[R1 Adopt a proclamation which recognizes the 250th anniversary of the United States of America and recognize and present awards to the winners of the Shasta County American Story Art Contest.]

RECOGNIZES AND PRESENT AWARDS TO THE WINNERS OF THE SHASTA COUNTY AMERICAN STORY ART CONTEST.

SO WE ARE GOING TO DO THE PROCLAMATION FIRST, AND WE WILL GET TO ART CONTEST AFTER THAT.

SUPERVISOR CRYE. THANK YOU, CHAIR. I'LL GO AHEAD AND READ THIS.

THIS IS THE UNITED STATES SEMI QUINCENTENNIAL CELEBRATION JULY 4TH, 2026.

WHEREAS, ON JULY 4TH, 1776, THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS ADOPTED THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, AFFIRMING THE SELF-EVIDENT TRUTHS THAT ALL PEOPLE ARE CREATED EQUAL AND ENDOWED WITH THE INALIENABLE RIGHTS OF LIFE, LIBERTY, AND THE PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS. AND WHEREAS, THE SIGNING OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE MARKED THE BIRTH OF A NEW NATION FOUNDED

[00:05:03]

UPON THE PRINCIPLES OF REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT, INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY, CIVIC RESPONSIBILITY, AND THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED. AND WHEREAS, THROUGHOUT THE PAST 250 YEARS, GENERATIONS OF AMERICANS HAVE WORKED, SACRIFICED AND SERVED TO PRESERVE AND STRENGTHEN OUR DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS, DEFEND OUR FREEDOMS, AND EXPAND OPPORTUNITIES FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS.

AND WHEREAS THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES IS THE STORY OF PERSEVERANCE, INNOVATION, COURAGE, AND CONTINUAL PROGRESS TOWARD A MORE PERFECT UNION SHAPED BY THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF CITIZENS FROM EVERY BACKGROUND, CULTURE, AND COMMUNITY. AND WHEREAS WE HONOR THE VISION OF OUR FOUNDING FATHERS, THE BRAVERY OF THOSE WHO SECURED AND DEFENDED OUR INDEPENDENCE, THE DETERMINATION OF THOSE WHO ADVANCE CIVIL RIGHTS AND EQUALITY, AND COUNTLESS INDIVIDUALS WHOSE SERVICE AND DEDICATION HAVE STRENGTHENED OUR NATION.

AND WHEREAS THE YEAR 2026 MARKS THE SEMIQUINCENTENNIAL OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL AMERICANS TO REFLECT UPON OUR SHARED HISTORY, CELEBRATE OUR ACHIEVEMENTS, RECOGNIZE OUR CHALLENGES, AND RENEW OUR COMMITMENT TO THE ENDURING IDEALS OF FREEDOM, JUSTICE, OPPORTUNITY, AND SELF-GOVERNMENT. AND WHEREAS THE HISTORIC MILESTONE INVITES US TO INSPIRE FUTURE GENERATIONS TO ENGAGE IN CIVIC LIFE, PRESERVE OUR CONSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES, AND CONTINUE BUILDING COMMUNITIES THAT EMBODY THE VALUES UPON WHICH OUR NATION WAS FOUNDED.

AND WHEREAS SHASTA COUNTY WAS CREATED ON FEBRUARY 18TH, 1850, AS ONE OF THE ORIGINAL 27 COUNTIES OF CALIFORNIA AND IS PROUDLY SERVED TODAY BY VARIOUS ELECTED OFFICIALS AND A WORKFORCE OF OVER 2000 DEDICATED PUBLIC SERVANTS.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT ALL RESIDENTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO PARTICIPATE IN ACTIVITIES THAT HONOR OUR NATION'S HISTORY, CELEBRATE OUR DEMOCRATIC HERITAGE, RECOGNIZE THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF THOSE WHO CAME BEFORE US AND INSPIRE A RENEWED COMMITMENT TO THE PRINCIPLES THAT UNITE US AS AMERICANS.

AS WE COMMEMORATE 2 AND A HALF CENTURIES OF INDEPENDENCE, LET US REFLECT WITH GRATITUDE ON THE SACRIFICES MADE TO SECURE OUR FREEDOMS, CELEBRATE THE ENDURING STRENGTH OF OUR REPUBLIC, AND LOOK FORWARD WITH HOPE AND DETERMINATION TO THE NEXT CHAPTER OF THE AMERICAN STORY.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE SHASTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HEREBY RECOGNIZES AND CELEBRATES THE 250TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND JOINS COMMUNITIES ACROSS THE NATION IN COMMEMORATING THIS EXTRAORDINARY MILESTONE.

THIS IS SIGNED BY CHAIR KELSTROM, DATED TODAY.

AND WITH THAT CHAIR, I'D MAKE A MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THIS PROCLAMATION.

MOTION MADE BY SUPERVISOR CRYE. SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR HARMON.

DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? WE DO. CHAIR. WE HAVE TWO REQUESTS TO SPEAK.

FIRST UP, DON DUCKETT, FOLLOWED BY JENNIFER WILLIAMS FROM THE DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION CHAPTER REGENT.

GOOD MORNING BOARD. I'D LIKE TO START BY CONGRATULATING THE WINNERS OF THE ART CONTEST.

THERE'S SOME GREAT WORKS OUT THERE, AND I'M REALLY HAPPY TO SEE THE DISPLAY AND THE TIME AND EFFORT THAT THESE KIDS PUT IN TO THAT. SO CONGRATS TO ALL OF YOU. AS WE CELEBRATE OUR NATION'S 250TH BIRTHDAY, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER WHAT TRULY MAKES AMERICA EXCEPTIONAL. OUR FOUNDERS DID NOT CREATE A COUNTRY WHERE EVERYONE AGREED.

THEY CREATED A REPUBLIC WHERE PEOPLE COULD DISAGREE, SOMETIMES PASSIONATELY, WITHOUT FEAR OF PUNISHMENT.

THE FIRST AMENDMENT PROTECTS OUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH, NOT BECAUSE OUR OPINIONS ARE ALWAYS POPULAR, BUT BECAUSE DIFFERING OPINIONS ARE ESSENTIAL TO SELF-GOVERNMENT.

OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS, THIS BOARDROOM HAS SEEN DIVISION, ANGER AND SOMETIMES EVEN CONTEMPT FOR THOSE WHO HOLD DIFFERENT VIEWS.

I HAVE FELT THAT PERSONALLY, AND I KNOW OTHERS HAVE AS WELL.

BUT THE FACT THAT WE KEEP SHOWING UP IS SOMETHING TO WORTH CELEBRATING.

WHETHER WE SIT ON THE DAIS, STAND AT THE PODIUM, OR WATCH FROM THE AUDIENCE, WE ARE ALL PARTICIPATING IN THE GREAT AMERICAN EXPERIMENT.

WE ARE ALL PATRIOTS BECAUSE WE CARE ENOUGH TO ENGAGE.

AS WE MARK 250 YEARS OF THIS NATION, I HOPE WE RECOMMIT OURSELVES TO SOMETHING OUR FOUNDERS UNDERSTOOD THAT DISAGREEMENT IS NOT DISLOYALTY, AND RESPECTFUL DISCOURSE IS NOT WEAKNESS.

IT IS DEMOCRACY ITSELF. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] NEXT UP, JENNIFER WILLIAMS. GOOD MORNING, CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

MY NAME IS JENNIFER WILLIAMS, AND I'M HONORED TO BE HERE TODAY AS THE REGENT OF THE MAJOR PEARSON BE READING CHAPTER OF THE NATIONAL SOCIETY, DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION. THE NATIONAL SOCIETY, DAUGHTERS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION, OR DAR, IS A NONPROFIT, NONPOLITICAL VOLUNTEER WOMEN'S SERVICE ORGANIZATION DEDICATED TO PROMOTING PATRIOTISM,

[00:10:03]

PRESERVING AMERICAN HISTORY, AND SECURING AMERICA'S FUTURE THROUGH BETTER EDUCATION FOR CHILDREN.

OUR MEMBERS ARE ALL LINEAL DESCENDANTS OF THOSE WHO SUPPORTED THE CAUSE OF AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE DURING THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR.

ON JULY 4TH, OUR NATION WILL COMMEMORATE AND CELEBRATE THE 250TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE SIGNING OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.

THE JOURNEY TOWARD THIS HISTORIC MILESTONE PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY TO REFLECT ON OUR NATION'S PAST, HONOR THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF ALL AMERICANS, AND LOOK AHEAD TO THE FUTURE WE HOPE TO CREATE FOR THE NEXT GENERATION AND BEYOND.

AS DAUGHTERS OF THE REVOLUTIONARY WAR PATRIOTS WHO FOUGHT FOR OUR NATION'S INDEPENDENCE, THE UPCOMING SEMIQUINCENTENNIAL IS PROFOUNDLY MEANINGFUL TO US.

THE MILESTONE IS NOT JUST ABOUT LOOKING BACK AT 1776, IT IS ABOUT CELEBRATING THE CORE TENETS UPON WHICH OUR SOCIETY WAS FOUNDED, TO HONOR AND PERPETUATE THE MEMORY AND SPIRIT OF THE COURAGEOUS MEN AND WOMEN WHO FORGED OUR INDEPENDENCE, TO CULTIVATE AN ENLIGHTENED PUBLIC DISCOURSE, AND TO INSPIRE A DEEP SEATED SENSE OF PATRIOTIC CITIZENSHIP THAT WILL ECHO THROUGH THE AGES. LET US COMMEMORATE THIS PIVOTAL MOMENT IN HISTORY WITH REVERENCE AND JOY, ENSURING THAT ALL IDEALS OF FREEDOM AND UNITY ENDURE FOR GENERATIONS TO COME.

ON BEHALF OF OUR LOCAL CHAPTER, I WANT TO EXPRESS GRATITUDE TO THIS BOARD FOR ADOPTING THIS PROCLAMATION, RECOGNIZING AND CELEBRATING THE 250TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

BY ADOPTING THIS PROCLAMATION TODAY, YOU ARE JOINING A HISTORIC NATIONWIDE MOVEMENT AND ENSURING THAT SHASTA COUNTY STANDS TALL IN HONORING OUR HISTORY AND EDUCATING THE NEXT GENERATION OF CITIZENS ON THE RESPONSIBILITIES OF AMERICAN LIBERTY.

THANK YOU, SUPERVISORS, FOR YOUR COMMITMENT TO KEEPING THE SPIRIT OF 1776 ALIVE HERE IN SHASTA COUNTY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE VOTE ON THE PROCLAMATION, AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO PRESENT YOU THE PROCLAMATION AND TAKE A PICTURE.

IF IT PASSES. I HAVE A FEELING IT PROBABLY WILL. SO ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? PASSES FOUR ZERO. WE'LL TAKE A PICTURE WITH YOU GUYS AND THEN WE'RE WE'RE GOING TO GET RIGHT TO THE ART STUDENTS AFTER THAT.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ALL RIGHT. NOW FOR A SECOND HALF OF R.1. ALL RIGHT.

IN CELEBRATION OF AMERICA'S 250TH ANNIVERSARY, THE SHASTA COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE HOSTED AN ART CONTEST FOR SHASTA COUNTY STUDENTS, GRADES K THROUGH 12. THE THEMES FOR STUDENTS TO CHOOSE FROM WERE PATRIOTISM.

SECOND, IT WAS A CELEBRATION OF AMERICA'S INDEPENDENCE AND THE FREEDOMS WE ENJOY.

AND THIRD WAS SHASTA COUNTY'S PART IN THE AMERICAN STORY.

SHASTA COUNTY FAMILIES AND BUSINESS OWNERS DONATED ALL OF THE PRIZES, INCLUDING PASSES TO TURTLE BAY.

DUTCH BROS GIFT CARDS. OASIS FUN CENTER IS WHERE, AS WELL AS RARE AIR PASSES, THE SHASTA CAVERNS.

AND THEN DAVE RICKERT, OUR CEO, DONATED HOBBY LOBBY GIFT CARDS.

SO WE ARE PROUD TO HONOR THE FOLLOWING SHASTA COUNTY STUDENT WINNERS AND HONORABLE MENTION ARTISTS.

AND SO IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SUPERVISOR LONG, WOULD YOU HELP ME OUT? MAYBE AND HAND GIFT BAGS TO THE INDIVIDUALS. SO AND WE'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE WHEN YOU GUYS YOUR NAME IS CALLED, YOU COME UP HERE AND RECEIVE YOUR BAG. STAY UP THERE BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO TAKE SOME PICTURES.

SO THE FIRST PLACE WINNERS MACKENZIE WILLOUGHBY.

IS MACKENZIE HERE? NOT SEEING MACKENZIE GU. [APPLAUSE] LEILA WILLIAM.[APPLAUSE] AND.

GENEVA RHEA. [APPLAUSE] SHE'S COMING. COME ON UP.

YOUR MOM CAN GO WITH YOU. IF YOU WANT TO GO WITH HER, YOU CAN.

[00:15:02]

SHE PROBABLY SAW SUPERVISOR KELSTROM STAND UP AND JUST FRIGHTENED HER.

69 WILL DO THAT TO A LITTLE GIRL. ALL RIGHT. SO.

AND THEN THESE NEXT HONORABLE MENTION WINNERS.

JESSICA DURHAM. [APPLAUSE] ELLIE WARNER.

[APPLAUSE] NICOLE STEVENSON. [APPLAUSE] LUCY DARLING.[APPLAUSE] JACKS SMITH. [APPLAUSE] ALANA BALLARD.[APPLAUSE] HARPER BIBLE. [APPLAUSE] AND THEN JUNIPER TERRA IS OUT OF TOWN.

BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE HER NAME WAS CALLED AS WELL.

SO LET'S GIVE HIM ONE MORE ROUND OF APPLAUSE. [APPLAUSE] AND CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL OF OUR WINNERS AND THEIR FAMILIES.

THANK YOU FOR COMING.

[00:20:21]

IT'S IN THE BAG.

GO AHEAD. OKAY, MOVING ON TO R.2. APPROVE A DECLARATION OF ELECTION CERTIFYING THE RESULTS OF THE JUNE 2ND,

[R2 Approve a Declaration of Election certifying the results of the June 2, 2026, Congressional District 1 Special Election.]

2026 CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT SPECIAL ELECTION.

I BELIEVE. MR. CURTIS, ARE YOU PRESENTING US WITH SOMETHING? WELCOME. YES. WE WANT TO CERTIFY THE CD 1 ELECTION, WHICH WAS HELD ON JUNE 2ND.

AND WE'VE CHECKED EVERYTHING WE COULD SO FAR, AND IT SEEMS TO BE CORRECT, SO I'M ASKING FOR YOU TO CERTIFY IT.

OKAY, I WILL. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? YES. OKAY. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION WHILE WE WAIT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE. MOTION MADE BY SUPERVISOR CRYE.

I HEARD SUPERVISOR HARMON. FIRST SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR HARMON.

OKAY. PUBLIC COMMENT. THANK YOU, ROV CURTIS. FIRST UP CAROL, FOLLOWED BY BEV, THEN SHASTA COUNTY WATCHDOG, THEN BRAD G. IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE.

CAROL, COME ON UP.

GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS. I'M CAROL AND I, FIRST OF ALL WANTED TO JUST THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE DISPLAY OF PATRIOTISM FOR THE 250TH OF AMERICA.

I THINK THAT WE ARE BLESSED TO BE IN THIS NATION AND IN THIS COUNTRY AND ESPECIALLY IN THIS COUNTY.

AND WHAT I WANTED TO SAY IS THAT I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE A MINISTERIAL DUTY TO CERTIFY THE ELECTION.

AND I BLESS YOU WITH THAT. AND THEN I ALSO WANTED TO SAY THAT I STILL HAVE AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT SOME OF THE ELECTION THINGS THAT ARE GOING ON WITH THE VOTER ROLLS AND PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT CITIZENS VOTING IN SHASTA COUNTY AND IN CALIFORNIA AND IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

BUT I DO STILL HAVE FAITH THAT ALL OF THIS, BECAUSE SHASTA COUNTY IS A FORERUNNER WITH OUR ELECTION INTEGRITY, AND WE'RE TRYING TO GET THAT STRAIGHTENED OUT AS WELL AS THE NATIONALS.

SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR DUTY AS REPRESENTATIVES OF SHASTA COUNTY.

AND GOD BLESS YOU. AND WE'RE STILL WORKING ON THIS.

AND THANK YOU FOR DOING WHAT YOU DO. SO GOD BLESS YOU.

NEXT UP, BEV, FOLLOWED BY SHASTA COUNTY WATCHDOG.

BRAD G. THEN LAURA HOBBS. IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE.

I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO CERTIFY TODAY NO MATTER WHAT YOU HEAR.

THERE IS PROOF THAT DMV IS ALLOWING NONCITIZENS TO REGISTER AND VOTE.

HAVE ANY OF YOU ASKED THE SHERIFF IF HE IS AWARE OF ANY FRAUDULENT VOTES IN SHASTA COUNTY? MR. CURTIS HAS DONE EVERYTHING HE COULD TO CUT DOWN ON THE FRAUD, BUT HE STILL CAN'T CLEAN UP THE VOTER ROLLS THAT THE STATE HAVE ACCESS TO.

HE CAN'T TAKE SOMEONE OFF THE VOTER ROLLS IF THEY VOTED.

YET SOMEONE LIVING AT AN ADDRESS THAT DOES NOT EXIST CONTINUALLY VOTES YEAR AFTER YEAR IF THE ADDRESS DOES NOT EXIST.

HOW IS THE PERSON GETTING THEIR BALLOT? BECAUSE THEY CONTINUE TO VOTE.

THEY CANNOT BE REMOVED FROM THE VOTER FILE WHEN PROCESSING A BALLOT.

THERE IS NO WAY TO TELL A REAL BALLOT FROM A COUNTERFEIT BALLOT.

DO YOU NOT SEE THE PROBLEM WITH THE LAWS THAT HAVE BEEN PASSED TO MAKE FRAUD EASIER.

DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND? THESE LAWS ARE NOT FOR THE GOOD OF THE PEOPLE.

THEY ARE MADE TO MAKE IT EASIER TO SELECT WHO SHOULD WIN OUR FRAUDULENT RACE.

CERTIFYING A FRAUDULENT ELECTION, I BELIEVE, IS A FELONY.

BUT IT IS NOT COUNTY COUNCIL THAT WILL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE.

PEOPLE COME UP HERE AND SAY THERE IS NO FRAUD.

ASK THEM IF THEY HAVE CALLED, IF THEY HAVE TALKED TO THE SHERIFF.

IF NOT, DON'T THEY CARE ENOUGH TO FIND OUT THE TRUTH? AND I KNOW IT'S A LAW THAT YOU GUYS HAVE TO CERTIFY.

SO YOU GUYS ARE IN A CATCH 22. THANK YOU. NEXT UP, SHASTA COUNTY WATCHDOG, FOLLOWED BY BRAD G.

LAURA HOBBS, THEN ANTONIA. IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE.

THANK YOU. CERTIFYING THIS ELECTION. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT HOW THIS COULD BE, A

[00:25:10]

LITTLE BIT OF CONFLICT BECAUSE YOU'RE CERTIFYING ELECTION PARTIAL, MEANING THAT YOU'RE GOING TO TRUST THE GUY WHO CLINT CURTIS, WHO'S BROKEN SO MANY LAWS. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO CERTIFY AND TAKE HIS WORD? RIGHT. SO I DON'T IF I WAS YOU, I KIND OF THINK ABOUT THIS, BUT I KNOW LIKE BETH SAID, YOU HAVE TO CERTIFY IT.

BUT HERE'S THE THING. WE KNOW THAT BETH HERSELF HAS BEEN GOING TO OTHER COUNTIES SOLICITING AND ASKING FOR THE OTHER COUNTIES TO JUMP ON BOARD IN MAKING SURE THEY'RE MAKING SURE THAT YOU DON'T CERTIFY THE ELECTION.

SO SHE'S ACTUALLY AN EMPLOYEE OF THE COUNTY TAMPERING AND SOLICITING TO GO AHEAD AND NOT TO CERTIFY THE ELECTION.

AND I KNOW, IN FACT, THAT MR. JOSEPH LARMOR WENT TO CHERRY CREEK ROAD POSTMASTER, IN REGARDING TO FIND OUT ABOUT CLINT CURTIS GOING TO THE POST OFFICE AND ASKING WHAT INFORMATION HE COULD GET AND THE POSTMASTERS TO APPROVE TO GET PUT IT IN WRITING SO THEY COULD USE IT TO SAY THERE WAS ELECTION FRAUD. THOSE BALLOTS DIDN'T GO TO SACRAMENTO OR THEY KEPT THEM HERE.

SO I KNOW THAT FOR A FACT, BECAUSE I SPOKE TO THE POSTMASTER AND I SPOKE WITH HIM BECAUSE I KNOW PEOPLE IN THERE WHO WORK THERE.

SO I KNOW HE WAS IN THERE 20 MINUTES AFTER CLINT CURTIS WAS THERE.

SO THESE PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOME SOME DELUSION OF SAYING THERE'S ELECTION FRAUD.

THEY'VE BEEN SAYING IT FOR A LONG TIME. AND HOW LONG ARE THEY GOING TO CONTINUE SAYING ELECTION FRAUD NOW BECAUSE THEY LOST AGAIN.

THEY'RE GOING TO COME UP WITH SOME KIND OF LIES.

I DON'T TRUST CLINT CURTIS. I DON'T SEE HOW YOU COULD EVEN CERTIFY SOMETHING THAT HE ACTUALLY DID AND DONE.

AND YOU APPOINTED HIM TO DO ALL THESE THINGS.

AND YOU'RE NOT WILLING TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT THE CITIZENS RIGHTS.

YOU VIOLATED THEIR RIGHTS BY NOT CENSORING HIM, NOT PUTTING THAT ON THE BALLOT.

I MEAN, ON THE ON THE AGENDA TO CENSOR HIM. YOU FAILED TO PROTECT THE EMPLOYEES.

THEIR RIGHTS BEEN VIOLATED, NOT JUST BY HIM BUT BY YOU, THE BOARD, THE GOVERNMENT WHO ACTUALLY IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE AUTHORITY OVER HIM.

AND YOU WERE RECOMMENDED TO REMOVE HIM AND PUT HIM SOMEWHERE ELSE.

SO THAT WAY HE STOPPED HARASSING AND THREATENING CITIZENS, THE STAFF MEMBERS.

AND YOU FAILED TO DO THAT. SO IT FALLS ON YOU.

SO THIS IS JUST ONE OF THEM THAT I FILE A COMPLAINT.

THIS IS NOT EVEN IT. THE COMPLAINT THAT I FILED, IT WAS THIS THICK THAT YOU HAVE FAILED.

