Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

Mr. Black, you all right? Kaylee, you got together? Council, CAO, you guys good? All right. I'm going to start with welcoming everyone here to the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors meeting of Tuesday, September 15, 2026, a few minutes after 9 AM. I have a very creaky microphone. Let's see. So I want to announce that Supervisor Madrone will be attending via Zoom today. And is he on now? Do we have him here?

Yes.

Okay. And he has... because of state law and the way that it is, Supervisor Madrone will read a quick statement and confirm that he is alone or tell us if there's anyone over 18 years or older with him in the room. And I am to remind him that his camera must be on the entire meeting. So with that, Supervisor Madrone, do you have something you want to read to us or say to us?

Yeah, I'm attending remotely for just cause because I have a contagious illness. And there is nobody over 18 years old in the room, and I will keep my camera on.

All right. It's a very small room. Okay. With that, we'll go to roll call, please.

Thank you, Chair. Supervisor Arroyo? Here. Supervisor Bone? Good morning. Supervisor Bushnell? Good morning. Supervisor Madrone? Chair Wilson?

Here.

All are here.

All right, great. Next, we'll do the salute to the flag. Supervisor Bone, will you please lead us?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

is where we ask for modifications to the agenda do we have any proposed modifications good morning chair wilson there are no modifications this morning all right and a reminder that we have uh at 1 p.m as a time set is nine closed session items and with that we will move to the consent calendar and we'll start with a few proclamations i think the first one will be a proclamation recognizing september as PACE Month in Humboldt County, and Supervisor Arroyo will be reading this one.

Good morning, welcome, good to see you all. All right. Whereas the elderly population in Humboldt County is growing rapidly with a significant impact on healthcare needs and costs, and whereas the program of all-inclusive care for the elderly, PACE, is a fully integrated, comprehensive model of care that allows older adults who qualify for a nursing home level of care to continue living safely and independently in their homes and communities. And whereas participants enrolled in PACE receive all Medicare and Medi-Cal covered services, along with additional support such as rehabilitation, transportation, nutrition, social engagement, and family caregiver assistance that promotes overall health and well-being. And whereas PACE programs assume full financial responsibility for participants' medical care and related services, including hospitalization and long-term care through capitated payments from Medicare and Medi-Cal, thereby helping to control costs for the state while improving quality of care. And whereas Redwood Coast PACE, a program of the Humboldt Senior Resource Center, has served more than 750 older adults in Humboldt County, with over 400 older adults currently enrolled with centers located in Eureka, Arcata, and Fortuna, providing a trusted local resource for families and seniors alike. And whereas Redwood Coast Pace celebrates its 12th anniversary of serving the Humboldt community, Whereas the PACE model of care has consistently demonstrated improved health outcomes, greater participant satisfaction, and enhanced quality of life for older adults while supporting families and strengthening communities. Now therefore be it resolved that the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors proclaim September 2026 as PACE Month in Humboldt County and encourage all citizens to recognize the importance of Redwood Coast PACE, a program of the Humboldt Senior Resource Center in ensuring dignity, independence, and quality care for our community's seniors. And I will come down and we can take a quick photo together and then we'd love to hear your remarks. Okay.

Thank you very much for helping us celebrate our 12th year. With me is Jen Maxim. She's our marketing and outreach coordinator. I'm Barbara Leahy, the director of the PACE program. So 12 years ago, we opened our program with two participants. and we are now at 402. So in 12 years, we're serving 400 participants. The feasibility study that came about, whether or not we would be successful here, predicted that we would serve about 130 participants in five years and level off. So we've shown them. We're known nationally as the program that has the highest penetration rate. So of those residents that we have here in Humboldt County that meet our criteria, we're serving the highest population nationally. It started in San Francisco, as many of you may know, over 50 years ago. So it is a model that's throughout our nation, and it's got great outcomes. We had thought with the predictability of being at 130 participants that our Eureka site and campus was all we needed, but we certainly found out that we outgrew that site. So in 2020, we opened in Fortuna, right in the middle of COVID. which was quite an experience for both the participants and our staff. But we were successful, got through it, and then also grew again so much that we had to look at additional sites. So excited that in May of 25 data growth, we opened up a site in Arcata, which is great because it's right on the campus of Mad River Hospital. So that's been a great partnership. And then, in addition to celebrating Pace Month, and it's in your packets, but the Humboldt Senior Resource Center is celebrating Senior Center Month, and that's happening next week, and all of our campuses will be open, so we hope that you'll stop by and see not just the Pace program, but all the other programs that the Humboldt Senior Resource Center provides. Jen, did I miss anything?

Well, I just wanted to note that I looked at the numbers. We've served 779 seniors in our community since 2014, since we've opened. And that is also not only our 12-year anniversary, it's Senior Center Month and it's National Pace Month. And this past May, our Arcata location passed 100 participants. So we're celebrating a lot this year, and we look forward to continuing to grow and work with our community.

Thank you for all your support.

Thank you.

Thank you. I was privileged to be at the ribbon cutting as well. Wonderful. Thank you. All right. Next is proclamation for transit month. And we have Supervisor Arroyo again.

All right. Wonderful. This one's near and dear to me. Whereas public transportation is an essential public service that connects people to employment, education, health care, shopping, community services, and other destinations that are fundamental to daily life. And whereas Humboldt Transit Authority provides fixed route, paratransit, intercity, and other transportation services throughout Humboldt County, connecting communities across a large and geographically diverse service area. And whereas public transportation contributes to the economic vitality of our communities by helping employees reach their jobs, students reach schools and universities, customers reach local businesses, and residents access essential services. Whereas the success of public transportation depends upon the dedication and professionalism of transit operators, maintenance personnel, administrative staff, and all of the employees who work every day to safely and reliably move the public. And whereas transit riders are an essential part of the public transportation system, and their continued use in support of public transit helps strengthen the services available to our communities. And whereas transit month provides an opportunity to recognize the important role public transportation plays in our communities, celebrate the people who provide and use transit, and encourage residents to explore the many ways public transportation connects Humboldt County. Now, therefore, be it proclaimed that the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors hereby recognizes September 2026 as transit month and encourages the residents of Humboldt County to recognize the value of public transportation and the people who make these services possible, ride public transportation, learn more about the services available in Humboldt County, and support continued investment in safe, reliable, accessible, and sustainable public transportation. I don't think we have anyone in person here to receive this today. My understanding is a number of folks who would have been here are at a conference today. But I did want to say it was really exciting to see our end of year or close to end of year results for Humboldt Transit Authority. Actually, it was the end of the state fiscal year. And we've served, we've exceeded our pre-COVID ridership levels, which was really thrilling. And we're well above 700,000 writers a year. So that was really great to see. And maybe Mike and I can take a quick photo with the proclamation, because he loves doing this. I'm a big nerd. We don't have to go all the way out there. Maybe we can just do it up here.

People who know me know I love photos.

Yes, Mike loves taking photos with me.

We are the two board members that serve on HTA. And I will say, a lot of compliments from folks that come from out of town that actually use our service. I myself use it, and I'm actually very excited that we have the plan for our employees to also have that as part of their package in terms of Their employment here, I encourage all employers to do that. It doesn't cost a lot of money to provide that for your employees, and especially helps them get to work. So that's great. Supervisor Bushnell.

Thank you. I just want to recognize that through the Measure O, some of that money was dedicated to public transportation, and it really has helped the Southern Humboldt area, which is farthest removed from services, and the ridership in Southern Humboldt and the Fortuna area have greatly increased. And I see a lot of folks down in Garberville and Redway waiting at the bus stops to come and reaching out to me to say what's the schedule. So I really appreciate the buses and also appreciate the community that voted for Measure O to increase those funds.

Thank you. Supervisor Arroyo.

Thank you. Yeah, that was a big win through Measure O to be able to put on more service to Southern Humboldt and working towards increased frequency of service on all routes. So that is in the mix of what HTA will be doing in the near future. I also want to thank our airport director, Justin Hopman, for making sure that we could really dedicate some space to sharing information about transit from the airport. I sometimes hear from, it's often international travelers who just immediately plan to take the bus from the airport into town, although I'm sure all travelers could be doing that. That's just who tends to reach out and say something about their experience. But I really appreciate that we'll have more signage and advertising information so people can learn more about those routes. So thank you, Justin.

All right. I have taken the bus several times to and from the airport. It does work. It's great. And I'm just saying, it's on schedule. I recommend the transit app. If you haven't seen it, it's called Transit App. Put it on your phone. It'll tell you when the bus arrives, when it goes, how far you need to walk to get there. It's wonderful. And it works in virtually every city in the United States.

Just a quick point of order, Chair. I wanted to acknowledge that Supervisor Bone has stepped down for a moment. He has jury duty this morning, so he is going to check in to that and hopefully will return shortly. All right.

There we go. Doing civic duty. Double duty. Here we go. All right. Excellent. Well, moving on to the next item we have here is Proclaim 925 September 25th, 2026 as Dolly Parton Day in Humboldt County. And we have Supervisor Bushnell.

Thank you. Is anybody here from the Bridgeville Community Center? No. Okay. They are working 9 to 5. That's a good one. Okay. Whereas Dolly Parton was a globally recognized musician, philanthropist, humanitarian, author, and advocate who generously encouraged whose generosity and commitment to children, literacy, and service touch communities throughout the world. And whereas Dolly Parton founded the Imaginary Library to inspire a love of reading by providing free, high quality, age appropriate books, each month to children from birth through the age of five, regardless of their family's income or background. And whereas California has proclaimed 925 or September 25th as Dolly Parton Day, following the passage of Senate Bill 931, which brought lawmakers together in celebration of Dolly Parton's remarkable legacy of music, philanthropy, and service to others. And whereas the Bridgeville Community Center serves as the official Humboldt County partner for the Imaginary Library, helping enroll eligible children, coordinate the program, and raise funds to provide books to children throughout the county. And whereas through this partnership and the generous support of local organizations, businesses, community groups, and individuals, including Friends of the Redwood Library, Rotary Clubs, Kiwanis, and Humboldt sponsors, the Humboldt County program has mailed more than 50,000 books and served more than 2,500 local children as of June 2026. And whereas Dolly Parton passed away on August 25th, 2026, leaving behind a lasting legacy that will continue through the imaginary library and the efforts of communities like Humboldt County to place books in the hands of children and encourage a lifelong love of reading. And so there now let it be proclaimed that Humboldt County Board of Supervisors hereby recognizes 9-2-5 September 25th has Dolly Parton Day in Humboldt County and honors the partnership between Dolly Parton's Imaginary Library and the Bridgeville Community Center. I wanted to just read a little something, a quote from her. When I was growing up in the hills of East Tennessee, I knew my dreams would come true. I know there are children in your community with their own dreams. They dream of becoming a doctor or an inventor or a minister. Who knows, maybe there's a little girl who dreams WHOSE DREAM IS TO BE A WRITER AND A SINGER. THE SEEDS OF THESE DREAMS ARE OFTEN FOUND IN BOOKS, AND THE SEEDS YOU HELP PLANT IN YOUR COMMUNITY CAN GROW ACROSS THE WORLD. AND I JUST THANK HER FOR HER CONTRIBUTIONS SO GLOBALLY. AND MY GRANDKIDS HAVE RECEIVED BOOKS FROM THE BRIDGEVILLE COMMUNITY CENTER, AND THEY ARE SO EXCITED WHEN THEY DO, AND THEY JUST LOVE TO READ. AND SO IT'S JUST A REALLY GREAT THING TO BE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE THAT.

ALL RIGHT. I KNOW SUPERVISOR ROE MUST HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY

I just, I love this. I love that we're acknowledging it locally and I'm so thrilled that the Bridgeville Community Center has been participating in this program for years now and I had the pleasure many years ago of working with the Bridgeville Community Center on some projects and it was interesting to talk with other community centers in less rural parts of the state and hear that they serve a half of a city, or a whole city, or in LA sometimes it's like a 10 block service area. And the Bridgeville Community Center serves more than 800 square miles of Humboldt County, which is just incredible. So big kudos to them for their participation in that program. I just love Dolly's program and I remember also reading that she was inspired to help other folks learn to read because her dad was unable to read and she saw that and thought that that was really life changing for people to have that opportunity, especially folks who live really far from other services. So I think her heart was in that work so much.

I'll just add that Bridgeville is a very small post office and a little tiny school, and the folks that organize the imaginary library out there work tireless, make phone calls, go to rotary groups, all kinds of things to be able to fund this program, and so I really thank them. Also, I would really like to thank Kaylee, who, this is a first-time proclamation, so she started from scratch and did a very good job.

All right, my only comment is if you haven't listened to the Dolly Parton's America podcast, nine-part series, it is amazing. Absolutely, I recommend it. Please listen to it. Dolly Parton's America, nine-part podcast. It's from 2019. The best quote I've got from there is, when you know better, you do better. So the next thing we have on here is Proclaim September 2026 Recovery Month in Humboldt County. I'm just wondering, do we have anyone that's going to receive this? Oh, great. Awesome. I will read it and we'll do that. This is definitely something that touches everybody, at least in their families or in their communities. We all have an understanding of this in some form or another. Whereas September is recognized nationally as National Recovery Month and recovery happens in Humboldt County, in Humboldt County welcomes all people impacted by addiction and celebrates those who have taken the courageous steps to make positive changes in their lives and their communities. And Whereas Recovery Happens in Humboldt County is celebrating its 10th year of bringing community together to recognize recovery. The event has grown from 78 attendees in its first year to 792 attendees last year, demonstrating the community's growing support for recovery and its recognition of the importance of connection, hope, and healing. And whereas early intervention, support, treatment, and recovery services are essential for individuals experiencing mental health challenges, substance use disorders, and other life circumstances from which people are recovering. And whereas through community, and meaningful change, many individuals have found a new way of living and have achieved long-term recovery. And whereas it is important to challenge the stigma that individuals with substance use disorders are defined by their past and to recognize that recovery is possible, relatives, friends, and community members are encouraged to implement preventable measures, recognize the signs of mental health and substance use challenges, and guide those in need towards appropriate early intervention, treatment, and recovery support services. And it is important to show individuals who are struggling that people in recovery are succeeding, achieving their goals and sustaining long-term recovery. People can reunite with their families and communities, overcome their darkest days, and give back to others. And whereas treatment providers, sponsors, judges, attorneys, law enforcement officers, case managers, and other community partners play an important role in supporting individuals' recovery, and need to see recovery is possible in Humboldt County. And Whereas Recovery Happens in Humboldt County is a group of community members dedicated to changing the community's understanding of addiction and recovery and reducing the stigma associated with substance use disorders. And Whereas Recovery Happens in Humboldt County will kick off Recovery Month with its 10th annual Recovery Happens in Humboldt Picnic and Chili Cook-Off on September 19th, coming right up, from... 12 p.m. to 4 p.m. at Sequoia Park in Eureka. And the event will feature musical entertainment by Two Tank. I don't know who Tank is, but Jamie George, Richard Larapenzo, and Sarah Torres, as well as a bounce house and bubbles and community resource tables and a raffle. Community organizers and partners that participate by hosting informational tables or donating raffle items will help... cover most of the event's costs, and now therefore be resolved or proclaimed that Humboldt County Board of Supervisors hereby recognizes September as recovery month and invites the residents of Humboldt County to join in celebrating recovery, honoring those in recovery and supporting individuals and families affected by mental health challenges, substance and substance use disorders. And with that, we're gonna take a picture and then you're gonna tell us about it.

And we get to make you come down here to take a picture? Yeah, yeah.

I'm going to stand over there.

Thank you. Oh, that's a big smile, right? Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh, I just want to share, um, I am so grateful that we get to come up here and, um, and get the support of this board of supervisors. I want to share, you know, um, recovery addiction looks different for everybody. Um, and some of the most, uh, some of the most interesting people in the world have been through this road of addiction and have been successful. And I've been contemplating this for a lot of years, so I'm just gonna say it. I have 31 years clean as of August 30th, and I got here posturing a shopping cart, 98 pounds, orange hair, royal blue spandex, and sleeping on a bus bench. And something that my dad said, when I was growing up finally made sense to me is can't never did nothing. Um, he used to tell me that all the time, never made sense. Um, I got, uh, I was able to have somebody believe in me enough to get me into treatment, um, and walk beside me. Um, and, uh, today I get to do some absolutely amazing things. Um, and I'm really, truly grateful. Um, I, I, we started this 10 years ago and i was told that by the place that i worked at that it was a conflict of interest um for me for us to do this picnic and uh so i started it on a saturday because they couldn't tell me what to do on saturdays um and so uh you know when I'm a dreamer. I'm a huge dreamer that anything is possible in recovery and so I just I'm really grateful. I hope that I remember when I first moved here there was people picketing across the street over there about those people and shaming those people. I am one of those people and so Like my hope is to provide resources because we only have so many treatment programs and we have more people that need it. than ever. My hope is to bring more resources to the area by having entities table up, share the information, educate the community, and know that you're not alone. Whether you are a parent or family member or a child or the Board of Supervisors that struggles with addiction, there is help for us out there, all of us. Thank you. Oh yeah, and there's . Let me introduce Melissa Nelson from Aegis.

That was beautifully said. I don't have much more to add other than thank you for your recognition and support.

Any comments from the board?

um i just want to say congratulations for recovery for you and it's hard to stand up there and say that sometimes i i don't think there's probably not one person that hasn't been affected by addiction of some sort or other or have had it in their family it's a very tough road when you're on the opposite side of the addiction if you're watching your family member go through that and being helpless. And so the groups that offer recovery are lifelines for many people and for many families. And I thank you for the work that you do. It's so important. Thank you. Thank you.

All right. Two guys are right up.

Danette, it's always wonderful to hear your, just hear your heartfelt words. I really appreciate you starting this. And it sounds like it's been a collaborative effort, but you were a huge driver of this and you've helped it grow. And it looks like a really fun event. So I encourage everyone to check it out on Saturday. And Melissa, nice to meet you. Thanks for coming out. Thank you.

Oh, what they said. I mean, and what I said before, which is this definitely touches everybody, and we feel you.

Thank you.

Thank you so much for being here.

Thank you.

All right, so I think that might be it for proclamations. Anything from Supervisor Madrone on any of these proclamations?

I do not see a hand raised.

Okay, great. Well, we're gonna move into the part of this where we're gonna have open up to public comment. We're gonna start online.

I have no hands raised online.

All right, we're gonna bring it back into the house.

Ken Sawatsky, I will re-echo what I made before. Hopefully sometime we will end up with a functional way of getting on a bus here for transit and getting down to SFO without having to transfer and make all kinds of transfers there. That would be a wonderful thing to have happen. Again, third world countries such as Mexico, these all things are very easy to do about the same drive sometimes to get to these places, but transits down there is fantastic. I noticed with DHHS, on consent, we have over $16.5 million going through on consent. I hope that's spent in a productive manner. Sometimes I wonder. We have a petition for a conversion from the DHHS ranch land or residential agricultural timberland. Frequently it's addressed by, I believe, Supervisor Wilson says, unfortunately, some things are coming off our tax roll. If Thomas Molder had been on the phone, he probably would have brought that point up. I have no problem with that particular thing happening. We get our timber tax later, and just to have these things converted and preserved as timberland and managed that way I think is of enough benefit to offset any kind of tax loss we may have. I did see on here we're rescinding the revocation of some permits that were revoked and I think that's a good sign. It means that somebody got the message and now we apparently got our fees out of them and they're bringing themselves into standing. So that's why sometimes using that stick can have a very good incidental positive consequence and we end up with a little bit more money on that thing. I think that pretty well sums up my comments on the consent items for today and I look forward to commenting on other topics. Thank you for my opportunity to speak.

Good morning. My name is Joanne McGarry, and I want to talk on a couple of things on the consent calendar. First of all, the Dolly Parton proclamation. I want to share that soon after it was known that Dolly Parton had passed away, some local musicians, primarily the Harmonic Howl, which is Ruby Ruth George and Elle and Brianna Prenner, They got together and created a tribute Dolly Parton music event on September 6th to benefit the Bridgeville Imagination Library that has been created there. And over $3,000 in ticket sales alone to that concert sold out beyond sold out. was given for the Imagination Library in Bridgeville and the Bridgeville representative came and one of the important things to share that he shared was that the first book children get at the Imagination Library is the little engine that could. because that is an inspirational story, universal for everyone. So I just wanted to let people know that our community stepped up and did something really beautiful right after Dolly's passing to pay tribute to her. Secondly, there's an item on the agenda about sheriff's remodel for the main office, and I think that's all important and necessary. But I also want to remind you that the grand jury has talked about the real need to upgrade the animal shelter. in our community and I really want to know what's happening and or not happening in that regard because animal welfare as you have seen is really really important to a lot of people in this community and what we do to show that we care about our animals reflects well on what we care about universally. So I'd like to see some action on that. And I will be going up to visit that animal shelter tomorrow. And interestingly, I take the bus up to the airport, but I have to walk down to my medical appointment. And then I have to walk over to the animal control center. And it's a bit of a walk, but I can do it. But we still need to improve some of the stops along the way. So thank you for the proclamation on Dolly Parton.

Is there anybody else in the room who wants to speak?

