS IN A PROFESSIONAL AND ACCESSIBLE ENVIRONMENT, AND WE KINDLY ASK THAT ALL ATTENDEES ADHERE TO THESE RULES.
REGARDING TODAY'S AGENDA, ITEM C9, THE EOC NORTH EXPANSION PROJECT HAS BEEN PULLED FOR DISCUSSION BY SUPERVISOR PLUMMER.
ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM MUST SUBMIT A SEPARATE SPEAKER REQUEST CARD TO THE CLERK AND THE FOYER BEFORE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD FOR THAT ITEM BEGINS.
WITH THAT, CHAIR, I'LL ACTUALLY BE TURNING THINGS OVER TO ASSISTANT COUNTY COUNSEL TRICIA WEBBER.
>> THANK YOU SECRETARY. MR. CHAIRMAN.
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 54954.2 SUBSECTION B2.
COUNTY COUNCIL IS SEEKING A 2/3 VOTE TO ADD A CLOSED SESSION ITEM TODAY AS THE NEED FOR ACTION CAME TO OUR ATTENTION AFTER THE AGENDA WAS POSTED.
THIS MATTER RELATES TO EXISTING LITIGATION IN SHASTA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT.
THE CASE IS MICHAEL SUTTER HALE VERSUS SHASTA COUNTY AND THE CITY OF REDDING, COURT CASE NUMBER 209407.
>> I'M JUST ASSUMING THE GOVERNMENT CODE YOU JUST QUOTED GIVES US THAT AUTHORITY TO DO THAT, CORRECT?
>> IT DOES, YES, MR. CHAIRMAN.
>> I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO ADD THAT TO CLOSED SESSION.
>> YOU HAVE A MOTION BY SUPERVISOR KELTROM, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR PLUMMER.
WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THAT RIGHT, MISS BLANKENSHIP.
IS THAT A REGULAR CALENDAR ITEM, THEN, STEPHANIE?
>> YES, CHAIR. IT'LL JUST BE ADDED TO CLOSED SESSION.
IT'LL JUST BE A CASE ADDED TO R7.
JUST FOR THE RECORD, I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM, MISS WEBBER, THE MICHAEL SETTER HALE ITEM IS CURRENTLY ON OUR AGENDA.
IS THERE A DIFFERENT CASE NUMBER THAN WHAT'S CURRENTLY LISTED? I SHOW 209407. IS THAT THE ONE YOU [OVERLAPPING]
>> THAT'S THE CASE NUMBER I CITED, YES.
>> IT IS ALREADY ON OUR AGENDA, SO WE DON'T NEED TO ADD IT.
>> DO WE HAVE TO WALK THAT BACK?
>> IF THE MAKER OF THE MOTION WANTS TO RESCIND IT, THAT'S FINE.
>> YOU GO WITH THAT, MATT? MAYBE THAT WAS JUST ADDED AT SOME POINT, AND STEPHANIE AND HER AMAZING CREW GOT IT ON THERE PROBABLY AT THE 11TH HOUR.
WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO INVITE UP GOOD FRIEND OF MINE AND ALSO PASTOR OF PATHWAY CHURCH, CHRIS MATOS FOR OUR INVOCATION.
I ASK YOU, PLEASE STAND. AFTER THE INVOCATION, REMAIN STANDING FOR THE PLEDGE, LED BY SUPERVISOR HARMON.
>> THANK YOU, LET'S PRAY. ALMIGHTY GOD, WE COME BEFORE YOU TODAY AS THIS BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PREPARES TO UNDERTAKE THE IMPORTANT WORK OF OUR COMMUNITY.
WE ASK FOR YOUR CLEAR GUIDANCE FOR EACH MEMBER AS THEY NAVIGATE THE MANY TASKS AND RESPONSIBILITIES BEFORE THEM.
GRANT THEM CLARITY OF PURPOSE, AND A UNIFIED SPIRIT IN THEIR SERVICE.
GRANT THEM DISCERNMENT AS THEY DELIBERATE ON THE COMPLEX ISSUES THAT IMPACT THE LIVES OF OUR CITIZENS.
MAY THEY HAVE THE WISDOM TO UNDERSTAND DEEPLY, TO LISTEN INTENTLY AND TO DECIDE JUSTLY FOR THE WELL BEING OF ALL.
LORD INSTILL IN THEM, UNWAVERING COURAGE, COURAGE TO ENGAGE THE SIGNIFICANT COMMUNITY CHALLENGES WITH INTEGRITY, RESOLVE, AND A COMMITMENT TO POSITIVE SOLUTIONS, EVEN WHEN THE PATH IS DIFFICULT.
MY THEIR DISCUSSIONS BE FRUITFUL, THEIR DECISIONS WISE, AND THEIR EFFORTS LEAD TO A STRONGER, MORE VIBRANT COMMUNITY FOR EVERYONE.
AS THEY CONCLUDE THEIR WORK FOR THIS YEAR, WE OFFER THIS PRAYER WITH DEEP GRATITUDE FOR THEIR SERVICE AND ASK YOUR BLESSING ON THE YEAR TO COME, AMEN.
>> ASK EVERYBODY TO JOIN US IN THE PLEDGE.
[00:05:15]
[R1 Receive an update from the County Executive Officer on County issues and consider action on specific legislation related to Shasta County’s legislative platform and receive Supervisors’ reports on countywide issues.]
RECEIVE AN UPDATE FROM COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND COUNTY ISSUES AND CONSIDER ACTION ON SPECIFIC LEGISLATION. YOU DON'T WANT TO STAY? IT'S ONLY BE ABOUT FOUR HOURS.RECEIVE SUPERVISORS REPORTS ON COUNTY WIDE ISSUES.
WITH THAT, WE WILL START WITH CEO RICKERT.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN CRYE, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, DAVE RICKERT, COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER REPORTING.
I CAN START OFF WITH SOME GOOD NEWS FROM A NEWS RELEASE FROM NACO, THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES.
CONGRESS PASSED THE BIPARTISAN SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS REAUTHORIZATION ACT FOR 2025 ON DECEMBER 9.
THIS WAS LED BY US SENATORS MIKE CRAPO, REPUBLICAN FROM IDAHO, DON WYDEN, DEMOCRAT FROM OREGON, AND US REPRESENTATIVES DOUG LAMALFA REPUBLICAN, CALIFORNIA, AND JOE NEGUSE, DEMOCRAT OF COLORADO.
THE BILL PROVIDES PAYMENTS TO COUNTIES FOR FISCAL YEAR 24 AND 25 AND REAUTHORIZES THE SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS PROGRAM THROUGH THE END OF FISCAL YEAR 2026.
IT DELIVERS CRITICAL RELIEF TO TIMBER DEPENDENT COUNTIES THAT RELY ON THESE FUNDS TO MAINTAIN ESSENTIAL SERVICES AND TRANSITIONS TOWARDS A LONG TERM FISCAL STABILITY.
MOVING ON TO COUNTY BUSINESS, ON DECEMBER 19, CHAIRMAN CRYE WILL ADDRESS THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION IN SACRAMENTO REGARDING THE FOUND WIND PROJECT.
AT THIS MEETING, THE CC WILL CONSIDER THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS RECOMMENDATION TO DENY THE FOUNTAIN WIND LLC OPTED APPLICATION.
OUR HOPE IS THAT WE ARE IN THE FINAL CHAPTER OF A LONG BATTLE TO DEFEND SHASTA COUNTY AND OUR RESIDENTS FROM A PROPOSED ENERGY PROJECT THAT WOULD DAMAGE NATIVE AMERICAN HISTORIC LANDS, HARM THE ENVIRONMENT, AND INCREASE FIRE SAFETY RISK FOR OUR COUNTY.
WE LOOK FORWARD TO A TIME WHEN WE CAN RECOGNIZE ALL THE MANY PEOPLE AND ORGANIZATIONS CONTRIBUTING TO THIS EFFORT.
I LOOK FORWARD TO REPORTING THE OUTCOME OF THIS HEARING AT OUR NEXT BOARD MEETING.
WILL START TO MY RIGHT WITH SUPERVISOR PLUMMER.
GOOD TO SEE YOU. FEW UPDATES HERE.
FIRST, STARTING WITH A PROJECT THAT WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT OVER THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS, WHICH IS THE SHERIFF'S NEW CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION CAMPUS THAT WILL BE LOCATED ON 90 ACRE PARCEL IN SOUTH CITY OF REDDING.
THE UPDATE I WANTED TO SHARE TODAY IS THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING HARD TO TRY TO GET THE STATE TO PUT FUNDING IN THEIR BUDGET TO PAY FOR A PORTION OF THE MAIL COMMUNITY RE-ENTRY PROGRAM, WHICH IS A PROGRAM FOR THOSE WHO HAVE SIX MONTHS TO TWO YEARS LEFT ON THEIR SENTENCE.
RATHER THAN MEET CERTAIN QUALIFICATIONS, SO RATHER THAN THEM SERVING THAT IN THE JAIL, THEY WOULD GO TO THIS PROGRAM AND START WORKING, GET ALL THEIR IDS, GET BACK CONNECTED TO HEALTH CARE, START SAVING MONEY AND GET CONNECTED TO HOUSING, SO THAT WHEN THEIR SENTENCE IS OVER, THEY WILL REINTEGRATE INTO THE COMMUNITY.
THIS HAS BEEN SHOWN TO REDUCE RECIDIVISM BY 92%.
THE GOOD NEWS ON THIS IS THAT WE'RE REALLY GETTING BIPARTISAN SUPPORT FOR THIS.
BOTH OF OUR STATE REPRESENTATIVES SIGNED LETTERS OF SUPPORT, AS WELL AS SHERIFFS FROM 12 OTHER COUNTIES, AND JUST LAST WEEK, US SENATOR ADAM SCHIFF ALSO SIGNED A LETTER OF SUPPORT.
WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT THIS WILL ENCOURAGE THE STATE TO PROVIDE FUNDING FOR WHAT WILL BE AN INNOVATIVE MODEL IN BRINGING BOTH ACCOUNTABILITY AND REHABILITATION TO THOSE IN OUR COMMUNITY.
SECOND, IS I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH A DEVELOPER WHO WE HAVE BEEN HAVING THESE DEVELOPER ROUND TABLES, AND WE'VE IDENTIFIED PROPERTIES THAT ARE IN WHAT'S CALLED THE HOUSING ELEMENT, WHICH IS WHAT WE BASICALLY ARE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE STATE TO BRING DEVELOPMENT ON IN THOSE PROPERTIES.
THERE'S A DEVELOPER WHO'S LOOKING AT ONE OF THOSE PROPERTIES AND IS LOOKING TO BRING STUDENT, FAMILY, AND SENIOR HOUSING, AND THAT WOULD BE NEAR SHASTA COLLEGE AND SIMPSON UNIVERSITY.
WE HAD SOME INITIAL CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COLLEGE THERE TO SEE WHAT WOULD BE THE NEED AND HOW COULD THIS DEVELOPER POTENTIALLY MEET THOSE? AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING TO MEET OUR HOUSING SHORTAGE TO BRING DOWN THE COST OF HOUSING AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE IN THE COMMUNITY HAVE AVAILABILITY OF HOUSING THAT CONTINUES TO BE A KEY NEED.
IF YOU'RE OUT THERE AND LOOKING TO DO THAT, LET US KNOW, AND WE WANT TO PLUG YOU INTO THAT EFFORT.
THE FINAL UPDATE IS THAT, I GUESS, A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, LED BY OUR PROBATION DEPARTMENT, THE COMMUNITY APPLIED FOR WHAT'S CALLED PROP 47 GRANT,
[00:10:04]
WHICH WAS A GRANT DOLLARS FOLLOWING PROP 47, WHICH MOST OF US HAD A LOT OF ISSUES WITH THAT PROP 47.BUT AS A RESULT OF THAT, THERE WERE STATE DOLLARS THAT COULD BE AVAILABLE TO THE COMMUNITY.
SHASTA COUNTY WAS AWARDED THOSE ABOUT A YEAR AND A HALF AGO TO CONNECT PEOPLE THOSE FREQUENT OFFENDERS, PARTICULARLY THOSE WHO HAVE A LOT OF MISDEMEANORS TO SERVICES AND TO CASE MANAGEMENT AND GET THEM CONNECTED INTO SERVICES SO THAT THEY'RE LESS LIKELY TO RECOMMIT CRIMES.
WE JUST HAD OUR QUARTERLY UPDATE YESTERDAY.
THE ONE THING THAT WAS INTERESTING, AND I THINK IS SOMETHING FOR US TO THINK ABOUT AS A COMMUNITY IS THEY SHARED THE GENDER SPLIT OF THOSE WHO, ENROLLED IN THE PROGRAM.
STRANGELY, BECAUSE, AS MOST OF YOU PROBABLY KNOW, MOST OF THE FOLKS WHO ARE IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM ARE MALE.
HOWEVER, IN THIS PROGRAM, 2/3 WERE FEMALE.
TO ME, THAT DOES ALERT US THAT, OKAY, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE DOING SOMETHING THAT WILL SPEAK TO AND ADDRESS AND ENCOURAGE THE MEN, PARTICULARLY WHO ARE INVOLVED IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM TO PARTICIPATE AND GET THE HELP THEY NEED TO BE ON THE PATH TO REINTEGRATING INTO THE COMMUNITY.
THAT WAS AN INTERESTING OBSERVATION AND SOMETHING THAT I WITH THE TEAM WANT TO LOOK INTO FURTHER AS THAT PROGRAM CONTINUES TO PROCEED. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR PLUMMER, SUPERVISOR HARMON.
>> GOOD MORNING. THE WOLVES IS STILL NOT GOING AWAY.
SUPERVISOR KELSTROM AND I ARE GOING TO GO DOWN ON FRIDAY AND MEET WITH FISH AND GAME.
I'LL LET YOU SPEAK TO THAT BECAUSE I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT AGENDA TO SEE WHAT ALL IS GOING ON THERE, BUT WE ARE GOING TO GO DOWN THERE FRIDAY, AND IT'S EVERY DAY, SOMEBODY ELSE REPORTS ANOTHER INCIDENT.
I WAS ON THE 11TH UP IN FALL RIVER, MCARTHUR, GETTING TOURED AROUND BY THE ASSISTANT FIRE CHIEF RYAN BOOTH, WHAT A BEAUTIFUL COUNTRY THAT IS UP THERE, IF YOU GET A CHANCE TO DRIVE AROUND UP THERE.
I GOT TO DRIVE AROUND TO ALL THE FIRE HALLS AND SEE ALL THE FACILITIES.
IT'S PRETTY IMPRESSIVE TO SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE OUT THERE THAT ARE VOLUNTEERS THAT ARE ALWAYS THERE FOR THE COMMUNITY, NO MATTER WHAT'S GOING ON.
I SPENT PROBABLY HALF A DAY WITH RYAN AND SUPERVISOR KELSTROM WAS ON THAT TOUR, AND YOU'RE LISTENING TO THE RADIO.
WE'RE IN HIS TRUCK AND WE'RE LISTENING TO THE RADIO, AND THERE'S ALWAYS SOMETHING GOING ON.
IT'S LIKE, WE HAVE A AWESOME BUNCH OF PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITIES THAT ARE ALWAYS THERE FOR EMERGENCIES FOR US, AND I JUST WANT TO GIVE A SHOUT OUT TO THEM, AND, IF ANYBODY KNOWS OF ANY INCIDENTS WITH THE WOLVES, BECAUSE IN THAT CASE, I ASKED WHILE I WAS UP THERE IF WE HAD ANY PROBLEMS IN GOING ON IN FALL RIVER, MCARTHUR AND I THINK IT WAS 13 CALVES ON THE RANCHER THAT I WAS TALKING TO WAS.
IT'S 13 CALVES THEY'VE LOST ON THAT ONE RANCH.
I'M ONLY HEARING A PORTION OF IT.
I ENCOURAGE THEM TO START POSTING ANY OF THE INCIDENCES THAT YOU KNOW ABOUT.
THE MORE NOISE WE MAKE, THE MORE HELP WE'RE HOPEFULLY GOING TO GET.
BUT WITH THAT, I'LL CONCLUDE MY REPORT.
>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR KELSTROM MOUNTAIN, THE DAY ROAD, GLENBU.
>> ON WEDNESDAY, I WENT UP TO SHINGLETOWN.
I HAD THE WRONG DATE AND TIME.
THERE WAS SUPPOSED TO BE THE WOMEN'S AUXILIARY YEARLY PARTY.
BUT SINCE I WAS IN SHINGLETOWN, AND THE SUN WAS ACTUALLY SHINING UP THERE.
IT WAS ABOUT 20 DEGREES WARMER IN SHINGLETOWN THAN IT WAS DOWN HERE BECAUSE WE WERE OUT OUT OF THE FOG.
I WENT AHEAD AND DROPPED DOWN TO MANTON AND MET WITH SEVERAL CONSTITUENTS AND FRIENDS DOWN IN MANTON AREA.
THEN, AS SUPERVISOR HARMON SAID, I WENT AHEAD AND WENT ON THE TOUR WITH HIM TO THE FALL RIVER FIRE DISTRICT.
WE WENT ALL OVER UP THERE, PITTVILLE, SOLDIER.
THERE'S LITTLE FIRE HALLS AND ALL THOSE PLACES.
IT WAS A PRETTY GREAT TOUR, AND ONCE AGAIN, WE WERE OUT OF THE FOG, WHICH WAS NICE.
THEN SATURDAY, I HAD THE VFW AND ANDERSON BREAKFAST AS NORMAL.
THE NEXT DAY, THERE WAS THE LIONS CLUB BREAKFAST IN COTTONWOOD.
AFTER THE LIONS CLUB BREAKFAST IN COTTONWOOD, I WENT OUT TO ONO, WHICH IS NOT MY DISTRICT, BUT I WAS ASKED TO BE THERE, AND SUPERVISOR LONG WAS THERE AS WELL.
IF ANYBODY GETS A CHANCE TO GO OUT TO ONO, IT'S COOL.
SANTA CLAUS COMES RIDING IN ON A HORSE.
THEN YESTERDAY, I HAD MEETINGS ALL DAY LONG.
I MET WITH SEAN O'HARE AND HIS STAFF, ON SOME ISSUES WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
THEN LATER ON, I MET WITH SHERIFF JOHNSON AND LOGAN STONEHOUSE AND MORE STAFF THERE.
[00:15:04]
THEN I HAD A MEETING WITH CEO RICKERT AND STEWART VITO, JOE LARMOR AND STEPHANIE BLANKENSHIP.>> THANK YOU SUPERVISOR KELSTROM, SUPERVISOR LONG.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. WELCOME, EVERYONE.
I LIKE TO MEET WITH OUR DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT HEADS OCCASIONALLY TO SEE UPDATES IN THEIR DEPARTMENTS.
I MET WITH OUR DISTRICT ATTORNEY STEPHANIE BRIDGET AND HAD A LOT OF GOOD DISCUSSION THERE.
I ATTENDED THE CHRISTMAS PARADE WITH SANTA CLAUS ARRIVING THAT SUPERVISOR KELSTROM WAS DISCUSSING.
THAT WAS GOOD TO GET OUT AND MEET THE FOLKS IN ONO AND JUST MINGLE IN THE GROUP AND GET TO HEAR EVERYBODY'S THOUGHTS ABOUT DIFFERENT THINGS.
I ATTENDED THE ANNUAL YEAR IN REVIEW DINNER FOR THE SHASTA COUNTY CHEMICAL PEOPLE.
THEY'VE GOT SOME IMPORTANT PROGRAMS THAT THEY PROVIDE UPDATES ON FRIDAY NIGHT LIVE, CLUB LIVE, SHASTA PEER MENTORING, AND SOBER GRAD.
I MET WITH A CONSULTANT WITH AP TRITON, AND BASICALLY, WE DISCUSSED CHALLENGES FACING OUR VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT SHASTA COUNTY FIRE, AND ANY THOUGHTS THAT WE COULD GIVE TO IMPROVE OPERATIONS, TO PROVE THE SUPPORT FOR THEM.
I THINK IT WAS A VERY PRODUCTIVE MEETING WITH THIS AP TRITON REPRESENTATIVE, SO AND THAT WILL CONCLUDE MY REPORT.
>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR. JUST TO CLARIFY, SUPERVISOR KELSTROM WASN'T SANTA CLAUS.
>> HE DOESN'T LIKE TO RIDE A HORSE.
>> HE DOESN'T LIKE TO RIDE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE I THINK THE CHILDREN WOULD RUN WHEN THEY SEE [OVERLAPPING]
>> HE DIDN'T HAVE A BIG ENOUGH HORSE.
>> HE DIDN'T HAVE A BIG ENOUGH HORSE.
ONE OF THE MAIN FUNCTIONS OF THAT ONE WAS TO ELECT THE OFFICIALS FOR THE DIFFERENT EXECUTIVE AND OTHER STATE-WIDE COUNCILS.
THAT WAS DONE. I HAD A MEETING WITH DR. STEVEN HERBER OF ADVENTIST HEALTH, AND I'M ACTUALLY VERY EXCITED ABOUT THAT CONVERSATION.
WE HAVE A FOLLOW-UP MEETING WITH DR.
NORM HALL OF SIMPSON, AS WELL AS DR. DHANUKA, AND THEN DR. IRENE SALTER FROM THE COMMITTEE THAT WE FORMED.
THE MEDICAL SCHOOL AND IMPROVING MEDICAL CARE IN OUR COMMUNITY IS JUST PLUGGING ALONG.
I WISH I COULD GIVE YOU MORE DEFINITIVE TIMELINES, BUT I WILL SAY THAT WE'RE REALLY ADAMANT TO TRY AND GET A REALLY GOOD ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE END OF JANUARY, BUT IT'S A LOT OF PEOPLE, AND IT'S A LOT OF EFFORT.
THE FACT THAT WE'RE HAVING SOMEONE OF DR. HERBERT'S CALIBER REACH OUT FROM ADVENTIST HEALTH, HEARING WHAT WE'RE DOING THROUGH NAPA COUNTY'S CHAIR, AND IT'S JUST BEEN HUMBLING, IT'S BEEN AMAZING.
I CAN START TO SEE THE LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL.
I MET WITH A GENTLEMAN NAMED KURT SWANSON ABOUT GETTING INVOLVED IN LOCAL COMMUNITIES, SO IT REALLY BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT THAT WITH SUPERVISOR KELSTROM BECOMING CHAIR NEXT YEAR AT THE BEGINNING OF EVERY CALENDAR YEAR, THERE'S NEW APPOINTMENTS, NEW COMMITTEES.
EVERY SUPERVISOR HERE HAS SPOTS THAT COME OPEN, WHETHER IT'S ON A PLANNING COMMISSION, AN ELECTION COMMISSION, SO ON AND SO FORTH.
THERE'S A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES TO GET INVOLVED, SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE IF YOU WANT TO GET INVOLVED, REACH OUT TO YOUR SUPERVISOR AND SAY, "HEY, I'VE GOT THIS SKILL SET, WHERE COULD YOU PLACE ME?" I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT.
I HAD A YOUTH OPTIONS MEETING.
IF YOU REMEMBER, THEY'RE PART OF THE ORIGINAL GROUP WITH RAISING SHASTA THAT GOT OF OPIOID MONEY.
THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO COME BACK IN JANUARY TO GIVE AN UPDATE.
I BELIEVE THAT MAY COME BACK THE FIRST MEETING OF FEBRUARY, JUST BECAUSE OF TIMING, BUT I'LL BE ANXIOUS TO HAVE THEIR REPORT ALONG WITH RAISING SHASTA SHARED.
I ATTENDED THE VA CEREMONY THIS WEEKEND, ACTUALLY, WITH MY SON AND HIS SCHOOL IN TURTLE BAY AND SOME OTHER SCHOOLS, BOULDER CREEK.
OTHERS WERE OUT THERE, BUT THEY LAID WREATHS ON HEADSTONES, AND THAT'S A REALLY NEAT CEREMONY AND A LOT OF DEDICATED VOLUNTEERS.
THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY THAT TOOK PART IN THAT.
I WON'T REITERATE TOO MUCH ABOUT THE CEC MEETING CEO RICKERT, AND I HAVE THIS WEEK.
IT'S BEEN A LONG ARDUOUS HALL AND PROCESS.
A LOT OF MONEY'S BEEN SPENT, BUT I'M VERY HOPEFUL THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO PUT THIS CHAPTER OF THE FOUNTAIN WIND PROJECT BEHIND US HERE VERY SOON.
THIS LAST MEETING, WE DISCUSSED FEES.
OUR AUDITOR CONTROLLER, NOLDA SHORT, CAME UP AND MADE A PRESENTATION.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS ASKED BY ONE OF OUR ELECTEDS, AS WELL AS A DEPARTMENT HEAD, WOULD BE CLINT CURTIS ASKED TO COME BACK.
HE WANTED TO SEE SOME MORE EFFICIENCIES AS IT RELATED TO ROUND 1 FEE THAT WE DIDN'T INCREASE BECAUSE I BELIEVE ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO COME BACK AND SAY THEY WANT TO MAKE EFFICIENCIES, LET'S JUST GIVE THEM SOME TIME.
BUT THROUGH THAT CONVERSATION, I'VE ENCOURAGED HIM.
I SAID, "LOOK, I THINK WE SHOULD ELIMINATE THAT BECAUSE,
[00:20:01]
COME TO FIND OUT, IT'S BEEN LESS THAN TWO YEARS." IT DEFINITELY PREDATED HIM, BUT THEY JUST STARTED ADDING THAT.I THINK ANYTHING THAT THE PRIVATE SECTOR COULD DO, THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD GET OUT OF.
THE GOVERNMENT ISN'T GOING TO DO IT CHEAPER, IT'S NOT GOING TO DO IT PROBABLY BETTER.
I'VE ASKED CLINT CURTIS, AND I'M ASKING OTHER DEPARTMENT HEADS, AND THIS ISN'T SOMETHING I'M EVEN ASKING CEO RICKERT OR NEXT YEAR'S CHAIR, SUPERVISOR KELSTROM, TO BRING BACK.
BUT I REALLY DO THINK IF THERE'S SOME OPPORTUNITY, THE PRIVATE SECTOR DOES SOMETHING, MAYBE SHASTA COUNTY SHOULD JUST GET OUT OF THAT AND STREAMLINE THE THINGS THAT WE DO NEED TO PROVIDE FOR CITIZENS, AND NOT ADD.
I'M NOT SAYING I WANT TO CUT JOBS, BUT I'M JUST SAYING I WANT TO MAKE MORE EFFICIENCIES, AND LET'S SUPPORT PRIVATE INDUSTRY.
I'M DEFINITELY GOING TO BE SEEING THAT COMEBACK. I HAVE ONE THING.
I WANT TO GIVE ONE MORE UPDATE. THIS IS GOING TO BE MY LAST PUBLIC UPDATE AS IT RELATES TO MY HEALTH.
THAT'S ONE OF THE TOUGHEST THINGS ABOUT BEING IN ELECTED OFFICE.
YOU WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THINGS SOMEWHAT QUIET, BUT REALITY IS YOU JUST CAN'T.
IF YOU DON'T, SOMEONE ELSE IS GOING TO TELL US.
LAST WEEK, I REPORTED I HAD A TUMOR.
IT IS, IN FACT, A STAGE 2 COLON CANCER, BUT HERE'S WHAT I'LL TELL YOU.
I HAVE SOME SURGERIES, I HAVE SOME TREATMENT.
I HAVE A LOT OF ROAD AHEAD OF ME, THE NEXT THREE OR FOUR MONTHS, MAYBE A LITTLE BIT LONGER.
EVERYTHING IS JUST GOING TO BE, STAND ON THE GAS PEDAL, GET THINGS DONE, AND CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD.
THE REASON WHY I WANT TO SHARE THAT IS BECAUSE I CAN'T STRESS ENOUGH.
I DON'T CARE ABOUT THAT HORN, THIS IS MY LAST DAY AS CHAIR.
I'M GOING TO TURN THAT HORN OFF.
I WILL SAY, IT'S WEIRD HOW THINGS COME ABOUT.
BUT HEALTHCARE WASN'T REALLY SOMETHING THAT WAS REALLY BIG ON MY LIST UNTIL I STARTED TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT DR. DHANUKA WAS TALKING ABOUT, AND ALL OF US HAVE HAD SOME LIVED EXPERIENCE WITH THEIR FRIENDS, FAMILY, COLLEAGUES, ETC.
WE DEFINITELY NEED IT IMPROVED IN THIS COMMUNITY, AND I'M GRATEFUL TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS.
THE LAST THING I'LL SAY, IT'S NOT FALSE CONFIDENCE.
I HAVE BEEN THROUGH A LOT, AS MANY OF US HAVE, BUT I SERVE A HUGE GOD, AND I REALLY DON'T WORRY ABOUT TOMORROW.
NEVER DO. THAT'S NOT HOW I LIVE MY LIFE.
I'D BE THANKFUL FOR JUST LEAVING ME ALONE ABOUT IT TO SOME DEGREE, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT SYMPATHY, BUT I WILL BEG YOU, PLEASE GET CHECKED.
IF YOU THINK YOU'RE FINE, I PROBABLY KNEW FOR TWO YEARS I NEEDED TO GET CHECKED AND DIDN'T.
THAT'S STUPID, AND I CAN ADMIT THAT.
GET CHECKED. [APPLAUSE] LAST THING.
ON A VERY HAPPY NOTE. THANK YOU.
THE LAST MEETING BEFORE CHRISTMAS, AND I WANT TO TELL ALL OF OUR STAFF, ABSOLUTELY, HAVE A MERRY CHRISTMAS.
BUT ABOVE THAT, THE LAST TWO YEARS I'VE GOT TO SEE AN INTRICACY OF GOVERNMENT THAT I WOULD NEVER HAVE IMAGINED POSSIBLE.
WHEN MANY OF US ARE HAVING OPENING PRESENTS AND GOING ABOUT THAT, IF YOU SEE WATER SHOOTING UP SOMEWHERE OR THERE'S A ROAD OUT, IT'S GOING TO BE PUBLIC WORKS.
IT'S GOING TO BE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT.
VERY OFTEN TIME IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF OUR DEDICATED COUNTY EMPLOYEES, AND ALSO WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT.
IT'S NOT JUST THE MEN IN BLUE OR THE INDIVIDUALS IN RED, THE FIREFIGHTERS, AND THE POLICE OFFICERS OR SHERIFF DEPUTIES, IT'S GOING TO BE THE VOLUNTEERS AS WELL.
EVERYBODY WHO'S ON CALL TO HELP OTHERS WHEN EVERYBODY ELSE IS ENJOYING THEIR TIME, I'M JUST VERY THANKFUL.
I'M THANKFUL FOR ALL THE EMPLOYEES WE HAVE IN THIS GREAT COUNTY AND YOUR DILIGENCE IN YOUR WORK. THANK YOU.
WITH THAT, WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT TIME.
[PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD - OPEN TIME]
MAN, LOOKING FORWARD TO IT. HOW MANY DO WE HAVE?>> CHAIR, AT THIS TIME, WE HAVE 12 SPEAKERS.
>> WE HAVE 12. IF YOU COULD CALL THEM UP, PLEASE, I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.
>> FIRST UP, STEVE WOODRUM, FOLLOWED BY CHRISTIAN GARNIER, THEN DON DUCKETT, FOLLOWED BY JEFF GORDER.
IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN THE QUEUE.
THERE YOU ARE, STEVE. COME ON UP.
>> SOME REMARKS ABOUT TRUE NORTH.
THE JAIL IS SHASTA COUNTY'S UNOFFICIAL MENTAL HEALTH CLINIC.
MANY OF THE INMATES ARE MENTALLY DISTURBED.
THE JAIL IS CROWDED WITH PEOPLE WHO NEED MEDICAL TREATMENT.
THIS FORCES THE SHERIFF AND HIS STAFF TO WORK OUTSIDE OF THEIR EXPERTISE.
A BAD SITUATION FOR EVERYONE, INCLUDING THE TAXPAYERS.
IN SHORT, UNTREATED PEOPLE FALL THROUGH THE CRACKS AND CRASH.
WHEN THIS HAPPENS, WE EXPECT LAW ENFORCEMENT TO CLEAN IT UP.
THIS OBVIOUSLY DOESN'T WORK, AND WE NEED A NEW PLAN.
>> NEXT UP, CHRISTIAN GARNIER, FOLLOWED BY DON DUCKETT, JEFF GORDER, THEN MARGARET HANSON.
[00:25:09]
>> I'M SORRY, THE HOBBS NONSENSE, ALONG WITH MR. LADD, HAS BEEN THROWN OUT REPEATEDLY, YET IT'S COST TAXPAYERS OVER $107,000.
OPENING BRIEFS FOR THE CASE IN THIRD DISTRICT COURT ARE DUE ON THE 22ND, THAT'S MONDAY, WHERE HOBBS WILL FACE BEST BEST & KRIEGER.
COOL. HOW MUCH IS THAT GOING TO COST? BETWEEN THE ELECTION COMMISSION, WHAT 120,000, AND HOBBS' CASE, 107,000.
WE'RE STARTING TO LOOK AT SOME SERIOUS MONEY.
BEST BEST & KRIEGER, SECRETARY OF STATE, AND ALL THE MEDIA HAVE BEEN SENT THE FOLLOWING.
HOBBS, RICHARD GOLLARDO, AND PATTY PLUMB, WERE ALL WORKING FOR CLINT CURTIS, WHILE HOBBS AND LADD WERE DOING THEIR CASE SUING AGAINST SHASTA COUNTY.
I SUGGEST THAT CURTIS BE SUBPOENAED, ALONG WITH THE SHASTA 5, THE ELECTION COMMISSION, AND THOSE WHO PUT CURTIS IN OFFICE, MR. CRYE, KELSTROM, AND CORKEY, TO SEE IF CURTIS WAS PUMPING HOBBS WITH POSSIBLY FALSE, DEROGATORY, AND SLANDEROUS INFORMATION FOR HER APPELLATE CASE.
AFTER ALL, IN SHASTA COUNTY, CURTIS BRAG THAT HE'S SHARING INFORMATION WITH TRUMP'S DOJ.
COOL. HE'S HOPING IT LEADS TO TOM TOLER AND JOANA FRESCO SCOTT BEING CHARGED WITH ELECTION FRAUD.
SUBPOENA ALL OF THESE ELECTION LIARS.
>> NEXT UP, DON DUCKETT, FOLLOWED BY JEFF GORDER, MARGARET HANSON, AND THEN CHRISTOPHER ENRIQUEZ.
>> AS WE END THIS YEAR AND BEGIN A NEW YEAR, LOOKING FORWARD, I'D LIKE TO OFFER A COUPLE OF NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTIONS FOR THE BOARD.
HERE WE GO. FIRST, COMMIT TO RESPECTFUL ENGAGEMENT WITH THE PUBLIC.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY IS NOT AN INCONVENIENCE; IT'S THE FOUNDATION OF REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT.
PLEASE WELCOME FEEDBACK, EVEN WHEN IT'S CRITICAL, AND REFRAIN FROM MOCKING, INTERRUPTING, OR DISMISSING THE SPEAKERS.
LISTENING COSTS NOTHING AND BUILDS CREDIBILITY.
SECOND, CLOSELY EXAMINE AGENDA ITEMS TO ENSURE THAT THEY HAVE A TANGIBLE IMPACT ON OUR COMMUNITY.
TOO OFTEN, TIME IS SPENT HERE IN THIS BOARDROOM ON POLITICAL THEATER, GRANDSTANDING, AND VIRTUE SIGNALING.
ITEMS THAT GENERATE HEADLINES BUT DON'T SOLVE LOCAL PROBLEMS. OUR AGENDA SHOULD REFLECT PRACTICAL GOVERNANCE AND NOT PERFORMATIVE POLITICS.
THIRD, RESTORE THE FULL THREE MINUTES OF OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT.
TWO MINUTES IS SIMPLY NOT ENOUGH TO MAKE COGENT, THOUGHTFUL POINTS, ESPECIALLY ON COMPLEX ISSUES.
THESE MEETINGS EXIST FOR THE BOARD TO HEAR THE PUBLIC, NOT TO RUSH THEM THROUGH.
FOURTH, SERIOUSLY RECONSIDER THE IMPACT FEES.
WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT DEVELOPMENT IMPACTS DON'T COST ZERO.
THE COUNTY'S LEAVING A LOT OF MUCH-NEEDED INFRASTRUCTURE MONEY ON THE TABLE, WHICH COULD FUND ROADS, PUBLIC SAFETY, AND ESSENTIAL SERVICES.
FINALLY, REVISIT THE SUBSTANTIAL RAISES THE BOARD GRANTED ITSELF.
LEADERSHIP MEANS SHARING SACRIFICE, NOT EXEMPTING YOURSELVES FROM IT.
>> NEXT UP, JEFF GORDER, FOLLOWED BY MARGARET HANSON, CHRISTOPHER ENRIQUEZ, THEN STEVE KAHN.
>> GOOD MORNING. I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE TRUE NORTH FACILITY AS WELL.
WHAT A TURN THIS PROJECT HAS TAKEN.
IT WAS ABOUT SIX WEEKS AGO OR SO THAT THE THREE-MEMBER MAJORITY, CORKEY, KEVIN, AND CHRIS, TRIED TO KILL THIS PROJECT.
HERE WE ARE, AND IT APPEARS IT'S GOING TO GET UNANIMOUS CONSENT.
I'M CONCERNED THAT LESSONS AREN'T BEING LEARNED HERE.
THE ONLY REASON THIS IS BACK AND THAT EVERYBODY WAS TALKING ABOUT IT IS DUE TO THE PERSISTENCE OF SUPERVISOR PLUMMER.
CORKEY, YOU SAID IT WASN'T A BAD DECISION.
YOU ACTED WITH THE INTENT TO KILL THE PROJECT.
YOU MAY RECALL THAT SUPERVISOR LONG SAID,
[00:30:02]
"IF WE DON'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION, WHY ARE WE ACTING TO KILL IT?" LET'S NOT OPPOSE IT.LET'S AT LEAST GET INFORMATION THAT'S NEEDED TO MAKE A DECENT DECISION, BUT YOU DECIDED TO KILL IT.
AS I SAY, THE ONLY REASON WE'RE BACK HERE IS BECAUSE OF THE PERSISTENCE OF SUPERVISOR PLUMMER AND THE ARCH COLLABORATIVE TO PUT THIS 200+ MILLION DOLLAR BEHAVIORAL HEALTH PROJECT FORWARD.
YOU REALLY NEED TO LEARN A LESSON.
YOU WERE SWAYED BY THE GUY FROM RASPAD, WHO WAS A DIRECT COMPETITOR OF TRUE NORTH, AND HE WAS HERE SPEAKING AGAINST IT.
IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION YOU NEEDED AND YOU THOUGHT YOU WERE ON THE SPOT WITH TWO DAYS TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER TO MAKE A DECISION, FOLLOW SUPERVISOR PLUMMER'S LEAD.
JUST DON'T OPPOSE IT, REMAIN NEUTRAL.
FOLLOW SUPERVISOR LONG'S LEAD AND SAY, "LET'S GATHER MORE INFORMATION.
CRYE WANTS US TO BELIEVE THAT THE STATE MOVED.
THE STATE DIDN'T CHANGE ANYTHING.
THE APPLICATION WAS DUE ON THE 28TH.