IT WAS OVER 3400 PAGES THAT I SUBMITTED LAST WEEK TO CONTINUE TO MAKE SURE I PROVIDE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AND SECRETARY OF STATE THAT YOU VIOLATED THOSE CITIZENS RIGHTS. NEXT UP, BRAD G. FOLLOWED BY LAURA HOBBS.

ANTONIA. THEN JENNY. YOU CANNOT CERTIFY THIS ELECTION FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.

VOTERS WHO VOTED IN PERSON FOR JAMES GALLAGHER DID NOT SHOW A PHOTO ID.

BALLOTS WERE COUNTED USING TABULATORS CONNECTED TO THE INTERNET.

THE ELECTION WAS NOT HAND-COUNTED. THUS, THE ELECTION WAS RIGGED.

PROPRIETARY CODE, NOT OPEN SOURCE CODE, WAS USED TO PROGRAM THE TABULATORS.

DIRTY VOTER ROLLS WERE USED IN THIS ELECTION.

VOTERS WHO VOTE AT AT REGISTER AT THE DMV ARE INELIGIBLE TO VOTE.

DEAD PEOPLE VOTED. THIS ELECTION USED MAILED BALLOTS.

THIS. THIS MEANS THAT, YES, DEAD PEOPLE VOTED AND THE BALLOT BOXES WERE STUFFED WITH BALLOTS.

ELECTION LAWS ARE MADE AT COUNTY LEVEL. STATE AND FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MUST OBEY OUR CHARTER LAWS IN ORDER NOT TO BE DEEMED COMPLETE AND UTTER HYPOCRITES.

YOU MUST NOT CERTIFY THIS ELECTION UNLESS YOU ADD THE WORDS UNDER DURESS, JUST LIKE YOU DID IN DECEMBER OF 2024. YOU GAVE THESE ELECTION DENIERS OXYGEN FOR 3 AND A HALF YEARS NOW. YOU'VE LISTENED TO THEM. YOU'VE YOU'VE THEY'VE TOLD US HOW OUR ELECTIONS ARE UNFAIR.

THEY ARE RIGGED. AND SO THEREFORE, YOU CANNOT CERTIFY THIS ELECTION UNLESS YOU ADD THE WORDS UNDER DURESS, WHICH IS COUNCIL L'AMOUR HAS SAID MEANS NOTHING.

[00:30:02]

BUT THAT'S WHAT YOU DID. MR. KELSTROM AND MR. CRYE, YOU ADDED THE WORDS UNDER DURESS IN DECEMBER 2024 BECAUSE YOUR ELECTION LAWS WERE NOT INCORPORATED INTO OUR ELECTIONS. SO YOU CANNOT CERTIFY WITHOUT UNDER DURESS.

NEXT UP, LAURA HOBBS, FOLLOWED BY ANTONIA, THEN JENNY.

GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS. I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU ABOUT THIS ELECTION AND DO A COMPARE AND CONTRAST.

I THINK GARBETT TEED IT UP PERFECTLY THERE. WE CAN TALK ABOUT NOVEMBER 2024 BECAUSE THAT WAS A DUMPSTER FIRE OF AN ELECTION.

WE HAD 2783 MORE BALLOTS COUNTED THAN PEOPLE WHO VOTED.

AND THAT'S NOT THE PROVISIONAL. I KNOW EXACTLY HOW MANY PROVISIONAL VOTES THERE WERE THAT YEAR, AND IT WAS LESS THAN 400 THAT WERE COUNTED AS GOOD.

SO ANYWAY THIS YEAR THOSE NUMBERS MATCHED ALMOST PERFECTLY, JUST A LITTLE BIT OFF WITHIN A COUPLE OF DIGITS.

THIS IS, THIS IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE HAD UNDER JOANNA, FRANCESCA AND THOMAS TAYLOR.

THERE WAS NO ACCOUNTABILITY. THERE WERE NUMEROUS LAWS BROKEN IN THE 2024 ELECTION, INCLUDING ELECTION CODE 15360, WHICH SAYS THAT THE IF THERE'S A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE HAND COUNT AND THE MANUAL IN THE MACHINE COUNT, THEN YOU MUST FOLLOW THE HAND COUNT AS THE OFFICIAL BALLOT TALLY.

AND THEY DIDN'T DO THAT. IF IF THERE IS A DISCREPANCY, THEIR SOLUTION WAS JUST TO RERUN THE BALLOTS THROUGH THE MACHINE AGAIN.

THERE WERE A NUMBER OF LAWS BROKEN. THIS WAS ALL, IF ANYONE'S CURIOUS TO SEE WHAT ALL LAWS WERE BROKEN, THEY CAN GO TO SHASTAVOTE.ORG AND CLICK ON THE LAD VERSUS TALLER CASE AND CLICK ON THE EXHIBITS.

YOU'LL FIND EVIDENCE FOR EVERYTHING THAT I'M SAYING THERE.

SO THIS, THIS ELECTION WAS LIKE NIGHT AND DAY COMPARED TO PREVIOUS ELECTIONS.

WE HAD FULL OPEN FLOORS WHERE EVERYBODY COULD OBSERVE.

WE ACTUALLY YOU KNOW, ONE THING I NOTICED IS THAT PREVIOUSLY ONLY PEOPLE OF A CERTAIN POLITICAL PERSUASION WERE ALLOWED TO WORK IN THE ELECTIONS OFFICE. THEY'RE PRIMARILY ALL LIBERALS OR DEMOCRATS.

VERY FEW CONSERVATIVES, WHICH WE ARE A MAJORITY CONSERVATIVE COUNTY.

THIS ELECTION WAS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. WE HAD EQUAL REPRESENTATION FROM BOTH SIDES.

I HOPE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WILL CONTINUE ON IN FUTURE ELECTIONS, BECAUSE THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT THAT EVERYONE CAN SEE AND EVERYONE BE INVOLVED FIRSTHAND IN THE ELECTION. I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE THAT CAN SPEAK TO THAT.

AND ACTUALLY BEING INVOLVED, BEING ABLE TO SEE FOR THEMSELVES AND HAVE FAITH AND ASSURANCE IN THE ELECTION.

NOW, OF COURSE, THE MAIL IN BALLOTS IS SOMETHING THAT WE DO NOT KNOW AND WE CANNOT VERIFY, BECAUSE IF YOU'RE A FRAUDULENT VOTER AND YOU SIGN UP THROUGH LEGITIMATE PROCESSES, THEN THERE'S NO WAY TO DISTINGUISH THOSE BALLOTS.

BUT FROM EVERYTHING THAT I SAW WITH THE HUMAN EYE, EVERYTHING LOOKED GOOD AND SQUARED UP.

THE NUMBERS MATCHED, AND I WAS INVOLVED DIRECTLY.

SO THANK YOU. NEXT UP, ANTONIA, FOLLOWED BY JENNY.

GOOD MORNING. BOARD. YES. CERTIFY THE ELECTION.

THIS ELECTION WAS VERY TRANSPARENT AND VERY JOYFUL ATMOSPHERE.

THIS IS THE SECOND YEAR THAT I HAVE WORKED IN THE ELECTION WITH CLINT CURTIS.

YES, HE MADE EVERYTHING TRANSPARENT AND SECURE.

HE ALWAYS HAS A SMILE ON HIS FACE, AND I ENJOYED HOW THE PART TIME WORKERS WORKED TOGETHER AS AS A TEAM.

ALTHOUGH THERE WAS FRICTION FROM THE OLD GUARDS BEFORE I WORKED, BEFORE I WORKED FOR THE ELECTIONS, I WAS AN OBSERVER THERE AND THERE WAS NO TRANSPARENCY.

THE BALLOTS WERE NOT SECURE AND THERE WAS A LOT OF NOT BEING ABLE TO SEE WHAT THEY WERE DOING.

THERE WAS A LOT OF CONFUSION AND THE ATMOSPHERE WAS VERY GLOOMY.

WE PEOPLE OF SHASTA COUNTY SHOULD BE GRATEFUL TO HAVE A MAN LIKE CLINT CURTIS, HONEST AND UPRIGHT, WHO IS WHO DESIRES TO HAVE TRANSPARENCY AND SECURITY FOR OUR BALLOTS.

THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE] NEXT UP JENNY. HI, EVERYBODY.

THIS IS KIND OF SILLY BECAUSE ISN'T HE ALREADY IN OFFICE? LIKE, THIS IS JUST FOR GALLAGHER, RIGHT? THIS ISN'T LIKE YOUR ELECTION OR YOURS OR CLINT CURTIS'S. THIS IS JUST FOR GALLAGHER. AND HE'S ALREADY BEEN SWORN IN.

[00:35:04]

SO THIS IS KIND OF A SILLY, REPETITIVE THING TO BE LIKE, DO NOT CERTIFY THIS ELECTION OR OTHERWISE.

WE WILL BE VERY ANGRY WITH YOU FOREVER. AND I MEAN, THEY CAN BE ANGRY.

THEY GOT EVERYTHING THEY WANTED. THEY HAVE CLINT CURTIS, WHO APPARENTLY DID NOT MAKE ELECTIONS MORE TRANSPARENT OR EASY TO, YOU KNOW, UNDERSTAND BECAUSE THEY'RE STILL CRYING FRAUD.

SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE MAD NO MATTER WHAT. SO JUST, YOU KNOW, CERTIFY THE ELECTION.

CHAIR, THAT WAS OUR LAST SPEAKER. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, I WILL CALL FOR A VOTE.

WE HAD A MOTION MADE BY SUPERVISOR CRYE SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR HARMON.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? PASSES 4-0.

MOVING ON. R.3 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 COUNTY WIDE ISSUES.

MR. BUETTELL. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR KELSTROM. HELPS IF I HIT THE RIGHT BUTTON.

GOOD MORNING, CHAIR KELSTROM. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. STEWART BUETTELL, DEPUTY COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER REPORTING AND CEO.

RICKERTS ABSENCE. JUNE 25TH WAS THE LAST DAY THAT A LEGISLATIVE MEASURE COULD QUALIFY FOR THE ELECTION THIS NOVEMBER.

AND CURRENTLY, WE'RE AWARE OF AT LEAST ONE BOND MEASURE APPROVED TO BE ON THE NOVEMBER STATEWIDE BALLOT.

THAT IS SENATE BILL 417, WHICH PROPOSES AN $11.25 BILLION, BILLION DOLLAR HOUSING AND HOME OWNERSHIP BOND AND INCLUDES A CARVE OUT FOR VETERAN HOUSING IN THE AMOUNT OF $1.25 BILLION. WE ANTICIPATE 2 TO 3 OTHER BALLOT MEASURES OR BALLOT INCLUSIONS, INCLUDING AT LEAST ONE ASSEMBLY CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, AND WILL RETURN WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ONCE WE RECEIVE THOSE FINAL DETAILS AND OTHER LEGISLATIVE NEWS. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH SENATOR ASHBY'S OFFICE ON AMENDMENTS TO SB 1010, WHICH HAS BEEN REVISED TO NO LONGER CREATE A STATEWIDE EPR PROGRAM THAT COULD HAVE ADVERSELY IMPACTED CONSUMERS IN SOLID WASTE FACILITIES.

WE'RE ALSO WORKING WITH ASSEMBLYMEMBER WICKS'S OFFICE TO MEANINGFULLY AMEND AB 2168 AND POSSIBLY REDIRECT SOME STATE PROJECT FUNDING FOR ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMS TO RURAL AND SMALLER COMMUNITIES. FOR BOTH OF THOSE BILLS, WE MAY RETURN TO THE BOARD SOON TO TO CONSIDER RESCINDING OUR OPPOSITION AS WE NEGOTIATE WITH THOSE AUTHORS AND THEIR OFFICES. ON A FINAL NOTE.

WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT ASSEMBLYMEMBER GALLAGHER'S BILL AB 2700.

WHILE WE PREFER THE INITIAL VERSION, WHICH INCLUDED A PROVISION FOR ELECTRICITY RATES TO BE CUT BY AT LEAST 30% BY 2028, THE CURRENT VERSION PRESERVES RESTITUTION FOR VICTIMS OF WILDFIRES FROM A PUBLIC UTILITY FROM PUBLIC UTILITY COMPANIES. WE ANTICIPATE RETURNING TO THE BOARD WITH A LETTER OF SUPPORT ALSO AT A LATER DATE. THIS CONCLUDES MY LEGISLATIVE UPDATE AND I'LL DEFER TO THE BOARD FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, CHAIR. THANK YOU, MR. BUETTELL. ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON. SUPERVISOR. LONG. THANK YOU CHAIR.

WELCOME EVERYONE. IT'S GREAT TO SEE EVERYBODY HERE.

SO I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE COMMUNITIES OF FRENCH GULCH AND OLD SHASTA IN BOTH SITUATIONS.

IT'S A BLIGHTED CONDITION WHERE THE ELDERLY GENTLEMAN DIED IN EACH TRAILER IN FRENCH GULCH AND ALSO IN A FIRE IN OLD SHASTA. SO WORKING WITH MIKE STEINECK, WHO'S THE OLD SHASTA FIRE DEPARTMENT.

AND HE ALSO, COINCIDENTALLY IS ALSO THE FRENCH GULCH FIRE CHIEF.

AND HE, HE RESIDES OVER BOTH, BOTH ENTITIES. SO WE'RE WORKING TOGETHER.

I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH CODE, TRYING TO GET THESE CLEANUPS DONE AND USING ARPA FUNDS REMAINING ARPA FUNDS THAT WE HAVE TO SPEND BY THE END OF THE YEAR.

SO 1 IS ALREADY PROGRAMED FOR OLD SHASTA THAT FIRE THAT WILL HAPPEN NEXT MONTH, IN FACT JULY.

SO THAT ONE'S ALREADY TAKEN CARE OF. AND I'M TRYING TO GET PERMISSIONS, AND WE'RE ALL TRYING TO SCRAMBLE TO GET PERMISSIONS TO ENTER TO CLEAN UP IN THE FRENCH GULCH, WHICH IS A KNOWN PROBLEM OUT THERE WITH THAT PERSON THAT DIED.

AND NO, NO NEXT OF KIN NECESSARILY THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT.

I ATTENDED THE CAMP LOVE THROUGH HAVEN HUMANE, AND IT WAS A WONDERFUL CEREMONY.

IF ANYBODY HAS BEEN, IF NOBODY HAS BEEN TO ONE BEFORE, IT'S, IT'S WELL WORTH THE EFFORT.

AND BASICALLY THEY HAVE CAMPERS, KIDS THAT ATTEND A 2 WEEK PROGRAM AT CAMP LOVE AND THEY TRAIN DOGS, RESCUE DOGS, AND TRY TO GET THEM ADOPTED DURING THEIR CAMP.

AND THE ONES THAT ARE NOT, THEY'VE TAUGHT THEM SOME BASIC SKILLS.

AND SO THAT IS FUN TO WATCH. AND MY DAUGHTER WENT THROUGH THAT CAMP 2 YEARS IN A ROW.

SO I, I REALLY VALUE THAT, THAT EXPERIENCE. I ATTENDED A SHASTA COUNTY FIRE SAFE COUNCIL BOARD MEETING AND SUBSEQUENTLY WROTE KIND OF A RUSHED LETTER OF SUPPORT.

I DIDN'T GET A CHANCE TO GET IT BACK BEFORE THIS BOARD BECAUSE OF THE TIMELINES FOR THE CUTOFF.

[00:40:03]

IT'S ACTUALLY TODAY. SO THANK YOU, STEPHANIE, FOR SCRAMBLING TO GET THIS LETTER TOGETHER FOR SUPPORT FOR THE CHIPPING GRANT.

AND IT'S THROUGH STATE FIRE. SO THAT'S EXCITING NEWS.

WE ALSO DISCUSSED AT THIS FIRE SAFE COUNCIL BOARD MEETING A MEETING THAT HAS HAPPENED WITH DOT CALTRANS AND THERE IS POTENTIALLY FUNDING AVAILABLE TO CLEAR 50FT ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROADWAY GOING ALL THE WAY UP TO THE PARK ENTRANCE A WHISKEY TOWN PARK.

SO THAT'S EXCITING. AND BLM HAS BEEN DOING WORK ALONG THE HIGHWAY THERE, AND WE'RE HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN GET THIS THIS FUNDING GOING AND ADDRESSING FIRE FUEL BRUSH NEEDS OUT THERE.

AND THAT CONCLUDES MY REPORT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

SUPERVISOR. LONG. SUPERVISOR. HARMON. GOOD MORNING.

I JUST WANT TO SAY, LOOKING AT THE WE CAN SEE THESE PICTURES IN THE FRONT, THE 250 YEARS.

I KNOW, I KNOW, THE POSITION I'M IN IS VERY INSIGNIFICANT AND I'M DEFINITELY NOT ABOUT ABOUT ME.

BUT WHAT A PRIVILEGE TO BE A PART OF OUR GOVERNMENT RIGHT NOW, AT THIS JUNCTURE WHERE WE'RE CELEBRATING OUR 250 YEARS.

I REMEMBER I'M AN OLD GUY LIKE HIM. JUST A LITTLE BIT.

JUST A LITTLE BIT. NO, WE'RE THE SAME AGE. SORRY.

BUT I, I WAS JUST RECALLING AS A SOPHOMORE IN HIGH SCHOOL, TELLING YOU MY AGE AGAIN.

THE 200 YEAR CELEBRATION AND MY, MY COUSIN BEING PART OF A PROGRAM IN THE GYM WHERE ALL THE GRADE SCHOOL WAS DOING A DIFFERENT ERA FROM KINDERGARTEN ALL THE WAY THROUGH.

I THINK IT WAS 6TH GRADE, DOING A DIFFERENT ERA FOR EACH PART OF OUR HISTORY.

AND HOW AMAZING THAT BECAUSE HE JUST SAID ON THE, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE GYM WITH A GUITAR AND A MICROPHONE AND DID EACH ONE SO LIKE PILGRIMS ALL THE WAY TO ROCK AND ROLL. AND THEN A YEAR LATER THE LORD TOOK HIM HOME.

HE WAS KILLED IN AN ACCIDENT. SO IT WAS, IT WAS A VERY SIGNIFICANT TIME IN OUR HISTORY.

BUT PERSONALLY IT IS TOO. BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY WHAT AN AMAZING COUNTRY WE LIVE IN.

AND WE SHOULD ALL BE, WE SHOULD ALL BE THANKFUL.

I KNOW WE GOT, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT OPINIONS AND DIFFERENT, BUT IF IT WAS, IF IT WAS REALLY NASTY OUT THERE, WE WOULD, WE WOULD GET A LITTLE CLOSER TO OUR NEIGHBORS.

IT'S TOO BAD WE'RE NOT CLOSE TO ALL OUR NEIGHBORS. EVEN IF WE DISAGREE, WE NEED TO AGREE ABOUT WHAT A PRIVILEGE IT IS TO BE WHERE WE'RE AT AND DO WHAT WE'RE DOING. SO THANK YOU. ON THE 24TH WEDNESDAY, THAT SORTA SORTA BOARD MEETING, THE 26TH I MET WITH ROBERT CHRONIC PROJECT RESTORATION. WHAT GREAT WORK HE'S DOING.

FOR, FOR TRANSITIONAL HOUSING. AND THEN SATURDAY NIGHT I DON'T DO THIS VERY OFTEN, BUT I WENT TO THE, TO THE. CASCADE THEATER AND THEY HAD A, A PROGRAM GOING THERE.

THEY HAD THE STREET CLOSED, THE MARKET STREET AND, AND FOOD VENDORS ON THE STREET AND A LITTLE BIT OF MUSIC OUT THERE.

BUT THEN WE WENT INTO THE LISTEN TO CLARE DUNN, AND SHE'S AN ADVOCATE FOR RANCHERS.

SHE'S A RANCHER FAMILY. WELL, SHE'S ALSO A VERY TALENTED MUSICIAN, BUT SHE'S A RANCHER FAMILY FROM SOUTHERN COLORADO.

AND SHE'S KIND OF REMINDS ME OF WILLIE NELSON'S FARM AID WAY BACK ON A SMALLER SCALE, BUT SHE WAS SHE.

AND THEY DID A FUNDRAISER FOR, FOR THE FIGHT WITH THE WOLVES AND THE, YOU KNOW, REPRESENTING THE RANCHERS.

AND BUT ANYWAY, IT WAS A VERY, IT WAS VERY FUN TO GO TO THAT.

AND I RECOMMEND IF YOU DON'T GET A CHANCE. I'M TERRIBLE ABOUT REMEMBERING TO LOOK, SEE WHO'S UP, BUT DON'T FORGET ABOUT THAT VENUE. IT'S AVAILABLE FOR US.

AND THEN WELL, CONGRATULATIONS. 250 YEARS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR. HARMON. SUPERVISOR CRYE. THANK YOU CHAIR.

AND JUST TO PIGGYBACK THAT, CLAIRE ACTUALLY IS PERFORMED IN DC YESTERDAY FOR THE 250 CELEBRATION.

YEAH. SO CLAIRE'S. CLAIRE'S GREAT. SUPERVISOR.

SUPERVISOR. HARMON MENTIONED I HAD, ALONG WITH SUPERVISOR KELSTROM.

AGAIN, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS WITH SERTA, IF I'VE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE, BUT ABOUT THE CARDBOARD THERE'S SOME LEGISLATION THAT

[00:45:01]

WE'RE, WE'RE PUSHING BACK ON THAT THEY ARE A GROUP OF INDIVIDUALS THAT REALLY RUN A LOT OF THE TRANSPORTATION COMPONENTS IN THE STATE, BUT THEY'RE NOT ELECTED AND THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE A LOT OF OVERSIGHT.

SO WE'RE PUSHING BACK ON TRYING TO PEEL SOME OF THAT BACK.

I'M THANKFUL FOR SEAN T[INAUDIBLE] WHO'S OUR SORT OF DIRECTOR WORKING WITH OTHER ELECTED OFFICIALS AND JUST TRYING TO DO THE BEST WE CAN FOR THE COUNTY BECAUSE REALLY A LOT OF THIS IS DRIVEN BY BIGGER CITIES.

SAN DIEGO, SACRAMENTO, SAN FRANCISCO, ETC.. SO THANK YOU TO THE WHOLE STAFF AT SERTA AND THEIR PRESENTATIONS AND THEIR EFFORT.

I ATTENDED THIS PAST WEEKEND AND THIS WAS ME PERSONALLY.

I ATTENDED THE [INAUDIBLE] INTEGRATIVE CANCER TREATMENT CONFERENCE DOWN IN LA JOLLA DOWN BY SAN DIEGO, AND THAT WAS SOMETHING I DID PERSONALLY. BUT IT REALLY BROUGHT BACK A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THE CANCER CENTER THAT'S BEING BUILT HERE IN THE COUNTY, AS WELL AS CONTINUING THOSE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT MEDICAL OPPORTUNITIES.