Good morning, Humboldt County. My name is Dale Bagley. I've lived in Fortuna for 66 years. I come from one of the biggest families in the history of Humboldt County, my grandma and grandpa. Had 16 children. I had 14 uncles, one aunt, and my mom. My grandma gave me property in 1974. I was a minor. I abused a road for 53 years that entered my property on the bottom. I did a lot line adjustment in 2006. There originally was one right away.

Hold on one second. We're talking about consent items, so this is not on consent. So we have a time when we talk about all the other things.

When will that be?

Like literally the next thing we get to. Okay. Yeah, hold on one minute. Yeah, we'll get there.

Also, Chair, I did have someone raise their hand.

Yeah, if you could bring in the person that's online, assuming that they want to talk about something that's on the consent calendar, yeah.

Okay. Caller 6685, I will unmute you, and you will have three minutes to comment on the consent calendar. You can press star six if it's not a meeting. I can't hear you. Can you speak directly into your phone please?

I'm calling at the wrong time. Hello? I'm calling at the wrong time. Hello? Can you hear me?

We'll come back to you. All right. So I'm bringing it back to the board. Is there anyone that wants to talk about anything that's on the consent calendar before we get a motion and a second?

No, but I'll move approval of the consent calendar.

Okay. Second. All right, we have a motion by Arroyo, second by Bushnell. We have someone online, so we're going to do roll call vote, please.

Okay. Supervisor Bushnell?

Yes.

Supervisor Arroyo? Yes. Supervisor Madrone?

Yes.

Chair Wilson?

Yes.

Supervisor Bone absent. Motion carries 4-0.

Great, all right. Moving on from the consent calendar, I think this is where we go into public comment on non-agenda items. So this is your time. Sorry, you were talking about the lot line or whatever that was. Bring it back and start on over.

I've been using this road for 53 years until I was locked out by a game warden on June 15th of 2026. He was videotaping me, blocked the road with his wife, and went to court. The video didn't work. He didn't want to show the judge that he was in my face trying to get me to cause a fight over this right away for he could get me. a restraining order or whatever. I filed paperwork for a prescriptive right of way. And his complaint was loud music, a red motor, lawn mower. He wants me to pay for a retaining wall, which that would say I got a right of way. Has mud coming over the retaining wall he built. There was no damages awarded for any of his garbage. December 30th. Game warden and his wife, three dogs trespassing on my land. We're going to court at the time. I pointed to the road to tell him to get off my property. Him and his wife told the court that I made my finger like a gun to shoot him. They were caught trespassing and they knew it. The game warden told the court he had permission from Ross, the neighbor, to trespass on my land or go back and talk to him. Apparently he needed someone to talk to. I've used this land for 53 years, eight segments of over five years. That is a prescriptive right-of-way. He had an expert witness come on and try to dispute the two right-of-ways. One was done in 57, one was done in 64. One was a 16-foot right-of-way, one was a 20-foot right-of-way. The 20-foot right-of-way was mine. Alan Barrett forgot to put it on the deed of my mom's after the lot line adjustment. So I sued for a prescriptive right-of-way. I've used that road for over 53 years. Judge Canning gave me nothing. Not the right to take logs out. I've done it before. Take gravel in. Nothing. Josh was trespassing. He's a stalker. He is a game warden. And the judge didn't want to hurt his career because that would have proved he's a stalker. That's what I live by. The game warden in 2020, Thanksgiving Day, killed the neighbor's puppy. A little Frenchie said it was killing his chicken. He shot it. He's fired his gun one time in 15 years, and that's what he did. I live by this. September 3rd, just last week, 14 cops came to my house. The trial's over, okay? He was awarded nothing except cost to go to court.

Okay, your time is up. Just give me a minute. I'll let you finish a sentence, and that's what we'll do.

Well, just let me finish this statement here.

Not too much of a run-on sentence.

You talked a lot, okay? Please. I'm asking you guys to ask the Attorney General to check in to Judge Canning, and I will return with more.

Perfect. Thank you. All right.

Take pictures before we do this stuff.

All right. Come on up. You're it.

I'm it. It's election season, and I don't normally endorse people. But in this case, I am. I'm endorsing Verda Winona Pitts. She's running for the Blue Lake City Council. And she's one of the strongest people that I've met. She's a single mom with two children, John and Jane Doe. How'd I do there, Miles? Good. And Zach and other people who object to me using names in the past. And she was without her children for a time of 13 months. Had no interaction due to actions that were taken by Connie Beck and CWS. And so anyway, this strong person, she's on the... your civil rights board or our thing there where we have those protected. She attends many things and she's an ongoing people. A lot of people wouldn't have been able to survive what happened to her. A lot of them get involved in drugs or alcohol or something like that. Some of them kill themselves because of what happens to them under these circumstances. And I think that the people of Blue Lake will be lucky hopefully to have her be on their city council. She's well spoken. She's able to look objectively at things for without having a preconceived attitude on things and a kind of person that I think would be a beneficial for any city council or board of supervisors or anybody to have a member as she does her homework and she's very smart. So anyway, I'm strongly endorsing, uh, I call her Nona and uh, and uh, hopefully the people of blue lake will in their wisdom, a lecture, a couple of the other people running against her. I, Well, we have an ex-mayor who has caused all kinds of financial woes there and other things going on. And then one person, well, I had some major business dealing with that went sour. So it's not really good when somebody goes ahead and misses a deadline, doesn't get their insurance, and goes ahead and convinces my wife while I'm in Mexico to go sign an extension on something. And of course she only got partway to the title company to try and file that document. And I had her on the phone and of course it already called the thing. So we do have people that are on the opposite end of the spectrum as far as being honest and, and with integrity. Um, but, uh, Verda is someone who I strongly endorse. As you know, I don't normally come in here and endorse people for political positions. So thank you for the opportunity to speak on this topic today. And I did want to close by thanking Supervisor Wilson for what transpired at the Coastal Commission. I think that was a very good thing that he did and help help have or some control over the Centerville beach will be given back to the county and hopefully, and we will have ability to maintain that access down there. So thank you Mike for what you did at that. And I also want to thank the commissioners who saw saw enough to follow your lead. Thank you.

Thank you. Next.

Hi, my name is Joanne McGarry, and I want to talk a bit about transportation and peace. And the Climate Action Plan, the number one sector of concern, you know, all sectors are of concern when it comes to climate change, but transportation. And I'm also very concerned about El Nino, the super El Nino, and how prepared or unprepared we are going to be in terms of our adapting to what may be floods and heavy rains and coastal wave action. And so I took the bus here, as I often do, and I'm just thinking about people traveling while the super el nino is happening and our safety and concerns and the humble bay trail what it's going to be like if people are trying to ride bicycles or walk along that trail and i just really want to see some more action and information and education and involvement of all of us to do what we can in this regard about our transporting ourselves during these kind of maybe wicked winter times. And so the other issue I want to talk about is peace. And the Arcata City Council and maybe some others will be proclaiming International Day of Peace at their meetings. And it's September 20th, and it's been happening since the early 80s out of the United Nations designation and proclamation. And I just, there's nothing more important than peace to me. And so peace in our world, peace in our communities. And I just really want to share something I just learned about United Airlines is that they are on their passenger flights apparently reinstituting the shipment of weapons parts on their passenger planes of weapons parts to Israel. And it brings back the ceasefire resolution we all passed a couple years ago. And the idea was we wanted a ceasefire, but many of us also wanted no more weapons shipments to the state of Israel. And I just think we need to maybe revisit that idea proclamation or ceasefire resolution and no more weapons to people causing great harm in our world, including to the climate.

Okay. Is there any more public comments?

There is online. All right, bring him in. Caller 3053. I will unmute you and you will have three minutes.

Good morning, Thomas Mulder here. I just want to confirm you can hear me there in the chambers.

Yes.

Just a handful of different things. I guess I'm going to say the same thing I've said for like, I have no idea, five times. It'd be nice to see a letter of support for the cannabis industry, for Humboldt County, for the county to actually take a stance on this rulemaking process the DCC is doing right now. I think it's crucial. I think it's unfortunate that People come into the chambers and talk about trees or other things, hot button items and agenda items get taken place right away. But something that's actually an industry within the county that brings economic value to the county, just gone to the wayside. Lots of things that are frustrating as a taxpayer. We rent our property from the county to drive on subpar roads. I don't feel that the money spent very efficiently and the maintenance isn't very efficient either. So yeah, we own our properties in essence, pay rent from the bank and we pay rent to the county because we got to pay our property taxes. So it'd be nice to see in this downturn economy that we have with taxpayer dollars being spent very wisely. tighten up that belt and do things a little more efficiently. There's lots more to say, but I'll leave it there for now. Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Thank you. Caller 6685, I will unmute you and you will have three minutes.

Hello, can you hear me? Yes. Hello? Can you hear me?

Yes, we can hear you.

Hello?

Yes, we can hear you. Please proceed. Oh, thank you so much.

Thank you so much. This is Diana Preston from Eureka, and I have a material addition to the coastal lighting debate. And this is the thing. I've always gone up from the highway of B Street after dark, and I've decided it's too dangerous. So now I'm getting off at O and walking up Myrtle. Myrtle's rather a long walk. And it has some parts in it that have very bright light and some parts that have muted light. And I want you to know I'm 82 years old. My eyes are pretty good. But this is probably universally true. In the bright light, there tends to be a very strong optical illusion going on, especially the curve looks just like a line. And I nearly walked over it a couple of times. I have to really concentrate when there's bright light so the optical illusion doesn't fool me. And in the dim light, it's very easy to see exactly what's what. There's no danger whatsoever. So anyway, if you remember there, when we were discussing this on an agenda item, there was a scientist, an astronomer who mentioned this, that actually dim light makes it easier for people to see. So I'm thinking that the elderly and people who have to work outdoors at night do actually better with a little dimmer light. So anyway, I just wanted to pass on that data point that I've personally come across myself and invite anyone to take that walk along Myrtle and see for yourself exactly what I'm talking about. Thank you very much.

Thank you. That is all, Chair.

All right. One data point. Great. All right, if there is anyone else here to speak? All right, seeing none, we are going to move on from public comment on non-agenda items to department reports. We're gonna start with our legislative platform.

Good morning, Chair, members of the board, Sean Quincy, Deputy County Administrative Officer here with Karen Langan, Clifton Wilson from Shaw Yoder and Thuy Smelger Ling. This is our end of session report on the county's state legislative program. I'll cover briefly how the program works, some of the efforts that we undertook this year, and I'll turn it over to Karen and Clifton. to provide a little bit more detail and some of the broad strokes on what's happening in Sacramento. As you are aware, the board adopted its legislative platform in January. This sets our positions across six policy areas, and it also provides standing direction that allows staff to act on the board's behalf without bringing individual bills to your board throughout the year. From there, our lobbyists monitor every bill introduced. Staff and department heads screen those bills against the legislative platform, and we take positions, and we advocate from there. We advocate as we can in each committee that a bill goes to, and then to the governor if bills get that far. And we advocate on the budget the same way. Attachment two in the staff report includes the list of bills that we are monitoring. It's about 60 bills that we have on that list. 20 bills are supported, four bills we oppose, and the rest have been monitored. That translated to several dozen letters on bills, but also allows us to weigh in on things like PUC proceedings, which we engaged heavily in with our partners over at RCEA this year. Just very quickly before I turn it over to Clifton and Karen, On the opposed side, AB 2099 would have let billboard owners rebuild structures as customary maintenance with no local permit review. We sent letters to assembly government organization and the Appropriations Committee along with City of Eureka. That bill was held on suspense and didn't move. ACA 9, which would have restructured the Public Utilities Commission and put carriers of last resort phone protections for rural communities at risk. That was pulled by the author. We joined a coalition of local governments, including the cities of Eureka and Fortuna, to oppose AB 1383. That was the pension bill that would have significantly raised employer costs without any state funding. It is on the governor's desk, and we've requested a veto for that bill. On the support side, There were three bills tackling nitrous oxide, SB 758, SB 936, and AB 2076 that would restrict retail and online sales and ban large canisters and flavored products marketed to young people. Those bills are all on the governor's desk. We supported Assemblymember Rogers, AB 2494, updating how demonstration forests are managed. And a little bit closer to daily county operations, AB 2224 modernizes county recorder fees and moves recording online. Both those bills are on the governor's desk. State budget-wise, one highlight for us is that the end of session package includes a $1 million earmark secured by Assemblymember Rogers to go towards our permit center. So thank you to Assemblymember Rogers for that. Karen and Clifton will cover the rest. The governor has until September 30th to act. And after that, the two year session is over and we turn to the next cycle. We'll be back in the winter to cover the proposed 2027 legislative platform. And today is a good chance for you all to provide some direction to us on what you want to see when we come back with that. Turn it over to you.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and members, good to see you. Karen Lang with Chi Yoder, Antwi Schmelzer and Lang. I'm gonna do a little bit of a recap on the end of the session, let Clifton fill you in on the wind energy coordination we've been doing move into any questions that you might have. The legislature is adjourned. They were supposed to adjourn right at midnight on August 31st. On the election year cycle, they conclude at the end of August to give legislators an opportunity to go home and get their jobs re-secured. However, they did work a little bit longer than expected by using a little They didn't quite get to agreement on the budget bill that Sean was describing until it was a little bit later than it should have been in order to get it into print. We operate on what's called the 72-hour rule. Neither house can take action on a piece of legislation in its final form until it's been in print for 72 hours. Because they didn't get certain things into print until 4 and 5 in the morning, on the 29th we couldn't conclude our work until the 1st of september in the middle of the day so it went over a little bit longer than we thought and the they did end up sending over a thousand bills to the governor's desk there are currently 922. i think that number went down slightly this morning because the governor did just sign a package of bills on wildfire But there were 922 bills at 7 o'clock this morning on the governor's desk, and he signed 597 already this year. And he has until midnight on September 30th to act. Normally he will sign them into law. You will see that in a press release. he will return them to the author without their signature, which means he's vetoed them. If he does neither, it becomes the law without his signature, which is an incredibly rare event. He has never done that. The last governor to do it was Jerry Brown on an advisory vote measure several years ago in his third term as governor. What we looked at, major issues that the legislature was tackling this year, sort of odd to tell you about what didn't happen, but it's still gonna come back, is this matter of wildfire liability. I know from work you did last year that you have seen firsthand the devastation that happened in Los Angeles. After the major events of Paradise, Napa, Sonoma, and Shasta, the utility responsible for some of that was PG&E. There was a fund stood up to provide faster resources to wildfire victims. That fund is going to be depleted because of the Eaton fire, where it appears as though Southern California Edison will be held responsible. And in that case, the utility is responsible for renumerating the victims and the insurance companies who have to pay out. they are allowed to do what's called subrogation. Public agencies do that too. One of the things that the utilities have articulated to the administration and the legislature is that subrogation is a killer for their fiscal health, and there was an effort launched by the governor this year to do a reform package there. One of the initial pieces that was proposed was a prohibition on local agencies subrogating for your losses in a wildfire caused by utility, with the exception of your depreciated value. As you could imagine, that was incredibly concerning to all public agencies. We were coordinating very closely with the statewide associations, so the Special Districts Association, the League of Cities, RCRC, CSAC, and we worked together to get out the message. I cannot commend to you enough, Assemblyman Rogers in particular was a very vocal advocate for local agencies in this circumstance. As you will probably recall, Assemblyman Rogers in his previous life was actually helping evacuate folks out of Sonoma, and he actually was with Senator McGuire now when those fires were burning in Sonoma. He has very personal experience with all of that, and he was a very vocal advocate for your interests and all of that. Ultimately, there was a bill put into print. It did not have the subrogation prohibition that is entirely attributable to members like yours going to bat for you. However, even though it was announced as a three-party deal that SB 492 was going to be voted on at some point on the 1st, it turned out the assembly was not there. The utilities were wildly unhappy with the package that was put together. The stock price of PG&E was fluctuating throughout that day. As the news came out that the package didn't include some of these provisions, they ultimately decided not to put the bill up for a vote. The governor has indicated that it's possible he could call a special session. The challenge in doing that is if the votes aren't there on what was left of the package, and the utilities are saying that wasn't good enough anyway, I don't know what the path forward is for a bill in a special session, and asking members to come back and put up a vote, that's just gonna be an ugly vote either way, because you're kind of, You know, who's winning in that circumstance? You know, fire victims are supposed to be sort of at the front of that, and the wildfire victims were not satisfied with the package. So I don't really know what will happen there. You have a huge stake in that game. It also has affected what PG&E is planning on doing for wildfire safety and prevention. They made a statement that without the package that they wanted to see, that they are going to be postponing about $2 billion worth of investments which directly impacts counties. And I know you have a lot of struggle in Southern Humboldt, for example, getting power down there and also doing more prevention work to make sure that folks aren't catching fire. So that was a big one that didn't happen. It's not going away. You're gonna still continue to hear about this issue. The utilities are not gonna stop talking about it. So anticipate seeing further efforts by the incoming administration or a potential special session. A couple other big ticket items that were themes throughout the year. HR1 impacts. The major pieces of that are not going to land on regular folks until the first quarter of 2027. There was a concerted effort in 2026 to secure more resources for counties to help your constituents that are going to either lose their subsidy or lose their eligibility. for healthcare coverage. When that happens, ultimately they become a county responsibility under Section 17,000 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. Thankfully, you are a member of the County Medical Services Program, which has continued to provide services to medically indigent adults Even after the Affordable Care Act expansion occurred, there was always going to be a certain population in the wash that didn't have access to Medi-Cal or coverage through the exchange. CMSP covered them. They have a network of clinics and coverage. They have a reserve. that will go away very quickly depending on how fast the population comes back to you. So it will be a very high priority for counties in early 27 to secure additional resources for counties to make sure you have the money to pay the bills to keep people from falling too ill and having to rely on the emergency rooms for service because your emergency departments are actually very important for your community's health. So we're going to be looking at that. Another piece that actually did happen was a piece of legislation, SB 577, which put some guardrails around how Claims are being filed against public agencies for childhood sexual assault cases. Los Angeles County issued a $4 billion note to retire claims there. They have another billion that I'm aware of sitting on the desk of their district attorney's office. um they are looking to to provide some protections for the county when these claims come in in terms of verification and what kind of documentation would be needed to pay out the claims obviously it is an incredibly difficult subject matter to tackle at all because of the nature of the victims however there is a huge exposure for public agencies in counties and cities across the state when it comes to this issue. So the SB 577 is on the governor's desk. I anticipate he will sign it. But I think there will be another run at a larger tort reform effort because public agencies are increasingly seeing large claims be paid out that impair your ability to provide core services to constituents. So I think there will be an effort to see a tort reform package in 27 or beyond. So we anticipate seeing those items. Before getting into some bill issues that I wanted to cover, I was getting handed over to Clifton to talk briefly about the wind efforts that have continued in 2026 that we participated in.

Good morning, Chair Wilson and members. Clifton Wilson, also as part of Shaw Yoder, Anthony Schmelzer, and Lang, part of the state advocacy team. So to touch on how we've been coordinating on offshore wind, it's been really great effort so far. I think it's been really collaborative. But we have biweekly meetings, and it includes county staff, a broad group of local and regional partners, the port, offshore wind developers. So we kind of, I think, have pretty much a representative from almost everyone at the table and if we don't we are encouraging more and more people to come to the table so we can be fully inclusive. And then I'd say the main purpose of these meetings is really just to discuss development so we're all on the same page at the same time and then just coordinate how we want to respond to these potential things and use our advocacy efforts in the best way possible. I'd say some of the major topics covered over the year would be proposition for funding, how to make sure we align ourselves right for that because In the newest proposal, they also put out another couple billion dollars in that. So that money is starting to come out the door. And unfortunately, there's some money out there, but that's kind of been the biggest pot for some of these things overall. And then there's also been discussion just port development and permitting timelines. I know that's huge here. If any state legislative activity comes up, we're there. We're discussing fisheries, offshore wind planning, public outreach, communications, how to make sure everyone's aware of what's going on. And then again, I think it's really just so we hear from each other, we coordinate, we're going at this as a partnership overall. And then I'd say the biggest issue that's kind of come before us right now is and what we need to kind of be more activated on and we're already in the workings of is just in light of the federal administration buying out some of the leases and then companies, some of them taking up on that lease, there's more pressure now to try to convince the CPUC to keep in the transmission planning guidelines that they're going to be putting out soon to keep that in there because previously the last iterations they bumped it down to like a delay of six years but we're worried now that they might just see the writing on the wall and be like on that out shore planning for 2045 and everything we're just going to cut offshore wind out of the game And if that happens, that makes it so much harder because then we have to fight just to get it in the line item and back overall, whereas we're advocating to just please keep it where it is at least, let things kind of blow over and see if we can keep going forward. And we want to try to make sure that that possibility, because it has so many great opportunities for the area, keeps going on. So yes, and then so currently that public comment period is open until September 28th. Sean's already working on the comments, so that's going along. And then after that period's done, then they have until October 12th to reply. And then I'd say just thank you so much for the hospitality. It's always great. Every time I come up here, it's a beautiful place. And you guys came prepared yesterday in all the meetings. You guys gave us some really good things. I feel like the priorities were ready to hit the ground running, so. And then just to touch on ACA 9 also, because she mentioned it, that got killed, but we know Carrier Last Resort's always coming up. There seems to be an effort every time. It seems right now they're kind of going the federal route, but never discount them to try to do a quick play on the state level. But we're ready. You guys are good. And we know those landlines are very, very vital to the rural communities out there because that's all they have sometimes. And then back to Karen.