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO CHANGE THE PARAMETERS OF THE APPLICATION AFTER IT WAS DUE.
WE GOT MORE INFORMATION, THAT'S WHAT WAS NEEDED.
THINK CAREFULLY NEXT TIME. [APPLAUSE]
>> MARGARET HANSON, FOLLOWED BY CHRISTOPHER ENRIQUEZ, STEVE KAHN, THEN HEATHER MCFALL.
IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN THE QUEUE.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR CORRECT VOTE LAST MEETING FOR CHRIS KELSTROM TO BE THE 2026 CHAIR.
THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR HARMON FOR STEPPING UP AS VICE CHAIR.
I LOOK FORWARD TO THIS NEXT YEAR 2026.
MAY WE SEEK TRUTH AND KINDNESS, HONESTY, AND TRANSPARENCY IN OUR COUNTY BUSINESS.
>> I AM STILL GOING TO RESPECTFULLY REQUEST AN OUTSIDE FORENSIC AUDIT OF EVERY DEPARTMENT IN THE COUNTY, NOT AN INTERNAL AUDIT OR OUTSIDE PAST COWORKERS AUDITS, TO START THIS YEAR OFF WITH CORRECTING ISSUES AND HOLDING ALL THE DEPARTMENTS RESPONSIBLE AND ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS.
IF THERE'S ANYTHING WRONG, CORRECT IT.
IF THERE'S NOTHING WRONG, GREAT.
NO ONE SHOULD OBJECT TO ANY DEPARTMENT AUDIT OR EFFICIENCY.
MERRY CHRISTMAS AND HAPPY NEW YEAR TO ALL.
>> CHRISTOPHER ENRIQUEZ, FOLLOWED BY STEVE KAHN, HEATHER MCFALL, THEN MAX WALTER.
>> HELLO, I'M SPEAKING AGAIN TODAY TO REITERATE MY OBJECTION TO HAVING A JAIL, ALTERNATIVE CUSTODY PROGRAM, AND A RE-ENTRY FACILITY NEXT DOOR IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
SUCH A FACILITY SHOULD NEVER BE CONSTRUCTED NEXT TO A NEIGHBORHOOD.
THERE ARE ALTERNATIVE SITES WITHIN THE CITY AND COUNTY THAT DO NOT ABUT ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS NOR PUT THE FAMILIES LIVING IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS UNDER FEAR FOR THEIR SAFETY, SECURITY, OR LOSS QUALITY OF LIFE.
WHEN MY FAMILY WAS LOOKING FOR A HOME TO BUY IN 2017, WE STUMBLED INTO A HOME OR ONTO A HOME IN THE RIVER RANCH SUBDIVISION.
FINDING THIS ISOLATED ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOOD SURROUNDED BY OPEN SPACE AND UNDEVELOPED LAND WAS EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR.
YOUR PLANNED COMPOUND IS GOING TO RUIN OUR QUIET, LOVELY NEIGHBORHOOD.
I'M NOT OPPOSED FOR THE NEED FOR SUCH A FACILITY HERE.
HOWEVER, THIS LOCATION IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE USE OF THE PROPOSED FACILITY.
BASED ON REACTIONS FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND THIS BOARD, I DON'T THINK THERE WAS MUCH THOUGHT NOR CARE PUT INTO THE EFFECT THIS FACILITY WOULD HAVE ON THE HUNDREDS OF RESIDENTS LIVING WITHIN A HALF-MILE RADIUS.
ANYONE WHO DOES NOT WANT TO LIVE NEXT TO THE FACILITY WILL BE FORCED TO MOVE OR SUFFER UNDER THE LOOMING PRESENCE OF THIS COMPOUND.
TO THAT EXTENT, THE VALUE OF PROPERTIES SURROUNDING THIS PROPOSED FACILITY HAVE ALREADY BEGUN TO LOSE VALUE.
I WOULD NEVER HAVE PURCHASED PROPERTY IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD IF THIS FACILITY WAS ALREADY IN PLACE.
SEEMS LIKE OTHER ALTERNATIVES EXIST, THAT WOULD BE MORE RESPONSIBLE AND MUCH LESS IMPACTFUL ON EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE RESIDENTS' QUALITY OF LIFE.
>> STEVE KAHN, FOLLOWED BY HEATHER MCFALL, MAX WALTER, THEN DAVID HALLIGAN.
IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE.
>> MORNING, BOARD, STAFF, COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
I'M GOING TO ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT ON WHAT DON DUCKETT WAS SAYING.
WE NEED TO AGAIN, GO BACK TO A THREE-MINUTE TIME PERIOD ORIGINALLY THAT WAS BROUGHT UP BECAUSE WE HAD 20 OR 30 SPEAKERS SPEAKING ABOUT VACCINATIONS OR THE ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT.
SINCE WE'VE HIRED THE PEOPLE THAT WERE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT TO BE PART OF THE ELECTIONS DEPARTMENT, THOSE PEOPLE AREN'T SPEAKING ANYMORE.
NOW WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT 12 PEOPLE.
THERE'S JUST A FEW MINUTES THAT YOU'RE CUTTING DOWN OR EXPANDING THE
[00:35:04]
TIME AT THE BOARD MEETING AND THEY SHOULD BE USED IN ORDER FOR YOU TO HEAR THE CONCERNS AND THE DISCUSSIONS ON IMPORTANT ITEMS THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE.SINCE WE HAVE A NEW CHAIR COMING UP, I'M HOPING THAT SUPERVISOR KELSTROM WILL JUMP ON THIS BANDWAGON.
I KNOW CRYE PROBABLY WON'T SUPPORT IT BECAUSE HE LIKES TO LIMIT THE CRITICISMS THAT HE CAN GET, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT MOVE FORWARD.
I'D LOVE SUPERVISOR CRYE TO ENLIGHTEN US ON A FEW THINGS.
NUMBER 1 IS, YOU JUST LAUGHED AT SAYING THAT THE STATE DIDN'T CHANGE ANYTHING.
I'D LOVE TO KNOW THE CHANGES THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
ALSO, THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT YOU SAID FLIPPED AND NO LONGER SUPPORT THE PROGRAM.
YOU SAID THERE WAS A HUGE NUMBER OF PEOPLE CHIMING IN ON YOU, SAYING THEY NO LONGER SUPPORT THE PROGRAM, YET I'VE HEARD CRICKETS. LOVE TO HEAR THAT.
HE ALSO COMBINED THE CONSENT CALENDAR WITH THE PUBLIC COMMENT TIME, WHICH I WOULD LOVE TO COMMENT ON A COUPLE OF CONSENT ITEMS, BUT THE ONE THING I'LL SAY IS THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CAMPUS, I LOVE TO SEE THAT SUPPORT AND THE STEP UP PROGRAM OR THE MONEY GOING TO THE COLLEGE, VERY IMPORTANT.
THAT PROGRAM HAS HELPED A LOT OF PEOPLE AND SAVED THE COUNTY A LOT OF MONEY. THANK YOU.
>> HEATHER MCFALL, FOLLOWED BY MAX WALTER, DAVID HALLIGAN, THEN NICK GARDNER.
>> THANK YOU. SPEAKING TO TAY WAS REALLY A LAST-MINUTE DECISION.
AS I WAS GETTING READY FOR WORK THIS MORNING, IT JUST THIS HAS BEEN SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN ON MY MIND AND PROBABLY WAKING ME UP MORE THAN I WOULD LIKE THESE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS WITH REGARD TO THE MEMBERS THAT I REPRESENT.
I STILL FELT THE NEED TO COME AND ADDRESS YOU, SO THAT'S WHY I'M HERE.
SPECIFICALLY, THIS IS IN REGARD TO PROPOSALS MADE BY NODA SHORT AND RICH RATHER FROM THE AUDITOR'S OFFICE REGARDING OUR TEAMSTERS' HEALTH INSURANCE FUNDING.
THE BARGAINING UNITS UNANIMOUSLY VIEW THIS AS A FULL FRONTAL, DIRECT SERIOUS ATTACK ON THEIR LIVELIHOODS.
THIS IS 355 COUNTY EMPLOYEES, AS WELL AS RETIREES.
THE TRADES AND CRAFT UNIT, SUPERVISORY, MID-MANAGEMENT, AND CORNER UNITS ARE FULLY AWARE OF THE COUNTY'S REFUSAL TO NEGOTIATE ON THIS ISSUE.
THEY VIEW THIS AS AN AGGRESSIVE STANCE AGAINST THEM.
IT'S TIME FOR THE COUNTY TO ENGAGE IN MEANINGFUL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THE HEALTH CARE FUNDING RATHER THAN RESORTING TO A SCORCHED-EARTH POLICY AND APPROACH.
I'LL BE RETURNING FOR YOUR BOARD MEETING ON JANUARY 6TH TO WELCOME YOU FOR THE NEW YEAR, ALONG WITH AS MANY MEMBERS AS I CAN GET TO ENSURE YOU FULLY GRASP THE GRAVITY OF THE SITUATION AND ITS POTENTIAL CONSEQUENCES.
IT'S TIME FOR THE BARGAINING UNITS TO MAKE THEIR VOICES HEARD AND ADVOCATE FOR THE SUPPORT THAT THEY DESERVE AS COUNTY EMPLOYEES. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, MAX WALTER, FOLLOWED BY DAVID HALLIGAN, NICK GARDNER, THEN LAURA HOBBS.
>> HELLO, BOARD. CHAIR CRYE, OF COURSE, I WISH YOU A FULL AND SPEEDY RECOVERY.
I'M GLAD THIS IS THE END OF YOUR LEADERSHIP.
I'VE NOTICED YOUR IDEOLOGY IS A LOG IN YOUR EYE.
LAST WEEK, WHEN YOU TOLD SUPERVISOR PLUMMER, "I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR ANYONE WHO SUPPORTS A TAX INCREASE", I THOUGHT, WHAT AN AUDACIOUS AND BIZARRE THING TO SAY IN YOUR POSITION.
BUT YOU WERE HONEST, AND THAT'S YOUR POLITICS.
THE MATH WORKS EASILY THAT OVER ONE MILLION NORTH STATE RESIDENTS WOULD RECEIVE MENTAL HEALTH CARE WITH THE TRUE NORTH PROJECT GIVEN THE 30-YEAR COMMITMENT.
YOUR IDEOLOGY, HOWEVER, CAUSED YOU TO IMMEDIATELY REJECT IT AND LEAD THE CHARGE IN OPPOSITION.
YOU WOULD HAVE SQUANDERED THAT OPPORTUNITY SIMPLY BECAUSE OF YOUR POLITICS.
YOU MISSED IT ENTIRELY OVER 1 MILLION PEOPLE.
LAST WEEK, REGARDING MEASURE MR. PLUMMER, IN RESPONSE TO YOUR CHASTISING, TOLD YOU HE VOTED FOR THE MEASURE BECAUSE, THOUGH IMPERFECT, IT OFFERED SOLUTIONS TO FIX REAL PROBLEMS WHEN NO ONE ELSE ON THIS BOARD HAD PUT FORTH ANY IDEAS TO RAISE REVENUE.
BUT YOU TOTALLY REJECT TAXES, NO MATTER WHAT.
IF THE STATUS QUO IS THE RESULT, THEN LET THE PROBLEMS FESTER.
YOUR SOLUTIONS AUTOMATICALLY REJECT ALMOST EVERYTHING INVOLVING THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
IN THE WORLD WE LIVE IN, YOUR IDEOLOGY LED TO AN INCREDIBLE BLUNDER, COUNTY, STATE GOVERNMENT, AND TAXATION, SEEMINGLY AT ITS BEST.
THAT'S JUST A SINGLE EXAMPLE FROM YOUR TENURE, SAYING GARBAGE MEDIA IS AN IMMEDIATE OTHER.
YOU STILL THROW OUT DOG WHISTLES.
[00:40:01]
ALL THE PHYSICIANS, NURSES, PSYCHIATRISTS, SURGEONS, AND SUPPORT STAFF AT MERCY, IN THE TRENCHES OF OUR BIZARRE EMERGENCY ROOM CRISIS, YOU COMPLETELY MISSED THE OPPORTUNITY TO HELP SOLVE A BROKEN SYSTEM BECAUSE OF THE LOG IN YOUR EYE.LET THE PROBLEM FESTER WAS YOUR KNEE-JERK REACTION.
I WISH YOU GOOD HEALTH AND MERRY CHRISTMAS.
>> DAVID HALLIGAN, FOLLOWED BY NICK GARDNER THEN LAURA HOBBS.
IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE.
IT WAS THE NIGHT BEFORE CHRISTMAS AND OLDEST P&LS WERE DONE.
THE SUPERVISORS' STATCKINGS WERE HUNG IN THE CHAMBER WITH CARE IN HOPES THAT CIVILITY SOON WOULD BE THERE.
ALL THE CITIZENS WERE NESTLED ALL SNUG IN THEIR BEDS WHILE VISIONS OF SNAP PAYMENTS DANCED IN SOME PEOPLE'S HEADS.
WHEN OUT ON COURT STREET, A ROW SUCH A CLATTER, SHERIFF JOHNSON SPRANG FROM HIS EXPLORER TO SEE WHAT WAS THE MATTER.
WHEN WHAT TO THE SHERIFF'S WONDERING EYES DID APPEAR, BUT A MINIATURE SLEIGH AND EIGHT TINY REINDEER.
WITH A LITTLE OLD DRIVER SO LIVELY AND QUICK, GORDER KNEW IN A MOMENT IT WAS CRYE BEING SLICK.
MORE RAPID THAN EAGLES, THE COURSERS, THEY CAME, AND BLANKENSHIP WHISTLED AND SHOUTED AND CALLED THEM BY NAME.
NOW PLUMMER, NOW HARMON, AND KELSTROM, AND LONG, AND DON'T FORGET LAMOUR AND RICHARD AS THEY TWO BELONG.
THE DISRESPECT AND BAD BEHAVIOR WAS JUST LIKE THE WILD HURRICANES FLY, AND CRYE WAS POUNDING THE GAVEL WITH WARNINGS TO THE SKY.
ALL OF A SUDDEN TO THE DAIS, THE SHASTA FLEW WITH A SLEIGH FULL OF LAWSUITS IN CLINT CURTIS, TOO.
THEN IN A TWINKLING, I HEARD ON THE ROOF, DR. MOO SPEAKING ON THE SCENE.
AS MISS COLEMAN WAS TURNING HER LETTERS AROUND, DOWN THE CHIMNEY CHAIR, CRYE CAME WITH A BOUND.
HE WAS DRESSED ALL IN FUR FROM HIS HEAD TO HIS FOOT, AND HIS TRUMP LITTLE RED TIE WAS TARNISHED WITH SOOT.
A BUNDLE OF CURTIS' TABULATORS, KEVIN FLUNG ON HIS BACK, AND HE LOOKED LIKE A HOMELESS GUY CARRYING A SACK.
SUDDENLY, CHAIR CRYE SPRANG LIKE NINJA, AND TO HIS TEAM GAVE A WHISTLE, AND AWAY THE SUPERVISORS FLEW LIKE DOWN OF A THISTLE.
BUT I HEARD CHAIR CRYE EXCLAIM AS HE DROVE OUT OF SIGHT.
I'M THE TWO-TIME CHAIR OF SHASTA COUNTY, AND TO ALL, GOOD NIGHT.
>> NEXT UP, NICK GARDNER, FOLLOWED BY LAURA HOBBS.
>> WELCOME. PLEASE DON'T TELL ME YOU'RE GOING TO DO AN INTERPRETIVE DANCE.
>> ACTUALLY, I WAS HOPING TO GET A LITTLE MUSIC GOING AND WE COULD DO A RAP VIDEO WITH HIM.
ON R5, I DISCUSS, IN ADDITION TO THE SHASTA COUNTY CHARTER REGARDING BOARD MEMBERS' SALARIES, THAT WOULD PROHIBIT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM GIVING THEMSELVES A RAISE WITHOUT THE PUBLIC VOTE.
C-16, ADOPT A SALARY RESOLUTION THAT AMENDS A SALARY SCHEDULE FOR VARIOUS JOB CLASSIFICATIONS FOR A FIVE-MINUTE OR A 5% ABOVE MINIMUM WAGE.
C-17, ADOPT A SALARY RESOLUTION, WHICH REPELS SALARY RESOLUTION NUMBER 1698, AND AMENDS SHASTA COUNTY SALARY SCHEDULE FOR COST OF LIVING INCREASES FOR UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT, AND ELECTED DEPARTMENT HEAD CLASSIFICATIONS.
WHY DO THEY WANT US TO VOTE ON FOR YOU GUYS GETTING A RAISE AND JUST PASS THIS DOWN HERE? SHOULDN'T WE VOTE ON BOTH OF THEM? I THINK THE PUBLIC OUGHT TO BE ABLE TO VOTE ON ALL THE RAISES, COST OF LIVING, EVERYTHING WHEN IT COMES TO PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, AFTER ALL, WE ARE THE EMPLOYERS.
I WONDER WHO COULD HAVE PUT THIS ON THERE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS TO DIRECT PEOPLE THAT ARE PLUSH WITH MONEY TO SERVE ON THAT AND WIPES OUT THE WORKING MAN.
WHEN YOU GET $84,000, YOU TAKE ABOUT 50% AWAY WITH TAXES AND FEES, AND THAT LEAVES ABOUT $45,000 AND THAT'S NOT MUCH TO PAY A MORTGAGE IN INSURANCE AND PUT A KID THROUGH COLLEGE.
THE PERSON THAT PUT THIS UP, I THINK PROBABLY THEY OUGHT TO DONATE THEIRS BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE NOT HURTING.
WHY DON'T THEY DONATE THAT TO SHASTA COUNTY? THANK YOU.
>> REGARDING C-16 AND C-17, THESE PAY RAISES FOR THE ENTIRE COUNTY SHOULD BE HEARD DURING REGULAR CALENDAR, NOT CONSENT.
AFTER WHAT WE SAW WITH THE CITY COUNCIL PAY RAISES, WE SHOULD LEARN FROM THEIR MISTAKES.
BECAUSE OF THESE EXECUTIVE PAY RAISES, THE CITY IS NOW CONSIDERING CUTTING ESSENTIAL SERVICES.
IT'S DANGEROUS TO TIE OUR SALARIES TO THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA'S MINIMUM WAGE BECAUSE YOU KNOW THE COMMUNISTS WILL CONTINUE TO INCREASE THAT, EVEN IF IT MEANS SMALL BUSINESSES GO OUT OF BUSINESS.
REGARDING ADD VERSUS TALLER, WHICH HAS NOT BEEN HEARD BASED ON ITS MERITS.
YOU MISSED AN OPPORTUNITY LAST WEEK.
[00:45:01]
YOU ALL CERTIFIED THAT ELECTION IN 2024 UNDER DURESS.YOU KNOW, THERE WERE MANY CALIFORNIA STATE LAWS THAT WERE VIOLATED BY JOANNA FRANCESCA AND HER TEAM.
I URGE YOU TO BRING OUT A CLOSED SESSION THE VOTE THAT YOU TOOK TO CONTINUE FIGHTING LAD VERSUS TALLER, WHICH CAN BE READ IN FULL A SHASTA VOTE.KEY WERE.
KEVIN AND KEVIN CRYE AND SUPERVISOR CHRIS KELSTROM.
THIS IS AN ELECTION YEAR FOR YOU, AND THE PEOPLE OF SHASTA COUNTY NEED TO KNOW THAT YOU DO NOT SUPPORT THE CITIZENS' CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO A FAIR AND ACCURATE ELECTION.
A TRULY REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
PLEASE CONSIDER THAT MOVING FORWARD.
YOU NEED TO BRING THAT VOTE OUT OF CLOSED SESSION, SO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE AT THE BALLOT BOX THIS YEAR CAN KNOW EXACTLY HOW YOU TRULY FEEL.
I THINK THAT WE'RE ENTITLED TO THAT, AND ALTERNATIVELY, WHAT YOU CAN DO IS YOU CAN BRING IT FORWARD AGAIN TO VOTE IN PUBLIC, SO PEOPLE CAN SEE YOUR TRUE COLORS.
THIS IS IMPORTANT, ESPECIALLY TO THE CONSERVATIVES OF SHASTA COUNTY THAT WANT TO KNOW THAT OUR ELECTIONS ARE PERFORMED ACCURATELY AND ACCORDING TO LAW.
AS A LAW IN ORDER, PERSON MYSELF.
I BELIEVE THAT WHEN LAWS ARE BROKEN, PEOPLE SHOULD BE HELD TO ACCOUNT, AND THE COUNTY SHOULD NOT CONTINUE USING TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO PAY THESE HIGH-POWERED ATTORNEYS OUT OF LOS ANGELES. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. THAT IS OUR LAST SPEAKER.
I DID HAVE A QUESTION, MS BLANKENSHIP.
[CONSENT CALENDAR]
I THINK I'M GOING TO I AM GOING TO PULL C-17.I DID WANT TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH COUNSEL LARMOR WHO WASN'T AVAILABLE THIS MORNING.
BEFORE YOU COME UP, I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.
DAVE, THIS MAY BE FOR YOU, BUT IS THE TIMING OF C-17? I TALKED TO COUNSEL L ARMOR A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT, TALK TO MS. FUGE OVER THE WEEKEND ABOUT THAT.
IS THE TIMING OF THAT SOMETHING THAT I CAN MAKE A MOTION JUST TO PUSH THAT TO THE FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY, OR IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THROUGH TODAY? MONICA, YOU CAN COME UP TO.
>> I'LL DEFER TO STAFF ON THAT.
>> MONICA FUGITT, DIRECTOR OF SUPPORT SERVICES.
THERE ARE SPECIFIC EMPLOYEE POSITIONS THAT WOULD BE IMPACTED BY DELAYING THIS.
IT WOULD RESULT IN A DELAY OF THEIR INCREASES.
MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE NOT TO PUSH IT.
>> WHEN I'D ASKED YOU ABOUT THE ELECTEDS, WE HAVE FIVE COMING LATER, AND WE TALKED ABOUT ALL THE ELECTEDS BEING IN SOME TYPE OF POOL.
I DID WANT TO GET CONFIRMATION FROM COUNCIL ARMOR THAT IF WE VOTED YES ON 17, THAT WE COULDN'T UNRAVEL THAT IF WE WANTED TO GROUP ALL ELECTEDS IN THE COUNTY TOGETHER.
CAN YOU HELP ME. IT'S HAPPENING IN LIVE TIME. THAT'S MY QUESTION.
IF WE VOTE ON THIS, DOES THAT MEAN SOMETHING WE WOULD VOTE ON IN JANUARY OR FEBRUARY WOULDN'T TAKE PLACE UNTIL JANUARY 1ST OF 2028, THING? THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO AVOID.
>> THIS RESOLUTION WOULD ESTABLISH PAY INCREASES STARTING WITH DECEMBER 14TH OF THIS YEAR, AND THEN IN THE FUTURE DECEMBER 13TH AND DECEMBER 12TH.
IF THE BOARD TOOK ACTION IN BETWEEN, I WOULD BELIEVE THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT AND MODIFY THOSE PAY INCREASES FROM THERE.
>> THERE'S NOTHING THAT YOU CAN PUT IN PLACE RIGHT NOW THAT YOU COULDN'T BRING BACK AND MOVE THE ELECTED OFFICIALS NOW, IF THEY WERE GRANTED THEIR RAISE BASED ON THIS, YOU WOULDN'T PULL THAT BACK AND IT WOULD MOVE INTO THE NEXT TIME THAT THEIR POSITION.
>> MOST LIKELY, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THIS CONTRACT IS FOR THAT MS. FUGITT IS FOLLOWING, BUT..
>> IT'S A THREE YEAR TIME FRAME.
>> HOW DO WE SPLIT THAT OUT? OR WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? IT'S IT'S UNCOMFORTABLE.
I KNOW I'M PROBABLY GETTING TEXT MESSAGES FROM OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS, BUT I THINK IT'S A GREAT CONVERSATION AND WHAT I THOUGHT WAS WE COULD WHEN WE SPOKE, I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE FINE, BUT THAT'S WHAT AS I READ IT MORE OVER THE WEEKEND, AND WE DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO CONNECT THIS MORNING.
STEPHANIE, OPERATIONALLY, CAN I MAKE A MOTION TO SPLIT THESE INTO TWO GROUPS AND PUSH ONE AND THEN PUSH THE EMPLOYEES AND APPOINTED DEPARTMENT HEADS AND EMPLOYEES THROUGH?
>> I WOULD DEFER TO COUNSEL, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT'S THE WAY IT WAS AGENDIZED.
>> CHAIR, THE LANGUAGE IN THE PERSONNEL RULES PROVIDES THAT ELECTED DEPARTMENT HEADS WILL GET RAISES AT THE SAME TIME THAT THE UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT RECEIPT.
THAT IS WHAT'S DRIVING THESE RAISES.
WE WOULD BE INCONSISTENT WITH OUR PERSONNEL RULES IF WE WERE TO SEPARATE THEM.
[00:50:06]
>> THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO CLARIFY BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S SOME PUBLIC CONFUSION OVER THIS.
WHEN WE'RE SAYING ELECTED DEPARTMENT HEADS, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS GIVING THEMSELVES A RAISE.
WE ARE TIED TO THE UPEC WHATEVER THEY GET, THEY'RE OUT OF CONTRACT CURRENTLY.
>> THE BOARD PROBABLY WILL RECEIVE A 0% RAISE THIS YEAR.
I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT AND MAYBE HEAR THAT FROM YOU THAT WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A DEPARTMENT HEAD AS IN BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND A RAISE FOR OURSELVES OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
>> NO. JUST TO CLARIFY SUPERVISOR LONG.
I'M TALKING ABOUT AUDITOR CONTROLLER, SHERIFF, DA, THAT'S RECORDER AND TREASURE.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO CLARIFY BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S SOME CONFUSION AMONG THE PUBLIC ABOUT, THAT'S A RAISE FOR YOURSELF, AND IT'S NOT.
WE ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THIS ELECTED DEPARTMENT HEAD CATEGORY.
WE ARE TIED TO WHATEVER THE UPEC IS, AND THAT WAS DECIDED BY THE BOARD LAST YEAR PRIOR TO MY TIME ON THE BOARD.
I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT POINT TO CLARIFY THAT'S WHAT'S GOING ON HERE.
THEN I APPRECIATE ALL THE CONVERSATION ABOUT SEPARATING DEPARTMENT HEADS FROM OTHER STAFF.
WOULD YOU ALSO TALK TO THE POINT THAT THESE ARE NEGOTIATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ONGOING? THIS IS THE END POINT TOWARD OF THE NEGOTIATIONS AND HOW THAT WORKS.
>> BECAUSE THESE ARE UNREPRESENTED GROUPS, WE DON'T NEGOTIATE WITH THEM.
HOWEVER, WE HAVE HAD OTHER GROUPS THAT WE'VE AGREED TO A 2% AGREEMENT FOR A TWO YEAR OR IN SOME CASES THREE.
>> THIS FOLLOWS THAT SAME MODEL, BUT WE HAVEN'T HAD NEGOTIATIONS.
>> THANK YOU. [OVERLAPPING] MA'AM, CAN I STOP YOU ONE SECOND? DO I JUST NEED TO OFFICIALLY PULL THIS? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW I HAVEN'T PULLED IT, BUT WE'RE HAVING DISCUSSIONS, SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE.
>> YOU CAN REASONABLY ASK QUESTIONS, BUT I'M ABOUT TO STOP IT.
>> IF I COULD. I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT ONE OTHER PIECE THAT I THINK IS IMPORTANT TO THIS DISCUSSION, WHICH IS THE BOARD ALREADY APPROVED THESE RAISES FOR THE ELECTEDS ON 18 NOVEMBER.
THIS REPEALS THAT RESOLUTION AND ADOPTS A NEW ONE TO ADDRESS THAT THERE WERE CERTAIN POSITIONS IN UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT THAT WERE INADVERTENTLY EXCLUDED.
THE ACTION HAS ALREADY BEEN TAKEN TO ADOPT THESE FOR THE ELECTEDS.
THIS JUST CLEANS IT UP FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE NOT RECEIVING THAT INCREASE.
I WILL BE THE FIRST TO SAY AS WE GO THROUGH, WHETHER IT'S CLOSED SESSION, AS YOU LOOK AT IT.
>> SUPERVISOR PLUMMER, YOU WANT TO ASK.
GO AHEAD, SUPERVISOR PLUMMER, THEN I'LL OFFICIALLY PULL IT AFTER YOU ASK YOUR QUICK QUESTION.
>> I WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO ASK YOU A QUESTION BECAUSE I WASN'T ENTIRELY CLEAR ON WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I CAN WRITE THIS IN THE DISCUSSION THAT WE [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE PULL C17.
>> I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS A MOTION, DOES IT, COUNSEL?
>> WITH THAT, THE ONLY THING I DO WANT TO SAY IS FOR ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM, PLEASE SUBMIT A SEPARATE SPEAKER REQUEST CARD TO THE CLERK IN THE FOUR YEAR.
>> IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE SEAT, AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO THIS.
WE'LL GIVE PEOPLE A OPPORTUNITY.
>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF C17 AND C9.
ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THE REST OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR MINUS C9 AND 17? HEARING NONE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> THE CONSENT CALENDAR PASSES 50-C9 AND C17.
[C9 Take the following actions: (1) Award the “EOC North Expansion Project,” Contract No. 610015, to Gifford Construction, Inc., in the amount of $3,118,000; (2) designate authority to the Public Works Director, or their designee, to sign a Notice of Completion and record it within 15 days of actual completion of the work; and (3) approve budget amendments which: (a) increase appropriations by $1,488,247 and revenue by $1,292,223 in the Sheriff Budget (BU 235) offset by use of Zogg Fire Settlement Funds; (b) transfer appropriations in the amount of $224,003 from Account 033791 to Account 095166 and increase appropriations by $508,952 and revenue by $8,952 in the Animal Control Budget (BU 297) offset by use of Zogg Fire Settlement Funds; (c) increase appropriations by $107,227 in the Impact Fee Admin Budget (BU 157); (d) increase appropriations by $1,193,948 in the Accumulated Capital Outlay Budget (BU 161) offset by use of Public Safety Infrastructure Committed Fund Balance; and (e) increase appropriations and revenue by $2,221,202 in the Land Buildings and Improvement Budget (BU 166).]
FIRST. SUPERVISOR PLUMMER, DO YOU WANT TO KICK THIS OFF SINCE YOU PULLED IT?>> SURE. MY MAIN CONCERN HERE, AND I EXPRESSED THIS WHEN THIS CAME BEFORE THE BOARD.
I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS A MONTH OR SO AGO WAS THAT WE WOULD BE USING MONEY THAT WE'VE SET ASIDE FOR THE JAIL INFRASTRUCTURE FUND TO PAY FOR THIS, WHICH SEEMS REASONABLE WHEN WE LOOK AT IT IN ISOLATION, BUT MY CONCERN IS THAT WE WILL ONE START TO DRAIN THOSE FUNDS, WHICH ARE ALREADY INSUFFICIENT TO DO WHAT WE NEED THEM TO DO, AND TWO, WILL SET A PRECEDENT AMONG OURSELVES THAT ALLOWING OURSELVES TO TAKE FUNDS FROM THAT FOR THE FUTURE AND THAT THERE COULD BE OTHER DECISIONS THAT THEN COME BEFORE THE BOARD THAT SAY, IT MAKES SENSE TO DO THIS AS WELL, AND SO WE'LL BEGIN TO REPLENISH THE RESOURCES
[00:55:01]
THAT WE HAVE SET ASIDE TO DO SOMETHING REALLY SIGNIFICANT.I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS A QUESTION FOR YOU TROY, BUT WHERE MY HEADS OUT ON THIS IS, I WOULD LIKE TO ENSURE THAT THE FUNDS THAT ARE TAKEN FROM THE JAIL INFRASTRUCTURE FUND ARE PAID BACK TO THAT.
MY UNDERSTANDING, AND MAYBE THIS IS FOR SHERIFF JOHNSON IS THAT YOU AT THIS ONE HAVE COMMITTED THAT THE 100,000 THAT YOU'RE CURRENTLY PAYING IN RENT OR LEASE FOR THE EXISTING SPACE, WHICH YOU WOULD NO LONGER NEED, THAT WILL BE ADDED TO THIS FUND ANNUALLY, SINCE YOU WILL NO LONGER HAVE A NEED FOR THAT PARTICULAR RENT PAYMENT.
>> NO, I'M KIDDING. I DON'T KNOW.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO STILL HAVE THAT MONEY.
BUT YES, THAT IS THE NEGOTIATIONS, IF YOU WILL, THAT WE HAD WORKED THROUGH, AND AARON BERTIN CAME UP WITH AS A WAY TO MAKE US WHOLE.
INSTEAD OF HAVING THAT WRITTEN PAYMENT AND MY BUDGET INCREASING IN THAT LINE ITEM, THAT MONEY WOULD BE GOING ANNUALLY TO PAY BACK THE MONEY THAT WE'RE USING.
IT WOULD MAKE THAT FUND WHOLE AGAIN OVER TIME.
>> THEN THE SECOND COMPONENT IS, RIGHT NOW, WE'RE ESSENTIALLY BE TAKING OR BORROWING, SO TO SPEAK, 1.1 MILLION FROM THE JAIL INFRASTRUCTURE FUND, AND THEN AT 100,000, WHICH I KNOW THAT WILL GO UP OR THAT WOULD THEORETICALLY HAVE GONE UP 3% A YEAR, SO YOU SAY 10 YEARS THAT THAT WOULD TAKE TO PAY BACK 10-11 YEARS TO PAY BACK THE AMOUNT THAT WE'RE BORROWING FROM THE JAIL INFRASTRUCTURE FUND.
MY CONCERN IS THAT THAT TIME PERIOD IS A BIT LONG, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE THINK ABOUT WHEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO START TO EXPEND RESOURCES FOR THE NEW CORRECTIONS AND REHABILITATION CAMPUS.
WE'RE CURRENTLY IN ENVIRONMENTAL, AND THEN THERE WOULD BE SOME CONSTRUCTION PROCESS FOR AT LEAST PHASE 1 AND POTENTIALLY PHASE 2.
MY QUESTION TO YOU, I GUESS, IS, COULD WE MOVE THAT UP TO A FIVE YEAR TIME REPAYMENT PERIOD, WHICH WOULD ESSENTIALLY REQUIRE YOU TO FIND AN ADDITIONAL 100,000 IN YOUR BUDGET TO CONTRIBUTE BACK TO THAT FUND OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS? ASSUMING THAT WE SPEND THE FULL AMOUNT, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE THE CONTINGENCY.
IF THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN, THEN IT WOULD JUST BE PAID IN FIVE YEARS USING THE 100,000.
>> I CAN'T SAY THAT I CAN COMMIT TO THAT.
I'M CERTAINLY WILLING TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT WITH OUR ANALYSTS AND OUR BUDGET.
THAT'S GOING TO BE TOUGH, THOUGH, SUPERVISOR PLUMMER.
THAT'S GOING TO BE NOW INSTEAD OF REALIZING A POTENTIALLY WHAT I HAD WAS A SAVINGS IN THAT BUDGET, NOW YOU'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT CUTTING THE BUDGET.
THAT WOULD BE A TOUGH PROBABLY FINE FOR ME, BUT I CAN'T COMMIT EITHER WAY.
I WOULD SAY THAT I'M NOT OPPOSED TO LOOKING AT THAT, BUT THAT'LL PROBABLY BE A DIFFICULT THING FOR US TO DO.
>> SUPERVISOR LONG, I'LL HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU SHERIFF IF IT'S NOT DIRECTED TO YOU. SUPERVISOR LONG AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, SHERIFF.
>> AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE BIDS CAME IN, I'M JUST GOING TO BALLPARK.
THREE MILLION VERSUS THE 4.5 MILLION THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR THE BUILDING AT THAT PROJECT.
WE'RE DOWN TO TWO MILLION OF THE THREE WILL COME FROM ZOG SETTLEMENTS IMPACT FEES, AND SOME OF THE OTHER SOURCES.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 1,000,001 FOR THIS PROJECT.
THE CONCERNS I HAVE OR THE THOUGHTS THAT I HAVE ARE THAT WE HAVE COMMITTED, AND TROY MIGHT BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THIS PART OF THE 24 MILLION THAT WE HAD SET ASIDE FOR THE ALTERNATIVE CUSTODY PROGRAM.
WE STILL HAVE NOT SEEN THE NUMBERS AS TO WHAT THAT IS GOING TO COST US.
IF WE TAKE OUT FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE OLD COURTHOUSE, WE TAKE THAT MONEY OUT, AND THEN WE TAKE OUT THIS MONEY IN A SENSE, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE ENOUGH FOR THE ALTERNATIVE CUSTODY PROGRAM BUILDING OUT THAT FACILITY? THAT'S MY BIGGEST CONCERN.
>> I WOULD SAY A COUPLE OF THINGS ON THIS, SUPERVISOR LONG.
IT'S ALWAYS A MATTER OF HOW BIG AND ROBUST WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THAT ALTERNATIVE CUSTODY PROGRAM.
IF YOU RECALL, WE HAVE ABOUT A $3.2 MILLION BUDGET ALREADY FOR ALTERNATIVE CUSTODY PROGRAM THAT WE OPERATE ON BRESLAU.
[01:00:01]
THAT'S AN OPERATIONAL BUDGET.THE BUILD OUT FOR THE ALTERNATIVE CUSTODY PROGRAM IS BASICALLY WHAT WE MAKE OF IT.
I CAN EASILY WITH THE MONEY THAT WE HAVE SET ASIDE, BUILD OUT A PROGRAM, WHICH IS BIGGER AND BETTER THAN I HAVE NOW.
IT'S JUST TO WHAT SCALE DO WE WANT TO BUILD DO? THAT'S WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE HOW MUCH MONEY IS.
I'LL REMIND YOU THAT THIS IS NOT TAKING MONEY AWAY, AND IT'S GONE. I AM PAYING IT BACK.
I'M VIRTUALLY BORROWING FROM MYSELF MY OWN BUDGET AND PAYING IT BACK SO IT CAN BE USED LATER.
NOW, YES, DOES IT COMPOUND OVER 10 YEARS? THAT IS TRUE.
IT'S NOT LIKE I'M TAKING IT AND IT GOES AWAY.
>> LOCKS OUT OF THE JAIL INFRASTRUCTURE FUND, CORRECT?
>> CORRECT. THE OTHER THING ABOUT THIS PROJECT, SIR, IS THAT IT IS MUCH NEEDED.
WE'RE PAYING RENT RIGHT NOW WITH THAT PAYMENT, AND BUILDING THAT'S NOT EVEN OURS, AND IT'S OFFSITE WHERE THERE'S NO SECURITY, AND WE'RE STORING SOME VERY HIGH DOLLAR EQUIPMENT AT THIS LOCATION, WHICH I'M NOT EXACTLY COMFORTABLE WITH SINCE WE DON'T HAVE A FOOTPRINT OVER THERE.
GETTING IT TO OUR EOC AND OUR SOUTH COUNTY SUBSTATION FOOTPRINT, PROVIDES A LEVEL OF SECURITY AND OWNERSHIP, WHICH WE DON'T HAVE NOW.
INITIALLY, WHEN WE ENTERED THIS PROJECT, AND WE LOOKED AT ARPA FUNDS, IT WAS GOING TO BE PAID 100% FROM THAT, AND IT'S BEEN A MOVING TARGET AND SOME EBB AND FLOW WITH GETTING THERE.