SO I WANT TO CLARIFY SOMETHING THAT I SAID LAST WEEK, BECAUSE I GOT SOME MESSAGES ASKING ME JUST TO CLARIFY WHAT I MEANT ABOUT BEING A PRIVATE CITIZEN. AND YOU KNOW, THE WORK THAT I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO DO TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S IMPROVED AND, AND IT CAME OFF MAYBE A LITTLE BIT I DON'T WANT TO SAY BITING OR TRITE, BUT BUT I WANT TO REALLY MAKE SURE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHEN I SAID THAT I'VE GOT THE BEST MEDICAL CARE IN THE WORLD.

HONESTLY, I MEAN, I HAVE A FUNCTIONAL NUTRITION DOCTOR OUT OF AUSTRALIA AND I COULD GO ON AND ON OF ALL THE PEOPLE.

BUT WHAT I REALIZE IS THAT'S NOT EVERYBODY'S REALITY.

AND I JUST WANT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE BECAUSE OF THE, THE PEOPLE THAT REACHED OUT TO ME SAID, WELL, LIKE, WHAT CAN WE DO GOING FORWARD? SO AS, AS YOU HAVE OPINIONS AND I DON'T CARE IF IT'S ABOUT DAVIS OR ABOUT SIMPSON OR ABOUT ANY OTHER ENTITY, BRING THOSE IDEAS FORWARD. BECAUSE THE LONGER I GO THROUGH MY JOURNEY, THE MORE PEOPLE I MEET THAT IT'S REALLY, REALLY SAD. AND IT'S DISHEARTENING HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE DIAGNOSED AND THEY WAIT 3 AND 4 MONTHS TO GET A SCAN, LET ALONE GETTING A PLAN IN PLACE. AND FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY THAT HAVE YOU KNOW, GEO BLASTOMA OR OTHER THINGS, IT'S JUST TOO LATE BY THEN.

LIKE EVERY DAY IS CRITICAL. SO IF YOU HAVE SOME INFORMATION OR YOU WANT TO GET INVOLVED, REACH OUT TO ME AND I DON'T CARE WHAT DISTRICT YOU ARE, I DON'T CARE. RACE, GENDER, SEXUAL PREFERENCE.

I DON'T CARE IF YOU HAVE SOME IDEAS AND YOU WANT TO COME TO THE TABLE AND BRING SOMETHING TO THOSE CONVERSATIONS. WE ALREADY HAVE COMMITTEES.

THERE'S ALREADY THINGS GOING, BUT THE MORE PEOPLE THAT CAN COLLABORATE AROUND HELPING PEOPLE THRIVE AND NOT JUST SURVIVE WITH CANCER IS IMPORTANT.

I MET YESTERDAY WITH WILLIAM TARBOX, WHO'S THE NEW CITY MANAGER AT THE CITY OF REDDING.

IF YOU HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO MEET HIM. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT SURE HIS SCHEDULE OR HOW MANY APPOINTMENTS HE TAKES, BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO TRY AND GET ON HIS SCHEDULE. THERE IS, AND I WON'T GO INTO A LOT OF DETAIL BECAUSE I WANT TO KEEP A LOT OF THAT.

I DON'T WANT TO SAY CONFIDENTIAL, BUT IT'S NOT MY ITEMS TO SHARE.

BUT THERE'S A LOT COMING IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS.

AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT NO MATTER WHERE YOU LIVE, IF IT'S MCARTHUR, FALL RIVER, SHINGLETOWN, COTTONWOOD OR IN THE CITY OF REDDING. I MEAN, IN A LOT OF WAYS, AS REDDING GOES, AS THE COUNTY GOES, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT PEOPLE REALLY RALLY AROUND THAT INDIVIDUAL WITH SOME OF THE TOUGH DECISIONS THAT ARE COMING FORTH FOR HIM IN THE CITY.

SO AGAIN, I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO REACH OUT TO HIM, TRY AND GRAB COFFEE WITH HIM.

AND I ENCOURAGE HIM TO, YOU KNOW, TALK TO HIS COUNCIL AND MAYBE DO SOME TYPE OF PUBLIC MEETING JUST TO OUTSIDE OF A COUNCIL MEETING, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT THE CITY OF REDDING IS GOING TO BE UNPACKING.

THANK YOU, CHAIR. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR. CRYE. AS WAS MENTIONED EARLIER, ON THE 24TH, WE HAD A MEETING WITH THE SUPERVISOR CRYE AND SUPERVISOR HARMON WERE BOTH THERE.

LATER THAT NIGHT, I WENT UP TO SHINGLETOWN, CALLED OUT THE BINGO NUMBERS.

SHOUT OUT TO THE GREAT GROUP UP THERE. THEY HAVE SOME WONDERFUL VOLUNTEERS AT THE VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT.

IT'S THEIR FUNDRAISER THEY PUT ON EVERY MONTH TO HELP OUT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.

THE NEXT DAY I HAD A GENDER REVIEW. SO THANK YOU, MISS BLANKENSHIP AND STUART BUETTELL, AND AS WELL AS CEO RICKERT FOR GOING OVER THE AGENDA WITH ME. AND THEN ON THE 27TH, I ATTENDED A FUNDRAISER IN MANHATTAN FOR A YOUNG MAN NAMED GARRETT ZIMMERMAN.

WELL KNOWN FAMILY UP IN THE AREA. GARRETT QUALIFIED TO GO TO THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONS IN TRAPSHOOTING.

SO HE WILL BE GOING OFF TO MICHIGAN. SO WE DID A LITTLE FUNDRAISER FOR HIM AND SHOUT OUT TO HE GOES TO FOOTHILL HIGH SCHOOL BECAUSE THEY HAVE A TRAP TEAM AND FOOTHILL AND ANDERSON, I KNOW BOTH HAVE A TRAP TEAM. SO MAYBE SOME OF THE OTHER SCHOOLS IN THIS AREA COULD GET THEIR STUFF TOGETHER AND GET ON THAT BOARD WITH THAT TOO.

SO AGAIN, GOOD LUCK TO GARRETT ZIMMERMAN ON HIS WAY TO MICHIGAN TO COMPETE IN THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP FOR TRAP SHOOTING.

SO WITH THAT, THAT CONCLUDES MY REPORT AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTERS? WE

[00:50:10]

HAVE 14 SPEAKERS, SO IT WILL BE 2K MINUTES EACH.

FIRST UP, STEVE WOODRUM, FOLLOWED BY CAROL DAWN DUCKETT, THEN JACQUELINE.

IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE. OKAY.

IS STEVE HERE? OKAY. CAROL, COME ON UP. AFTER CAROL, WE HAVE JACQUELINE, STEVE KHAN, THEN LINDA GLASS. I'LL SEND IT TO YOU.

I'LL SEND IT TO YOU. HELLO AGAIN. MY NAME IS CAROL, AND MY PUBLIC COMMENT IS IN REGARDS TO OUR ELECTIONS.

AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT I REALLY HAVE BEEN ENCOURAGED BY WHAT CLINT CURTIS AND YOU GUYS APPROVED HIM. YOU APPOINTED HIM. AND I HAVE WATCHED VERY, VERY CLOSELY THE DIFFERENT KINDS OF REFORM THAT HE HAS GIVEN TO US IN OUR ELECTION OFFICE.

AND I KNOW THAT THERE HAVE BEEN ALL KINDS OF STATEMENTS COMING AGAINST HIM.

AND I HAVE JUST SEEN IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S A REAL CHARACTER ASSASSINATION AND I'M JUST GOING, WHAT IN THE WORLD IS GOING ON? AND IT JUST SEEMS TO ME AS THOUGH PEOPLE ARE NOT WANTING TRANSPARENCY IN OUR ELECTIONS.

AND SO A LOT OF NEGATIVE COMMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE ABOUT HIM.

ON THE OTHER SIDE, I HAVE I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO HEAR TESTIMONIES OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN HIRED MORE RECENTLY IN THE ELECTIONS OFFICE, AND THEY SAY THAT CLINT CURTIS, HIS PERSONALITY, HE'S JOVIAL, HE'S MILD MANNERED, AND HE WOULD NEVER DO ANY OF THOSE THINGS.

SO THERE ARE 2 SIDES TO THIS. AND I, I HAVE MET CLINT CURTIS AND AND I'VE JUST WATCHED WHAT HE'S DONE.

AND I'M I'M JUST VERY, VERY IMPRESSED AT ALL OF THE THINGS, ALL OF THE REFORM THAT HE HAS DONE IN THE ELECTION OFFICE.

AND PART OF THIS IS I'M JUST SAYING I'VE HEARD ABOUT MORE MORE ON THE AGENDA ABOUT CENSORING HIM.

AND I'M ASKING YOU NOT TO CENSOR CLINT CURTIS AND ALLOW HIM TO CARRY THROUGH WITH WHAT HE HAS DONE, AND TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR ELECTIONS ARE TRANSPARENT AND FAIR.

AND ANYWAY, SO THAT'S MY POINT. THANK YOU. NEXT UP, JACQUELINE, FOLLOWED BY STEVE KHAN, LINDA GLASS, THEN BEV, IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE.

HI, I'M JACQUELINE, DEVELOPING DIAMONDS COMMUNITY AND FOR YEARS I'VE BEEN TRYING TO EDUCATE YOU TO THE PERILS OF CAMPING AND STREET HOMELESS LIFE AND THE INHUMANE PRACTICES THAT HAVE BEEN SHOWN TO ACTUALLY INCREASE THE CRIME THAT AGAINST THE PUBLIC AND, AND THE HOMELESS THAT HAVE BEEN ALLEGED AS WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO PREVENT.

I HAD WITNESSES COMING TODAY, BUT FROM THE HOMELESS COMMUNITY.

BUT THEY ARE FIGHTING FOR THEIR LIVES RIGHT AT THIS VERY MOMENT FROM THE SWEEPS.

AND ONE IS 1 OR 2 ARE RISKING THEIR LIVES WITH ATTACKS FROM THE RAT PACK FOR JUST COLLECTING DATA THAT THAT SUPPORT OUR PROPOSALS BY ARRESTING AND FINDING THEM, TRYING TO STAY FOR TRYING TO STAY ALIVE.

IT CREATES A CRIMINAL RECORD AND PREVENTS THEM FROM QUALIFYING FOR HOUSING, DESTROYING OR CONFISCATING THEIR LIFE SUSTAINING POSSESSIONS AND PERSONAL DOCUMENTATIONS BACKFIRES ON ALL THE EFFORTS TO ESCAPE FROM THAT CYCLE.

FINALLY, THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HAS SAID ENOUGH TIME'S UP ON THESE IMMORAL AND COUNTERPRODUCTIVE PRACTICES.

IN THIS YEAR, THE 250TH ANNIVERSARY, CALIFORNIA HAS HAS ENACTED A NEW LAW, SB 634, THAT PROTECTS THE MOST VULNERABLE HOMELESS FROM THESE PRACTICES AND DIRECTS ALL THE CITY, COUNTY, AND STATE ENTITIES TO FIND A BETTER WAY TO ADDRESS THE PLAGUE OF HOMELESSNESS.

THE DDC HAS ESTABLISHED A COOPERATIVE THAT IS ALREADY GAINING SUPPORT CALLED COMPASSIONATE COMPLIANCE FOR THE GREATER GOOD.

634 I'M INVITING YOU TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS, IN THIS COLLABORATIVE, AND I GIVE YOU MY CARDS TO TO GET HOLD OF ME TO PRESENT WHAT THE PURPOSE OF THE COLLABORATIVE IS ALL ABOUT AND HOW IT WORKS, INVITING THE POLICE AND EVERYBODY TO BE PART OF IT.

NEXT UP, STEVE KHAN, FOLLOWED BY LISA GLASS, BEV, THEN SHASTA COUNTY WATCHDOG.

IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE. SO KELSTROM AND CRYE BELIEVE IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE TO ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK. HERE WE ARE ON OUR 250TH ANNIVERSARY OF OUR GREAT COUNTRY.

AND IN SHASTA COUNTY, WE'RE EXPERIENCING THE LARGEST ATTACK ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH OF ANYWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES.

[00:55:03]

UNDER THE RULE OF KELSTROM, WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THE EXTENT NECESSARY TO RELAY RELAY WHAT WE BELIEVE SHOULD OCCUR.

WE NO LONGER HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO EXPRESS OUR DISCONTENTMENT WITH ALL THE LAWSUITS, LEGAL COSTS THAT ARE THAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING, NO LONGER WILL WE BE HEARD. KELSTROM, THE MUZZLER IS IMPOSING MORE AND MORE RESTRICTIONS ON OUR ABILITY TO SPEAK.

THESE ARE RESTRICTIONS WE SEE IN CHINA, IN RUSSIA AND COMMUNIST COUNTRIES AND IN DICTATORSHIPS, BUT NEVER BEFORE IN SHASTA COUNTY. THEIR ATTITUDES WHILE ON THE DAIS MAKES IT CLEAR THAT THEY DO NOT CARE WHAT THE PUBLIC SAYS.

THEY DO NOT CARE WHAT THE PUBLIC THINKS. THEY WILL TINKER WITH ELECTRONIC DEVICES OR SIMPLY GET UP AND LEAVE.

THEY DON'T CARE WHAT THE COMMENTS ARE. THEY WILL DO.

AND SOME OF THEM HAVE SELECTIVE PAIN, APPARENTLY BECAUSE THEY ONLY LEAVE DURING CERTAIN COMMENTERS.

THEY WILL DO WHAT THEY WISH IF IT. IF IT DRAWS A LAWSUIT, SO WHAT? DURING KELSTROM AND CRYES RULE, OUR LEGAL COSTS HAVE GONE FROM 7 MILLION A YEAR TO OVER $20.9 MILLION A YEAR.

WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? HE DOESN'T. THEY DON'T BELIEVE WE CAN DO ANYTHING TO STOP THEM.

THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY WISH. IT'S TIME FOR THE PEOPLE TO STEP UP.

WE'VE GOT TO. WE'VE GOT CRYE OUT OF THERE IN JANUARY.

ANYWAY, LET'S FINISH THE JOB AND GET KELSTROM OUT OF THERE.

AND WE NEED TO CENSURE CURTIS. IF WE'RE GOING TO PROTECT OUR EMPLOYEES, HE NEEDS TO BE CENSURED.

HE NEEDS TO BE KNOWN THAT IF THAT KIND OF BEHAVIOR WILL NOT BE TOLERATED IN SHASTA COUNTY.

NEXT UP, LINDA GLASS, FOLLOWED BY BEV SHASTA COUNTY WATCHDOG, THEN GREG BONDI.

GOOD MORNING BOARD AND EVERYONE HR INTERVIEWED LONG TERM FRIENDS OF JOANNA'S WHO HAD A MOTIVE TO BRING HER BACK BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY. THEY DIDN'T WANT TO CLEAN UP HER PROCEDURE THAT ALLOWED ELECTION FRAUD.

SO [INAUDIBLE] AND FRIENDS MADE UP A TEENAGE NOVEL TO CHARACTER ASSASINATE CURTIS.

CURTIS IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF THE PERSONALITY THE OLD GUARD PORTRAYED.

THEY ARE PROJECTING THEIR OWN BEHAVIOR ONTO HIM.

HR REPEATEDLY DENIED INTERVIEWS WITH THE NEWER EMPLOYEES, WHO IN FACT, WERE HARASSED BY THE OLD GUARD IN THE SAME WAY THEY HARASSED CURTIS.

OPPENHEIMER IS REPEATING HEARSAY WITHOUT SWORN STATEMENTS OR LIE DETECTOR RESULTS IN THEIR OWN ECHO CHAMBER.

CURTIS CAME TO THIS COUNTY TO CLEAN OUT THE FRAUD, AND HE HAS DONE JUST THAT.[APPLAUSE] NEXT UP, BEV, FOLLOWED BY SHASTA COUNTY WATCHDOG, GREG BONDI, THEN KATHERINE SMITH VARGAS.

I ASK YOU TO NOT CENSURE CLINT CURTIS. THIS IS SO RIDICULOUS.

YOU DON'T WANT THE TRUTH. IF YOU DID, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE SOMEONE THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY INVESTIGATION EXPERIENCE DO THE INVESTIGATION.

YOU WOULD HIRE A COMPANY THAT IS IMPARTIAL IN THEIR INVESTIGATION AND NOT A FAR LEFT COMPANY.

LISTEN TO BOTH SIDES. BUT SOME OF YOU DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT.

BOTH THESE EMPLOYEES AND SOME OF YOU ARE GUILTY OF ELECTIONEERING, IN MY OPINION.

IT HAS BEEN A LONG TIME SINCE ANYONE HAD TRIED TO HAVE A VALID ELECTION.

DO NOT PENALIZE MR. CURTIS FOR THE LACK OF YOU TRYING TO FIND OUT THE TRUTH FOR YOURSELF.

I HOPE MR. CURTIS SUES THE GUILTY PARTIES FOR WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO HIM.

YOU HAVE BEEN ASKED TO PUT THE DISCUSSION OF FRAUD IN OUR ELECTIONS ON THE AGENDA, AND IT IS COMING TO BE.

IT GOING TO BE AT LEAST 2 WEEKS. I QUESTION THE PRIORITIES OF HAVING A FAIR ELECTION.

THANK YOU. NEXT UP, SHASTA COUNTY WATCHDOG, FOLLOWED BY GREG BONDI, KATHERINE SMITH VARGAS, THEN LAURA HOBBS. IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE.

YOU KNOW, IT'S REALLY DISGUSTING TO HAVE TO COME HERE EVERY TIME.

YOU KNOW, YOU TALK ABOUT CONSTITUTION, CHRIS AND THAT CRY BABY CRYE OUT THERE.

WHO'S STANDING OUT THERE, WHO CLAIMS HE HAS CANCER? BUT YET A COUPLE WEEKS ON THE RADIO, HE SAID HE WAS DONE WITH HIS CHEMO, SO THAT MEANS HE WAS DONE.

BUT HE'S ALWAYS USING THAT LIE TO GET PEOPLE TO PITY HIM.

YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS ARE SUPPOSED TO SAY I'M THE CONSTITUTION.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR RIGHTS, BUT YET THE PEOPLE WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT VIOLATING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

IT'S YOU GUYS BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE DOING THAT TO ALL OF US.

AND WHEN YOU DO THAT, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY BOARD SUPERVISOR BEEN HERE?

[01:00:02]

134 OR 123? THAT'S HOW MANY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HAVE BEEN IN THIS COUNTY.

THAT'S HOW MANY. AND THE WORST ONE IS GUESS WHO? KEVIN CRYE HAS BEEN THE WORST 1 WHO HAS CAUSED MORE CHAOS AND CAUSED MORE LAWSUITS IN THIS COUNTY.

DID YOU KNOW THAT? HE'S THE WORST. SO WHEN HE ACTUALLY MADE SOME RACIAL COMMENTS LAST MEETING ABOUT ME COMING UP HERE 6 OR 7 TIMES, YOU'RE DAMN RIGHT I'M GOING TO MAKE YOU HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE WHEN YOU DO TO THE CITIZENS WHEN YOU VIOLATED THEIR RIGHTS.

I WILL MAKE YOU ACCOUNTABLE. I DON'T CARE HOW MANY TIMES YOU BIG CRY, BABY CRY.

I DON'T CARE HOW MANY TIMES IN POLICIES YOU TRY TO PASS TO SILENCE US.

IT DOESN'T MATTER BECAUSE I COULD SIT BACK AND STILL COLLECT ALL THE EVIDENCE AND COLLECT EVERYTHING WITH AI.

ALL I HAVE TO DO IS TELL IT TO DO PULL UP ON THE EMAIL'S ACTUALLY FROM EVERYBODY IF I WANTED TO.

SO YOU KNOW WHAT? I ACTUALLY FILED A CIVIL RIGHTS COMPLAINT AGAINST VIOLATIONS OF DISCRIMINATION AND RATIO THAT HE MADE ABOUT A TACO TRUCK OR WHATEVER STAND MAKING COMMENTS ABOUT ME RACIAL.

SO I FILED A, I WILL FILE A LAWSUIT AGAINST ALL OF YOU FOR THE CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS.

GREG BONDI FOLLOWED BY KATHRYN SMITH VARGAS, LAURA HOBBS, THEN JENNY, IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE. IS GREG BONDI HERE? YOU'RE NOT SEEING GREG KATHRYN SMITH VARGAS.

COME ON UP. AFTER KATHRYN, WE HAVE LAURA HOBBS, JENNY.

THEN MICHELLE.

SHE GOT A DEPUTY TO COME AND KICK ME OUT. JUST SO YOU KNOW THAT I FILED A LAWSUIT.

I'M GOING TO FILE A LAWSUIT. ADA WILL ACTUALLY TAKE IT ON.

SO SHE WENT TO WASHINGTON. ALL RIGHT, YOUR 2 MINUTES IS UP.

WE NEED TO GET ON TO THE NEXT SPEAKER. DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT LOSING THE RACE.

CATHERINE, COME ON UP. SHUT UP. YOU CALL YOURSELF CHRISTIAN GOOD MORNING. IS IT STILL MORNING? I'M HERE TO PRESENT MAYBE A SOLUTION TO SOME OF THE HOMELESS THAT WE ARE SEEING.

AND IT'S NOT JUST THE HOMELESS, BUT FOR ALL OF US IN THE COMMUNITY.

INSTEAD OF USING POLITICS, I WANT TO JUST FOCUS ON COMMUNITY THAT WE CAN ALL COME TOGETHER AND HELP WITH SOLUTIONS TO ALL OF OUR PROBLEMS IN SHASTA COUNTY.

HOTELS AND OTHER ABANDONED BUILDINGS ARE SEEN THROUGHOUT THE TOWN, AND IT WOULD BE REALLY COOL IF WE COULD FIX THEM UP AND USE THAT AS TEMPORARY HOUSING AND HAVE A TRIAGE WHERE WE CAN LOOK TO SEE WHAT KIND OF THINGS ARE STOPPING PEOPLE FROM GROWING. SO IF WE COULD IN THAT TRIAGE, FIND OUT THOSE WHO HAVE ALCOHOL AND DRUG ADDICTIONS AS WELL AS MENTAL ILLNESS, AND GET THOSE PROBLEMS TAKEN CARE OF THROUGH DETOX, COUNSELING AND SKILL TRAINING.

THEN I'VE ALSO WORKED WITH THE ADULT PROTECTIVE AGENCY, AND THEY SAY THAT 60% OF OUR HOMELESS ARE ELDERLY AND THOSE PEOPLE WORKED ALL THEIR LIVES. SO A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE WANT TO JUST SAY THAT THESE ARE LAZY PEOPLE THAT DON'T WANT TO GET BETTER.

BUT THOSE PEOPLE WORKED. THEY CAN AFFORD TO PAY, AND WE CAN GIVE PEOPLE SKILLS SO THAT THEY CAN PAY FOR THEIR TREATMENT IN THE FUTURE. THERE ARE ALSO, IF ALL THE AGENCIES COME TOGETHER AND HELP US WITH SOME OF THE FUNDING, I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN REALLY MAKE AN IMPACT ON SHASTA COUNTY.