Yep. I wanted to briefly touch on a couple of bills commending the board to be an early adopter of legislation addressing the Knox issue. There's a couple of pieces of legislation that are on the governor's desk, as mentioned by Sean. The board also took a position of support on AB 2494 by Assemblymember Rogers. I wanted to flag for you when Your board let us know that you were going to be supporting it through Sean. We did flag for the county administrator's office that we did have two counties that the firm represents that were opposing that bill. So the way we handled that is we divided and assigned. So I represented Humboldt County in support of that bill. We made sure the letters were into the committee on time once you signed. sent a letter and coordinated with Sean to let him know we had an issue with two boards of supervisors in opposition to it. And you were represented by me and the committee when the bill was heard. You didn't have a position in time for its first policy hearing. The second hearing on July 1st in the Senate Natural Resources and Natural Resources and Water Committee. I was there to do the me too for you at that time and the bill was amended so we flagged for you after that hearing just to make sure everything was still consistent with what the board supported. You remained supportive. The bill is on the governor's desk. We alerted the county administrator's office to the fact that it was on the governor's desk and a request for signature letter is in to the governor. I know it was a very regrettable circumstance to have clients on both sides. It happens. Very infrequently when it comes to counties, you have so much more in common with each other. It was an unpleasant circumstance. We tried to make sure everybody knew that this was happening, that we had clients on both sides. But you were represented in person by me when it was being heard and your letters were submitted timely and in the analyses. it should have been so if you have any questions about that I'm happy to answer that for you the opposition unfortunately is about 43 different organizations remained in opposition to the bill as it went to the governor's desk I don't really know what will happen to it I know the folks that are in support of it are vociferously supporting it and trying to work to get a signature on it the governor has until minute on the 30th of September. Just very quickly, going back to budget, in the last few days, there's been a discussion about AI and potential slowdown. How does that matter to you so directly? The state budget really does benefit enormously from the billionaires becoming bigger billionaires. There are three AI companies that were anticipated to turn public this year. One of them has now stated that they are going to postpone going public because of what is happening in the last few days. And so I tried to, this morning, try to find the through line on what exact amount of our state budget was relying on that one piece of IPO. It's not as clear as that. But overall, the legislative analysts increased our budget predictions because of the activity in the AI community. And as a result of that, the state said, oh, well, we have more money coming in. We can spend more money. If more money doesn't come in, we could find ourselves out of whack in the budget year that we're in, which would potentially require some budget adjustments. I doubt that our incoming governor is going to want to have to make that his first priority, especially with everything I just described about HR1 and the need to make sure that there's funding there. But that is something that you should be tracking and be aware of, because when we have billionaires do well, it makes an enormous difference in our general fund. And I'm not trying to editorialize at all about the billionaire proposed tax. But when they do well, the general fund benefits enormously. The top 1% of California earners contribute about 50% of the state's general fund. So when we have a huge IPO like that, it has a good impact on the state's budget. As silly as this might sound, when Facebook went public that year, there was a line item in the state budget for $1 billion. because of the amount of people that became billionaires and millionaires overnight because of the IPO. So that's the kind of impact it has and it's just something to keep track of given how much you have going with the health of the state budget. And then of course this morning the California Teachers Association announced that they're gonna be suing the state of California for $3.2 billion in deferrals. That potentially will take a few years to resolve in court. That is going to cast a shadow on the state budget as well. So something to be mindful there. And then finally, We are very closely coordinating with your county administrator's office and your sheriff on a response to what happened at Miranda's Rescue. Full disclosure, our firm represents the statewide association of animal shelters. They had been pursuing legislation prior to what happened to create some sort of mechanism to regulate rescues at shelters. because absent something to take away, you can't really easily shut them down, which I think is unfortunately becoming very clear with what's going on. So there's a proposal that has been drafted. We are actively trying to secure authorship preferably Assembly Member Rogers, since this happened here, and we want to make sure Humboldt has a very strong hand in the outcome of that legislation. Ideally, it's your legislator that carries it. It has been fully drafted. Your sheriff is aware of it. And it would provide a mechanism for a state entity to issue permits to operate and so that if there's an issue, that operation can be shut down more quickly because it's directly associated with the activity of animal welfare as opposed to land use or something like that. So that's the core idea. It would be housed in the Department of Food and Ag. We had had good conversations with the current administration, but of course, all of this becomes a bigger question when you have a brand new administration that may have their own priorities. However, we are actively trying to engage both candidates to make sure that they're aware of the issue and what the goal is here in order to give a more direct tool to folks that want to shut down a rescue that shouldn't have any business operating the way that they were. So that's what I have on that so far. My heart is 110% and on that it's personal for me as you may figure out. So I'm looking forward to working on that bill and working with your county and your sheriff on that. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. And again, thank you for having us. It's always nice to come up here and get to see everybody in person and see my favorite restaurants. So it's a good time. Thank you.

All right. We're going to bring it back to the board for a minute, and then we'll go to public comment. If there are folks online that want to comment on this, please raise your hand as soon as possible. Supervisor Arroyo?

I am a little bit curious. You were going through the AI public offering piece

Oh, sorry. I'm sorry. No, it was great.

I knew that that was coming and that we were all maybe not hanging our hats on that, but hoping for the best. But with some of the recent news around a slowdown with AI, do you have a crystal ball where you can tell us whether you think those IPOs will actually happen? I know everyone's been kind of hoping for that at the state level. Yeah.

It sounds, so this is me just honestly repeating to you what I was listening to on the news getting ready this morning. So this is nothing, no insider baseball. It seems like OpenAI is going to postpone, but Anthropic may not. And the SpaceX one, I think Elon is... I haven't heard him say that he's going to try to slow anything down. And then, of course, the president called into an event where the NVIDIA CEO was this morning to say we can't slow down because then we can't lose AI to China. And so if the collection doesn't agree as a group, I don't know how you control it. Because the way that they've kind of described What happened is the same phenomenon occurred with multiple versions of AI's bots. And so if they don't all do it, I don't know how you stop it. And I certainly don't know how you convince China to slow down. It doesn't seem like the president is supportive of the concept. You know, for people that want to make money, going public is a good way to do that. But it's really fresh. There's the policy piece of it, and then there's the fiscal. And, you know, it's a hard... We need the money because we need to... PROGRAMS THAT ARE GOING TO BE DESPERATELY NEEDED BY YOUR CONSTITUENTS BECAUSE OF HR1, BUT THERE'S THE LONGER TERM HORIZON QUESTION AND IT REALLY IS A FEDERAL ISSUE. And I don't see the will there. And it didn't seem to me, based on what was being described by Congress, that there's a will at the congressional level to really focus on reeling that in. So there's only probably so much the state can do. There's definitely pieces of legislation on the governor's desk about AI and youth access to social media. And actually, the governor already signed a small package of bills the other day on trying to reel in what kids are having access to. There's only so much I think the state can do on AI regulation and the larger framework. And gosh darn it, we need the money. So it's a pretty pickle.

Yeah, and I wasn't trying to say, like, I support this unfettered usage of AI just proliferating, but from a perspective of what we'll do for the state's budget and thereby for programs that we receive funding from, I'm very, I guess we're all on the edge of our seats there. And then with respect to, this is, is this a larger stack waiting on the governor's desk than normal? Or is this kind of typical?

922 is it? Freaking a lot of bills. It seems like a lot. Sorry to be so flippant. I was trying to think back. It's probably... A somewhat normal amount. People were really going for it on the way out the door, right? I mean, if you don't get it to his desk now, you don't get another turn. So there's bills that are on his desk that were two-year bills that got parked the first year because they didn't have the votes or the governor's office was sending a signal that they didn't want it. But if you don't send it, like, shoot your shot, right? If you don't send it, he's not going to do anything with it. And, you know, he's... I don't know how many of you saw the CNN snippets this morning, but I mean, he's in the field and stream with the CNN reporter this morning giving an interview about potentially running for president. And there are bills that people might want him to sign to help burnish his cred for a presidential run, potentially. So there may be different political factors in play for what he's going to sign or not. There's a very expensive pension. bill on his desk that had no no votes. Oh, had one no vote. So there's things that are on there that if he was coming back next year, he may not want to sign because it's going to leave a hangover financially for him, but it's not going to be around. It's going to be a gift he leaves for the next guy. So there's a lot on there, and I think there are some bills that were sent down because I think members were shooting their shot. And it's now or never for them. But 922, and he's already signed 537. That's a heck of a lot of bills.

So can we expect by the end of the month, not that I don't want to look to see every single one of the 922 that he either did or didn't sign, but would it be possible for you all to convey to Sean and to us which of the ones we're interested in and what the outcome was? Absolutely.

We send a report of the final actions of the governor um once the deadline is passed it usually takes about a day or two for this like the electronic systems to catch up so you won't get it to probably um october 3rd but um you get a report that's very specific only to the bills that you are tracking and only the bills that were signed or vetoed um sometimes folks like well wait what happened to this one bill and it's like well it's because he didn't it didn't get to his desk so we didn't try to confuse you with bills that didn't get there and make the bill report even bigger. So we try to send a very targeted list to you. These are the bills you cared about, and this is what happened to them on the governor's desk. And if they didn't get signed or vetoed, then they didn't get there for that to happen. So that's an automated thing that we will absolutely do the first week of October.

Great. Thank you. I'll look forward to having my coffee and celebrating the new federal fiscal year while I read about what the state did.

Thank you so much. Of course.

Thank you. I really appreciate all your work on our behalf. Thank you.

Thank you as well. Thanks for the discussion yesterday and thank you for all the work that you guys do on behalf of Humboldt and the constituents. The update on animal welfare. Well I think that the having a state some kind of state authorization is good. I think it really needs to coincide with with land use. I wouldn't want it to also be a detriment to a new shelter opening that it is probably so much needed in counties. So it could work either way. And I would want to be cautious of that and just advocate on both sides that it I wouldn't want it to because sometimes that can get messy. Yes. So and then also the landline issue I appreciate that my district is very rural and cell phone cell phone service is non-existent in a lot of places and we talked about that yesterday so I appreciate that push still trying to fight for that to have those landlines available. One thing I didn't mention yesterday which just looms on from year to year is homeowners insurance. rural areas areas as well there are a lot of folks in Humboldt in general that just don't have or are choosing not to ensure their homes if they're paid for because it's either too expensive too many requirements or they just can't get it and so I know that that's been a work in progress for some time but there hasn't been a ton of relief to that yeah

If I could jump in on that one. That was one of the biggest concerns I saw coming down the pipe with what the governor's doing on subrogation. If you think it's expensive or hard to get now, if insurance companies can't subrogate for when it is someone else's fault, I can't even imagine what would have happened to the market. So we were all in the statewide public agency coalition that we were participating in on that topic. That was one of the things that was really mindful. Like, we're not trying to carry water for the insurance companies. They have their own lobbyists for that. But what the downstream impacts were going to be to homeowners would have been, I can't even fathom what would have happened to the insurance market if that had passed. So it was top of mind. It is such a slow slog. on this insurance crisis. I feel like sometimes you get two steps forward and one and three quarter steps back on what is happening at the commissioner's office and trying to get folks to come back in. You hear like, oh, well, somebody else is writing again, but it doesn't mean it's affordable. Trying very hard. Senator Allen, who is one of the two candidates for insurance commissioner, represents Palisades. Very, very personally familiar now with the crisis. It's hit his district. So hopefully the new insurance commissioner, if it is him, is going to be, you know, it's a real crisis for, and it's statewide, right? It started in the rural areas. It is hitting urbanized urban areas as well. And so hopefully that creates an addition. You know, we have more friends now.

Yeah, thank you. I know I'm preaching to the choir, but a lot of, especially in Humboldt specifically, folks' homes that are paid off are retired folks and on fixed incomes, and they aren't able to afford, so they are saying, I just can't do it. I can't pay $10,000. I'm not going to eat. And so then their homes are not insured. they're paid for so they don't have to, their house burns down and now they're homeless on a fixed income. And it's really a sad situation. I have neighbors in the Bloxburg area that live on ranches and their homes are paid for and insurance companies are... $18,000 to insure their home and they cannot do it. And so it just scares me that that population that's worked so hard their whole lives and this is what they have to look forward to is homelessness if their home burns. And so thank you for your continued work on that as well. And then, and I'm sure Supervisor Wilson's going to hit on it, but the nitrous oxide has been a very big pet peeve of mine and Supervisor Wilson's, and so I appreciate all the advocacy. I know there are several bills. You know, it's a slippery slope because it is a weird product, but it kills people, and it's important, and Humboldt has taken a good stance, and I want to thank Public Health. If they're over there for their continued work in Humboldt, and just to continue to move forward on that, because it makes a difference in young folks' lives. It's a pleasure.

All right. I've got a couple of things here. I've spoken to Senator Allen a few times on his bid for insurance commissioner, and I can't even believe anyone would want that job, to be quite honest. I find it to be an impending... financial disaster, because if the insurance industry hits the wall, the mortgage industry hits the wall, and our real estate market hits the wall, I don't think people really understand the sort of dominoes that may come from that. And anyone standing in those spaces is just gonna be, that is gonna be a very tough space to be in. Again, HR1, it is shocking to me sometimes when we're with our compatriots who then want to blame the state's response and the governor's office's response to HR1 as if HR1 was a natural disaster. It is not. It is policy that was promoted by HR1 a candidate for federal presidency. These policies were in the platform, and people voted for it. And I just sometimes get very frustrated because in those spaces, the people complaining about our state's response to save us from H.R. 1 were the people who were promoting that administration's rise to power. That is something I have a very hard time with sometimes. It gets to me. I want to reference the AI and this idea that how do we control it and then it's always Yes, but China. But China, but China. And I want to, I think it's important that folks understand there is a, Ezra Klein did his podcast, his newest one yesterday, he was interviewing somebody who has a lot of expertise in this, and understanding that China has about one-eighth of what's called the compute of the United States, which means the capacity to actually process for AI. So they are way ahead. smaller in their actual capacity. And they also, if you're reviewing their policies, they don't view it as a race in the way that we just assume. We're just putting our vision on what the world is and how it works onto that nation's prospects and how they're working it. And so there's nothing in their current policy or their movements that would indicate that they're viewing it in that way that we're putting onto them to make an excuse why we shouldn't do anything. And I think that, A good review of that is something that people should be really considering and understanding. It's like we just make this assumption about that. And I think people should really analyze if that's really the case and whether or not we're just being told that we're in a race in that way so that we don't regulate something that could kill us all. Right? I just feel like sometimes it's like... Yeah, it's just bizarre. Thank you for all the work on the nitrous stuff. I want to emphasize it's not just about the health impacts and the addiction issues, which every time there's more data, we find out more and more how serious it is. But it's also a hazardous materials impact for local governments because our local governments, cities, and counties pick up these materials. They're pressurized containers. and now they have to be properly disposed of, which costs us money. And there is no currently, there's no fee when people get those containers to how that works. And so that might be something, a next step in sort of how we manage that is also from a hazardous materials perspective. And so I think we're not done with that. We certainly didn't get everything we were looking for in the nitrous arena, but we got a lot and it really elevated. And I don't think the governor has, has he signed those bills yet?

They were still on his desk this morning.

Okay. Let's cross our fingers that the retail lobbyists and the lobbyists for recreational drug lobbies do not prevail in that, and let's be hopeful for that. And reach out to the governor's office and let him know. That would be great. On 2494, I just wanna recognize that every time there was something that we had to do in that process to respond, You guys help us do that. I never felt on our end that we were being slowed down in any way. And I do recognize the conflict that occurs when you have clients that have differing viewpoints. And I believe you managed it well. So I'm not concerned about that. Prop 45 is coming up on just kind of wondering, which is, and I think we're going to have to have some analysis on that. And we may have an opinion on that at some point. And I don't know where you guys are. are at with that. And that's all I have for today.

I apologize. I haven't memorized the numbers yet. That's the CEQA reform?

Yeah, the CEQA reform one, yeah.

There is an LAO analysis of it. For the purposes of your department heads that might be listening, and we did mention it to John Ford yesterday, the chatter had started where we were hearing from county administrators' offices that there was fear about county staff capacity to respond in the timelines associated with an accelerated CEQA process, because right now it can kind of go for a long period of time, and parts of the CEQA streamlining initiative that's sponsored by the Chamber of Commerce, speed up how fast your staff have to respond to various projects that require review from public agencies. I don't know that there's... I don't know that CSAC or RCRC has a position yet. I haven't seen them take one. It's secret issues bring out weird bedfellows, right? Everybody hates it until they need it, and then they love it. And so I'm not sure really where all the chips will fall on it. And I haven't seen any polling yet, but we are very tuned into when PPIC releases their polling, which tends to be some of the most in-depth and reliable. So whenever there is a PPIC poll release, and we should start to see them as we get closer to the election day, we embed those in that weekly report that we send out to our county clients so you can see for yourselves where people are lining up. We know that those pieces of information are important for how you move about in your daily life, so we try to get the polling data out. I just haven't seen anything yet. The only chatter I've heard is that there's concern from public agency staff about response times.

And others.

So from the county government perspective, we're hearing from those folks. Yeah.

Great. And so Kaylee does is Steve have his hand up on any, I know he's, he does not. Okay. That's good. We're going to go to public comment now. That's all right. And is again, online, any online public comment?

There is.

All right. Let's hear it.

Caller three zero five three. I will unmute you and you will have three minutes.

uh good morning still thomas holder here i want to confirm you can hear me there in the chamber yes thank you uh uh i wasn't gonna comment on this but then i heard about insurance uh which i want to remind you if you've got a cannabis license and you live on site it's three times the cost for insurance um i know myself personally i've spent Six figures on homeowners insurance since I had this wonderful cannabis state license that we're so thankful about. Just on fire insurance. That's my home, you know, modest home. So I just want to throw that out there while you're talking about insurance. And then the other thing that's got me commenting, I'm on a roof, so maybe I'm ungrounded, but I didn't know that we could air. I think the chair got in trouble before about talking about negative, about musts. So I'm just wondering if maybe we got outside our board policies when we start talking about current administration. Sorry, I have a nail gun in the background, not a firearm. And then I didn't know our chair was an expert on China and policy and what they're doing. So just want to be aware that we are following our board protocols and practices. Thank you for the opportunity.

Thank you.

All right. Anyone OK. Taking it back to the room.

Thomas if that was a roofing gun you're not moving quick enough. Bang, bang, bang, bang, bang. We know how to roll. I did wish to make a comment. I appreciate you folks and totally agree with the animal shelter regulation. I love Mexico because it's the 28th. I'm supposed to be purchasing a property for when I'm going to be putting in a little village called Kino, Mexico down there. Dear to my heart, obviously, putting my money and time into. If that is not on the governor's desk, the legislation, hopefully you can make sure it's the first 20 signs in the next session. Pushed that one really hard. I'm gonna talk a little bit about offshore wind. And when I was interviewing people running for our assemblyman, Mr. Rogers, I had two questions for all of them. One was, are you willing to do a really small offshore wind thing off our coast rather than a big one? The other one was, are you willing to keep all the water in the Eel River? well i was misinformed by him on that one that one didn't happen mr rogers uh only one person rusty hicks was honest and said i'm a two basin solution the rest said yes they would abide by all of those things um when it comes down to offshore wind i think you need to really and that they spoke before the coastal commission the tribes are the ones who i trust to take care of our environment and do that so if you can emphasize and give them not just a seat at the table but a majority seat at the table and listen to what they have to say. They're very wise. I started into researching that and I found that some of the first ones, which were off of England, ended up on the shore. And I told the coastal commissioners, mother nature probably will slam anything you put up there on the shore. They should be aware of that. And that's a catastrophe waiting to happen. Uh, I also informed them that, uh, according to my research on it, the, uh, if we put a heavy lift terminal, uh, for offshore wind, uh, all it takes is the federal government to, uh, make a strategic port. They take that over future, uh, Future people coming in here could use that totally for offshore oil production and things. If you build it, it will get used for that eventually because that's where the money is going to be. strongly support not putting time into the offshore wind. I feel it's like I expressed before, it's kind of like mankind flipping a whole bunch of large fingers at Mother Nature and she will put it on the shore. Reports I read from NOAA show that one of their concerns until we really know is the transmission lines allegedly under the water could totally undermine the ability of all mammals and fish to migrate. And these are things of major consequence to us around here, because that could eliminate our fisheries. So I recommend moving slow. AI, I don't use that. I use my own form of AI, which is called autistic intelligence. It's far superior. But I see that as the current AI thing as being the contagion that will eliminate the human race, most likely, if not all of it. A majority of it need to move slow. And I do worry about China. It's a weapon to be used. So thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Hello, my name is Joanne McGarry, and I appreciate the briefing about all the things happening in Sacramento. I used to live in Davis and followed a lot of things in Sacramento a little bit more closely. I do think some of the issues brought up, especially the animal welfare issues statewide, based on some of the issues locally that have been big in the news, I remember the Hayden Act of 1998 and I read that act after the Miranda issue came to light. And I had been out of animal welfare where I had worked for 16 years in San Francisco. But I do think in addition to land use and shelters and rescues and accountability and record keeping, we need to look at what that Hayden Act says and maybe strengthen it a little bit more. in regards to holding animals, accepting animals, and the major importance of, as Mother Teresa said, getting out of the business when she was running orphanages. But I think we need to do much better in the whole system of animal welfare statewide and just revisiting the Hayden Act and seeing what we can do to improve it at these times.