BUT I'M NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT THAT.
THINGS CHANGE IN MY PROFESSION, AND WE IMPROVISE ADAPT AND OVERCOME ALL THE TIME, AND THIS IS JUST ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF THAT OF TRYING TO GET IT DONE IN WHAT'S BEST INTEREST OF THE COUNTY.
>> TROY, THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR YOU.
IN THIS CONTRACT, THERE'S A CERTAIN PORTION OF GETTING US TO THE 3.7 IS CONTINGENCY.
DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH OF THAT IS CONTINGENCY?
>> SOMEWHERE AROUND 300,000, POTENTIALLY?
>> AROUND 300,000. YOU'RE ASKING, ARE WE GOING TO SPEND IT?
>> NO, I KNOW THAT YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO PREDICT THAT.
I WAS JUST GETTING A SENSE OF WHAT THAT AMOUNT WAS AND HOW THAT WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO IT.
THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD IS, WERE YOU INVOLVED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE I'LL CALL IT THE SHOP AT THE JUVENILE REHABILITATION FACILITY, AND DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THAT ENDED UP COSTING US OR IS COSTING US?
>> I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
THAT WAS MY DEPARTMENT DID. ON THE TOP OF MY HEAD.
WE ABOUT SPENT THE CONTINGENCY, BUT WE ALSO USED PART OF THAT CONTINGENCY BY CHOICE TO DO SOME ADDITIONS TO THINGS THAT WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT, WHICH OFTENTIMES HAPPENS IF YOU HAVE THE LUXURY OF IT, AS YOU COME TO THE CLOSE OF A CONTRACT, YOU CAN ADD THINGS THAT YOU DIDN'T THINK YOU COULD, OR SOMETIMES THAT CONTINGENCY GETS ADDED INTO UNKNOWNS.
AS WE GO ON, WE FIGURE OUT WHAT'S LEFT, AND SOUNDS LIKE IF THERE'S CONTINGENCY LEFT, WE WON'T USE IT FOR EXTRAS.
I GUESS THAT'S BETWEEN YOU AND THE SHERIFF, BUT THAT'S POSSIBILITY TO DO OUR BEST TO MINIMIZE THE CONTINGENCIES.
I JUST WANTED TO ADD ONE LITTLE THING THAT MIGHT HELP, AND THIS IS THE TAIL END OF A LARGER PROJECT TO MOVE THE ENTIRE EOC OUT TO MAKE A SOUTH COUNTY SHERIFF'S PATROL A MUCH LARGER, MORE EXPENSIVE PROJECT, WHICH A LOT OF RPA FUNDS WILL BE ABLE TO USE ON.
HONESTLY, REMEMBER, DOWN THERE IN BRESLAU, WE HAD THEM BASICALLY, WE HAD USED MODULAR BUILDINGS THAT THE SHERIFF WAS IN FOR YEARS.
THIS IS THE TAIL END TO BRING TO BE ABLE TO STORE THEIR EQUIPMENT ON SITE.
ALSO, THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SOMETHING WE HAVEN'T HAD BEFORE.
I THINK THE ZOC FUNDING USED FOR LARGE ANIMAL STORAGE, LIKE EQUESTRIAN AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
IT'S NOT THAT THIS PROJECT WAS JUST PLANNED AND STAND ALONE.
WE TRIED TO SPEND AS MUCH OF THE UPPER MONEY AS WE COULD ON A ONE TIME THING.
YES, WE'RE USING MONEY AT THE END, BUT THIS IS A SMALLER PIECE OF SOMETHING MUCH LARGER. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HELPS OR NOT.
>> I DID HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VISIT IT AND BOTH THE OLD CURRENTLY LEASE SITE, AND I AM TOTALLY ON BOARD WITH THE IDEA THAT THIS WOULD BE A SIGNIFICANT IMPROVEMENT REGARDING THE JUVENILE REHABILITATION FACILITY.
I ACTUALLY WASN'T REFERRING TO THE CONTINGENCY, OVERALL THE TOTAL BUDGET IF THERE'S A BALLPARK THERE.
>> IF YOU DON'T KNOW, THAT'S FINE, TOO. I KNOW IT WASN'T.
>> THEN ONE OTHER QUESTION FOR YOU TROY.
REGARDING THE CONTINGENCY, AND I WAS TALKING TO ARON BERTINE ABOUT THIS THIS MORNING THAT IT SOUNDS LIKE
[01:05:06]
HISTORICALLY THERE'S SOME FLEXIBILITY TO USE THAT OBVIOUSLY, IF THERE'S CHANGE ORDERS THAT COME UP THAT ARE REQUIRED TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT, THAT MAKES COMPLETE SENSE, BUT ALSO, IN SOME CASES, IT'S USED TO ADD ADDITIONAL FEATURES OR POTENTIALLY SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES THAT'S MORE OPTIONAL.>> I GUESS SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, GIVEN MY CONCERN ABOUT USING THESE FUNDS TO FUND THIS, IS THERE A SCENARIO IN WHICH WE COULD APPROVE THE CONTRACT WITHOUT THE CONTINGENCY, AND THEN IF IT'S NECESSARY THAT COMES BACK HERE?
>> THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS BUILT INTO THE CONTRACT LIKE COST REDUCTION IN SENATE PROPOSALS, CONTRACTUAL THINGS YOU CAN DO, BUT THAT'S WHERE YOU SPLIT THE SAVINGS SHORT OF TAKING THINGS OUT.
WE'VE PURCHASED THE BUILDING ALREADY.
THERE'S NOT A LOT OF ROOM FOR EXTRAS.
THEN ALSO, WHEN WE TAKE THINGS OUT, WE DO HAVE TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE CONTRACTOR FOR THAT, AND IT USUALLY DOESN'T COME OUT TO OUR FAVOR SO THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION IS PROBABLY IT'S NOT LIKELY.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. THIS WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR THE SHERIFF.
ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION THAT I JUST THOUGHT OF.
I DIDN'T SEE ANYWHERE IN THIS PROPOSAL FOR C9, THE ACTUAL STRUCTURED REPAYMENT PLAN.
HOW EXACTLY WOULD THAT WORK AND WHAT WOULD COMMIT THE DEPARTMENT TO LET'S SAY YOU'RE NOT HERE FIVE YEARS FROM NOW OR WHATEVER.
WHAT WOULD WE PUT INTO PLACE IN PERPETUITY TO SHOW THAT REPAYMENT PLAN OF THE MILLION DOLLAR AT $100,000 A YEAR?
>> YOU'RE TRYING TO PUSH ME OUT, SUPERVISOR LONG.
>> [LAUGHTER] THAT'S WHY I GAVE YOU 10 YEARS.
>> I DON'T HAVE THE SPECIFICS OF THAT.
TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, I'D PROBABLY HAVE TO BE AARON TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
WE DISCUSSED IT AND EMAILED BACK FORTH ABOUT IT, BUT SHE COULD GIVE YOU THE DETAILS.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR CRYE, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, AND RETAINED DEPUTY COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
TO YOUR QUESTION, ESSENTIALLY, THAT THE WAY THAT WOULD WORK IS THE SHERIFF HAS COMMITTED TO REDUCING HIS ASK FOR GENERAL FUND AND THE OES BUDGET SPECIFICALLY.
THEN OUR OFFICE DURING BUDGET PROCESS, WOULD TAKE INTO A TRANSFER FROM THE GENERAL FUND, INTO THE CAPITAL FUND, SPECIFICALLY INTO THIS COMMITTED FUND ANNUALLY FOR THE NEXT 10 YEARS.
IT'S THERE'S NOT A WAY TO CONTRACTUALLY OBLIGATE ANYBODY BECAUSE IN REALITY, THIS IS A COMMITMENT BY THE BOARD WITH THE BOARD, BECAUSE THE BOARD IS THE ULTIMATE APPROVER OF THE BUDGET.
IN FIVE YEARS, I WILL LIKELY NOT BE HERE.
I'LL STILL BE ON THIS EARTH, BUT I'LL NOT BE HERE.
[LAUGHTER] IT WOULD BE A MATTER OF SOMEBODY CONTINUING THAT AFTER ME.
I CAN TELL YOU FOR ME, IT'LL BE IN THE BUDGET EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THE INTENT WAS THE 100,000 FOR THE CURRENT EXISTING EOC WILL BE USED TO REPAY THE MILLION, ONE.
THEN IT WILL GO ON IN PERPETUITY AS A PERMANENT BUDGET REDUCTION OF 100,000 EQUIVALENT DOLLARS A YEAR.
THAT'S MY ONLY CONCERN IS BECAUSE THIS COULD WELL OUTLAST ALL OF US.
>> IT COULD. REALISTICALLY, THERE COULD BE ADDITIONAL ASKS THAT ARE FOR SOMETHING ELSE, BUT AT NO POINT WILL THEY BE ABLE TO SAY, IN THIS YEAR, WE LOST $100,000 A YEAR.
WE WANT THAT 100,000 TO SPEND, HOWEVER WE WANT, THEY'D HAVE TO MAKE THE CASE FOR WHAT THEY WANTED TO SPEND IT ON.
WE WOULDN'T BE SPENDING ON ON A LEASE OF STRUCTURES ANY LONGER.
BECAUSE IT'S WITHIN THE GENERAL FUND, THERE'S NOT A WAY FOR US TO COMMIT OURSELVES TO DOING SOMETHING IN A TIME WHERE IT WOULD BE A COMPLETELY SEPARATE BOARD.
THIS BOARD CAN'T OBLIGATE FUTURE BOARDS ON THEIR BUDGET DECISIONS.
IT WOULD BE A FUNCTION OF OUR OFFICE TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT HAPPENS, BUT ANY FUTURE BOARD COULD CHANGE THAT.
REALISTICALLY, A FUTURE BOARD COULD SAY, THIS $34 MILLION THAT'S IN THIS FUND, WE WANT IT BACK IN THE GENERAL FUND, AND THEY COULD MOVE IT AT BUDGET TIME WITH A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE AND SO [OVERLAPPING] WE'VE DONE AS MUCH AS WE COULD DO TO SET THAT ASIDE.
IT WOULD HAVE TO BE AN INTENTIONAL DECISION BY A FUTURE BOARD, BUT FUTURE BOARDS CAN DO THAT.
>> [BACKGROUND] WELL, KNOWING THAT SHERIFF JOHNSON, HOW PROTECTIVE HE IS OF HIS FUNDS, BECAUSE HE IS VERY PROTECTIVE OF HIS FUNDS AND WITH THE PLAYERS INVOLVED HERE, AARON AND TROY, IF THEY ALL APPROVE OF THIS PROJECT,
[01:10:01]
I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE C9.>> SUPERVISOR LONGER PLUMMER, DID YOU GUYS HAVE ANOTHER MOTION BECAUSE WE DID ALL OF THAT.
QUITE HONESTLY, I'LL SECOND THAT.
BUT I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU, FOR YOU GUYS I DIDN'T TALK TOO MUCH ABOUT THIS, I APPRECIATE IT.
IT'S REALLY SIMPLE WHEN YOU GET SHERIFF JOHNSON, ARON BERTINE, AND TROY ALL ON THE SAME PAGE WHEN IT'S ABOUT MONEY AND A NUMBER, AND ESPECIALLY WHEN IT'S GOING BETWEEN ACCOUNTS AND THE WAY THIS IS DONE, SO.
ANYWAY, SUPERVISOR PLUMMER, DO YOU HAVE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION YOU WANTED TO MAKE?
>> WELL, I MIGHT ASK SUPERVISOR KELSTROM, IF YOU WOULD ADD TO YOUR MOTION TO APPROVE IT AND TO DIRECT THE CA'S OFFICE TO LOOK TO ALLOCATE 100,000 TO $200,000.
EACH BUDGET YEAR TO THE JAIL INFRASTRUCTURE FUND AS A REPAYMENT FOR THIS FOR THE NEXT 5-10 YEARS.
>> I BELIEVE THAT'S ALREADY IN THERE.
THEY JUST SAID HE'S ALREADY SETTING ASIDE 100,000 EVERY YEAR.
>> THERE'S BEEN E-MAIL CORRESPONDENCE, BUT WHAT I'M ASKING THIS BOARD TO DO IS TO MAKE OFFICIAL BOARD DIRECTION THAT IS THAT WILL THE BOARD TO DIRECT THE CAO STAFF SO THAT IS INGRAINED AS MORE OF A FORMAL COMMITMENT VERSUS WHAT HAS JUST BEEN EXCHANGED OVER E-MAIL CORRESPONDENCE.
>> I'LL AGREE TO THE 100,000 BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY WRITTEN IN THERE.
BUT AS FAR AS THE 200,000 GOES, THE SHERIFF DOES AMAZING WORK WITH HIS BUDGET, AND I DON'T THINK HE'S ABLE TO CUT $100,000 OUT OF THAT BUDGET.
THE MEETING WE HAD YESTERDAY WAS SOME FINANCIAL ISSUES THERE, AND I'M NOT GOING TO COMMIT TO ANOTHER 100,000 THAT HE DOESN'T HAVE.
HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE AWAY FROM SOMETHING ELSE.
I'LL FIND 100,000, THAT'S FINE.
WE CAN PUT THAT IN THERE. THAT WE CAN GUARANTEE THAT THAT WILL BE GOING IN THERE.
HE'S ALREADY SAID IT'S GOING TO GO IN THERE, AARON AGREES.
>> YOU'RE AMENDING YOUR MOTION?
>> ARE YOU AMENDING YOUR MOTION THEN TO MEET PLUMMER?
>> SUPERVISOR, SHERIFF, YOU COME ON UP REAL QUICK.
WHAT'S YOUR THOUGHT? 'CAUSE QUITE HONESTLY, I'M GOING TO DEFER TO YOU.
IF YOU DON'T WANT ME TO SUPPORT THAT, I WON'T SUPPORT THAT, AND I'LL JUST STICK TO MY ORIGINAL SECOND OF THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
BUT I'M GOING TO DEFER TO YOU, THAT'S YOUR DEPARTMENT, THAT'S YOUR BUDGET.
YOU'RE THE LEADER ELECTED IN THAT SPOT SO YOU JUST TELL ME WHAT YOU WANT.
>> I WOULD LIKE IT AS IS ORIGINALLY PROPOSED IN THE C9 BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'VE WORKED OUT, AND I KNOW THAT WE CAN AFFORD IT.
>> NOT TO EVEN SAY ANYTHING ELSE. IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'VE WORKED ON, AND I DEFER TO THAT.
>> I'LL LEAVE MY MOTION AS IT IS.
>> ORIGINAL, I'LL SECOND YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION.
WE'LL TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE, STEPHANIE, START TO MY LEFT.
>> WE DO HAVE ONE SPEAKER. LAURA HOBBS.
>> THIS IS A VOTE TO APPROVE AS PROPOSED [OVERLAPPING] C9.
>> PASS THIS 4-1. THANK YOU, SHERIFF FOR YOUR WORK.
THANK YOU, MISS PERTAIN. THANK YOU, TROY.
MOVING ON TO C17, WE'RE GOING TO BRING MONICA FUGITT, DIRECTOR OF SUPPORT SERVICES BACK UP.
YOU HAVE TO HELP ME NAVIGATE BECAUSE THIS IS DIFFERENT, JUST BASED ON, AGAIN, WE CAN'T TAKE R5 BEFORE C17, BUT I THINK IT HAS SPURRED A MUCH LARGER CONVERSATION.
COUNSEL LARMOUR, I HAD A QUESTION FOR YOU.
BECAUSE THIS IS A STAFF THING, I WOULD REALLY LIKE, I NOTICED SOME OF OUR INDIVIDUALS FROM THE STEP UP PROGRAM HAVE SLOWLY, MAYBE HAD TO GO TO WORK OR BAIL.
CAN I MAKE A MOTION TO BRING C17 BACK AFTER R5? BECAUSE HONESTLY, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THOSE CLOSE TOGETHER, IF POSSIBLE.
PLUS, I WANT TO GET THE GOOD PEOPLE FROM STEP UP HERE.
>> ULTIMATELY IT BECOMES AN R ITEM, AND IF YOU WANT TO VOTE TO REORDER [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE THIS REGULAR CALENDAR ITEM, AND WE'RE GOING TO BRING IT BACK.
LET ME THINK HERE REAL QUICK ON THE FLY.
R5, I WOULD LIKE TO, I GUESS I COULD REORDER IT EVEN LATER, BUT WE'LL MAKE IT R6.
WE'LL MAKE THIS ITEM WE'LL FOLLOW R5, SO THAT'S MY MOTION.
>> ANY DISCUSSION ON THAT? SORRY, MONICA, IF YOU HAD AFTERNOON PLANS.
>> WE'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE THAT, AND THAT IS TO THE MOTION I MADE IS TO MOVE C17 BELOW R5, WHENEVER THAT COMES UP. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
>> PASSES 5-0. THANK YOU, GUYS.
MONICA, THANK YOU. WHOEVER ELSE NEEDS TO BE HERE.
I WAS PROBABLY SAY MONICA, YES, NODA SCHWARTZ HERE.
[01:15:01]
MOVING ON TO R3.[R2 Take the following actions: (1) Receive a presentation from the Health and Human Services Agency regarding the Social Services Fund; (2) approve an extension of the General Fund loan through June 30, 2026; and (3) approve budget amendments which: (a) decrease appropriations by $6,461,540 in the Social Services Administration Budget (BU 501); (b) decrease appropriations offset by an increase in Cost Applied by $1,478,737 in the Health & Human Svs Agency Adm Budget (BU 502); and (c) transfers appropriations by $220,208 from Salaries and Benefits to Services and Supplies in the Mental Health Budget (BU 410).]
HOW YOU DOING? YOU'RE COMING UP? YOU'RE PRESENTING. MISS WATTS.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR CRYE, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
AARON WATTS, BRANCH DIRECTOR HHSA ADMINISTRATION.
I'M HERE TODAY WITH AGENCY DIRECTOR CHRISTY COLEMAN.
TODAY'S PRESENTATION IS A FOLLOW UP FROM THE OCTOBER 21ST PRESENTATION.
WE WILL INCLUDE INFORMATION ABOUT OUR DECEMBER BUDGET AMENDMENT, WHICH REDUCES COSTS IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND OR FUND 140.
AN UPDATE ON THE NEWLY IMPLEMENTED FIVE YEAR SUSTAINABILITY SPREADSHEET, WHICH WILL SUPPORT ONGOING COST SAVING EFFORTS AND FISCAL PROJECTIONS, AN UPDATE ON HR1 IMPACTS, AND AN UPDATE ON ADDITIONAL COST SAVING EFFORTS WITHIN HHSA.
TO RECAP, EARLIER THIS YEAR, HHSA WAS APPROVED TO USE GENERAL FUND TEMPORARILY UP TO $10.5 MILLION TO COVER NEGATIVE CASH WITHIN SOCIAL SERVICES THROUGH JUNE 30TH.
ON JUNE 24TH, HHSA REQUESTED AN EXTENSION TO THE GENERAL FUND LOAN THROUGH OCTOBER 31ST AND REDUCED THE REQUESTED AMOUNT TO $5 MILLION AS WE HAD NOT EXCEEDED THAT AMOUNT IN NEGATIVE CASH IN THE PRECEDING MONTHS.
ON SEPTEMBER 9TH, HHSA ALERTED THE BOARD THAT WE WERE NOT ABLE TO STAY WITHIN THE $5 MILLION IN NEGATIVE CASH ALLOWANCE AND REQUESTED AN INCREASE TO $7 MILLION, WHICH THE BOARD APPROVED WITH DIRECTION TO RETURN IN THE FUTURE WITH A PLAN TO REDUCE SPENDING IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND.
ON OCTOBER 21ST, THE BOARD APPROVED AN ADDITIONAL 10% REALIGNMENT TRANSFER FROM PUBLIC HEALTH TO SOCIAL SERVICES AND EXTENDED THE GENERAL FUND LOAN THROUGH DECEMBER 31ST, WITH DIRECTION TO RETURN WITH A BUDGET AMENDMENT INCORPORATING SAVINGS AND PROJECTIONS.
DURING THIS MEETING, SEVERAL COST SAVING MEASURES WERE PRESENTED, WHICH WILL BE REFLECTED IN THE BUDGET AMENDMENT BEFORE YOU TODAY FOR CONSIDERATION.
AS I SHARED PREVIOUSLY, THIS REPRESENTS THE GROWTH OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND FOR THE PERIOD OF FISCAL YEAR 2017 THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2025.
HERE YOU CAN SEE THAT FOR SEVERAL YEARS REVENUES EXCEEDED EXPENDITURES, WHICH RESULTED IN STRONG GROWTH IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND AND SUBSEQUENTLY A HEALTHY FUND BALANCE AND CASH FLOW.
IN 2021, THERE WAS A $6.8 MILLION SURPLUS, WHICH GREW THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND BALANCE TO OVER $30 MILLION.
IN 2022, REVENUE SLIGHTLY EXCEEDED EXPENDITURES, BUT IN 2023, WE START TO SEE A SIGNIFICANT SHIFT IN TRENDS.
EXPENDITURES EXCEEDED REVENUE BY ABOUT $9.4 MILLION, AND WE SAW SIMILAR TRENDS IN 2025 AS WELL.
IT IS NOTABLE THAT WHILE SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION EXPENDITURES HAVE INCREASED AND DID HAVE A DEFICIT IN FISCAL YEARS 2023 AND 2025, THE BULK OF THE DEFICIT HAS OCCURRED IN THE WELFARE CASH A PAYMENTS BUDGET OR BUDGET UNIT 541, WITH A TOTAL LOSS OF ABOUT 18 MILLION FROM FISCAL YEARS 2021 TO FISCAL YEARS 2025.
FOR THE SAME PERIOD, SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION BUDGET HAD A SURPLUS OF $5.9 MILLION.
AS THE BOARD AND THE PUBLIC ARE AWARE, EXPENDITURES ARE OUTPACING REVENUES, AND ONE THING I WANT TO POINT OUT IS THAT THE REVENUES WILL INCREASE AS COSTS INCREASE DUE TO HIGHER CLAIMS AND MORE SERVICES, THE COUNTY SHARE OF COST IS ALSO INCREASING.
WE COVER OUR SHARE OF COSTS THROUGH REALIGNMENT AND GENERAL FUND CONTRIBUTIONS, WHICH WE RECEIVE NEARLY $4 MILLION ANNUALLY IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND.
AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, GROWTH TRENDS AND REALIGNMENT DO NOT MATCH THE GROWTH WE SEE IN EXPENDITURES.
IT'S NOTABLE THAT FROM 2021-2025, THERE'S ONLY BEEN ABOUT A 7% INCREASE IN REALIGNMENT REVENUE, AND FOR THE SAME TIME, THERE'S BEEN A 27% INCREASE IN EXPENDITURES.
AS A REMINDER, REALIGNMENT IS FUNDED THROUGH VEHICLE LICENSE FEES AND SALES TAX REVENUE.
THE HEALTH OF THIS REVENUE IS DIRECTLY TIED TO THE HEALTH OF THE ECONOMY AND IS NOT TIED TO PROGRAM MANDATES.
OVERALL, IN THE LAST THREE FISCAL YEARS, THERE'S BEEN ABOUT A $19 MILLION DEFICIT IN SOCIAL SERVICES, WHICH HAS GREATLY IMPACTED THE OVERALL HEALTH OF THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND.
IN OUR OCTOBER PRESENTATION, WE BROUGHT FORTH SEVERAL COST SAVING MEASURES.
TODAY, WE HAVE A BUDGET AMENDMENT THAT REDUCES COSTS IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND BY $6.4 MILLION WITH MATERIAL SAVINGS AND SALARIES AND BENEFITS, AND A TOTAL REDUCTION OF $4.2 MILLION IN BOTH HHSA ADMINISTRATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION FOR SALARIES MEDEFITS.
THIS IS LARGELY DUE TO THE SOFT HIRING FREEZE THAT WAS IMPLEMENTED IN SEPTEMBER.
IN ADDITION TO SALARY SAVINGS, OFFICE EXPENSES WERE REDUCED IN BUDGET UNIT 501 BY $200,000.
LEASE COSTS WERE REDUCED BY $100,000, AND FACILITIES AND IT CHARGES WERE REDUCED BY OVER $1.2 MILLION IN TOTAL.
THIS REDUCTION IN PARTICULAR IS BASED ON SPENDING TRENDS FOR THE CURRENT FISCAL YEAR,
[01:20:01]
AS WELL AS PRIOR YEAR AVERAGES.HHSA ADMINISTRATION COSTS WERE REDUCED BY NEARLY $1.7 MILLION, WHICH WAS APPLIED AS SAVINGS IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION BUDGET.
THIS IS LARGELY DUE TO SALARY SAVINGS AND INCLUDES A DECREASE IN PROFESSIONAL AND SPECIAL SERVICES AND TRAINING COSTS.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT ONLY INCORPORATES CHANGES TO APPROPRIATIONS.
FOLLOWING THE POSTING OF REVERSE ACCRUALS THIS MONTH, WE WILL CONTINUE TO EVALUATE CURRENT YEAR EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES, AS WELL AS BEGIN MORE CLAIM ANALYSIS OF THE COUNTY EXPENSE CLAIM OR CEC, WHICH ACCOUNTS FOR SOCIAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION REVENUE.
DECREASES IN APPROPRIATIONS IS LIKELY TO IMPACT THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE PROJECTED, AND MATERIAL CHANGES WILL BE INCLUDED ON FUTURE MID YEAR AND URINE BUDGET AMENDMENTS.
>> AT THIS POINT, THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND HAS BEEN IN NEGATIVE CASH STATUS FOR MOST OF THE FISCAL YEAR.
AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, OUR MAJOR CHALLENGE CONTINUES TO BE EXPENDITURES, OUTPACING REVENUES, AND INCREASING SHARE OF COUNTY COST DUE TO INCREASING EXPENDITURES.
WE EXPECT COSTS FOR MANDATED SERVICES TO CONTINUE TO INCREASE FURTHER.
WE DON'T EXPECT THIS TO CHANGE IN THE SHORT TERM AND HAVE MADE SIGNIFICANT EFFORTS TO REDUCE COSTS IN AREAS WHERE WE HAVE MORE CONTROL WHILE RETAINING THE ABILITY TO MAXIMIZE OUR ADMINISTRATIVE ALLOCATIONS.
TO SUPPORT OUR ANALYSIS EFFORTS, WE HAVE IMPLEMENTED THE USE OF A FIVE-YEAR SUSTAINABILITY TOOL.
THIS WAS PREVIOUSLY UTILIZED SEVERAL YEARS AGO TO IDENTIFY LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF FUNDS WITHIN HHSA AND HAS BEEN UPDATED FOR CURRENT USE.
THIS IS THE CURRENT FIVE-YEAR TREND WITHOUT ANY SAVINGS ADJUSTMENTS INCORPORATED.
AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, THE OUTLOOK IS PRETTY GRIM, WITH A PROJECTED NEGATIVE FUND BALANCE AS SOON AS FISCAL YEAR 2027.
I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THIS OUTLOOK AS IF WE DO NOTHING.
WHILE IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD FOR SOCIAL SERVICES, I INCLUDED THIS INFORMATION TO FURTHER DRIVE HOME THE URGENCY OF ACTING NOW AND CONTINUING TO PRIORITIZE COST-SAVING EFFORTS WITHIN HHSA.
INCORPORATING THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT ALONE, WE EXTEND THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND BALANCE THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2027, AND WE SEE SIMILAR CHANGES AS WE MAKE SAVINGS ADJUSTMENTS TO FUTURE YEARS.
AS WE IMPLEMENT CHANGES, WE'LL MAKE ADDITIONAL ADJUSTMENTS TO THIS DOCUMENT, AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO USE THIS TOOL TO INCORPORATE PROJECTED SAVINGS AND IDENTIFY THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF SAVINGS NEEDED TO SUSTAIN THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND, AND WE'LL BE UTILIZING THIS TOOL DURING BUDGET PREPARATIONS TO IDENTIFY AREAS OF SAVINGS IN ORDER TO ENSURE LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY OF THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND.
I WILL NOW TURN IT OVER TO AGENCY DIRECTOR CHRISTY COLEMAN TO DISCUSS FUTURE CONCERNS RELATED TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF H.R. 1.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN CRYE, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
CHRISTY COLEMAN, HHSA DIRECTOR.
1 PRESENTS POTENTIAL BUDGETARY CHALLENGES IN THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR AND BEYOND.
WHEN THE NON-FEDERAL SHARE OF SNAP, ALSO KNOWN AS CALFRESH, ADMINISTRATION COSTS WILL INCREASE FROM 50% TO 75% BEGINNING OCTOBER 1ST, 26, REALIGNMENT STATUTE CODIFIES THAT THE COUNTY SHARE OF COST IS 30% OF THE NON-FEDERAL SHARE, THEREFORE, WE CAN ASSUME THE COUNTY SHARE OF THE COST WILL INCREASE FROM 15% TO 22.5% OF THE OVERALL SNAP ADMINISTRATION, WITHOUT A SIGNIFICANT CHANGE IN CURRENT LAW.
SHASTA COUNTY SHARE OF COST IS $2.4 MILLION, AND ASSUMING NO CHANGE TO CURRENT LAW IN FISCAL YEAR '26-'27, COUNTY SHARE WILL INCREASE TO $3.6 MILLION.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF POTENTIAL SCENARIOS THAT COULD CHANGE THIS PROJECTION, INCLUDING COUNTY MATCH HELD FLAT AT $2.4 MILLION, OR THE INCREASE BEING PASSED ONTO COUNTIES ENTIRELY, WHICH COULD INCREASE THE COUNTY SHARE OF COST TO 4.5 MILLION.
IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THIS IS A STATE-WIDE CONCERN.
ACCORDING TO THE LAO RECENT PUBLICATION OF THE CALIFORNIA'S FISCAL OUTLOOK, THE STATE PROJECTS COSTS FROM MEDI-CAL AND CALFRESH TO INCREASE BY ABOUT ONE BILLION AND 300 MILLION RETROSPECTIVELY.
THERE ARE ALSO FINANCIAL PENALTIES INCLUDED IN THE H.R.1 FOR STATES WITH A HIGHER ERROR RATE, WHICH INCLUDES A 5% FEE FOR STATES WITH ERROR RATES BETWEEN 6-8%, 10% FOR STATES WITH ERROR RATES BETWEEN 8-10%, AND 15% FOR STATES EXCEEDING A 10% ERROR RATE.
IT IS UNCLEAR HOW THE STATES WILL SPREAD THE ADDITIONAL COST AMONGST COUNTIES.
IT IS NOTABLE THAT OVERALL, THE STATE'S ERROR RATE CURRENTLY IS 11.3%.
IF THE ERROR RATE STAYS THE SAME, THE STATE WOULD HAVE A 15% FISCAL PENALTY.
THIS FISCAL PENALTY WOULD BE PASSED ON TO COUNTIES, RESULTING IN A POTENTIAL FISCAL PENALTY OF $1 MILLION ON TOP OF THE INCREASE IN ADMIN SHARE OF COSTS OF 1.2, FOR POTENTIAL COUNTY SHARE OF COSTS TO GO FROM $2.4-$4.6 MILLION.
A MAJOR CONCERN IS THE COST-SAVING EFFORTS THAT HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED WILL BE OFFSET BY FUTURE COST INCREASES.
[01:25:03]
H.R. 1 IS NOT JUST IMPACTING SHASTA COUNTY.UP AND DOWN THE STATE, COUNTIES ARE SCRAMBLING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PAY FOR CHANGES COMING FROM H.R.
1. H.R.1 BRINGS CHANGES TO THE CALFRESH ADMINISTRATIVE COUNTY SHARE OF COST, WORK REQUIREMENTS, WHICH WILL REQUIRE MORE TIME FOR STAFF TO PROCESS DOCUMENTS, AND MORE FREQUENT CERTIFICATION FOR CLIENTS.
IHSS RECERTIFICATIONS ARE NOW REQUIRING COUNTIES TO BE AT 100% ACCURACY, OTHERWISE, FACE A FISCAL PENALTY, AS WELL AS THE ERROR RATE PENALTY FOR THE CALFRESH PROGRAM, AS MENTIONED A MINUTE AGO.
CALIFORNIA COUNTIES ARE CLOSING OFFICES, MOVING TO ROTATING TELECOMMUTE SCHEDULES TO DECREASE THE AMOUNT THAT THEY ARE PAYING FOR LEASE SPACE, LAYING OFF STAFF, IMPLEMENTING HIRING FREEZES, OR RECEIVING AN INCREASE IN THEIR GENERAL FUND, IN AN EFFORT TO PAY FOR THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH H.R.1.
H.R.1 GIVES THE COUNTIES A LOT OF NEW REQUIREMENTS WITHOUT THE ADMINISTRATIVE FUNDING TO PAY FOR IT.
CALIFORNIA COUNTIES SERVE AS THE HEALTHCARE SAFETY NET PROVIDERS FOR UNINSURED RESIDENTS THROUGH THE COUNTY INDIGENT CARE PROGRAM, CMSP.
AS THE MEDI-CAL CHANGES GO INTO EFFECT WITH H.R.1 AND PEOPLE LOSE OR CANNOT AFFORD THEIR MEDI-CAL, CMSP COULD SEE A LARGE INCREASE IN USAGE.
CMSP USED TO BE FUNDED THROUGH REALIGNMENT.
HOWEVER, THROUGH AB85, THOSE FUNDS WERE REDIRECTED TO CALWORKS.
CURRENTLY, CMSP HAS AN AVERAGE CASELOAD OF ABOUT 10 CASES PER MONTH.
GOING FORWARD, THAT COULD CHANGE AND COULD BECOME A LARGE EXPENDITURES TO THE COUNTY.
AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, WE INSTITUTED A SOFT HIRING FREEZE IN SEPTEMBER, WHICH ALLOWED FOR ADDITIONAL AGENCY-WIDE SAVINGS.
WHILE THIS HAS BEEN IMPACTFUL, ADDITIONAL SAVINGS IS NEEDED TO SEE A POSITIVE SHIFT IN THE SOCIAL SERVICES FUND.
WE ALSO CONTINUE TO EVALUATE OTHER PROFESSIONAL SERVICES THAT ARE NOT ASSOCIATED TO MANDATED SERVICES THAT CAN BE REDUCED OR ELIMINATED, RESULTING IN ADDITIONAL SAVINGS.
WHILE THESE INCREASING COSTS CONTINUE TO KEEP US LARGELY IN THE NEGATIVE CASH STATUS, WE DO HAVE OTHER AREAS WHERE WE HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO SHIFT COSTS WITHIN THE AGENCY.
FOR EXAMPLE, CALIFORNIA CHILDREN SERVICES, OR CCS, WHICH PROVIDES VITAL SERVICES FOR MEDICALLY FRAGILE CHILDREN IN OUR COMMUNITY, IS PARTIALLY FUNDED BY SOCIAL SERVICES REALIGNMENT.
IN 2001, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROVED BY RESOLUTION TO SHIFT RESPONSIBILITIES OF CCS FROM SOCIAL SERVICES TO PUBLIC HEALTH.
ADDITIONALLY, CCS WAS INCLUDED IN THE COUNTY AB8 PLAN, WHICH OPENS UP THE POTENTIAL TO SHIFT REALIGNMENT, PORTION OF THIS COST TO PUBLIC HEALTH REALIGNMENT, AS WELL AS CONSIDER A PRIOR YEAR ADJUSTMENT TO UTILIZE HEALTHIER PUBLIC HEALTH RESERVES TO FUND CCS IN PRIOR YEARS.
>> BOTTOM LINE IS HR IS GOING TO EXTREMELY HURT?
>> IT'S GOING TO BE DEVASTATING.
>> IT'S GOING TO BE BRUTAL. THEY'RE PASSING IT ON TO THE STATE.
I'M NOT TRYING TO [INAUDIBLE] IS LOOKING AT ME.
I'M JUST KIDDING. IS THERE ANY LAST THINGS? WE GOT SOME COMMENTS, AND I WANT TO MOVE THIS ALONG.
>> THERE'S A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS THAT I WANT TO MENTION.
WE ARE LOOKING AT A MORE ROBUST REMOTE WORK SCHEDULE, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE US CLOSING OFFICES AND REDUCING OUR LEASE SPACE TO SEND A MAJORITY OF OUR STAFF HOME TO WORK, AND DOING A ROTATING TELECOMMUTE SCHEDULE WITH SHARED DESKS.
>> LET'S GET TO SOME PUBLIC COMMENT.
WE'LL BRING IT BACK BECAUSE THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME DISCUSSION, AND I WANT TO KEEP THIS MOVING. IS THAT GOOD?
>> MS. BLANKENSHIP, HOW MANY SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE FOR THIS?
>> WE HAVE ONE REQUEST TO SPEAK ON THE ITEM.
>> GREAT. LET'S BRING THAT INDIVIDUAL UP.
>> WHILE CHRISTIAN IS MAKING HIS WAY UP, ERIN, MS. WATTS, MS. COLEMAN, YOU GUYS, GREAT JOB.
YOU GUYS ARE MAKING SUCH HEADWAY.
WHEN PEOPLE TALK ABOUT FORENSIC AUDITS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, YOU GUYS ARE DOING THE WORK, AS WELL AS THE CEO STAFF, AND I KNOW [INAUDIBLE] IS LEANING IN, BUT FISCALLY, YOU GUYS HAVE REALLY COME A LONG WAY UNDER YOUR LEADERSHIP AND THE PEOPLE THAT YOU'VE PUT IN PLACE TO MAKE THESE CHANGES.
I'M GRATEFUL. CHRISTIAN, COME ON UP. THREE MINUTES.
IF IT WASN'T FOR THE STAFF THAT SUPPLY THIS BOARD WITH ALL THE INFORMATION, INSIGHT AS TO WHAT'S COMING DOWN THE ROAD, YOU GUYS WOULD BE SUNK.
YOU'RE RIGHT. THIS IS THE BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL.
THIS IS THE TIDAL WAVE THAT PEOPLE LIKE ME, AND I'M NOT TAKING ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS, HAVE BEEN TELLING YOU GUYS, IT'S COMING, AND IT'S COMING HARD.
WITH A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT FROM BOTH DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICANS, WE WERE ABLE TO RESTORE SOME FUNDING TO EDUCATION.
BUT THIS IS GOING TO BE BRUTAL.
IF THINGS AREN'T WORKED OUT THIS WEEK, THERE'S GOING TO BE BILLIONS ADDED TO THIS AS HEALTHCARE EXPENDITURES
[01:30:08]
WILL SKYROCKET DUE TO H.R.1'S ATTACK ON THE OBAMACARE PROGRAM.THIS LETTER SHOULD HAVE BEEN WRITTEN MONTHLY TO THE REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATORS SAYING, PLEASE DON'T DO THIS TO US.
THE PUBLIC NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THIS IS COMING FROM, AND I THINK MR. CRYE ALLUDED TO IT, THIS IS NOT CALIFORNIA.
CALIFORNIA HAS DONE ITS BEST TO SUPPLY BRIDGES TO THE SNAP PROGRAM AND TO THE OBAMACARE PROGRAM, BUT THAT MONEY'S GONE.