THIS WILL ALSO ENCOURAGE BUSINESSES AND MEDICAL PEOPLE TO COME TO THIS AREA.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NEXT UP, LAURA HOBBS, FOLLOWED BY JENNY MICHELLE, THEN BRAD G.

IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE. GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS.

I WANTED TO SPEAK IN PUBLIC, COMMENT ABOUT A FEW DIFFERENT THINGS, INCLUDING THE BROWN ACT VIOLATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN HAPPENING WITH THIS BOARD.

AND I'M AGAINST ANY REDUCTION OF PUBLIC TIME AT THE PODIUM.

I THINK LOCAL GOVERNMENT WORKS BEST WITH INPUT FROM THE CITIZENRY, AND I THINK YOU NEED TO DO YOUR BEST TO ENCOURAGE THAT, NOT DISCOURAGE IT. THE PAST COUPLE YEARS, IT'S GOTTEN PROGRESSIVELY WORSE, IN MY OPINION, AS FAR AS THAT GOES. ALSO, I'D LIKE TO SPEAK TO THE IDEA OF CENSORING CLINT CURTIS.

[01:05:05]

THIS WAS CLEARLY A POLITICALLY MOTIVATED ATTACK.

WHAT I'M FINDING IS THAT THE COUNTY DOESN'T CARE TO HEAR ABOUT ANY COMPLAINTS FROM ANYONE IN THE OFFICE, UNLESS THEY ARE COMPLAINTS AGAINST CLINT CURTIS.

WE HAVE A TOXIC WORK ENVIRONMENT IN THAT OFFICE, AND UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF CLINT CURTIS.

IT'S BECAUSE OF ENTRENCHED BUREAUCRATS WHO ARE RESISTANT TO CHANGE, TO CHANGE, AND THEY DO NOT WANT TO WORK WITH NEW PEOPLE IN THE OFFICE.

SO I'M SUFFERING FROM RETALIATION ON A REGULAR BASIS IN THAT OFFICE PERSONALLY.

AND WHEN I GO TO MONICA FUGATE AND COMPLAIN, SHE SAYS, I'M SORRY, I CAN'T HELP YOU.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO GO TO CLINT CURTIS WITH THAT, WHICH IS THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF THE OTHER OFFICE.

THE OTHER HALF OF THE OFFICE. WHEN THEY HAVE COMPLAINTS, THEY GO TO PERSONNEL.

PERSONNEL SAYS, HOLD ON A SECOND. I'LL BE RIGHT DOWN THERE.

AND THEY'RE RIGHT THERE INTERVENING AND ADVOCATING FOR THE OLD GUARD.

BUT WHEN ANYONE ANY NEW EMPLOYEE HAS FACES A SIMILAR SITUATION, WE HAVE NO SUPPORT.

AND I BELIEVE THAT THIS BOARD WANTS TO SUPPORT ITS EMPLOYEES, AND THAT'S WHY I'M HERE ADVOCATING FOR THEM.

THE NEW EMPLOYEES THAT NEED YOUR SUPPORT AND WANT YOUR SUPPORT.

SO PLEASE TAKE ALL COMPLAINTS IN EQUALLY AND EVALUATE THEM EQUALLY.

THAT'S NOT WHAT I'VE SEEN HAPPEN. I FEEL LIKE THE ATTACKS ON CLINT CURTIS ARE POLITICALLY MOTIVATED.

HE'S TOO LAID BACK. HE'S LAID BACK TO A FAULT AND PEOPLE TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT.

THANK YOU. NEXT UP JENNY FOLLOWED BY MICHELLE, THEN BRAD G.

IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE. SHORTER THAN LAURA.

TODAY I COME BEFORE YOU WITH A REQUEST, FIRST OF ALL, TO HUMBLY ASK IF IT'S TRUE THAT THE CIRCLE OF FRIENDS AND BERNIE IS CLOSING BECAUSE THAT REHABILITATION CENTER IS SO IMPORTANT TO THAT COMMUNITY.

SECONDLY, IF IT IS CLOSING, I COME TO ASK THAT YOU DON'T CLOSE IT.

IT'S A VERY HARD HIT FOR BERNIE BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A RURAL AREA.

IT'S NOT LIKE THERE'S ANOTHER ONE JUST DOWN THE STREET.

BERNIE IS A SMALL PLACE, AND IF YOU THINK A QUAINT SMALL TOWN HAVE LESS PROBLEMS BECAUSE THEY'RE TINY, THAT'S NOT HOW IT WORKS. THAT'S IGNORANCE. THE ISOLATION EXPERIENCED IN A SMALL COMMUNITY CAN BE DIFFICULT FOR ABUSE VICTIMS, FOR TRAUMA SURVIVORS, FOR HIGHLY IMPOVERISHED PEOPLE.

AND IT IS A VERY HIGHLY IMPOVERISHED AREA. THERE ARE LITTLE RESOURCES THAT CAN COME IN AND OUT OF THE TOWN, AND UNFORTUNATELY, THERE'S VERY LITTLE RESOURCES FOR PEOPLE WHO SUFFER FROM ADDICTION.

THE CENTER ON PAPER IS JUST A REHABILITATION CENTER.

BUT THIS IS A COMMUNITY. IT'S HEALING FOR SOMEBODY.

IT'S A SECOND CHANCE THAT MANY PEOPLE HAVE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF AND HAVE COME OUT THRIVING.

YES, ADDICTION IS AN ONGOING DISEASE THAT DOESN'T JUST END WHEN A PERSON GETS OFF DRUGS OR WHEN THEY STOP DRINKING ALCOHOL.

IT'S MUCH MORE LIKELY A PERSON WILL CONTINUE TO BE SUCCESSFUL WITH COMMUNITY AND WITH SUPPORT.

I SEE MANY OF THESE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS TODAY ARE ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH AND REHABILITATION.

I'M HOPING SOME OF THOSE MIGHT GO THAT DIRECTION.

IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT ASK. PLEASE SEND FUNDS AND PLEASE KEEP THE LITTLE TOWN OF BURNIE ALIVE.

SHASTA COUNTY ISN'T JUST REDDING AND ANDERSON.

THERE'S A WHOLE COMMUNITY EAST OF THE MOUNTAIN.

DON'T FORGET THEM. THANK YOU. NEXT UP, MICHELLE, FOLLOWED BY BRAD G.

GOOD MORNING BOARD. I HEARD KEVIN ON THE RADIO SAYING THAT YOU WERE GOING TO GET MORE INVOLVED WITH THE CANCER.

SOME CANCER PROJECTS. AND I WAS REALLY GLAD THAT THIS NEGATIVE IN YOUR LIFE CAN TURN IN MANY WAYS POSITIVE.

I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE NUCLEAR PLANTS. IS ALL WE HEAR HERE ON MAINSTREAM MEDIA IS HOW SAFE THEY ARE.

I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT THERE WERE MANY STUDIES DONE, ESPECIALLY BETWEEN THE 70S AND 2000, SHOWING HOW DESTRUCTIVE IT WAS TO OUR ENVIRONMENT AND CANCER CAUSING MATERIALS FROM THE, THE WASTE OF THE WATER.

THERE WAS A STUDY DONE. I JUST WANT TO GET THE NUMBERS RIGHT.

IT WAS DONE BETWEEN 1970 AND 2001 BY DOCTOR GOULD FROM THE RADIATION AND PUBLIC PROJECT.

HE CHECKED 4 NUCLEAR PLANTS IN THE FLORIDA AREA.

THE RESULTS WERE, THERE WAS A MORTALITY ROSE OF 26% TO 55% IN THOSE 2 REGIONS, WITH 2 REACTORS WITH A 1% INCREASE NATIONALLY. THE STRONTIUM 90, WHICH IS AN ISOTOPE AND THE HALF LIFE.

[01:10:05]

WE WON'T BE ABLE TO LIVE IT OUT, CAUSED CHILDHOOD HIGHER RATES IN AVERAGE AND AN ENORMOUS 325.3% CHILDHOOD CANCERS IN SAINT LUCIE COUNTY, INCREASING THE RATE MORE THAN DOUBLE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE.

SO IF YOU COULD PULL SOME OF THE REPORTS THAT WERE BURIED, CENSORED, AND I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE CENSOR, IT REALLY BOTHERED ME. MR.[INAUDIBLE] WHEN YOU [INAUDIBLE] WHEN YOU WENT LIKE THIS, WHEN WHEN CHRIS WAS LOOKING FOR HELP TO CUT SOMEBODY OFF.

THAT WAS A VERY BAD LOOK. I WAS SO DISAPPOINTED.

A VOTE TO CENSURE CURTIS IS NOT A WASTE OF TIME, KEVIN.

IF CRYE OWNS UP TO HIS MISTAKE, IT WILL BE A 5-0 VOTE.

A CENSURE WILL SEND A CLEAR MESSAGE TO COUNTY EMPLOYEES.

YOU HAVE THEIR BACKS. IT WILL ALSO PUT THE NATION ON NOTICE.

CURTIS IS NOT SOMEONE TO HIRE, APPOINT OR ELECT.

THE COUNTY BUDGET OUTLOOK IS BLEAK. JUST THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT YOU 2 WERE SAYING ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL.

LAWSUITS REQUIRING OUTSIDE LEGAL SERVICES AT A COST OF MILLIONS, SETTLEMENTS FOR MILLIONS.

MORE MILLIONS MORE WASTED ON TRYING TO MAKE THE ELECTION DENIERS HAPPY.

FORGET ABOUT THE 10 MILLION TO SIMPSON UNIVERSITY.

WE'RE BROKE. MR. KELSTROM. CRYE LOST BY A LANDSLIDE.

JUST LIKE JONES. UNHITCH YOUR STAR FROM CRYE.

HE IS A FAILED SUPERVISOR. STOP BEING HIS YES MAN.

MR. HARMON, YOU TOO WOULD BE WELL ADVISED TO STOP BEING CRYES TOADY.

DO WHAT'S BEST FOR YOUR CONSTITUENTS, NOT CRYES.

MISGUIDED AGENDA. DRASTIC CUTS WILL BE NEEDED TO TO NEED TO BE MADE TO THE 2026-27 BUDGET.

OTHERWISE THE COUNTY WILL NEED TO BORROW MONEY OR GO BANKRUPT.

WHAT'S ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK? FIXING POTHOLES.

LAW ENFORCEMENT. HEALTH SERVICES FOR THE POOR.

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU GOVERN AS IF YOU HAVE AN OPEN CHECKBOOK AND BELIEVE MONEY GROWS ON TREES.

MEANWHILE, STOP CRYE FROM DOING FURTHER DAMAGE WITH HIS SCORCHED EARTH AGENDA.

HE HAS HE EXITS THE DAIS. DON'T BELIEVE, MR. KELSTROM, THAT VOTERS MADE A MISTAKE BECAUSE THERE WERE 2 GALLAGHERS ON THE BALLOT.

THAT WAS OUR LAST SPEAKER. ALL RIGHT. SO WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO CONSENT.

[CONSENT CALENDAR]

IS THERE ANY ITEMS PULLED OFF CONSENT? THERE WAS NOT. CHAIR.

MISS LUCERO, PLEASE QUIT YELLING OUT AND DISRUPTING THE MEETING.

SHE'S UNHAPPY. THERE WAS NOT CHAIR. NO. OKAY.

I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT MOTION MADE BY SUPERVISOR LONG.

SECOND BY SUPERVISOR CRYE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? PASSES 4-0. MOVING ON TO R.4.

[R4 Suspend Rule 7.6.3 of Administrative Policy 1-101, Operation and Conduct of Business Before the Board of Supervisors, and adopt a policy resolution which approves updates to the Shasta County Administrative Manual.]

SUSPEND RULE 7.63 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY, OPERATION AND CONDUCT OF BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND ADOPT A POLICY RESOLUTION WHICH APPROVES UPDATES TO THE SHASTA COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL.

WELCOME. THANK YOU SIR. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

SENIOR ADMINISTRATIVE ANALYST FOR THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE. THE ITEM BEFORE YOU TODAY IS A POLICY RESOLUTION TO ADOPT CHANGES TO THE SHASTA COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL.

POLICY RESOLUTIONS ARE NORMAL AND CUSTOMARY BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD WOULD NORMALLY BE ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR, BUT DUE TO THE SCOPE OF THE CHANGES, STAFF THOUGHT A PRESENTATION WAS IN ORDER.

AS CAN BE SEEN FROM THE ATTACHMENTS ON THE STAFF REPORT, THERE ARE A MULTITUDE OF CHANGES TO THE MANUAL, INCLUDING REPEALING AND MOVING SECTIONS, ADDING NEW SECTIONS AND ALSO INCLUDED WAS AN OVERHAUL OF THE FORMATTING FOR CONSISTENCY AND EASE OF USE IN THE ENTIRE MANUAL. THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS WERE REPEALED AS PART OF THE PROJECT POLICY.

1-103 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY POLICY POLICY 1-118 PROCLAMATIONS AND CERTIFICATES OF APPRECIATION OR COMMENDATION POLICY.

3-105 SELF-INSURANCE DEDUCTIBLES POLICY 3-180.

DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING POLICY FOR POSITIONS REQUIRING A COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE.

POLICY 3-401. ELECTRONIC MESSAGE RETENTION AND POLICY 5-105.

FUNCTION OF THE PURCHASING AGENT. THE REASONS FOR REPEALING EACH OF THESE POLICIES IS INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT, BUT I AM HAPPY TO GO OVER THEM HERE AS WELL IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

ADDITIONALLY, POLICY 8-400 HEALTH INSURANCE PORTABILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT OF 1996 HIPAA PRIVACY AND SECURITY POLICY FOR SHASTA COUNTIES.

[01:15:04]

DESIGNATION AS A HYBRID ENTITY WAS RENUMBERED TO POLICY 9-101.

THE CHANGES IN THE MANUAL ALSO ESTABLISH POLICY 2-6 HUNDRED COUNTY REFUND POLICY AND POLICY 4-4 HUNDRED ELECTRONIC MESSAGE RETENTION POLICY, WHICH REPLACES THE PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED POLICY.

3-401. THERE ARE ALSO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY.

6-101, WHICH IS THE SHASTA COUNTY CONTRACTS MANUAL, INCLUDING ADDING PROCUREMENT AND ETHICS POLICY, INCREASING THE PURCHASE ORDER LIMIT FROM $3,000 TO 5000, MODIFYING LANGUAGE TO STANDARDIZE THE USE OF ELECTRONIC PAYMENTS AND, AT THE REQUEST OF THE AUDITOR, ADDING LANGUAGE LANGUAGE TO ESTABLISH PROCEDURES FOR VERIFYING A VENDOR'S STATUS THROUGH THE SAM.GOV EXCLUDED PARTY SYSTEM TO ENSURE VENDORS ARE NOT DEBARRED, SUSPENDED OR INELIGIBLE FROM RECEIVING FEDERAL FUNDS.

DEPARTMENT HEAD SIGNING AUTHORITY WAS INCREASED FOR REVENUE AGREEMENTS, AND THE CEO SIGNING AUTHORITY WAS EXPANDED TO INCLUDE SERVICES AGREEMENTS UP TO THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED UNDER GOVERNMENT CODE. SECTION 25502.3 REVENUE AGREEMENTS UP TO 750,000 WITH A TERM LIMIT OF 10 YEARS LEFT LESS AND NO COMPENSATION AGREEMENTS, INCLUDING RETROACTIVE, WITH A TERM OF 10 YEARS OR LESS, AS DIRECTED BY THE BOARD ON MAY 5TH, 2026. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR NONPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS WERE ALSO INCLUDED IN SECTION 5.18, AND THE BOARD ALSO DIRECTED STAFF TO RETURN WITH CHANGES TO PUBLIC COMMENT RULES OF THE JUNE 23RD, 2026 MEETING.

THOSE CHANGES ARE REFLECTED IN RULE 7 OF ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY 1-101.

IN ADDITION TO THE POLICY RESOLUTION, STAFF ARE RECOMMENDING THE BOARD ALSO SUSPEND RULE 7.6.3 OF ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY 1-101, WHICH WAS ALSO DISCUSSED ON JUNE 23RD. THESE CHA,,NGES COME AFTER HUNDREDS OF HOURS OF WORK FROM A MULTITUDE OF COUNTY DEPARTMENTS.

I WANT TO SAY A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO ALL THE DEPARTMENTS THAT CONTRIBUTED, AND WHAT I JUST COVERED WAS JUST A SUMMARY OF THE MORE IMPACTFUL CHANGES TO THE MANUAL.

OR I'M AVAILABLE IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS. AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE IS IF YOU COULD GO OVER THE RETENTION POLICY ON THE EMAILS.

THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME, YOU KNOW, IF YOU COULD PUT THAT IN LAYMAN'S TERMS, WHY WE'RE CHANGING THAT PARTICULAR POLICY.

HAPPY TO. SO JUST A LITTLE HISTORICAL CONTEXT.

THE COUNTY HAS A EXISTING RETENTION POLICY. AND SO THE ONE THING THAT'S REALLY NOT COVERED IN THERE IS EMAILS.

WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT WE HAVE TO BALANCE OUR PRIORITIES WHEN IT COMES TO THESE KINDS OF THINGS.

AND SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT THIS POLICY IS INTENDED TO DO, BALANCE OUR PRIORITIES WITH WHEN IT COMES TO FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY, TRANSPARENCY IS ALSO SECURITY. THOSE ARE THE 3 BIG THINGS.

WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT THIS I DON'T KNOW IF JOE HAS ANY OTHER COMMENTS.

I MEAN, WE'RE STILL SAVING THE EMAILS. IT'S JUST NOT FOR AS LONG A TIME. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. AND IT DOESN'T DELETE EVERYTHING.

IT JUST DELETES THE THINGS ON THE OUTLOOK SERVERS. THIS IS REALLY JUST THE BIG PIECE OF THIS HAS BEEN A KIND OF A CULTURE SHIFT OR A MIND SHIFT FOR DEPARTMENTS TO TAKE THE THINGS THAT ARE USEFUL, CRITICAL, OR RETIRED OR REQUIRED TO BE RETAINED AND MOVE THEM OUT OF OUTLOOK WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE A RETENTION TOOL.

IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY ARCHIVING FEATURES. NO VERSIONING.

AND SO, AND THE ACCESS TO IT IS LIMITED, RIGHT? I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO YOUR INBOX. YOU DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO MINE. SO IF I HAVE A EMAIL THAT'S HELPFUL FOR A PROCESS OR A PROJECT, AND I SAVE IT IN MY OUTLOOK. THE REST OF MY TEAM CAN ACCESS IT, BUT IF I SAVE IT ON A SHARED DRIVE, IT IS AVAILABLE TO THEM. AND IT ALSO, BY MOVING THEM OUT OF OUTLOOK, IT DOESN'T CIRCUMVENT OUR REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE THEM DURING A FOIA OR PRA REQUEST. AND I THINK THE SAME PEOPLE THAT ARE CONCERNED THAT WE'RE NOT KEEPING THEM LONG ENOUGH PROBABLY WOULD NOT WANT A DATA CENTER BUILT TO STORE THEM IN EITHER.

SO SUPERVISOR, DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING TO THAT? COUNCIL THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THEY HAD ATTEMPTED TO PASS SOME LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD HAVE MADE IT 2 YEARS, BUT THAT WAS VETOED BY THE GOVERNOR BECAUSE HE RECOGNIZED THE HUGE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN OF HAVING THESE.

AND AS THE NUMBER OF PRAS HAVE INCREASED, YOU KNOW, WE'RE HAVING TO SORT THROUGH DOCUMENTS FROM THE EARLY 2000S.

AND SO THIS WILL STREAMLINE THAT PROCESS, THOSE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE RETAINED ARE NEED TO BE MOVED OUT OF THOSE EMAILS.

SO AS FAR AS THOSE ITEMS THAT SHOULD BE RETAINED, THEY WILL BE.

THANK YOU. COUNCIL. SUPERVISOR LONG. JUST FOR THE BOARD'S SAKE, I LEFT ALL YOUR MICS ON BECAUSE WE'RE HAVING ISSUES WITH MICS TODAY, SO FEEL FREE TO JUST LEAVE THEM ON.

OKAY. THAT IS A HELPFUL CLARIFICATION. BRYCE, YOU AND I HAVE TALKED EXTENSIVELY ABOUT THIS.

I'VE TALKED WITH COUNCIL. I'VE TALKED WITH STEWART BUETTELL, DEPUTY CEO, OR CAO.

SO I'M, I THINK WE'LL AND COUNCIL LARMER DISCUSSED GOVERNMENT CODE 26202.

[01:20:04]

AND THAT WAS PASSED BY THE LEGISLATURE AND THEN VETOED BY THE GOVERNOR.

AND SO MAYBE ONE OF YOU 2 COULD WEIGH IN ON THIS A LITTLE BIT THE STATE RETENTION POLICY FOR EMAILS ON THE, THE OUTLOOK. LET'S SAY WHAT WHAT IS THAT RIGHT NOW? I, I'VE TALKED TO YOU ABOUT THIS, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA HAS A 1 YEAR MINIMUM.

DO THEY HAVE A MAXIMUM? I, I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY HAVE THAT.

SO, SO THEY, THEY, THEY WILL RETAIN THEM AT 1 YEAR.

AND YOU'RE NOT SURE WHAT HAPPENS AT THAT POINT.

SO MY GUESS WOULD BE THEY'RE USING THE SAME SOFTWARE WE ARE.

THERE'S AN AUTOMATIC DELETION. OKAY. WELL THANK YOU.

AND THEN QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS THE ISSUE THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT TO ME BY CONSTITUENTS.

THE DOCUMENT NON DOCUMENT CLARIFICATION ON SOME OF THESE EMAILS.

AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THROUGH THIS, THROUGH MY, THROUGH MY RESEARCH THAT MOST, MOST EMAILS THAT REACH US FROM CONSTITUENTS AND THE LIKE, THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT CONSIDERED DOCUMENTS FOR THE PURPOSE OF FUTURE RETENTION.

AND SO I THINK OFFICIAL THINGS, THE SUPERVISOR WILL BE ABLE TO CHECK AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT EMAIL DIDN'T JUST COME TO THEM ALONE. SO IF IT HAS AN OFFICIAL DOCUMENT, SO LET'S JUST SAY A PUBLIC WORKS DOCUMENT ON THE COURTHOUSE DEMO, AND IT'S GOT ALL KINDS OF PAGES, DOCUMENTS AND EVERYTHING THAT WILL BE RETAINED BY THE DEPARTMENT HEAD BECAUSE THEY'RE THE RETENTION RETAINER OF THE DOCUMENTS IN PERPETUITY.