Okay, that's it for public comment. I know that Supervisor Bushnell has something else.

Thank you. I just wanted to add for the animal welfare and for counties, spay and neuter is a huge thing. And if there could ever be funds that could be found for spay and neuter in counties, it would help the reduction of animals in animal shelters. And so I think really getting to the root of the problem for animal shelters, it's crucial. And there is not a lot of funding available for spay and neuter.

We've been wearing a different hat for the animal shelters. There's a newer way to teach spay-neuter, and it's called high-quality, high-volume spay-neuter. We have been trying to get budget line item in the budget to direct that funding to UC Davis to include that in their veterinarian curriculum so that it could be taught because you can it's a There's probably too much detail for the public. But hearing that people in the room care It's a you know minimum invasiveness to do it and you can do a lot of them really fast in a You know then try to get it in a mobile situation the the challenge with Hayden is is that it's a suspended mandate at the moment because the states stopped paying counties and cities to hold animals. So essentially, when you guys are holding animals in your shelter, that's all on your own dime. There's no money coming from the state. The only funding that comes to the state to then go out the door to nonprofits and public shelters is money that is directed by taxpayers through the tax checkoff. Everybody that files in April, you can donate some of your refund to the spay-neuter fund. Or you can buy a license plate through the DMV that is the spay-neuter plate, which Pierce Brosnan designed. So if you want a Pierce Brosnan license plate, when you renew your license plate every year, You have to pay the extra fee to have that. And then that goes to spay-neuter. And both of those funds are administered by CDFA, which is why the proposal has it there, because there's no state agency to regulate public animal shelters. But that's the only money at all that comes through the state. And that's not even something out of the general fund. It is an extremely underfunded fund. area of public agency service, and there's advocacy around trying to increase it. The other thing is trying to address the veterinarian shortfall overall, because during COVID, it was like they just disappeared out of thin air, and access to spay and neuter is expensive, and there's just an enormous shortfall of service providers. the approach to trying to solve this issue is going to be a long one, and people get kind of weird about telling them they got to spay or neuter, and that's another piece of it that gets very challenging when you start trying to pass laws on that front. Although I'm sure it'll come back again, and we'll be in the middle of it.

Yeah, thank you. And I don't know how I feel about the mandate to spay and neuter, but I do feel very... a lot about having funds available for folks that do want to spay and neuter their animals because it is a deterrent in our county. If a dog's $500 and a cat's $100 or something and they just sometimes can't afford it and then you get all these puppies and it creates and really is the root of some of the problems for the rescue. So I appreciate that you guys are aware and the advocacy is there. Lastly, I want to just say along with what Supervisor Wilson said. I know it's a fine line for you guys when you get boards of supervisors that aren't in alignment with everything. I don't align with everything in our legislative platform, but I do align with the majority of my board. and support that because that's what we're supposed to do. However, you know, it is interesting when a platform comes forward and I don't agree with everything in it. And it's just the way it is. But I appreciate everything that you do. Thank you.

All right.

I'll make a motion to receive and file the report. And thanks again.

Great. I'll second. We have a motion to receive and file this report. We didn't talk about everything. Nor could we, and nor should we. So, uh, but I think it was a pretty good overview. There's a lot going on. Um, it's very dynamic. I encourage folks to in the public that if they see legislation, uh, that they want us to engage on, please reach out to your supervisors about that. But also if you. maybe have ideas about legislation that you think would be helpful, please do so. And we encourage our department heads to do so as well, and the staff through the department heads to make those suggestions. And with that, we'll have a roll call vote, please.

Thank you, Chair. Supervisor Arroyo? Yes. Supervisor Madrone? I'll come back. Supervisor Bushnell? Yeah. Chair Wilson.

Yes please bring it back to Supervisor Madrone if you can.

Supervisor Madrone.

Can you see him.

I can't see him.

You can see him. OK well that's good.

Supervisor Madrone can I please have your vote.

All right. Maybe the signal's not there. I'll give it five more seconds, and then we're going to move on to the next item.

I did not hear you, Supervisor Madrone.

Can we get a hand signal? How about that? Thumbs up. All right, I think it sounds like it's going to be a 3-0 vote, maybe.

Thank you.

All right, we got it? Thanks, you guys. Good seeing you.

We all need a five-minute break.

So I think we're all there for you on that. And so actually, let's just come back at 11. All right? That big 13 minutes. Enjoy.

And let's see.

Okay, we are now at H2, and it's an item from the clerk of the board, and it's receive an update from surveillance use ad hoc group, and the current group, and then consider a new one.

Correct. Hi, good morning. So on June 2nd of this year, the Board of Supervisors created a surveillance use ad hoc group, which was developed, which was formed to develop recommendations regarding surveillance use throughout Humboldt County. The initial ad hoc consisted of Supervisor Steve Madrone, Supervisor Michelle Bushnell, CAO Alicia Hayes, Sheriff William Hansel, and the IT Director Scott Irving. Supervisor Madrone has resigned from this ad hoc committee. So today the supervisors will hear an update from the ad hoc relating to the work that has already taken place. And the board is then recommended to end the existing ad hoc and consider new appointments to a continued surveillance ad hoc group. And this is all in compliance with the Brown Act. Sheriff Hansel is out of town and IT Director Scott Irving is also unavailable. So I would leave it to Supervisor Bushnell, CAO Hayes, and Supervisor Madrone to give any update on where that ad hoc is and what the current status is.

you

I can start out. The ad hoc has met a number of times. I think it was three, two meetings. So we are relatively early in the process. We've been doing a lot of research around what other organizations are doing and trying to find some models that we could utilize. So with that, we're not at the point where we have a policy or a product yet to bring forward. So I think the good news is that we're fairly early in this process and can easily catch up a new ad hoc.

Okay.

I'm sure I just our last meeting We really just had one meeting that was a informational one meeting was like an introduction and the sheriff sheriff Hansel was going to do some research around different license plate later companies Which we had challenged him with The flock seems to be something that is stickler for people. Also, the storage in the cloud is a stickler for people. And so Sheriff Hansel recognized that and is doing some work around that. And that's pretty much where we left it to come back with... Sheriff Hansel was going to give the ad hoc an update on what he... With how to store, who accesses that information. And that's about all we've done so far.

All right. And then... Does anyone else have anything you want to say before we kind of roll into this?

I would just add in that I had my staff do a significant amount of research. We were particularly targeting Santa Clara County, Lake County, and other comparable, Modesto County, who has a very robust system in their counties. So kind of looking at from, you know, very mild response to a heavy response in our research. And then my staff also found a whole slew of other counties that have policies around this. So there is a bit of data and research information that they've put together that we'll share out immediately as soon as we know who the new ad hoc members are.

Okay, good to know. Do we have Supervisor Madrone on? Does he have anything or is his hand up at all? With that, I'll bring it back to the board, some more discussion.

Supervisor Madrone has lost connection and is not on Zoom.

Oh, okay. All right, all right, yes. Supervisor Arroyo.

I do just have a process question and product question. so because you've already had even though it's been minimal had meetings about this we have to appoint an ad hoc that doesn't consist of either of the current two ad hoc members oh okay all right that's helpful the the point of the report out is because now we're conveying it to the entire board and so that gets rid of that ad hoc and a new one can be formed it could be the same members

OK, great. Supervisor, vote.

We don't have to appoint an ad hoc. Do we? I voted against it last time, so I thought we had the option. And I will probably vote against having an ad hoc now. I really believe this is a sheriff's issue. I think he hears the public out there. I would love for the sheriff to work with our CEO, but anyway, the administration and come up with an idea because, you know, you're down to two that are going to serve on the ad hoc now. So you guys get it through. I don't want to serve on it cause I don't know enough about it. And I think this is a law enforcement sheriff. He's the only one that uses the flock. Um, so I don't know what we can bring to the table except okay.

Through the chair, Supervisor Madrone is back on Zoom.

Okay, let me know if he raises his hand, and we will immediately bring him in, okay? So there was another part of this, and I guess I'm... Hadn't his raise. All right, Supervisor Madrone, this is your time.

Yeah, thank you, Chair. I just wanted to say thank you to the staff for their incredible work on doing research to help us see what other communities are doing. That was my main comment. Thank you.

All right, great. So one issue, I mean, there seem to be, there's the policy around whether or how we use technology in that context, but then we were also talking about policy around how our... sort of the land use policy of this in terms of, and Public Works was going to be looking at in terms of like easements and or those sorts of things that would allow either for our entities to do that and how we interact with our own departments, but also the public as well or other third party potential users of this technology. Did you guys talk about that?

no so the ad hoc is specifically to the surveillance uh the license plate readers public works is going to be bringing and this was from direction from our board um it's not the land use portion of it is not part of the ad hoc but uh tom director matson is going to bring an item back which was decided by this board to um for county properties and other properties. So we're waiting. That will come back from Public Works land use portion.

And it seems like there's a nexus though because if we make a policy from a land use perspective that guides or prohibits or whatever that is or limits or even regulates our own use of the technology on our own access and roadways and those other places as well as others that where we have control, it would seem like we would want to know about that. So maybe CAO, you can reference that discussion.

uh yeah i we haven't formulated anything at this point yet but uh director matson is in the research stages last time i followed up with him was just about a month ago so i can certainly follow up again but uh he was you know uh we love in government to plagiarize where possible so he was looking at other uh county's ordinances that might be in line with your board's thinking around this issue and using that as an example to sort of start his recommendations to come back to your board okay and before we

We'll have a few more comments from board members, then we'll take it to public comment. But I want to recognize that even in the time between we talked about this last time and now, this has exploded as a national issue. And it is very different the way people are talking about it from a broad political perspective. And so we aren't in a place where we have less information than before. We have much, much more information. So Supervisor Arroyo.

Thank you. And my recollection of that item was that we were creating this not solely to talk about automated license plate reader technology or one specific company, but rather a county-wide approach. And I think we could be as expansive as we would want in coming back around surveillance and what that looks like. We have a number of different forms that that takes. And that was my understanding, was that it was not limited exclusively to automated license plate reader technology. It would be great if that was not the understanding of the group to clarify that point. I think it is a bigger question that we get a lot of public feedback, and I mentioned this before, but the California Constitution includes a right to privacy, whereas our federal constitution doesn't articulate that in the same clear terms. we've taken this oath to uphold both, and so we have this I THINK, YOU KNOW, TO SUPERVISOR WILSON'S POINT, THE CONVERSATION, I THINK, HAS CHANGED QUITE A BIT, EVEN SINCE WE HAD OUR FIRST REPORT ON THIS MATTER.

THROUGH THE CHAIR? YES. THANK YOU. WELL, THE REASON THAT DIRECTOR MATHSEN'S NOT IN THE AD HOC IS BECAUSE IT WASN'T ABOUT THE LAND USE PORTION. HE WAS GOING TO BRING THAT BACK TO THE BOARD. I THINK THE CAO BROUGHT, HAS THE MOTION UP, BUT THE AD HOC CONSISTED OF NOT DIRECTOR MATHSEN, WHO WOULD BE BRINGING THAT ITEM BACK, just the sheriff, two supervisors, CAO and IT. I think, could you read that?

Yeah. For clarity, there were a number of motions on this item. The first one was to direct staff at Public Works to return with an item for a policy around flock cameras on any county property rights of way and easements for third-party applicants. and that was a motion that passed. The second motion was to appoint an ad hoc consisting of Supervisor Bushnell and Supervisor Madrone, representatives from the Sheriff's Department and the County Administrative Office, to develop recommendations regarding surveillance use. Staff was further directed to use those recommendations to inform IT on drafting a county-wide policy or ordinance.

Okay, well, I mean, hold on one second, and then I'll have you next. We're in this moment, though, great. That's what happened then, but we are in the moment now. So we can modify this however we want, move forward in whichever way we want to do that, and I appreciate that, and supervise our bone.

I'm just wondering, the right to privacy, does that... pertain to public roads. And then the other factor is, how does the city of Eureka get by with all their cameras? And they've been around for five, six years. So they were voted on by that current council. And WinCo has cameras now in their parking lot. I mean, mobile cameras that are right there. I park next to it all the time. So if my truck gets broken into, I can find out who did it.

It'll be a guy wearing a black hoodie over his head.

Um, but how do we, how do we, so this would be just for unincorporated parts. So the city of Eureka could still have all their cameras and whoever else wants to, and we'd have to work in conjunction with them and let the outlying areas. Okay. It sounds like a sheriff issue.

I mean, we just, we make policy for the unincorporated County, right? For on all matters. I don't,

Okay. That's the way. Okay. I'm going to take a quick break and bring this to the public comment. Do we have any public comment online?

We do.

All right.

Caller 7108, I will unmute you and you will have three minutes.

Yes, thank you. I think having an ad hoc committee is a good idea. When you talk about surveillance, besides the flat cameras, we've got the satellite that's pretty much looking at everybody. And that's supposed to make it better for the building planning and code enforcement. And the plot cameras are supposed to be for public safety. And it just, how did that all fit in with the right to privacy? And I think you should include the satellite and any other surveillance that's going on. So thank you.

Thank you. That's all online, Chair.

All right, bringing it to the room.

The right to privacy is a very important topic. And maybe I'm incorrect, but there's a major difference as far as a perception by the public. You're right in a public place, public right of way, versus your own yard, your own backyard, and things of that. The use of drones, surveilling people, and being used illegally, that's of concern. The other day, I had some person who I'd heard was very nefarious on my back porch, which you have to go through gates to get to. And he wanted to talk to me. He wanted to bully me into giving him a ride to McKinleyville. I did some quick research with my people and heard that he was a very person that I wouldn't want to have any interaction with. Then on this last Saturday, he was down at the gas station filling up his gas can. And he said, Mr. Sawatsky, I hope you have lots of cameras there to keep people from stealing your stuff. which I felt was a threat. And this person is perceived to be violent and I fear for my safety. So I informed him, yes, I do have sufficient cameras. Didn't seem to bother him much. And then I referred to going to Mexico a lot and having certain friends down there, which I won't mention by name. It's unfortunate, but I totally can understand the need for protection, especially as you're older, and if the sheriff feels it's necessary to have some form of thing out there, I think it's give and take from the public. I think the one time when you save someone's life with this versus somebody who's not supposed to be doing something or doing something illegal and does not want to be on a camera, I just really, I feel that it's not responsible. The public good, safety and welfare I think is outweighed by tools that are necessary for law enforcement to protect us and I think if one of you anywhere had a chance to give up a certain right and not lose your life or not use your property or your family being harmed, In any way, I think that would be something you would willingly trade. And I'm more than willing to trade it. My own self, and I'm just speaking for myself, and probably a good share of the older people, and actually probably a majority of the people who actually don't make comment in this forum. So it's kind of a privilege, I feel, to be able to speak for those people who don't come here and speak all the time. But they do make their comments to me regarding these things. And thank you for my opportunity to speak.

Okay, is there anyone else in the room? Considering what a hot topic this is, this is a surprising number of folks here. All right, so bringing it back to the board, is there any suggestions or ideas? And I think... Supervisor Madrone, is he on there and does he have something he wants to say about his, whether he wants us to continue or any direction forward?

He does not.

Okay. Supervisor Bushnell, do you have any ideas or concepts about moving forward? Yeah.

Let's hear it. So I would like to continue on the ad hoc and I would want... to see if Supervisor Arroyo would want to serve on it as well. We're doing, her and I serve on one with the sheriff already, and so it does kind of go along with the sheriff's stuff that we're working on. I did talk with Sheriff Hansel. The last meeting we had in the ad hoc, it was a very good one. He's receptive. working on information and realizing you know what how the public's feeling and express that and so my I would make a motion that myself and supervisor Arroyo sir reform an ad hoc for we could if you wanted to be more exclusive of just not flock cameras or it could be a surveillance well

In my, I would say that we should have a goal in mind which is to bring back draft, some sort of draft policy or at least, or even potentially draft ordinance. I would ask that maybe that the ad hoc be just supervisors and only receive the advice of staff and the sheriff so that it's concise and what we get back is something that basically, so that the supervisors who are in charge of this can just kind of get it done. Do you see what I'm saying?

I'm not interested in serving on an ad hoc that doesn't have the people in the room that are utilizing this surveillance to give their feedback. I am interested in serving on an ad hoc that works with the department heads that utilize this surveillance and to get their feelings and to work collaboratively together to bring an ordinance forward.

And what I'm emphasizing isn't that an ad hoc doesn't receive and get that input, what I'm saying is that the decision to bring back the item to this board lies solely with the two supervisors as opposed to with members that are staff and other electeds. That's what I'm getting at. It doesn't mean that they can't go out and get that information and receive it and analyze it and ask, and I don't know what staff actually supports this. Would this be the CAO's office or who would actually support the item to come back to the board, the staff report?

I wasn't actually finished with my motion, which was going to include more. But if that's the direction that the board's going, I'm going to withdraw. I'm not interested in being on an ad hoc that doesn't collaborate with the other agencies that utilize the surveillance. And so maybe just scratch what I said and see where it goes.

I just wanted to let you know that when I was creating this item, I did reach out to Sheriff Hansel about attending, and he was out of town, but he very much wanted to remain on the ad hoc. I just wanted to share that on his behalf.

Can I make a comment about department heads using that?

Yeah, I'm going to let Supervisor Bone take a shot, and then we'll bring it back to Supervisor Rowe. Supervisor Bone?

And I don't know if I got it verbatim. The way Sheriff Hansel said to me this morning was he is working on other options. Now, knowing full well we call him a department head, but he's an elected department head. He's the one that's going to have to implement it. I don't think DHHS, Public Works, or anybody else is using them. So I don't know if us regulating them is beneficial. So I will not want to serve. I think the ad hoc is going to be just as successful as the last one. And, well, anyway, I just think it's the sheriff's responsibility. The sheriff is hearing the national catastrophe this has caused by an element, so I think that we just go ahead and let the sheriff decide and bring it back to us. Now, if we could do the thing like Supervisor Madrona and not fund them or whatever the case may be, but I think the idea of us getting involved where we really don't, it's public perception whereas is, I don't wanna say I agreed with Kent, but when you have your choice, I think I'd rather have the cameras as in an incident in Cutton yesterday that had no cameras, but I'm just saying. And I think they're successful, City of Eureka I think uses them successfully. I know they brought it on without a vote and then had to vote for it afterwards after they bought it.

Supervisor Arroyo and then Supervisor Bushnell.

I think when it comes to surveillance, other jurisdictions have adopted policies. We don't have a countywide policy related to this. So I still want to kind of harken back to whether we're going to make this specifically about the conversation. Entirely on this dais right now is about automated license plate readers. And I would say there are other department heads who also use that information, elected, included. So I don't know how expansive we make that ad hoc, but... WE ALSO HAVE SURVEILLANCE RELATED TO OTHER DEPARTMENTS THAT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE'RE, WE HAVEN'T, I THINK THE PUBLIC PUSH ON THIS HAS BEEN ABOUT AUTOMATED LIGHT ESSENCE PLATE READERS. A LOT OF THE CONVERSATION ON THIS DIAS HAS BEEN ABOUT THAT. We certainly get complaints and concerns about other forms of surveillance. And to the public commenter's point, yes, there's a difference. And in some of our commentary up here, there's a difference in people's expectations of privacy in public spaces versus other spaces. So I think it's a sticky topic that we need to take a crack at, even if it's imperfect, and be more equitable about than just focusing on one specific company and abating or changing or whatever in response to concerns about one particular company. It's a broader and I think more important topic than just that one specific application. so i i'll be happy to serve last thing i need is one more ad hoc but that's okay i will i think this is very important to us as a community um and happy to serve on whoever would like to serve on the ad hoc thank you supervisor bushnell thank you i'm going to make a motion to create an ad hoc to talk about license plate readers and surveillance cameras

on public properties to consist of Supervisor Bushnell, Supervisor Arroyo, Sheriff Hansel, CAO representative, and public works representative.

Okay, so that's, we just had a request from Supervisor Arroyo around actually doing a broader surveillance policy.

I said that in my motion, Mike.

I don't think, can you read that again, please, because I didn't hear that.

It's my intent, and maybe if someone wants to help me, is to have a broader discussion than just license plate readers, but that it consists of a public works person for land use, which wasn't there before, the sheriff, because it is about license plate readers as well, and that's the, you know, I get a lot from my constituents, the CAO, Supervisor Arroyo, Supervisor myself, and I forgot IT, to talk about broadly surveillance within the county organizations and a policy around license plate readers.

So I heard public property, though, so I do just want to note that one of the concerns constituents have brought up is around how and when we use drones, for example, to surveil non-public property for whatever purpose. That's a concern that has been brought to me multiple times prior to all of the license plate readers.

So I'm not specific on, you can add, I'm okay with whatever you want to make it more about. What I'm specific about is the people participating in the ad hoc. SO IF YOU WANT TO HELP ME WITH MAKING IT BROADER, THAT'S FINE. BUT I STILL WOULD LIKE MY MOTION TO INCLUDE THE CHAIR HONSLE, SUPERVISOR ARROYO, CAO, CHOICE OF PUBLIC WORKS AND I.T. AND TO DISBAND THE PRIOR AD HOC.