THAT'S WHAT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTY VOTED FOR, IS THE DEVASTATION AND THE TIDAL WAVE THAT IS HITTING US, THAT IS HITTING PEOPLE WHO REALLY NEED SUPPORT THE MOST, CHILDREN, KIDS IN SCHOOLS, SCHOOLS, THE DISABILITY PEOPLE THAT ARE RECEIVING DISABILITY, OUR VETERANS, OUR WORKING FAMILIES.
>> TRY TO BRING IT BACK TO THE APPROPRIATION DOLLAR AMOUNTS [OVERLAPPING].
>> THE APPROPRIATION DOLLAR AMOUNT HAS ONLY BEGUN.
I APPLAUD THE COUNTY STAFF FOR DOING WHAT THEY CAN TO TRY AND PLUG THE DAMAGE THAT H.R.1 HAS DONE.
I IMPLORE EACH ONE OF YOU TO WRITE LETTERS TO YOUR LEADER, PRESIDENT TRUMP, ASKING HIM, PLEASE, REVERSE SOME OF THE COURSE OF THIS DAMAGE.
>> THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO BRING IT BACK FOR BOARD DISCUSSION.
I'LL MAKE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.
ONE THING I DEFINITELY WANT TO HIGHLIGHT IS, MS. COLEMAN, WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WORKING REMOTE, I'VE MENTIONED THIS BEFORE, I'M EXTREMELY AGAINST A LOT OF REMOTE WORK, BOTH IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND IN THE PUBLIC, AS WELL.
I JUST WANT TO THROW IT OUT NOW. IT'S NOT A BOARD ACTION, BUT IN TERMS OF THE METRICS AND AMOUNT OF WORK AND PACE, AND TIMELINES, I WOULD DEFINITELY WANT TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE SOME VERY QUANTIFIABLE WAY TO TRACK PERFORMANCE AND OUTPUT, NOT ACTIVITY, BUT OUTPUT AND OUTCOMES.
BUT YOU GUYS, YOU'VE DONE A GREAT JOB, AND I THINK A LOT OF THIS, THOUGH, IS REALLY, REALLY LONG OVERDUE, SO IT'S GOING TO HURT, BUT LIKE MOST THINGS, THE HARDEST THING TO SOMETIMES DO IS BEGIN.
I THINK A LOT OF THESE CHANGES ARE NECESSARY, BUT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S NOT UNINTENDED COLLATERAL DAMAGE.
SUPERVISOR LONG AND THEN SUPERVISOR PLUMMER.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU, KRISTI, FOR TAKING A DEEP DIVE AND TAKING THIS SERIOUSLY.
MY CONCERNS, OR NOT MY CONCERNS, BUT MY QUESTIONS ARE ABOUT THE MOC CLAIM THAT HAS NOT BEEN.
BECAUSE WHEN YOU REDUCED THE SOFT SALARIES, NOW, WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET AS MUCH REIMBURSEMENT FROM THE STATE FEDS PROGRAMS, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT OFFSET IS TO ADD AGAINST THE $6.4 MILLION IN SAVINGS.
IS THERE ANY WAY YOU CAN ESTIMATE THAT, MAYBE NOT, OR WHEN IS THAT GOING TO BE DONE THIS MONTH? THE MOC.
>> IT'S REALLY HARD TO ESTIMATE THAT AT THIS TIME BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO BE DOING A HARD HIRING FREEZE AS WELL, AND SO THE SAVINGS THAT WE'VE SEEN AS OF TODAY WILL BE DIFFERENT THAN THE SAVINGS WE'RE GOING TO BE SEEING COMING UP IN FUTURE MONTHS.
WITH A HARD HIRING FREEZE, WE WON'T BE HIRING ANYBODY.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WAIT TO SEE HOW THAT PLAYS OUT WITH OUR ANALYSIS AND THE SAVINGS THAT WE WILL SEE FROM THAT GOING FORWARD, TO KNOW WHAT OUR CLAIM COULD LOOK LIKE.
>> YOU'RE ASKING UNDER THIS TO BRIDGE IT OVER UNTIL NEXT JUNE, CORRECT? IT'S GOING TO BE [OVERLAPPING]?
>> SIX MONTHS UNTIL THE END OF THE FISCAL YEAR.
I'M TRYING TO GET A HANDLE SITTING UP HERE AS TO WHEN THIS COULD START TO TURN AROUND, AND THE MOC FEES INCLUDED IN THAT, THE HARD HIRING FREEZE.
WHERE COULD WE POTENTIALLY START TO TURN THIS SOCIAL SERVICES FUND DEFICIT AROUND, OR IS IT GOING TO BE MANY, MANY YEARS IN THE MAKING OF DOING THIS CONTINUOUSLY OF LENDING FROM?
>> THE BAD THING IS, WHAT WE'RE SEEING NOW, IS NOT THE CHANGES WITH H.R.1.
THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE'RE SEEING NOW THAT WE'RE HAVING A STRUGGLE TO KEEP UP FINANCIALLY WITH.
WHEN H.R.1 GOES INTO EFFECT IN OCTOBER OF 2026, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE EVEN MORE COUNTY SHARE OF COSTS THAT ARE ON TOP OF THE SAVINGS [OVERLAPPING] TODAY.
[01:35:01]
IT'S GOING TO BE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD.WE DON'T HAVE AN ANTICIPATED DATE THAT WE WILL ACTUALLY SEE THAT WE COULD BE IN A GOOD, POSITIVE CASH STATE AT THIS TIME.
WE JUST DON'T HAVE THAT GOOD BUCKET TO SAY, OH, WE GOT THIS BIG THING COMING UP THAT WILL CAUSE IT TO CHANGE.
UNFORTUNATELY, WITH ALL THE CHANGES COMING DOWN FROM H.R.1, IT'S GOING TO LIKELY CAUSE US TO GO INTO A HIGHER NEGATIVE CASH.
>> IN YOUR OPINION, WE WILL CONTINUE WITH THESE BRIDGE LOANS FROM THE GENERAL FUND INDEFINITELY? WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING THIS ALL NEXT YEAR?
>> THAT'S REALLY UP TO THE BOARD ON THE DIRECTION OF WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THE GENERAL FUND LOAN.
IF YOU GUYS WANT TO CONTINUE TO HAVE US GO INTO NEGATIVE CASH FOR HOWEVER LONG THIS GOES, AND WE JUST CONTINUE TO HAVE A GENERAL FUND LOAN, AND WE COME BACK ON AN INCREMENTAL TIME BASIS AND GIVE UPDATES, I WOULD LEAVE THAT UP TO BOARD DIRECTION ON WHAT YOU GUYS WANT TO DO.
>> WE WOULDN'T HAVE A CHOICE, YOU'VE GOT TO PROVIDE THIS [OVERLAPPING] YOU'VE GOT TO BRIDGE IT SOMEHOW, SO I DON'T SEE THAT THERE'S MUCH CHOICE FOR THIS BOARD OTHER THAN TO.
PART OF SITTING UP HERE, MY RESPONSIBILITY IS TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHEN WE'RE GOING TO ROUND THE CORNER ON THIS, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE ANY OF THOSE ANSWERS, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HARD HIRING FREEZE WILL SAVE, AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MOC IS GOING TO BE REDUCED REVENUE AND WHAT THAT'S GOING TO GENERATE, SO WE DON'T HAVE THE PIECES TO THE PUZZLE, AND THIS PROBABLY WILL JUST CONTINUE ON.
>> IT WILL CONTINUE ON. IF WE DO THE REMOTE TELEWORK, THERE'S A POTENTIAL THAT WE COULD SAVE ABOUT $1.4 MILLION FOR THE YEAR IN LEASE COSTS, IF WE GET OUT OF OUR LEASE SPACE AND JUST HAVE A SMALLER BUILDING FOR THOSE THAT NEED TO COME IN THAT ARE IN POTENTIAL LEASE BUILDINGS RIGHT NOW.
THAT'S A GOOD AMOUNT OF SAVINGS.
BUT, AGAIN, IS ALL OF WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY ENOUGH TO MAKE UP FOR THE CHANGES THAT ARE COMING WITH H.R.1? I WILL SAY, PROBABLY NOT.
>> WELL. YOU SAID H.R.1 WOULD GO FROM 2.4 UP TO 4.6?
>> CORRECT. THAT'S JUST FOR THE CALFRESH PORTION.
THERE'S STILL THE MEDI-CAL PORTION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS GOING UP BECAUSE THEY WILL HAVE TO DO TWICE THE AMOUNT OF WORK, SOMETIMES THREE TIMES THE AMOUNT OF WORK IF THEY ARE AN ABLE-BODIED ADULT.
THERE'S A LOT OF CHANGES COMING UP TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE PORTION THAT WILL BE PUT ON COUNTIES TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO PAY, THAT WE, RIGHT NOW, CAN DO AN ESTIMATE TO SAY, WE'RE GOING TO NEED 60 MORE STAFF TO COVER THOSE CHANGES.
BUT IF WE CAN'T HIRE ANYBODY RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY FOR 60 MORE STAFF COMING IN TO DO THOSE CHANGES, SO IT WILL BE PUT ON TOP OF THE STUFF THAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY, RIGHT NOW, AS WELL AS POTENTIAL FISCAL PENALTIES BECAUSE WE CAN'T KEEP UP WITH THE WORKLOAD.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ADOPT THIS AS PRESENTED.
LET ME GET BACK TO MY PAGE HERE.
R2 FOR APPROVING THE EXTENSION OF THE GENERAL FUND LOAN THROUGH JUNE OF 2026 AND THE ASSOCIATED BUDGET AMENDMENTS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY SUPERVISOR LONG, SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR KELSTROM. SUPERVISOR PLUMMER.
>> YES, A FEW QUESTIONS, AND THEN I'D LIKE TO MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION WITH SOME ADDITIONAL PIECES, OR SUPERVISOR LONG, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO AMEND AFTER I SHARE THOSE, THAT ALSO WOULD BE POSSIBLE.
FIRST, STEPHANIE, COULD YOU BRING UP THE SLIDES AND GO TO THE SUSTAINABILITY TOOL SCENARIO SLIDES? THOSE ARE THE SCREENSHOTS OF THE EXCEL TABLES.
>> LET ME KNOW IF THIS IS WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR, SUPERVISOR PLUMMER?
>> YES. THANK YOU. AM I UNDERSTANDING THIS CORRECTLY THAT IN IF I LOOK AT FISCAL YEAR '25/'26, THIS SUGGESTS THAT WE'RE PROJECTING THAT OUR EXPENSES WILL EXCEED OUR REVENUES BY 9.2 MILLION?
>> THAT'S CORRECT. THE YELLOW LINE AT THE TOP. YES.
>> THAT'S WITHOUT THIS BUDGET AMENDMENT?
>> ALSO, IS IT I KNOW WE MOVED 1.2 MILLION FROM THE PUBLIC HEALTH FUND TO INCREASE REVENUE, ESSENTIALLY.
>> IT'S INCLUDED. THAT MEANS THAT IF THE BUDGET AMENDMENT, I THINK TODAY IS AROUND ALMOST 6.5 MILLION.
THAT MEANS THAT THERE'S ANOTHER THREE OR SO THAT WILL LIKELY BE IN DEFICIT, ESSENTIALLY AT THE END OF THIS YEAR WITHOUT ADDITIONAL CHANGES.
>> WITHOUT ADDITIONAL CHANGES.
IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, THE BUDGET AMENDMENT IS INCLUDED IN THAT,
[01:40:04]
SO YOU CAN SEE THE DIFFERENCE OF WHERE WE WOULD IN THE FISCAL YEAR, IF WE JUST DID THE BUDGET AMENDMENT THAT IS BEFORE YOU TODAY, WE DO PLAN TO DO ANOTHER BUDGET AMENDMENT WITH THE HARD HIRING FREEZE THAT WE ARE DOING TO REALIZE THOSE COSTS AS WE GO INTO THE YEAR.>> I THINK IT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE THIS ON A QUARTERLY BASIS GIVEN BOTH HOW FEDERAL POLICY IS CHANGING AND ALSO OUR UNDERSTANDING OF OUR FINANCIAL PICTURE.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS COME BACK IN BY THE END OF MARCH.
THE OTHER THING IS, I KNOW WE'VE BEEN HAVING SOME CONVERSATIONS, SOME VERY EARLY STAGE CONVERSATIONS WITH SOME POTENTIAL, DEVELOPERS OF AI SOLUTIONS.
IN THAT INITIAL CONVERSATION, THERE WERE A NUMBER OF POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITIES.
IT'S TOO EARLY TO TELL IF THOSE WOULD PRODUCE SAVINGS AND IF THOSE WOULD BE MEASURABLE.
BUT I'D LIKE THE TEAM TO PURSUE THOSE AS WELL.
THEN, I THINK IN TERMS OF THAT THREE MILLION, I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT AS A TARGET TO TRY TO SHOOT FOR IF WE CAN SEE WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE TO TRY TO ADDRESS HALF OF THAT BY THE END OF MARCH.
I KNOW YOU ALL DID GREAT WORK TO GET US WHERE WE WERE IN THE OCTOBER MEETING, AND THEN WE'RE TAKING A STEP FURTHER.
I THINK IF WE'RE ABLE TO TRY TO SET A TARGET OF AN ADDITIONAL EITHER REVENUE INCREASES OR COST REDUCTIONS OF 1.5 TO CUT THAT IN HALF AGAIN OVER THE NEXT QUARTER.
I KNOW YOU ALL ARE CONTINUING TO WORK WITH SOME CONSULTANTS TO HELP ON THE CLAIMS, BUT ALSO ON THE COST SIDE AS WELL, AND THAT THERE MIGHT BE OPPORTUNITIES TO BRING IN SOME ADDITIONAL EXPERTISE ON THAT FRONT.
>> GOT YOUR SUBSTITUTE MOTION. YOU WANT TO?
>> I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE EXTENSION OF THE LOAN TO MARCH 31ST, 2026, THE CORRESPONDING BUDGET AMENDMENTS, AND TO DIRECT STAFF TO PURSUE CONVERSATIONS WITH AI DEVELOPERS FOR POTENTIAL COST REDUCTIONS AND TO PRESENT A TARGET OF $1.5 MILLION IN ADDITIONAL COST SAVINGS AT THE MARCH MEETING.
>> YOU LOST ME AT AI DEVELOPERS.
THIS IS JUST ME, WHEN WE START ASKING THE STAFF OF HOW THEY WANT TO GET TO WHERE THEY'RE GOING.
I CAN APPRECIATE SOME OF YOUR STAFF, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO TELL STAFF, THEY'VE GOT TO RUN IT ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.
IF YOU WANT TO AMEND THAT, THE FISCAL PART, I CAN GET BEHIND SOME OF THAT, BUT THE OTHER PARTS, I'M JUST I'D LIKE TO DIRECT STAFF TO EVERY 15 MINUTES EXERCISE FOR TWO MINUTES TO SPARK THEIR BRAIN BECAUSE IT'D BE BETTER OUTPUT.
BUT I JUST I'M NOT GOING TO DO THAT.
>> I THINK PART OF THAT IS THAT I KNOW THERE'S CONSIDERATIONS WHEN WE THINK ABOUT PURSUING AI SOLUTIONS THAT INVOLVE IT AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND SO SHOWING THE WHOLE COUNTY, INCLUDING SOME OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THE BOARD WANTS TO SEE US PURSUE IS MY INTENT THROUGH THAT ADDITION.
>> SUE ROGER LONGER, YOU'RE GOING TO AMEND YOUR MOTION? YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP IT THE SAME.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD PURSUE WITHOUT MAKING IT A MANDATE FROM THE BOARD THAT YOU WOULD PURSUE AI SOLUTIONS POTENTIALLY AND LOOK INTO THOSE POSSIBILITIES? PERSONALLY, I DON'T SEE THE NEED TO MAKE YOU COME BACK IN MARCH, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO BE COMING BACK IN JUNE FOR AN EXTENSION BASED ON WHAT YOU'VE REPORTED THAT THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE TURNING THE CORNER ANYTIME SOON.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD ALREADY BE DOING IF WE DON'T MANDATE IT AS A BOARD?
>> WE CAN DEFINITELY LOOK INTO AI.
IT IS SOMETHING THAT WHEN WE WENT TO A CONFERENCE IN OCTOBER, WE DID LEARN ABOUT A POTENTIAL AI PRODUCT.
I THINK IT'S CALLED MAGIC NOTE THAT COULD HELP SAVE EIGHT HOURS OF WORK PER STAFF PER WEEK.
IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE DEVELOPER ABOUT.
TO HEAR MORE ABOUT IT AND HOW IS THAT SAVINGS REALLY ACCOUNTED FOR AND WHAT DOES THIS ACTUALLY DO? WHAT COULD THIS EVEN GET PAST IT, REALLY LOOKING AT IT.
THERE'S OTHER PRODUCTS TOO THAT COULD POTENTIALLY SAVE IN THE CALL CENTER.
WE ARE ALREADY VENTURING INTO THAT TO REALLY SEE IF WE ARE NOT HIRING STAFF DURING THIS TIME, WHAT CAN WE DO TO REALLY HELP ALLEVIATE THE WORKLOAD FOR THE STAFF THAT WE HAVE WORKING FOR US? THAT'S THE OPTIONS WE'RE LOOKING AT ALREADY.
>> SUE LONG, IF YOU'RE GOOD WITH THAT, I THINK YOUR MOTIONS ARE GREAT.
>> I JUST WANTED THAT CLARIFIED THAT YOU BECAUSE THE LAST THING I WANT TO DO IS MICROMANAGE YOU AND THE OPERATION OF THE DEPARTMENT.
[01:45:01]
I'M NOT GOING TO GET DOWN ON YOUR WEEDS TO SPEAK [OVERLAPPING] I JUST WANTED TO KNOW TO MY SATISFACTION THAT YOU'RE WILLING TO EXPLORE OTHER OPTIONS.IT LOOKS LIKE YOU ARE TRYING TO CUT COSTS AND SALARIES AND HARD FREEZES AND A LOT OF THINGS. I'M GOOD WITH MY.
>> THE GENERAL FUND LOAN TO COMING BACK IN MARCH, JUST SO YOU GUYS ARE AWARE TO THE IHSS MOE WILL BE COMING OUT IN MARCH, AND WE WILL POTENTIALLY BE BACK HERE ANYWAYS ASKING FOR AN INCREASE IN THE GENERAL FUND LOAN AMOUNT TO COVER THAT COST.
>> I'M GOOD WITH MY ORIGINAL MOTION.
>> MY SECOND TO YOUR ORIGINAL STILL STANDS.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN, CRYE. I WANT TO REITERATE THAT WE WILL EXPLORE ANY AND ALL OPTIONS WITH THEM, INCLUDING AI.
I THINK WE'RE AT THE POINT WHERE THE ACCOUNTS HAVE TAKEN A REAL GOOD LOOK AT THIS, SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN THIS, NOLDA, RON BERTIN, ERINN WATTS.
BUT WE'RE APPROACHING THE POINT TO WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF LEGAL QUESTIONS AND INVOLVE LEGAL AND WHAT WE COULD LEGALLY DO TO FULFILL OUR MANDATES WITHOUT RISKING POTENTIAL LAWSUITS OR LITIGATION WITH THE STATE.
WE'RE GOING TO PURSUE ALL OPTIONS.
I WANT TO ENSURE, AND WE'RE OPEN IDEAS TO LISTEN FROM SUPERVISORS ON THINGS WE COULD EXPLORE IN THAT PROCESS.
BUT THIS IS GOING TO BE AN ONGOING PROCESS.
IT'S SOME VERY DIFFICULT DECISIONS THAT ARE GOING TO BE MADE.
>> MANY OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT, AT LEAST SUPERVISOR ALSO AND I FOR THREE YEARS ABOUT FISCAL TRANSPARENCY, AND AGAIN, WITH FRIENDS A AUDITS AND ALL THOSE BUZZ WORDS.
YOU GUYS ARE DOING IT, AND NOLDA SHORT AND HER OFFICE ARE DOING IT.
THIS IS THE ACTUAL WORK OF THAT.
I'M THANKFUL. WE'LL TAKE SUPERVISOR PLUMMER'S LAST COMMENT AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO PUT THIS TO A VOTE.
>> WHEN WOULD YOU EXPECT THE IHSS PAYMENT TO BE IN?
DEPENDING WHERE WE ARE IN LOOKING IN THE FEBRUARY TIME FRAME OF WHERE WE'RE AT WITH CASH, WE'LL BE COMING BACK POTENTIALLY AT THE END OF FEBRUARY OR SOMETIME IN MARCH WHEN THAT'S GOING TO COME OUT.
>> I WOULD AMEND OR I'LL MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
TRY AGAIN AND THAT WE DO IT BY THE END OF APRIL.
PART OF THE REASON IS THAT I THINK EACH TIME THAT YOU'VE COME FORWARD AND THE BOARD HAS PROVIDED DIRECTION, IT ACTUALLY HAS MOVED US ALONG AND PROGRESSED ON THE ISSUE, INCLUDING IN AUGUST WHEN WE ASKED THAT YOU COME BACK WITH A PLAN FOR CUTTING $1 MILLION A MONTH, THE CORRESPONDING MEETING, WE SAW A PLAN THAT GOT US A GOOD PORTION OF THE WAY THERE.
I THINK THAT THIS HAS BEEN A PRODUCTIVE PROCESS.
IT ALSO KEEPS THE PUBLIC ENGAGED IN TERMS OF WHERE WE ARE STANDING AND WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THESE IMPORTANT ISSUES THAT AFFECT THOUSANDS OF SHASTA COUNTY RESIDENTS.
I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT THAT WE CONTINUE TO HAVE REGULAR CONVERSATIONS AND ARE MAKING CHANGES IN A MORE RAPID FASHION TO STAY ON TOP OF THIS.
>> PROFESSOR PLUMMER, CAN YOU [OVERLAPPING]
>> PLEASE REPEAT SUBSTITUTE MOTION.
>> POTENTIAL QUESTION. BASICALLY WHAT YOU WANT IS YOU JUST WANT THEM NOT MANDATED, BUT YOU JUST WANT TO GUARANTEE THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK IN THE EARLY SPRING?
>> I'D LIKE THEM TO COME BACK IN APRIL, AND I WOULD LIKE TO ALSO SET THAT TARGET AGAIN FOR LOOKING FOR ANOTHER 1.5 MILLION IN SAVINGS OR COST REDUCTION.
>> I THINK BECAUSE I CAN IMAGINE THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT THEY PUT INTO THIS, I WOULD RATHER HAVE THEM DOING THE WORK AND TALKING ABOUT THE WORK THEY'RE DOING.
I WOULD SUPPORT BRINGING THIS BACK IF THEY'RE NOT ON TARGET AS WE GO, 'CAUSE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE, SOME OBVIOUS CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN NOW AND THE BUDGETS IN JUNE.
I'M DEFINITELY SUPPORTING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.
I JUST DON'T WANT TO MANDATE THEM TO HAVE TO COME BACK IN MARCH OR APRIL AND DEDICATE TIME TO DO THAT WHEN THEY'RE ALREADY DOING THAT WORK. HOW ABOUT THIS? WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO JUST SAYING, HEY, KEVIN, HERE, LET'S SAY, IT'S MARCH, AND YOU'RE LIKE, I DON'T LIKE THIS.
THEN YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION, AND I'LL SECOND THAT NEXT YEAR IF WE THINK THEY'RE OFF TARGET, BUT I DON'T WANT TO GIVE THEM MORE WORK TO TALK ABOUT THE WORK THEY'RE DOING.
I WANT THEM TO DO MORE WORK. YOU OPEN TO THAT?
>> I'M OPEN TO THAT. THOUGH, IT'S HARD FOR US TO KNOW ON A DAILY BASIS, UNLESS WE'RE REQUESTING SPECIFIC INFORMATION OF WHETHER THEY'RE OFF TRACK, SO TO SPEAK.
THAT WAS WHY I DID MOVE IT TO APRIL BECAUSE IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE LIKELY TO COME BACK ANYWAY TO ASK FOR AN INCREASE IN THE LOAN AMOUNT.
I WAS TRYING TO CONSOLIDATE THAT INTO A SINGLE.
>> I'M JUST TRYING TO GET OFF [INAUDIBLE]
>> CAN I MAKE A SUGGESTION BECAUSE WE WILL BE HIGH NECK DEEP IN BUDGET BY THE TIME MARCH AND APRIL COME AROUND.
IF WE COULD PUSH IT TO THE MAY TIME FRAME AND COME BACK LIKE AT THE BEGINNING OF MAY THAT WAY, WE HAVE TIME TO GET ALL OF OUR BUDGET DOCUMENTS IN FOR THE NEXT FISCAL YEAR, AND THEN CATCH OUR BREATH TO FIGURE OUT WHERE WE ARE AND TO BRING A GOOD THOROUGH PRESENTATION BACK.
I WOULD SUGGEST MAY, IF WE ARE DOING ONE, IF NOT WITH OUR JUNE BUDGET PRESENTATION THAT WE DO.
>> CAUSE I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SEE THIS BE A FIVE VOTE, SO PEOPLE DON'T THINK THERE'S ANYTHING NOT HAPPENING IN HHSA THAT WE'RE NOT ALL ON BOARD FOR.
WE DON'T HAVE TO HAVE A MOTION FOR THAT.
SHE'S GOING TO DO IT. ARE YOU GOOD WITH THAT? 'M ON BOARD THAT.
[01:50:01]
THIS IS SUCH A DIFFERENCE THAN WHEN WE FIRST GOT HERE.I'LL JUST SO IT'S REALLY GOOD. GO AHEAD.
>> JUST TO CLARIFY, I THINK CURRENTLY THIS EXTENDS THE LOAN TO JUNE 30TH.
I THINK THAT FORCING FUNCTION IS HELPFUL, AND SO I WOULD SAY THAT MAY 15TH, IF WE BRING THAT UP A BIT, THAT WOULD BE MY ADJUSTMENT THERE.
>> MY SECOND STILL GOES TO SUPERVISOR LONG'S ORIGINAL MOTION.
I THINK IT'S ALREADY BEEN COVERED.
I THINK THAT THEY'RE DOING EVERYTHING THEY POSSIBLY CAN.
I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO MICROMANAGE AND SET TIME FRAMES AND EVERYTHING ELSE.
>> I DON'T DISAGREE WITH YOU, BUT WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE BOAT.
MS. BLANKENSHIP WILL START TO MY RIGHT WITH SUPERVISOR PLUMMER.
I THINK THEY'RE ALL GOOD THINGS.
THE AMOUNT OF TIME THEY'RE GOING TO PUT INTO PRESENTING IN MAY, I'D RATHER HAVE THEM PRESENT THAT IN JULY OR JUNE.
BUT IF YOU SEE SOMETHING PRIOR TO THAT, LET'S BRING IT BACK BECAUSE WE'RE INCREDIBLY ON TARGET AND DOING BETTER THAN EXPECTED IN HHSA, ESPECIALLY WITH OTHER RURAL COUNTIES AND HOW THEY'RE FACING THESE SAME DECISIONS.
WE'LL START A ROLL CALL VOTE TO MY RIGHT.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT SUPERVISOR PLUMMER DIDN'T GET WAS TRYING TO DO DID NOT GET A SECOND, BUT THAT MOTION, JUST FOR THE RECORD, WAS TO DIRECT STAFF TO BRING AN UPDATE BACK IN MAY AND SET ANOTHER TARGET TO LOOK AT SAVINGS AND COST REDUCTIONS.
WAS THAT CORRECT ON YOUR SUBSTITUTE MOTION? I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT FOR THE RECORD, AND THEN YES, IT DID NOT GET A SECOND AND THEN WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION.
>> I WOULD CLARIFY THAT IT WAS TO BRING UP THE LOAN DUE DATE, ESSENTIALLY, TO THE MAY 15TH AND TO SET THE TARGET OF 1.5 MILLION IN COST REDUCTIONS.
>> I THINK IT'S A GOOD CONVERSATION, BUT I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO HIT THAT ANYWAY.
START TO MY RIGHT WITH SUPERVISOR PLUMMER.
>> THE MOTION ON THE TABLE IS [OVERLAPPING].
>> C9 APPROVED AS IS BY SUPERVISOR LONG, SECOND BY SUPERVISOR KELSTROM.
>> THANK YOU. WHO AM I STARTING WITH?
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE.
I'M SORRY IF YOUR BIRTHDAY HAS COME AND GONE OR IT'S PASSED.
BUT IN ALL SERIOUSLY, I'M EXCITED TO HAVE YOU HERE.
SUPERVISOR KELSTROM, THIS IS YOUR ITEM. I'LL LET YOU PRESENT IT.
[R3 Take the following actions: (1) Receive a presentation from Shasta College regarding a proposed use of Opioid Litigation Settlement Funds; (2) approve a request for use of $888,683 in Opioid Litigation Settlement Funds; and (3) approve a budget amendment which increases appropriations and revenue in the Opioid Settlement Budget (BU 430) in the amount of $296,228 (Sponsored by Supervisor Kelstrom).]
>> BACK WHEN WE VERY FIRST GOT ELECTED, I'LL BE VAGUE ON THE THE STORY.
BUT WHEN WE FIRST GOT ELECTED, YOU AND I WERE MEETING WITH STEPHANIE BRIDGET, I STOPPED SOMEWHERE TO GRAB SOMETHING BEFORE THAT MEETING.
JUST HAD A RANDOM CONVERSATION WITH A GIRL THAT FIRST TOLD ME ABOUT THE STEP UP PROGRAM, AND IT WAS IT WAS PRETTY AMAZING.
I THINK THAT I WAS PUT IN THAT PLACE TO HEAR THAT STORY.
>> AGAIN, HAVE I HAVEN'T GONE BACK AND GOTTEN HER PERMISSION TO SHARE IT [OVERLAPPING] IT'S VERY GENERAL.
SHE WAS LOOKING TO SERVE SOME TIME.
WE'D HAD THIS NEW STEP UP PROGRAM THAT, BY THE WAY, IT WAS JUST A GRASSROOTS EFFORT AT THE TIME BETWEEN SOMEBODY IN OUR PAROLE DEPARTMENT IN SHASTA COLLEGE, AND THEY SAID, HEY, LET'S JUST GET TOGETHER AND SEE IF WE CAN'T OFFER SOME ALTERNATIVE TO GOING TO JAIL.
SHE WENT INTO THE STEP UP PROGRAM.
SHE GOT I BELIEVE, SOME COLLEGE CREDITS AND GOT TOTALLY CLEANED UP, AND NOW SHE'S A VERY PRODUCTIVE MEMBER OF SOCIETY.
IT WAS A VERY GREAT STORY TO HEAR.
EVER SINCE THEN, THE STEP UP PROGRAM HAS BEEN MY FAVORITE PROGRAM.
I'VE BEEN GOING TO THE GRADUATIONS AND EVERYTHING ELSE AND HEARING THE STORIES.
IT'S AN ALTERNATIVE TO GIVE SOMEBODY THAT'S DOWN ON THEIR LUCK, NOT DOING THE RIGHT THINGS, GIVING THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO START DOING THE RIGHT THINGS, AND I THINK IT'S VERY SUCCESSFUL.
I'LL LET YOU TAKE IT FROM THERE.
>> MS. BLANKENSHIP, YOU'RE IN QUEUE. IS THERE SOMETHING?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIRMAN CRAY AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
MY NAME IS SANDRA HAMILTON, AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES.
OUR PRESIDENT, SUPERINTENDENT DR. FRANK NIGRO, AND OUR VICE PRESIDENT, DR. TIM JOHNSTON.
IT WAS LAST NOVEMBER WHEN I LOOKED AT MY NOTES TO GIVE YOU AN INITIAL PROPOSAL FOR HOW WE, AS SHASTA COLLEGE, COULD SUPPORT OUR COMMUNITY'S RECOVERY THROUGH THE OPIOID LITIGATION SETTLEMENT FUND.
AT THAT TIME, YOU HAD SOME QUESTIONS AND THEN ASKED IF WE COULD TRIM THINGS DOWN AND GET A LITTLE BIT MORE FOCUSED IN OUR PROPOSAL.
THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BRINGING TO YOU TODAY.
THERE'S TWO ELEMENTS OF OUR PROPOSAL.
ONE OF THEM, THE SECOND WILL ADDRESS THE STEP UP STUDENTS, AND I APPRECIATE THEIR PRESENCE WITH US TODAY, ALONG WITH OUR PARTNERS FROM PROBATION, NICK HITCHCO.
[01:55:02]
BUT THE FIRST ONE I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS A NEW PROGRAM THAT SHASTA COLLEGE HAS, WHICH ALIGNS CLOSELY WITH SOME THINGS YOU'VE ALREADY DONE IN TERMS OF LOOKING AT OPTIONS FOR TREATMENT.TWO YEARS AGO, SHASTA COLLEGE STARTED AN ALCOHOL AND DRUG STUDIES PROGRAM.
IT'S BOTH A DEGREE AND A CERTIFICATE PROGRAM TO TRAIN MORE PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUNITY TO GO INTO THE TREATMENT FACILITIES AND TO OFFER THEIR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES.
WE ARE COMING TO THE END OF THE FIRST CLASS THAT WILL GRADUATE NEXT SPRING.
AS A PART OF THAT CERTIFICATION PROCESS, THEY NEED TO DO AN INTERNSHIP.
THIS IS MORE OF A VOCATIONAL TRAINING PROGRAM.
THEY'RE GETTING BOOTS ON THE GROUND, FRONT-LINE EXPERIENCE IN INTERNSHIP SETTINGS.
WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT MOST SHASTA COLLEGE STUDENTS IS THAT THEY ARE ALSO WORKING ADULTS.
ADDING 255 HOURS OF INTERNSHIP TO THEIR COURSE LOAD AND TO THEIR WORKLOAD COULD LIKELY OVERTAX SOME OF THEM.
THE FIRST PART OF OUR PROPOSAL IS A REQUEST THAT WE USE SOME OF THIS FUNDS TO GIVE THEM PAID STIPENDS FOR THEIR INTERNSHIP, SO THAT IF THEY'RE IN INTERNSHIP SETTING, THEY WOULD BE EARNING MINIMUM WAGE FOR THAT TIME THAT THEY'RE SPENDING IN ORDER TO REPLACE THE LOST WAGES THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE.
WE DON'T WANT TO SEE THEM AS STUDENTS GO BACKWARDS IN THEIR FINANCIAL STANDING AS THEY'RE GETTING READY TO GRADUATE AND MOVE INTO OUR JOB INDUSTRY.
WE ALREADY DO HAVE MANY OF OUR STEP-UP GRADUATES WORKING IN THIS INDUSTRY IN SOME OF THESE TREATMENT PROGRAMS. THE SECOND ONE THEN DOES ADDRESS OUR STEP-UP PROGRAM.
ABOUT 30% OF THE STUDENTS WHO ARE IN STEP UP HAVE BEEN IMPACTED BY OPIOID ADDICTION, AND SO WE ARE LOOKING TO HELP SUPPORT THEM AS THEY GO THROUGH THEIR TRAINING PROGRAM.
IT MIGHT BE IN THE ALCOHOL DRUG STUDIES PROGRAM OR ANOTHER AREA OF THEIR INTEREST, BUT WE LIKE TO GIVE THEM WRAP-AROUND SUPPORTS TO HELP BUY SOME OF THEIR EQUIPMENT AND MATERIALS, MAKE SURE THEY HAVE THE LAPTOPS AND TECHNOLOGY THEY NEED, AS WELL AS HELPING TO SUPPORT THEIR BASIC NEEDS AROUND FOOD TRANSPORTATION, AND OTHER COSTS.
WE'RE LOOKING TO OFFER UP TO $2,000 PER SEMESTER FOR UP TO 25 STUDENTS THROUGH THIS FUND AS WELL.
THERE IS ONE TYPO, I WILL SAY.
IT'S NOT A MATH ERROR BECAUSE I DO MATH PRETTY WELL, BUT I'M SORRY FOR THE TYPO ON THIS SCREEN; IT'S ACTUALLY $324,000 FOR THE TOTAL AMOUNT FOR OUR STEP-UP PROGRAM, NOT FOR 25.
THE TOTAL AMOUNT FOR THREE YEARS, I'VE ESTIMATED THIS OUT JUST AS A THREE-YEAR PROJECT, IS 888, BUT IT WOULD BE UNDER $300,000 PER YEAR.
I AM GOING TO SAY ON BEHALF OF THE COLLEGE.
I'M UNAPOLOGETIC ABOUT REQUESTING FOR INDIRECT DISTRICT EXPENSE, BECAUSE, AS THERE ARE BACKGROUND EXPENSES WITH HR FOR HIRING THESE STUDENTS IN PAYROLL AND IT, AND ALL OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT GO ALONG WITH RUNNING PROGRAMS LIKE THIS.
BUT ALL OF THIS MONEY THAT YOU'RE PROVIDING, OTHER THAN THE INDIRECT, WILL GO DIRECTLY TO STUDENTS THEMSELVES.
SO I'VE GONE THROUGH THAT PRETTY QUICKLY.
IT WAS A PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD PRESENTATION.
I'D LOVE TO HEAR ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.
>> SUPERVISOR ELSROM, DO YOU WANT TO START A TO YOUR ITEM, AND THEN WE'LL GO TO SUPERVISOR LONG? I CAN JUST DEFER TO SUPERVISOR LONG IF YOU.
SUPERVISOR LONG. FOLLOWED BY SUPERVISOR PLUMBERS.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
A LITTLE BIT OF A LAG TIME IN MY MIC.
BUT THANK YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION.
AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, NOT ALL STEP UP PROGRAM STUDENTS ARE PEOPLE THAT HAVE HAD PROBLEMS WITH SUBSTANCE ABUSE.
CORRECT? YOU MENTIONED THAT, DID YOU SAY 40%?
>> THIRTY PERCENT. 30% WOULD BE ELIGIBLE FOR THIS.
ALSO PART OF THE REQUEST, THEN YOU MENTIONED.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE I'M TALKING ABOUT THIS THE INTERNSHIP, BECAUSE I HAD HEARD THERE WERE SUBSTANCE ABUSE COUNSELORS? IS THAT THE INTERNSHIP FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE COUNSELORS THAT WE WOULD BE GIVING, BASICALLY, A PAYCHECK? WOULD YOUR EXPECTATION BE THAT WHEN THEY GO THROUGH THE SUBSTANCE ABUSE INTERNSHIP PROGRAM THAT THEY'RE NO LONGER HOLDING A JOB OUTSIDE?
>> THEY MIGHT BE, BUT WE'RE CONCERNED THAT IT IS GOING TO ADD ON TO THEIR LOAD ON BEING A FULL-TIME STUDENT.
WE'RE LOOKING TO REPLACE THOSE WAGES IF THEY HAD TO REDUCE THEIR INCOME.
BUT IT'S PRETTY COMMON TO WANT TO START GIVING UNPAID INTERNSHIPS SO THAT STUDENTS CAN GET BETTER INTERNSHIPS.
WE'RE ALSO LOOKING TO PAY THE HOST AGENCIES $1,500, BECAUSE, AGAIN, THESE ARE NON-PROFITS, AND IT DOES COST THEM SOMETHING TO SUPERVISE THOSE INDIVIDUALS.
>> WHAT WOULD BE THE COMMITMENT? ONCE THEY GO THROUGH AN INTERNSHIP PROGRAM, DO THEY THEN SERVE FUTURE STEP-UP STUDENTS FOR A PERIOD OF TIME?