IT'S NOT THE END PRODUCT FOR ME. IF I HIT DELETE, IT'S IT'S NOT GOING TO AFFECT ANYTHING FOR RECORD STORAGE.

YEAH. SO JUST A LITTLE CLARIFICATION. I THINK THAT LANGUAGE MAYBE IS JUST GETTING INTO THE WEEDS A LITTLE BIT.

THE WAY TO LOOK AT IT IS THERE ARE LOTS OF REQUIREMENTS FOR RETAINING DOCUMENTS IN GOVERNMENT CODE.

THERE ARE DIFFERENT KINDS OF DOCUMENTS. FOR EXAMPLE, CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD HAS TO BE PERMANENT RETENTION.

SO OUR TEAM PULLS THAT OUT AND RETAINS THAT AS IT IS ANYWAY.

THIS POLICY DOESN'T SUPERSEDE THAT. SO WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT IT, I'M LOOKING AT IT AS ITEMS IN OUTLOOK ITEMS PULLED OUT OF OUTLOOK.

THE THE DEPARTMENTS ARE THE ONES RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THEIR RETENTION POLICIES AND MAKE SURE THEY ARE ADHERING TO THOSE RETENTION POLICIES, INCLUDING THE REQUIREMENTS FROM THE STATE OR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT REQUIRES THEM TO KEEP EMAILS OR DOCUMENTS FOR A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME OR FINANCIAL REQUIREMENTS ARE FIVE PLUS ONE. AND SO THIS DOESN'T AGAIN, DOESN'T SUPERSEDE THAT.

SO THE DEPARTMENT, AS THEY ARE NOW, WILL MAKE THE DETERMINATION, WHAT THE RETENTION NEEDS TO BE ON THAT, PULL IT OUT, STORE IT AND THEY'LL HOLD ON TO IT.

THE THINGS IN OUTLOOK WOULD BE DELETED AFTER A YEAR.

CORRECT. AND ANOTHER QUESTION I HAD, WHICH I THINK IS IMPORTANT TO CLARIFY, WHEN WOULD THIS TAKE EFFECT, THIS NEW POLICY FOR 1 YEAR RETENTION. AND SO WOULD THINGS START DROPPING OFF INDIVIDUAL SUPERVISORS, LET'S SAY OUTLOOK A YEAR FROM NOW, OR WOULD THEY, WOULD THIS BE AN EFFECT? THIS YOU WOULD STILL RETAIN EVERYTHING FOR A YEAR.

YOU WOULDN'T GO BACK TO THE DATE OF THE EMAIL AND START DROPPING THEM AT INDIVIDUALLY.

SO THE POLICY WOULD GO INTO EFFECT IF IT WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD TODAY.

AND IT WOULD BE WE ONCE WE TURN ON THAT FUNCTION, IT WOULD START DELETING EMAILS OLDER THAN A YEAR AND IT WOULD BE A ROLLING SYSTEM.

SO IT WOULD START DELETING EMAILS OLDER THAN A YEAR, EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY IF ADOPTED.

YES. OKAY. THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S AN IMPORTANT CLARIFICATION.

SO ALL OF OUR OLD EMAILS, ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A CHANCE? BECAUSE WHAT I UNDERSTAND IS YOU CAN, YOU CAN TRANSFER THEM THROUGH A FILE FOLDER AND PUT THEM ON THE SERVER AND THEY WILL BE MAINTAINED FOREVER.

AND IF THEY'RE ON THE OUTLOOK, WHICH WAS NEVER MEANT TO RETAIN EMAILS LONG TERM, THEN WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO MAKE QUICK DECISIONS.

IS THERE ANY IDEA OF A LITTLE BIT OF A LEAD TIME FOR US TO, TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO DO WITH OUR EMAILS PRIOR TO THEM JUST DROPPING AUTOMATICALLY IF THEY'RE OLDER THAN A YEAR? THAT WOULD BE ENTIRELY UP TO THE BOARD. IF YOU WANTED TO SET A START DATE, THAT WOULD BE LATER OR AN EFFECTIVE DATE LATER.

STAFF HAS ALREADY BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR SEVERAL MONTHS, SO THEY'VE BEEN AWARE WE'VE BEEN COMMUNICATING WITH THEM ON THIS PROJECT. SO THEY'VE ALREADY BEEN TAKING THOSE EFFORTS TO CHANGE POLICIES, AS WELL AS RETAIN ALL EMAILS THAT THEY WANT TO HOLD FOR BEYOND THAT ONE YEAR LIMIT.

OKAY. I'M JUST CONCERNED WITH, WITH MY PERSONAL EMAILS.

[01:25:03]

SOME OF THEM GO BACK A COUPLE OF YEARS NOW AND SINCE I'VE BEEN CAMPAIGNING IN THE BOARD AND ALL THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

SO TO SORT THROUGH THAT WITH AN IMMEDIATE START DATE AFTER IMPLEMENTATION TODAY WOULD WOULD DELETE, AND I WOULDN'T HAVE A CHOICE IN SOME OF THOSE.

AND THAT THAT WOULD BE, I WOULD BE MAYBE THE BOARD COULD CONSIDER JUST A LITTLE BIT OF A LEAD TIME.

SO WHERE WE CAN ALL CONSIDER THAT AS A START POINT.

YEAH, IT'S ENTIRELY UP TO THE COURT'S DISCRETION. OKAY.

AND OKAY, SO I THINK THE EMAIL QUESTION IS HANDLED FROM WHAT THE STATE DOES.

DO YOU HAVE ANY INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT OTHER COUNTIES ARE DOING WITH THIS RETENTION POLICY AND WHERE THEY FIT ON THE MAP OF RETENTION? SO I DID A LITTLE RESEARCH YESTERDAY AFTER YOU AND I TALKED, AND IT'S KIND OF ALL OVER THE MAP. I FOUND SOME OLDER DOCUMENTS FOR SOME COUNTIES THAT STATE 90 DAYS. ANYTHING OVER 90 DAYS GETS DELETED.

DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S STILL IN EFFECT, BUT I DIDN'T HAVE TIME YESTERDAY TO REACH OUT TO INDIVIDUAL COUNTIES TO CONFIRM.

SO IT'S ALL OVER THE BOARD. SO WHEN YOU MEAN ALL OVER THE BOARD.

AND 90 DAYS TO 10 YEARS. THANK YOU FOR RESEARCHING THAT FOR ME BECAUSE THAT WAS AN IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION FOR ME.

SO ALL OVER THE BOARD, IT COULD BE ANYWHERE FROM 90 DAYS ALL THE WAY UP TO 10 YEARS THAT WE'RE RETAINING.

AND I THINK ANOTHER BENEFIT THAT HAS NOT BEEN DISCUSSED WITH THE EMAIL RETENTION IS THE COUNTY INVOLVEMENT WHEN HAVING TO RESEARCH PRA REQUESTS. CAN YOU DESCRIBE A LITTLE BIT FOR GOING THROUGH 10 YEARS WORTH OF EMAILS AND THE EXTRA BURDEN WHEN THEY MAY NOT BE PERTINENT TO THE TOPIC AT HAND? JOSEPH IS PROBABLY MORE QUALIFIED TO SPEAK ON THAT.

WHAT I CAN SAY IS I'VE BEEN ADVOCATING FOR AN EMAIL RETENTION POLICY FOR PROBABLY 3 TO 5 YEARS NOW, SO THIS HAS BEEN A LONG TIME COMING. THE FACT IS, IF WE HAVE LESS RECORDS, WE'RE GOING TO SPEND LESS TIME REVIEWING REQUESTS BECAUSE THERE'LL BE LESS TO GO THROUGH.

BUT I WOULD TURN IT OVER TO JOE. SUPERVISOR LONG.

SO WHAT I WOULD SAY ABOUT THAT IS THE ONLY WAY WE CAN SEARCH THESE EMAIL SERVERS IS THROUGH A KEYWORD.

THERE'S, THERE'S REALLY NOTHING FOR US TO SET A TIME FRAME.

AND SO WE'RE SEEING EMAILS FROM THE EARLY 2000 AND AS STAFF GOES THROUGH TO TRY TO SEE WHAT'S RESPONSIVE, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH ALL THOSE. SOMETIMES WE'RE SEEING, YOU KNOW, 20,000 HITS WHERE WE MIGHT FIND, YOU KNOW, 15 EMAILS THAT ARE ACTUALLY RESPONSIVE.

AND SO THE INTENT HERE IS TO STREAMLINE THAT PROCESS.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S, THERE'S REALLY NO USE FOR THESE EMAILS FROM THE EARLY 2000.

THEY'RE JUST NOT RELEVANT TO ANYTHING AT THIS POINT.

SO YES, IT WILL STREAMLINE, IT WILL CUT DOWN STAFF TIME.

AND WE'RE SEEING YEAR OVER YEAR THE REQUESTS DOUBLE.

SO IT'S BECOMING MORE OF A, ALMOST A MANDATORY REQUIREMENT TO GET RID OF THESE THINGS.

BECAUSE THERE'S GOING TO BE A POINT WHERE WE'RE REACHING IT WHERE WE CAN'T RESPOND WITHIN THE TIME FRAME THAT WE'RE GIVEN IN THE LAW.

OKAY. AND IS IT YOUR OPINION THAT PRA REQUESTS, WITH A 1 YEAR RETENTION WILL STILL BE TIMELY ENOUGH FOR FOR FOLKS TO GET THE INFORMATION THEY NEED FOR WHATEVER ISSUE WITH GOVERNMENT RECORDS? SO WHAT I WOULD SAY IS THE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE MAINTAINED WILL BE MAINTAINED OUTSIDE OF THE PROGRAM.

SO. CORRECT. BUT AS FAR AS INDIVIDUAL SUPERVISOR EMAILS, LET'S SAY THAT HAVE NO DOCUMENT RETENTION PERIOD, LONG TERM PERMANENT, IT'S THE OPINION OF STAFF THEN THAT A 1 YEAR RETENTION WILL GIVE FOLKS SUFFICIENT TIME TO FILE A PRA REQUEST AND GET DOCUMENTS. I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY DETERMINATION ON WHETHER PEOPLE ARE GOING TO FIND THAT AS AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT OF TIME.

BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY IS IF YOU IF YOU READ THE PORTION WHERE THE GOVERNMENT VETOES THIS THAT THE ATTEMPT TO CREATE A 2 YEAR REQUIREMENT. HE UNDERSTANDS THE THE PROCEDURAL AND STAFF TIME AND THAT'S WHY IT WAS VETOED.

OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU. MOVING BRYCE TO A DIFFERENT PART OF THE TOPIC.

WE TALKED ABOUT SIGNING AUTHORITIES GOING UP, AND YOU AND I DISCUSSED THIS, BUT I THINK IT'S AN IMPORTANT DESIGNATION.

SO LIKE CURRENTLY THE CEO IS $50,000. YEAH. THE, THE ORIGINAL INTENT, IF I GOT THIS RIGHT, WAS MEANT TO INDEX FOR INFLATION AND WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT.

SO BY, BY SOME OF THESE LIMITS, ARE THEY IN KEEPING WITH WHAT INFLATION WOULD HAVE UPPED THE SIGNING AUTHORITY.

AND HOW CONSISTENT IS THAT WITH INFLATION. YEAH.

SO WHEN LOOKING SPECIFICALLY AT THE CEO SIGNING AUTHORITY FOR SERVICES AGREEMENTS, YOU KNOW, IN WHICH WE'RE PAYING A VENDOR TO PROVIDE SERVICES FOR THE COUNTY, THE CODE STATES THAT BACK IN 2010,

[01:30:01]

THE LIMIT WAS 50,000. BUT TO INCREASE WITH CPI ANNUALLY.

AND SO WE HAVEN'T DONE THAT SINCE APRIL OF 2010, WHEN THAT FIRST I GUESS IT WAS APRIL 2011 WHEN THAT FIRST INCREASE WENT INTO EFFECT.

AND SO LOOKING AT THAT NUMBER THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS, IT'S 60.7% INCREASE IN CALIFORNIA.

SO THAT'S HOW WE CAME UP WITH THE LIMIT FOR 26-27 WOULD BE $80,000.

BECAUSE WHEN WE WENT WITH THAT, BECAUSE AS YOU KNOW, WITH CPI, IT COULD GO UP 1.47%, RIGHT? OR 3.19. AND SO IT WOULD GIVE US SOME YEARS, IT MIGHT GIVE US REALLY, REALLY ODD LIMITS, LIKE $60,124.43. AND THAT JUST ISN'T FUNCTIONAL FOR STAFF.

SO THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN IS THAT IT WOULD ALWAYS ROUND DOWN TO THE NEAREST 5000.

SO THAT ENSURES THAT STAFF HAVE A AN EASY NUMBER TO WORK WITH, BUT ALSO THAT WE ARE NEVER SUPER OR OVER GOING OVER WHAT THE LIMIT IN CODE IS. OKAY. AND SO THAT IS ACROSS THE MAP, HOW YOU CALCULATED THE INCREASES, BECAUSE YOU AND I TALKED ABOUT EXPENSE CODES AND REVENUE CODES AND THEM BEING DIFFERENT AUTHORITY LIMITS.

CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THAT JUST A BIT? AND THEN DID THOSE FIGURES KEEP UP WITH INFLATION BY ALL THE CALCULATIONS? IS THAT HOW WE'RE GETTING TO THE HIGHER AUTHORITIES FOR EXPENSE AND REVENUES? NO. SO SOME OF THE OTHER INCREASES ARE NOT TIED TO CPI MORE JUST STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON BEST ESTIMATE.

THE REVENUE AND THE REVENUE AGREEMENT COMPENSATION INCREASES BOTH WENT UP BY I WANT TO SAY IT'S $50,000 OR 50%. SORRY. SO THAT'S UNDER WHAT CPI HAS BEEN.

BUT THE TERMS, WE ALSO INCREASE THE TERM LENGTHS.

BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, AS THINGS GET MORE EXPENSIVE, WE'RE HOPING THAT REVENUE COMES IN HIGHER.

AND SO IT JUST, IF WE AREN'T SEEING THAT, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO BRING THE AGREEMENTS TO THE BOARD ANYWAY.

BUT THAT'S A, YOU KNOW, 20 TO 60% INCREASE. SO IT'S ABOUT CPI, BUT NOT EXACTLY.

OKAY. SO IS IT FAIR TO SAY THAT THE NEW INCREASED LIMITS ARE ROUGHLY IN LINE WITH CPI? I MEAN, JUST I'M, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT BECAUSE THE, THE ARGUMENT'S GOING TO BE THAT WE'RE INCREASING THE AUTHORITY OF STAFF TO OPERATE AUTONOMOUSLY AND OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE OF THE BOARD JURISDICTION.

AND SO I, I THINK IF IT'S TIED TO CPI AND IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED TO BE TIED TO CPI, AND WE CAN SAY THAT IT'S GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH CPI, I THINK THAT ELIMINATES THAT ARGUMENT. SO FROM WHAT I REMEMBER AND AGAIN, I DON'T HAVE THE ENTIRE POLICY IN FRONT OF ME.

I'M SORRY. ALL THE LIMITS ARE INCREASING. NO MORE THAN WHAT CPI HAS BEEN SINCE NO MORE THAN.

OKAY. THAT'S, THAT'S MY BEST ESTIMATE AT THIS POINT.

AGAIN, THIS IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION. WHAT WILL WORK BEST FOR THE COUNTY.

GOT IT. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION.

SUPERVISOR. CRYE. SUPERVISOR. LONG. DID YOU HAVE A MOTION? I MEAN, I'M JUST I'M TRYING TO WELL, I'M. I'M GOING TO MAKE THE MOTION THAT WE ADOPT, BUT STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON ALL OF THIS. AND SO MY POINT WAS TO CLARIFY, I THINK WE NEEDED TO CLARIFY BECAUSE I'VE GOTTEN A NUMBER OF EMAILS FROM CONSTITUENTS EXPRESSING CONCERN WITH EMAIL RETENTION POLICIES AND, AND THOSE THINGS.

AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO FLUSH OUT ALL THE DETAILS SO THAT THE PUBLIC CAN UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE.

YEAH. SO WAS THAT IT? SUPERVISOR CRYE. WELL, NO, I JUST I WANT TO ASK THAT.

SO HERE'S MY WAS THAT GOING TO GET A SECOND TO APPROVE IT? I HAVE NOT HEARD A SECOND YET. I HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE BY SUPERVISOR LONG.

DO I HAVE A SECOND? I'LL SECOND IT. OKAY, SO HERE'S WHERE I SIT ON THIS.

THIS IS THIS IS A REALLY TOUGH, TOUGH ONE FOR ME BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, PART OF THE REASON OF OUR LAWSUITS IS BECAUSE OF ALL THE THINGS THAT I FOUND GOING BACK INTO 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023. AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE SLOWLY BEATING THEM ALL BACK IS BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MUCH STUFF. AND SO I MR. BUETTELL, I HAVE A. I HAVE A QUESTION BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE AMOUNT OF.

AND BRYCE, I KNOW THAT'S NOT SO MUCH YOUR DEPARTMENT ANYMORE. IT'S MORE OVER TO COUNCIL LARMER AND HOW YOU GUYS ARE DOING THE PRAS.

[01:35:01]

AND I KNOW THE AMOUNT IS A LOT. AND THERE IS SO MUCH FRIVOLOUS WASTE BY ACTUALLY QUITE A FEW PEOPLE IN HERE, BUT I HAVE A REALLY HARD TIME DELETING THOSE.

LIKE I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT I SUPPORT THAT BECAUSE I WOULDN'T HAVE FOUND ALL THE STUFF THAT I FOUND AND TURNED IT OVER.

WE WOULDN'T HAVE, WE WOULDN'T HAVE HAD ALL THE COUNTY COUNCILS WHO WERE DESTROYING DOCUMENTS.

YOU KNOW, I WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PROVE SOME OF THAT STUFF.

SO I DON'T YOU KNOW, I, I'M AT A CROSSROADS BECAUSE, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE FINANCIAL IMPACT AND AS AS I HAD SAID BEFORE, PEOPLE DON'T HAVE THE FINANCIAL ACUMEN TO RUN A TACO TRUCK.

SO THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH MONEY THEY COST THIS COUNTY IN TERMS OF 10S OF 100S OF 1000S OF DOLLARS IN TIME AND RESOURCES.

BUT. SUPERVISOR CRYE I CAN I ADD ONE THING TO THAT CONVERSATION? ABSOLUTELY. SO I THINK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT APPLES AND ORANGES HERE.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE OUTLOOK PLATFORM FOR INDIVIDUAL EMAILS.

AND THE SUPERVISOR WOULD HAVE THE ABILITY TO SORT WHETHER THOSE BECOME PERMANENT RECORD.

AND THE THINGS THAT YOU'RE DISCUSSING ARE ALREADY PERMANENT RECORD.

AND THEY WILL BE AVAILABLE FOREVER FOR THOSE THOSE TOPICS.

I DOWNLOADED. CORRECT. WHAT'S THAT? BUT BUT THE SUPERVISORS, IF I'M UNDERSTANDING IT, RIGHT, LIKE I KNOW EVERYBODY UP HERE HAS VARYING DEGREES OF THE RESPONSIVENESS TO EMAILS AND WHAT COMES IN AND WHAT'S FILTERED.

SO I'M JUST AND MAYBE, AND MAYBE I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING IT.

I TALKED, I TALKED EXTENSIVELY WITH IT SCHREIBER AND THE MICROSOFT OUTLOOK PROGRAM FOR RETENTION OF EMAILS WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE A PERMANENT PLATFORM TO RETAIN EMAILS INDEFINITELY, AND I THINK THERE ARE OTHER SAFEGUARDS THAT ARE BUILT IN TO SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF A CONSTITUENT ADDRESSES IT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AS A BLANKET, NOT INDIVIDUAL SUPERVISORS, THEN IT GOES BEFORE. AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THE CLERK OF .STEPHANIE GETS IT AND THEN.

STEPHANIE GETS IT. AND, AND SHE DETERMINES WHETHER THERE'S A PERMANENT NEED FOR A RECORD AND THAT GETS FILED FOREVER.

AND SO, AND SUPERVISORS INDIVIDUALLY CAN PUT SOMETHING INTO A FOLDER FILED FOREVER, ANY EMAILS THAT THEY WANT.

AND THE PLATFORM WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE A, YOU KNOW, 10, 20 YEAR STORAGE FACILITY FOR EVERY EMAIL THAT WE'VE GOT.

AND WE'VE HEARD FROM COUNCIL AND OTHERS ABOUT SOME OF THE CHALLENGES, WADING THROUGH EXTENSIVE 10-20 YEAR VOLUMES OF EMAILS TO COMPLY WITH. AND IT'S, IT'S IT'S IMPACTING OUR STAFF.

SO, SO I THINK ANY RECORD THAT IS REQUIRED WILL BE PERMANENT.

AND THAT WILL BE DETERMINED THROUGH A LOT OF DIFFERENT AVENUES.

WHAT I DON'T LIKE THOUGH, IS LIKE THE ARBITER OF WHO SAYS IT'S, YOU KNOW, RELATIVE OR NOT.

AND OBVIOUSLY STAFF HAS TO DO THEIR JOB, BUT IF EVERYTHING'S KEPT, THEN NOTHING IS LOST.

SO IF SOMETHING IS DEEMED NOT, YOU KNOW, NOT WORTHY TO GO INTO THIS FILE, THEN IT'S GONE.

WELL, I THINK, I THINK IT WOULD BE. DO WE HAVE PROCESSES IN PLACE THAT ENSURE THAT IMPORTANT DOCUMENTATION IS RETAINED FOREVER? AND I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT IF I WASN'T IN MEETINGS WHERE WE HAD COUNTY COUNCILS TAKE COPIOUS NOTES, PHOTOCOPY IT, DESTROY THEM, AND THEN SAID THEY NEVER EXISTED.

AND THEN WHEN I WAS ABLE TO PROVE THAT THEY EXISTED, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE NO LONGER HERE.

SO WHEN THAT KIND OF STUFF HAPPENS AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL IN COUNTY GOVERNMENT, COUNTY COUNCIL, AND THAT HAPPENS, LIKE, WHERE DO YOU GO FROM THERE? AND THAT'S WHERE I AM. I'M JUST LIKE, I DON'T KNOW.

I MEAN, IS MR. SCHREIBER, DID YOU COME UP? WOULD YOU MIND.

IN ANSWER TO THAT RESPONSE? I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE AFFECTED AT ALL.

IF A DEPARTMENT HEAD OR COUNTY COUNCIL IS GOING TO DESTROY DOCUMENTS, THEY'RE GOING TO DESTROY DOCUMENTS.

IT DOESN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS ONE ISSUE, WHICH IS THE OUTLOOK PLATFORM FOR OUR INDIVIDUAL EMAILS AND HOW LONG WE KEEP THEM ON THAT PLATFORM. THAT'S I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THAT. SO MY QUESTION IS, I MEAN, I USE I USE OUTLOOK, AND THEN I WENT TO SPARK, CAME BACK TO OUTLOOK BECAUSE IT'S BETTER FOR THE NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES.