OKAY. GREAT. ALL RIGHT. SO I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR WHO THE WHO OF THAT. And there's the sort of broader discussion, is there an actual product? Because I think we really need to, in order to make a ad hoc, we need to basically either have a time frame for it or a product for it. And so what is the anticipated product that we would be getting from this ad hoc?

To bring a policy forward to this board for discussion around surveillance.

And could we add draft ordinance to that as well? Because I believe we should probably talk about a draft ordinance, if that's where we're going. Yeah, as an option.

Sure, it can be in there.

Okay. Either policy and or draft ordinance to address, and more broadly, surveillance technologies and policy for the county. I think that's broad enough.

It's pretty broad.

Okay. Can we have an expected time frame of which when we might see a draft ordinance and or policy come back to the board?

So if I could just chime in there. So we're going to go into October and November, December, where we don't have a lot of meetings. So I would think six to eight months. And I'm going to look at staff too. And I haven't talked with the sheriff about his time frame, but I did talk with the sheriff about this item. But we're working on the other item with Natalie and I are on the other ad hoc with the sheriff. And so we're doing a lot of meetings trying to get things accomplished. So I would think eight months.

Yeah, I would ask for a significant amount of time, primarily because this has proven to be a difficult group to align our schedules together, which is why we've only been able to have two meetings at this point. So yeah, and an ordinance is also a bigger lift than a policy could be. So to get that right, I think we would need ample time.

Can we include the sheriff or his representative? I think, you know, I'm fine with that if it keeps us moving. It does help with scheduling for us to be able to have it as... And then we can consult with other department heads as needed. I'm fine with this. I would just say maybe till the... Even until the end of 2027, before the end of the calendar year, if we could do that, that would be helpful, recognizing that early 2027 is going to be a limiting factor for me. Thanks.

Yeah, and I want to comment that the level of production of policies and ordinances nationwide is like, there are a lot of agencies doing this. So for us to say like, well, it's gonna take us a year to do it, where there's just like, it's just flowing. I would hope that we can find some of those policies and maybe even interim, maybe we can offer an interim policy and or interim ordinance that addresses some of those things, just as we've done for data centers, just as we've done for some other issues as well. I think it would be important that we can show that we can actually produce some policy and or ordinance language sooner rather than later. That should just be my emphasis and my request. Supervisor Arroyo and then Supervisor Bushnell.

Thanks. I just want to note, A, this isn't exclusively about law enforcement. It has to do with regulatory oversight as well in different capacities. And B, I think we have been focused on the conversation, and I think the community has been focused on the conversation with a context of law enforcement. But some of this could simply be codifying what we already do as practice without an attempt to change it when it comes to, I remember the big hubbub that was caused when Fish and Game, so they were using enhanced satellite imagery that people didn't know was that capable to do cannabis enforcement. That kind of thing causes a stir in our community whether or not it's an applicable and useful tool that we can utilize, codifying in what ways, even broadly speaking, we use these forms of technology, I think it instills a sense of understanding and clarity with our constituents. So I appreciate that we're having a more expansive conversation about it. It doesn't need to be reinventing the wheel on every single department's use of surveillance, but I do think it's reasonable to articulate that. And I don't actually know what we're talking about with other jurisdictions' adoption of these technologies because they're not using them. So I'm not sure.

that's relevant but a lot of our other jurisdictions have rejected this but um i do i do believe we have plenty of opportunity to learn from what other counties have done can i interrupt just really quick yeah sure by all means you're not interrupting your okay because we we first of all don't have a second i'd like to clarify for kaylee also i'd like to let the ad hoc do the work and bring back and we could bring regular updates to this board like we've done with other ones I don't think that anybody wants to belabor and string it out. But I do want to ask CAO Hayes about staff capacity right now. We have a lot of things going on. And make sure that we're very thoughtful in moving forward and getting something that's right. for our county and for our constituents. Because I agree with Supervisor Arroyo, it is a big discussion among the folks in Humboldt County and I don't want to belabor that for them either. So if I could ask CEO Hayes what staffing looks like.

yeah thank you for that um i i think that staff from line level staff to your department heads are feeling the pinch right now i'm certainly hearing that from them and furthermore your board did give us direction to take on a very significant project of evaluating uh programs and departments and prioritizing where program cuts could be made so um you know in support of staff i just need to recognize that we've got a lot of ad hocs going on right now uh we've got a discussion coming up about pro program reduction and we've got you know significant strain from a budgetary perspective so uh just in response to the the time of how quickly we can get this out i i want to be conscientious of the capacity of staff, and I do think that's gonna be a challenge.

And I appreciate that. I do, just sort of as a quick comment, response to Supervisor Arroyo's comment that there are jurisdictions that just have chosen not to do these things. And that in and of itself is a policy. It's a very simple one, and required discussion on their part to do that maybe. But I'm just saying that is in and of itself something that was a choice that was made and I assume that for some of them there is some SORT OF ADMINISTRATIVE LANGUAGE AROUND THAT. SO WHAT WE DO RIGHT NOW IS WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE TABLE TO BASICALLY CREATE A NEW AD HOC COMMITTEE THAT LOOKS AT THE BROADER SURVEILLANCE POLICIES AND OR POTENTIAL ORDINANCES THAT IS NOT LIMITED TO LICENSE PLATE READERS BUT ALSO INCLUDES uh could include uh drone and other surveillance as well as um our land use policies around this so um i think that's clear enough and broad enough and um and and also just as a reminder it can be brought back in pieces you find something really awesome or something that's very clear that we can have a decision about and discussion about by all means Please do so. If there's any more discussion, then we're, if not, we're ready to go.

We don't have a second.

I'll second it.

Thank you. But I want to make sure, can I, through Kaylee, do you have sheriff or representative, supervisor Arroyo, CAO or representative from CAO, public works and representative from public works, Bushnell, and then also to dissolve the current ad hoc? I do. Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to confirm that. And IT, I'm sorry. Is IT on there? I do have IT. Okay. Thanks, Kaylee.

Well, I just heard Chair Wilson say he would also do it. But I do think there's a certain, there could be a certain expediency with scheduling with the sheriff if we're scheduling, recognizing that Supervisor Bishnell has a long journey to come to the courthouse and some of the expediency just with scheduling some of these potentially back-to-backs, so.

I'm willing to serve and want to. There's a motion and a second.

Yeah, I'm not trying to kick you off. I'm saying Supervisor Wilson was interested, and I'm considering a swap out for me for him, just recognizing the number of ad hocs that I'm serving on. So there's certain benefits to doing it when we're already part of an ad hoc there, but I also think there's other... How excited are you about it?

I WASN'T I JUST I JUST KNOW YOUR SCHEDULE SO I WAS TRYING TO BE COGNIZANT OF THAT I WOULD BE HAPPY TO PASS THE BATON IF YOU'RE WILLING TO MODIFY YOUR MOTION I'M WILLING TO MODIFY MY MOTION TO REPLACE SUPERVISOR ARROYO WITH SUPERVISOR WILSON AND KAYLEIGH ALSO DID YOU CAPTURE THAT TO TRY TO COME BACK BY THE END OF THE CALENDAR YEAR 2027 I DID OKAY SO IS THE SECONDER OKAY WITH THAT YEAH I'M FINE OKAY SO IT NOW WILL BE SUPERVISOR BUSHNELL AND SUPERVISOR WILSON

And just as a clarifying question, you already have an ad hoc with the sheriff, the two of you, on a separate issue. Can you remind me what that is?

That's related to the oversight. We're not gonna call it the oversight committee, but something to that effect.

I just wanna make sure there's not a lot of bleed between these two things.

There's not overlap. I do also wanna note that the original motion was specific to, had a separate item related to public works action to review a policy related to placement on county property, and that can proceed separate from all this. That was a separate action from a prior meeting.

I was kind of under the understanding that it would come back through this committee. But if not, that's fine too. We can separate it out. I'm happy to leave that strictly to the Public Works Department.

There were two different motions at the time of the board agenda item. And the first motion was for Public Works to work on that and bring the item back. And the second item that we voted on was this ad hoc. So we already have a motion and a consensus on that first item.

All good. All right, supervisor Vaughn. Sorry, I keep looking this way. I apologize.

No, that's fine. I'm used to it. So this is so broad now. Will this cover our cameras on the outside of the courthouse? Does this cover, it's so broad now, it's anything that is county owned that creates a surveillance thing. So is this gonna take care of our exterior surveillance cameras also? It's so broad, I just.

I think that if we could let the ad hoc do its work that we could get a report back and we would know, because I think it's pretty broad also.

It is broad, but you have my commitment to parse out this to be as specific as possible so that we can advance whatever these policies are in bite-sized pieces.

And I don't think anyone's saying we have to stop using certain forms. We're saying, who has access to it? Maybe there are certain forms of surveillance we don't want to have, but a policy would just make clear what we're doing. That's all you guys are bringing back. I don't think it needs to be onerous. Well, it will take work, but I don't think it needs to necessarily be this concern that everything will change.

Is Supervisor Madrone have his hand up at all right now.

He does not.

OK. Well I'm feeling like we have a motion and we have a second and we have some direction to go. And so I think we're ready for a roll call vote unless there's any last minute comments from any of the supervisors. Seeing none please do a roll call vote.

Thank you. Supervisor Boehme.

No.

Supervisor Madrone?

Yes.

Supervisor Arroyo? Yes. Supervisor Bushnell? Yes. Chair Wilson? Yes. Motion carries 4-1.

Now we are on to the district attorney's item, approve of a supplemental budget for the amount of $858,163. Wait. Oh, excuse me. If you add it all together, $1,298,694 for this fiscal year. And that's it. That's all.

Well, this is a forfeits item, and Supervisor Bone just exited the room, so I would really encourage him to be here for this presentation so that we have a full board.

All right, we're going to take a five-minute break.

Mr. Black, we good?

Bailey? All right. Council and CAO settled. So I already announced what this item is. We'll just jump right into it. Take it away. District Attorney.

Thank you. Good morning, Chair Wilson. Good morning to the board. Thank you so much for having me this morning. I'm coming on behalf of my office with a really substantial ask of you all for approval of a $1,298,694 transfer from your general fund contingencies fund to the district attorney's general fund office unit 205 budget unit. I'm here with this ask because we've had a significant amount of monies that were anticipated revenues that just simply have been unrealized and increased in unanticipated expenses throughout the office. So I wanted to really go through how we've gotten to this point with you all. And if you'll... walk through this with me as I just indicated that the budget deficit in the district attorney's office is largely due to unrealized revenues primarily through grant funds that we anticipated being able to receive as revenues that simply has not come to fruition. The Factors that really also that are a play for us is that in terms of looking at the general fund contribution that's gone to the district attorney's office, the amount that we've received from the county's general fund has been static since 2019. So we haven't received an increase, but for this last budget cycle for 2026, 2027, we did receive a 10% increase, which of course we're quite grateful. But what we're talking about today is really balancing out the 2025, 2026 budget. So for that purpose, the amount that has been received from the county's general fund to the district attorney's office to fund our public safety activities has been static for good six years this has been in the face of substantial rising costs and the district attorney's office you know as I've indicated for you all during our prior budget hearings has been has done a very exceptional job of bringing in grant funding typically funding the office at about 50% via grant fund and opportunities unfortunately we've seen you know a dramatic decline in grant funding opportunities other things that we've done throughout the district attorney's office in terms of trying to reduce our expenses to sort of survive this period of time where we've had Limited contributions yet rising expenses is that we've under filled a number of a pit positions we've reduced our operating expenses as much as we can we have Under filled for example the assistant district attorney's Position has been under filled with a senior da deputy da our senior district attorney investigator position has been under filled with a district attorney investigator We've had three deputy DA positions deallocated. We deallocated three crime analyst positions. We deallocated an IT tech. Our administrative services manager is under filled with a legal offices business manager. That person takes on tremendous amount of tasks and duties and responsibilities for very reduced pay. Our administrative services officer has been also under filled with an administrative analyst. What we're experiencing is not particularly unique. It's something that's going on across the state with other district attorney's offices as well as really the nation as a whole. As you all are aware, the work that we do is mandated. It's providing essential services to our county that are directly related to public safety. The district attorney is obliged via government code section 26500 to prosecute all crimes. So that's what we do. These are our activities. And it takes personnel to do so. But for this, we would have no accountability and public safety would be at great risk. just to demonstrate some of the work that we do and the fact that despite the fact that resources have been declining, we have had increased workloads. So just looking at in 2025, we actually received 500 more police report referrals within the office. So we went from 6,400 law enforcement referrals in 2024 up to 6,900. So the workload itself has been substantially greater. Also, what it looks like to prosecute crime within the courts has really evolved over the years. For example, as demonstrated by the mental health diversion process, which is a really litigious process and very complicated. and it applies to a significant amount of our caseload where we're bringing in experts and we're working with experts, professional mental health professionals, and trying to develop the best plans and routes possible, working very closely with victims of very serious crimes and helping them navigate complexities of these systems so that that has also increased significantly so it's kind of beyond just like the traditional jury trial pre-trial types of hearings it's really you know evolved quite a bit and it's demanding on the attorneys that are handling the cases in court So with our staffing levels, we have had in 25, 2026, we had 60 employees budgeted. We currently, for our 26, 27 budget, we have 57 employees budgeted. That is in light of the deallocation of three deputy district attorneys, which helped make the raise that was given to the County Attorneys Association happen by our office. The actual areas where we have a deficiency in funds, for us it comes largely from the grant funding, which I mentioned at the outset. So there's $945,733. grant funding that we were awarded but we're unable to unrealized or to realize those funds because of staffing shortages which I'll talk about a little bit more the additionally the salary increases have caused for the attorneys as well as bonuses that were given to all of the employees within the office has created an additional three hundred deficit for our Unit 205, our general fund. And then also we've seen a dramatic decline in state aid programs. So one of those, Prop 172, is a tax-based And the others are collections from fines and fees within the courts that result at the time of sentencing for defendants. And that's another thing that's sort of like this evolution within the court system. If you're not sentencing people, then you're not collecting these fines and fees because they're not being ordered to make those payments. So that has certainly had an impact on court services throughout the state as well. Just looking a little bit more closely at the relationship between grant funding and the impact of staffing shortages is that within the grant-funded positions, for example, if we have an employee that's funded via the grant and we need to cover the other work which is mandated and we must do it, we must prosecute the other crimes regardless of whether they fall within those grant-specific type activities, then the individual that is assigned to that grant-funded position can't bill out those hours to the grant. And so that makes those funds just sort of remain sitting there inaccessible because they're not engaged in the grant-specific activities. So while grants are really a great thing and they can really help us do the work that we need to do and it benefits the county as a whole because it's less money that we're asking for typically from the general fund, they also come at a cost because we don't control exactly which types of crimes come our way. And we don't control which attorneys or which investigators or other staff might have reason to be unable to do their work and need to have someone else help cover them. And so that is kind of the cost, is that we might have these funds that have been awarded, but they're really not accessible due to the activities. So the most significant grant that we were awarded that we're experiencing tremendous impact from because of resources that we're unable to take advantage of due to the work is with the organized retail theft for political prosecution team. So for that team, we have a deputy district attorney, a DAI, a district attorney investigator, as well as an administrative analyst who are all grant funded for that work. Again, it's really a great program where it's beneficial to the community as a whole. We've seen increased reporting from businesses that have been victimized because they appreciate the fact that we do have a specially assigned prosecutor and investigator that are working hard to ensure that there's accountability for the offenders and increasing public safety and trying to have some more hands-on involvement and that we will prosecute theft related offenses. I initially assigned a deputy district attorney to that program who is an experienced and seasoned prosecutor who basically, he knows what he's doing and he has the ability to put together this program and did a lot of good outreach with businesses and working with loss prevention officers. But at the same time, this particular prosecutor has the ability to handle other serious and violent crimes as well. And so when his colleagues are needing assistance or they're out due to leave or other matters, he steps in and helps with that work. But those hours can't be billed to the Retail Theft Grant Program. and you can't just switch it around because you have to have the dedicated employee. So there's all these rules and requirements that come hand in hand with the grant funding that create a lot of restrictions and don't allow the flexibility that I think the general public at large might not recognize or understand. And so the same thing with our district attorney investigator that they also help their fellow colleagues and take care of whatever demands are needed to be met on that moment in time within the office. And so those might not always fall within being specific to the retail theft. prosecution team so that's how um in large part we reached the um deficit of 858 163 dollars that we had been awarded but we cannot realize due to the fact that those activities of those persons occupying those funded positions were engage in activities outside of the grant specific activities. And then just, I wanted to look a little bit at why we're having staffing shortages as a whole within the district attorney's office and i think that as i mentioned earlier that that's really something that's been experienced across the nation the national district attorneys association you know issued a study that they had done that indicated that despite the fact that prosecutors and folks working in prosecution of crime they really like their jobs they appreciate the serving the community and helping with public safety. But the problem is that because of the toll that the work can have on their personal well-being, and there's other opportunities with better pay, and just really the overwhelming caseloads that over half of the people are looking to do to leave the profession. Each of those are factors that we've experienced within my office. I've lost people because they just simply, they were tapped out, really. And it's really difficult work. It's very draining work. It requires a good mental, State of mind and it certainly challenges people in that way Additionally historically we haven't had a competitive compensation packages relative to other counties and We certainly have the overwhelming caseloads within Humboldt County it's always been a bit of a challenge for prosecution and for recruitment we've always kind of been a training ground in light of the rural location we're somewhat isolated we have limited access to services and then the compensation plan has historically not been as robust as it might be in a more competitive Currently, a lot of offices are offering hiring bonuses. They have higher pay. They have more manageable case loads. So it's really, really been difficult to find qualified professionals that are trained and have the ethics and integrity that it takes to do the work. So it's been a tremendous challenge. And then somewhat touched on already that with grant-funded positions that you have additional expenses that tie into that. And so another thing that happens with grants is that if you have grant-funded positions, you're able to pay a portion of other services that you receive within the office that are well beyond like salary. and also well beyond the other employee specific expenses such as insurance, retirement, other taxes, but services such as for IT or just running the office as a whole typically the grant will pay a portion of that but again it's based upon the hours worked on the grant by the specific personnel so all of that funding has also dramatically declined for our office The other area that has had a significant impact on our budget deficit is the diminished trust fund revenue. And this is what I touched on a little bit earlier with the reduced collection of funds by the state as a whole core activities and I think there's probably a direct correlation between just what it looks like for cases to be prosecuted in criminal court these days and far fewer cases actually reach the point of sentencing and that's not to be critical of that and I think it's great that we're looking at different ways to address public safety, crime, and also people's needs and hopefully help them not engage in further criminal activity. But nonetheless, it's having an impact on the fines and fees that are collected at the time of sentencing from offenders. So that's an $85,575 hit to our budget of unrealized, anticipated funds that historically we would have received, and that's what an estimated budget comes from, is what historically we receive from those types of funding sources. An additional area that is resulted in the revenue loss is with the production of discoveries. So that's just the copying of all of our cases. So we share everything that we have, essentially, has to be reproduced for the defense. And so that's a lot of body worn camera these days. surveillance and photographs, the copies of the actual police reports. We've been working for a number of years trying to go to a paperless system, but there's a lot of challenges with our local infrastructure and accessing services through IT and developing all of this and then having all of that coordinated with our law enforcement partners as well. so um long story short with that we have over thirty thousand dollars of um loss revenue another interesting point to make on that is that um about between 80 to 85 percent of our cases are defended by the public defender's office and so we don't bill them for the cost of reproduction of um all these case file materials. And the reason we don't do that is it would cost our office and it would cost their office additional monies to go through the billing process. And it all comes from the same source, which is the county. And so that's historically what we've done. So we just sort of absorbed that within our budget, which really kind of is an expense that would ordinarily go to them. because we're producing it for them. Additionally, the private defense attorneys, some of them are really great about paying their bills and some of them aren't. So that's definitely an area where I think we could be more aggressive in our collections. Then, as this board is aware, the attorneys were given a significant salary increase, which was something that I advocated for and I'm grateful for, and I think that that has I know that has a direct impact on our ability to recruit and certainly to retain qualified professionals within the district attorney's office. So we're grateful for that. But even with the deallocation and having less buffer within our salary category, within our estimated budget, we have a $222,670 dollar deficit related to the salary increase and additionally there's the bonus that was given to all employees and that has um it's an 80 000 one dollar expense that we need assistance for coverage for So just covering, again, some of the steps that we've taken within the office to address the issues that have gotten us to where we are today is that with the organized retail theft grant, because the staffing shortages impacted other recipients of that same grant throughout the state, the funding source provided an opportunity for those who were Able and to apply for an extension of that grant and those funds So we did apply for that and that's really where we put a lot of energy and work to build that why the extension should be granted and we were awarded that those funds to be extended into the 2026 2027 budget fiscal year budget and And so that is a very helpful thing. It doesn't help us necessarily with the deficit for the 25, 26 budget, but it's really good to know that we have those funds available and we have the staff to do the work. So to somewhat address that issue of having a more senior, experienced deputy DA handling that caseload as a whole, I now have two deputy DAs at halftime so that they can sort of share that workload and ensure that we're taking full advantage of those grant funds. and also cover the work that needs to be done within the office. So it gave us a little bit more flexibility. It creates a lot more paperwork to make all of that happen for the billing process. But I think in the end, that'll help alleviate that same issue occurring again. And similarly, we have gone through a transition period from the initial district attorney investigator who was assigned to that position. The original individual who did a great job sort of developing the role, he came into the office actually after we had the grant already up and running, but he helped develop the role and now he's transitioned to a different assignment. And we've gone through that transition with another district attorney investigator who's doing a phenomenal job as well, getting out there and doing the work, working very closely with our law enforcement agencies as well as local businesses. So I think that a lot of those issues that we experienced for the fiscal year 25-26 budget have been alleviated with these staffing changes. And then also similarly the other grant that funds that created the attributed to the deficit was with the finding a human trafficking attorney and so there was a very extensive like trying to find a search to because we had funding that was available for that and Took some time to find someone who was qualified and had the the right as well as ability to work with the multiple agencies for that particular assignment and we now have that filled and I was able to fill it with someone that's a newer hire but had a lot of experience previously working actually with folks at labor trafficking but more in a civil arena and so it was a really good flow. for that as well, so now we're able to access those fundings with her, those funds with her activities as well, and prosecuting labor, human trafficking, more of the labor nature. um additionally we continue to actively recruit and we've successfully filled so you know i mentioned earlier the impact of the salary increases on our budget and that that certainly was significant but um it has really assisted and our ability to recruit and retain qualified and quality applicants. So to do the work that we need to do in the district attorney's office. And also I just want to highlight as well with the district attorney investigators, They really are a resource for all of our local law enforcement agencies. Ideally, they're the folks that are there that can help with the court process and how to build a case and help our investigators within the local other law enforcement agencies. And so it's kind of the cream of the crop is the goal. I'm really proud of the team that we have and hopeful that we'll continue to be able to retain them and as opportunities present that we'll be able to recruit the qualified applicants that really should be in those positions. so ultimately that kind of brings us to where we are which is my ask of you to approve the transfer requests from the general fund contingencies fund to the district attorney's fund to make up the difference for the deficit that we've experienced upon balancing our 25 26 budget um additionally you know in terms of looking at remedies that we've gotten a lot of great help in a really short period of time from the cao's office and i want to thank them um cao hayes and the ladies behind me um so they've done a really great job and they've offered to assist us with like quarterly financial reports, which I think is a great way for us to do closer looks at where we are with all of our funds. How are these hours that have been billed, how are they adding up? And so are we taking full advantage of the grant funds that we worked so hard to get and maintain in compliance with, are we taking advantage of those funds that we've been awarded? And so that we are sure that we don't find ourselves in this situation once again. So with that, I want to thank you all and thank the CAO's office and open the door for any questions you might have.

