Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

Hi. I'm Russ.

And I'm Laurie.

And we're part of the employee engagement team. The employee engagement team is a voluntary group that's made up of county staff across all levels and from all departments.

This team is the one that puts together the annual employee survey, which helps us find ways to help employees feel heard and appreciated.

In connection with the employee survey, we want to announce the engagement team's spring campaign, which we're calling gratitude month. Gratitude month provides some simple ways for staff to show appreciation to those they work with every day for their help and support.

We all have great colleagues that we work with that make our jobs a little easier or more enjoyable, and gratitude month hopes to provide little ways to help recognize those people around us.

Each department will receive a packet with instructions and materials for their common room, including things like gratitude wall or simple tearaways to help say thank you to someone. We hope you'll take advantage of these opportunities to recognize those around you for their contributions.

Keep an eye open for emails announcing the start of the campaign as well as the arrival of those packets in your office.

And remember that the employee engagement team is open to anyone, and we're always looking for new members. If you'd like to be part of what we're doing or have comments or questions, you can reach us at employee_engagement@MendocinoCounty.gov.

Are you prepared? We're the Office of Emergency Services, and we're committed to providing the most up to date and accurate information so that you and your family can stay safe during an emergency. Visit mendoready.org. It's our one stop shop for emergency information. You can sign up for emergency alerts, find your pre established evacuation zone on our current emergencies map, and find hazard and preparedness information.

Imagine you're faced with a disaster such as a wildfire and you're ordered to evacuate. I'll bet you wish you had more time in that moment. Now is your chance to buy yourself that time. Sign up for NCSEL and Mendo alerts on our website, mendoready.org. Do it today.

If you want your family to be as resilient as possible, it's important to take some time today and visit mendoready.org, where you can look up your pre established evacuation zones on our current emergencies map. You can also find important tools to help maintain your situational awareness, such as the alert California wildfire cameras and the Caltrans road conditions cameras. We hope you'll take some time today to prepare so that your family can be Mendo ready. Thank you.

To the regular meeting of the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors, Madam Clerk, would you take the role?

Supervisor Klein? Here. Supervisor Mulhern? Here. Supervisor Hatchack? Here. Supervisor Norvell?

Here.

Supervisor Williams?

Here.

And Supervisor Williams is going to lead us in the pledge today.

I pledge allegiance

Okay, we will now open the podium up to anybody who would like to speak on anything not on today's agenda. Please come to the podium. Seeing nobody, Madam Clerk?

Seeing no public comment online.

Okay, we'll move on to the consent. Yep, Supervisor Williams.

Yeah, public expression, I wonder if chair would entertain a motion of silence for Norman Duvall, who sat in the seat for sixteen years and then continued serving the public in various ways.

Yes, please go ahead. Thank you, everyone. Okay. We will now move on to the consent calendar. I know Supervisor Klein would like to pull C16 for discussion.

Is there any member of the board that would like to pull any item off of consent?

Chair, I just have a comment on another item.

Okay.

I just wanted to briefly thank staff for item C8 ratification of letter supporting ACR 97 by Assembly Member Chris Rogers, which would name our new bridge Highway 20 to the Charlie Barra Memorial Bridge.

Okay. Thank you. Madam Clerk, proper notice been established?

Proper notice has been established, and any correspondence, if any received, has been sent to your emails.

Okay. And then I would like to ask anybody that would like to speak on C16 to come to the podium first. Supervisor Klein, did you want to say anything?

Yeah. Just on item C16, this is the adoption of the proclamation recognizing April 2026, as Volunteer Appreciation Week in Mendocino County. We this community thrives on volunteers, runs on volunteers, and so I know there are several people here to give comments today, and I just want to extend my appreciation for all the volunteers that dedicate their time.

Thank you. Good morning, Chair, members of the Board, CEO, and County Council. My name is Quincy Crummer. I'm the field services captain for the Mendocino County Sheriff's Office. So as a small office, we definitely rely on volunteers, and they fall into four different groups.

Those groups are our search and rescue volunteers, our volunteer chaplains, we have our inmate services programs, and then our SWAT medics. And to briefly speak about the SWAT medics, there's two paramedics here locally that volunteer their time to go out on our SWAT deployments, which is a multi jurisdictional team between Mendocino County and Lake County. And they do that free of charge, so we have immediate medical support any type of critical incident that may happen on a call out for our SWAT team. So first off, I'm going to call up a few friends that are going to speak about these different groups, and our administrative services manager, Rose Britton, is first.

Thank you, Captain Cromer, and good morning. I'm Rose Britton, Administrative Services Manager for the Mendocino County Sheriff's Office. I'm honored today to introduce and have been a part of the conception and implementation of the Minasino County Sheriff's Office Volunteer Chaplain Program. The Volunteer Chaplain Program started with Sheriff Kendall's idea in the spring of twenty twenty five with which is now in its official capacity as of January 2026. These chaplains will be out in our communities supporting residents during difficult calls for service to support the sheriff's office patrol.

They'll be recognized by white shirts with the sheriff's office badge and their names. The chaplains represent a wide variety of denominations And with that, I'd like to welcome up Chaplain Davina Sintik, who is our lead chaplain overseeing the program. Thank you.

Good morning, and thank you for this opportunity to be here today. I am happy to say that over the last year, we have had a process of developing this concept and policy and procedures and recruitment, facilitating a law enforcement chaplain academy here locally. We have 12 volunteer chaplains from throughout the county who, as Rose mentioned, represent a variety of denominations. Many of them are highly trained and experienced chaplains, four of them from our Adventist health care system, and we are fortunate to have the support of Adventist Health in allowing their chaplains to participate in this program and be available for call out during their hours of service for the hospital. We have three wonderful chaplains here in Ukiah, six serving in the North County area, and three on the coast.

I don't know if you have any questions about that, but we are excited to be in service in our community and also supporting the staff for the Mendocino County Sheriff's Office.

Thank you. I'm not seeing any questions. Thank you.

Thank you.

My next introduction will be our volunteer SAR commander, Detective Jared Chaney.

Morning board, CEO, everyone else. My name is Jared Chaney. I am currently a detective at the sheriff's office. However, I came to the sheriff's office by volunteering for SHAR back in 2010. I joined that team and realized quickly these were my people. These are the kind of people that will go out in the middle of a dark and stormy night to look for your loved ones. Most of the gear they wear is purchased with their own funds. The sheriff's office is very supportive with providing older vehicles, but everything else is support. All the money is brought in is by donations that those SAR members get themselves, so as a team. It is an incredible group of about 30 to 50 people, depending on the time of day, time of year, and people's schedules, because these people will leave their own jobs to go out and search for your loved ones.

They'll take days off, and they'll spend their free times away from their families to look for yours. We do have around 30 missions on average. Our busier years are around 70 times a year. We'll go out looking for that missing person in the woods, looking for mushrooms, the lost hunters, the visitors from out of county. So we're quite a busy team and we're getting to be known across the state. We're well known for our abilities and our volunteer team. They're amazing.

Excuse me, sir, we have one question or perhaps a comment.

Where can interested members of the public learn more about volunteering with SAR?

That's an excellent question. So we do have a website and a Facebook page that does have a link to our application. We also have an open to the public, we call an all star meeting, every fourth Wednesday of the month. We're meeting at the sheriff's office at the Donovan Room, and it's open to the public. 6PM, anybody can come and watch a meeting and participate in that training for that evening to see if it's a family they want to join.