SO IS IT SOMETHING WHERE THOSE CAN GET DOWNLOADED INTO A FILE AT THE END OF LIKE EVERY CALENDAR YEAR, LIKE DECEMBER 31ST. AND THEN WHAT'S THE STORY? I MEAN, I KNOW IT'S A LOT OF THAT'S A LOT OF STORAGE AND BUT WHAT'S THE.

SO JUST ON THE LEGAL SIDE, THE ANSWER TO THAT IS NO, BECAUSE IF YOU DOWNLOAD THEM INTO A FILE, THEY STILL HAVE TO BE SEARCHED AND THEY STILL HAVE TO BE PROVIDED.

CORRECT. SO THE ANSWER IS NO. THAT WOULD THAT WOULD SLOW THINGS DOWN AND MAKE IT MORE DIFFICULT.

[01:40:02]

SO WHAT OTHER I MEAN, ARE THERE ANY LIKE, YOU KNOW, SAAS OR SOFTWARE'S COMING THAT ARE MEANT FOR THIS, YOU KNOW, NEW WORLD OF PRAS WHERE EMAILS ARE.

WELL, THERE'S DIFFERENT. TOM SCHREIBER CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER THERE'S THERE'S DIFFERENT SOFTWARE'S OUT THERE FOR ARCHIVING AND THAT KIND OF THING.

AND REALLY WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO IS NOT SO MUCH THE ARCHIVING BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF ARCHIVING EMAILS NOW, RIGHT? YOU CAN TAKE THEM OUT. YOU CAN PUT THEM IN YOUR SYSTEM.

I KNOW COUNTY COUNCIL HAS A SYSTEM. THE EMAILS ACTUALLY GET INTO THE CASE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM.

OTHER DEPARTMENTS HAVE THAT AS WELL. OTHER DEPARTMENTS CAN ACTUALLY, LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT, DRAG THEM OFF INTO A SHARED FOLDER AND HAVE SOME KIND OF ARCHIVE THERE IF THEY NEED TO KEEP THEM.

THERE ARE OTHER SOFTWARE'S TO DO THAT KIND OF THING.

WE DON'T HAVE THEM. I MEAN, WE JUST HAVE WHAT COMES WITH 365 AS PART OF THE ENVIRONMENT.

AND THE GOAL HERE IS THAT TRYING TO GET SOME KIND OF CONTROL ON HOW MUCH IS KEPT IN THE SYSTEM.

LIKE WE TALKED ABOUT EMAIL AS A COMMUNICATION PLATFORM FROM MY PERSPECTIVE OF IT.

IT'S NEVER MEANT TO BE. IT WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE AN ARCHIVE SYSTEM IF YOU NEED TO ARCHIVE DOCUMENTS.

WE HAVE SYSTEMS TO DO THAT. THERE'S THE EDMS FOR ARCHIVING DOCUMENTS, THERE'S CASE MANAGEMENT FOR DOCUMENTS, EVEN YOUR FOLDERS FOR DOCUMENTS. AND TOM IF I MAY.

YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. YOU TOLD ME THAT IF A SUPERVISOR WANTED TO RETAIN THEIR OWN EMAILS, THEY COULD JUST DRAG THEM AND DROP THEM AND THEY WOULD BE RETAINED INDEFINITELY. SO YOU WERE YOUR.

YOUR WHOLE POINT TO ME WAS THE MICROSOFT OUTLOOK PLATFORM IS NOT THE INTENDED PLATFORM FOR LONG TERM SERVICE, BUT A SUPERVISOR CAN RETAIN ALL OF THEIR INFORMATION.

THAT'S CORRECT. INDEFINITELY. YEAH. THE EMAIL SYSTEM WAS NEVER MEANT TO BE THE ARCHIVE, RIGHT FOR RETENTION.

I MEAN, WE HAVE TENSION RULES BASED ON DOCUMENT TYPES BASED ON COMMUNICATIONS.

AND THAT STUFF SHOULD BE HELD WHEREVER THE DEPARTMENT HOLDS THEIR DOCUMENTS FOR RETENTION.

YEAH. BUT I MEAN, I JUST THINK. SUPERVISOR LONG.

SUPERVISOR MOST SUPERVISORS, NOT ON THIS ONE, BUT JUST IN GENERAL OF THE GO TO CSAC OR MOST OF THEM AREN'T GOING TO DO THAT.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SLIDE IT OVER. AND I MEAN, WELL, IT DOES TAKE AN INDIVIDUAL TO TAKE THE EFFORT TO DO IT RIGHT.

SO IT'S NOT AUTOMATIC, RIGHT? SO IF YOU NEED TO, IF YOU WANTED TO KEEP YOUR EMAILS AT THE END OF THE YEAR FOR THE YEAR, YOU WOULD END UP HAVING TO MOVE THOSE EMAILS OUT OF THE SYSTEM.

THAT THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION. COULD YOU MAKE IT OR WOULD IT BE ABLE TO MAKE IT AN AUTOMATIC SO ALL OF THE SUPERVISORS EMAILS ARE TRANSFERRED OVER WITHOUT THEM DOING AN INPUT.

THAT WOULD REQUIRE SOFTWARE, RIGHT? WE COULD LOOK IN TO SEE WHAT SOFTWARE IS AVAILABLE FOR DOING THAT KIND OF THING OUTSIDE OF THE EMAIL SYSTEM.

THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING ORIGINALLY WAS JUST, I JUST, I JUST THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT.

LIKE, YOU KNOW, I MEAN I REMEMBER ON THE AIR WATER OR THE THE OH, SHOOT, WHICH ONE? WHICH BOARD WAS IT? QUALITY, AIR QUALITY, AIR QUALITY, WHERE WE WENT BACK YEARS AND FINDING THOSE EMAILS AND REALIZED HOW, YOU KNOW, 14 YEARS AGO THAT THAT'S WHERE THESE PROBLEMS STARTED.

WE WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT, WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO FIND THAT WITH MR. EWING, OR WAS IT TROY? EITHER ONE. BUT I HAD TO GO BACK 14 YEARS OF EMAILS, AND THAT'S THE ONLY WAY WE FOUND THAT ANYWAY.

ALL RIGHT. I'M I'M GOOD. I'M GOING TO VOTE NO.

MISS BLANKENSHIP, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE DO HAVE ONE MORE THING. KEVIN, WE COULD. OUR SUPERVISOR CRYE.

THAT'S FINE. WE COULD ALSO ADJUST THE TIME FOR RETENTION.

SO IF YOU WERE COMFORTABLE WITH 4 YEARS, WE COULD THE BOARD COULD DECIDE THAT.

OR IF YOU WANT TO GO 2 YEARS OR 3 YEARS, THAT'S UP TO THE BOARD TO DECIDE A RETENTION PERIOD RATHER THAN JUST KNOW THEY WILL BE KEPT FOREVER. SO I'M JUST THROWING THAT OFFER OUT.

I MEAN, I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THE TIMING, STEWART, IS THIS IS TIMING CRITICAL ON THIS? OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT LIKE, MAYBE MR. SCHREIBER COULD FIND OUT LIKE A COST OF THAT? I MEAN. SO HERE'S THE ISSUE. SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO ARCHIVE IT, THERE'S NO POINT IN HAVING NECESSARILY THE POLICY.

IT'S GOING TO UNDERMINE THE POINT OF THE POLICY.

YEAH. WELL I MEAN SO AGAIN, RIGHT, WHERE DOES THAT AND I'M JUST TALKING TO THE FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS LIKE, LIKE WHERE DO YOU PUT THE PRICE ON THAT? LIKE I THINK, I THINK, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THAT STUFF IS I MEAN, LIKE, LOOK LIKE THE CITY OF REDDING IS GOING TO HAVE STUFF THAT'S GOING TO GO BACK, YOU KNOW, 2 TO 6 YEARS OF VOTES THAT ARE GOING TO BE CATASTROPHIC, CATASTROPHIC FOR THIS COUNTY, AND IT'S GOING TO COME OUT.

AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR PEOPLE TO HAVE THOSE EMAILS TO BE ABLE TO GO BACK AND SAY, LOOK, HERE'S WHAT HAPPENED. AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, SO I DON'T. BUT AGAIN, I UNDERSTAND THE THE COST. AND FOR ME, LIKE, YOU KNOW, I, WE LIKE FOR LIKE, IT'S DIFFERENT, RIGHT? I HAVE FOUR EMPLOYEES AND MAYBE FOUR OF THEM HAVE SALES ACCESS WHERE I WANT EVERY EMAIL.

[01:45:05]

SO WE CAN LOOK AT EVERY CUSTOMER CONVERSATION THAT DIDN'T MAYBE MAKE IT INTO OUR, OUR CRM.

SO I COULD LOOK BACK AT RELATIONSHIPS OR, YOU KNOW, WHEN A BOARD CHANGED OR SUPERINTENDENT, WHATEVER. SO HAVING THAT IS LIKE, BUT I KNOW THAT'S NOT THOUSANDS OF EMPLOYEES.

SO WHAT'S THE COST RATIO? AND THAT'S TOUGH FOR ME.

AND I THINK I'M ALWAYS GOING TO ON LETTING THE PEOPLE HAVE ACCESS TO ALL THAT STUFF SO YOU CAN ACTUALLY, IF YOU WANT, AND THE BOARD CAN DECIDE, RIGHT. WE CAN DELAY THE THE TIME WE ACTUALLY START THIS PROCESS.

RIGHT. DOESN'T HAVE TO BE IMMEDIATE. YOU WANTED SOME TIME TO BE ABLE TO LOOK THROUGH YOUR EMAIL.

SO WE COULD ACTUALLY DELAY THAT START PIECE FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.

WE COULD CHANGE THE RETENTION PERIOD OR THE TIME FOR THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IF YOU WANT.

SO LET'S SAY YOU WANT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO HAVE 2 YEARS.

WE COULD DO THAT. I MEAN, WE DO HAVE THAT CAPABILITY, BUT I WOULD MAKE SURE THAT IT MAKES SENSE AND TRY TO BE CONSISTENT AS POSSIBLE.

SO IT'S ACROSS THE BOARD THE SAME AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

STEWART. SUPERVISOR CRYE. JUST TO RESPOND TO ONE THING IN PARTICULAR REAL QUICK.

TO, TO YOUR POINT, I THINK THERE'S A QUESTION.

THERE'S AN IMPLIED QUESTION OF TRUST BETWEEN THE BOARD AND STAFF.

AND I THINK IF IF SOMEBODY CHOSE TO DELETE SOMETHING IN EARNEST THERE'S NOTHING TO STOP THEM OR PRECLUDE THEM FROM BEING ABLE TO DO THAT.

AND THIS CHANGE DOESN'T CHANGE THAT. SO I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT AS WELL.

WELL, AND AGAIN, THIS IS THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CURRENT STAFF.

I MEAN, IF STEPHANIE COMMITTED TO WORKING HERE THROUGH THE YEAR 3000, LIKE I WOULD BE, I WOULDN'T BE A BIG DEAL.

BUT I ALWAYS LOOK AT THE POSITION, NOT THE PERSON.

ALL RIGHT. MR. BLANKENSHIP, IF WE CAN HAVE OUR PUBLIC COMMENTERS.

YES, WE HAVE 5 SPEAKERS. FIRST UP, DON DUCKETT, FOLLOWED BY SHASTA COUNTY WATCHDOG, THOMAS H.

THEN JENNY, IF I CALLED YOUR NAME, PLEASE GET IN QUEUE. DON PASSES.

SHASTA COUNTY WATCHDOG UP NEXT, FOLLOWED BY THOMAS H.

JENNY, THEN DAVID HALLIGAN. WELL.

SINCE YOU CLAIM TO SAY THAT THIS COUNTY IS A CHARTER, YOU'RE ALWAYS SAYING THAT.

WHY DON'T YOU PUT THIS TO THE VOTERS AND SEE? LET THE VOTERS DO VOTE ON THIS AND SEE WHAT THEY DECIDE TO VOTE.

BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT? THIS IS WHAT IS IT? GOVERNMENT PROPERTY WHEN YOU JUST START DESTROYING GOVERNMENT PROPERTY.

LOOK AT KEVIN RUNS AWAY. HE DON'T WANT TO HEAR.

WHAT WE HAVE TO SAY IS HE'S DONE IT MULTIPLE TIMES.

PRETTY SAD. AND HE CARES. HE SAYS HE CARES. BUT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU OUGHT TO THINK ABOUT THE VOTERS.

LET THE VOTERS VOTE ON THIS. WHY ARE YOU GUYS VOTING ON THIS DESTROYING GOVERNMENT PROPERTY? ACTUALLY, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD PROBABLY DO WHAT? TAXES? 7 YEARS. HANG ON TO IT. VOTE ON FOR 7 YEARS.

JUST, YOU KNOW, SO WHAT IF THE STAFF MEMBERS WORK ON THIS AND THEY WORK A LOT OF HOURS ON IT? WE THE PEOPLE ARE, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT ACCESS TO HAVE EMAILS OR ANY INFORMATION.

BECAUSE I KNOW THAT ONCE KEVIN CRYE IS GONE, HE'S GOING TO WANT TO KNOW WHAT AARON REZNOR OR ANYBODY ELSE GETS IN HERE.

HE'S GOING TO START ASKING BECAUSE HE WANTS TO MAKE SURE HE HAS ACCESS, BUT HE'S ONLY THINKING ABOUT HIMSELF.

BUT HE'S NOT THINKING ABOUT US. SO THAT'S WHY HE'S.

BECAUSE, AS YOU HEARD HIM SAY, HE WAS ABLE TO RETAIN EMAILS BECAUSE HE ASKED.

HE DID. HE DID NOT. ABOUT THE PEOPLE. YOU NEVER HEAR HIM SAY WHAT HE'S DONE FOR THE PEOPLE.

IT'S ALL ABOUT HIM. SO WHY DON'T YOU JUST LET THE PEOPLE KNOW WHAT YOUR PLANS ARE? IF YOU CARE ABOUT THE CITIZENS AND THE VOTERS, INSTEAD OF JUST CRYING ABOUT YOU, YOU.

AND LET THEM. LET THEM KNOW. GIVE THEM THE INFORMATION THEY HAVE A RIGHT.

LET THEM KNOW THAT YOU WANT TO DESTROY EVIDENCE, EMAILS THAT GOVERNMENT OR ANYBODY SENDS TO SOMEBODY ELSE THAT THEY SHOULDN'T BE SENDING TO EMAILS. THEY WANT TO DESTROY EVIDENCE. DESTROYING EVIDENCE IS A CRIME.

SO I WOULDN'T I WOULD RECOMMEND NOT TO DO IT BECAUSE THE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT.

IF YOU DECIDE TO DO IT OR MANIPULATE IT, THEN DO IT, BUT DO IT THE RIGHT WAY SO WE HAVE ACCESS.

HOW MUCH MORE ARE YOU GOING TO CHIP OUR RIGHTS AWAY TO TAKE THAT FROM US? BECAUSE WHEN YOU TAKE IT AWAY FROM US, BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE US, BECAUSE YOU MAKE A STUPID COMMENT ABOUT TACO STAND, THAT MEANS YOU'RE APPLYING TO ME. THAT'S A RACIAL COMMENT.

INSTEAD OF ATTACKING THOSE AND MAKING THESE CHANGES BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE CERTAIN PEOPLE,

[01:50:03]

YOU'RE ACTUALLY ATTACKING YOUR OWN CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, YOUR OWN RIGHTS, THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE PUBLIC RECORDS.

SO YOU'RE NOT HURTING US. YOU'RE HURTING YOURSELF.

THOMAS H. FOLLOWED BY JENNY, THEN DAVID HALLIGAN.

AND THOMAS H. YEAH, I WAS HERE BASICALLY OPERATIONS AND CONDUCT OF BUSINESS BEFORE US.

I WAS HERE BASICALLY HOPING THAT YOU GUYS DON'T CHANGE THE PROCEDURE OF OUR LITTLE MEETINGS AND OUR CUT OUR OPPORTUNITY OF ACTUALLY GETTING UP AND TALK AS CITIZENS.

I COULD BE A LITTLE BIT MORE STRONG ABOUT PEOPLE THAT INTERRUPT OTHER PEOPLE, PEOPLE THAT SCREAM OUT.

I WOULD PROBABLY UP THERE, I WOULD SAY YOU GET ONE SHOT AND THAT'S IT.

NO SECOND SHOT. I WOULD TIGHTEN THAT UP. YOU'RE IN CHARGE AS FAR AS HOLDING RETENTION.

AGAIN, PROTECT THE PEOPLE. WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD SAY. WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE BEST OF ALL PEOPLE AND PEOPLE.

IT'S MORE WORK FOR PEOPLE. I THINK THEY'RE PAID QUITE WELL AND THEY SHOULD BE HAPPY TO WORK, NOT COMPLAIN. NEXT UP, JENNY, FOLLOWED BY DAVID HALLIGAN.

I PROBABLY DON'T HAVE THE ACUMEN TO RUN A TACO STAND, SO I'M FINE WITH THAT.

I'M NOT VERY FINANCIALLY SET, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT I DON'T THINK THAT THE ABILITY TO RETAIN EMAILS SHOULD BE IMPORTANT, BECAUSE I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT BENJ WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ABLE TO FIGHT THE COUNTY AND, AND GET HIS JOB BACK WITHOUT RETAINING EMAILS THAT WENT BACK 4 OR 5 YEARS.

HE WAS ABLE TO PROVE THAT THERE WERE LIES ABOUT HIM AND HIS ARBITRATION THROUGH EMAILS, THROUGH EMAILS AND COMMUNICATIONS AND THINGS THAT WERE NOT BROUGHT UP. I DON'T THINK THEY REALIZED HE HAD RETAINED THOSE. AND IT'S NOT JUST THAT SOME OF THE PR REQUESTS THAT YOU GUYS ARE SAYING WOULD HAVE BEEN RETAINED ANYWAY.

WOULDN'T HAVE NECESSARILY BEEN RETAINED, SUCH AS DURING THE MEASURE B ARGUMENT WHERE PEOPLE WERE TALKING ABOUT HOW TO MAKE IT LEGALLY ON THE BALLOT BY CHANGING THINGS AROUND.

THOSE WERE EMAILS, THOSE WERE EMAILS THAT PEOPLE FOUND.

SO IF THOSE THINGS ARE DESTROYED IN A YEAR, WHO KNOWS IF THERE ARE THINGS THAT MIGHT NOT HAVE BEEN DISCOVERED.

THERE MAY BE THINGS WE STILL DON'T KNOW THAT ARE TRAVELING AROUND BY EMAIL, BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN DIFFERENT PARTS OF THE DEPARTMENTS THAT WE WON'T KNOW FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS. AND IF THOSE EMAILS ARE GONE, WE WON'T KNOW THAT THESE ARE GOVERNMENT DOCUMENTS.

AND EVEN IF THEY DON'T SEEM IMPORTANT, THEY MIGHT BE IMPORTANT LATER.

SO ODDLY ENOUGH, I AGREE WITH MR. CRYE. NEXT UP, DAVID HALLIGAN.

GOOD MORNING BOARD. I'M SPEAKING ON THE RECORD RETENTION OF THE PROPOSED COUNTY POLICY BECAUSE THE AUTOMATED SYSTEM IS SET TO PURGE STANDARD EMAILS NOW AT 365 AND CHATS AT 90. THE POLICY MANDATES THAT COUNTY EMPLOYEES MANUALLY SEGREGATE PUBLIC RECORDS.

EMPLOYEES MUST TRANSFER ANY BUSINESS ESSENTIAL COMMUNICATIONS INTO DESIGNATED LONG TERM COUNTY RECORD KEEPING SYSTEMS BEFORE THE AUTOMATED DETECTION OR DELETION SYSTEM CLOSES. VERY CONCERNING PUTTING A LOT ON THE MANAGERS AND DEPARTMENT HEADS HERE.

MY 2 CONCERNS THE PRESERVATION HOLDS AND ONLY HAVING 1 YEAR TIME FRAME BEFORE AUTO DELETION.

PRESERVATION HOLDS, AUTOMATIC DELETION PROTOCOLS ARE IMMEDIATELY SUSPENDED FOR ANY DATA OR COMMUNICATIONS TIED TO PENDING LITIGATION, AUDITS OR FORMAL INVESTIGATIONS. 2, 1 YEAR AUTO DELETE APPEARS TO ME TO BE WAY TOO SHORT FOR WHAT HAS BEEN CURRENTLY BROUGHT FORWARD IN THE COUNTY CASES THIS PAST YEAR. I AGREE WITH MR. CRYE. I WANT TO LOOK BACK AT HISTORY.

I WANT TO SEE WHAT THE PROCESSES WERE. HOW DID THIS COME TO BE? I'M ALSO CONCERNED WITH THE 1 YEAR AUTO DELETES TIME FRAME IN CALIFORNIA.

THE LEGAL DEADLINE TO FILE SUITS IS GOVERNED BY THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS, COMMON STATUTES, PERSONAL INJURY, BREACH OF WRITTEN CONTRACT, PROPERTY DAMAGE, FRAUD, DEFAMATION, SLANDER, DISCRIMINATION, HARASSMENT, WHISTLEBLOWER RETENTION, RETALIATION, EXCUSE ME, VIOLATION OF PUBLIC POLICY.

NOW, THIS ONE'S SCARY. MR. LARMER. WHAT ABOUT THE DEFAULT JUDGMENT IN A LAWSUIT? IF THERE ARE MISSING EMAILS THAT ARE CRITICAL IN A LEGAL CASE.

A JUDGE CAN AUTOMATICALLY RULE AGAINST THE DESTROYING PARTY, ENDING THE LAWSUIT IN AN IMMEDIATE LOSS TO THE COUNTY.

MY VIEWS. I BELIEVE THE TIME FRAME FOR DELETING EMAILS SHOULD BE A MINIMUM OF 18 MONTHS, AND MAYBE UP TO FOUR YEARS.

[01:55:03]

THIS WOULD ALSO PARALLEL WITH THE CITY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN THEIR TIME FRAME ON THE BOARD.

WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE? ARE WE GETTING RID OF THE PAPER TRAIL? THE PAST 12 MONTHS, MR. RITCHIE, YOU SAID WE COULD START TOMORROW.

ARE YOU TELLING ME EVERYTHING YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH? EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN SAVED FOR THE COX MAGRINI AND THE FRANCESCA LAWSUITS? AN EXAMPLE. THE PROPOSED 12 MONTH TIME FRAME.

THE COUNTY DELETES AT 365 DAYS. AND THEN THE COUNTY RECEIVES A LAWSUIT THE FOLLOWING WEEK FOR DEFAMATION, WRONGFUL TERMINATION. AND THEN THE COUNTY THROWS UP THEIR HANDS AND SAYS, OH, WELL, WE JUST WE'RE FOLLOWING COUNTY POLICY.