All right. Thank you. That was very comprehensive. And I'm going to open this up to public comment first before we bring it back to the board. Do we have any hands up on public comment online?

We do not.

All right, bring it into the room. Public comment.

Most likely the only person speaking from the public is Kent Sawatsky. I support this as a one-time thing with the obviously objective that if it comes back before us again, something else would have to be done and I wouldn't grant it a second time. I basically can understand. One question I have and maybe we'll get an answer or not, what is the total amount in that particular contingency fund? Does this draw it down to zero or do we actually have sufficient funds? I know it's something you go to on a regular basis. I feel law enforcement and the district attorney's office is a very high priority with the public when it comes to using your contingency funds to get it. It really does us no good if we have someone arrested and they have enough things to deal with in their world, enough rules and regulations that in our society makes it very difficult to prosecute people. A lot of people like myself and others are very disappointed in our legal system here, including some of the judges. We do have some good judges. We have other ones that I noticed, if I was informed correctly, not by them, by another source. They have to have that judge basically bounced from hearing any of their cases. And that says something's wrong with the process. We do not get a chance to really elect our judges, it seems like. Nobody's willing to run for those positions. And we have a very flawed system, in my opinion. So I'm supporting this. And I'm also letting everybody know out there including the district attorney, anybody who would be running for that position, the sheriff, and even Supervisor Rex Bone, who mentioned that he doesn't think Shannon Miranda will be prosecuted, that if Shannon Miranda is not charged and prosecuted by the county, I think you're going to find myself and many people objecting to anybody in this process who doesn't follow through with that, and we don't really care what the insurmountable odds are regarding this. My understanding is that things have risen to a level of death threats regarding this. Something needs to happen and something needs to be done. That's my opinion as far as that goes. And of course, sometimes you have to find ways to make things happen properly. And I will not be accepting any excuses. This does not move forward. Thank you for my opportunity to speak.

Chair Wilson, we did have a hand raised online right as we went to end all.

Let's bring that person in, please.

Thank you. Caller 3053, I will unmute you, and you will have three minutes.

Good afternoon. Thomas Mulder here speaking. Just want to confirm you can still hear me there in the chambers?

Yes.

Speaking from a rooftop again still. Luckily, I can do my construction job and participate on this meeting with the air pod. um just uh this was an interesting one i'm hearing the presentation uh sounds like we have a serious crime problem in humble county and we need to do something about dealing with petty crimes that's constantly eating at our taxpayer dollars but also as a victim of a crime uh i hold a little bit i don't want to use the word resentment frustration disappointment all those other uh words at the district attorney office You know, I was a victim of a crime, you know, white-collar crime, as they call it. And the person was prosecuted, but the DA pled out. The guy had 12 felonies and two misdemeanors, and the DA pled out for one felony. Guy got off with nothing, moved to another state. I got an IOU for over 300 grand, and... A lot of wasted taxpayer dollars that the guy should have been behind prison. So I think if the DA actually put people behind bars and fully prosecuted rather than petty plea bargains, I think we'd be somewhere. But, you know, I've been so frustrated at the DA's office. I mean, yeah, I'm not even going to go there. I mean, after they let John Ford off. was ridiculous so keep a close eye on this but also as citizens what are we doing to get rid of this petty crime like these repeat offenders that are constantly wasting taxpayer dollars uh but meanwhile we're trying to scrutinize if there's officer involved shooting or something like that um so that's that's it for now thank you that is all online chair

All right, we've had a comment online and a comment in the room, and we are bringing it back to the board. I'm also going to ask the CAO to reference what her perspective is in terms of the budgetary impacts of this, and then I'll bring it back to Supervisor Bushnell.

Yeah, we also have your chief finance officer, Jessica Maciel, in the room as well, who is the liaison to the DA and intimately aware of all the goings on budgetarily with them. But I think you know we that we do have the contingency funds as a reminder this is uh impacting the year 2526 so i believe it virtually uh eliminates the funds that are in there which are normally funds we would anticipate going back into the general fund to fund this year um i think probably my biggest concern is just organizationally uh the the message to departments that they need to stay within their appropriations and if they can't that needs to be communicated to your board early so that mitigating impacts could be implemented to help resolve those problems unfortunately this happened you know this came to our attention after the close of the year so there's no ability there to move resources around or restructure or hold positions vacant or do any actions that would normally be taken when we get wind of a significant shortfall. With that, I think it's your board's discretion. If you don't approve, this transfer today we will need to go back and you know do some research around what that means from a state perspective the state budget act does say that your expenditures cannot exceed your appropriations this is why at the end of the year you all start to see a lot of board items coming from departments to shore up their budgets so what what those impacts are and what remedies we'll need to implement from the state's perspective will need to be researched. And I would also ask if Assistant CAO, CFO Jessica Maciel has anything to add to that.

Thank you, CAO Hayes. Assistant CAO Jessica Maciel. I think CAO Hayes pretty much covered our perspective on this. It is the expectation that departments would come to us well in advance with these adjustments. And I'm happy to go through any questions you all may have about the circumstances from our perspective and what may have led to this, if you have any specific questions about that.

Thanks, Supervisor Bushnell.

Thank you. First of all, I want to thank you for the presentation, and I'm very supportive of the DA's office. However, organizationally, if we were to do contingencies like this with every department, we would be $23 million running. And my question, and it's concerning, especially where every department has cut for six years since I've been here, and they're doing... more with less every department and they have had to cut their budgets cut their staff it's not just the da's office that has had to do that and so i'm wondering um from you jess so the money's already been spent and so i'm wondering where where why it wasn't recognized that you know when i do my checkbook if i'm starting to go negative i know Because if I don't have any money in there, I do it weekly. If I do have some money in there, maybe I do it monthly. But how do we get here and not recognize that the DA's office was going in and out, that the expenditures were exceeding? I'm a little lost on that part.

Yeah, that's a great question through the chair. It is common for many of our departments throughout the year, especially with grant-funded departments, to sort of overdraw a little bit. And then they're doing their grant claiming and reimbursing after the fact. So that is a common practice. We have been working with the DA's office do their trust fund transfers more regularly. So they have funds like their asset forfeiture funds that sit in other funds besides the general fund that have to be journaled over to their budgets. And so I have requested that they do those more regularly so that it's not overdrawing as much. But that is a common thing that would happen. So it wouldn't necessarily be alarming On our end, however, departments should know where they're at in that.

Okay, and then another question is, and maybe Stacy can answer, but was there a similar problem last year? Because I remember an item coming, I think it's about a million dollars from last year, or it would be two years, that similar thing happened. And maybe it's different, I'm just trying to recall. I looked for the agenda item, but I couldn't find it. So I'm wondering, maybe Jessica or you could... reference to that and then I guess along with that question if we know that this has been happening was there something you sat in place to recognize that this was going to happen again so in terms of last year we've had a dramatic decline in the asset forfeiture

And so that had a big impact. So when we had the flooring project, there were less accessible funds in that. But it was different in terms of what we're looking at here significantly. And also throughout this time period, and I'm not sitting here trying to do a woe is me and it's just the DEA's office by any means. It's just... this is sort of the reality of where things are um fiscally i think across the board and we haven't come to the board in a vast form or we haven't done that but i see in other like areas that are you know lit litigation type offices where there have been increased in funds made available to them to continue to do the work because there is such an increase in costs and so really we have tightened our belt and we've Tried to get by and and we were hopeful that we would be able to do that once again but the reality is with staffing shortages, which are Entirely unpredictable. I've had people go out on medical stress leave I've had you know unanticipated retirements people that have left because they don't they can't get the medical care that they need here locally people that love the job they love the workplace they have friends and And they just, with tears in their eyes, they leave. I don't get applicants that we historically would have gotten. I've been in the office for well over 20 years, and so I've seen the number of applicants that used to be highly competitive to become a prosecutor or work in the district attorney's office. And there's just been this tremendous... shift you know and it's had a really big impact but but the amount of the volume of work and the the crime that we need to prosecute and the complexity of that has has not minimized is is you know a lot of it's really increased exponentially in particular when you look at discovery and just the the volume that we're processing and then having to implement um race line charging which you know was So just creating that process was something that, you know, was a different additional task that was put on my staff with no additional funding. You know, so it's like...

I think my concern, Stacey, is that, you know, if you weren't an elected and this was a department head, it would be a different discussion. And it is a violation of the Budget Act to go over on expenditures. And I sympathize with your department. Absolutely, I get... I get what you're saying, but why wasn't it brought to us before you went so far over? I'm just trying to understand. Government budgeting is hard for me to understand. I'm just trying to understand why the board wasn't apprised way prior to this.

The reality of it is staffing shortages, because the person that's adding up those numbers is also doing a number of other jobs. And she's still doing the tasks of the person that's literally pulling the files for the office. It's unbelievable. And so I have staff that have been with the office for years. that are there Friday nights, they're there first thing in the morning, they're there in the evenings, and they're doing the jobs of five people. That's just the reality of it. So is it ideal? It's so far from ideal, it's not even funny. i i you know even as i'm sitting here like in this situation that's far from perfect and it's a big ask of you all absolutely i i am very very aware of that um but i'm i'm proud of them and i'm grateful the people that are doing this work can i Yes, when I see the numbers, it's like I knew that, you know, but when it all adds up, it's just like, you know, and I'm very proud that they were able to get, we worked to get the extension, and frankly, that's where a lot of our time and energy went, so we didn't have to give those monies back. right so that we can put them to use and we can continue to serve the community and we can try to protect you know our our streets and and have accountability for offenders and it's extremely disheartening and it's extremely frustrating and it's you know when mr mulder calls i know i know i've met with him you know and i know he's he's upset it was a case that resolved before my tenure, but I understand where he's coming from. We can't give everyone what would be the ideal. And it's extremely frustrating. We don't have the unlimited resources that the community might think or as seen on TV. That's just not the reality of the situation. And so we have to prioritize. We do the best that we can with what we have. We have to put our focuses in places. And frankly, yes, these numbers did not get totaled in the timely manner that they should have. I absolutely own that. And here I am.

Thank you. I really appreciate that. Jess, I probably will have more questions, but do you have anything to add to my question?

Yeah, just in terms of the situation last year, Stacy is correct. It's not the exact same situation because they did not exceed expenditure appropriations last year. They just under received revenue. So they did go over their general fund allocation by roughly $500,000. And that did impact the situation this year because those asset forfeiture funds were not available for this year, but they had budgeted at the time when we found that. And so they had to do a negative supplemental, a budget reduction. And we did that, I believe, at first quarter. And that was roughly, it was in the realm of $600,000 that was mostly reduced out of salaries, which is why their salaries have gone over. Their salaries did not go over as a result of the raises because we deallocated those positions, but we did not reduce their budget for the raises.

Right.

Yeah.

Thank you. Those are all my questions for right now. I really, really thank your department, and I know that you guys work hard. I'm upstairs sometimes, and so I know that it's a huge lift and load. Like you, I have a job, too, so I'm just trying to figure it out. I appreciate it. Okay. Thank you.

Supervisor Arroyo.

Thank you. I recognize this is not an easy thing to get through and not an easy realization to come to. And of course, as we've talked about, this is frustrating to get not just within the fiscal year, but after the fiscal year has closed. Sounds like there's some strategies in place to be in better communication in the future and more closer communication with the CAO, who can then be in communication with us. I also recognize you have an important job to do, a lot of mandated services, and nearly 70% of what the county does organization-wide is a mandated service. So the things that sound discretionary in here are related to the areas where grant funding was not able to be realized. So it sounds like, if I'm understanding correctly, of the Total of almost 1.3 million 860K roughly was anticipated grant revenue that was not realized and then the rest was other expenditures which you've enumerated. I'll just say I wasn't a supporter of Prop 36, not because I don't want to see organized retail theft prosecuted, but because I was concerned that it would come with a big bunch of money up front that wouldn't be reauthorized or followed up on, and that it would be um something that sounded good but wasn't possible to fund um and i'm kind of here thinking that today um there there's probably many other merits that i'm not recognizing just from a funding standpoint i'm concerned about that as we all know you know this illustrates really clearly how grant money isn't just um Like, woohoo, we got more money. It's also extra work. And I'm concerned about the organized retail theft vertical prosecution team being able to realize funding longer term, as well as I also, you know, sat here and didn't support the grant from the Northern California Coalition to Safeguard Communities, which it sounds like we were also... IT WASN'T THAT WE WEREN'T ABLE TO RECEIVE THE GRANT FUNDS, IT WAS THAT WE WEREN'T ABLE TO ACCESS THEM DUE TO BEING PULLED ANOTHER DIRECTION. SO I AM CONCERNED ABOUT BOTH OF THOSE LINES OF WORK THAT DO SOUND, WHILE THEY'RE IMPORTANT TO THE COMMUNITY, THEY SOUND to some degree, there's discretion there. So I'm curious. We can come back to that in a minute. I'd love to hear your thoughts on that. But then I do just want to note for the general public and for staff, because I know a lot of other departments are seeing this go down and have a lot of concerns. We've already heard from some of them. they're frustrated. But for anybody watching from those departments, I just don't want there to be a perception that one department got bonuses that other people didn't. When we talk about bonuses, I think what we're talking about is the negotiated one-time payment. through all of our MOUs countywide. So every county employee received the same. It was because we weren't able, and this is, I see you all nodding. I think we all know this, but for the benefit of the public, we weren't able to give salary increases countywide. And so every unit received instead a one-time payment. Now, the attorneys had a separate issue going on. For those particular positions, there was a different negotiation that happened, but I just didn't want people to perceive that we were giving bonuses to one department that weren't received elsewhere. But if you have any thoughts about the viability of the organized retail theft, vertical prosecution, the human trafficking, and then also it sounded like one of the other areas was CAST, which I know these are all beloved and important programs, but how viable are those over time given that the staffing shortages you're describing?

So for the retail, the organized retail theft prosecution team, that's actually pre-Prop 36. It's totally unrelated. And there was some movement in Sacramento regarding trying to get funding for Prop 36, which was not provided to district attorney's offices despite the fact that there was a lot of advocacy for that, but the main issue there is like to have the treatment programs for the repeat offenders for the drug related offenses. So that was like the deferred entry of judgment, felony mandated treatment program. So that's where a big drive was needed for funding. the retail theft program really having that funding provides monies to prosecute retail theft related crimes and then also we have a diversion program and that's that's the area where i really would like to see more development within my office when when our staff has the the time to do so and when they're not you know engaged in other mandated so really the diversion aspect is like more the discretionary part versus actually prosecuting crime because the government code mandates that I prosecute crime that's my job that's public safety number one so so it's really not it's kind of related topics but it did not Prop 36 did not create that problem in any way. And in fact, it gave district attorneys a tool that they really didn't have in the past to have some accountability measure versus having offenders be able to just continuously reoffend without any sort of consequence or any ability to steer them towards treatment. So Prop 36 is not the problem here. And then similarly with the labor trafficking, that deficit is just a matter of trying to find a qualified prosecutor to take on those cases because they are very complex. And when you're handling trafficking cases, they're very similar in nature in some ways as to domestic violence cases in terms of the complexities. Even if you don't have the physical violence per se, you often do have threats though. and acts of violence, but it's because the victims become so reliant upon their trafficker, and so they're very difficult, challenging cases to prosecute that take a lot of experience and know-how and training and education, and so really it was, It's not an assignment that could really just be handed to somebody that's fresh out of law school, for example. So finding the right candidate to take on those cases and then also to work so closely with our law enforcement partners in those cases. So that was really the issue there. And again, I will be prosecuting those crimes. I'm mandated to do so and to have some assistance in making that happen is a good thing. And that's something that benefits the county as a whole and benefits the county in a fiscally manner. It's beneficial as well. It's just a matter of finding the right person to fit that slot. And so we do have that person now, which I'm very grateful for. So we're kind of going back in time, you know, as we've talked about. And so, yeah. And then also for the budget, again, it's an estimate based upon historical data. And so there were a lot of expenses that we couldn't have predicted at the time that that estimate was developed. THAT DOESN'T FORGIVE THE SITUATION OF GETTING THESE NUMBERS TOTALED AND BALANCING OUT OUR BUDGET AT THE POINT IN TIME THAT WE DID THAT. SO I'M NOT TRYING TO MAKE ANY SORT OF EXCUSE FOR THAT.

MAYBE A BETTER WAY OF ASKING THAT QUESTION WOULD HAVE BEEN THIS ASK HERE TODAY, is our general fund stability funds for this current fiscal year are, I'm actually gonna maybe check in with Jessica and see all about this. So this is a request to utilize current fiscal year stability funds. No, it's for the last fiscal year.

Yes, through the chair. For fiscal year 25-26, our general fund contingencies, and it is in the staff report, the status of our general fund contingencies. We did have more budgeted in fiscal year 25-26 because of the anticipated staffing the bonuses in lieu of raises. And so there was a little bit more budgeted in contingencies than we would normally budget in 25-26. So there is enough funds there. Normally this would be very close to our total budget for contingencies in a normal year.

Yeah, it seemed like we had, yes, some to work with there. I I did get a question from a member of the public. Just because the numbers were so similar, they thought this was a request for additional Measure Z funds, but this is accounted for differently because it's 1.28. It's like almost the same figure. So I think there was a public perception that those were somehow aligned, but that's not. That's just happenstance.

Yeah, there's no Measure Z component to this.

Okay. I think I am just curious to understand how, given this and the grant funding and how that was a significant component of anticipated budget revenues, rather than just the transfers and the more communication, are there structural changes that are happening or any modifications for this year's budget that are gonna reflect lessons learned from this?

Right. So we did receive the extension for that primary grant deficit. So those funds are going to continue to be available. And so I split. So previously, the retail theft program was staffed with one full-time deputy district attorney, one full-time district attorney investigator, and one full-time admin analyst. The admin analyst, her hours have been built through the grant. But that's... relatively less than the salaries for the DAI and the DDA. So for the DDA assignment, I split that to two persons because I anticipate that those individuals will need to cover other duties and assignments for their fellow colleagues and as cases come through our office and so that allows them to have a little more flexibility rather than when they're not working on the grant funded activities so the retail theft prosecution the other in theory could be doing some of that time so at least we're you know taking advantage of those those available funds in a different fashion so And the positions are filled too. So the DAI position as well has a person who's gone, we've kind of gone through that transition period. We're looking at the hours really closely. My business manager was good enough to just provide me because I was like, how did we get here? So I need to see the numbers. And so, you know, literally like the hours that each of those, employees that were assigned to those positions were working and trying to look at those trends and you know and it was one would get diverted on to another and the other it wasn't consistent but at no point were they able to like fully commit themselves you know on a 80-hour you know two-week pay schedule for grant funds

So essentially the allocation for this coming year for grant-funded work, you're seeing a match between the investigators and district attorneys who are available given your current caseload and the grant-funded work, so we'll be able to...

bill out some of those grants, is sort of what I'm hearing. So to help alleviate, so like I have two half-time attorneys now versus one full-time, right? So that there's more flexibility. So if the one attorney gets involved in, say, a serious violent trial, which is one of the things that happened, then his colleague can be working on the retail theft and billing that time out, right? So it keeps some balance to it. So that's one of the mechanisms utilized to help reduce this impact.