Thank you. And the last introduction I would like to make is our restorative justice program manager, Buffy Wright Barossa.

Good morning, Board and Chair Nervell, CEO Antal, and County Counsel Elliott. It is with great pleasure to come up here and appreciate the volunteers that come into inmate services and programs. We have over 62 current volunteers that are coming in and they are providing services such as Alcoholics Anonymous, Narcotics Anonymous. We also have women that are coming in for the Garden crew, and that's Carlotta Curti and Robin Goldner. Robin Goldner is a real special lady.

She comes out of Willits. She is an LCSW volunteering her time not only for the garden, but also for our new class that started up about a year and a half ago. It is the Victim Impact, Listen and Learn. And it is provided once a week to our minimum classification. And we really are seeing some changes there.

The other programs that are coming in are the Native American program. Martin Martinez has been doing this for years in Mendocino County Jail and leading up some volunteers there. We also have a huge jail ministry, and we are very proud of that ministry and all of the work that they do. We have several denominations that are coming in providing the service. And in providing service to incarcerated folks, we are looking at planting seeds and, you know, starting those changes.

And those changes, they happen slowly for some. And some, it happens right away. So we're happy to do those things. If anyone in the community is willing to volunteer, they're welcome to contact myself or Karina Guzman, and we will start the process to get them cleared to come into the jail. Thank you.

Thank you.

Sorry to take over this portion of your meeting, but as another plug, thank you, Supervisor Williams, for mentioning that. If there's anything we spoke about here today regarding volunteerism that anyone that is watching or is here present and is interested in, please go to the mendocinosheriff.org website. On the top right, contact us. You can find my contact information, Rose Britton, basically everybody that spoke here today. We try to connect you with whichever group you would like to volunteer with. Thank you, board.

Thank you. Is there anybody else? Yes. Yes. Madam Clerk?

We have two online. First is Amy Campbell.

Good morning. Amy Campbell, Shelter Director, Animal Care Services. Want to take a moment to appreciate all our wonderful and dedicated volunteers here at the shelter. Endless volunteer hours are spent each year walking dogs, socializing cats, coordinating and attending adoption events, fostering, networking, and so much more. Volunteering at an animal shelter can be hard physically and emotionally, but it's also very rewarding.

I think it's important for our community to know that the Yukai Shelter has a very committed, consistent, and dedicated network of volunteers, and that we are very fortunate to have them. Thank you to all the volunteers who show up for the animals in our care. You are all so very, very appreciated. We have a volunteer orientation the second Saturday of each, month at 09:00 at the shelter at 298 Plant Road for anyone interested in becoming a volunteer. We love to have as many people as possible coming in and and socializing and walking our animals and participating in events. Thank you all very, very much.

Thank you.

Next we have Melissa Hannum.

Good morning. Melissa Hannum, county librarian. Libraries across the country are joining together to celebrate National Library Week this week under the theme, find your joy. And one of the things that brings great joy to our Mendocino library branches is our volunteers. Our volunteers help us create inviting, organized spaces. They shelves, set up displays and programs, and support library staff. Almost 4,000 volunteer hours have already been recorded during this fiscal year, proving that they're integral to our team. We are truly grateful for the library joy that our wonderful volunteers bring us each day. Thank you.

Thank you.

Seeing no further comments online.

Thank you.

Good morning. Karen Matson, Mendocino County Museum Administrator. Our museum is an asset to our county. It is beloved. It's a beloved community hub and a vital tourist destination.

And it is through the contributions of our volunteers that we are able to sustain and grow this incredible place of pride. Our county volunteers fill a variety of crucial roles at the museum. They lead family activities, aid with field trips, lead group tours, provide theatrical readings, provide collections care, research, environmental monitoring. These are all specialized museum tasks, and I want to thank each and every one of our museum volunteers for their time and truly unique skills that they bring to our organization. Our nonprofit support organization, the Friends of the Mendocino County Museum, operate our gift shop, welcome and connect visitors from around the world to our unique county history, and raise funds to support museum programs and projects.

I'd like to acknowledge the friends of the Mendocino County Museum Board and their team who volunteer in this capacity. I'd also like to appreciate the members of the Museum Advisory Board. This is a volunteer role that is often unsung, and I want everyone to know that the individuals who serve on this board are appreciated, and their role is valuable to our organization. And I'd also like to acknowledge the Roots and Motive Power incorporated for their volunteerism and collaboration with the Mendocino County Museum. Our community is truly our greatest asset of all. I believe that. And I appreciate this board and HR for taking the time to acknowledge the great work of volunteers throughout the county during Volunteer Appreciation Week. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Anybody else would like to comment on anything on the consent calendar? Please come to the podium. Madam Clerk, any online?

Seeing none online.

Okay. Back to the board for action or discussion. Supervisor Hashtag.

Well, before I make a motion to approve the consent calendar, I'd just like to appreciate all the people who serve on the boards and commissions of the county, all the MACs that are out there in municipal advisory councils and all of those that make this county run. Like Supervisor Klein said, you know, our communities can't really do it without the volunteerism, so thank you all.

Well said.

And with that, I make the motion to approve the consent calendar.

Second. All

right. We have a first by Supervisor Hashtag, seconded by Williams. And vote by the button.

The motion carries unanimously.

Okay. We'll move on. Thank you. We'll move on to the regular calendar agenda item r one, discussion and possible action, including acceptance of informational reports from the assessor, clerk, recorder, registrar of voters, auditor, controller, treasurer, tax collector, district attorney, sheriff, and various county department heads or designees. Anybody in the room?

Good morning, supervisors. My name is Sarah McBurney. I'm the senior program manager with the Cannabis Division in Planning and Building Services. I wanted to provide an update on the state's cannabis equity grants program, which is also known as CEG funding. So this program supports local jurisdictions in advancing economic justice for individuals and communities disproportionately affected by cannabis prohibition and the war on drugs.

Since the county adopted its local equity program in 2020, we have submitted seven applications for CEG funding, with six of those rounds being awarded to the county. We are pleased to announce our most recent award, which is the Local Equity Entrepreneur Program, or LEAP Round seven, in the amount of $750,000 This grant term began on 04/01/2026, and will continue for the county through 10/31/2027. From this round, the division anticipates allocating 10% of the total award to offset our 1,000 series, which will be used for administrative functions of the equity program. Another 10% will be used to continue our contract with Canada Business Services, who is our procured vendor for direct technical assistance. And the last 80% will be directed towards fee relief and direct grants for our equity verified individuals.

We anticipate being able to fund 11 different direct grants with this funding. Overall, since its inception, the program has administered over $6,000,000 in direct grants and fee relief directly to eligible equity applicants. This money is used for the purposes of startup and ongoing business expenses related to their cannabis business licenses. Thank you.

Thank you. Supervisor Klein.

Yes, one quick question. Ms. Burney, you said 10% of the grant would go towards administrative costs. Does that completely cover the administrative costs associated with the county administering the grant? Or are there additional resources needed for the grant?

If I may, through the Chair, so that 10% does go towards County Council time as well as staff administrative time. I do think that, you know, different opportunities arise when planners are working through cannabis business license review, and a piece of that can be captured through the equity program as well. I think it does a pretty good job of capturing the total cost associated with running the program.