>> NO, THIS WOULD BE THE END OF THEIR DEGREE.
THEY WOULD COMPLETE THEIR DEGREE THEN IN MAY AND GRADUATE, AND THEN THEY WOULD SIT FOR THEIR CERTIFICATION TEST AND THEN BE ABLE TO
[02:00:03]
GO INTO THE PRIVATE SECTOR OR PUBLIC SECTOR FOR THEIR EMPLOYMENT? THEY WOULD BE GRADUATED AT THAT POINT.>> THERE'S NO SERVICE COMPONENT TO.
>> THEIR INTERNSHIP IS THEIR SERVICE.
THAT'S REQUIRED FOR THEIR CERTIFICATION.
THAT'S A PART OF THEIR DEGREE.
>> ARE THESE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE WORKING OFF SOME SENTENCE OR ANYTHING?
>> NOT NECESSARILY. THESE ARE JUST INDIVIDUALS WHO WANT TO GET THEIR DEGREE IN DRUG ALCOHOL COUNSELING.
WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY IN THE FIELD AS THERAPISTS, TEACHERS, OR PARAPROFESSIONALS WHO ARE COMING BACK TO GET THAT DEGREE TO INCREASE THEIR CERTIFICATION.
SO IT'S TWO DIFFERENT PARTS. THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY STEP-UP STUDENTS WHO ARE IN OUR DRUG ALCOHOL STUDIES PROGRAM.
THEY MAY BE, BUT THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY.
IT'S JUST PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BECOME DRUG COUNSELORS.
>> WHAT PORTION OF THE 888 REQUEST WOULD BE THE SUBSIDY FOR INTERNSHIP STUDENTS? WHAT WOULD THAT PORTION OF THE 800?
>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR LONG. SUPERVISOR PLUMBERS.
>> THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION AND THE WORK YOU'RE DOING.
COULD YOU SPEAK A LITTLE BIT TO THE OUTCOMES OF THE STEP UP PROGRAM THAT YOU'VE BEEN ABLE TO COLLECT SO FAR?
>> I'M GOING TO CALL ROBERT BOWMAN FORWARD AND PUT HIM ON THE SPOT, AND HE'S GOT SOME OF THOSE AT HIS FINGERTIPS.
>> GOOD MORNING, ROBERT BOWMAN, I'M THE PROGRAM DIRECTOR FOR STEP UP AND OUR JUVENILE ICE PROGRAM.
WHEN YOU DISCUSS OUTCOMES, ARE YOU REFERRING TO RECIDIVISM RATES? ARE YOU REFERRING TO EMPLOYMENT RATES, GPA? BECAUSE THERE'S A NUMBER OF WAYS THAT WE MEASURE SUCCESS, AND NOT ALL OF THEM ARE ACADEMIC.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE HAVE A NUMBER OF STUDENTS RIGHT NOW, BOTH CURRENT AND ALUMNI OF OUR PROGRAM, THAT ARE WORKING AT ABOUT TIME, VISIONS OF THE CROSS, NO BOUNDARIES, THE NEW LIFE RECOVERY, NEW LIFE DISCOVERY.
WE ALSO HAVE STAFF FROM THE ADDICTED OFFENDER PROGRAM THAT HAVE COME OUT OF STEP UP IN GASTROENTEROLOGY AS WELL.
RIGHT NOW, OUR GPA IS IN TERMS OF CUMULATIVE IS OVER THREE.
I BELIEVE THE LAST TIME THAT WE DID WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF DOING OUR FIVE-YEAR REVIEW FOR RECIDIVISM.
THE LAST TIME WE DID IT, IT WAS IN THE 20S.
I BELIEVE IT WAS 2022 AND SOME CHANGE, WHICH IS WELL BELOW THE STATE AVERAGE, AND CERTAINLY WELL BELOW THE FEDERAL AVERAGE IN TERMS OF THAT.
THE OTHER THING THAT I DID WANT TO POINT OUT IS WE ALSO HAVE A NUMBER OF STUDENTS THAT ARE WORKING ON OUR CAMPUS AS REGULAR EMPLOYEES.
IN TERMS OF THAT, WE HAVE PUTTING THEM BACK OUT IN THE COMMUNITY.
THE WONDERFUL THING ABOUT STEP UP IS THAT BECAUSE WE PARTNER WITH PROBATION AND THE SHERIFF AND LOCAL ADULT PAROLE, AS WELL AS WE ALSO HAVE ONE OF OUR PARTNERS IS FEDERAL PROBATION.
WE'RE ABLE TO REALLY WORK HAND IN HAND WITH THOSE PUBLIC SAFETY FOLKS THAT CAN HELP US IN TERMS OF REACTING TO THEIR NEEDS AND THAT THING.
IT'S GOING INTO OUR 13TH YEAR, AND WE'VE BEEN PRETTY SUCCESSFUL.
>> ABOUT HOW MANY FOLKS HAVE YOU SERVED OVER EITHER THE 13 YEARS, OR ON AVERAGE PER YEAR?
>> RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE AROUND 100 IN OUR PROGRAM.
BUT AGAIN, THAT 100 ENCOMPASSES NOT JUST SHASTA COUNTY, BUT ALSO ENCOMPASSES TEHAMA, TRINITY, AND THAT THING.
I BELIEVE WE'VE GONE AS HIGH AS 115, PRE-COVID, AND THEN THAT REALLY CUT THE BOTTOM OUT OF US.
BUT ALSO, IN PREVIOUS YEARS, JUST TO ENLIGHTEN EVERYONE IN TERMS OF THE ALCOHOL AND DRUG STUDIES, ALCOHOL AND DRUG STUDIES, A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF THOSE FOLKS ARE COMING FROM STEP UP.
THERE IS THAT TIE IN THAT THEY HAVE THAT PASSION FOR SERVICE, SO.
>> THEN IF YOU HAVE ABOUT 100 YEAR, WHAT PORTION TYPICALLY COMPLETE THE PROGRAM, AND HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO COMPLETE THE PROGRAM?
>> IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THEY'RE STUDYING.
FOR INSTANCE, A REALLY POPULAR PROGRAM FOR US IS A HEAVY EQUIPMENT AND LOGGING PROGRAM.
WE HAVE 25-30 STUDENTS THAT DO THAT PER TERM.
[02:05:01]
FOLLOWING THAT IS THE ALCOHOL AND DRUG PROGRAM.I WOULD SAY OUT OF THE HUNDRED WE HAVE, WE GRADUATE EACH YEAR ON A ROTATING BASIS AROUND ANYWHERE FROM 30-35, DEPENDING ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE GETTING A CERTIFICATE OR A DEGREE, BECAUSE THOSE ARE SEPARATE THINGS.
A LOT OF TIMES, WE HAVE STUDENTS THAT GET BOTH A CERTIFICATE AND A DEGREE.
>> YOU'D ASK A CLARIFYING QUESTION.
>> YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 100 IN THAT ROTATION, AND WHETHER FIRST YEAR, SECOND YEAR, SO 100 PEOPLE WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY OR THE TIME HAD BEEN SPENT TO GRADUATE OR RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE, AND YOU'RE SAYING IT'S LIKE 35, SO 35%.
>> IT TAKES ABOUT TWO TO THREE YEARS TO GET THROUGH THE PROGRAM. DEPENDING ON WHAT THEY'RE IN.
>> AN INDIVIDUAL, IF A PERSON I'M HOP IN THE LINE.
SUPERVISOR LONG. DO YOU MIND IF I FINISH ASKING THIS? SOMEONE STARTS YEAR 1, LIKE, DO YOU HAVE THOSE RATES OF THE DROPOUT FROM YEAR 1? WHAT'S THE SUCCESS RATE? IF THEY GET TO YEAR 2, AND THEY MAKE IT TO YEAR 3? DO THEY THEN GRADUATE? I THINK THAT'S WHAT SUPERVISOR PLUMBERS ASKING?
>. IS THAT CORRECT? I'M CURIOUS, TOO.
IF PEOPLE DON'T GET OUT OF YEAR 1, IT'S LIKE, OKAY, BUT IF PEOPLE MAKE IT IN YEAR 2, AND THEN YEAR 3, DO YOU HAVE A 90% GRADUATION RATE? ONCE THEY MAKE IT TO YEAR 3, DO YOU HAVE THOSE NUMBERS?
>> WE DO NOT RIGHT NOW. THAT IS SOMETHING I'VE ASKED IT FOR.
WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT ALL THE STUDENTS WHO'VE BEEN IN THERE AND HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET THROUGH, AND WHAT THE OVERALL GRADUATION RATE IS.
BUT I APOLOGIZE, YOU DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT NOW.
>> ACTUALLY, I HAD A FEW MORE QUESTIONS OF THAT.
>> I'M SORRY. SUPERVISOR PLUMBERS.
>> THEN THE $4,000 PER STUDENT.
THIS ONE QUESTION FOR YOU, AND THEN THIS MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR AARON IN THERE, TOO.
THAT IS FOR SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS.
HOW IS THAT CURRENTLY BEING FUNDED?
>> RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE FUNDING THROUGH SHASTA COUNTY CCP.
WE HAVE FUNDING THROUGH THE CHANCELLOR'S OFFICE THROUGH THE RISING SCHOLARS PROGRAM, AND SO THIS IS LOOKING TO AUGMENT THAT BUDGET.
SOMETIMES WE HAVE STUDENTS WHO GO OFF OF PROBATION AND ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THAT FUNDING ANYMORE. THEY'VE GRADUATED.
THEY'VE COMPLETED THEIR TERMS, BUT WE STILL WANT TO SUPPORT THEM THROUGH STEP UP, SO THIS WOULD HELP US TO AUGMENT THOSE COSTS.
WE ALSO HAVE OTHER FUNDS ON CAMPUS THROUGH OUR BASIC NEEDS CENTER AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WE WOULD WORK HARD TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE NOT GOING TO LOSE OUT ON THAT.
BUT AT THIS POINT, WE GET THE FUNDING THROUGH OTHER CHANNELS AS WELL.
>> WHEN YOU SAY AUGMENT, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THEIR STUDENTS WHO ARE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR THE CCP FUNDS OR THOSE OTHER FUNDS, AND SO THIS WOULD FILL THAT GAP, OR THAT YOU'RE ADDING MORE TO?
>> WE WOULD JUST MAKE SURE THAT THOSE STUDENTS DON'T LOSE OUT BECAUSE WE'VE RUN OUT OF FUNDING.
>> A QUICK QUESTION FOR AARON BERTIN.
I KNOW THAT IN THIS REPORT, WE SAID THAT 30% HAVE SOME CONNECTION TO OPIOID USE.
DOES THAT MEAN IN ORDER TO ALLOCATE OPIOID DOLLARS, WE WOULD HAVE TO EITHER SCREEN INDIVIDUALS, AND THEN WE'D BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THESE TYPES OF FUNDS FOR INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE A CONNECTION TO THE OPIOID USE DISORDER, OR THAT WE CAN ONLY DO 30% OF THE TOTAL BECAUSE THAT'S ON AVERAGE WHERE IT STANDS?
>> MORNING, CHAIR CRIME MEMBERS, BOARD AMERTIN, DEPUTY COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER.
ESSENTIALLY, WHAT WOULD NEED TO BE DONE IS THEY WOULD NEED TO ASSESS THE STUDENTS AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY FALL WITHIN THAT POPULATION BEFORE THEY WOULD BILL THEM TO THIS FUNDING STREAM.
THERE COULD BE SOME STUDENTS THAT COULD BE FUNDED BY THE CCP, SO IT COULD ACTUALLY INCREASE THE CCP POPULATION, BECAUSE THEY HAVE AB 109 FUNDING TO PAY FOR WHAT THEIR CURRENT LEVEL IS.
BUT IF THEY DON'T MEET THE OPIOID CRITERIA, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BUILD THEIR COSTS THAT WAY.
WE WOULD WRITE THE CONTRACT TO SAY THAT.
>> IT COULD BE THAT THE ACTUAL PROJECTION OF THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS HERE MIGHT END UP BEING LOWER IF, FOR EXAMPLE, THEY DON'T FIT THE QUALIFICATIONS OF THE OPIOID SETTLEMENT FUNDS.
>> CORRECT. WE WOULD NOT BE GUARANTEEING A NUMBER OF STUDENTS.
WE WOULD BE GUARANTEEING UP TO A NUMBER OF STUDENTS, PROVIDED THAT THEY FALL INTO THAT POPULATION.
AND JUST FIRST, SOME CLARIFICATION, SHOULD THE BOARD APPROVE THIS TODAY, WE WOULD BE RETURNING TO THE BOARD WITH A CONTRACT WITH SHASTA COLLEGE THAT WOULD DETAIL ALL OF THAT OUT.
ADDITIONALLY, IF THERE ARE SOME DATA POINTS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IN THAT COME BACK WITH THAT STAFF REPORT, WE CAN DEFINITELY MAKE THAT HAPPEN.
>> THANK YOU. THEN ONE MORE QUESTION.
WHEN IT COMES TO THE INTERNSHIP SO THE STIPEND, DO YOU CURRENTLY HAVE OTHER PROGRAMS THAT REQUIRE INTERNSHIPS? I GUESS WHERE I'M TRYING TO GO AT THIS IS, IS IT TYPICAL FOR OTHER PROGRAMS TO REQUIRE AN INTERNSHIP AND THEN TO PAY A STIPEND BOTH TO THE STUDENT AND THEN A HOST FEE, OR IS THIS GOING TO BE SOMEWHAT OF A UNIQUE SCENARIO WITH THIS PARTICULAR PROGRAM THAT DOESN'T REFLECT OTHER PROGRAMS?
>> WE HAVE SOME OTHER PROGRAMS THAT ARE SIMILAR TO THIS.
THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY INTERNSHIPS,
[02:10:01]
BUT OUR COLLEGE CORPS PROGRAM IS BASED ON AMERICORPS, WHERE STUDENTS DO A CERTAIN NUMBER OF SERVICE HOURS, AND THEN THEY GET PAID A STIPEND AT THE END OF THAT.WE ALSO HAVE NEW FUNDING FROM THE STATE FOR A PROGRAM CALLED HIGHER UP, WHERE WE ARE JUST GIVING DOLLARS TO STUDENTS, THE EQUIVALENT OF WHAT WOULD BE 20 HOURS OF WORK.
THAT'S OVERSEEN BY OUR CAREER, CAFE, ARE CAREER COUNSELORS, AND SO WE HAVE STUDENTS WHO ARE COWORKERS RECIPIENTS, STEP-UP RECIPIENTS OR FORMER FOSTER YOUTH, AND THEY ARE GETTING JUST A STRAIGHT HONORARIUM FOR GOING TO SCHOOL.
THE GOAL IS TO REPLACE THE INCOME.
IT'S REALLY HARD FOR STUDENTS TO SUPPORT THEMSELVES ONLY ON FINANCIAL WAYS.
THEN THEY'RE WORKING, WHICH IS THEN LAGGING THE TIME THAT THEY'RE GETTING TO COMPLETING THEIR DEGREES.
WE DO HAVE OTHER PROGRAMS THAT ARE DOING THAT.
AMERICORPS, THE COLLEGE CORPS PROGRAM, ALSO DOES GIVE A STIPEND LIKE THIS TO THE AGENCIES THAT ARE HOSTING, BECAUSE, AGAIN, IT'S SCHOOLS, IT'S NON-PROFITS.
WE'RE TRYING TO HELP RECOUP SOME OF THE COSTS FOR THE SUPERVISION AND THE OVERSIGHT OF THE STUDENTS WHO ARE PLACED THERE.
WE'VE BEEN DOING BOTH OF THESE MODELS THROUGH THE CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE SYSTEM.
>> THEN, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE ALCOHOL AND DRUG STUDIES PROGRAM IS NEW THIS YEAR?
WE'RE JUST AT THE END OF OUR TWO-YEAR CYCLE.
WE'LL HAVE OUR FIRST GRADUATES NEXT SEMESTER.
THESE ARE THE FIRST ONES ENTERING INTO THE INTERNSHIP, AND THEN WE'LL CYCLE THAT THROUGH EVERY SEMESTER.
>> SO FAR, WHAT'S BEEN THE STUDENT DEMAND FOR THAT PROGRAM, HAVE THERE BEEN A LOT OF FOLKS TRYING TO GET INTO IT, OR HAS IT?
>> YES. I THINK I'VE PUT SOME NOTES ON THAT, WE'VE OFFERED ABOUT EIGHT SECTIONS PER SEMESTER, AND THOSE ARE MOSTLY FULL.
THE INTERNSHIP CLASS IS CAPPED AT JUST A CERTAIN NUMBER OF NO MORE THAN 25 STUDENTS SO THAT THEY CAN GET THE SUPERVISION THEY NEED.
BUT THAT PROGRAM HAS BEEN IMPACTED FULLY.
WE'RE ABLE TO OFFER EIGHT SECTIONS A SEMESTER.
I WAS COMPARING TO COLLEGE OF THE CICES WHO ORIGINALLY HAD THIS PROGRAM ONLINE.
AT THIS POINT, THEY'RE OFFERING ONLY TWO SECTIONS PER SEMESTER, OF COURSE WORK.
>> FULL-TIME FACULTY WHO ARE TEACHING THAT PROGRAM.
>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR PLUMMER. SUPERVISOR LONG.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. THIS IS A QUESTION FOR AARON.
I WAS HOPING TO GET YOU BEFORE YOU HAD TO SIT DOWN, BUT WASN'T MY TURN.
AS I SEE THIS, IT'S BIFURCATED INTO TWO COMPONENTS.
ONE IS THE STEP UP PROGRAM STUDENTS, SOME OF WHICH WILL BE ELIGIBLE BECAUSE THEY HAVE SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROBLEMS, AND THEN THE FUNDING STREAM CAN BE APPLIED TO THAT.
BUT THE OTHER PART I WOULD SEE, WHICH IS THIS INTERNSHIP AND INVOLVING A STIPEND TO OFFSET THE NEED FOR THEM TO WORK PRIVATELY, SO IT INCREASES THEIR SUCCESS RATE AND WE GET MORE DRUG AND ALCOHOL COUNSELORS INTO THE COMMUNITY.
DO BOTH OF THOSE COMPONENTS MEET THE DEFINITION? I'M SURE IT WOULDN'T BE BEFORE US IF IT HADN'T, BUT I HAVE TO ASK THAT.
DOES THAT MEET THE DEFINITION OF A STUDENT THAT DOESN'T HAVE A SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROBLEM, BUT ARE GOING INTO A FIELD THAT WE DEEM ADVISABLE, DRUG AND ALCOHOL COUNSELING, BUT THEY'RE NOT A SUBSTANCE ABUSE VICTIM PERSON? DOES THAT MEET THE DEFINITION OF THE OPIOID SETTLEMENT DOLLARS, AND IT'S APPROPRIATE?
THE OPIOID FUNDS NOT ONLY WILL PROVIDE PAY FOR, SERVICES TO PEOPLE TO EITHER, GET SOBER, STAY SOBER, AND THEN IMPROVE THEIR LIVES AFTER THEY'VE GOTTEN [INAUDIBLE].
BUT IT ALSO APPLIES TO INCREASING THE AVAILABILITY OF TREATMENT WITHIN OUR AREA, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THOSE TREATMENT PROVIDERS HAVE SUBSTANCE USE ISSUES.
PROVIDING A PROGRAM THAT INCREASES THE NUMBER OF SUBSTANCE USE COUNSELORS IS VERY MUCH WITHIN THAT.
>> THANK YOU. THAT WAS THE QUESTION I HAD BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE A DUAL PROCESS TO ME.
I HAVE ISSUE WITH THE FACT THAT WE SUBSIDIZE SOME INTERNSHIPS, AND WE DON'T OTHERS.
BUT IF THE GOAL OF THE OPIOID SETTLEMENT IS TO GET MORE DRUG AND ALCOHOL COUNSELORS INTO OUR COMMUNITY.
THEN THAT IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT THAN IF YOU'RE GOING TO BE INTERNING FOR SOMETHING OTHER THAN WHAT THAT DEFINITION IS.
>> I DID GO AHEAD AND PUT ON THEIR CORE STRATEGY E.4 IS FOR THE STEP UP PROGRAM, AND THEN THE CORE STRATEGY, FOR THE ALCOHOL DRUG STUDY WOULD BE B.4 AND E3 AND 5 IN THE OPIOID SETTLEMENT.
I WANTED TO CROSS-REFERENCE WHAT THAT SUPPORTS.
>> SUPERVISOR LONG, THIS IS JUST CONVERSATION.
ARE YOU SUPPORTIVE OF THIS AS LONG AS THAT IS SPECIFICALLY ITEMIZED OUT IN TERMS OF HOW IT MEETS THE OPIOID REQUIREMENTS? I MEAN, JUST TO MAKE SURE IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT THAT'S WHERE IT'S GOING AND NOT SUBSIDIZING OTHER?
[02:15:01]
>> YOU MEAN BOTH COMPONENTS, ONE, THE STEP UP PEOPLE THAT HAVE SUBSTANCE ABUSE ISSUES AND THE OFFSET TO SUBSIDIZE THE COUNSELOR TRAINNING?
>> THAT'S THE PART, HONESTLY, I WRESTLED WITH BECAUSE WE OF THE 88129 IS GOING TOWARD THE INTERNSHIP PROGRAMS. I BELIEVE IN FAIRNESS, AND SO I WAS STRUGGLING WITH THAT A LITTLE BIT, BUT THE FACT THAT IT FITS THE OPIOID DEFINITION, AND WE DESPERATELY NEED MORE COUNSELORS IN THE COMMUNITY, I WILL BE SUPPORTING THAT.
>> BUT I REALLY, THIS IS A QUESTION FOR YOU GUYS, AS WELL.
I'M SUPPORTIVE OF WHAT YOU'RE DOING, BUT ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE AS FAR AS THE OUTCOMES OF KNOWING BECAUSE THERE ARE A BUNCH OF INTERNSHIP PROGRAMS OUT THERE.
I KNOW YOU MENTIONED THE AMERICORPS AND THEN THE HIGHER UP AND SOME OF THOSE, AND I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH.
I'M IGNORANT TO KNOW HOW MANY OF THOSE INTERSECT AND WHERE THERE IS OVERLAP.
ACTUALLY, SUPERVISOR PLUMMER, I ACCIDENTALLY BUMPED SUPERVISOR CALSTRS MADISON.
WE HAVE HOW MANY COMMENTERS, STEPHANIE? I'D LIKE TO GET TO THOSE.
>> WE HAVE SIX SPEAKERS ON THIS ITEM CURRENTLY.
>> SUPERVISOR PLUMMER, GO AHEAD AND THEN I WANT TO BRING UP PUBLIC COMMENTS, AND THEN WE'LL GO BACK TO BOARD DISCUSSION.
>> WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS, I THINK THE STEP UP PROGRAM IS GREAT.
I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE OUTCOMES THERE IN TERMS OF GRADUATION RATES AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.
BUT WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IS, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? IF WE DON'T GIVE THIS FUNDING, WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE IN TERMS OF NUMBER OF STUDENTS GOING THROUGH AND THE POTENTIAL IMPACT OF THE PROGRAM VERSUS IF WE DO, BECAUSE IT FEELS A LITTLE BIT LIKE THESE ARE EXTRA ADD ONS AND THAT THE PROGRAM IS CURRENTLY WORKING.
THERE'S ENOUGH STUDENTS GOING INTO IT ON BOTH FRONTS.
NOT THAT IT WON'T POTENTIALLY ENHANCE THE PROGRAM, BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, AND IF YOU CAN HELP ME WITH THAT.
>> SURE. WELL, RIGHT NOW, WE TURN AWAY STUDENTS THAT DON'T QUALIFY UNDER CCP.
OR WE HAVE A SEPARATE CONTRACT WITH STATE PAROLE, TO SEE UP TO 10 PER SEMESTER.
THAT THAT IS RUN THROUGH THE COMMUNITY BASED COALITION, WHICH IS OVERSEEN BY THE BUTTE COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION.
THEY SEE OVERSEE ALL OF THE PAROLE POST RELEASE PROGRAMS FOR FAR NORTHERN CALIFORNIA.
ANYONE THAT'S ON INFORMAL DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR CCP.
ANYONE THAT DOESN'T QUALIFY FOR TREATMENT UNDER THE CBC, WHICH IS BASICALLY PAROLES VERSION OF THE DRC.
ANYONE THAT DOESN'T QUALIFY UNDER THEM, WE HAVE TO GO BACK TO LOOKING AT, WHAT ARE OUR TOTAL DOLLARS THROUGH RISING TO SCHOLARS? EVERY SEMESTER, WE TURN AWAY STUDENTS.
>> THAT'S HELPFUL. I GUESS TWO QUESTIONS.
ONE IS, WHY DON'T THEY QUALIFY UNDER CCP?
>> BECAUSE IF THEY'RE ON AN INFORMAL PROBATION OR THEIR PROBATION GETS TERMED, THEY GET DISCHARGED FROM PROBATION, THEN THEY NO LONGER FALL UNDER CCP.
IF THEY GET RELEASED FROM THE CBC, WHICH IS GENERALLY ONE SEMESTER, TWO SEMESTERS MAX FOR PAROLE, THEN I HAVE TO LOOK TO FUND THEM UNDER A DIFFERENT MEANS.
EVERY SEMESTER, WE TURN AWAY STUDENTS.
>> WHEN YOU SAY LOOK TO FUND THEM, ARE YOU TALKING JUST ABOUT THIS $4,000 FOR MATERIALS, ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING BROADER THAN THAT?
>> IT'S A LITTLE BROADER THAN THAT.
CERTAINLY, THE STEP UP PROVIDES EVERYTHING FROM LAPTOPS TO HELPING COVER THEIR FEES TO TEXTBOOKS, TO SCHOOL SUPPLIES, TO BASIC NEEDS SUPPORT.
THERE'S A LOT THAT GOES INTO IT IN ADDITION TO THIS.
THE ONE THING I DID WANT TO JUST TOUCH ON REALLY QUICKLY IS ALL OF OUR STUDENTS ARE REFERRED.
WHEN STUDENTS COME THROUGH US, IT'LL BE THROUGH SHASTA PROBATION THROUGH NICK HITCHCOCK IS A DEDICATED STAFFER THAT IS ASSIGNED FROM PROBATION TO THE STEP PROGRAM.
WE ALSO HAVE A DEDICATED PAROLE OFFICER, OUR PAROLE AGENT RATHER.
THOSE STUDENTS IN TERMS OF, DO THEY MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS FOR THE OPIOID SETTLEMENT? THEY GET VETTED, EITHER THROUGH THE SHERIFF'S WORK RELEASE,
[02:20:01]
THROUGH PROBATION, THROUGH PAROLE.THAT'S HOW WE MAY ENSURE THAT WE KNOW THAT THEY ARE MEETING THE CRITERION OF THIS.
STUDENTS THAT ARE FROM, SAY, OTHER COUNTIES, THAT WE SUPPORT, STUDENTS THAT ARE NO LONGER ON PAROLE OR GET TERMED, WOULD NOT BE SUPPORTED UNDER THIS.
>> I WOULD ALSO SAY THAT THE FUNDING IS JUST THE DIRECT AID TO THE STUDENT.
OBVIOUSLY, WE HAVE STAFF SUPPORT, AND SO NONE OF THIS IS GOING TO ANY OF THE STAFF SUPPORT.
THE OTHER FUNDING WE HAVE, IS ALSO PROVIDING THAT SUPPORT, THOSE COUNSELORS AND THOSE STAFF THAT ARE HELPING THEM GET THROUGH COLLEGE.
THIS IS JUST MONEY THAT'S DIRECT AID TO THE STUDENT.
>> THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR PLUMMER, LET'S BRING UP PUBLIC SPEAKERS.
>> QUICK CLARIFICATION. IF WE WERE TO GIVE THE 4,000 PER STUDENT FOR THE STUDENTS WHO DON'T CURRENTLY QUALIFY FOR THE PROGRAM, BUT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SERVE, WOULD THAT ENABLE YOU TO THEN SERVE THEM?
>> GOOD. LET'S CALL UP THE SPEAKERS.
ALL THOSE THAT HAVE WAITED TO SPEAK, WHO ARE HERE PROBABLY FOR ONE OF THEIR FIRST MEETINGS.
>> WE HAVE SIX SPEAKERS. FIRST STEP, DON DUCKETT, FOLLOWED BY JEFF GORDER, STEVE KHAN, THEN LISA JENSEN.
IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET AND QUEUE.
>> I THOUGHT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE SOME THAT WE'RE HERE FROM THE PROGRAM.
IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE WE HAVE MANY.
>> WOW. THREE MINUTES SEEMS LIKE AN ETERNITY.
THANK YOU BOARD FOR HAVING THIS ON THE AGENDA.
THIS IS A GREAT USE OF THE OPIOID SETTLEMENT FUNDS.
SUPERVISORS, YOU ASKED FOR OUTCOMES, AND I'VE GOTTEN UP HERE MANY TIMES OVER THE YEARS AND TOLD YOU THE STORY OF MY SON, JEFF, WHO WAS SEVERELY ADDICTED TO OPIOIDS.
WE ALMOST LOST HIM SEVERAL TIMES.
HE WAS IN AND OUT OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, IN AND OUT OF THE COUNTY JAIL, SUCKING UP THOSE RESOURCES, ON AND OFF OF PROBATION UNTIL HE FINALLY ENDED UP IN STATE PRISON.
UPON HIS RELEASE, HE WAS REFERRED FOR POST RELEASE SUPERVISION, AND WAS AT THE DAY REPORTING CENTER WHO REFERRED HIM TO THE STEP UP PROGRAM.
THAT WAS A GAME CHANGER FOR MY SON.
JEFF BECAME CERTIFIED, AS A HEAVY EQUIPMENT OPERATOR.
HE WENT FROM HAVING A CHANGE OF CLOTHES, TO EARNING A SIX FIGURE INCOME.
WHEN HE FIRST BECAME CERTIFIED, HE HELPED TO FIGHT THE DIXIE FIRE.
I'LL NEVER FORGET HIM CALLING ME AFTER HIS FIRST NIGHT OF DUTY OF CLEARING FIRE LINES, AND HE SAID, MOM, I HAD THE SCARIEST NIGHT OF MY LIFE, BUT THE BEST NIGHT OF MY LIFE.
HE SAYS, IT JUST OCCURRED TO ME THAT I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THE WRONG TEAM.
I'D LIKE TO THANK HITCHCOCK, AND THE STEP UP PROGRAM FOR CHANGING HIS LIFE.
ESSENTIALLY, I'LL MAKE IT SIMPLE FOR YOU.
THEY TURNED JEFF, WHO WAS A PIE EATER INTO A PIE MAKER.
BOY IS HE EVER MAKING PIES? HE'S A HOMEOWNER. HE'S A GREAT FATHER.
WITH THAT SIX FIGURE INCOME, HE'S DONATING TO CHARITIES.
HE'S PAYING FEDERAL AND STATE, AND LOCAL INCOME TAXES MUCH MORE IN TAXES THAN WERE EVER CONTRIBUTED TOWARDS HIS REHABILITATION.
I URGE YOU STRONGLY TO APPROVE THIS. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, JEFF GORDER, FOLLOWED BY STEVE KHAN, LISA JENSEN, THEN ASHLEY BARTLETT.
>> I WANT TO THANK SUPERVISOR KELSTROM FOR BRINGING THIS ITEM UP, AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW.
I'VE BEEN ADVOCATING FOR THE USE OF OPIOID FUNDS FOR OVER A YEAR NOW.
I WAS AS THEY SAID, IT HAD BEEN OVER A YEAR AGO THAT THEY MADE THEIR PRESENTATION.
I'M GLAD WITH THE RESCUE MISSION MONEY THAT WE SOW A LITTLE WHILE AGO.
IN THIS MONEY, IT APPEARS THAT YOU'RE STARTING TO REALIZE THAT THESE OPIOID FUNDS ARE NOT GOING TO GO TO A MEDICAL SCHOOL.
I'VE MENTIONED THAT FROM DAY 1, AND THAT'S NO STOP.
I THINK THE LEADERSHIP IS FINALLY RELEASING THE PURSE STRINGS A LITTLE BIT, AND I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT.
STEP UP PROGRAM, I KNOW FROM MY WORK AS A PUBLIC DEFENDER, HAS BEEN AROUND FOR ABOUT 12 YEARS, AND IT'S ALWAYS BEEN AN OUTSTANDING PROGRAM.
IT ADDRESSED FOLKS THAT WERE JUSTICE INVOLVED, FORMERLY INCARCERATED INDIVIDUALS OR PEOPLE WHO ARE ON FORMAL FELONY, PROBATION OR PAROLE.
IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO DO IS EXPAND TO THOSE THAT AREN'T ON FORMAL PROBATION, WHICH, EVERYBODY THAT GETS A POSSESSION OF METHAMPHETAMINE OR LET'S SAY, POSSESSION OF FENTANYL OR HEROIN, IN THIS CASE, IT'S GOING TO BE A MISDEMEANOR NOW.
THEY'RE GOING TO BE ON INFORMAL PROBATION, OR IF THEY'RE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF FENTANOL OR OPIOID,
[02:25:03]
THAT'S GOING TO BE A MISDEMEANOR.I THINK WHAT THEY'RE REALIZING IS, OTHERWISE, WE HAVE STUDENTS OUT AT CHASTA COLLEGE THAT FIT THAT CRITERIA, AND THEY WOULDN'T BE ELIGIBLE FOR, THE NORMAL STEP UP ROUTE THAT ONLY DEALS WITH FOLKS ON FORMAL PROBATION, PAROLE, OR WHATNOT.
I WAS CONCERNED AS SUPERVISOR LONG WAS ABOUT WHETHER THIS IS GOING TO BE FUNDING PEOPLE, THAT DON'T HAVE A SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROBLEM THEMSELVES, AND OPIOID PROBLEM THEMSELVES, AND THEY JUST WANT TO BECOME A ALCOHOL AND DRUG COUNSELOR, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT, IN AND OF ITSELF IS WITHIN THE CRITERIA OF THE OPIOID DOLLARS.
PERHAPS IT IS A GOOD USE OF THAT EXPENDITURE.
AGAIN, THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR KELSTROM, FOR BRINGING THIS ITEM UP, AND I KNOW THE STEP UP PROGRAM IS AN OUTSTANDING PROGRAM, AND I'LL LEAVE IT UP TO YOU TO DECIDE WHETHER THAT FALLS WITHIN THE CRITERIA OF THE OPIOID DOLLARS, BUT TO ME, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT DOES. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, STEVE KHAN, FOLLOWED BY LISA JENSEN, ASHLEY BARTLETT, THEN STEVEN WALKER.
>> I ALSO WANT TO THANK SUPERVISOR KELSTROM FOR BRINGING THIS TO ALL OF OUR ATTENTION.
I'VE BEEN TO A LOT OF DIFFERENT PRESENTATIONS WHERE THE STEP UP HAS PRESENTED, AND I'VE FOLLOWED IT FOR A WHILE, AND I'VE WATCHED ITS PROGRESSION.
IF YOU WATCH AN INDIVIDUAL THAT HAS SUCCEEDED IN THE PROGRAM, AT A GRADUATION, GO AND SIT AT A TABLE WITH HIS FAMILY AND HIS CHILDREN, AND YOU REALIZE THAT THAT CHAIN OF CRIME THAT EXISTS IN FAMILIES HAS BEEN BROKEN.
THE SAVINGS IS YOU CAN'T ESTIMATE IT.
YOU DON'T KNOW WHETHER THREE OF THOSE KIDS WOULD END UP ADDICTED TO DRUGS DEAD OR IN PRISON.
BUT WHAT I WANT TO SPEAK TO IS THE AMOUNT OF SAVINGS THAT WE DON'T REALIZE.
THAT IS, WHEN SOMEBODY AND THIS ADDITIONAL MONEY MAY INCREASE YOUR SUCCESS RATE, BECAUSE SOME OF THESE PEOPLE MAY BE DROPPING OUT SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY JUST CAN'T KEEP UP WITH THE NEEDS.
HAVING THIS ADDITIONAL MONEY, PERHAPS THAT 30 WHATEVER PERCENT WILL INCREASE.
THE OTHER SAVINGS IS, IS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT $4,000 TO HELP THESE PEOPLE GET THROUGH, BUT IT COSTS US $50,000 A YEAR TO INCARCERATE SOMEBODY AT OUR JAIL, $50,000.
THAT DOESN'T TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE MONEY IT COSTS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT TO ARREST THIS INDIVIDUAL, INVESTIGATE THE INDIVIDUAL, THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, AND ALL OF THE THINGS THAT LEAD UP TO A PERSON BEING IN EITHER THE SHASTA COUNTY JAIL OR PRISON.
MUCH MORE OF THE SHASTA COUNTY JAIL NOW BECAUSE MANY MORE SERIOUS OFFENSES, THOSE INDIVIDUALS ARE BEING INCARCERATED THERE.
I JUST WANT TO SPEAK TO THE SAVINGS.
THE SAVINGS TO ALL OF US CITIZENS THAT AREN'T HAVING PEOPLE COMMIT THOSE CRIMES.
EVEN IF THESE INDIVIDUALS AREN'T SUCCESSFUL, MAYBE THEY AREN'T ONE OF THOSE 30%.
BUT WHILE THEY'RE INVOLVED IN THE PROGRAM, I BELIEVE THE CRIMINALITY IS REDUCED, IF NOT ELIMINATED, AND MAYBE THEY ACTUALLY GO ON BETTER FROM THAT POINT, BUT AT LEAST WHILE THEY'RE INVOLVED, WE'RE PROBABLY REDUCING THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON OUR LOCAL COMMUNITY.
IT'S VERY HARD TO CLEARLY ESTIMATE THE BENEFITS OF THE STEP UP PROGRAM AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING OUT HERE.
BUT IT'S MASSIVE. I THINK IT'S MONEY.
YOU CAN'T DO A BETTER INVESTMENT. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, LISA JENSEN, FOLLOWED BY ASHLEY BARTLETT, THEN STEVEN WALKER.
>> GOOD MORNING, BOARD. I WASN'T PLANNING ON SPEAKING TODAY, BUT I SAW ROBERT BOWMAN WAS GOING TO SPEAK, AND I REMEMBER HIM.
HE IS A HERO IN OUR COMMUNITY SO IS NICK HITCHCO.
THE REASON I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE FOR THE PEOPLE THAT THEY HAVE HELPED, YOU CAN'T PUT A NUMBER ON THAT.
THE PEOPLE WHO THEY WANTED TO GET THEIR RECORD BEHIND THEM AND MOVE FORWARD WITH SOMETHING BETTER.
THOSE ARE PEOPLE WHO HAVE HELPED THEIR FAMILIES RECOVER FROM THE PAST.
THEY'VE BEEN ABLE TO GO ON TO BE PRODUCTIVE, AND THEY HAVE GONE ON TO LEAD BETTER LIVES.
I THINK THAT MORE SO THAN INCARCERATION, AND YOU'LL SEE PEOPLE WITH THE SHIRTS THAT SAY, EDUCATION, NOT INCARCERATION, THAT'S BIG.
YOU CAN PUT SOMEBODY IN JAIL, BUT THE BIGGEST THING YOU CAN TAKE AWAY FROM THEM IS HOPE AND FAITH IN THE COMMUNITY THAT THEY HAVE.