How many retail theft cases have we prosecuted since we've done this?

Well, what I do know is that we've seen a significant increase in those, and I am having a number of 471 come to my mind of one of my last reports for how many cases that they'd had within that reporting period. And I know that there's been an increase in the level of convictions for those cases since we've had dedicated folks looking at those and trying to recognize that there's the repeat offenders and here's this person that's targeting these areas and trying to focus in on those more serious offenders. Yeah.

Okay, because I'm still getting, I mean, you know, take Facebook for what you can, but they did have pictures of the guy walking out of there with a, shopping cart full of liquor they stopped him and he still walked off with his shopping cart liquor and had pictures of him and everything else yeah and knowing full well that that social media and everything else but i'm wondering myself wow should we go after him do we go after him and things like that because i mean loss of we paid for that it was not like the liquor wasn't paid for or or any groceries i'm just i just happened to know it was a high volume high high case and it was pretty well documented so

Yeah, so I don't know what that specific case is, but I do know that our currently signed district attorney investigator, Chelsea Brewer, has been working really closely with the loss prevention officers and as well as the local law enforcement agencies. And so she has helped. build cases, you know, for offenses. And it takes also, if it's not reported to the law enforcement agency, then there isn't going to be prosecution. So I don't know. Maybe it was. Maybe it wasn't.

And you know why they don't get reported. I'm not sure. And I've talked to you. We've talked about this. And I'm just not sure if everybody knows that something's going to be done. Because for the longest time,

nothing was done and i can tell you from some very large retailers that said nothing's done he says they'll be back in the store stealing the next day because they just get brought in and released yeah and that's you know there's it's a multi-faceted problem and there's a lot at play but we will and we can do the part that we can which is to prosecute the cases and build them and and invest resources in it and that's part of the retail theft prosecution programs to show and demonstrate that there is dedication and really it impacts. I think it's important for the community to appreciate as well that theft impacts us all in various ways and it also impacts the county's general fund directly. So if there's less tax base and less proceeds, then there's going to be a smaller general fund. And so, you know, it impacts the county's ability to provide those essential services. So it's something that we've worked to prioritize within the office and help address that problem. Is it a perfect fix? No, it's not. And it does take a lot of players, you know, working together and different stores have different policies in terms of what they're doing. actions and responses are going to be and we've seen a lot of improvement with the law enforcement agencies that we've worked with as well you know that we're communicating to them that yes we will prosecute the cases please don't tell the public that we won't and therefore we're not going to respond that's not that's not the case

Okay, I just, I can ask a lot of questions, but I'm just having a hard time and I appreciate the job you're doing. I love your staff. I'm just having a hard time with this because I am going to get inundated with, where's mine? I'm doing more with less and you keep saying more with less. Everybody's, you know, I got to do more with less. And they're saying they can't do any more with less. But this would give, you know the numbers, this would give raises to our sheriffs. This would give, you know, we just gave you guys and gals raises and stuff like that. And so I just, I mean, put in terms, it sucks. There's no other way around it. But we're running short of money. And just say, I only need, you know, and it could be one time. It was said, you know, this time only and everything else. But, you know, I'm just, I'm sorry. I'm just having a hard time getting there. And we're all running in that same thing. And I just, I'm not getting anything definitive enough that we're going to fix it. I mean... I don't know.

Keep trying to convince me. All right. I'm going to take this Supervisor Madrone and then back to Supervisor Bushnell. Supervisor Madrone?

He is not commenting.

OK. Okay, I'm going to take it back to Supervisor Bushnell.

Okay, so I think that reassurance that this isn't going to happen again is necessary. I hear you, and I know it's a struggle for your department, it's a struggle for every department. But how to have things in place that this doesn't happen again, I think is really important. And you said that you're working with the CAO's office to ensure that. Secondly, you know, it's still to me is that your numbers weren't tallied and you didn't know you were going over is what I'm feeling, which is weird to me. I'm trying to be kind. Stacy, I'm sorry. But also, in departments that have spent over like this, and I'll reference to DHHS that we've been working with, they've had to pay back the money that they spent over. Is there a plan? Or do you have a plan that if we approve? And the money's already spent. That's the other issue. Like, if we don't approve this today, then as the CAO said, we're going to have to figure something else out because the money's already been spent. You're coming to us after realizing that you're CHECKBOOK IS EMPTY. IS THERE A PLAN OR HAVE YOU THOUGHT ABOUT HOW YOU COULD REPAY THE GENERAL FUND THIS MONEY, YOU KNOW, BUDGET THAT IN IN THE FUTURE? OR DO YOU JUST, YOU HAD A BUDGETED AMOUNT, YOU WENT OVER YOUR BUDGETED AMOUNT, AND SO IS THERE A PLAN THAT MAYBE YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO IN THE FUTURE BE ABLE TO REPAY THIS MONEY BACK TO THE GENERAL FUND? THE MESSAGE THAT THIS BOARD AND THE CAO'S DEPARTMENTS HAVE SAID FOR six years is that we're gonna be broke in two years, 28. And that we don't have extra monies. We did hiring freezes, we did reductions, we did 10% vacancy rates. We did a lot of things across the board with all departments in anticipation of being broke in two years. And so to pull out $1.2 million of money that we've been trying to save, it's hard to do that. And so I'm just wondering what your thoughts are around that.

Well my hope is that that money would be saved to cover mandated essential services, which is what this is. This is not any, beyond that and so it's like this is an office that has been you know through its work bringing in grant funding and they've done we've done an exceptional job of that and I don't want to compare across the board of other other departments but there's similarly situated departments that can't say the same and that's a interrupt you however the Sheriff's Department is in the same boat

And they have mandated services and their budget has been cut enormously. And he has, the sheriff has came to us and said, I'm, you know, in advance. And so while I understand what you're saying, I'm asking if, and I know there are essential services. I know they're mandated services. There are departments that have mandated services as well as yours that have not done this, have not gone over and then come said, give us $1.2 million, additionally to what was budgeted, which you're hearing from this board today. And so I'm asking, you know, the money is spent, so we're trying to figure out what to do here. And the message to other departments and other mandated services is to be fiscally responsible, do you have a plan to repay the money back to the general fund?

We will continue to seek out all grant opportunities and bring in revenue that's outside of the general fund whenever possible. The other cold, hard reality of the situation is grant funding opportunities have dramatically declined and diminished. If they were there right for the taking, absolutely, that's where we would go. So it's like I would love to give you this great developed plan of other opportunities to bring in funding that's outside of the county's general fund. I hear exactly what you're saying. I can't make a representation that I feel I can't keep. This is bad enough. My integrity is what I have. And so I don't want to sit here and make a false promise. That's not something I can do. And so am I saying that this is okay? I'm not saying that. And am I saying we will make every effort and we will work very closely with the CAO's office to ensure that this doesn't happen again? And that, you know, yes, absolutely. I make that commitment. I'm very comfortable making that commitment. And it's absolutely the right thing to do. Again, these are funds that it was like we thought we would have. It takes work to get this funding to implement it into the estimated budget. It's not easy. These are competitive funds. things happen that are so far out of our control. And, um, that's what brings us here. And thank goodness that there were the contingency funds, you know, that the CEO's office, you know, had the vision to know that this was something that could occur. It's not something I planned for or thought, Oh, this will be an easy take. Now, you know, there's no intent behind any of this. I didn't think that, nor did I reference that. No, I'm not saying you did. Okay. I just, this is the best I can give you. Okay. And so.

So, you know, once again, you have your job and I have mine, and my job is to ask those questions. Absolutely. I really appreciate your answer. That's all I have for right now.

Okay, so we have recommendations from staff. I mean, as a board, we could give some direction in terms of that repayment that you were talking about. I don't know how that happens. What kind of language that would be necessarily, and I don't know necessarily where it would come from and how that would be reported out, but also... hiring freezes are part of this discussion as well. Is there, to the CAO, do you feel like there are some fiscal sort of guidelines or remedies that, not remedy, but really guidelines that we could implement beyond what's suggested here in order to help us move in that direction in terms of our responsibility, then I'm going for, like how would, I heard Supervisor Bushnell talk about repayment to the general fund. I don't know how that happens necessarily, but what language would we suggest to try to move in that direction?

The recommendations in the staff report to do quarterly reporting and have more up-to-date accounting on the fiscal projections of the DA's office is definitely very helpful for us because that is part of the problem is not knowing until it's too late and now we can't do anything about it um if it were a repayment plan it would likely be through a reduction of the current general fund for a period to the allocation that she receives for a period of time i suspect that that could have the implications of just compounding the situation for the da um

And then what about we have talked about in the past in terms of hiring freezes and we've asked for those and I'm just kind of wondering is that an option here? I'm just kind of looking at both of you guys to see.

Yeah, that's always an option. Looking at Stacy, I'm sure her response to that would be that that would be detrimental to our office because we are hearing a lot today that staffing challenges are part of the issue for her office. Yeah. Your board is really in an unfortunate predicament here. And this is the challenge with it coming right now. You all are stuck between a rock and a hard place. If this budget adjustment doesn't go through, then the only other mechanism to your board is GovCode that personally holds the DA responsible. you're checking in with the auditor, their association has never seen that happen, and I don't suspect your board wants to do that now either, but that's really the sort of, you know, the most authority you have over rectifying this situation, particularly with an elected office.

Okay, so unless there's suggestions for amendments to what is recommended in the staff report, I think we've done a lot here in terms of this discussion. Supervisor Arroyo?

I just want to note that there You all are attorneys, so you know probably better than I do that if there are federal grant opportunities that you would otherwise be eligible for but may not be under the current conditions, which is referenced in the staff report, you know, we're seeing... On all fronts, cases get settled where those are quietly getting paid out. So I don't know if you're still applying for all those, but just not betting on them, or just not applying because it seems so restrictive. I KNOW YOUR ALREADY VERY BUSY TEAM MAY NOT HAVE THE CAPACITY TO APPLY FOR THEM, BUT I THINK THERE'S SOME BENEFIT IN US AS A COUNTY GOVERNMENT IN EVERY AREA PURSUING GRANT FUNDING THAT WE WOULD OTHERWISE BE ELIGIBLE FOR AND LETTING THAT PLAY OUT. I think that goes for any number of grant funding streams. And I'm curious if, because it just refers to these historically would have been viable opportunities, now questionable. Are those things that the DA's office is still pursuing at this time?

Yes, and it's limited, but it's also, I think that as, you know, there's a lot of litigation around all of that, and so it's difficult from my perspective to also ask the, commit the staff time and resources to something where it might not fit and it might not pan out or even be remotely close, but yes, we have put ourselves out there.

Okay, yeah, I just... It does seem like there's a long delay, but that for a wide variety of things, we're seeing folks at the local government and state level see these quietly settled court of claims and other processes going through and saying like, yep, you were entitled to that and that would certainly be welcome in our budget picture this next year. So I appreciate you noting that in here as well, that that's part of the current picture. All right. Nobody wants to make this motion because understandably it's going to have a ripple effect as Supervisor Bunn mentioned. However, we've already spent these funds and we have to square up the budget. So there's not a lot to be done other than moving staff recommendation with the understanding that we're going to have a lot more communication around this in the coming fiscal year. That's my motion.

All right, we have a motion. Is there a second? Okay, I'll second it. Supervisor Bushton.

Thank you. Jessica, can I have you come back up?

I'm sorry.

Do you want to sit?

It's so bad.

Additionally to the staff recommendations, are there some safeguards that you would add that would ensure that this doesn't happen again? Because I do want to recognize, Stacy, I know this is not comfortable for you. And you're probably dreading this today. And so I don't want this to happen again. It's uncomfortable for the board. The fallout is going to be huge for this board. and you know how it goes. So is there anything you would add to the staff report to make sure that this doesn't happen again?

Yeah, something that we have discussed and I think will be addressed in the quarterly report is what could have prevented this, and in particular, bringing a budget adjustment forward when we knew that we were extending the grant out and we knew that we would maybe not bill the full amount because we had extended the deadline out. And so I think the quarterly report will help address that, and we've discussed that concept with the DA. Aligning this with what we are requiring of DHHS is a possibility. So that includes the quarterly report. DHHS is under a hiring freeze. So that would be in alignment with what we are doing with DHHS. Obviously they're different departments and that may be different for them.

Can I ask really quick about the hiring freeze? So if we were to implement a hiring freeze on the DA's office, Would it be something that, and I hear you about your staffing shortage, but to be responsible and equitable across the organization, would then the DA bring, if she has, you know, like it's detrimental, then she could bring an item to the board?

Currently, we have DHHS set up where the CAO is authorized to give exceptions to the hiring freeze. DHHS has brought very few forward. I think I can count them on two hands in that entire time. So they've been really thoughtful about that. And so some of the challenges we had in the prior iteration of the hiring freeze where it moved to board approval was just that department heads really pushed back on the CAO and then it was difficult to have that conversation. But we haven't experienced that with DHS. Okay, I'm sorry I interrupted you.

No, you're good. Continue.

Yes, and then the other challenge that we have for DHHS was to do a review of mandated services, which we are already doing under the program review. And so the DA has done that work already. And then to bring back program prioritization and reduction recommendations in the next budget cycle, which we are also using that process to do. And that one, I would not say fully, happened with DHHS, but those are the, I would think it would be best to align it with, it's a very similar situation to DHHS.

How do the motion makers feel about that?

I'm not hearing a recommendation right now, and maybe some of it is that this is awkward and tense, but I'm not hearing a recommendation to institute a hiring freeze, perhaps because of some of the dynamics we talked about here today. But we can always make a mid-year budget adjustment that includes policy recommendations if the process seems like this is just not going to work. And I realize bringing that is... putting you all in an awkward position and putting you in an awkward position and putting us in an awkward position, but that's just where we all are. So I would say unless you feel like we should make those recommendations right now, which I welcome hearing, then we could always revisit it.

Yeah, fortunately, Jessica will be returning for mid-year this year. Thank you very much, Jess, for that because I forget how to do all this stuff on the back end because I've been so far removed from it. We could certainly make those adjustments at mid-year. And I just want to reiterate for Jessica that this is why good mid-year projections are so vitally important for all departments. Like we really need them to approach it with an honest and not honest as if they're not telling us the truth, but just like they've really dove into their expenditures, and that's the time to identify problems when we still have enough time left to mitigate it.

Natalie, can I ask one question?

Great. Yeah, sure.

I just, around the item of you hadn't received your grants, and then there was extension, so you were still spending, assuming that you were going to get that grant money. Yeah. Is that what you were referring to?

Yeah, so that would be, like CAO Hayes said, identifying that for us at mid-year and doing a budget adjustment at that time, which allows budget blocks in our systems to do what they're supposed to do. When we have revenue over budgeted, then the budget blocks on expenditures are not able to do what they're supposed to do. Thank you.

And I appreciate that. And I just want to say that we're talking about being able to make adjustments mid-year. And my hope would not be for any of our departments this year to be projecting mid-year significant financial need, but rather to curtail expenditures somehow or increase revenues during that time and for us to be working on that rather than the expectation that we're going to be able to make adjustments of this scale.

Okay, I'm not totally clear as to whether or not we are recommending hiring freeze or not. And so we have a motion on the floor and a second. Are there any other amendments proposed?

I would share that the auditor has also implemented some additional safeguards in our finance system so that we are better and informed as early as possible should we start to butt up against what the appropriations are in the DA's office. uh the hiring freeze i would leave to you all um this department is very different than dhhs they're you know they are in the general fund so you know the money is there uh it's just needed for a lot of other things and they're you know significantly smaller uh 60 staff versus i don't what's dhhs 11 1200 staff so you know a department that large gives you a whole lot more flexibility of moving your resources around but that is certainly a way to I mean that's probably the best way to save money throughout the year is to hold some vacancies and and that is why we've made those recommendations to you in the past

And just clarifying what I heard is that we could make that recommendation, but then also it would have an exemption policy by which they could go to the CAO's office for an exemption in any of those hirings. Okay. Bringing it back to the motion maker, if you want to keep it the same or amend it for a hiring freeze.

The recommendation already includes quarterly financial reports in conjunction with the CAO and auditor controller in a format determined by them. Great. I appreciate you all worked on that. We are already three months, we're already one quarter into this fiscal year. I would say if that, mid-year is roughly February. If before that time you all determined that you need to bring an item to update us a little bit more about this fiscal year, or if the DA and her team decide that that needs to come to us for this current fiscal year, I would encourage that to happen before mid-year. It would just be helpful for everyone to get ahead of it. I don't know where we stand right now, because that wasn't the item for this agenda, but if we need to agendize that, I would say, let's please do, so we just avoid the conversation kind of going this far again. With that, I'm not modifying my motion, but the recommendation that's already within there, I think, gives that opportunity.

Okay. I think we're ready for a roll call vote. Supervisor Bone.

I'm trying to think if it got answered. How are you going to save money going into the future? Do you have a contingency how you're going to? Because grants are gone. Grants are going to be, you know, and I don't think this one's caused by the federal government. This is coming from the state, most of this. So I'm just, the grants aren't going to be there. How are we going to save money going forward? I know we're holding your feet to the fire to save us money. And I know you've got a great staff. I know them. I ride the elevator every day with them. And they're good people. But how are you going to save money in the future? uh... kind of feel this is a bill that we have to pay i'd i'd i don't know if it's part of it i do feel that it's a bill that we have to pay we're talking about quarterly reports with that report comes in and you can say hey we cut this cut this cut this so we saved a hundred forty five thousand dollars this quarter thirty thirty thirty thousand dollar grant that we're not getting anything do you have a plan going forward and that the probing is for you to have a plan It's hard for you because then you're going to look at the sheriff and say, well, what's your plan to stop crime so I don't have to prosecute? I know it's a trickle effect, but this is not going to get any better. I don't see anything in the horizon that's going to help this get any better. Is there a plan or are we just going to pay this? I don't want to hold your feet to the fire. You're not going to come back and ask again, but I fully... Do you have an idea how you can save money?

The expenses are primarily personnel-related directly, and as indicated earlier, we're very reliant on the personnel that we have. And so it's like it's sort of this domino effect. If you don't have enough people to do the work, then people are going to get transferred into doing the work that perhaps falls outside of grant-specific activities. So we have grant funding for, say, the violence against women cases. That's a specialized caseload that there's and then the retail theft. And so for the retail theft, that's a really big chunk of this request today, and so it's just instilling the necessity of the grant folks that are assigned to those positions to do those work, and that's how we keep this office going. So I think really having better communication, better understanding, and then also having two different attorneys that can tap into that so that it allows that flexibility, which is just, you know, it's necessary. We have to have that flexibility in order to do the cases that we're prosecuting. And so I'm hopeful that that will provide assistance as well. And, of course, we'll continue to be aggressively seeking additional grant funding. opportunities but we have to balance that because it costs money to like apply for grants to comply with the grants and they're competitive and the you know as we discussed a little bit earlier the opportunities are becoming less and less and so it's like the there are funding issues at all levels and um so so we are going to tighten our belt even wherever we can and um you know we've we've

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be, but I just, you know.

I don't want to cut you off.

No, you didn't cut me off at all. I'm just saying that we're going to tighten our belt compared to specifics or a wide range, and I know you can't be specific, so I'll just leave it at that.

And it's hard. I mean, it's hard because we've been doing it from the beginning, and again, we haven't had an increase in the general fund for well over six years, and there's been tremendous increase in costs, and that's just the reality. We all...

are facing and that's and we all are facing that's that's my biggest fear yeah because we all are every department is facing that same fear and i mean i'm going to have the public defender saying okay you gave her more ammunition can i get more ammunition to defend my people that she's prosecuting i don't know if you i mean the balance there and i don't know you know That's a whole different animal. I'd rather see you prosecute it anyway, but I'm not going to get into that. But I'm just saying, it's all a trickle. And I'm just saying, if you take a little bit of sand out of the dike, the dike's going to fail. And we're pretty close to failure anyway without doing that. And then we're going to add this to it. And I'm just saying, we've got how many other departments that are going to say, what about me? And I can take that, but do I have a good answer? I mean, the heat's fine. But do I have a genuine answer of why? And I haven't got it yet. Sorry.

Supervisor Bushnell, and then I'd like to see if we can get this back to a vote.

Thank you.

And as a reminder, four-fifths vote is required.

Well aware. I'm wondering about, you know, you put a budget together and you insert those grants into that budget, and I'm wondering what does it look like budgeting for you without those grants, given that you haven't received the grants, and they do sound iffy even now, and trying to do your budget without... If you're not realizing the grants, they're not helpful. Obviously, this is probably why you got into this situation, right? That's what you're saying, because your grants didn't come through. So what does putting together a budget look like without realizing grants?

A significantly greater contribution from the general fund.

I mean, I think that for myself, I would rather have that information prior to than to be sitting here today doing this, which I'm sure you would too. And so I think that it's really important that, and I don't know how you check on it now for this budgetary year, because I know you've budgeted in grants as well. Like I think Supervisor Arroyo said, maybe if we could check on those and see what the realization is and then come back to this board and say they're not going to happen. And I recognize that across, there have been grants that were given before easily, and now things are difficult everywhere for grant money, right? Everybody, the administration is saying, nope, you're not getting that. And it's killing departments across the organization. But I just, is there a way to check on those grants?