Thank you. I appreciate you sharing that update. I have received some questions from residents, and so just wanted to provide a snapshot for folks listening into the board meeting of what the grant was about. So thank you.

Thank you. Also, our website is a great resource as well. It's currently updated with all relevant information and a rolling application system for anyone that may be interested in applying to be an equity verified individual, not necessarily for a new direct grant, but to apply to be part of the equity program.

We have one more question, please. Supervisor Hastrich.

I heard you say that it could provide funding for about 11 applicants, so is the limit 50,000 or so?

Yes, if I may, through the chair.

So the LEAP direct grants are a maximum of $50,000 per equity verified individual, so we anticipate usually that funding can shift a little bit depending upon the applicant. Sometimes they'll take a little bit less but they are allowed up to 50,000 per individual.

And how many applicants are there?

There are currently two zero two applicants in the existing direct grant queue so this was a queue that we inherited from Elevate Impact when the equity program was first adopted, so we are not accepting any new LEAP direct grant applications, so folks that apply on our rolling application system and get verified today. Our goal is to get through the queue that was originally expecting that money and then open up the application system for anyone new that's verified.

All right. So, you know, in the past we've talked about people paying their fees with that money. So has there been discussion amongst your department about doing more grants for more people so that they could pay those fees instead of the high amount for a few?

If I may, through the chair. So yes, every year we attempt to do a fee relief window, and we do have that calendarized this year, so on May 15 we'll open up a fee relief window for equity verified applicants to apply for different county fees. So it can go towards planning and building fees, if they have a compliance plan it can go through county fees, whether that be renewal for their cannabis business license or taxes, so they can pay their true up or anything left with that. They can pay quarterly fees. We have about $92,000 set aside for that this year.

It is important to note we had the same amount set aside last year, and that funding was gone within two hours of the application window opening. So we opened up at 8AM. By 10AM, that funding was gone. So there absolutely are equity verified applicants taking advantage of those fee relief times. It's just not enough funding to cover everyone.

But there is a piece of funding set aside in that 80% of the total grant award for fee relief. For round seven, the $750,000 it's $120,000 is set aside for fee relief, and the rest of that will go towards direct grants. A few years ago, through the general government committee, we hosted a survey for equity applicants participate online, and they pulled and told us that they wanted what portion of funding to go towards fee relief and what portion to go towards direct grants, and we actually received pretty large community feedback from that, and so we're continuing on with that same feedback that we received.

Well thank you, and really I appreciate your professionalism in administering that program.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Anyone else in the room?

Morning all. Katrina Bartlett, May I assessor, Clerk Recorder, Registrar of Voters. I'm here to tell you what's going on in elections today. So we've been busy working on the June second election. Our ballot and our sample ballot are now at the printers.

The sample ballot should probably begin being mailed later this week and our ballots will be mailed by May 4. We out, which I think is always amazing, we used to send out about 200 UOCAVA, which is military and overseas ballots. This time we sent out three seventy four. So, I I think that's great. So we mailed 66 and we emailed, which is becoming more and more popular, about three zero eight.

So that's getting better and better election. The one thing with emailing them out, we're not allowed by law to accept them by email. They have to be faxed. So there used to be a federal program it was called FVAP that the the voter could email their ballot to them, and then they would fax it to us. Well, that doesn't work anymore.

So I think the entire state is looking for an alternative, an easy way for these people to get their ballots returned to us in time. So that is, I think, always in the works. Head, do you have a question?

I shouldn't ask,

You but promised.

I did. I'm breaking my promise. They are allowed to use a third party service. They can email a service that then faxes us?

Yes.

Could we

be A federal service.

Oh, federal service. Was going ask, could we be that service where they email us and we fax ourselves?

Well, it can't be emailed to my office, so it has to be faxed to my office. There are other fax services, but I think it costs money. So that's a big quandum that we hope to get resolved before too long. But that's a statewide thing. That's not a we'll do whatever the Secretary of State tells us to do, right?

So I think that's really important. You all were talking about volunteers, and I don't know if you realize how many volunteers the Elections Department has to have to have an election. So we have 30 polling places at 21 locations, and they each have at least four people. That's an inspector who's in charge of getting everything signed and returned to us, a judge who is the one that actually issues the ballots to the people, and two clerks. So that's one hundred and twenty minuteimum people that we have to have.

But most of the clerks, because most of our poll workers are getting up there in age, don't just can't work all day. So they split their day in half so that adds to that number. And then in our office we have between six to eight people not ladies people that come in and they work about they'll work from like mid May through June until we certify. Most of them have been here for several years, and what they do is they help us with checking signatures, filing the ballots in precinct order that are still in the envelopes. When it comes time to start opening, when we get enough, then they open the ballots, they put them in batches of 50 to get them ready to be counted.

So, you know, we probably have in one election two fifty people working for us. Did you guys realize that? It's amazing. And it's getting harder and harder for us to find poll workers. So, you know, it's we need to do some sort of poll worker drive.

We've had one of our extra help ladies in working for several months trying to get poll work. So we've got a couple places that I think we're finally getting. Point Arena, the city clerk, has stepped up and he's going to be our inspector because we could not find one. It was either that or close that polling place. So if you guys can help with that, that would be amazing. Ted?

Where can potential volunteers learn more?

They can call our office and speak to Gina or to Sally. Sally is the one that's been doing this. She doesn't work full time, but she's there now helping with all that and checking petitions, the statewide petitions. So the volunteers are definitely they get paid a small stipend, but they're volunteers. We will be conducting a special election for Ukiah Unified School District Trustee Area six.

That's a small, long district that runs from about Freitas Avenue, where Ellie's Muth Hut is you know where that is and goes a couple blocks each way down State Street to Norgard. So they've been having a bad time filling that position, so if anyone is interested or thinks they're in that district, call our office and we'll let them know, but we need to really help them out with that. So the candidate filing period for Ukiah Unified is about May 4 to May 29. Do any of you have any more questions?

I'm not seeing any. Thank Thank

you.

Anyone else in the room? Madam Clerk, do you have anybody online?

Seeing no presenters online.

Okay, we'll go to public comment. Again, Madam Clerk, anybody online?

Seeing no comments online.

Okay, back to the board. Supervisor Williams. Move approval. Second. Second. Okay. Thank you. First by Supervisor Williams, second by Supervisor Hashtag. We'll go by the button.

The motion carries unanimously.

Okay. Moving on to item R2, discussion and possible action, including approval or denial of requests from department heads and elected officials regarding budget impacts, funding and recruitment of vacant or new positions following the strategic hiring process. Ms. Johnson.

Good morning, Chair and members of the Board. Cherry Johnson, Human Resources Director. Today we have one department asking to hire, so that is the executive office. I will turn it over to the CEO Antal. Thank you.

Thank you. If I may, through the Chair, I have a memo attached. It is to fill a Deputy CEO position. As you may be aware, current Deputy CEO Tony Rakes accepted the IS Director position earlier this month. He has agreed to stay in the department to help throughout the budget process this year, but he is stepping up and doing more duties within the IT division or department now. So we are requesting to fill that position as it is desperately needed with changes that are happening.