I SEE PEOPLE, I KNOW THERE ARE PROBABLY PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM THAT FEEL THAT WAY.
BUT THAT IS MORE POWERFUL THAN ANYTHING THAT A DRUG ADDICTION OR AN ARREST CAN DO TO SOMEBODY.
[02:30:04]
THE FACT THAT ROBERT BOWMAN AND NICK HITCHCO AND THE STEP UP PROGRAM ARE AT IT EVERY DAY, GIVING THESE PEOPLE SOME STRUCTURE AND GIVING THEM SOME HOPE THAT THEY CAN PUT THEIR PAST BEHIND THEM AND DO SOMETHING PRODUCTIVE.I THINK THAT IF THERE IS ANY MONEY THAT WE CAN THROW AT THEM, PLEASE DO IT, I THINK THAT THEY ARE ONE OF THE MOST VALUABLE RESOURCES WE HAVE IN THE COMMUNITY. IT'S THEM.
IT'S THE COLLABORATIVE COURTS.
THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE TRYING TO MAKE IT SO THAT YOU CAN WALK DOWN THE CYPRESS BRIDGE AND NOT HAVE A PERSON ON A BICYCLE WITH ALL THEIR BELONGINGS RIDING INTO TRAFFIC AND YOU HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO GET KILLED.
I THINK THAT WE CAN DO BETTER THAN THAT.
THESE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT CAN LEAD US THERE.
I HOPE THAT YOU FIND THEM. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, ASHLEY BARTLETT, FOLLOWED BY STEVEN WALKER.
>> MY NAME IS ASHLEY BARTLETT.
EIGHT YEARS AGO, I ENTERED THE STEP UP PROGRAM.
I HAD NO IDEA WHAT I WAS DOING WITH MY LIFE, AND ROBERT GAVE ME A CHANCE.
TODAY, I'M EMPLOYED WITH THE COUNTY, AND NOW I WORK FOR THE ADDICTED OFFENDER PROGRAM AND THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH COURT PROGRAMS. I GET TO WORK WITH MY CLIENTS NOW TO BE IN THE STEP UP PROGRAM.
WHAT I COULD TELL YOU IS THAT IT SEEMS LIKE A VERY MUCH HIGHER NUMBER THAN WHAT THEY REPORTED HAD A PROBLEM WITH OPIATES THAT WE'RE HAVING TROUBLE GETTING INTO TREATMENT.
THEY DO A COMPLETE WRAP AROUND WITH HELPING THEM GET INTO SERVICES.
GOING TO SCHOOL WAS LIKE THE FIRST THING I EVER ACCOMPLISHED.
IT WAS A HUGE MOTIVATION FOR ME TO CONTINUE TO KEEP GOING.
I DON'T KNOW WHERE I'D BE WITHOUT THE STEP UP PROGRAM TODAY, AND I WANT TO SEE IT CONTINUE TO HELP WITH THE CLIENTS THAT I HELP TODAY AND THE COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, STEVEN WALKER, AND CHAIR, THIS IS OUR LAST SPEAKER.
>> MY NAME IS STEVEN WALKER, AND I'M A GRADUATE OF STEP UP.
I BRING MY LIVED EXPERIENCE IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY.
I'LL GRADUATE FROM CHICO STATE UNIVERSITY NEXT SEMESTER WITH A BACHELOR'S DEGREE IN SOCIAL WORK.
I'M CURRENTLY VOLUNTEERING MY SERVICES AND COMPLETING A PRACTICUM AT THE GOOD NEWS RESCUE MISSION.
FOR US THAT STRUGGLED WITH SUD AND FOR US THAT WERE JUSTICELY IMPACTED, WE HAVE A HARD TIME WITH HONESTY.
IF YOU REALLY CALCULATED THOSE NUMBERS, I'LL BET YOU THAT THE MAJORITY OF US JUSTICE IMPACTED MEN AND WOMEN HAD A SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER.
WITH THAT BEING SAID, THIS MONEY THAT HOPEFULLY GOES TO PROJECT OR TO STEP UP, I COULD NOT HAVE GOTTEN TO THE POSITION THAT I AM TODAY WITHOUT THEIR HELP.
THEY GAVE ME THE EMOTIONAL SUPPORT, GUIDANCE, HELP ME THROUGHOUT EVERY SITUATION THAT I COULD COME ACROSS.
I HOPE THAT YOU GRANT THEM THIS MONEY.
>> YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE REQUEST AND APPROVE THE BUDGET AMENDMENT.
>> I WOULD SECOND IT. WOULD YOU CONSIDER PUTTING IN JUST MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE THE METRIC LIKE WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST ONES WHERE WE HAVE A YEARLY UPDATE, AND THAT WOULD BE RENEWED EACH YEAR?
>> YEAH. WOULD YOU GUYS AGREE TO THAT? ABSOLUTELY.
>> OKAY. YOU'LL AMEND THAT MOTION.
I WILL SECOND THAT. SUPERVISOR PLUMBER.
>> YEAH, I THINK WHERE MY HEAD'S AT, AT THIS POINT IS THAT I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF THE STEP UP PROGRAM, SO THAT 300,000 PLUS THE INDIRECT ON TOP OF THAT.
BUT AT THIS POINT, TO ME, THE ALCOHOL AND DRUG STUDIES PROGRAM, IT SEEMS LIKE THERE'S PEOPLE GOING INTO IT.
THEY'RE PARTICIPATING IN IT, THEY'RE COMPLETING IT.
I DON'T SEE THE NEED TO DIRECT AN ADDITIONAL HALF A MILLION TO THAT AT THIS POINT.
IF YOU ALL WERE TO COME, COME BACK TO THE BOARD IN A YEAR OR TWO YEAR AND SAY, WE'RE NOT GETTING ENOUGH STUDENTS BECAUSE THEY CAN'T MAKE IT THROUGH THE INTERNSHIP OR THAT TYPE OF THING, THEN I WOULD BE MORE INCLINED.
THE REASON IN PART, THAT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE VERY SELECTIVE IN OUR USE OF THE OPIOID SETTLEMENT DOLLARS IS THAT AS THE SHERIFF TALKED ABOUT THIS MORNING WITH ADDITIONAL FUNDS RELATED TO THAT NEW CAMPUS, THE OPERATIONAL COSTS, WE CURRENTLY DON'T HAVE A WAY OF FUNDING THAT.
THE OPIOID SETTLEMENT DOLLARS WOULD BE A POTENTIAL WAY TO FUND A PORTION OF THAT.
THAT'S WHY I WOULD SUPPORT THE ALTERNATIVE CUSTODY PROGRAM, ALSO WITH THE CAVEAT THAT WE ONLY DO IT FOR STUDENTS WHO DON'T QUALIFY FOR FUNDING FROM SOMEWHERE ELSE SO THAT THEY'RE NOT USING THIS FUNDING SO THAT THEY CAN GIVE BACK THAT OTHER FUNDING.
>> ARE YOU SAYING YOU'D WANT THAT TO BE DRAWN DOWN, SO WE'D HAVE AN AMOUNT UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT, BUT IT WOULD ONLY BE USED FOR PEOPLE THAT DON'T, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?
>> YEAH, I THINK I'M FINE WITH THE AMOUNT THAT'S IN THE PROPOSAL FOR THE 300,000 FOR THOSE STUDENTS,
[02:35:02]
PLUS THE 8% ON TOP OF THAT.JUST SAYING THAT WE WOULD ASK THAT THEY DON'T USE THAT FUNDING TO PAY FOR STUDENTS WHO ARE ARE ALREADY CURRENTLY GETTING FUNDING FROM OTHER SOURCES.
>> I'M GOING TO STAY WITH MY ORIGINAL MOTION.
THESE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN DOING THE WORK FOR A DOZEN YEARS.
AGAIN, I DON'T WANT TO GET INTO MICROMANAGING PEOPLE, MICROMANAGING ORGANIZATIONS.
THEY'VE BEEN DOING A GREAT JOB.
WE HAD TWO TESTIMONIALS THERE.
I HAD ONE PERSONALLY, AND IT'S LIKE, I WOULD LIKE THEM TO CONTINUE TO DO THE GOOD WORK AND LET THEM MAKE THEIR DECISIONS.
>> JUST FOR MY CLICK, YOU WANT TO COME UP REAL QUICK, I THINK IT WAS THE GENTLEMAN, MAYBE.
>> ROBERT, YES. EITHER ONE, THOUGH, JUST THAT SUPERVISOR PLUMBER CONCERN ABOUT THAT EXTRA BLOCK OF MONEY, LIKE, THE INTENTION IS TO GROW THAT, CORRECT? WHAT'S GOING TO BE REALLY IMPORTANT FOR ME IS IN ONE YEAR, IF THIS COMES BACK IN DECEMBER AND WE VOTE ON THE SECOND, AND THEN THE THIRD YEAR OF FUNDING IS SEEING HOW YOU'VE GROWN THAT, HOW YOU'VE TAKEN THAT, AND HOW YOU'VE GROWN THAT.
THEN ALSO IT'LL BE IMPORTANT FOR YEARS 2 AND 3, FOR ME THAT THOSE NUMBERS ARE THERE PROVIDED.
THIS IS WHAT WE'VE DONE AND THEN ALSO HOW YOU'RE GOING TO SUSTAIN IT AFTER THREE YEARS.
I KNOW YOU GUYS, BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO GROW IT, BUT WHEN THAT FUNDING GOES AWAY, WHAT OTHER SOURCES OF FUNDING ARE YOU LOOKING AHEAD, SO IT DOESN'T GO BACK TO WHERE IT CURRENTLY IS PRIOR FUNDING? THAT'S JUST MY INTENTION WITH THE SECOND.
>> THEN I HAD A QUICK QUESTION, BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED 30%, AND I AGREE WITH THIS GENTLEMAN HERE.
IT'S GOT TO BE MUCH HIGHER THAN THAT.
ARE YOU BASING THAT ON THEY WERE ARRESTED FOR OPIOID USE OR THEY WERE ARRESTED FOR OPIOID DISTRIBUTION, AND THAT'S WHO YOU CLAIM IS THE 30%, BECAUSE I GO TO THESE GRADUATIONS AND STUFF, AND JUST ABOUT EVERY SINGLE PERSON HAS HAD DRUG ADDICTION IN THEIR BACKGROUND.
>> THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'VE ASKED IN THE PAST.
IT IS SOMETHING WE CAN ADD TO OUR INTAKE SO THAT WE HAVE BETTER INFORMATION.
BUT WE'RE GOING RETROSPECTIVELY WITH WHAT WE KNOW ABOUT THE STUDENTS WHEN THEY CAME IN.
GOING FORWARD, WE'LL ASK THAT MORE DELIBERATELY.
>> ONE THING I DID WANT TO JUST LET THE BOARD KNOW IS IS THAT RIGHT NOW, WE DO HAVE ANNUAL REPORTING THAT WE DO TO THE COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS PARTNERSHIP EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, AS WELL AS THE JUVENILE JUSTICE COMMITTEE.
WE HAVE THAT ACCOUNTABILITY THAT'S BUILT IN IN TERMS OF REPORTING THAT OUT.
WE HAVE A RESEARCH DEPARTMENT THAT WORKS DIRECTLY WITH US TO LOOK AT THE RATES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO TRACK.
THE GREAT THING ABOUT BEING ABLE TO WORK WITH.
>> SORRY, IF YOU COULD PLEASE SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE INTO THE MIC.
>> THE OTHER THING THAT IS NICE ABOUT WORKING WITH COUNTY AGENCIES SUCH AS THE SHERIFF'S ALTERNATIVE CUSTODY PROGRAM AND PROBATION, AS WELL AS ADULT PAROLE, IS THAT WE HAVE THAT DIRECT LINK BETWEEN THEM IN TERMS OF THEY'RE THE ONES THAT ARE SCREENING THE APPLICANTS, SEEING WHO'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO FIT NOT JUST FROM AN ACADEMIC STANDPOINT, BUT FROM A TREATMENT STANDPOINT, WHERE THEY ARE IN TERMS OF THEIR RECOVERY.
BECAUSE THEY HAVE THAT CONSISTENT COMMUNICATION WITH THEM, IT MAKES THE COMMUNITY A LOT SAFER BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT SUPPORT BUT ACCOUNTABILITY BUILT IN.
>> THANK YOU, SUPERVISOR PLUMBER. THEN WE'LL GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE BOAT.
>> ON NOTE, AND I'M SURE THIS WILL COME UP IN THE CONTRACTING PIECE, BUT IN ADDITION TO THE OPIOID USE DISORDER, IF THERE'S A CO-OCCURRING SUBSTANCE USE DISORDER, AND MENTAL HEALTH CONDITION, THAT ALSO QUALIFIES FOR USE FOR THE OPIOID SETTLEMENT, SO THAT COULD ALSO BROADEN THAT PORTION OF THE POPULATION.
I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND JUST EVEN IF THERE'S NOT SUPPORT FOR IT, MAKE A SUBSTITUTE MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE FUNDING FOR THE FOR THE STEP UP PROGRAM, THE 300,000 WITH THE INDIRECT ON TOP OF THAT.
>> WITH THE INDIRECT THE 8% INDIRECT.
STEP UP PLUS INDIRECT 300,000 PLUS THE 8%.
>> BASICALLY, YOUR MOTION JUST ELIMINATES THAT OPPORTUNITY FOR GROWTH, TO MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT?
>> I'M JUST SAYING LET'S FUND THE STEP UP PROGRAM, AND LET'S NOT FUND THE INTERNSHIPS FOR THE ALCOHOL AND DRUGS CERTIFICATE PROGRAM OR DEGREE PROGRAM.
>> IT'S TOUGH I'LL TELL YOU, IT'S TOUGH NOT TO SECOND THAT, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO ONLY BECAUSE I BELIEVE, AND I CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE I'M GOING TO EVEN AGREE WITH ONE OF OUR SPEAKERS WHO I AGREE WITH ABOUT FOUR TENTHS OF A PERCENT OF WHAT HE NORMALLY SAYS.
BUT I DO BELIEVE THERE'S A LOT OF ANCILLARY COSTS THAT WE'RE AVOIDING THE MORE WE GO INTO PREVENTION AND HELPING INDIVIDUALS NOT BECOME PART OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM.
[02:40:03]
I APPRECIATE THAT.BUT I WOULDN'T SAY GAMBLE, BUT I'M GOING TO STICK WITH MY MOTION TO GIVE THEM A SHOT, BUT I'M TELLING YOU A YEAR SO WE BUY ALONG.
>> BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THESE ARE TWO SEPARATE PROGRAMS THOUGH, THERE'S AN INNER ACTION POTENTIALLY FOR SOME STUDENTS WHO THEN END UP GOING INTO THIS DEGREE PROGRAM.
BUT THESE ARE TWO SEPARATE PROGRAMS. ONE IS.
>> THERE'RE TWO SEPARATE PROGRAMS UNDERNEATH THE SAME UMBRELLA, ESSENTIALLY, OR THE SAME WORKING GROUP.
YOU HAVE TWO GROUPS, AND I THINK COLLECTIVELY THEY WORK BEST TOGETHER.
THAT'S WHAT I WANT. I WANT MORE ORGANIZATIONS PERSONALLY.
I DO KNOW A LOT ABOUT THIS ORGANIZATION.
I HAVE TALKED TO DR. ROD OVER AT THE COLLEGE ABOUT SOME OF THE WORK THAT THIS GROUP DOES.
I HAVEN'T BEEN PART OF IT PERSONALLY, SO I DON'T HAVE FIRSTHAND KNOWLEDGE, BUT I BELIEVE AGAIN, THIS IS JUST LIKE THE GOOD NEWS RESCUE MISSION OR RAISING SHASTA, THE YOUTH OPTIONS, WE HAVE TO MOVE IN THIS DIRECTION.
THIS IS WHAT THE MONEY'S INTENDED FOR.
I KNOW WE'VE ALL HAD A BUNCH OF MEETINGS WITH A BUNCH OF GROUPS, AND WE'RE SLOWLY BRINGING THEM FORWARD BECAUSE IT TAKES MONTHS TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND THAT STILL.
I'M JUST DISAPPOINTED THAT YOU DON'T HAVE BETTER NUMBERS, BUT YOU GUYS GET THE BENEFIT OF THE DOUBT.
WHAT I MEAN BY BETTER NUMBERS IS JUST AT YOUR FINGERTIPS, LIKE THAT ACTUAL DATA.
BUT I STILL THINK YOU'VE OBVIOUSLY EARNED THAT OPPORTUNITY TO BRING THAT BACK.
SUPERVISOR LONG, LET'S TAKE THE VOTE.
SUPERVISOR LONG GO AHEAD. THEN LET'S TAKE.
>> THE ONLY PART OF THIS THAT I'VE WRESTLED AT ALL WITH IS THE INTERNSHIP PROGRAM AND SUBSIDIZING AN INTERNSHIP PROGRAM, IT MEETS THE DEFINITION OF OPIOID.
WHAT MY CONCERN IS IS THAT FOLKS WITHIN THE INTERNSHIP PROGRAM WILL WORK ALL THEIR FULL TIME EMPLOYMENT AND THEN GET A SUBSIDY.
THEN THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO FOCUS ON BECOMING A DRUG AND ALCOHOL COUNSELOR.
IS THAT SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO EMPHASIZE WITH THEM PROGRAM COMES FIRST? YOU MAY HAVE TO REDUCE SOME OF YOUR OUTSIDE EMPLOYMENT SO THAT YOU CAN GET THROUGH THIS WITHOUT BEING OVERLOADED.
>> EXACTLY. THAT'S THE GOAL, WHICH IS WE COULD REPLACE THAT INCOME FROM YOUR JOB WITH THE HOURS YOU'RE ALREADY POINTING IN THE INTERNSHIP, WHAT YOU HEARD STEVEN SAY IS HE'S HAVING TO DO IT FOR FREE RIGHT NOW.
THOSE ARE HOURS OF WORK THAT ARE GOING TO IT, THIS ALSO HAS CREDITS WITH IT.
YOU DON'T GET THE CREDITS IF YOU DON'T FINISH THE INTERNSHIP.
THIS WAS ACTUALLY PLANNED BY OUR ALCOHOL AND DRUG STUDIES INSTRUCTOR A YEAR AGO.
SHE PUT THIS INTO HER ANNUAL PLANNING AT THE COLLEGE BEFORE WE EVEN CONSIDERED OPIOID SUPPORT FOR THIS.
WHEN I WENT TO HER AND SAID, WHAT CAN WE DO TO SUPPORT YOUR PROGRAM? SHE SAID, THIS IS SOMETHING WE'VE ALREADY IDENTIFIED AS BEING A NEED IN THESE PROGRAMS, AND SO SHE WAS THE ONE WHO SUGGESTED THIS AS THE LEAD INSTRUCTOR FOR THIS PROGRAM.
YOU'RE RIGHT. THIS IS THE FIRST SEMESTER WE'RE PUTTING STUDENTS THROUGH THIS, BUT IT REALLY DOES INCREASE THE POTENTIAL THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO COMPLETE THEIR PROGRAM, GET TO GRADUATION, AND THEN SIT FOR THEIR CERTIFICATION DEGREE.
THE ONLY LAST QUESTION I HAVE IS, WHAT IS THE NEED IN OUR COMMUNITY FOR SUBSTANCE AND ALCOHOL ABUSE COUNSELORS, AND IS THERE A SHORTAGE CURRENTLY, AND WILL THIS HELP THAT IF WE CAN GET PEOPLE THROUGH THIS PROGRAM SUCCESSFULLY?
>> GIVE ME YOUR NOTE. I DID DO SOME NOTES ON THAT.
WE DID BEFORE WE STARTED THE ALCOHOL AND DRUG STUDIES PROGRAM, WE DID A FEASIBILITY STUDY THROUGH OUR ECONOMIC AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT SO THEY COULD LOOK AT THE JOB GROWTH POTENTIALS.
I THINK WHAT I UNDERSTAND RIGHT NOW IS THERE'S ABOUT A 4% GROWTH IN NEED FOR THIS, AND THAT WAS BEFORE WE BROUGHT IN SOME OF THE NEW TREATMENT CENTERS.
THIS WAS DONE THREE YEARS AGO.
NOW THAT WE HAVE SOME NEW TREATMENT CENTERS LIKE THE GOOD NEWS RESCUE MISSION THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE FUNDING, THAT WILL INCREASE.
THE OTHER THING WE LOOK AT IS THAT THESE ARE JOBS THAT PAY ABOVE MINIMUM WAGE SO BETWEEN $2 AND $9 MORE ABOVE MINIMUM WAGE, SO THAT THERE ARE GETTING TO BE MORE LIVING WAGE WORK RATHER THAN JUST, ENTRY-LEVEL WORK WHICH SOME PEOPLE ARE GETTING.
>> AS FAR AS NEED IN THE COMMUNITY.
DO YOU HAVE THOSE KINDS OF NUMBERS? WE'RE 20% DOWN OF WHERE WE SHOULD BE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT?
>> YEAH, DID I NOT BRING THAT WITH ME? I CAN GO AHEAD AND PROVIDE TO THE BOARD THE STUDY THAT WAS DONE.
>> YEAH, I'M GOING TO VOTE THE WAY I'M GOING TO VOTE.
>> WE DID IT. THAT'S HOW WE GOT THE PROGRAM APPROVED AT THE COLLEGE.
THEY WOULDN'T APPROVE PROGRAMS IF THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE A NEED FOR THE STUDENTS WHO ARE GRADUATING TO GET EMPLOYED, BECAUSE THAT REALLY SETS THEM UP.
>> WE'LL START TO MY RIGHT WITH SUPERVISOR KELSTROM.
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, SO WE'RE SETTING UP THE FUNDING RIGHT NOW, BUT THEY'LL COME BACK TO US WITH A CONTRACT, SO THEN WE CAN GET ALL THOSE DETAILS AND THAT GO.
>> IN THE CONTRACT, IT'S GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE RENEW IT YEARS 2 AND 3.
[02:45:01]
THAT WAS THE AMENDED MOTION.WE'RE VOTING ON APPROVING YEAR 1 FUNDING WITH THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A RENEWAL AT SECOND AND THIRD YEARS, BUT THAT'LL COME BACK NEXT YEAR IN '26 TO RENEW THAT FUNDING.
WE'LL START TO MY RIGHT WITH SUPERVISOR PLUMMER, MS. BLANKENSHIP.
>> PASSES FOUR, ONE. [APPLAUSE]
>> WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO R4.
[R4 Take the following actions: (1) Receive a presentation from Hope Seth regarding the Community Engagement and Opinion Research for the Development of a Strategic Plan; (2) discuss the results of the Community Engagement and Opinion Research for the Development of a Strategic Plan; and (3) provide direction to staff.]
WELCOME, MS. SETH.THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. GO AHEAD AND TAKE IT AWAY.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN, SUPERVISORS, COUNTY LEADERSHIP, AND STAFF.
MY NAME IS HOPE SETH AND I'VE BEEN A CONSULTANT.
I'M AN ORGANIZATIONAL CONSULTANT, AND I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE COUNTY ON DEVELOPING A COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS TO HELP INFORM THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN.
OVER THE NEXT EIGHT MINUTES, I'M GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE HIGHLIGHTS OF THIS PROCESS AND WHAT WE'VE LEARNED FROM NEARLY 2,000 PARTICIPANTS ON THE COUNTY'S PRIORITIES.
I DO WANT TO BEGIN BY ACKNOWLEDGING SOMETHING THAT BECAME VERY CLEAR THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS, AND THAT'S THAT PEOPLE REALLY DO CARE DEEPLY ABOUT OUR COUNTY.
THEY CHOOSE TO LIVE HERE, THEY RAISE FAMILIES HERE.
THEY BUILT THEIR BUSINESSES, THEY'RE RETIRED.
THEY INVEST THE TIME AND ENERGY.
WHEN PEOPLE CARE REALLY DEEPLY, THEY ALSO SPEAK CANDIDLY.
RESIDENTS WANT TO BE PARTNERS IN THE FUTURE DIRECTION OF OUR COUNTY.
A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROCESS.
WE BEGAN IN OCTOBER TO INTERVIEW THE COUNTY DEPARTMENTS, AS WELL AS DIFFERENT BUSINESS ORGANIZATIONS IN TOWNS SUCH AS THE SHASTA EDC, THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, TO REALLY INFORM THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR SURVEY.
THEN BETWEEN NOVEMBER 1ST AND DECEMBER 5TH, NEARLY 1,900 RESIDENTS PARTICIPATED IN THE ONLINE SURVEY.
IT'S ACTUALLY ONE OF THE LARGEST RECENT ENGAGEMENT EFFORTS IN SHASTA COUNTY.
IT WAS CRAFTED TO ALLOW MAXIMUM PUT BOTH THROUGH QUESTIONS AS WELL AS OPEN-ENDED COMMENTS.
WE REALLY WANTED TO HEAR WHAT PEOPLE THOUGHT ON THE QUESTIONS.
WE EVEN HAD SOME PRIORITIZATION EXERCISES WHERE WE ASKED THEM TO TRULY PRIORITIZE FOR US TO HELP UNDERSTAND WHAT'S IMPORTANT.
WE ALSO HAD FOUR IN-PERSON COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS.
WE HELD ONE IN SOUTH COUNTY IN SHASTA LAKE, IN READING, AND IN THE BERNIE AREA.
WE HAD NEARLY 200 ATTENDEES BETWEEN ALL OF THOSE WORKSHOPS, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE OUR CAO, DAVID RICARD; OUR DEPUTY CAO, ARON BERTIN; AUDITOR NOLDEL SHORT; AS WELL AS SOME OF THE DEPARTMENT HEADS WHO CAME TO THOSE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT MEETINGS, AS WELL AS YOURSELVES.
EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU CAME, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THAT, AND ENGAGING WITH THE ATTENDEES.
WHAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT HERE IS NOT JUST THE VOLUME OF DATA.
IT WAS ABOUT A 15-MINUTE SURVEY THAT PEOPLE FILLED OUT.
SOME OF OUR RESPONSES, WE HAD 1,100 COMMENTS ON ONE QUESTION, 01,200 ON ANOTHER, AND SO WE HAVE A LOT OF DATA OF WHAT PEOPLE FEEL AND THINK ABOUT THE DIRECTION OF THE COUNTY.
BUT WHAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT IS WE REALLY HAVE A GREAT DIVERSITY.
SOMETIMES WE WONDER, IS IT REPRESENTATIVE? DID WE GET A LOT OF DIFFERENT VOICES? WE HEARD FROM CITY RESIDENTS, WE HEARD FROM RURAL RESIDENTS, UNINCORPORATED AREAS, BUSINESS OWNERS, SENIORS, FAMILIES, AND IT REALLY SHARED THEIR LIVE EXPERIENCE.
WHERE DID OUR RESPONDENTS COME FROM? YOU CAN SEE BASED ON THE AREA IN WHICH THEY LIVE.
IT ALSO REPRESENTS THE POPULATION MAKEUP OF OUR COUNTY REPRESENTATIVELY, AND 30% OF THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS.
ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS ABOUT THE SURVEY IS WE CAN ACTUALLY BREAK DOWN RESPONSES BY THE AREA THEY LIVE IN.
FOR INSTANCE, IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THEY WANTED TO MAKE COMMENTS ABOUT ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE, WE CAN SEE, ARE THEY IN THE READING CITY LIMITS OR WERE THEY ACTUALLY IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS, WHICH IS WHERE THE COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITY WOULD LIE VERSUS THE CITY.
WE ALSO ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT IS THEIR CURRENT LEVEL OF CIVIC ENGAGEMENT? WE REALLY WANTED TO UNDERSTAND HOW WELL THEY'RE CURRENTLY ENGAGED IN THE ISSUES.
I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE ONES IS 74% HAVE ATTENDED OR WATCHED A BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING.
MOST OF THEM HAVE ALSO BEEN THEY USE THE COUNTY WEBSITES AND COMMUNICATION CHANNELS,
[02:50:07]
AND OR THEY'VE CONTACTED A COUNTY DEPARTMENT OR OFFICIAL, 60%.THIS TELLS US TWO THINGS: RESIDENTS ARE PAYING ATTENTION, AND THEY'RE ALREADY ENGAGED, WHICH MEANS FUTURE OUTREACH EFFORTS.
WE CAN BUILD UPON THAT BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY PAYING ATTENTION.
WHILE THERE IS SOME FRUSTRATION IN THE FEEDBACK, WHICH YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A LITTLE BIT OF, IT'S COMING FROM PEOPLE WHO REALLY ARE LEANING IN AND PAYING ATTENTION, NOT NECESSARILY CHECKED OUT.
GENERAL SENTIMENT, WE ASKED THE QUESTION, HOW WOULD THEY RATE SHASTA COUNTY? YOU CAN SEE, IT'S A LITTLE BIT MIXED.
RESIDENTS ARE MOSTLY POSITIVE ABOUT SHASTA COUNTY AS A PLACE TO LIVE, RAISE A FAMILY, AND ENJOY QUALITY OF LIFE.
WHEN IT COMES TO EDUCATION ACCESS, BUSINESS CLIMATE, DIVERSITY, AND OVERALL REPUTATION, THEY VIEW THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE NEGATIVELY.
WE STARTED BROAD. WE WANTED TO HEAR THE GENERAL SENTIMENT AND THEN DIVE DOWN INTO THE ACTUAL FUNCTIONS AND SERVICES THAT THE COUNTY PROVIDES.
THE GENERAL SENTIMENT QUESTION REALLY WAS, ARE WE HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AS A COUNTY? OR ARE WE SOMEWHAT ON THE WRONG TRACK? YOU CAN SEE THE BREAKDOWN OF RESPONSES THERE.
BUT WE ALSO, THEN VERY NEXT QUESTION, SAID, IF YOU COULD TELL SHASTA COUNTY LEADERS ONE THING, WHAT WOULD IT BE TO FOCUS ON IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS? WE HAD 1,200 WRITING COMMENTS.
PEOPLE WEREN'T JUST SAYING, HEY, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.
THEY ACTUALLY WANTED TO TELL US WHAT THEY WOULD PREFER US TO DO AS A COUNTY.
WHEN YOU TAKE THROUGH THOSE 1,200 COMMENTS AND YOU LOOK TO SUMMARIZE WHAT ARE THE THEMES IN THOSE COMMENTS? THESE WERE THE THEMES THAT CAME OUT DURING THE COMMENTS.
LOT OF COMMENTS ON HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS, MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTION, PUBLIC SAFETY AND CRIME, AND YOU CAN SEE THE REST OF HOW THOSE CAME UP TO THE SURFACE.
WE ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE COUNTY PUT MORE EMPHASIS IN, THE SAME AMOUNT OF EMPHASIS OR LESS EMPHASIS ON.
THESE ARE AREAS THAT THE COUNTY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR.
THE TOP 5 THAT THEY WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE MORE EMPHASIS ON WOULD BE THE MENTAL AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, SUBSTANCE USE TREATMENT, HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION, TRANSPARENCY AND COMMUNICATION, AND COUNTY GOVERNMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, AND SAFETY AND EMERGENCY SERVICES.
DIVING INTO EACH ONE OF THOSE, THE TOP FIVE, THE MENTAL AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH.
RESIDENTS EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT REALLY ACCESS TO THOSE SERVICES IN THOSE WORKSHOPS, WE ACTUALLY HEARD STORIES OF FAMILIES WHO FOUND ACCESS WHERE THEY WOULD HAVE A LOVED ONE THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE SENT OUTSIDE OF OUR AREA FOR TREATMENT.
IT WAS QUITE A BURDEN, AND WE HEARD LOTS OF PERSONAL STORIES LIKE THAT WHEN WE DID OUR COMMUNITY WORKSHOP.
AS WELL AS THEN, BASED ON THE SURVEY, 74% OF RESPONDENTS WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS EMPHASIS ADDRESSED. LAST SLIDE REALLY FAST.
HEALTH AND WELLNESS AND ACCESS.
EVEN THOUGH THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY AN AREA THAT THE COUNTY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THROUGH THEIR BUDGET OR THROUGH THEIR SERVICES, WE WANTED TO FIND OUT HOW PEOPLE ARE DOING INDIVIDUALLY BECAUSE A HEALTHY INDIVIDUAL DOES MAKE FOR A HEALTHY COMMUNITY.
THE ACCESS TO PRIMARY CARE DOCTORS CAME OUT BY FAR ONE OF THE MAJOR ISSUES, AS WELL AS SPECIALIST, SOME ISSUES THAT THEY ARE STRUGGLING WITH.
HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION, 66% WANTED TO SEE MORE EMPHASIS IN THAT AREA.
ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO THE COUNTY, THE UNINCORPORATED RESPONDENTS, THEY FREQUENTLY REFERENCED ENCAMPMENTS ALONG MAYBE RIVER BANKS, TRAILS, ROADWAYS, RURAL CORRIDORS, TRASH, ILLEGAL DUMPING, AND SAFETY CONCERNS RELATED TO FIRE RISK, DRUG ACTIVITY, AND PROPERTY CRIME.
TRANSPARENCY AND COMMUNICATION.
THIS WAS ONE OF OUR LOWEST RATINGS IN THE SURVEY, PERTAINING TO COMMUNICATION AND GOVERNANCE, ONLY 70% OF RESPONDENTS TRUST COUNTY LEADERSHIP, AND ABOUT 8% FEELS LIKE THE COUNTY COMMUNICATES EFFECTIVELY, FEWER THAN 10% BELIEVES THAT WE COLLABORATE WELL WITH OUR PARTNERS, AND JUST 13% FEEL LIKE THEY RECEIVE A GOOD VALUE FOR THEIR TAXES.
THERE WERE 500 OPEN-ENDED COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR TOPIC OF TRANSPARENCY, COMMUNICATION, AND TRUST.
REALLY, WHAT WE HEAR THEY'RE ASKING FOR IS CLEAR EXPLANATIONS, CONSISTENT UPDATES, RESPECTFUL DIALOGUE, AND VISIBILITY INTO THE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS, AND BUDGET PRIORITIES.
[02:55:05]
TRANSPARENCY AND COMMUNICATION TOPICS.WE ALSO ASKED, WHAT WOULD THEY LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE COUNTY MORE INFORMATION? OPEN-ENDED. WHAT WOULD THEY LIKE TO HEAR? THEY WOULD LIKE TO HEAR TRANSPARENCY ABOUT HOW MONEY IS SPENT, THEY WOULD LIKE TO HEAR ABOUT QUARTERLY UPDATE PROGRAM, INFORMATION, AND YOU CAN SEE.
BY THE WAY, ALL OF THIS IS GOING TO BE COMPILED INTO A REPORT THAT WILL BE PUT OUT IN JANUARY.
>> THANK YOU. MISSES. THIS IS GOOD.
THIS IS GOING TO BE BACK OUT AS WELL.
SUPERVISOR LONG, SUPERVISOR PLUMMER, DID ONE OF YOU GUYS WANT TO KICK OFF THE CONVERSATION BEFORE WE MOVE TO PUBLIC COMMENT? SUPERVISOR PLUMMER.
>> SURE. THANK YOU, HOPE, FOR CONDUCTING AND LEADING THIS PROCESS AND FOR SHARING THESE RESULTS AND THANKFUL TO THE RESIDENTS OF SHASTA COUNTY FOR PARTICIPATING IN THIS.
I KNOW SOME OF YOU SAID IT TOOK YOU 45 MINUTES TO COMPLETE THE SURVEY.
APPRECIATE THE TIME THAT YOU PUT IN TO SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS.
I WANT TO START BY SAYING THAT WE'RE MAKING TIME TO BOTH HEAR THESE RESULTS, AND THIS IS JUST THE BEGINNING OF OUR ONGOING CONVERSATION ABOUT IT, AND THERE'LL BE A LOT MORE WORK TO BE DONE TO FULLY TAKE IN AND RESPOND TO WHAT YOU HAVE SHARED WITH US.
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT YOU DID SHARE YOUR OPINIONS, AND WE DO WANT TO BE SURE TO ACT ON IT.
I THINK EVEN AND MAYBE IF STEPHANIE, IF YOU CAN PUT, MIGHT HAVE BEEN THE THIRD SLIDE WITH THE CHART OF THE TOP 5 IN TERMS OF SURVEY RESULTS.
IT'S HELPFUL TO SEE THAT, TOO, BECAUSE WE EACH, PROBABLY, AS SUPERVISORS, HAD OUR OWN IDEAS OF WHAT WE THOUGHT WOULD BE DEFINITELY ON THE TOP.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE WERE SURPRISED THAT A NUMBER OF THESE MADE IT ONTO THE LIST, BUT I THINK IT IS INTERESTING.
WE'VE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THE PUBLIC SAFETY ASPECT OF IT, AND I THINK IN SOME OF OUR AD HOC CONVERSATIONS, THERE WAS A SENTIMENT OF, WE THINK THAT THAT WILL DEFINITELY RISE TO THE TOP.
I THINK THAT JUST REFLECTS THE IMPORTANCE OF DOING A PROCESS LIKE THIS AND SEEING WHERE THE COMMUNITY IS AT IN TERMS OF THE KEY PRIORITIES, AND SEEING BOTH MENTAL AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH RISE TO THE TOP IN TERMS OF THIS, AND THAT WAS CERTAINLY A TOPIC IN MY IN-PERSON CONVERSATION.
THEN I THINK ALSO THE ONE THAT WAS INTERESTING TO ME IS HEARING A LOT ABOUT THE HOMELESSNESS ENCAMPMENTS ILLEGAL DUMPING.
WE'VE, AS A BOARD, FOCUSED QUITE A BIT ON THE CODE ENFORCEMENT SIDE OF THAT, MAYBE LESS SO, AT LEAST AS A BOARD, IN TERMS OF THE ENCAMPMENT PIECE.
I KNOW, SUPERVISOR CRYE, YOU DID A NUMBER OF THINGS ON THAT IN YOUR FIRST FEW YEARS ON THE BOARD.
I THINK SEEING SOME OF THAT HIGHLIGHTED, SEEING THAT THAT, IN PARTICULAR WAS HIGHLIGHTED IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREAS WAS SIGNIFICANT.
THEN THE TWO OTHER THINGS I WOULD MENTION IS, I THINK THE TRANSPARENCY AND COMMUNICATION PIECE IS INTERESTING.
WE HAD A CONVERSATION DURING THE BUDGET HEARINGS ABOUT WHAT TO DO ABOUT THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER AND THE FACT THAT THAT PERSON HAS LEFT, AND THAT POSITION IS VACANT CURRENTLY.
I THINK THIS COULD INFORM HOW WE THINK ABOUT THAT POSITION GOING FORWARD, AND I KNOW CEO RICHARD HAS PUT SOME THOUGHT INTO THAT.
THEN I THINK SOME OF THESE OTHER THINGS, WHETHER THAT BE HEALTHCARE, WHICH I KNOW WE'VE AS A BOARD DONE SOME WORK ON, MEDICAL SCHOOL, OR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WE'VE DONE LESS OF.
THESE ARE AREAS THAT ARE HISTORICALLY A LITTLE BIT OUTSIDE OF THE CORE OF OUR FOCUS, BUT CERTAINLY VERY IMPORTANT TO THE COMMUNITY.
I THINK IT DOES REQUIRE US TO ASK THE QUESTION AS A BOARD OF, WHAT COULD WE BE DOING ON THAT, IF ANYTHING, OR HOW CAN WE PARTNER OR MOBILIZE OTHER ENTITIES IN THE COMMUNITY TO TAKE ACTION ON IT, GIVEN THE IMPORTANCE TO SHASTA COUNTY RESIDENTS.
>> THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR LONG, AND THEN HOW MANY SPEAKERS DO WE HAVE, STEPHANIE?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. HOPE IT'S BEEN AN ABSOLUTE PLEASURE WORKING WITH YOU.
I THINK WE GOT A HIGH-QUALITY PRODUCT HERE, AND I WAS VERY ENCOURAGED THROUGH ALL OF OUR AD HOC MEETINGS.
I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU BECAUSE YOU WERE LEADING THAT CHARGE WITH OUR GROUP.
SAME THING, I ECHO SOME OF THE SENTIMENTS OF SUPERVISOR PLUMER.
I WOULD HAVE EXPECTED MAYBE A DIFFERENT OUTCOME.
IF IT HAD BEEN UP TO ME, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A DIFFERENT OUTCOME, BUT I WAS JUST ONE VOTE.
YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE WILL BE A WRITTEN REPORT.
CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO EVERYONE HERE WHAT
[03:00:02]
THE NEXT STEPS IN THIS PROCESS ARE AND HOW WE GET TO ACTUALLY FORMING COMMITTEES TO DEAL WITH WHATEVER WE IDENTIFY AS THE TOP PROJECTS THAT WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON GOING FORWARD?THAT WAS ONE OF MY LATER SLIDES.
BUT IN THIS SURVEY PROCESS, WE COMBINE AND COMPILE THE DATA INTO A REPORT THAT WILL THEN BE MADE PUBLIC.
THEN THE NEXT PHASE WILL CONSIST OF SETTING APPROXIMATELY FIVE OVERARCHING STRATEGIC GOALS INFORMED BY BOTH THE SURVEY AS WELL AS WITH THE DEPARTMENT HEADS, FORMING CROSS-DEPARTMENT WORKING GROUPS, AND DEVELOPING ACTION PLANS WITH TIMELINES, BUDGETS, AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES.
THEN HOPEFULLY WE ARE ABLE TO TAKE SOME OF THAT WORK AND PUT THAT BACK OUT INTO THE PUBLIC AS WELL SO THAT THEY CAN SEE AND BE PART OF THAT PROCESS.
THOSE ARE THE NEXT STEPS, AND I BELIEVE THAT SHOULD BEGIN HERE IN JANUARY.
THANKS, HOPE FOR ALL YOUR WORK.
>> CAN WE HAVE THE SPEAKERS, MISS BLANKENSHIP?
>> YES. FIRST, DON DUCKETT, FOLLOWED BY CHRISTIAN GARDNER, THEN DORIS LUCERO.
DON DUCKETT PASSES TO CHRISTIAN GARDNER.
COME ON UP. FOLLOWED BY DORIS LUCERO.
>> SOMEBODY LEFT THEIR CLICKER.
THIS PRODUCT IS REALLY AMAZING.
HOW SUBSTANTIAL IT IS REMAINS TO BE SEEN, BUT I THINK IT'S REALLY WELL DONE FROM THE INITIAL OUTPUT.
WHAT I'D BE INTERESTED IN IS HOW THIS CORRELATES WITH OTHER COUNTIES THAT ARE SIMILAR TO OURS.
SOME OF THESE THINGS, I THINK, WE'RE VERY PREDICTABLE.
WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THE ACTUALLY, THE FIRST FIVE INDICATORS IN WHAT PEOPLE WOULD LIKE THIS BOARD TO KNOW, WHAT CITIZENS WOULD LIKE THIS BOARD TO KNOW NEEDS TO HAPPEN AS FAR AS CHANGE GOES, EACH ONE OF THESE, WHETHER WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HOUSING AND HOMELESSNESS, MENTAL HEALTH, AND ADDICTION, PUBLIC SAFETY, AND CRIME, JOB DEVELOPMENT, ECONOMIC GROWTH, AS WELL AS ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE CAN BE WRAPPED UP IN SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE'VE BEEN BATTLING HERE, LIKE TRUE NORTH.
THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT THERE ARE CO CO WHAT'S THE WORD I'M LOOKING FOR, OCCURRING DISORDERS THAT AFFECT ALL OF THESE, WITH PEOPLE WITH MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES OR SUBSTANCE ABUSE ISSUES, AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE ISSUE IS A MENTAL HEALTH DISORDERS.
IF I WERE A CEO OF A CORPORATION, I'D LOOK AT THIS AND GO, DAMN.
THIS IS NOT A GOOD REPORT CARD.
ONCE AGAIN, THE VALIDITY IS QUESTIONABLE.
ALL THAT HAS TO BE LOOKED AT FURTHER.
BUT I WOULD HOPE THIS BOARD UNDERSTANDS THAT THE CORRELATIONS HERE BETWEEN THE TOP FIVE ISSUES ARE ALL INTERRELATED.
I REALLY APPLAUD DIGNITY HEALTH AND ALL THE EFFORTS THAT THEY'VE DONE TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO GROW THAT.
MR. STREET IS NOT THE ANSWER TO THIS.
I JUST WISH THIS BOARD WOULD UNDERSTAND THAT YOU NEED TO GO WITH THE WHEELS THAT ARE WORKING AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO AUGMENT THEM.
I REALLY SUPPORT THE BOARD'S LAST ACTION IN SUPPORTING ALL THE WORK DONE BY SHASTA COLLEGE IN THIS AREA.
>> TORRES LUCERO, AND HAIR, THIS WILL BE OUR LAST SPEAKER.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MISS BLENKINSHIP.
>> WHY IS THE CLUB GOING BEFORE I GET UP HERE? SEE? THIS WAS A GOOD PRESENTATION, BUT I THINK IT WAS, I'M SORRY TO SAY, A WASTE BECAUSE WE KNOW THE BOARD ISN'T GOING TO LISTEN AS LONG AS WE HAVE THREE PEOPLE WHO THINK THEY'RE ABOVE EVERYBODY.
IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MANY TIMES THAT YOU MIGHT HOLD
[03:05:01]
A MEETING, TRANSPARENCY, AND COMMUNICATION.WE TALK ABOUT HOMELESSNESS, AND WE TALK ABOUT ALL THAT GOOD STUFF.
BUT IS IT GOING TO HAPPEN? NO. WHY? BECAUSE THE BOARD MEMBERS, THE BOARD, ACTUALLY, THE BOARD HERE HAS THEIR OWN AGENDA.
IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MANY TIMES THAT THESE POOR PEOPLE GO OUT THERE AND TRY TO COMMUNICATE WITH PEOPLE WHO HAVE MEETINGS.
LOOK AT HOW MANY YEARS WE'VE BEEN HERE, COMING TO THESE MEETINGS.
HOW LONG HAVE WE BEEN COMING HERE AND SAYING, WE WANT THE TRANSPARENCY? WE WANT THIS.
WE WANT FREEDOM OF SPEECH FOR THREE MINUTES.
DICTATOR KEVIN CRIDE WANTS TO ALWAYS DICTATE EVERYTHING. YOU KNOW? IT GOES THROUGH ONE YEAR, COMES OUT THROUGH THE OTHER YEAR, AND WE KNOW HOW IT WORKS.
LITTLE CORKY OVER THERE JUST SITS THERE, JUST WAITS FOR HIS DADDY, KEVIN, TO PULL THE STRING, SAY, HERE, THIS IS HOW YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE.
THEN CHRIS OVER HERE JUST SITS THERE AND LAUGHS AND WHISPERS IN BETWEEN WHEN PEOPLE ARE COMING UP HERE TO DO A PRESENTATION.
HOW IS THAT A ROLE MODEL OR SOMEONE WHO IS PROFESSIONAL, WHO'S GOING TO RUN THE COUNTY TO LISTEN TO THE CITIZENS? YOU GUYS DON'T UNDERSTAND.
WHY WASTE YOUR TIME GOING TO THE CITIZENS? IT STARTS WITH YOU.
IT'S JUST LIKE WHEN PEOPLE HAVE CHILDREN, AND THEY SAY, OKAY, IT COMES.
WHAT DID YOU USE TO SAY, KEVIN? YOU CAN'T CHOOSE THE PARENTS FOR THE KIDS, OR YOU CAN'T OR WHATEVER.
YOU GUYS ACTUALLY ARE THE ONES WHO CAUSED THE PROBLEMS IN OUR COUNTY.
YOU'RE THE ONE WHO STOPS YOU LAUGHING.
YOU'RE A JOKE. SEE, THIS IS WHY YOU'RE IN THE SITUATION YOU'RE IN.
>> LOVE AND LIFE, BEING BLESSED?
>> NO, YOU'RE NOT BLESSED ANYMORE.
>> NO. YOU TALKED OUT OF BOTH ENDS OF YOUR MOUTH.
>> STICK TO OUR FOUR. THAT WAS ART FULLER.
>> IT IS. THAT'S SAYING THAT YOU LIKE CONTROL, YOU LIKE TO DICTATE.
HOW ARE YOU GOING TO LISTEN TO THE CITIZENS? IF THEY COME UP TO YOU AND SAY, HEY, WE WANT OUR PROJECTOR BACK, WHY DID YOU TAKE IT AWAY? IT'S BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT US TO SHOW THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE HAVE TO ABLE TO PROVE WHAT WE SAY.
THAT'S PART OF OUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH.
WHAT ABOUT ALL THE OTHER STUFF THAT PEOPLE CAN COME UP HERE AND TELL YOU TO DO WHAT'S RIGHT? YOU DON'T LISTEN. WHAT A WASTE YOU ARE.
>> MERRY CHRISTMAS. WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND BRING THAT BACK TO THE BOARD DISCUSSION. SUPERVISOR PLUMER.
>> I HOPE I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU TO COME BACK UP.
THERE ARE A FEW OTHER THINGS THAT I THOUGHT WERE INTERESTING AND WORTH JUST FLAGGING FOR BOTH THE REST OF THE BOARD AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC.
QUESTION 9 AROUND IF COUNTY REVENUES WERE TO DECLINE IN THE FUTURE.
WE ASKED WHAT ACTIONS THE PUBLIC WOULD PREFER THAT COUNTY LEADERS TAKE.
I WONDER IF YOU COULD, AND I KNOW THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN YOUR SLIDES, BUT ASKING IF YOU COULD SPEAK TO WHAT WE FOUND ON THAT.
>> REALLY QUICK, BEFORE YOU ANSWER THAT, SUPERVISOR PLUMER, WE ARE GOING TO HAMMER THROUGH R5, AND THEN THE ADDED R6 BEFORE A CLOSED SESSION, AND WE DO HAVE A SCHEDULED OUTSIDE COUNSEL AWAITING US FOR A CLOSED SESSION.
IF YOU'RE NOT MOVING THIS TO A MOTION, I WOULD ASK THAT WE EXPEDITE THE PRESENTATION PART, AND THEN, I KNOW HOPE, CAN GET ALL THIS INFORMATION OUT TO THE PUBLIC.
>> VERY QUICK. WE DID HAVE TWO QUESTIONS AROUND PRIORITIZATION OF IF REVENUES MAINTAINED OR INCREASED, WHERE WOULD THEY LIKE TO SEE THAT MONEY BE SPENT? THIS IS FROM THE GENERAL FUND, AS WELL AS IF THERE WAS A REVENUE DECLINE, WHAT ACTIONS PRIORITIZE WHAT ACTIONS THEY WOULD FEEL LIKE THEY WOULD WANT THE BOARD TO TAKE.
IN TERMS OF PRIORITIZING FUNDING, ONLY BEING ABLE TO MAKE THOSE PRIORITIES.
MENTAL AND BEHAVIORAL HEALTH WAS THE TOP FIRE MITIGATION AND PREVENTION WAS SECOND, ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE, THIRD, COUNTY STAFFING, AND SERVICE EFFICIENCY WAS FOURTH.
WHERE WOULD THEY WANT TO SEE THOSE CUTS MADE? THOSE WERE REALLY IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE ESSENTIAL SERVICES MAINTAINED, YET FINDING EFFICIENCY WHERE POSSIBLE.
THEY WOULD ALSO PREFER TO HAVE USE REVENUES.
ACTUALLY, I HAD IT ON THE SLIDE IN ORDER. I DON'T HAVE IT IN MY NOTES.
BUT ESSENTIALLY, THEY WOULD LIKE TO SEE SERVICES MAINTAINED, BUT MORE EFFICIENCY WHERE POSSIBLE, BEFORE GETTING INTO OTHER CUTS.
AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT LIST, WE DID HAVE CUTS TO PUBLIC SAFETY BECAUSE WE KNOW IT'S SUCH A LARGE PERCENTAGE OF THE BUDGET.
WOULD THEY WANT TO RAISE REVENUE THROUGH A TAX INCREASE? BOTH OF THOSE WERE AT THE BOTTOM.
[03:10:02]
I THINK MAYBE A PERCENTAGE POINT SEPARATED THEM BETWEEN WHICH THEY WOULD PREFER TO SEE EITHER PUBLIC SAFETY CUT, BUT THAT IS ACTUALLY IN THE SLIDES IF THOSE ARE MADE AVAILABLE.>> THANK YOU. WELL, I'LL MAKE A MOTION, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED IT, BUT TO BRING BACK A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE AD HOC FOR GOALS BASED ON THIS INPUT IN THE SECOND MEETING OF JANUARY.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.
I'M GOING TO WEIGH IN JUST REALLY QUICK.
I DO APPRECIATE THE WORK OF HOPE SETH.
SHE WORKS A LOT WITH YOUTH OPTION SHASTA HAS, AND YOUR WORK IS NOT A TESTAMENT TO THE RESULTS IN THE OUTCOMES.
WE'RE TALKING LIKE ESSENTIALLY LESS THAN 1%, MAYBE RIGHT AT 1%.
I KNOW THE FACT THAT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SOME OF THESE ISSUES, AFFORDABILITY DOESN'T COME UP.
I DON'T KNOW A SINGLE PERSON IN SHASTA COUNTY THAT DOESN'T TALK WITH THEIR SPOUSE OR THEIR ROOMMATE OR WHOEVER THEY'RE HAVING A MEAL WITH AND DOESN'T TALK ABOUT THE COST OF LIVING AND AFFORDABILITY.
I THINK A LOT OF THESE THINGS ARE GREAT.
THEY HAVE INPUT, BUT IT'S STILL LESS THAN 1% OF THE TOTAL RESIDENTS.
I PERSONALLY THINK THAT WE'RE ALREADY DOING A LOT OF THIS WORK.
ONE OF THE THINGS WAS HOMELESS CAMPS.
THERE'S REALLY NOT MANY HOMELESS CAMPS IN THE COUNTY.
THEY'RE IN THE CITY OF READING, AND IT'S THE CITY OF READING'S MONKEY, IT'S THEIR CIRCUS.
THERE'S NOTHING THE COUNTY CAN DO ABOUT SOME OF THAT, OTHER THAN THE THINGS THAT WE'RE ALREADY DOING.
WE'RE ALREADY VERY PROACTIVE IN THAT.
I WON'T BE SUPPORTING IT COMING BACK JUST BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE ALREADY MOVING TO FOR IT.
NOW, IF YOU GUYS HAVE SOME THINGS THAT YOU GUYS WOULD LIKE TO BRING BACK ABOUT SOME WAYS WE COULD DO THINGS, BUT IT'S BEEN A YEAR.
WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS A YEAR.
WE'RE A YEAR INTO SOMETHING WE TALKED ABOUT, A FOUR OR FIVE-YEAR STRATEGIC PLAN.
IT DOESN'T TAKE THIS LONG TO MAKE A PLAN.
WE ALREADY KNOW FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, WE ALREADY SEE THE AUDITOR CONTROLLER, HHSA, MANY OF THE DEPARTMENTS MAKING CUTS, DOING FISCAL THINGS.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ELIMINATING PROCESSES THAT THE GOVERNMENT'S DOING THAT THEY DON'T NEED TO BE IN TERMS OF SERVICES, AND WE'RE STREAMLINING.
I'M VERY PROUD OF THE WORK THAT OUR STAFF IS DOING.
AGAIN, HOPE YOU'VE DONE A PHENOMENAL JOB, BUT HAVING LESS THAN A RIGHT OUT 1% OF RESPONDENTS.
THAT DOESN'T THAT'S NOT HELPFUL TO ME, BUT THAT'S WHERE I AM. SUPERVISOR LONG.
>> JUST TO PUSH BACK TO THAT A LITTLE BIT, AS I RECALL, IN OUR FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY, YOU WERE THE ONE THAT PROPOSED THAT WE CREATE A STRATEGIC VISION.
>> ABSOLUTELY. WELL, I DID IT, AND THEN I SUPPORTED YOU AND SUPERVISOR PLUMMER AS NEW INDIVIDUALS ON THE BOARD TO GIVE YOU GUYS A GREAT CHANCE.
YOU GUYS HAVE DONE GOOD WORK, BUT WHAT I'VE LEARNED IN THIS EXTRA YEAR, I'VE BEEN HERE TWO YEARS, AND NOW I'VE BEEN HERE A THIRD YEAR.
I JUST REALIZED, THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE DON'T PAY ATTENTION TO ANYTHING. THEY DON'T KNOW.
LOOK AT THE PEOPLE THAT COME IN HERE, EVEN THE GUY THAT'S WITH STEVE KHAN, [OVERLAPPING] HE DOESN'T, HEY, STOP YELLING OUT.
STOP. THAT'S YOUR FIRST WARNING.
>> I GUESS THE QUESTION I WOULD HAVE WOULD BE, WAS THERE A THRESHOLD OF PARTICIPATION THAT YOU WOULD HAVE HONORED THE RESULTS, BECAUSE MATT AND I AND NOLD AND CEO RICKERT AND ERIN HAVE PUT IN COUNTLESS HOURS ON THIS PROJECT.
WE ASKED THE TOUGH QUESTIONS, AND WE CAN'T CONTROL COMMUNITY INPUT, BUT ABSOLUTELY.
IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS WHERE WE'RE GIVEN A GOOD IDEA OF WHAT PEOPLE THAT TOOK THE TIME TO RESPOND WANT TO SEE IN OUR COMMUNITY.
>> IT'S HUGE THAT WAS A WAKE-UP CALL TO ME, TRANSPARENCY AND COMMUNICATION.
THAT RANKED REALLY HIGH, AND DISTRUST IN GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS.
>> WHAT WAS THE GREATEST THING UNDER TRANSPARENCY WAS WHAT? THE BUDGET. LOOK AT WHAT WE DO WITH OUR BUDGET.
SINCE I'VE BEEN CHAIR, WE SPEND AN ENTIRE WEEK AN ENTIRE WEEK ON THE BUDGET. WE DON'T DO IT.
>> I GUESS WHAT I'M ASKING IS, ARE YOU PROPOSING THAT WE DO NOT DEVELOP A STRATEGIC PLAN FOR OUR COUNTY BECAUSE I'VE BEEN TO CONFERENCES, AND THIS IS ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS SHOCKED WHEN I FIRST CAME INTO OFFICE THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING THAT IS A STRATEGIC VISION AND A ROADMAP, AND WE'VE DISCUSSED IN OUR AD HOC THE EXTREME IMPORTANCE OF GIVING GUIDANCE TO OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS WHERE THEY FEEL RESPECTED [OVERLAPPING]
[03:15:09]
>> I THINK THERE MIGHT BE A MISUNDERSTANDING IN TERMS OF WHAT I WAS ASKING TO BRING BACK.
WHAT I'M ASKING TO BRING BACK IS THE GOALS THAT WE WOULD DECIDE ON AS A BOARD.
>> I THOUGHT WE I THOUGHT YOUR MOTION WAS ABOUT ANOTHER PRESENTATION.
>> I'M SAYING THAT THE AD HOC, WE'RE GOING TO REFLECT ON THESE RESULTS.
WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE INPUT FROM TODAY'S CONVERSATION.
THEN IN JANUARY, WE'LL BRING BACK HERE OR FIVE OR WHATEVER NUMBER IT ENDS UP BEING GOALS THAT WE AS A BOARD, WILL THEN DISCUSS IF WE WANT TO APPROVE THOSE OR NOT AND MAKE AMENDMENTS TO IT.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.
>> I THINK AN IMPORTANT DISTINCTION HERE AS WELL IS THE FACT THAT HOPE HAD GREAT TURNOUT WITH DEPARTMENT HEADS WHO TALKED VERY FREELY.
THESE ARE OUR SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS, AND I VALUE THEIR OPINIONS IMMENSELY.
IT'S NOT LIKE WE REACHED 180,000 PEOPLE, BUT WE REACHED 1,900, AND WE HAD WORKSHOPS, AND WE HAVE IMPORTANTLY OUR DEPARTMENT HEADS AND THINGS THAT THEY SEE AS VISIONARY FOR THE COMMUNITY DIRECTION, AND TO GET THAT BROKEN DOWN INTO GOALS THAT WE CAN BRING BACK.
>> I THINK IT'S VALUABLE THAT WE BRING BACK SOMETHING THAT WE COULD VOTE ON.
MY POINT, THOUGH, IN THIS PROCESS WAS, IN THE WORKSHOP YOU AND I HAVE, WE HAD 17 PEOPLE, 11 OF WHICH I INVITED TWO HOURS PRIOR TO THE MEETING.
WHEN WE TALK ABOUT HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY ATTENDING THESE THINGS, I'M SAYING, HEY, WE'VE HEARD IT. WE'VE DONE THE WORK.
I KNOW, ORIGINALLY, WE WANT YOU, I BELIEVE IT WAS YOU THAT WANTED TO SPEND 100 OR 50,000, AND I SAID IT SHOULD BE TEN, BECAUSE ULTIMATELY, THIS IS WHERE WE ENDED UP.
I SUPPORT YOU, SUPERVISOR PLUMBER, AND SUPERVISOR LONG, WORKING WITH MISS SHORT AND DAVE RICKERT, BRINGING SOMETHING BACK.
LET'S GET THE PEOPLE IN THE CAR, AND LET'S GET THE CAR ON THE ROAD, BECAUSE IT'S TIME FOR ACTION, AND I'M DONE TALKING ABOUT ALL THE ANCILLARY STUFF.
WE GET PAID FOR ACTION, WE GET PAID FOR DONE.
I'LL SUPPORT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, BRINGING SOMETHING BACK THAT WE COULD VOTE ON AND POINT TO AND SAY, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ALL ON BOARD FOR.
I APPRECIATE THAT. I THINK WE COULD ALL VOTE AT THAT ON ONE TIME.
[R5 Discuss an addition to the Shasta County Charter regarding Board Member salaries which would prohibit the Board of Supervisors from giving themselves a raise without going to a public vote and consider providing direction to staff.]
THANK YOU, MISS HOPE. MISS SETH. CORKY DING IT.YES. THANK YOU. YOU CALL HER SETH HOPE.
I DON'T KNOW. R5. THIS IS SOMETHING SUPERVISOR PLUMBER ORIGINALLY BROUGHT UP, AND THEN WE'VE DISCUSSED IT.
I THOUGHT MAYBE MONICA WAS GOING TO BE UP HERE FOR THIS ONE, BUT MAYBE NOT. GO AHEAD.
>> I CAN INTRODUCE IT. I THINK THE INTENT MADE A MOTION A FEW WEEKS AGO TO BRING THIS BACK AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON DRAFTING A SPECIFIC AMENDMENT, WHICH I'LL DESCRIBE IN JUST A MINUTE.
THEN IT FELT LIKE IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO GET BOARD DIRECTION BEFORE INVESTING ADDITIONAL COUNTY STAFF TIME TO REVIEW THE LEGALITY OF IT.
THIS IS FIRST, I'LL DESCRIBE MY REASONING FOR THIS.
THEN SECOND DESCRIBES SPECIFICALLY WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS THAT I WOULD PUT FORTH BEFORE THE BOARD.
IN TERMS OF REASONING, I THINK AT A FUNDAMENTAL LEVEL, THERE IS A CONCEPT THAT WE SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GIVE OURSELVES RAISES.
IN PRETTY MUCH NO OTHER CONTEXT, UNLESS SOMEONE OWNS A BUSINESS THAT'S A SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP, ARE THEY ABLE TO JUST CHANGE THEIR OWN INCOME INDEPENDENT OF OUTSIDE AUTHORITY, AND SO I THINK THE BOARD SHOULD ABIDE BY THAT ON A PRINCIPLE LEVEL.
SECONDARILY, AS WE SAW IN THESE SURVEYS RESULTS, AND IN COMMENTS IF YOU LOOK AT SHASTA COUNTY POSTED THIS SURVEY, AND SOME OF THE COMMENTS RIGHT THERE IMMEDIATELY WERE THAT PEOPLE EVEN THOUGH IT WASN'T PROMPTED, PEOPLE SAY, DON'T GIVE YOURSELF A RAISE IN TERMS OF THE STRATEGIC PLAN.
I THINK IN ORDER TO BEGIN THE JOURNEY OF RESTORING TRUST WITH THE PUBLIC, THAT IT IS INCUMBENT UPON US TO BE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE PUBLIC ON THIS IMPORTANT MATTER WHEN IT COMES TO OUR PAY AND THE FINANCES OF THE COUNTY.
THE THIRD THING IS THAT, AND I'M ASSUMING THE BOARD KNOWS THIS, BUT FOR THE PUBLIC SAKE, CURRENTLY OUR PAY IS TIED TO, AS SUPERVISOR LONG MENTIONED EARLIER, THE UPAC BARGAINING UNIT, WHICH I THINK IS NOT REALLY APPROPRIATE IN THE SENSE THAT WE ARE
[03:20:04]
NEGOTIATING WITH THAT UNIT FOR THEIR RAISES AND WHATEVER PAY INCREASE THEY GET, WE GET, AS WELL.IT'S A CONFLICT OF INTEREST THERE.
FOR THOSE REASONS, AND MY UNDERSTANDING WITHIN THE CAPACITY OF A CHARTER AND US BEING A CHARTER COUNTY IS THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO MAKE DIRECTION RELATED TO OUR COMPENSATION.
AS A RESULT, I WOULD PROPOSE THAT WE MAKE IT THAT THE BOARD CANNOT CHANGE ITS OWN PAY, AND THAT THERE'S AN INGRAINED 1% COLA, SO 1% INCREASE IN ANNUAL PAY PER YEAR.
THE REASON FOR THAT AND THOUGHT ABOUT THIS QUITE A BIT IN TERMS OF WHAT IS THAT MARK? IF YOU MAKE IT ZERO, AND YOU MAKE IT SUCH THAT SUPERVISOR CAN INCREASE THEIR PAY.
IN 20 YEARS, YOU MIGHT LOOK AT THE PAY AND SAY, WOW, IT MIGHT EVEN BE BELOW MINIMUM WAGE IN A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME [OVERLAPPING].
AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE TIED TO, FOR EXAMPLE, ONE OF THE OTHER PROPOSALS HAS BEEN TYING IT TO THE JUDGES BECAUSE THAT IS DECIDED BY THE STATE.
ONE, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE EXPECT THE STATE TO MAKE GOOD FINANCIAL DECISIONS IN TERMS OF HOW MUCH THEY'RE PAYING THEIR PEOPLE.
SECONDARILY, IF WE LOOK OVER THE LAST, I THINK, SEVEN YEARS, THE AVERAGE PAY INCREASE IS CLOSE TO 3%.
THAT BRINGS ME TO THE FINAL POINT OF WHY 1%, WHICH IS OFTENTIMES WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT MONICA TALKED ABOUT TODAY WITH C17, WE ARE CONSIDERING A 221 OVER A THREE YEAR INCREASE.
IF YOU LOOK BACK IN MY UNDERSTANDING, AND BRYCE, YOU CAN CORRECT ME IF I MISSPEAK HERE.
BUT IF WE LOOK BACK OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS OF WHAT UPEC'S GENERAL INCREASE IS, IT'S BEEN IN THAT 2-3% RANGE.
I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD PUT OURSELVES IN A POSITION WHERE BECAUSE WE CAN'T CHANGE IT, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO CHANGE IT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS WHERE OUR PAY INCREASE IS GREATER THAN WHAT WE WOULD BE ASKING OUR STAFF TO MAKE ON A REGULAR BASIS.
FOR THAT REASON, JUST TO SUMMARIZE, MY PROPOSAL IS THAT WE BRING FORTH IN THE JUNE ELECTION, WHICH WE HAVE TILL MARCH TO GET IT ON THE BALLOT, BUT BRING FORTH IN THE JUNE ELECTION, AN AMENDMENT THAT WOULD SAY, SUPERVISORS CAN'T CHANGE THEIR OWN PAY, AND THERE WILL BE A 1% ANNUAL INCREASE TO SUPERVISOR PAY.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR? SOUNDS LIKE IT FAILS FOR A SECOND.
MISS BINGENSHIP, ARE WE HAVING SOME PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> YES, WE DO HAVE PEOPLE [INAUDIBLE].
>> CHRISTIAN GARDNER, DON DUCKETT.
DELORIS LUCERO WANT TO GET IN LINE.
>> CHAIR, AT THE MOMENT, WE HAVE SIX SPEAKERS SIGNED UP TO SPEAK.
I AM NOT SEEING ALL OF THEM HERE, BUT SOME OF THEM ARE.
>> DON DUCKETT FIRST, FOLLOWED BY STEVE CORN, MARGARET HANSON, THEN CHRISTIAN GARDNER.
IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE.
>> CAN YOU CALL EVERYBODY UP JUST SO WE KNOW IF WHO'S HERE SO I CAN LOOK AT FOR TIME?
>> YES. DON DUCKETT, STEVE CORN, MARGARET HANSON, CHRISTIAN GARDNER, DELORIS LUCERO, THEN BENJAMIN NOIN. GO AHEAD, DON.
>> THIS WILL ONLY TAKE A MINUTE.
I WAS VERY VOCAL THAT I THOUGHT THE RAISES THAT YOU DID GIVE YOURSELVES WERE RIDICULOUS.
IF WE WERE GOING TO DO A CHARTER AMENDMENT, I DON'T THINK WHAT YOU'VE PROPOSED SUPERVISOR PLUMBER TAKES IT FAR ENOUGH, RATHER THAN 1%.
I WOULD SUGGEST TYING SUPERVISORS SALARIES TO THE HOUSEHOLD MEDIAN INCOME IN SHASTA COUNTY AND THAT IT SHOULD NEVER EXCEED THAT, WHICH RIGHT NOW, I BELIEVE IS ABOUT 68,000.
IF WE WERE GOING TO DO A CHARTER AMENDMENT, I WOULD WANT IT TO BE PRETTY CUT AND DRY WITH NO BUILT IN COLAS. THANK YOU.
>> STEVE CORN FOLLOWED BY MARGARET HANSON, CHRISTIAN GARDNER, DELORIS LUCERO, THEN BENJAMIN NOIN.
>> I LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING TO GO TO PUBLIC VOTE TO GET A RAISE BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A CLEAR EXAMPLE HERE, THE 60 PLUS PERCENT INCREASE THAT YOU GUYS GAVE YOURSELF WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE $5,000 FOR FUEL OR WHATEVER.
CLOSE TO $90,000 FOR WHAT IS A PART TIME JOB FOR THREE OF YOU.
IF ANYBODY'S BEING OVERPAID IN THIS COUNTY AND WE WANT TO SAVE MONEY, IT IS THIS BOARD.
I BELIEVE THAT YOU GUYS, I THINK THAT YOU SHOULD REDUCE YOUR PAY DOWN.
MAYBE JUST SOMETHING LIKE DON DUCKETT JUST MENTIONED, I THINK THAT ACTUALLY MIGHT BE A GOOD MEASURE.
I DO THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE LIMITS BECAUSE CLEARLY IT'S BEEN ABUSED BY SOME OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. THAT'S MY OPINION.
[03:25:03]
>> NEXT UP, MARGARET HANSON, CHRISTIAN GARDNER, DELORIS LUCERO, THEN BENJAMIN NOIN.
I'M NOT SEEING MARGARET, CHRISTIAN, COME ON UP.
FOLLOWED BY DELORIS LUCERO, THEN BENJAMIN NOIN.
>> ONE PERCENT. YOU GUYS WOULD BE LUCKY TO GET A HALF A PERCENT.
I DON'T THINK THE PUBLIC'S REALLY GOING TO GO FOR THAT.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS STUFF, GOOD LUCK.
IT'S AN INTERESTING CONCEPT BECAUSE YOU GUYS WOULD HAVE TO ACTUALLY LOBBY THE PUBLIC AS TO WHY YOU WOULD EVEN DESERVE A RAISE, ALONG WITH YOUR HEALTH BENEFITS IN YOUR CAR, ALLOWANCE, ETC.
IT'S A REALLY INTERESTING CONCEPT.
LETTING THE PUBLIC VOTE IS ACTUALLY A PRETTY GOOD IDEA, AND I BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY OR A DEMOCRATIC PROCESS.
SOME OF THAT COULD ACTUALLY BE ON THE BALLOT THAT'S IN HERE.
WHAT SHOULD WE BE DOING, FOLKS? I KNOW SUPERVISOR CRY MADE A POINT A 1% RETURN ON A SURVEY IS STRETCHING IT IF YOU'RE GOING TO TRY TO CALL THAT VALID.
BUT YOU GUYS, WHEN I FIRST HEARD THE CONCEPT, I'M GOING, YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO GET A RAISE.
NOW WITH OUR PUBLIC, ARE YOU KIDDING? IT'S A BIT OF A DILEMMA.
I UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT AND UTILIZING DEMOCRACY OR DEMOCRATIC PROCESS IS A GOOD IDEA WHEN POSSIBLE.
BUT THIS PUPPY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REWORK IT QUITE A BIT, I THINK, TO TRY AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO EVEN MAKE THIS HAPPEN.
OR IT'LL BE A COLD DAY IN READING IN THE MIDDLE OF JULY BEFORE YOU GUYS GET A RAISE.
I WOULD ASSUME THIS IS COMING BACK FOR LATER DISCUSSION, BUT GOOD LUCK.
>> THANK YOU. DELORIS, COME ON UP, AND I'M NOT SEEING BENJAMIN, SO CHAIR, THIS WILL BE OUR LAST SPEAKER.
>> I'M GLAD THAT YOU PUT THIS ON HERE, PLUMBER.
BUT AS WE ALL KNOW, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO VOTE ON THIS FOR IT TO PASS BECAUSE HERE'S THE THING.
IT'S ACTUALLY EVEN BECOMES A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WHEN THEY DON'T VOTE ON THIS ITEM, AND IF THEY DO, IT STILL BECOMES CONFLICT OF INTEREST.
I THINK THAT THE BOARD ACTUALLY SHOULD BE MAKING $40,000 A YEAR.
THEN THE PEOPLE SHOULD EVALUATE YOUR JOB, HOW YOU DO YOUR JOB.
BUT YOU KEEP ON SMILING, KEVIN, BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE REELECTED, JUST SO YOU KNOW THAT.
BECAUSE IT'S ALSO CRIMINAL FOR YOU, ALL THE BOARD OR SUPERVISORS, WHATEVER YOU CALL YOURSELVES, WHEN YOU ACTUALLY VOTED FOR YOURSELF TO TAKE MONEY FROM THE PEOPLE, THAT ACTUALLY WAS FRACKING CRIMINAL BECAUSE YOU HAD NO PERMISSION TO TAKE THE MONEY FROM THE CITIZENS.
YOU ACTUALLY JUST DECIDED TO GO INTO A COMPANY WHERE YOU GOT ELECTED TO BE RUNNY AND TO MANAGE.
YOU WENT IN THERE AND YOU SAID, SHIT, THERE'S NO WAY I COULD RUN THIS JOB.
THERE'S NO WAY I COULD DO THIS JOB FOR THIS THAT AMOUNT OF MONEY.
AS WE KNOW, CHRIS, YOU USED TO WORK AS A STORE MANAGER.
YOU WERE THINKING IF I ONLY BANKRUPTCY ALREADY INTO WHAT'S HIS NAME DECIDED TO RAISE YOUR RACE BECAUSE YOU TALKED TO PATRICK? REMEMBER THAT.
JUST SO YOU KNOW, THIS IS CRIMINAL.
FOR ME TO COME UP HERE, I'M JUST TELLING YOU WHAT I KNOW, WHAT WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DONE, BUT I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO DO THE RIGHT THING.
I'M GOING TO TAKE THIS TO AN AGENCY, WHICH IS ALREADY PART OF MY COMPLAINT THAT HAS BEEN OUT THERE.
THEY'RE ACTUALLY DOING AN INVESTIGATION, AND IT'S NOT HERE IN SHASTA COUNTY, BECAUSE EVERYTHING YOU'VE DONE IS CRIMINAL.
YOU TOOK MONEY, FROM A BUSINESS, FROM THE COUNTY TO PAY YOURSELF SO YOU COULD HAVE ENOUGH MONEY FOR YOURSELF TO PAY YOUR BILLS OR WHATEVER.
IF SOMEBODY DID THAT TO YOU COME TO YOUR HOUSE AND TOOK YOUR MONEY OR CAME INTO YOUR BUSINESS, AND TOOK YOUR MONEY AND SAY, YOU'RE NOT PAYING ME ENOUGH.
I'M GOING TO GIVE MYSELF A RAISE. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? THAT'S THEFT. YOU WOULD HAVE CALLED THE POLICE.
WE NEED TO STOP YOU GUYS FROM DOING WHAT YOU'VE BEEN DOING FOR SO LONG, BECAUSE YOU ARE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE CITIZENS,
[03:30:03]
AND THAT'S CALLED ABUSE OF AUTHORITY.YOU HAVE GONE BEYOND AND ABUSE YOUR POSITION.
YOU KEEP ON SMILING GOD'S LOOKING AT YOU JUST WHAT YOU ALWAYS DO, KEVIN.
IT DOESN'T HURT ME, DOESN'T BOTHER ME, AND I'M GLAD WE'RE IN A SITUATION YOU'RE IN.
>> THANK YOU. PEOPLE CAN TRY AND STEAL MY MONEY, BUT WHEN THEY TAKE MY TIME, THAT JUST MAKES ME.
LET'S GO AHEAD AND HAVE HER REMOVED. THAT'S IT.
SHE CAN LEAVE. THAT'S HER THIRD WARNING.
REMOVE HER. YOU NEED TO LEAVE.
>> REMOVE. THANK YOU. HAVE A GOOD CHRISTMAS.
>> I WILL TELL YOU, SUPERVISOR PLUMBER, I CAN APPRECIATE BECAUSE IT REALLY SOUNDS LIKE IT'S ON PRINCIPLE, CORRECT? THAT THE BOARD SHOULD NOT HAVE VOTED FOR THE RACE.
IS THAT WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO FOR YOU AS PRINCIPAL?
>> YEAH, I LOOKING FORWARD, TO HAVE THE PUBLIC TRUST US AS A LEADERSHIP GROUP AND KNOW THAT WE CAN'T ARBITRARILY CHOOSE TO ENRICH OURSELVES ON THAT. I THINK [OVERLAPPING].
>> IS ROOTED IN PRINCIPLE FOR YOU.
IS THAT REALLY WHAT THIS COMES DOWN TO?
SUPERVISOR KELSTROM, WAS THE ONLY MEMBER HERE THAT'S STILL HERE THAT VOTED FOR IT.