AND YES, WE DELETED ALL THE EMAILS LAST WEEK.

BOARD BUILD SOME LEEWAY HERE AND IMPROVE TRUST WITH CITIZENS AND EMPLOYEES THAT COULD SAVE EVERYONE SOME TIME, MONEY AND IMPROVE TRANSPARENCY WITH AN EXTENDED TIME FRAME PAST THE 12 MONTH PROPOSED TODAY.

AGAIN, I'M SUGGESTING AT LEAST 18 MONTHS AND UP TO 48 MONTHS.

THANK YOU CHAIR. THAT WAS OUR LAST SPEAKER. [APPLAUSE] ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, MISS BLANKENSHIP. ALL RIGHT. ARE YOU ABLE TO CLARIFY AT ALL? I MEAN, ARE WE GOING TO LOSE IMPORTANT EMAILS OR IS THIS JUST GOING TO LOSE THE OUT OF OUTLOOK? THE TODAY'S NEWSLETTER FROM EVERYONE HAS A DIFFERENT MEANING OF IMPORTANT.

ONE EXAMPLE I LIKE TO COME UP WITH IS WHEN IT HAS TO DO SYSTEM UPDATES.

THEY HAVE TO EMAIL THE ENTIRE COUNTY. THAT'S 2000 PLUS RECORDS.

AND OVER AND OVER AND OVER EVERY TIME, EVERY WEEK.

DISREGARD THIS NOTICE. YEAH. EVERY WEEK PERSONNEL SENDS OUT THESE ARE THE AVAILABLE JOBS TO THE COUNTY STAFF TO SEE WHO'S YOU KNOW, INTERESTED IN MOVING UP OR PROMOTING OR A NEW JOB.

THOSE GO OUT TO EVERY SINGLE INDIVIDUAL. SO THOUSANDS OF RECORDS.

AND SO AGAIN, IT'S A BALANCING ACT. 1 YEAR, YOU KNOW, WE MET WITH COUNCIL.

IT THE CEO AND 1 YEAR WAS WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS BEST FOR OUR OPERATION.

IT WON'T WHEN THERE'S SOMEONE MENTIONED LITIGATION HOLD.

WE HAVE TO HOLD ON TO THOSE RECORDS. RIGHT NOW, JUST FOR REFERENCE, WHEN SOMEONE TERMINATES, LET'S SAY STEPHANIE WINS THE LOTTERY TOMORROW AND JUST SAYS I'M OUT.

WE TAKE A SNAPSHOT OF HER PROFILE. WE SAVE IT IN THE TERM USERS FOLDER.

GENERAL POLICIES THAT GETS DELETED AFTER A YEAR ANYWAY.

AND SO PREVIOUS EMPLOYEES EMAILS AREN'T AROUND AS THEY ARE NOW.

AND TO THE COMMENT ABOUT DELETING GOVERNMENT RECORDS WE ALREADY DELETE.

WE ALREADY DO THAT. AS I MENTIONED, THE COUNTY HAS AN EXISTING RETENTION POLICY FOR ALL SORTS OF DOCUMENTS.

SO IT IS COMMON PRACTICE THAT EVERY YEAR OR EVERY 5 YEARS, WHATEVER THE RETENTION IS FOR A CERTAIN DOCUMENT TYPE, THOSE ARE DELETED ANYWAY. WE DON'T HOLD ON TO WE GENERALLY AS A BUSINESS PRACTICE, DON'T HOLD ON TO THEM BECAUSE IT'S EFFICIENT.

WE AREN'T. IT'S INEFFICIENT. WE AREN'T REQUIRED TO.

AND WE HAVE TO BALANCE THE COSTS OF MAINTAINING THOSE WITH WITH THE USEFULNESS OF THE DOCUMENT.

AND YOU'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET THE STAFF HAS BEEN TRYING TO GET A POLICY FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

YEAH. IT'S BEEN MY OPINION THAT WE'VE NEEDED SOME IT'S PRETTY COMMONPLACE IN THE PRIVATE INDUSTRY.

AND IT SEEMED ODD THAT WE HAD THIS GIANT CARVE OUT IN WHICH OUR RETENTION POLICY DIDN'T APPLY TO.

IT WASN'T UNTIL I STARTED WORKING WITH, IN MY CURRENT ROLE WITH TOM THAT WE STARTED HAVING CONVERSATIONS ABOUT IT.

AND THEN IN CONVERSATIONS WITH COUNCIL LARMER REALLY GOT ITS LEGS.

AND ONCE SUPERVISORS OR EMPLOYEES ARE GONE, THEY'RE.

HOW LONG DO YOU HOLD? LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, IF I, IF I WANTED TO SEARCH AN EMAIL FROM PATRICK JONES, WOULD THAT INFORMATION BE OUT THERE NOW? CURRENTLY, NO.

BE GONE. OKAY. YEAH. AND SO THAT DOESN'T CHANGE ANY OF THAT.

NO. OKAY. SUPERVISOR LONG. IT'S PLAYING NICE NOW. THANK YOU CHAIR. I THINK IS THERE A WAY TO A COUPLE THINGS. 1 WHY DID NEWSOM. GOVERNOR NEWSOM VETO WHEN THEY BROUGHT FORWARD THE RETENTION POLICY OF 2 YEARS? WHY DID HE DO YOU DO YOU ARE YOU AWARE OF THAT? I WOULD LIKE COUNCIL SPEAK TO THAT. IT WAS RELATED TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN AND THE COSTS.

HE WASN'T WILLING TO PLACE THAT ON THE PUBLIC AGENCIES.

OKAY. SO IT HAD TO DO WITH COST AND ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN AND ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN.

WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT PRA REQUESTS OR JUST IN GENERAL.

WELL, THERE ARE MULTIPLE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDENS HERE.

TOM HAS TO MAINTAIN A SYSTEM THAT HOLDS THESE DOCUMENTS.

EVERY PRA THAT COMES IN REQUIRES THAT WE GO THROUGH ALL OF THOSE DOCUMENTS THAT HIT THAT KEY WORD,

[02:00:05]

AND TOM COULD PROBABLY LAY OUT SOME OTHER ADMINISTRATIVE BURDENS THAT, YOU KNOW, INDEFINITE RETENTION KEEPS.

AND THAT IS DONE MANUALLY AT THIS POINT. IT'S NOT SEARCHES AUTOMATICALLY.

THE SEARCH IS IS DONE AUTOMATICALLY, THE 20,000 TO 100,000 HITS BECAUSE IT'S BECAUSE OF THE INDEFINITE RETENTION IS HUMAN THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH EACH ONE OF THOSE AND DECIDE WHETHER THEY APPLY.

OKAY, OKAY. I WOULD, I WOULD ASK THE BOARD TO CONSIDER BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD FROM THE PUBLIC AND I THINK PUBLIC TRUST IS SUPER IMPORTANT AND THE PUBLIC IS FEARFUL OF DELETING PREMATURELY. SO WOULD THIS BOARD BE WILLING TO ENTERTAIN SOMETHING OTHER THAN A 1 YEAR RETENTION PERIOD.

AND AND I CAN'T VOTE FOR THIS IF WE DON'T HAVE LIKE A 6 MONTH GRACE PERIOD WHERE PEOPLE CAN GET THEIR EMAILS IN ORDER TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT'S IMPORTANT TO SLIDE OVER TO THE PERMANENT SERVER.

I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW, I, I'M KIND OF CONFLICTED HERE BECAUSE, YEAH, I WOULD LIKE THE EMAIL RETENTION.

THAT'S FINE. COUNCIL. IF SUPERVISOR. CRYE WANTED TO SEARCH EMAILS FROM A PREVIOUS COUNTY COUNCIL, WOULD THAT BE, WOULD THERE BE ANY RECORDS NOW? CURRENTLY. SO IT WOULD DEPEND ON WHETHER THEY'RE STILL IN THE OFFICE.

AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A COUNTY COUNCIL EMAIL, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE.

AND BOARDS ARE ONLY ENTITLED TO THE ATTORNEY CLIENT PRIVILEGE WHILE THEY'RE DEALING WITH THE ITEM.

OTHER THAN THAT, IF THEY'RE AN ACTIVE BOARD MEMBER, THEY CAN COME INTO COUNTY COUNCIL'S OFFICE AND REVIEW SOMETHING. SO COULD YOU SEARCH THAT ANYWAYS? NO. OKAY. HOW ABOUT A FORMER CEO, FOR INSTANCE? SO MUCH LIKE WAS DESCRIBED A PRIOR EMPLOYEE, THEIR RECORD IS OR THEIR EMAIL SERVER IS MAINTAINED FOR ONE YEAR AND THEN IT'S DELETED.

IT'S GONE. SO WE COULDN'T GO BACK AND SEARCH THOSE RECORDS CURRENTLY COULD NOT WITH THAT.

AND BEFORE THIS IS EVEN IMPLEMENTED. CORRECT.

OKAY. SO GO AHEAD. I MEAN, WELL, YOU KNOW, SUPERVISOR LONG, I HEAR YOU AND I, YOU KNOW, BUT I DON'T KNOW IF YOU THIS WAS 900 PAGES IN THE PACKET.

SO STAFF HAS DONE SOME EXTENSIVE WORK ON THIS.

AND I MEAN, I HATE TO GO AGAINST THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.

I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO CHANGE ALL THAT MANY THINGS.

I PERSONALLY JUST DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO CHANGE A WHOLE LOT OF STUFF. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S, I MEAN, THE PR REQUESTS ARE FINE, BUT MOST OF THEM ARE PRETTY MUCH RELEVANT TO THE TIME AT HAND.

THEY DON'T NEED TO KNOW, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT WHATEVER THERE WAS A CLINTON MENTIONED BACK IN THE 90S, YOU KNOW, IN AN EMAIL. AND IT'S NOT THE ONE THEY WANT THE THE PR REQUESTS FOR.

YEAH, SURE. SURE. AND MY QUESTION WOULD PROBABLY BE COUNCIL AGAIN, WHICH WOULD BE IF WE CAME UP WITH A 2 YEAR PERIOD AND A 6 MONTH GRACE PERIOD.

SO SUPERVISORS CAN GET THEIR EMAILS IN ORDER AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT HAS TO BE RETAINED.

AND IT CAME UP WITH A 2 YEAR PERIOD. WHAT WOULD THAT AFFECT BE ON? BECAUSE I THINK IT WOULD INCREASE PUBLIC TRUST ONE, AND IT WOULD GIVE THE PUBLIC AN INCREASED ABILITY TO SUBMIT PRA REQUESTS, WHICH ARE IMPORTANT. THAT'S AN IMPORTANT FUNCTION TO HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE.

AND WHAT. SO IF WE LIMITED THAT 2 YEARS INSTEAD OF ONE YEAR, WHAT, WHAT WOULD BE THE REDUCTION IN THE BURDEN FOR STAFF TO PROCESS ALL THESE REQUESTS? WELL, I CAN'T SAY SPECIFICALLY.

I KNOW NOT SPECIFICALLY, BUT I MEAN, ULTIMATELY IT WOULD BE IT WOULD MULTIPLY BY 2.

WHAT THE NEW POLICY. SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU'RE IF WE'RE SEARCHING THROUGH 1 YEAR OF EMAIL AND YOU SWITCH IT TO 2, IT'S ESSENTIALLY GOING TO INCREASE IT BY, BY 2.

AND THE OTHER THING THAT I, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS SOME MENTION ABOUT LITIGATION.

THE TRUTH IS THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR A PUBLIC AGENCY DON'T EXIST IN THE WAY THEY WERE PRESENTED TO YOU.

YOU HAVE TO FILE A CLAIM WITHIN 6 MONTHS THAT CREATES THE LITIGATION HOLD.

ONCE WE RECEIVE THAT, THE NORMAL STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS DON'T APPLY TO A GOVERNMENT AGENCY.

OKAY. AND SO MY, MY CONCERN IS TO GET RID OF THE, THE VOLUME OF IRRELEVANT EMAILS, MEANING THOSE THINGS THAT ARE 06, 10, 8 YEARS OUT, WHATEVER. SO THERE WOULD BE NO WAY TO COME UP WITH AN ESTIMATION TO JUST GIVE IT A LITTLE MORE ROOM FOR RETENTION. AND I, AND I KNOW STAFF HAS DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH ON THIS.

SO I TEND TO TRUST THE STAFF OPINION. SO I'M JUST I'M JUST TRYING TO SPITBALL HERE JUST A BIT AS TO WHAT THE LIKELIHOOD OF THAT BURDEN WAS. SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE SEARCHING THROUGH 10 YEAR OLD EMAILS AND 6 YEAR OLD EMAILS.

[02:05:02]

YEAH. SO I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY 2 YEARS IS BETTER THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW SUBSTANTIALLY.

THE INDEFINITE RETENTION POLICY FOR EMPLOYEES WHO STAY HERE IS, IS BEYOND A BURDEN.

SO 2 YEARS IS BETTER, OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, STAFF THROUGH THEIR WORK WITH TOM ON WHAT THE SYSTEM CAN DO, IT CHOSE ONE YEAR AND RECOMMENDED THAT TO THE BOARD.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT'S WHAT THE BOARD HAS TO DO. NO.

OKAY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO AMEND YOUR MOTION? SUPERVISOR LONG.

WELL, IS THERE ANY BOARD DISCUSSION AS TO THIS? I DON'T KNOW IF. SUPERVISOR. CRYE. WE ONLY HAVE A 4 MEMBER BOARD HERE, SO WE'RE GOING TO.

THIS IS IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE KIND OF HASH THIS OUT, BUT THE.

OKAY, I'LL JUST GO FOR THE AMENDMENT. I WOULD AMEND THAT.

WE ADOPT ALL OF THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, ALL, ALL THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE EMAIL RETENTION COMPONENT. AND WITH REGARD TO THAT, THAT WE HOLD FOR 2 YEARS.

SEE HOW THAT WORKS WITH STAFF AND THEIR ABILITY TO PROCESS THESE MORE EFFECTIVELY.

AND WE ALSO GIVE IT A 6 MONTH GRACE PERIOD FOR US TO FIGURE OUT WHAT, WHAT WE NEED TO SLIDE OVER TO THE SERVER. OKAY. AND EVEN THOUGH I DO NOT NEED THE GRACE PERIOD, I WILL SECOND MY, I MEAN, I'LL AMEND MY SECOND. SO. SUPERVISOR. CRYE YOU WEIGH IN.

MR. CHAIRMAN, 1 OF THE, ONE OF THE STAFF CONSIDERATIONS ON NOT A SUBSTANTIAL GRACE PERIOD WAS TO PREVENT A MASSIVE RUSH OF REQUESTS THAT WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO KEEP UP WITH.

I MEAN, OH, OKAY. I MEAN, ALL I COULD WEIGH IN BRIEFLY, THIS IS JUST THIS IS KIND OF LIKE KIND OF LIKE THE MEASURE B THING.

LIKE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, THERE'S AN ELECTORATE, THEY VOTE YOU BACK THEM.

AND I THINK THIS IS LIKE, I HATE TO BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THE COST AND THE BURDEN ON STAFF.

THAT'S TOUGH FOR ME. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, AS MUCH AS I THINK HALF THESE PEOPLE ARE NUTS IN THE BACK, IT'S STILL THERE. IT'S STILL THEIR RIGHT TO HAVE ACCESS TO IT.

YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT SLANDER. YOU'RE NUTS. SO ANYWAY I JUST THINK IT'S I, AND I FEEL BAD FOR STEPHANIE.

LIKE IF YOU WERE MY EMPLOYEE, LIKE, I WOULD HAVE TO DO LIKE, AN ICE CREAM PARTY EVERY WEEK FOR WHAT YOU HAVE TO PUT UP WITH.

BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, I DON'T LIKE IT. I THINK IT'S A WASTE.

BUT JUST LIKE MANY OF THESE FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS THAT WHEN THE WHEN THE CHIPS ARE DOWN AND IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BE THEIR OWN MONEY AND THEIR HOUSE GETS LEAN.

GUESS WHAT? THEY KNOW THEY'VE BEEN LYING AND THEY ALL BAIL OUT.

LOOK AT THE LINDELL THING. ALL RIGHT. YOU GOOD? SUPERVISOR LONG. I MEAN, WELL, 1.3 BILLION DROPPED.

WELL, THERE YOU GO. SO ANYWAY. SO WE HAVE A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION AS TO A RETENTION PERIOD.

AND WE JUST HEARD A LEGAL OPINION THAT I WANT TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ALSO.

SO. I THINK YOUR RETENTION PERIOD, I MEAN, YOUR GRACE PERIOD WOULD COVER THAT.

MAYBE WE JUST TAKE THE VOTE. WELL, THE GRACE, THE GRACE PERIOD, IF IF WE WANT 6 MONTHS COUNCIL JUST SAID THAT THAT WOULD BE PROBLEMATIC IN THE FACT THAT WE WOULD GET A FLOOD OF REQUESTS IF WE WERE TO HAVE NOT NO GRACE PERIOD.

AND WE WERE CUTTING THEM TOMORROW, THAT WE'D HAVE THE FLOOD TODAY.

CORRECT? SO, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, THE LONGER THE GRACE PERIOD IS, THE MORE THAT THESE REQUESTS CAN COME IN TO ASK FOR THOSE OLD ARCHIVED EMAILS, AT WHICH POINT YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE THE STAFF TO RESPOND TO WHAT WE'RE RECEIVING NOW.

SO IF WE WERE TO RECEIVE THAT FLOOD AND IT CONTINUES FOR 6 MONTHS.

AND JUST SO THE PUBLIC KNOWS, IT'S LIKE 8 PEOPLE, 10 PEOPLE, I MEAN, THAT ARE COSTING US 10S OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS. YOU WANT TO STAY WITH YOUR ORIGINAL MOTION OR. WELL, COULD, COULD WE COULD WE COULD GIVE IT A MONTH.

RIGHT? I MEAN, IF WE, IF WE GAVE IT A MONTH, WHATEVER YOU WANT, WOULD THAT BE SOMETHING THAT.

LIKE I JUST SAID, I DO NOT NEED A GRACE PERIOD. SO WHATEVER YOUR MOTION IS, I'LL SECOND IT. OKAY.

SO IT WILL BE A 1 MONTH BECAUSE OF STAFF ISSUES AND ALSO TO ADOPT ALL OTHER POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS WITH THE EXCEPTION OF EMAIL. AND THAT WILL BE FOR A 2 YEAR RETENTION PERIOD WITH A 1 MONTH GRACE PERIOD.

I WILL AMEND MY MOTION. MY SECOND. ALL RIGHT.

LET'S TAKE A ROLL CALL VOTE STARTING WITH SUPERVISOR CRYE. SUPERVISOR CRYE.

NO. SUPERVISOR KELSTROM. YES. SUPERVISOR. HARMON.

YES. SUPERVISOR LONG. YES. ALL RIGHT. PASSES 3 TO 1.

THANK YOU. BOARD. THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR. LONG.

APPRECIATE THE DISCUSSION. YEAH, THAT WAS A GOOD DISCUSSION BECAUSE THAT'S A VERY DIFFICULT TOPIC.

ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON TO OUR 5 APPROVE THE LETTER OF SUPPORT ASSEMBLY BILL 1821, CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RECORDS ACT,

[R5 Approve a letter of support for Assembly Bill 1821: California Public Records Act: methods of submission, fees, and agency response time and designate authority to the County Executive Officer, or their designee, to submit future letters on the Board’s behalf so long as changes do not substantially alter its intent or affect the Board’s position.]

METHODS OF SUBMISSION FEES AND AGENCY RESPONSE TIME, AND DESIGNATE AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE OFFICER OR THEIR DESIGNEE TO SUBMIT FUTURE

[02:10:06]

LETTERS ON THE BOARD'S BEHALF, SO LONG AS CHANGES DO NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER ITS INTENT TO AFFECT THE BOARD'S POSITION.

IS THAT. THAT ONE IS ME. THAT'S YOU. ALL RIGHT.

AND IT IS STILL MORNING. SO GOOD MORNING, CHAIR. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, STEPHANIE BLANKENSHIP, CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK OF THE BOARD BEFORE YOU TODAY IS THE LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR ASSEMBLY BILL 1821, WHICH WAS SIGNIFICANTLY AMENDED LAST THURSDAY, JUNE 25TH, AND NOW FOCUSES ONLY ON PUBLIC RECORDS ACT RESPONSE TIMELINES.

THE BILL CHANGES THE INITIAL RESPONSE PERIOD FROM 10 CALENDAR DAYS TO 10 BUSINESS DAYS AND THE EXTENSION OF UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES FROM 14 CALENDAR DAYS TO 14 BUSINESS DAYS, PROVIDING AGENCIES WITH MORE PRACTICAL TIME FRAMES WHILE MAINTAINING TIMELY PUBLIC ACCESS TO RECORDS.

THIS IS PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT AS THE COUNTY HAS SEEN PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUESTS INCREASE FROM 265 IN 2023 TO MORE THAN 1300 ALREADY THIS YEAR. STAFF WERE ABLE TO AMEND THE PROPOSED LETTER OF SUPPORT TO REFLECT THE RECENT AMENDMENTS BEFORE THE AGENDA WAS PUBLISHED.

HOWEVER, THE STAFF REPORT DOES STILL REFERENCE PROVISIONS THAT WERE REMOVED FROM THE BILL.

WITH THAT, THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU, MISS BLANKENSHIP. MY FIRST QUESTION IS, DO WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? WE DO. WE HAVE 2 SPEAKERS. OKAY. DO WE WANT TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THEM? GO AHEAD. OKAY. SO 3 MINUTES EACH. FIRST UP SHASTA COUNTY WATCHDOG FOLLOWED BY JENNY.

THE REASON YOU ARE GETTING SO MANY PEOPLE TO ASK FOR PUBLIC RECORDS IS BECAUSE YOU'RE NOT DOING YOUR JOB, AND WE ALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS.

IF YOU DID YOUR JOB, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE US COMING AND ASKING FOR PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST.

NOW YOU WANT TO ALSO PROBABLY, PROBABLY DOWN THE ROAD, ACTUALLY LIMIT US FROM ASKING FOR PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS BECAUSE YOU GUYS COMPLAINED THAT THE STAFF MEMBER HAS THEIR BEING OVERWHELMED REGARDING PUBLIC RECORDS.

BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? THEY STILL GET PAID THE SAME.

HOW MANY TIMES DID YOU USED TO SAY THINGS LIKE THIS, CHRIS, THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T TRUST THE STAFF, YOU NEVER TRUSTED THE STAFF. THE STAFF RUNS THE COUNTY AND THE LEGAL COUNSEL ALSO DOES THE SAME THING.