Thank you. Any questions from the board? No? We will go to public comment. Seeing any in the room, Madam Clerk?

Seeing no comments online.

Okay, back to the board. Supervisor Williams. Move approval.

Second.

Okay, first by Supervisor Williams, second by Supervisor Klein. We'll vote by the button.

The motion carries unanimously.

Thank you. On to item R3, notice of public hearing, discussion of possible action, including adoption of resolution amending Exhibit X, Mendocino County Master Fee Schedule effective June sec excuse me, 06/20/2026 unless code or policy require longer adopting fee modifications for the Department of Agricultural Executive Office, Environmental Health, Health Services, Museum, Planning and Building Services, social services, and land improvement transportation. So the public hearing will go as such. The clerk will establish proper notice. We will open the public hearing.

The clerk will note correspondence. We'll have staff presentation, public input. Staff can present their final remarks. I'll go back to the Board of Supervisors for questions to staff. The public hearing will close, then the matter will be before the board. So it is 09:33. We'll open the public hearing. Madam Clerk, has proper notice been established?

Proper notice has been established, and all correspondence for this item, if any received, has been sent to your email.

Okay. And we'll go to staff presentation. Ms. Pierce.

Good morning, Board of Supervisors, CEO, Antel County Council. Sarah Pierce, Assistant CEO. So before you today are nine departments bringing forward their fees. As with the prior fee hearings, unless they are dictated or mandated by code, the fees are being calculated based on a modified cost recovery, so it does not include all indirect costs from the department. It does include a supervision rate, and it does include A87 costs.

So I will just turn it over to each department just in alphabetical order. We'll be sharing the change memo shortly. But before I get started, there are fees within the departments that have previously had direction to reduce. Based on our requirement, we have to bring the fee back at the cost recovery. So if it's the Board's direction, we can waive those fees again or reduce them. In the staff memo change memo, those fees will be noted in like a purple color under the current fee, so as we go through each department, we can call them out. So the first department to present will be agriculture.

Good morning, Chair Nivelles, honorable members of the Board, CEO Antle, and County Counsel Elliott. I am happy to present today. As you see as we go through this, this is in line with a recent as Sarah mentioned, a recent time study and cost analysis. Some of our key changes include restructuring inspection and certification fees to hourly rates where appropriate, deleting obsolete and redundant fees, and adjusting device administration fees to comply with the State rate. As I want to point out, we have not had a major fee revision since around 2020 something was done in 2023, so there's a lot of cleanup.

You're seeing a lot of deleted fees on here because again wanting to really streamline

what we

are charging the people and the community. These factors with operational efficiencies, we want to really try to capture the full cost of services. Many of our services, such as regulatory inspections and certification, are essential and many are set by statute, but the ones that are not, we've looked at carefully here to revise, focusing our fee updates again on deleting restructuring, deleting obsolete fees, consolidating into hourly models, deleted and waiving reduced fees to encourage compliance. Restructuring, like I said, you'll see the Fido sanitary fees. They used to be broken up per number of items.

Cases we've just gone with an hourly rate that reflects the actual time spent, including travel, insurers' equity. Decreases and waivers, the device fees were marked way too high and out of compliance with statutes, so we've corrected that. There's a new B Apiary registration program in place. Those are new fees on there, but we do recommend that the Board waive the small hive hobbyist bee people up to nine hives. That just allows them to register, be aware of any pesticide applications, puts them on our radar, but waives any fees for them.

And those fees are generally collected by us and go to the State. One of the key overrides I wanted to suggest is that even though we have calculated the cost rate for certified producers and certified farmers markets, We suggest that we raise them from the $37 that they are now. Am not sure how exactly we ended up with so many $37 fees from the past, but they are all being restructured to really reflect something right now. I would suggest with the certified farmers market fee that we increase it from $37 market would be increased from $37 to $75 and the certified producers fees would be increased from $37 to $50 These are very much in line with our neighboring counties, which I have a list here if the board would like to have it. We're very much in the middle of that, much less than our neighbor to the South Sonoma, but very much in line with Lake County, Humboldt, Shasta, Nevada.

Again, have copies if the Board would like that. That is the primary override that I'm suggesting. Again, with our weights and measures, we have adjusted the admin fee. Thank you. Sorry, I should have had that ready for you earlier. Again, open to any questions. And with weights and measures, most of our fees are covered under business and profession code twelve thousand two forty, so they're not going to be affected. It would just be the random odd inspection we get called usually of higher capacity scale, that's why that dollar rate, the hourly rate is higher but those are pretty rare. I think we might go out once or twice a year on some of those things. Anyway I do feel like this is a much needed cleanup.

I really, really appreciate all the work that I had from the CEO budget team and Sarah Pierce and I welcome any questions.

Supervisor Williams.

So I appreciate staff showing us what cost recovery would be. I don't know that the people in this county support greater charges for farmers market related activity. What hear is it's a no go with the public. I'm wondering, we pay those fees out of 91 realignment, or is there some other funding source? We're not talking about much money here. This is like a rounding error, budget dust. But just politically, it's not the best move to be jacking up the rates on farmers markets. As I understand, a lot of those farmers at farmers markets, this may represent their profit margin. They're operating very slim margins and providing a great service to the public that we have fresh produce available.

I may, the Chair, Sarah Pierce, Assistant CEO. So the certified farmers market the farmers market fee that you're referring to, I believe, is under the environmental health, which we'll get to. But there are two fees here that Angela is requesting to have reduced, the certified producer certificate from $2.20 to 75, and then the certified farmer's market certificate from $2.45 to 50. So if that's the of the board, the full direction of the board, we can make that change. Or if it's a different amount, we'll take the direction from the board.

And I appreciate what you just said, but you switched them. It's okay, it's a certified farmers market, and that involves up to maybe 20 producers at the big markets that we at least every six months to a year need to be inspecting, And then the other would, like I said, it's a $13 increase. But I do leave it up to the Board, and I definitely feel for this component of the community, and I welcome your direction.

Go ahead.

Mainly, comments apply to the environmental health fees, which are more substantial. But I think anything that has the word farmers market, should leave as is.

Yeah, I would agree. Supervisor Klein?

Yeah, I appreciate the comments for my colleague. We did have a constituent, I think she's actually my constituent, reach out to all of us via email, and she had some comments regarding both the fees set by AG and the environmental health fees. She did agree with AG bringing the CPC and the CFM fees into the proposed alignment, so kind of keeping that moderate level that's with our neighboring county. So I'm in agreement with what the AG Commissioner is proposing. I think it's a moderate increase, but there seems to be buy in from that community.

Supervisor Mulhorn.

Thank you. Most of my comments related to the fee hearing will be about supporting small businesses and local people that are working to create some type of enterprise in this economy, especially in Mendocino County where we have many Mindopreneurs and people that like to work for themselves. And so I support the Ag Commissioner's recommendation to lower the costs beyond what was based on cost recovery for these two items.

Thank you. Supervisor Hastia. Could you clarify this fee versus the one in environmental health for farmers markets?

I know what we do to you know, this involves registration, we will do amendments, we do growing ground inspections. I can't really speak to what environmental health does for their fee and I apologize for that, But I do know the amount of time we spend on the phone, we interface between the state system, there is again growing ground visits, there is a lot of work that goes into it, and we are more than happy to be supporting this part of the community. Do a lot of amendments that there is no charge for that. Like I said, these are modest, but they are what we do. We verify that the farmers are actually producing that.