Well, I mean, they're awarded. It's a question of, like, can we, the personnel that are occupying those positions, conducting their activities, their work, you know,

If they're awarded and not funded, Stacy, though, we have to make some changes. We do. Because this is where we got into this problem.

No, I hear you. I just want to make sure you and I are communicating well. That's all.

And so if you were supposed to be funded three months ago for a grant for a position that you're currently paying, and that grant is not being realized, maybe at that point it's time to say, okay, we can't go forward any longer with this position.

And that's where I think the quarterly reports will be really helpful. Okay, thank you.

Supervisor Arroyo.

and not to belabor this too much but i think you know enormous amount of discretion rests with you as the district attorney when it comes to how to prosecute what what that's a driver for all these other um needs that the county has um so um and how to manage this department so i mean a lot of it is resting on your shoulders i think when it comes to deciding what the costs are really going to look like. And I'm sure you fully are aware that, you know, it affects the bailiffs, it affects the public defender, it affects, you know, so much else in what county's expenses are realized. And, you know, we're all... We're all kind of in this boat together. I think our first either mid-year or perhaps a quarterly report is more imminent than that is going to be a good conversation opener about what that really looks like. And unfortunately, we're just not in the place at this time to say, oh, it costs more to do these county functions. Well, let's just fund it more. We're just not in that position. So I think you've heard that really clearly today. I think we've all said our piece about it. I'd love to move on just because we're really over behind on our closed session if we can.

Yep. Okay. Are we ready for a roll call vote? Let's do it. Nope, hold on.

Is there a way we can, is Madrone going to vote? Because this is a four-fifths and he's going to vote? Okay.

Okay. Are we ready?

Thank you, Chair. Supervisor Madrone?

No.

Supervisor Arroyo?

Yes.

Supervisor Bone? No.

Sorry, no.

Supervisor Wilson?

Yes.

Supervisor Bushnell? No. Motion does not carry.

All right. So to the CAO, we have a...

I think the option here is for a motion to receive the report and that will close this out. Like I said, the budgets will just historically be out of balance in our system and the only other nuclear option is the budgetary gov code for accountability. And we all know, I mean, I think I can safely say nobody's interested in doing that.

Okay.

Could there be another motion, though, if there wasn't some kind of an agreement to try to pay this back?

There certainly could. And I think a motion to implement the quarterly reports would be helpful as well.

So would that look like a reduction in this current year's budget or in subsequent years' budgets over a certain period of time or a hiring freeze? I'm actually kind of thinking about Supervisor Bichnell since you said perhaps there's another motion that can be made. It would be great to hear what your thoughts are.

Thank you. Could I have Jess come forward? So I had said this earlier in the discussion that we would hold other departments accountable to pay this back to the general fund. And I think this year we're already in a budget cycle, so it might be difficult. But for next year, what could that look like?

As CAO Hayes mentioned, I think the only way you could go about this would be to prescribe a reduction in the general fund allocation for the DA's office over a period of time.

Okay, so what if I made a motion to, I'll make a motion to approve staff report, add the DA to work with the CAO to figure out a mechanism to repay this back over time. What, the attorney's like getting the thing here.

Just a clarification. You said approve the staff report. Are you saying approve staff recommendations and then add the additional? And adding, yeah.

Try it again. We'll try it again. So because if, I mean, I'm more likely to vote yes if there is a mechanism to repay this and recognize it in the future. So to approve staff recommendations, to work with the CAOs, to come up with a mechanism to repay this amount, and that could come at mid-year. So that would give you guys time. And yeah, that would be my motion.

All right, I'll second the motion to keep this moving forward. And did you want to include the hiring freeze option in there or no?

I don't, I think Stacy hears the message. Okay. I don't know. All right. Just that. I just think that it's, no, just that.

Okay. Is there a clarification from the CAOs in terms of her understanding of what this repayment would look like?

no i i understand it it will be you know potentially a reduction of a hundred thousand two hundred thousand in the coming years uh of her general fund allocation i think it would be good to know from you all what that time frame looks like because you know that makes a difference in how many years this would be implemented

and um if you do if that motion does go through then she's clearly going to need to make some reductions in places and that leaves it to her discretion as to how she does that okay can i can as a motion maker can i just say that that could come back at mid-year and you could get you guys could tell us this is our plan we have a plan and it's going to take us this long but we are going to we're going to commit to paying this back to the general fund

We got that? Okay, bringing it back. Supervisor Bone.

I think it's a noble effort, and I think it's a great effort and everything else, but my issue is we're going to tell her, okay, we want you next 12 years, depending if this is interest-free or recharging interest. I mean, these are all factors that go through, changes from 12 years to 20 years to whatever. As we move forward, we're going to ask you in an economy that is going this way to go this way for the next 10 years, and the DA's office, and I don't want to say she because she might be saddling the next guy with a hell of a, it's going to become inoperable.

My hope is that some of those grant funds that didn't come through are going to be recognized, and that could be, and Jessica's saying no.

And I agree with that. I hope to. I hope to. But reality is setting in, grant capability fundings are going the other way. All the way across, through all the administrative, state, federal, all of them. So I'd hate to bank on that and do that. And no offense, I think that's what got us here. Because we banked on grants being presented that didn't come through.

I'm just trying to make a motion that I can live with and feel more comfortable about with the organization. Stacey, how do you feel? It's probably not doable. You think it's not doable, right? But it's really hard when every department is in the same boat and are not spending over their budget.

How I feel is this will directly impact public safety. And we will have to figure out something that we can't, how we'll address it. I mean, again, mandated to prosecute crime and ensure public safety. And so that's what, if... you know it's your board's decision and i've told you all that i know and all that i can tell you and this is where we're at and and to me it's it's a matter of you know perhaps priorities for um for this board in terms of what goes where and i will have to explore my options i have some ideas but i don't want to cause distress for people and so

I think priorities for this board is making sure that we have money to work with in the future. And it doesn't mean that I don't think that public safety is number one on my list or my constituent list. And so I think it's a little unfair to say board's priority when this is a terrible position for us to be in and for you to be in. And it's uncomfortable because I support the district attorney's office and I support the sheriff's office immensely. But there's not the money there to do that

Across the board and it's hard.

I'm not I'm not speaking as to you personally No, I'm not saying I'm not saying you are personally but you are saying this board And so I'm just trying to figure out something that I guess I'll ask CAO if so I could pull my motion and it just is out there a budgetary nightmare for you guys I Mean well

the money was budgeted in contingencies. So, you know, we plan for that way. It doesn't, the overall budget doesn't impact because we have the funds and contingencies. Um, you know, having this be a perpetual problem or, you know, having this occur next year or this year, that does start to become a problem because, as you know, your board directed us to do, we're working on a project right now to figure out how we're going to close the deficit. So if you don't pass the budget adjustment today, we can work with that.

um a motion to require the quarterly reporting would be helpful supervisor bone i'd almost just settle for that just for the basic reason if you think she's having trouble hiring people now try to explain to somebody, come to work for us, but we're going to drop the budget. It just becomes unfeasible for somebody who wants to go to work for 10, 15 years. And a lot of people that go into the district attorney's office, they don't want to do private practice. They don't want the headaches. They don't want the billable hours. They want to just prosecute. And that's a great thing. But if we sell them with this, they're going to go somewhere else. And everywhere else is having the same issue. But I don't think if we say we're going to reduce your budget every year, it would be, I don't think it's tolerable. And I don't think it would be accepted by, I don't know.

I'm going to pull my motion and just make a motion to require quarterly reports. Amended motion.

Does it involve the rest of the staff recommendation?

No.

Okay, so may I ask?

Yeah, I'm not sure why we just went through that exercise. I was trying to get somewhere. And we got somewhere, I thought.

Since the auditor controller is in the room, hello. Hi, Michael. Do you have any concerns or do our CAO team have any concerns about leaving this as an imbalance in the previous fiscal year's budget? I mean, we have to take action of some kind. Is that correct? Or will we create an anomaly that we... Are we, in essence, saying, yep, go ahead and backfill it. We're just not going to take action? How is this going to work?

Effectively, the fiscal effect is identical whether you take an action today or not. The money is spent.

The money is already spent? Okay.

Yeah. It is if we leave the budget out of balance. It's technically a violation of the County Budget Act as Supervisor Bushnell indicated. But as far as I am aware, there's no practicable action taken on that other than that the budget is left out of balance. So when we do our final reports to the state, we'll report a final out of balance budget.

I would prefer that we use the contingency to balance the budget so that we have a clean slate moving forward, recognizing we're all not happy about it and we have some measures in place and we would not fail to take more stringent measures if we need to, but I will, we have a motion on the floor. Would you be willing to amend it to accept staff recommendation plus conduct these quarterly reports?

That's already in the staff recommendations and I just want some other, I just, no.

Okay. I'm confused. Are you saying to support staff recommendations but with some extra reporting? I don't understand what the motion is that you put forward.

So my motion originally was for staff recommendations, which is the quarterly reports, and then to try to find a mechanism to repay to the ConsentG general fund.

Okay, and I seconded that, but you pulled it back.

Because I believe what Rex said is true, that it would be difficult for you to have your general fund allocation reduced. And maybe I can amend that to say to investigate, not mandate, but to investigate if there is a way to pay back that funding. And I would make that change. Was that okay with you?

Yeah, sure. I mean, you know, all these things can be changed in later budgets, too. So I'm not that... And I'm trying to give some reasonable direction. CAO, you have a suggestion? Because I'm fine with any of these that incorporate the current direction from staff. Because to be honest, that's kind of our responsibility at this moment. If we don't do that, we cause other problems for ourselves.

Yeah, Jessica just shared with me an idea of keeping their general fund allocation stagnant for the coming years until what they would have gotten equals the balance of this budget adjustment so essentially in the future if we you know this year we gave a five percent increase uh they they ended up getting the increase of the picket positions because we gave whichever was more for departments who have had adjustments so in the future if we give departments an increase to keep up with inflation then we could withhold that from the da until the 1.2 million is repaid

No, it's still, thank you, Jess, but it's still impacted. Go ahead.

I was just discussing with the auditor controller, too, another offer or suggestion would be to not allow budgeting for grant revenue. And then once they receive it, yeah, then once they receive it, we could then supplement at that time.

And that's what I had asked Stacy earlier, but she didn't think that would work. I said budget without grants.

I might not have understood what you were asking.

Oh, that's what I was asking, if you could do your budget without depending on those grants so that you could stay within a balanced budget because you got this here from the grants not being paid, which is what Supervisor Bone said as well. That's what I was asking you earlier, if that is a possibility. So that if you do recognize grants, then it would be like a bonus to you, but it wouldn't put you over your expenditures or over your budget if you don't recognize them.

Yeah, and I guess part of why I was confused is because then I would have this much larger general fund request. And so I just assumed that that was not palatable. So I think that was part of my breakdown there. So my apologies.

I think this would require curtailment of the programs that are grant funded for the time being, which is I really think this, if there's going to be edits to this year's budget and what the program areas are, that that should come back with another presentation. And for the... I feel like the public also isn't apprised of where we're going with this to the point where I think it needs to come back, allow you all to prepare, allow us to prepare, have a conversation about what program areas we're focusing on. This is getting too crazy. I know I'm not the chair, but I just really don't think we can have a really productive conversation about this under...

without a little bit more time for preparation on all for all parties so there is a motion that for staff recommendations plus an item to possibly come back at mid-year with a recommendation from stacy on where maybe she could um recognize revenues to repay this doesn't mandate it but it would that was my emotion the second and my second sure

My concern with that motion is that I think Stacey has people tied to these. So it would essentially place you in a position of a hiring freeze until you knew you got the grant revenues and could backfill those costs. But I'm wondering how many vacancies do you have right now?

I mean, as to attorneys or across the board?

Yeah.

For all staff, yeah.

approximately four and how much how much is the grant revenue total for its two programs right do you how much is that in grant revenue budgeted this year okay which would be more than what for FTE would even costs likely right so even if you so if if you were to implement that idea of not recognizing the grant until it was received she would effectively need to hold her four positions vacant and um there could be a potential if those revenues don't come in and i think you're fairly positive they're going to come in though But if they didn't, then there would be a pretty significant amount, $800,000 is how much these two grants are.

Yeah, that's not the motion on the floor. There is a motion and a second on the floor. And I recognize what Natalie says, but I think that it's important that everybody on this board gets to ask the questions.

Okay, so my understanding there is a motion uh to go with staff recommendations with a slight modification that's what i'm being told it's not how i understood the motion to begin with but it's okay let's just let's just go with that okay can we can we repeat the motion because i missed that yes yes i believe the motion is from uh supervisor bushnell uh and which is to go with staff recommendation with the addition of

working with the CAO to figure out at mid-year how to repay the $1.2 million. Stacey, is that what you understood? I'm just taking notes. Okay. Kaylee, is that what you understood?

I wrote down that you guys would investigate. That was the word that you requested. Sure.

Okay, great. We have a motion to do that. Again, it's a forfeits vote if... We don't get that four-fifths. We're going to have to go through another round of voting again for some other option. And just as a reminder, we have a responsibility to, I believe, the state constitution to balance this budget. So with that, let's have a roll call vote, please.

Thank you, Chair.

And maybe not.

Supervisor Arroyo? Yes. Supervisor Bone?

No.

Supervisor Madrone?

No.

Supervisor Bushnell?

Well, you still have to vote. I mean.

Yeah. Yeah.

All right, we have a 3-2. We still have to have a positive vote to do something here, as reported by our attorney. So Supervisor Arroyo, we can take a attempt at this.

Great. I would move that we accept the report only and that we receive a presentation with the first quarter of 2026, or fiscal year 2027, at a subsequent meeting along with some recommendations around ways to mitigate the costs moving forward, especially associated with some of the grant uncertainty that we've heard about. It's already past the end of the fiscal year anyway, so we can take a little bit more time to come to some kind of conclusion about how we close out the 25-26 budget. I think that'll give everyone time to prepare and meet and have a few more possible recommendations. I also see a lot of faces from our staff, so do you have anything to add on that?

I think the concern was on the first quarter report, because Jessica only got one more week with us until she returns from maternity leave. That being said, I think it could be directed to be in that time frame, but not necessarily a quarterly report.

Yes, and also we will need to close the 25-26 budget while I am gone. There's a little bit of a conflicting issue there. We are not planning to bring a full first quarter report just due to me not being here and trying to limit the impacts on the rest of our staff while I'm out.

Can you pour all of your knowledge into these people so that they can bring us some ideas while you're out? Or is that... We tried really hard. I know, I know. Okay. Well, you hear the sort of willingness of the board as a whole to... go with the existing recommendation is not there. So I think if we can come back with something that is going to get us closer to togetherness, we'll make some progress. What I'm saying is I don't know that Jessica has to be here as much as we adore you being here for us to proceed. I think staff can have some discretion of when they bring it back, but informed by at least the first quarter. Does that sound reasonable? No? I don't know what to do here then.

How about if If I think we're all in agreement that we want to implement a more robust quarterly reporting process with the DA and we could also bring that to your board in the form of a presentation. So then you would get updated far more regularly than we were caught choir of any other department. And it would be, unfortunately, in this public setting. Not unfortunately, but it could be laborious for you guys.

We could just extend the awkwardness. That's all right. It's a good conversation to have. I'm going to just make that my motion, what the modification Alicia said, which is essentially allowing you discretion over the timing. bringing it back more regularly and allowing you to bring that update as this opportunity for communication allows.

I'm not gonna say anything more other than this is a clarification of the motion, please.

The motion is to accept the report and require the district attorney to work with the county administrative office in quarterly reporting and further bring those reports to your board in the form of a departmental item.

And if you're hearing I'm hearing correctly, there's a desire for some reduction in budget or some restoration of funds. I can you bring those options with the report next time it comes? I don't know that we'll get there without it because that's what we saw here today. Sure. Okay. Thank you.

Can we get a roll call vote, please?

I don't have.

I will second.

have a question and i'm sorry but what happens with the budget because it's not balanced it'll remain out of balance and as michael said it will be reflected in our financial statements and also just to clarify if we're not doing a budget adjustment this this can be a 3-2 right okay then i will ask that question if this is reflected in our financial statements how does that impact our credit rating

That's difficult to say and also it's difficult to determine whether this will actually cause us to have an out of balance budget simply because you aggregate the whole general fund together. So if there's enough underages and other departments to balance this overage, it might come out in the wash. I haven't done that full aggregation yet plus we're still in year end processing so it's tough to do until the very end. But the though the reality is we just have a situation where we overspent. And so actuals and budget are kind of two separate things. So we did adopt a balanced budget. We just overspent the budget. And that's two separate issues. And that's not one that the state's gonna be all that concerned with.

Okay, great. Great answer. Love it. Let's move forward. Can we have a roll call vote, please?

Yes, Chair. Supervisor Bone.

Yes.

Supervisor Arroyo.

I just want to say I don't even love my own motion, but I will keep going with this just to get it done. Yes.

Supervisor Madrone.

Yes.

Supervisor Bushnell? Yes. Chair Wilson?

Yes.

Motion carries 5-0.

Amazing. Okay, so we are going to go into closed session. I need you to please read that in so we can get moving because I think we might have overstepped some scheduling here.

Thank you, Chair Wilson. It is the intention of the board to meet in closed session pursuant to California government code section 54957.6 in order to review the county's position and instruct its designated labor negotiators. It is also the intention of the board to meet in closed session pursuant to government code section 54956.8 to grant authority to its negotiators regarding the price and terms of payment for the purchase of real property located at 4325 Broadway, Eureka, California 95501, assessor parcel number 302-171-039. The county's negotiators are identified as Tom Mattson, Humboldt County Public Works Director, and any duly authorized designees thereof. The parties with whom the county may negotiate are identified as John McNellis and any duly authorized designees thereof. It is also the intention of the board to meet in closed session pursuant to California government code sections five four nine five four point five and five four nine five seven in order to consider the public employee performance evaluation for the position of the public works director. It is also the intention of the board to meet in closed session pursuant to California Government Code section 54956.9 in order to discuss existing litigation in the cases of Jordan J. Place versus Humboldt County District Attorney's Office et al. Humboldt County Superior Court case number CV2601718. Jordan J. Place versus Humboldt County Sheriff's Office. Humboldt County Superior Court case number CV2601719. Melissa Sterling versus County of Humboldt. Humboldt County Superior Court case number CV2601799. Melissa Sterling versus County of Humboldt at all. Humboldt County Superior Court case number CV2601800. and courtney mcrae zanoni versus humboldt county sheriff's office humboldt county superior court case number cv2601721 finally it is the intention of the board to meet in closed session pursuant to california government code section 54956.9 d2 and e1 in order to discuss exposure to litigation in one potential case

Okay. Do we have comment online?

We do not.

All right. In the house.

Ken Swarovski, you had two different people suing for two different cases. Frequently, the judge will go ahead and combine those into one, so they only have to hear one. Or maybe you'll be able to demur one or both of those cases, hopefully. I do support Tom Mattson. I think he does a fantastic job with that, so that would be my opinion on that. now i'm going to speak up on my favorite one item number nine potential case of litigation last time i brought it might be a suit against douglas caber i was informed by your staff scott that he's not actually an employee of the county so that would not be appropriate but on the other hand let me give you the caveat of what we have here and i have a date here and i'm going to request that your council go ahead and look for a pra request dated 11-19 of 2025, filed by Ms. Pitts, which has not been replied to. And there's another one that's not been replied to, one of which was told that it was such a high volume, we couldn't comply to it in a short time period. there was nothing to reply to. Something's wrong here, and I can tell when there is. So I can see litigation combining Mr. Caber's actions, gross negligence, and also combining that with the failure of CWS to provide the documents as required by law, And those together will show most likely. And it's a very, very, if you get a copy of it, and I'll get it to some of you to see the PRA, very well done, very concise. And the allegations in there that will be proven will be very detrimental to your budget. You'll be looking at first of many multi-million dollar lawsuits if this comes forward. And I can guarantee that with a very high chance of probability. and I wish the county would take care of its P's and Q's in this issue and some other ones related to what's happened within that particular department. Thank you for my opportunity to speak on that. I think that pretty well covers. You guys have quite a long one. You guys gave me a headache on that last one. Thank you for my opportunity to speak.

Okay. Bringing it back, council. Do we have an estimate of time?

I would say three to three and a half hours.

That sounds like fun. And one last question. How's the schedule for the person coming into the space?

That council is no longer available, so we'll fly solo.

OK, that's good. OK, great. I would like us to at least have 15 minutes to gather ourselves and maybe get a little snack or whatever before we jump in there. Actually, I'll give us 20 minutes, and then we'll be in. So we will be in at 2.25, right? Are we ready to adjourn? We, oh, sorry, report out, sorry.

Thank you, Chair Wilson. There was no reportable action taken with regard to items K-1 through K-4 and K-7 through K-9. With regard to items K-5 and K-6, the board voted unanimously to authorize the Humboldt County Counsel's Office to defend the County of Humboldt in the cases of Jordan J. Place, versus Humboldt County Sheriff's Office, Humboldt County Superior Court case number CV2601719, and Melissa Sterling versus County of Humboldt, Humboldt County Superior Court case number CV2601799. Great, we are now adjourned.