BUT YET YOU'RE DOING THE SAME THING. YOU'RE JUST RUBBER STAMPING WHAT THEY BRING FORWARD TO YOU, AND YOU'RE NOT EVEN ACTUALLY FIGHTING OR DEFENDING WHAT YOU ACTUALLY SAID, THAT YOU HATE IT.

SO NOW YOU'RE JUST GOING ALONG WITH IT. I HEARD YOU SAY THE LAST TIME THAT YOU KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO SUPPORT WHATEVER THE STAFF SAID, AND THAT'S RIDICULOUS BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING AGAINST WHAT YOU SAID.

AND SO BASICALLY, YOU'RE A HYPOCRITE. WE HAVE A RIGHT TO REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS.

WE HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING. WE ACTUALLY ARE YOUR BOSS, BUT YOU'RE ELIMINATING US FROM US ASKING FOR US TO LOOK INTO WHAT YOU'RE DOING, ESPECIALLY WITH KEVIN CRYE. ESPECIALLY WITH CORKY.

ANYBODY ELSE WHO GETS ELECTED. HOW ABOUT WHEN YOU WHEN KEVIN CRYE IS GONE, HE'S GOING TO WANT TO KNOW.

HE'S GOING TO ASK FOR PUBLIC RECORDS AGAINST AARON RESSNER BECAUSE HE'S GOING TO WANT TO KNOW.

YOU KNOW THAT. AND SO, I MEAN, WHAT IS IT GOING TO TAKE, YOU KNOW, HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE BEEN ELECTED TO THE BOARD, 134 PEOPLE ON THE BOARD OF ALL THAT MANY PEOPLE.

NO ONE HAS EVER DONE THE RIGHT THING FOR THE CITIZENS.

NO ONE. YEAH. YOU GOT THE AMERICAN 250 YEAR TO CELEBRATE.

WHAT ARE WE CELEBRATING? CHIP, CHIP, CHIP AWAY OUR RIGHTS.

THE PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST IS PART OF OUR THE PUBLIC'S BUSINESS OF DOING BUSINESS IN THE GOVERNMENT.

WE HAVE A RIGHT. BUT YET YOU'RE GOING ALONG WITH THE STAFF.

YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO BE IN CHARGE OF THEM TO TELL THEM WHAT YOU ARE DOING, WHAT YOU WANT, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW YOUR ROLE AS A PUBLIC OFFICIAL. ALL YOU KNOW IS TO GO ALONG WITH KEVIN CRYES, ALWAYS TRYING TO TELL YOU WHAT TO DO OR HOW TO VOTE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

WHAT HAPPENED? REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE. YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO LOSE THE RACE BECAUSE WHAT YOU'VE DONE TO YOURSELF.

YEAH. YOU YOU DON'T LIKE HEARING IT, BUT I'M TELLING YOU THE TRUTH.

YOU DID IT TO YOURSELF. NEXT UP, JENNY.

THERE ARE A FEW THINGS THAT I DIDN'T HEAR COVERED WHEN IT WHEN AB 1812 WAS EXPLAINED TO THE PUBLIC HERE JUST NOW THAT IT

[02:15:02]

WAS A A WRITTEN BY A DEMOCRATIC ASSEMBLY MEMBER IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SPECIFICALLY TO TAIL MALICIOUS REQUESTS TO THE COUNTY, AND IS REALLY ABOUT TRANSPARENCY THAT IF OUR GOVERNMENT WAS MORE TRANSPARENT IN THE FIRST PLACE, WE WOULDN'T BE REQUESTING SO MUCH. MY BIGGEST CONCERN WITH THIS BILL IS IT GIVES THE COUNTY A RIGHT TO SUE CITIZENS IF IT FEELS THAT THEY ARE MALICIOUSLY DOING A PRIORI REQUEST, BUT I'M NOT SURE THE COUNTY SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO JUDGE WHETHER OR NOT A CITIZEN IS ACTING MALICIOUSLY. NOW, MAYBE I MISUNDERSTAND THIS AB BILL, BUT I DID LIKE READ IT SO I DON'T MAYBE IN YOUR DISCUSSION YOU CAN QUELL OUR OUR CONCERNS BECAUSE I KNOW I'M NOT THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS THESE CONCERNS.

SUPERVISOR LONG. THANK YOU CHAIR. I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO DISCUSS WHAT AB 1821 ACTUALLY COVERS AND WHAT IT DOESN'T. THE BILL WAS GUTTED ON FRIDAY AND THAT WAS BY IT WAS MASSIVELY REMODELED.

AND SO ALL THE PROVISIONS THAT WE JUST HEARD MENTION THOSE NO LONGER EXIST IN THIS BILL.

THIS BILL SIMPLY DOES 1 THING. THIS CHANGES THE NUMBER OF DAYS THAT THE COUNTY HAS TO RESPOND TO A PRA REQUEST. AND THAT IS IT. THAT'S IT. THAT'S WHAT'S EVERYTHING ELSE HAS BEEN TAKEN OUT.

SO IT GOES FROM 10 CALENDAR DAYS TO 10 BUSINESS DAYS.

THAT'S IT. SO IT GIVES THE COUNTY A LITTLE BIT MORE CHANCE.

SO LET'S SAY THAT A PRA REQUEST WAS RECEIVED ON A FRIDAY SATURDAY, SUNDAY.

THOSE THE COUNTY'S NOT HERE. THEY'RE NOT WORKING.

AND THEN THEY'VE GOT A TIME PRESSURE TO GET THE RESPONSE TO THE PRA AND FURTHERMORE, THE PRA RESPONSE IS TIMELY.

IT'S TIME INVOLVING BECAUSE ONE IT IT ADDRESSES THE RECEIPT OF THE PRA AND THEN IT, I BELIEVE, ADDRESSES STEPS THAT WILL BE TAKEN TO ADDRESS THE PRA.

SO GIVING OUR STAFF AN EXTRA COUPLE DAYS TO RESPOND IN A TIMELY MANNER.

I DON'T SEE THAT AS AS CONTROVERSIAL AT ALL. AND I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO, TO THIS OUT.

AND THIS WAS, THIS WAS LITERALLY GUTTED AT THE STATE LEVEL.

NOT, NOT OUR LEVEL. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. YES, I WILL.

I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE A LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR AB 1821, GIVEN THE NEW IN COMPONENTS. I'LL SECOND THAT. AND JUST TO CLARIFY.

MR. MR. YOU'LL NEVER LET ME LIVE THAT DOWN. OR DEPUTY CEO BUETTELL.

IS THAT TRUE? EVERYTHING'S BEEN STRIPPED OUT JUST TO FACT CHECK THAT.

THAT IS CORRECT. YEAH. EVERYTHING'S BEEN STRIPPED OUT.

OKAY. YEAH. SO SO THAT WAS THE PART OF THE LANGUAGE IN THE STAFF REPORT I REFERRED TO IN MY PRESENTATION WAS THAT THERE WAS THAT INFORMATION IN THERE.

THERE WAS ALSO SOME LANGUAGE IN THAT BILL THAT ALLOWED AGENCIES TO RECOVER COSTS, BOTH OF WHICH WERE TAKEN OUT.

OKAY. OKAY. THIS IS SIMPLY TO SEND A LETTER OF SUPPORT.

I HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE BY SUPERVISOR LONG.

SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR CRYE. ANY MORE DISCUSSION? OTHERWISE, WE'LL TAKE THE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

PASSES 4-0. ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON. SCHEDULED HEARINGS, PUBLIC WORKS CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPTED RESOLUTIONS,

[R6 Conduct a public hearing and adopt a resolution which continues parcel charges for Fiscal Year 2026-27 to raise a portion of the revenue necessary for the operation, maintenance, and administration of Siskiyou County solid waste disposal facilities.]

WHICH CONTINUES PARTIAL CHANGES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027 TO RAISE A PORTION OF THE REVENUE NECESSARY FOR THE OPERATION, MAINTENANCE AND ADMINISTRATIVE OF SISKIYOU COUNTY SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES.

ALL RIGHT. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT THE BOARD HAS RECEIVED ALL DOCUMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE FILED WITH THE CLERK OF THE BOARD PRIOR TO THIS HEARING.

AT THIS TIME, I WILL TURN THINGS OVER TO PUBLIC WORKS TO PRESENT THE STAFF REPORT.

WELCOME, MR. HEATH. GOOD MORNING, CHAIR KELSTROM, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

JOHN HEATH, INTERIM PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR. THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS THE ANNUAL CONSIDERATION OF A SOLID WASTE PARCEL CHARGE FOR THOSE DEVELOPED PARCELS WITHIN THE CASTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT IN THE CASTLE CRAIG AREA.

SO THIS AREA, IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR, IS ON THE FAR NORTHERN BORDER OF SHASTA COUNTY.

IT ABUTS SISKIYOU COUNTY. FOR PARCELS IN THAT AREA, THE ONLY WASTE DISPOSAL SERVICES AVAILABLE COME FROM SISKIYOU COUNTY.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, THE THE IF YOU HAVE CURBSIDE COLLECTION IN THERE, THE THE, THE COLLECTOR IS COMING DOWN FROM DUNSMUIR TO COLLECT YOUR GARBAGE.

ALL ALL GARBAGE THAT'S COLLECTED THERE GOES TO SISKIYOU COUNTY WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITIES.

[02:20:04]

AS SISKIYOU COUNTY FOR A LONG TIME HAS OFFSET THEIR SOLID WASTE PROGRAM THROUGH A PARCEL CHARGE.

SO IF YOU LIVE IN SISKIYOU COUNTY AND YOU HAVE A PARCEL, YOU PAY A PARCEL CHARGE THAT GOES TO SUPPORT SISKIYOU COUNTY WASTE DISPOSAL.

SINCE SHASTA COUNTY WASTE IS GOING TO SISKIYOU COUNTY.

DISPOSAL FACILITIES IN THAT CASTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT AREA.

IN 1987 SHASTA COUNTY BOARD AND THE SISKIYOU BOARD ENACTED AN AGREEMENT THAT PARCELS DEVELOPED PARCELS WITHIN THAT BOUNDARY WOULD HAVE WOULD ALSO HAVE A SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ASSESSMENT.

THAT WOULD BE COLLECTED AND TRANSMITTED TO SISKIYOU COUNTY FOR SUPPORT OF THEIR SOLID WASTE FACILITIES.

WHEN THAT ASSESSMENT WAS ENACTED IN 1987, IT WAS SET AT 15% HIGHER THAN THE SISKIYOU COUNTY ASSESSMENT.

CURRENTLY THAT ASSESSMENT IS 72 TO $72.45 PER YEAR.

THAT'S A BASE RATE FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE IF YOU HAVE A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OR MULTIFAMILY.

THERE'S A MODIFIER THAT MAY RAISE THAT ASSESSMENT.

THAT IS THE, THAT IS THE DETAILS ON THIS PROGRAM.

WITH THAT, THERE'S A COUPLE OF ACTION. THERE'S A COUPLE OF ITEMS REQUIRED WOULD BE TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING.

AND THEN AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDER ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION WHICH WOULD CONTINUE THIS SOLID WASTE PARCEL ASSESSMENT.

HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, MR. HEATH.

OKAY. I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS. MISS BLANKENSHIP, DO WE HAVE ANY REQUESTS TO SPEAK? WE DO NOT. IT WAS RESCINDED. OKAY. SUPERVISOR.

LONG. YEAH. SO SEEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING THE MATTER BACK BEFORE THE BOARD.

SUPERVISOR. LONG. THANK YOU CHAIR. THANK YOU JOHN.

I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE OF IMPORTANT POINTS THAT YOU AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS WHOLE SITUATION AND THE IDEA.

ONE. ONE. FIRST THING IS, YOU'VE HAD NO CITIZEN PUSHBACK AGAINST THIS 15% HIGHER CHARGE, CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. AND SECONDLY, BACK TO 1987, PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO KIND OF UPSET THE APPLE CART AND REVISIT THIS BECAUSE IT WOULD INVOLVE BECAUSE, BECAUSE THE 15% EXTRA FOR SISKIYOU, THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME, BUT THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL DESIGN.

CAN YOU TALK TO A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT? WELL AND WHAT WOULD BE INVOLVED IN TRYING TO RESET IT? NOT 15% SURCHARGE. SURE. SO THERE'S LIMITED DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE.

THIS IS 1987, RIGHT? SO QUITE SOME TIME AGO, THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT STILL EXISTS BETWEEN THE SISKIYOU COUNTY BOARD AND THE SHASTA COUNTY BOARD. AND THERE IS NO THERE'S NO DISCUSSION.

IT IS SIMPLY SET AT A RATE THAT IS 15% ABOVE THE SISKIYOU COUNTY PRCHAL CHARGE.

WHEN. WHEN I'VE REACHED OUT TO SISKIYOU COUNTY TO TALK TO THEM ABOUT THAT 15%.

THEY HAVE EXPRESSED CONCERN ABOUT MODIFYING IT.

THEY WORRY ABOUT OPENING UP THEIR PERSONAL CHARGE TO RECONSIDERATION.

AND I THINK SINCE 1987, WHEN THE ASSESSMENT WAS FIRST ENACTED, PROP 218 HAS PASSED.

SO YOU KNOW, ANY KIND OF MODIFICATION TO THE ASSESSMENT, I BELIEVE WOULD ENACT A PROP 218 PROCESS.

OKAY. THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR. CORRECT. I WAS JUST.

I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF ALL CORRESPONDENCE WAS ON FILE WITH THE CLERK.JOHN, THANK YOU FOR THAT PRESENTATION. DO YOU, ARE YOU COUNCIL LARMER? CAN I ASK A QUESTION AS IT PERTAINS TO THE NEXT HEARING, OR SHOULD I JUST WAIT TILL THE NEXT HEARING. I'LL JUST. ALL RIGHT. NEVER MIND.

I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. SINCE YOUR MICS ON.

I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE RECOMMENDATIONS.

MOTION MADE BY SUPERVISOR CRYE. SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR HARMON. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? PASSES 4-0. OKAY. MOVING ON. ITEM 7, OUR NEXT SCHEDULED HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTING FINDINGS LISTED ON PLANNING RESOLUTION

[R7 Take the following actions: (1) Conduct a public hearing; (2) adopt the recommended findings listed in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2026-005; (3) find that Zone Amendment 26-0001 is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), and is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301; (4) adopt the recommended findings listed in Planning Commission Resolution No. 2026-010; and (5) introduce, waive the reading of, and enact “An Ordinance of the Board of Supervisors of the County of Shasta Amending Ordinance Number 378-2073, the Zoning Ordinance of the County of Shasta, a Portion of the Zoning Plan (Zone Amendment 26-0001 – Brian & Jennifer Johnson Family Trust),” to amend Section 3 of Ordinance No. 378-2073 to extend the timeframe within which payment of the Shasta County Clerk’s document handling fee for posting a Notice of Exemption (NOE) and the appropriate fees pursuant to Fish and Wildlife Code Section 711.4 (AB 3158) may be paid in order that the previously-adopted ordinance can be made operative upon payment of the subject fees and recording of Property Line Adjustment 23-0003 which was also approved when Ordinance No. 378-2073 was adopted for a 4-acre portion of an 88.9-acre parcel located at 10921 Old Oregon Trail, Redding, CA 96003, approximately 0.85 miles south of the intersection of Old Oregon Trail and College View Drive (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APN’s) 076-140-010 and 077-030-043 as those APN’s were assigned for purposes of the 2023 Regular Assessment Roll and as are currently described as APN’s 076-140-010 and 077-030-048 for purposes of the 2026 Regular Assessment Roll).]

2026 005. THE RECORD SHOULD REFLECT THAT THE BOARD HAS RECEIVED ALL DOCUMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE FILED WITH THE CLERK OF THE BOARD PRIOR TO THE HEARING.

AT THIS TIME, I WILL TURN THINGS OVER TO RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND TARA.

WELCOME. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

JUST A QUICK CORRECTION ON THE AGENDA ITEM. THERE'S A TYPO IN THERE.

IT'S ACTUALLY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 26-010.

IF YOU'D LIKE. THE ONLY PART I READ OUT OF THAT.

[02:25:01]

I KNOW I WAS TRYING TO CATCH YOU BEFORE IT HAPPENED, BUT I MISSED YOU.

WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO READ IT IN? NO. IT'S FINE. OKAY.

AGAIN. TARA PETTY, PLANNING DIVISION MANAGER.

SHASTA COUNTY DEPARTMENT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT. THQIS ITEM BEFORE YOU IS A REQUEST FROM BRIAN AND JENNIFER JOHNSON TRUST FOR APPROVAL OF ZONE AMENDMENT 26-0001.

THE PROJECT SITE IS IN THE BELLA VISTA AREA. IT'S APPROXIMATELY 0.85 MILES SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF OLD OREGON TRAIL AND COLLEGE VIEW DRIVE, AND THE PROJECT'S. AN AMENDMENT TO ORDINANCE 278-2073, WHICH WAS APPROVED AND ENACTED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON OCTOBER 17TH, 2023. THE PURPOSE OF THE PREVIOUS ORDINANCE WAS TO FACILITATE A PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT.

THE CONDITIONS OF THAT ORDINANCE REQUIRED FEES WERE TO BE PAID WITHIN 30 DAYS.

THOSE FEES WERE NOT PAID ON TIME. AND THEREFORE THE ORDINANCE AS OF NOW HAS NO FORCE OR EFFECT.

THE AMENDED ORDINANCE BEFORE YOU WILL GIVE THE APPLICANT TIME TO PAY THE REQUIRED POSTING FEES AND ALLOW THEM TO RECORD THE PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT, MAKING THE ORDINANCE NUMBER 378-2073. FINALLY, OPERATIVE THE TIME FRAME TO PAY THE FILING FEES UNDER THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD BE EXTENDED TO JULY 23RD, 2027, WHICH IS THE CURRENT EXPIRATION DATE FOR THE PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT APPROVAL.

THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO NOT BE SUBJECT TO AN.

EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.

THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL GENERAL FUND IMPACT THAT WOULD RESULT FROM THE APPROVAL OF THIS PROJECT.

SO WITH THAT, IT'S RECOMMENDED THAT THE BOARD TAKE SPECIFIC ACTIONS DESCRIBED IN THE WRITTEN STAFF REPORT THAT WAS PROVIDED WITH THE AGENDA PACKET.

THAT INCLUDING THE TYPO TO CHANGE 005 TO 010.

THAT INCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU FOLKS MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I WILL NOW OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS. MISS BLANKENSHIP, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? 1 MOMENT CHAIR.

I DON'T BELIEVE WE DO. WE DO NOT. OKAY, SO SEEING NO FURTHER COMMENTS, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK FOR BOARD DISCUSSION.

SUPERVISOR. LONG. THANK YOU CHAIR. I THINK THERE'S A COUPLE IMPORTANT POINTS.

ONE, THIS WAS ALREADY APPROVED BACK IN 2023, AND THE ONLY REASON THIS CAME BACK BEFORE THIS PROCESS AND BACK BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION, WHICH GAVE IT ANOTHER 5-0 VOTE, WAS SIMPLY THEY DIDN'T PAY IN TIME THE NECESSARY FEES.

SO THEY WANTED TO WRITE A CHECK AND DELIVER THE FEES, BUT IT WAS OUTSIDE THE WINDOW ACCEPTABLE WINDOW.

SO IT HAD TO KIND OF GO BACK THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS. SO THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN VETTED AND APPROVED BY THE PRIOR BOARD BACK IN 23.

AND SO WE'RE JUST REALLY ESSENTIALLY ACCEPTING ALLOWING TO ACCEPT THE PAYMENT BY JULY 27TH OR WHATEVER 23RD. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S, THAT'S ALL ACCURATE.

SO I WOULD MAKE THEM WELL, OKAY, WE GOT ANOTHER DISCUSSION.

YEAH, YOU CAN MAKE A MOTION. WELL, OKAY. GO FOR IT.

I WOULD MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE R.7. AND.

SECOND. ADOPTING THE FINDINGS. ADOPTING THE FINDINGS.

YES. THANK YOU. MOTION MADE BY SUPERVISOR. SECONDED BY SUPERVISOR CRYE.

MISS BLANKENSHIP, I JUST WANT TO ASK TARA FOR CLARIFICATION ON R.7.

ITEM NUMBER 2 DOES REFERENCE THAT THE BOARD WOULD BE ADOPTING THE RECOMMENDED FINDINGS LISTED IN PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2026-005.

BUT THEN DOWN IN NUMBER 4, IT SAYS THAT THE BOARD SHOULD ALSO ADOPT THE RECOMMENDED FINDINGS LISTED ON PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2026-010, WHICH ALSO YOU MENTIONED. SO I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THAT THE BOARD'S ADOPTING BOTH OF THOSE.

NO, I WOULD VERY MUCH LIKE IF WE COULD STRIKE OUT NUMBER 2 OUT OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

IT'S KIND OF A GLITCH IN THE MATRIX WHERE WE SAID THE SAME THING TWICE WITH 2 DIFFERENT RESOLUTION NUMBERS.

OKAY. SO AS LONG AS THE MAKER OF THE MOTION AND THE SECOND ARE GOOD WITH THAT. ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? SUPERVISOR LONG. I AM OKAY WITH THAT. AND. SUPERVISOR. CRYE. YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT, WITH THAT, I'LL TAKE A VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? PASSES 4-0. ALL RIGHT. THE SHASTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS WILL RECESS AND CONVENE AS THE SHASTA COUNTY IN-HOME SUPPORTIVE SERVICES PUBLIC AUTHORITY GOVERNING BOARD.

[R8 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – EXISTING LITIGATION (Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1)): Name of Case: Denise Eye v. Fairway Oaks Mobile Home Park et al., Shasta County Court Case No. 208669]

THE SHASTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DOES NOT RECEIVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION OR STIPEND FOR ACTING AS THE SHASTA COUNTY IHSS PUBLIC AUTHORITY GOVERNMENT BOARD.

MISS BLANKENSHIP, DO WE HAVE ANY REQUESTS TO SPEAK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? OPEN TIME. WE DO NOT, CHAIR. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION. SUPERVISOR HARMON MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

SUPERVISOR CRYE SECONDED. MOTION IS MADE. SHASTA COUNTY.

OKAY, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? PASSES 4-0.

ALL RIGHT. THE SHASTA COUNTY IHSS PUBLIC AUTHORITY GOVERNING BOARD WILL NOW ADJOURN AND RECONVENE AS THE SHASTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.

[02:30:01]

AND I THINK THE LAST THING WE HAVE IS CLOSED SESSION, MISS BLANKENSHIP.

DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? WE DO. CHAIR 1.

SPEAKER. SHASTA COUNTY WATCHDOG.

THIS IS CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL. EXISTING LITIGATION.

YOUR LITIGATION. YOU HAVE SO MANY LAWSUITS ALL THE TIME ON UNDER CLOSED SESSION.