We verify when we are at the markets that they have all the proper documentation and that there is no well, actually McFarm here in this county is very well run. We are very fortunate to have such a great farmers market association and they kind of well, I won't say they do their own policing, but they do a great job. I look at them as really strong partners. Again, know we are overspending and every dollar counts to this constituency, so again, just what I think is fair, but I welcome whatever the Board decides.

Yes, I thank you and I think that your work on a lot of these is appreciated by the community. I would just agree with my colleagues who say that let's keep the certified producer certificate and certified farmers market certificate the way it is along with I am going to propose with the environmental health, this cottage industry fees and the farmers market fees too.

Appreciate that.

Supervisor Williams? I'm in agreement. Oh, sorry. Ms. Pierce, would you like direction after each?

Yes, please.

So it sounds like we have at least three to keep the fees where they were.

Oh, the fees at 37. I

think that I would say that my direction, Mr. Chair, was to go to the Ag Commissioner's recommendation as outlined in her memo.

Okay. Thank you.

And that's what I voiced as well.

Okay. It seems the chair is the tiebreaker.

Okay. Well, I'm looking at the email Supervisor Klein talked about, and I also heard from Happy Day Farms, which I apologize I didn't refresh on this morning. And they seem to be fine with the egg commissioners increase as well. Concern is more around environmental health. So I'm going to be in agreement with Supervisor Klein and Mulhern.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, the Board.

So the next department that is up is Behavioral Health and Recovery Services. And I would just like to note the memo for the behavioral health recovery services was inadvertently left off. It was loaded this morning.

Good morning, Doctor. Janine Miller. We have our behavioral health recovery services fees. Our fees are supposed to be posted yearly. These fees are set by the state. They are not set by the department. The state sets fees for each county. And so what you see before you are the state fees for how much the county can charge per service. The thought process is that when we do a contract with our providers that they get 75% of that fee and so Mendo does really make sure we align with what the state perception is of how fees are to be worked with our contracted providers. We do have some fees that also are a fee for service, self pay.

We follow the same process of using that state fee but we also do have a sliding fee schedules so that we are an individual is able to pay up to a minimum of $36 a year for all services if they don't have an income and we can't bill medical for them and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you Supervisor Williams. Approve. I see no other questions or comments.

If I may through the chair the next department up is emergency medical services.

Okay.

First. We're going be the next two.

All right, so we have the EMS fees and a couple of things I wanted to go over. A lot of our fees are set by our LIMS. They did a fee analysis this last year to look at fees. As we know, our LIMSA is a look at Sonoma County and Mendocino County for those fees. And so some of those fees you're going to see are what was proposed by that fee analysis by the LIMSA that was conducted by the LIMSA.

We also went back to look at our fees to really look at when is the last time we saw any fee increases in Mendocino County regarding EMS. And I was able to go back and see 1992 that our fees were pretty similar. So in 1992, our receiving hospital rate was $8,000 You'll see today it's still $8,000 Most of our other EMS fees minus the dispatch fees for ambulance, there's been a change there. But all of our fees for initial permit, the annual review, all of those were the same costs in 1992, 'ninety four, 2002, all the way up to date. And that's actually what we've been charging since 1992.

You will see some changes, requests to up a little bit of those fees. It does not bring us to market, and it does not bring us to full recovery. It's just a little bit of an increase to cover some of the staff time. We do realize that to really bring them, they would be a lot higher than they are today. Our current base hospital rate is we have three hospitals in Mendocino County. All three operate as base hospitals. That's not common in Sonoma County. They have one base hospital, that's Santa Rosa Memorial, and the rest are receiving hospitals. But because of our geographical spread, we've always worked at Mendo to have three base hospitals. So what we have done is really give them one fee for all three base hospitals.

The change of that fee this year is 37,334 thousand, and we would be moving it up to match what the LIMS have proposed for all three hospitals. That would not be per hospital cost. That would be the $48,000 would be for all three hospitals to continue to operate as base hospitals. And then we've had a discrepancy sort of in our ambulance response, and so that was looking at what the LIMSHA decided was kind of based on call ratio. This fee only provides to the private and nonprofit ambulance.

This excludes public safety agencies, and it excludes mutual aid response. So we only have two in Mendocino County. This fee has been applied to for multiple years, So it's not a change in applying this fee to those two agencies. It is a little bit of a change in cost. One of the discrepancies we see as we've been looking at other fees is one ambulance company has 2,000 calls on average a year and they are paying $2,400 a month give or take and the other ambulance has four six hundred calls a year and they are paying 2,500 a month.

And so we are seeing a discrepancy in trying to get more aligned with how are we basing that, that there is a structured fee schedule on how we are billing our ambulance for those calls. And I am happy to answer any questions.

Supervisor Williams? Yes, two thoughts. The first one's easy. This will come back again in the future. It would be great to include in the agenda summary or the attachments that we're not proposing charging other public agencies. We have some quasi volunteer fire departments that are providing ambulance transport. And I think they're starting to get PTSD from feeling that the county is a partner, but they're always having to fight for their money and for support to not be taken away. I know that's not staff's intention, nor is it the board's, but I think the way we communicate on the agenda. But by the time they see it, it's the same time we see it. And they think that the board is proposing this.

And no, it's not. It's just staff showing us cost recovery. So that's my request is in the future when this comes back, if we get to annotate somewhere, to just include a little description of who will be paying. That it won't be the public agencies or the volunteer fire departments. The second concern, in other counties that have a higher population density, ambulance companies can pay a fee to county for the right to do business.

In our county, that's inverted because we have such sparse population and low call volumes that we arguably, we have to subsidize ambulance service. We could have better response if we had more subsidy. So I guess I see this is appropriate from the standpoint of it hasn't shifted since the nineties. And the county is incurring costs. But what I'm less confident about is, is this a cost that will be passed on to insurance companies?

Whether government insurance or private insurance? Or will this be taken out of pre hospital care for the patients? Because frankly, the most important thing a county does is preserve life. And this may be going directly against that. It may be that whether they're a for profit or a nonprofit, private public. This is money that's going to come out of their pocket, which could translate into reduced level of service. Do we have any confidence that we're not hurting the emergency response by taking this action?

Just wanted to add, they already pay. So currently they each pay about $30,000 a year.

Yeah. But we're talking about extracting more. When we do that, is that coming out of patient care? Is it the member of the public who calls 911 that will see a reduction in service due to these fees being passed on? And if that's the case, I'm less confident that it's a good idea. If we did some research and found that these fees can be billed to the insurance of the person who's getting that ride, Let's bring more money into the system. I don't think we have an answer to that today. How do my colleagues feel about this?

Supervisor Hashtag? Well do we know that we are not going to get reimbursed by the insurance company? Is there an answer to that?

I don't have that answer I would have to ask MedStar and Adventist how they get reimbursed for those fees that they pay.

That seems like information we should have.

Supervisor Mulhern?

I guess my eyebrows instead of using my pen. I would imagine that self pay ambulance services, an incredibly small percentage. I think that the majority of calls for service for ambulances are billed either to private insurance or Medi Cal. So I guess I'm fine with having the information come back. I'm just not sure about delaying this agenda item based on it.