DO YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? DO YOU FEEL THE SAME ABOUT THE PRINCIPAL SIDE OF IT? WELL, I'M SORRY, I DIDN'T KNOW IF I SUPERVISOR PLUMBER, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU THEN BECAUSE THE DIFFERENCE IN WHAT THE PAY IS, I BELIEVE, IF MY NUMBERS HERE ARE CORRECT, THE DIFFERENCE IS PER PAY PERIOD IS ABOUT $1,200 OR $1,212 PER PAYCHECK.
I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO GIVE THAT MONEY BACK EACH PAYCHECK TO THE GENERAL FUND, BECAUSE IF IT'S PRINCIPLED FOR YOU, THAT THAT MONEY SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN GIVEN IN THE FIRST PLACE, BECAUSE IT'S BASED IN PRINCIPLE, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO GIVE THAT BACK EVERY MONTH, AND I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO DO IT VERY PUBLICLY BECAUSE IF IT'S ABOUT PRINCIPLE.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO RIGHT WRONGS OF THE PAST.
IF YOU FEEL LIKE IT'S A WRONG, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU, RIGHT NOW, WILL YOU GIVE THAT GROSS AMOUNT? HEY, THAT'S YOUR FIRST WARNING.
AGAIN, WE SIT AND LISTEN TO YOU GUYS, AND WE'RE QUIET.
MY QUESTION, SUPERVISOR PLUMMER TO YOU.
SUPERVISOR LONG, IF YOU FEEL ANYWHERE, AND I'M GOING TO GO DOWN THE LINE HERE BECAUSE I FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT THIS.
I THINK AS WE TALK ABOUT THIS POLITICAL STAND OR WHATEVER IT IS, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT.
I'M GOING TO COME BACK FOR THAT ANSWER HERE IN A SECOND.
WELL, ACTUALLY, I'VE ALREADY ASKED IT.
WILL YOU GIVE YOUR RAISE BACK? DECIDE RIGHT NOW BASED ON PRINCIPLE THAT WE SHOULD HAVE NEVER GOT IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I THINK IT'S A YES OR NO QUESTION. IF IT'S PRINCIPLED.
>> WELL, I'M THINKING ABOUT IT.
>> YOU DON'T THINK ABOUT YOUR PRINCIPLES?
>> NO, I DO, BUT THERE'S CERTAIN PRINCIPLES THAT ARE IN OUR CORE.
WHY DIDN'T YOU GIVE BACK YOUR RAISE? I'LL TELL YOU EXACTLY WHY, BUT I'M WAITING FOR YOURS.
WELL I'VE ALREADY DEMONSTRATED THAT I WAS WILLING TO GIVE BACK MY PORTION OF MY INCOME WHEN, FOR EXAMPLE, THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN HAPPENED.
>> HERE'S WHAT I'LL TAKE BECAUSE I'M GOING TO GO DOWN THE LINE AND TALK ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A GREAT ISSUE.
I THINK AFFORDABILITY IS A GREAT ISSUE.
BUT I'M ASKING YOU, ARE YOU GOING TO GIVE BACK THAT GROSS AMOUNT THAT WAS GIVEN IN A RACE?
>> BECAUSE HERE'S WHAT THIS COMES DOWN TO.
I'LL GO THROUGH THIS EXTENSIVELY.
BECAUSE I THINK WE HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL THE ELECTEDS AND HOW WE PACKAGE THESE TOGETHER.
THIS WILL BE THE NEXT ITEM, BUT I'M GOING TO NOT JOIN THEM, BUT I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT THEM IS FOR ME, AS IT RELATES TO THIS SPECIFIC THING.
IF IT GOES TO THE VOTERS, ONE OF THE SPEAKERS IS RIGHT, THEY'LL NEVER DO ANYTHING.
WHAT I DO NOT WANT IS I DON'T WANT INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE RETIRED.
NO OFFENSE TO SUPERVISOR LONG.
I DON'T WANT PEOPLE THAT HAVE OUTSIDE REVENUE AND CAN AFFORD A LIFESTYLE, AND THEY HAVE THE TIME TO DO THIS.
MAYBE POSSIBLY, LIKE SUPERVISOR HARMON AND MAYBE MYSELF.
WHAT I WANT AND THIS IS WHAT I WAS EXTREMELY TORN ABOUT IN THE VOTE LAST YEAR WAS,
[03:35:05]
YOU HAVE SUPERVISOR KELSTROM, WHO HE CHOSE TO WALK AWAY FROM ANOTHER CAREER AND HAD MADE MORE MONEY.BUT HE BELIEVED SO MUCH IN WHAT WAS BEING DONE AND THE CHANGES THAT NEED TO BE MADE, HE STEPPED UP, AND HE SAID, HEY, I'M GOING TO RUN, AND I DON'T THINK AND THOSE THAT KNOW HIS ENGINE AND HIS VEHICLE BLEW UP BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE A DISTRICT THAT IS FINITE.
I MEAN, IT'S FROM ONE TIP TO THE OTHER, PROBABLY WELL OVER AN HOUR, CORRECT? WHAT I DON'T WANT IS I DON'T WANT ANOTHER TEHAMA COUNTY SITUATION WHERE THEY'RE MAKING VERY LITTLE.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE MAKEUP OF THEIR BOARD, THEY HAVE RETIREES OR PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING IT VERY PART TIME, AND I THINK THE COUNTY DESERVES TO HAVE PEOPLE THAT ARE FULLY GIVEN IN THESE ROLES DOING THE WORK.
THAT'S WHY I COME BACK. IF IT'S A PRINCIPAL DISCUSSION, I WANT TO SEE WHERE YOU'RE STARTING THIS DISCUSSION OFF IF WE'RE GOING TO GO THAT WAY.
>> TO YOUR ARGUMENT FOR HAVING IT BE, SAY, A LIVABLE WAGE, SO TO SPEAK.
THAT WAS WHY I INCLUDED IN THIS PROPOSAL THAT THERE WOULD BE A COLA.
BECAUSE I DO THINK THAT IT SHOULD INCREASE AS INFLATION INCREASES SOME AMOUNT, BUT THAT THAT AMOUNT SHOULD NOT BE HIGHER THAN WE'D BE ASKING.
>> BUT I THINK WE SHOULD ONLY GET IT IF EVERYBODY GETS IT.
WE SHOULD NOT GET 1% IF WE HAVE OTHER DEPARTMENTS GET NOTHING.
I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE TIED IN TO BE.
>> WELL, I THINK AND THAT'S FAIR.
THE CHALLENGES THAT WE SET THOSE DEPARTMENTS PAY.
THAT CREATES AN INHERENT CONFLICT OF INTEREST, WHICH IS WHY I PICKED 1% BECAUSE ON AVERAGE, I BELIEVE THAT WILL ALWAYS BE LOWER OVER, SAY, A THREE TO FIVE YEAR PERIOD THAN ANY PAY INCREASE THAT WE WILL GIVE STAFF.
I THINK IT KEEPS US BELOW IT, BECAUSE LIKE YOU SAID, I THINK WE LEAD BY EXAMPLE, WE SAY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO ASK YOU TO TAKE OR NOT RECEIVE A COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT THAT WE RECEIVE OURSELVES.
ON WHOLE, I THINK WILL OFTEN BE, HALF OR EVEN LESS THAN WHAT WE'RE ASKING STAFF TO DO.
>> AGAIN, THIS IS THE PROCESS, BUT I FEEL LIKE THIS AND I'M NOT SAYING IT'S A POLITICAL STUNT, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK A LOT OF THOUGHT AND A LOT OF ENERGY WAS PUT INTO THIS.
I THINK RIGHT NOW, THIS BEING BROUGHT UP IN THE CONTEXT OF IT IS.
THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING, AND IT WASN'T RESONATING TOO MUCH UNTIL YOU'VE DRILLED HOME THE WORD PRINCIPLE.
THAT'S WHY I'M PUSHING YOU ON IT IS BECAUSE, I'D HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR THAT.
IF YOU'RE GOING TO DIE ON THAT HILL, I THINK YOU LEAD US IN THAT, AND I WANT TO SEE YOUR ANSWER, BUT I KNOW IT'S NOT BEEN TEN MINUTE.
SUPERVISOR LONG. THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE SIR.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I REALLY WRESTLE WITH THIS.
SHOULD THE BOARD BE ABLE TO, AS HAPPENED LAST YEAR, GIVE THEMSELVES A RAISE? NO, THEY SHOULD NOT.
THE BOARD SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SET THEIR OWN SALARY.
THE BOARD HAVE GONE 22 YEARS WITH NO COST OF LIVING? NO, THAT WAS INAPPROPRIATE BECAUSE THEY FELL BEHIND WHEN EVERYONE ELSE WOULD BE EXPECTING TO GET THEIR COLA LAST, THEIR COST OF LIVINGS, 2, 3%, WHATEVER IT IS, OVER THE YEARS.
I LOOK AT THIS, AND THIS IS MY EXPLANATION.
I LOOK AT THIS AS THE PROTECTION FOR THIS POSITION AND GETTING THE RIGHT PEOPLE IN THIS POSITION.
IF YOU HAVE A SITUATION LIKE TEHAMA COUNTY, THE VOTERS HAVE NEVER APPROVED A RAISE, AND THEY MAKE $18,000 A YEAR.
ALL OF THEM HAVE TO HAVE INDEPENDENT MEANS TO MAKE A GO OF IT, WHETHER IT'S RE THEY HAVE ONE RETIRED POLICE LIEUTENANT.
THEY'VE GOT A PROPANE PERSON THAT IS WELL TO DO AND DOESN'T NEED ANYTHING.
YOU'RE GOING TO LIMIT THE SUBSET OF PEOPLE THAT ARE WILLING TO TAKE THIS ON.
I LOOK AT THIS AS IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME, BUT HOW DO YOU PROTECT THE POSITION AND GET THE RIGHT PEOPLE TO COME INTO THIS POSITION AND GIVE IT THEIR ALL FOR THE RIGHT REASONS TO BETTER OUR COMMUNITY.
I'M RELUCTANT TO BIND FUTURE BOARDS WITH DECISIONS WE MAKE, WHICH WILL COOKIE CUTTER, FORMULAIC, SET WHAT THEY WANT TO DO.
[03:40:02]
I DO LOOK AT THE VOTERS, IF THE FUTURE BOARD WERE TO GIVE AN INORDINATE AMOUNT OF A RAISE.THERE ARE MEASURES THAT CAN BE TAKEN, MY WIFE'S AN ATTORNEY, AND THERE ARE MEASURES THAT CAN BE TAKEN TO A, REMOVE THEM FROM OFFICE.
THAT'S A VOTER DECISION AND B TO COUNTERACT SOMETHING THAT WOULD HAVE TO STAND UP TO THE SCRUTINY OF WHAT IS REASONABLE.
PUTTING ALL THAT TOGETHER, I CAN LIVE WITH WHATEVER WE DECIDE AS A BOARD.
THAT'S NOT IT, BUT I JUST WANT TO PROTECT OUR BOARD, AND I WANT TO PROTECT THIS SO THAT PEOPLE CAN COME INTO THIS.
IT'S A LITTLE HARDER NOW THAT WE HAVE TERM LIMITS BECAUSE WE HAD SOME SUPERVISORS THAT WERE DOING A GREAT JOB.
THEY STAYED FOR 20 YEARS AND REALLY GOT INTO THE TRENCHES WITH SOME OF THAT.
IT'S A REALLY COMPLEX PROBLEM, AND I DON'T THINK WHAT'S BEING BROUGHT FORWARD NECESSARILY SOLVES THE PROBLEM, BUT I WOULD BE OPEN TO FUTURE DISCUSSION AS TO HOW WE GO.
BUT MAKE IT KNOWN THAT I DO FEEL STRONGLY THAT THE PAST BOARD ACTIONS, WHETHER TO CATCH UP OR NOT, THE VOTERS SHOULD BE ABLE TO DETERMINE THE WAGES UP HERE, AND I CAN SEE ALL THE POINTS FROM A 30,000 FOOT PERSPECTIVE ON THIS.
I JUST WANT TO PROTECT THE BOARD MEMBERS AND THE QUALITY OF PEOPLE THAT COME FORWARD TO JOIN THE BOARD.
>> YES, MY IMPRESSION, LOOKING AT THE CANDIDATES WHO HAVE BOTH RUN AND WON OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS IS BOTH THAT THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF VARIATION IN AGE.
I MEAN, WE HAVE A 30 YEAR RANGE IN AGE IN OCCUPATION IN WEALTH OR INCOME STATUS.
THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF VARIATION.
I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THE QUALITY OF CANDIDATE.
FOR YOU TO JOINED THE BOARD BEFORE THE CURRENT PAY WAS EVEN IN PLACE.
I THINK IN TALKING WITH TEHAMA COUNTY, FOLKS AT SSAC, THIS LAST TWO WEEKS AGO.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS THEY'RE PUTTING IN A GOOD AMOUNT OF TIME.
YES, THEY'RE GETTING PAID 19 OR 33,000 OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES, A VERY MINIMAL AMOUNT.
BUT YOU ALSO SEE SIGNIFICANT VARIATION IN THOSE CURRENT SUPERVISORS IN TERMS OF THEIR AGE IN TERMS OF THEIR OCCUPATION.
I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO PROTECT AGAINST A PROBLEM THAT WE DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE, AND THAT HASN'T NECESSARILY BEEN HERE EVEN IN THE PAST.
I THINK WHAT WE WANT TO PROTECT AGAINST IS THE MISTRUST OF THE PUBLIC, IN OUR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
WHAT I WILL SAY, AND HERE'S MY DECISION REGARDING YOUR QUESTION.
I THINK IT'S A FAIR POINT BY DAN DUCKETT AROUND MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME IS THAT THE GAP BETWEEN OUR CURRENT PAY AND THE MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME.
I WILL DONATE THAT BACK TO THE COUNTY.
IF AN AMENDMENT WERE TO GO ON THAT APPROVED OUR CURRENT PAY WITH A 1% COAL, AS I'VE SUGGESTED, THEN I WOULD STOP THAT DONATION, BECAUSE I WOULD TAKE THAT AS A SIGN THAT THE PUBLIC IS APPROVING THAT CURRENT PAY.
>> I APPRECIATE THE CONVERSATION.
[APPLAUSE] HERE'S MY QUESTION, THOUGH.
AGAIN, I'M GOING TO PUSH ON THIS IF THE PRINCIPLED ITEM BECAUSE HERE'S THE THING AT THE END OF THE DAY, BECAUSE AT THE END OF I GIVE AWAY MY ENTIRE SALARY.
I DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT OR RIGHTEOUS OR ANYTHING ELSE TO TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU GIVE.
YOU JUST GIVE FREELY AND ABUNDANTLY, AND YOU JUST DON'T TALK ABOUT IT.
I'M NOT STAMMERING, BUT I'M PASSIONATE ABOUT THIS WORK.
I WOULDN'T DO IT, ESPECIALLY IN EVERYTHING I'VE PROGRESSED THROUGH TO BE HERE, IF I WASN'T SO INVESTED IN MAKING THE NECESSARY CHANGES IN THE COUNTY.
I REALLY WOULD ASK YOU IF IT'S ABOUT PRINCIPLE.
IT'S NOT ABOUT WHAT DON DUKE A SPEAKER SAID.
IT'S ABOUT THE PRINCIPLE THAT THIS BOARD DID SOMETHING THAT YOU ADAMANTLY AGAINST.
IT IS ADMIRABLE TO GO BACK TO THAT.
BUT IF WE'RE GOING TO GO ON PRINCIPLE, THAT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE COMPROMISING YOUR PRINCIPLES.
IF YOU'RE COMPROMISING YOUR PRINCIPLES, I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHO I'M SERVING WITH, BECAUSE IT WAS AT 55, NOW IT'S AT 92.
IF YOUR PRINCIPAL SAID THAT SHOULD HAVE NEVER HAPPENED,
[03:45:02]
AND WE BROUGHT IT THIS WAY, I WOULD ASK YOU TO RECONSIDER BECAUSE I THINK YOU'RE A MAN OF PRINCIPLE, AND I THINK WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT, YOU PROBABLY SHOULD GO BACK TO THE 55.>> I THINK THAT THE PROCESS FOR HOW WE GOT THERE WAS WRONG.
DO I THINK, LIKE SUPERVISOR LONG, THAT THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN NO PAY INCREASES FOR 22 YEARS? NO. THAT'S WHY I'M PROPOSING IN THIS PROPOSAL THAT THERE ARE A PAY INCREASE, BUT THAT THAT PAY INCREASE SHOULD BE LOWER THAN WHAT WE'RE GRANTING STAFF.
THAT'S THE PRINCIPLE THAT I'M OPERATING BY.
THAT'S WHAT I HAVE PROPOSED HERE TODAY.
>> I'M GOING TO EMBARRASS THEM, AND SUPERVISOR HARMON, I APOLOGIZE.
BUT THE ONE PERSON I TALKED TO ABOUT THIS ITEM WAS SUPERVISOR HARMON.
IT WAS PRETTY MUCH THE SAME SENTIMENTS ABOUT WHAT HE DOES WITH HIS PAY.
I WAS GOING TO TALK TO YOU SUPERVISOR LONG ABOUT SAYING, HEY, YOU HAVE, A PENSION, YOU'RE BEING PAID, I THINK, NOT 148000 ON TRANSPARENT CALIFORNIA BALLPARK TO DO A JOB THAT YOU 1 MILLION% EARNED EVERY CENT OF THAT, PROTECTING THE PUBLIC AND SERVING THE WAY YOU SERVED BEHIND A BADGE, AND I'M THANKFUL FOR THAT.
BUT, JUST THE BOARD DISCUSSION HERE, I TALKED TO SUPERVISOR HARMON, AND I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU THE SAME THING, SUPERVISOR LONG, BUT YOU DIDN'T NECESSARILY MAKE THE SAME STATEMENTS, AND I APPRECIATE THE WAY YOU APPROACHED IT.
FOR SUPERVISOR KELSTROM, SUPERVISOR HARMON WILL GET YOU 1 SECOND, BUT, IF YOU WANT TO GET IN QUE, I'VE TAKEN YOU OUT A COUPLE OF TIMES ON ACCIDENT.
>> DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. LET'S MOVE ON.
>> DIED FOR LACK OF SECOND. SUPERVISOR HARMON, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON. SUPERVISOR HARMON.
>> I JUST WANT TO I DON'T KNOW I GUESS JUST MAKE A STATEMENT BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO SEE SOMEBODY IN THE FUTURE.
IT COSTS ME MONEY TO DO THIS, AND I'M NOT WHINING ABOUT IT OR NOTHING.
I MADE THAT DECISION, BUT IT TRULY COST ME MONEY TO DO THIS JOB.
I MADE THAT DECISION AND I'M OKAY WITH THAT.
DID I DECIDE TO BE A SUPERVISOR FOR THE SALARY? NO, I DIDN'T.
IS IT HELP COMPENSATE FOR SOME COSTS? I MEAN, YOU GOT TO DRIVE ALL THE WAY TO BERNIE.
I'M TELLING YOU, I'M NOT WHINING ABOUT IT, BUT I'M TELLING YOU IF YOU GET SOMEBODY THAT'S A CANDIDATE THAT SHOULD BE A CANDIDATE IN THE FUTURE, THAT YOU AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE DO THIS JOB BECAUSE THEY SHOULD, AND THEY GOT PREVENTED FROM DOING THIS JOB BECAUSE THERE'S NOT AN ADEQUATE INCOME?
>> YOU GOT KIDS STILL AT HOME.
I GOT KIDS, TOO, BUT THEY'RE NOT HOME.
KELSTROM HAS NO OTHER SALARY THAT I'M AWARE OF.
I KNOW YOU SPEND MONEY PAYING SOME OF YOUR PEOPLE JUST TO HELP YOU FILL IN THE GAPS, SO THAT'S WHAT I DO.
I HAVE TO PAY PEOPLE THAT ARE ALREADY IN MY ORGANIZATION, BUT I'M PAYING THEM TO FILL IN THE GAPS BECAUSE I'M NOT THERE.
MY SON'S RUNNING THE BUSINESS.
ANYWAY, I DON'T CARE WHICH WAY THE THING GOES, TELL YOU THE TRUTH.
EXCEPT FOR I DO CARE ABOUT ONE THING.
I THINK KELSTROM IS DOING US A AWESOME JOB.
SORRY, IF I STEP OUT OF LINE HERE, BUT I THINK KELSTROM IS DOING US AN AWESOME JOB, AND I WOULDN'T WANT TO SEE HIS SALARY DECREASE BECAUSE THIS IS THE ONLY INCOME HE'S GOT.
>> WELL, AND HONESTLY, IT'S NOT [OVERLAPPING].
>> I'M SORRY, IF I'M OUT OF LINE.
>> NO, SUPERVISOR PLUMMER, AND WE'RE NOT VOTING ON THAT. GO AHEAD, SUPERVISOR PLUMMER.
>> WELL, AND JUST TO BE CLEAR AS A CHARTER COUNTY, AS FAR AS MY UNDERSTANDING, IS THAT THE PUBLIC AT ANY POINT COULD PUT A CHARTER AMENDMENT ON THERE TO REDUCE OUR COMPENSATION.
WHAT I'M ASKING IS NOT THAT WE REDUCE IT, BUT ONE, WE FIX A CONFLICT OF INTEREST PROBLEM.
TWO, WE CREATE A STEADY BUT MARGINAL INCREASE THAT IS LESS THAN, SO JUST TO CLARIFY THERE.
THERE WAS NOT A SECOND. WE'VE HEARD THIS.
I THINK AT THIS POINT, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON, AND THEN THANK SUPERVISOR PLUMMER FOR THE CONTRIBUTION BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND AND WHATEVER THAT AMOUNT WINDS UP BEING TO THE MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME.
MS. FUGET ARE YOU HERE? YES, YOU ARE.
HERE SHE GETS UP, STANDS DOWN THE AISLE.
TOWARDS THE PODIUM, SHE COMES. WELCOME BACK.
>> I NARRATED THAT FOR YOU, SO C-17, AND THIS GOES RIGHT IN LINE WITH THE ITEM WE JUST SPOKE ABOUT IS.
[C17 Adopt a salary resolution which repeals Salary Resolution No. 1698 and amends the Shasta County Salary Schedule for cost of living salary increases for Unrepresented Management and Elected Department Head classifications.]
I AGREE WITH SUPERVISOR PLUMMER,[03:50:03]
THAT'S WHY I DIDN'T VOTE FOR IT LAST YEAR.I HAD A REALLY HARD TIME WITH IT BECAUSE I DIDN'T FEEL RIGHT, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I COMPLETELY SUPPORTED THE OTHER THREE BOARD MEMBERS WHO DID VOTE FOR IT BECAUSE IT WAS BEYOND NECESSARY.
I JUST COULDN'T GET THERE, BUT THAT'S WHY IT HADN'T MOVED IN 20 SOME YEARS.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WITH C17, HOW CAN WE PUT THE ELECTEDS ALL IN A BUCKET, WHICH WOULD BE THE FIVE DISTRICTS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, THE SHERIFF, THE DA, THE ASSESSOR RECORDER, AUDITOR CONTROLLER, AND THE TREASURER.
HOW CAN ALL OF THOSE POSITIONS BE IN A BLOCK TOGETHER, AND MAYBE MOVE TOWARDS SOME TYPE OF, AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S A CHARTER AMENDMENT OR HOW THAT WORKS, BECAUSE I DO KNOW WE DON'T WANT THE SHERIFF OR ANY OF THOSE POSITIONS NOT TO HAVE SOMEBODY THAT WOULD WANT TO BE IN THAT ROLE AND MOVE FORWARD.
AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK IT'S JUST AS IMPORTANT WITH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
>> MR. CHAIRMAN. I HAVE TO TELL YOU THE ITEM THAT'S ON AND DOESN'T HAVE A DISCUSSION LISTED WITH THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL.
IF YOU WANT TO HAVE THAT COME BACK AT ANOTHER TIME WHEN THE PUBLIC CAN BE NOTICED THAT THAT'S WHAT ON.
>> LET ME ASK YOU THIS, AND I'M ASKING MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS.
I THINK THIS IS CRITICAL BECAUSE WE HAVE DEPARTMENT HEADS THAT KNOW ABOUT COLAS AND RAISES AND COST OF LIVING.
I GET THAT. MY WIFE'S A TEACHER.
I UNDERSTAND HOW THOSE PAY SCALES GO.
I WANT TO HAVE THAT CONVERSATION QUICKLY, SO SHOULD I MAKE A MOTION TO BRING THIS BACK AND WE DO A SPECIAL MEETING ON CHRISTMAS EVE? I'M JOKING, BUT DO WE DO IT ON, I DON'T KNOW THE TIMING OF IT.
BUT I DON'T WANT TO VOTE FOR ALL THE ELECTEDS TO MOVE FORWARD ON A THREE YEAR PLAN AND THEN NOT GET TO ADDRESS THIS NOW, BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A RELEVANT CONVERSATION. SUPERVISOR KELTRO.
>> WE'VE ALREADY VOTED ON THIS.
THIS IS JUST A SMALL GROUP THAT WAS NOT REPRESENTED OR NOT IN THE VOTE THAT WE DID.
HAD WE PUT THEM IN THERE TO BEGIN WITH, WE PROBABLY STILL WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR THIS.
>> I WOULDN'T HAVE. THAT'S MY FAULT.
I CAN APPLAUD SUPERVISOR PLUMMER AND WHAT HE'S TALKING ABOUT, AND THAT'S WHY I'M CURIOUS.
MAYBE THIS IS THE TIME WHERE WE BREAK IT OUT.
>> I GET THAT, BUT YOU DID VOTE FOR THIS, HOW MANY MEETINGS BACK WAS THAT? DO YOU REMEMBER?
I'M READILY ADMITTING AS WE GO THROUGH, AS WE ALL KNOW, WITH CLOSED SESSION, WE GO THROUGH THE ITEMS.
>> YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE SAYING THAT IF IT WAS WORDED DIFFERENTLY, THIS SMALL GROUP WAS ORIGINALLY PUT IN THERE, YOU WOULD HAVE VOTED NO.
>> WHAT I'M SAYING IS, BASED ON THE CONVERSATIONS WITH SUPERVISOR PLUMMER AS HE BROUGHT THIS UP, AND I BEGAN TO TALK TO THE AUDITOR CONTROLLER AND LOOKING BACK TO THIS GOES WAY BACK TO PAZANKO AND SUPERVISOR MODI AND HOW THOSE RAISES, WHY THE PAST AUDITOR CONTROLLER, NODA SCHULTZ PREDECESSOR, WHY HE LEFT.
I THINK, MAN, THIS IS WONKY THAT YOU HAD SUPERVISORS NOT GIVING CERTAIN ELECTED RAISES AND GIVING HIM TO OTHERS BECAUSE OF POLITICS.
I THINK THE ITEM OF BRINGING ALL THE ELECTEDS INTO ONE CONVERSATION INTO A CHARTER AMENDMENT, I'M COMPLETELY FOR.
IN THIS ITEM IN CLOSED SESSION, TO BE HONEST, I DIDN'T HAVE THE DEEP CONVERSATIONS AT THAT POINT WITH ALL THE PEOPLE I SPOKE ABOUT [OVERLAPPING].
>> I HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A CHARTER AMENDMENT, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAKING MAJOR CHANGES, SO YOU CAN DO ONE OF TWO THINGS.
YOU CAN CONTINUE THIS ITEM AND PLACE ANOTHER ITEM ON TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION WHERE YOU CAN MOVE THIS ITEM THROUGH TODAY.
>> MONICA, WHAT'S THE FALLBACK IF WE PUSH THIS TO JANUARY 6TH?
>> THE FALLBACK OR THE EMPLOYEES WHO ARE NOT ELECTED, WHO ARE INADVERTENTLY LEFT OUT OF THE PRIOR RESOLUTION WILL NOT GET THEIR COST OF LIVING INCREASE UNTIL THIS COMES BACK.
>> ALSO, IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT BECAUSE THE BOARD ALREADY APPROVED THIS, THE ELECTEDS WILL GET THEIR INCREASES AS OF THIS PAY PERIOD.
WE WILL PROCESS THOSE FORWARD.
THAT WILL BE UP TO HOW WE BROUGHT IT FORWARD.
IN THE CASE OF THE ELECTED OR THE UNREPRESENTED MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEES WHO WERE INADVERTENTLY EXCLUDED, WHEN WE BROUGHT IT FORWARD, WE CAN MAKE THAT RETROACTIVE BACK TO THE 14TH.
>> DID YOU GET THAT SUPERVISOR LAW? I'M NOT SURE I TRACKED THAT.
YOU'RE SAYING THAT THAT CAN BE RETROACTIVE, SO WE CAN CATCH THEM BACK UP, SO THEY WOULD GET THAT PAY.
THEY JUST WOULDN'T GET IT NOW. THEY WOULD GET IT IN JANUARY.
THEY'RE NOT LOSING IT. THEY'RE JUST HAVING IT DELAYED. IS THAT RIGHT? CORRECT. BUT I ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU UNDERSTAND THE ELECTED DEPARTMENT HEADS RIGHT NOW THAT ARE COVERED IN THAT RESOLUTION.
GIVE ME EXAMPLE. WE TALKED ABOUT HHSA, ARE WE TALKING ABOUT PUBLIC WORK? THOSE NON-ELECTED DEPARTMENT DR. MOO,
[03:55:01]
ARE THOSE THE ONES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT?>> I'M SPECIFICALLY RIGHT NOW TALKING ABOUT THE ELECTED DEPARTMENT HEADS, SO THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY.
THEY WERE ALREADY APPROVED TO RECEIVE THEIR COST OF LIVING INCREASE.
THAT COST OF LIVING INCREASE WILL GO INTO EFFECT AS OF THIS PAY PERIOD THAT'S CURRENTLY I N PLACE.
IF WE KICK THIS TO A LATER DATE, WE WOULD ALREADY HAVE THAT RESTIVE LIVING INCREASE IN PLACE FOR.
>> THIS IS JUST COVERING THE UNELECTED THAT WERE LEFT OUT OF THAT GROUP.
>> IT REPEALS THE OTHER RESOLUTION IN ITS ENTIRETY AND ADOPTS A NEW RESOLUTION ON THOSE [OVERLAPPING].
>> IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING WITH THE ELECTED, WHICH APPROVING THIS TODAY WON'T ADDRESS EITHER WAY.
>> YES. I WOULD SAY [OVERLAPPING].
>> LET'S MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS.
IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING LATER WITH THE ELECTED, WE CAN DO THAT SEPARATELY.
>> I MAKE A MOTION WE APPROVE C-17 AS WRITTEN.
JUST TO CLARIFY COUNCIL HARMON BEFORE WE TAKE THE VOTE, SO WE CAN BRING BACK IN JANUARY A DISCUSSION ABOUT MOVING THE ELECTED ALL INTO ONE GROUP FOR PAY INCREASES AND SALARIES.
>> YOU CAN MAKE THAT PART OF YOUR MOTION.
>> I'M GOING TO AMEND MY MOTION TO APPROVE C 17 AS STATED, AND THEN MONICA, DO YOU THINK JANUARY 6? SHOULD WE PUSH IT TO THE SECOND MEETING? DO YOU WANT?
>> I THINK WE COULD HAVE THE DISCUSSION ON THE 6TH.
>> WE'LL DO THAT. AGAIN, THE FULL MOTION IS APPROVED C17 AS WRITTEN WITH THE ADDITION OF A DISCUSSION COMING BACK ON JANUARY 6 ABOUT MOVING ALL ELECTEDS INTO ONE BLOCK FOR DISCUSSION.
YOU AMMEND YOUR MOTION. SUPERVISOR OR YOUR SECOND? PERFECT. MS. BLANKENSHIP.
>> WITH THAT, WE DO HAVE A COUPLE REQUESTS TO SPEAK. LET ME GET OVER TO THAT.
>> JUST SPOKE TO JOE THAT THAT HE WAS IN COURT THIS MORNING AND COULDN'T BE HERE.
FIRST UP, CHRISTIAN GARDNER, FOLLOWED BY LAURA HOBBS, DOR SUCERO, DAVID HALLIGAN, THEN BENJAMIN NOWIN.
IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE.
>> THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS ALL THE MINUTIA THAT MR. CRY BROUGHT UP THIS INTERPLAY WITH MR. PLUMMER ABOUT THIS ISSUE, YOU GOT TO BE KIDDING ME.
YOU ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO BE KIDDING ME.
THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT, AND IT TIES IN NOT ONLY TO YOUR SALARIES AND ELECTED OFFICIALS SALARIES, AS WELL AS MANAGEMENT POSITION SALARIES, AS WELL AS WHAT'S COMING UP WITH R6.
I THINK YOU SAID SOMETHING TO THE EFFECT IS, IT'S A CIRCUS WITH A BUNCH OF CLOWNS TRYING TO NAVIGATE THIS.
ALL I WANT TO DO IS ENSURE THAT THE PEOPLE THAT REALLY DESERVE RAISES GET THEM.
ONCE AGAIN, I THINK IF YOU ASK THE PUBLIC, THEY'RE GOING TO SAY NONE OF YOU GUYS DESERVE IT.
I'M NOT TOO SURE THAT'S [OVERLAPPING].
>> BUT YOU KEEP TALKING ABOUT, WELL, WE NEED TO FOLD THIS IN WITH A CHARTER.
I DON'T KNOW. THAT'S COMING UP FOR LATER.
BUT GENTLEMEN, REALLY, THERE SHOULD BE SOME FEMALES ON THIS BOARD, BUT THAT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE.
YOU KNOW WHAT? I'M GOING TO SAVE THE REST BECAUSE WE'VE GOT R6 COMING UP, AND I'LL USE MY TIME DURING R6.
>> I'M NOT SEEING LAURA HOBBS.
I'M NOT SEEING DAVID HALLIGAN OR BENJAMIN NONE, SO CHAIR, THAT WAS OUR LAST SPEAKER. WE NEED TO TAKE A VOTE.
>> YES. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION FOR MYSELF THAT SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR LONG.
>> AYE. DO WE ALL GET THAT? THAT WILL COME BACK THE R6.
[04:00:03]
MONICA, THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT.PROBABLY KILLED YOUR LUNCH PLANS.
NOW R7 AND THEN R8 ALL BEING MOVED DOWN. DO YOU HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> JUST ONE MOMENT, CHAIR. SORRY, I'M TRYING TO KEEP MY NOTES STRAIGHT THIS MEETING.
FOR R6, WE HAVE ONE SPEAKER, CHRISTIAN GARDNER, EXCUSE ME, FOR R7.
>> WELL, I CAN FILL IN FOR A FEW OTHERS, BUT HERE'S THE THING IS JUST ABOUT EVERYBODY ON THIS LIST DESERVES SOME SORT OF A RAISE.
I JUST ASK YOU THAT YOU KEEP IT IN MIND.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT POLICE OFFICERS.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO RUN THIS COUNTY. NO YOU GUYS.
YOU GREETS THE WHEELS, BUT YOU REALLY DON'T RUN IT.
OR IF YOU DO, YOU DO A LOUSY JOB OF IT, OR A FEW OF YOU DO.
WHILE YOU'RE KEEPING THIS IN MIND, I HOPE THAT YOU UNDERSTAND WE HAVE IN HOME HEALTHCARE PROVIDERS THAT ARE WORKING TWO JOBS AND COLLECTING FOOD STAMPS.
>> THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ITEM YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.
>> YOU'RE SAYING UPEC DOES NOT COVER IN HOME HEALTH PROVIDERS. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING?
>> THAT'S NOT WHAT I'M SAYING THAT'S WHAT THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SAYS, SO I'M JUST REITERATING WHAT THE STATE SAYS.
I NEED YOU TO STICK ON TOPIC, PLEASE.
>> THE TOPIC IS, YOU HAVE COUNTY EMPLOYEES, THEY'RE CLEANING THE OFF OF PEOPLE WHO ARE BED RIDDEN.
>> BOY, IT SEEMS RATHER ON TOPIC TO ME.
YOU HAVE PEACE OFFICERS THAT ARE TRYING TO KEEP OUR COUNTY SAFE. ON TOPIC? YOU HAVE SO MANY PEOPLE THAT ARE TRYING TO RUN THIS GOVERNMENT.
PLEASE KEEP IT IN MIND THAT THEY ARE ACTUALLY THE PEOPLE THAT DESERVE SOME SORT OF A RAISE.
YOU MIGHT WANT TO KEEP THIS IN MIND.
IF THAT WAS ACTUALLY BROUGHT TO THE PUBLIC THROUGH A CHARTER AMENDMENT, I THINK THEY'D GET THEIR RAISE.
WHAT I REALLY HOPE YOU UNDERSTAND IS THIS NONSENSE OF LINING YOUR POCKETS AND NOT TAKING CARE OF EVERYBODY IS WHAT'S CAUSING THE ANIMOSITY THAT THE CITIZENS HAVE TOWARDS GOVERNMENT.
I REALLY HOPE YOU'RE MORE TRANSPARENT, AND YOU NEED TO TAKE CARE OF YOUR WORKERS.
>> THANK YOU. WE'RE GOING TO AT THIS TIME,
[CLOSED SESSION ANNOUNCEMENT]
RECESS THE SHASTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND RECONVENE AS THE SHASTA COUNTY IN HOME SUPPORT SERVICES PUBLIC AUTHORITY.AT THIS TIME, MS. BLANKENSHIP, IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT?
>> FOR PUBLIC COMMENT OPEN TIME, WE HAVE NO SPEAKERS, CHAIR.
>> I AM GOING TO RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION.
>> REAL QUICK. THAT WAS JUST FOR PUBLIC COMMENT OPEN TIME.
I WILL JUST MAKE A COMMENT THAT WE ALSO DON'T HAVE ANY REQUEST TO SPEAK FOR THE REGULAR SESSION ITEM, EITHER, CORRECT.
>> THERE'S NO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR IHSS R1, EITHER.
WE'RE GOING TO RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION FOR THE IN HOME SUPPORT SERVICES.
WE'RE GOING TO RECONVENE AS THE SHASTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, AND WE ARE GOING TO RECESS AND TAKE THAT IN CLOSED SESSION, AS WELL.
ESTIMATED TIME, WE WILL NOT BE BACK BEFORE 1:30. WE ARE AT RECESS.
>> DOWNSTAIRS? RETURNING FROM CLOSED SESSION AS THE IN HOME SUPPORT SERVICES PUBLIC AUTHORITY,
[REPORT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS]
COUNCIL HARMON, IS THERE ANY REPORTABLE ACTION?>> NO REPORTABLE ACTION, MR. CHAIRMAN.
>> WE ARE GOING TO ADJOURN THAT MEETING OR THAT [OVERLAPPING].
[04:05:04]
>> RECONVENE AS THE SHASTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
COUNCIL HARMON, RETURNING FROM CLOSED SESSION.
IS THERE ANY REPORTABLE ACTION?
>> MR. CHAIRMAN, ITEM R6 WAS HEARD IN CLOSED SESSION.
THERE IS NO REPORTABLE ACTION.
R7 WAS HEARD IN CLOSED SESSION, THERE'S NO REPORTABLE ACTION.
>> THANK YOU, MS. BAGEHI, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ON THE SCHEDULE TODAY?
>> NO FURTHER BUSINESS, MR. CHAIRMAN..
I APPRECIATE ALL OF YOU AND THIS CONCLUDES OUR YEAR OF 2025.
WITH THAT, WE ARE ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.