Ms. Pierce, do you have a comment or Ms. Antle?

CEO Antle, tend to be in agreement with Supervisor Mulhern. Having worked in health care, not particularly on the emergency side, a majority of fees are passed on to the insurer to pay. And there is very few currently in the State of California that are uninsured right now, right? Now, do we know how that is going, HR1 is going to impact? No, we don't. But I believe we can get that answer and bring that back to you at next meeting or maybe by the end of today even to research on who gets how they would reimburse those fees that are passed along.

Thank you. Supervisor Kline.

Thank you, Chair. My understanding and conversations with staff is that those agencies are aware of this fee and would like to confirm that they know that this is up for discussion today. Correct?

Yes, they are. And we did get a quick response that says the ambulance providers can raise transport fees but can't bill for increased county rates. We do not have contracted rates in Mendocino County.

So maybe I'm wrong. My interpretation of that statement is these fees will be coming out of patient care. And that's concerning to me. I think we have such we have a system today that's held together with duct tape and bubble gum, and a lot of dedicated paid and volunteers. And I don't like the idea of removing subsidy, because I think that will translate into worse patient outcomes.

If I may, through the chair, I'm not sure what you mean

mean, it doesn't sound like if we pass this cost on to the ambulance provider, that the ambulance provider will be able to get reimbursed for that actual cost from insurance.

I think that's what you just said, right? I don't know who you got your

This comment came from the LIHMSA.

Yes. If I may, we can we have come back at end of day with this and let them take a minute and we'll come back to this one? Because I think I understand it doesn't have to be at the end of the day. We've got like five or six more. And if Janine and Tammy can work and get a clarifying statement to, I think I understand what you're saying supervisor but I want to make sure Jen and Tammy and Janine have a moment to discuss it along with maybe one or two of the providers.

Yeah, absolutely fine with coming back.

Supervisor Williams? That works for me. I was hoping that would be the direction we take. When it comes back, I would like to hear the response from the actual providers, not just LEMS position is important, I value that. But I would also like to hear that from the providers confirmation that this won't negatively impact patient care.

Okay. Will check to make sure if we can get them today. If not, we will have to delay it to another day, if I understand what you are asking. Janine, Tammy, are you good?

Yes.

Okay. If

I may, to the Chair, and I will make a note, we can, on the Exhibit X that gets posted, the approved one, we can make a note that this applies, does not apply to public safety. Okay, so then the next department that will be coming forward is environmental health.

Right, so we have our environmental health fees. These are staff costs but not full department costs, So we wanted to make sure we make that clear. We do realize that there may be some fees that you guys pull, like Cottage Foods, Farmers Market, but we feel that it's important that we at least show the board the cost, and you guys can make the decision on how you want to fund those or what you want to charge. So these fees are in front of you. I know, Supervisor William, you asked about 91 realignment.

We do put in about $250,000 of 91 public health 91 realignment dollars into environmental health, and then there's also some general fund dollars that go into environmental health to meet the department needs due to the different offsets of fees. But in front of you are the total cost of not even the full cost, but the cost of the proposed based on the staffing workbook schedule. And so obviously, if you have any questions, we are willing to answer those. We also know that last year, you guys didn't want to raise the fees to full cost, so some we brought up at 50% with a proposal to bring them back and try to get them at actual cost. And so we have those CEO's office has those color coded so you can see what those are.

You'll also notice that some of our fees went down, so not all fees went up, some fees went down, and then some fees went up, and we're happy to answer any questions.

Supervisor Hashtag. Well, I appreciate your work on this and it helps to have it color coded. With looking at it on pages six and seven, all the purple ones are ones that we've tried to limit in the past because of the benefit of having farmers markets that are viable and thriving in our communities. And so I would propose that we keep all of the purple as is without any increase on pages six and seven.

Supervisor Williams. Second.

Supervisor Mulhern.

Thank you. When an organization like the County of Mendocino sets fees it should be with the expectation that we are providing a service and that we are constantly improving our ability to provide that service. Board, previous boards, has given direction to pay our staff more so that we have employees that are working well with our community and with our agency. So I think that keeping the fees the same is an unrealistic expectation, given the board's direction as it relates to salaries. But I do also really want to support the small businesses that participate and work legally with the county by applying for food permits.

And so I am concerned about the large increases of over 100% or adding a fee that wasn't there before. I would support a modest fee increase at 50% or below. And I think that, for me, the expectation, as we do see that some fees have gone down based on, I would hope, time studies and evaluation by the Department of how long things take, that we'll continue to see adjustments for our fee schedules, especially as it relates to environmental health and planning and building based on the efficiencies that the county can make by improving our processes, especially for these kinds of permits. So my concerns in particular for were the temporary food booths and the cottage food, as well as the farmer's market. For my colleagues, what I said was not in support of keeping it exactly as it is.

I mean, in support of a modest increase. And I'd like to hear from the two that haven't spoken already.

Yeah, I'm going to agree with both Supervisor Williams and Hashtag on the cottage fee, the cottage food, and the farmer's market. The only public input I got on this entire agenda item was around those two. And as supervisor Klein pointed out they were fine with a commissioner but their issue was and it was a strong issue and I think they made a good case for themselves was around those fee increases and they would like to keep them the same so that's what I'm going to support. Supervisor Klein?

Yeah, I appreciate all the comments given by my colleagues. I do think that we need to, you know, do something to temper certain fees with certain industries. I wanted to bring up something that was also raised by my constituent in the email that she sent to the Board about how it's especially challenging to see unpermitted vendors. There's a couple of unpermitted vendors that are operating in Redwood Valley right now. I'm hearing a lot of feedback from my constituents, their frustrations around the impact that that's having with neighboring legal and permitted restaurants.

So those operators are obviously there not meeting the same standards, and so these businesses, as she says, allowed to operate outside the legal framework, it places an unfair burden on those who are doing everything correctly. So I just want to add that as kind of a caveat to this conversation, is there is a lot of pressure for certain businesses that are now having competition that are able to have, you know, less regulatory burden, because they're just choosing to operate outside of outside of these guidelines. So times are particularly tough for our food industry, our restaurants, and it's something that this board needs to be cognizant of.

Thank you. Supervisor Williams?

Yeah, it's also a risk to the public. I'd like to know where I shouldn't be eating. Is there a referral, or how do we clean this up? I don't we don't need to name them here, but is somebody following up?

I have had some conversations with staff, and I think those conversations need to continue. I don't think that there's currently things that were, to my knowledge, we're not actively pursuing those. But that's outside of the scope of this conversation, so.

Okay. Thank you. I'm not seeing any other questions.

If I may, through the chair, so just the direction is to keep the ones that are in purple the same as what they were previously, which is cottage food, food establishment fees, and then the farmers market.

Supervisor Hajczak? Yes,

that was the motion. Okay.

If I may, through the chair, the next department up is oh, the executive office. So the executive office has one fee that is really administered by planning and building, but due to code, it is listed under the executive office. So that's the film permit. When we looked at this, we looked at the individual that was performing these duties, is the administrative service manager, and based the fee on the rate of that individual. So if there's any questions, it's actually a reduction.

I'm not seeing any. Thank you.

So the next one up is land improvement, and Jason Wise is on Teams, or Zoom, if you could let him in.

Morning. Can you hear me alright?

Yes, sir.

Okay. So this is the updated fees. Most of them are, less than 10% reduction, and that changes from the revision for the supervisorial rate, but most of them don't have much of a change. Most of them went down if you went up. There's nothing, we didn't change the hours or the way we calculated the fees in any way, and so it's pretty standard from previous fee requests.

Not seeing any questions. Okay.

You, Jason. Next department is the museum.

Karen Matson, Museum Administrator, drew the chair. The museum is bringing forward one fee. This is a request to eliminate the Wanakot Room use fee for the Roots of Motive Power Incorporated following board direction provided at the 03/24/2026 meeting. The Roots of Motive Power utilized the Wanakot Room in the museum on average six times per year for the purpose of hosting steam engineering, railroad operation and safety classes for Roots of Motive Power members. Thank you for your time reviewing this today.

Supervisor Hashtag. Well, I appreciate the people from Roots who are here today and Karen Medson from the museum for bringing this forward. This was part of the MOU that we agreed to the other meeting. And there's a long history with the railroad history project with roots in the museum and this is to honor that history and the agreement that we just came up with. Thank you.

I am seeing no other questions.

If I may, through the Chair, so the direction will be to reduce waive those fees, the two fees?

Correct, yes.

Thank you. The next is Planning and Building.

Morning, Supervisors. Julia Crogg, Planning and Building Services Director. So the fees in front of you today are both for our building division and our planning division. For the building division there's an approximate 2% increase that's proposed across all of the various fees. This is primarily based upon updated time study that showed we had some additional time being done by our particularly our administrative staff in handling those permits so it was a minor adjustment that had to happen but it does result in a 2% fee increase.

I'll also note that the building division is proposing to update our building valuation table and move from the 2021 table to the 2024 table and this is used in determining a building's overall valuation for the purposes of determining the appropriate fee for that structure. There is a reduction, a pretty significant reduction for our education fee reducing from 6% to 1% and this was based upon actual cost associated education and training for the building division. That fee may adjust in the future but as it is right now we feel confident with reduction from 6% to 1%. There is a new fee as well for floodplain permit reviews and that's based upon staff time at the weighted rate. For the Planning Division, there's an overall decrease of 2% in applicant cost however I do want to highlight there is a particular fee this relates to Mendocino Historical Review Board permits where the department is recommending that there be an increase in that fee.

What you see in the memo that was prepared for today's meeting is an analysis of the staff time spent and as the board is likely aware, most of our planning division fees are subject to cost recovery so meaning if we exceed that average processing time, we then bill the applicant at staff time for the remaining processing associated with it. So with the MHRB fees, you will see the analysis including the sample size that was utilized in determining the actual staff time spent and we're seeing that for the majority of our fees we're having to ask for additional deposits 100% of the time. So that is why we have requested for a fee increase. The other alternative is if the board wants to keep the fees as is, they would still be subject to cost recovery, it just is staff time associated with obtaining that additional funds from the applicant. So we're happy either direction, but since we were seeing that it was 100% of the time for some of these fees that we are requesting additional funds, we thought it was important to bring forward that discussion to the board.

The other fee that I just want to highlight is the deletion of the Gualala Municipal Advisory Council referral fee and as you see in the memo this is based upon that it was originally established for the GMAC Secretary which that position is no longer existing in the GMAC structure, so we cannot continue to charge that fee, so it's just removal of that fee, it puts them at the same spot as all the other MACs. We did notify GMAC of this fee change coming forward and receive no comments. That concludes my presentation. Happy for any questions.

Thank you. Supervisor Williams? Yeah, the MHRB fee, is it accurate to see that as not a fee increase, but just being upfront about the cost? Because the applicants are being billed for it regardless. Now we're just going to tell them before they start the process what it will be.

Yes, exactly. So I think we're seeing that, like I said, 100% of the time. And you see the sample size. I mean, these aren't we don't have big windfalls of MHRB permits, but we're seeing across the permits that we have done that it is 100% of the time.

That's a great comment. Thank you, Supervisor. Supervisor Mulhern?

Thank you. That one was also on my list, and I'm just wondering what opportunities does the department have to help in Mendocino, and particularly for businesses that are trying to work through the challenging economic times? Are there opportunities to provide more documentation up front so they're not having to go through more links or a lengthy permit process and then not being approved? Is there something we can do to help minimize the impact?

Thank you that's a great question I think staff continues to try to put that public facing information out there of what makes a quality application so that way there's less back and forth that's required because that's where you start to see staff time really get eaten up The other item is that I know that the MHRB has really taken a focus on trying to find ways where there's minor adjustments being done to previously approved projects to not have to have that come back through for an additional review and instead bring it as like a staff memo to the review board for their consideration. So I think between partnership between the board and planning staff as well, we are looking at those opportunities constantly of how can you streamline the process and make it easier for folks to come through, and we continue to focus on that and of course looking at can we have more templatized sort of documentation to reduce the overall staff expense that's associated with it. What the board may or may not be aware, for each project we keep a fee tracking sheet so at any time we're able to take a look and see where we're at in terms of the processing and also look at whether or not it's outside the norm.

So for example, the major MHRB permit fee, you can see we had one project that came in underneath that fee type and the staff spent twenty one hours working on that particular permit. However our fee is proposed to come in at twelve hours because we realize that could be an anomaly out of what we could see coming in in the future.

I'm not seeing any more questions thank you.

If I may, to the chair, the next and final department is social services.

Good morning chair, members of the board, CEO Antle. My name is Jen Thompson. I'm senior program manager with social services. I'm here today to speak about the proposed updates to the public administrator and public guardian fee schedules. For context, the public administrator program manages the estates of deceased individuals, while the public guardian program provides conservatorship for living individuals who can't handle their own affairs.

They're separate programs with distinct legal authorities, but they both operate under court oversight, and the public guardian program has fewer cost recovery opportunities due to the financial status of her clients. For the public administrative program, most of the fees are set by statutes, so the only one that we are looking to change is the extraordinary services rate. Extraordinary services are really work that's done outside of routine state administration, such as managing a business or handling a legal dispute on behalf of the decedent. Previously, these services were billed under separate staff rates, which we are consolidating into a single rate of $103 per hour, and that's based on fully loaded staff costs. For the public guardian program, the proposed updates are going to simplify the fee structure.

We have, like, a nine tier system based on the size of the state of the client, but most of our clients are coming in with around $2,000 because they're in receipt of SSI funds, so they're capped at $2,000 asset limit, so there's not really a point in having the nine tiered system set up for them if we're never going to recover that money. So we are proposing to simplify that and come up with an annual rate of $1,500 which aligns closely with our projected actual cost of $15.06 We are also looking to align the investigation rate to match up with the Mendocino County Superior Court's established rate for conservatorship investigations, which is $600 Taken together, these changes are going to result in a simpler and more consistent fee schedule that balances cost recovery with collectability. Also, all the fees remain subject to court approval on a case by case basis, so you guys will sign off on it, and then we will ask the court also, and they will sign off on it. The full memo is in your board packet, and I'm happy to answer any questions if you have them.

Thank you. I'm not seeing any questions. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you. So those are all the departments. I don't know if we wanted, if emergency medical services was able to give an answer.

We have a preliminary answer because we were able to speak to one, we weren't able to get both. So it does not impact patient care, it does impact overall cost for the operator, which could impact other things, but they would add it to billing to the insurance, but they bill as a bundled rate in a sense, the full cost, and as you know, their reimbursement is never what they ask for because private insurance and everyone in Medi Cal doesn't reimburse very well. They get reimbursed what the insurance would reimburse. They do feel that it could be an impact on their overall business by raising, but they would like to have a larger conversation. So one recommendation is we could allow the other fees to go forward and hold off on these fees or keep them at the rate of $30,000 each and work with them on an alternative method to work on those dispatch fees.

Thank you. Supervisor Williams?

Yes, so I like that suggestion of just holding off and having the conversation. They should be in the room with us. I see ambulance, whether it's private or public, as a system. And they're not going to be able to bill more. And so we're pulling money out of the system. That's going to affect the patient. That's my take, unless somebody comes forward and can show otherwise. So I'm hesitant to support the fee increase without more of a conversation. They may have been aware of it, but I don't think it's quite the same as inviting them to the table. One thing that's gone really right in recent times is I think there's more trust between the county and the EMS providers.

It's collaborative effort to figure out how we make progress on the overall system. And I don't want this to take away from that. I want them to feel like they have a seat to at least have the discussion with us, even if in the end we have to set a higher fee.

Question for staff, does bringing just this one item back, does that create an issue for you on any kind of timeline?

If I may, to the chair, we would need to reestablish the public hearing, which does take some time. It would probably be in June that we would be able to bring it back due to the timelines of noticing and everything. We can proceed with accepting the ones as is and then bringing just back emergency medical services for which I'm not sure which few fees exactly, but if we can call those out, we can bring those back separately.

Okay. Board, we've been presented with a couple of different options here. One is to continue with the current fees and then have the discussion with the agencies as Ms. Miller discussed or bring it back at a later item after they've had the discussion. Which would the board prefer?

Supervisor Hajczak? Well, I think that what we're saying is continue with the current fees, have the discussions, and then bring it back. Is that correct?

Works for me.

Okay.

So I'm fine with that.

If I may, to the chair, can we call out exactly which fees are remaining the same? Is it the EMS based hospital Thank

you. Supervisor Williams?

Dispatch fee would remain the same for now.

Oh, it's the tiers.

So all of the dispatch fees, and then are we holding on the EMS based hospital as well? Or is that?

No, don't think So it's

the dispatch fees? Yep. Thank

you. Ms. Pierce again that was your last one?

If I made to the chair, yes that is it.

Thank you. Alright. We'll open the item up for public comment. Anybody in the room? Okay. Seeing none, Madam Clerk?

Seeing no comments online.

Okay. Back to the Board. Supervisor Klein.

Yeah, I want to thank staff's time working on this update to our fee schedule. A lot of these are, you know, minor changes. I know the staff is really being cognizant of the increased pressure to our stakeholders, all the businesses, the nonprofits, etcetera, that would be impacted by these various fees, so I appreciate the effort that went into this. I want to echo one of Supervisor Mulherrand's comments from earlier about how so many of our fees have gone up over the last several years, because we've had three years of increased labor fees, or labor costs for the county. And so these fees are driven by the staff time that takes to administer these services, and that's why there has been such an increase to these fees over the years.

Moving forward, I'm hopeful that we can have increased efficiencies to hopefully continue to bring down as many fees as possible.

Thank you. Supervisor Hashtag.

I move approval of all the changes that we made to this fee schedule.

Okay. It is tentwenty two. We'll close the public hearing. And supervisor Hashtag, if you could restate that, please.

I move approval of the fee schedule as presented with all the changes that we made.

Ms. Pierce, you are comfortable with what?

Yes, we are comfortable.

Okay. Do we have a second? I'll second. So first by supervisor Hashtag, seconded by myself. I will vote by the button.

The motion carries unanimously.

Okay. It's ten twenty five. We will take a fifteen minute break.

I'll bet you wish you had more time in that moment. Now is your chance to buy yourself that time. Sign up for Nixle and Mendo Alerts on our website, mendoready.org. Do it today.

If you want your family to be as resilient as possible, it's important to take some time today and visit mendoready.org, where you can look up your pre established evacuation zones on our current emergencies map. You can also find important tools to help maintain your situational awareness, such as the alert California wildfire cameras and the Caltrans Road conditions cameras. We hope you'll take some time today to prepare so that your family can be Mendo ready. Thank you.

Are you prepared? We're the office of emergency services, and we're committed to providing the most up to date and accurate information so that you and your family can stay safe during an emergency. Part of being prepared is knowing your hazards and taking proper precautions. Visit mendoready.org. On the know your hazards page, you can find hazards for where you work, where you live, and where your kids go to school. On the plan and prepare page, you'll find a plan template. It's important to know what you're gonna do, what you're gonna take with you, how you're gonna communicate, where you're gonna go, and how to get there.

One great way to prepare is to pack a go bag. Each member of your family should have their own go bag. Visit our website, mendoready.org, to get a list of items that should be in your go bag.

Gathering and organizing important documents before an emergency is an important part of preparedness. So visit mendoready.org today where you can find a list of important documents that you should have ready near your go bag in case you have to evacuate.

Not every emergency requires people to evacuate. An emergency kit will have supplies for you to remain self sufficient for seventy two hours. Find a list of supplies for disaster kits on our website, mendoready.org.

A prepared community is a resilient community that will recover faster from disasters. So take some time today, visit our website, get yourself prepared so you can be Mendo ready.

A beautiful clean river doesn't start here. It starts here. What we put down our storm drains goes straight from our streets into our local creeks. Simple changes can make a big impact. Like when you wash your car, the best solution is washing at a professional car wash. But if you wash at home, divert wash water to an area where it can soak into the ground, like a planter strip. Also, empty your bucket of dirty wash water in the sink. The wash water will make its way to the treatment plant where it is clean. You probably know how to pick up your pet's poop when you're out on

a walk. After all, it's the neighborly thing to do. But what about the

pet waste in your backyard? Pick it up regularly and especially before rain or irrigation water washes any of it into a backyard drain. Your pet's poo is full of bacteria and nutrients that can contaminate our creeks. Scoop the poo, bag it, and put it in your garbage. When tending to your yard or garden, check the weather and prevent over irrigation.

Runoff of fertilizer, herbicides, landscape materials, compost piles, leaf debris pollute our creeks. Remember, timing is everything. Pick up any litter or trash that may get into the streets. If you grab it before water or wind arrives, it doesn't have a chance of ending up in our creeks. It's up to each of us to take care of our creeks and rivers. They're ours to protect. Find out more at streetstocreeks.org.

Hi. I'm Russ.

And I'm Laurie.

And we're part of the employee engagement team. The employee engagement team is a voluntary group that's made up of county staff across all levels and from all departments.

This team is the one that puts together the annual employee survey, which helps us find ways to help employees feel heard and appreciated.

In connection with the employee survey, we want to announce the engagement team's spring campaign, which we're calling gratitude month. Gratitude month provides some simple ways for staff to show appreciation to those they work with every day for their help and support.

We all have great colleagues that we work with that make our jobs a little easier or more enjoyable. And gratitude month hopes to provide little ways to help recognize those people around us.

Each department will receive a packet with instructions and materials for their common room, including things like a gratitude wall or simple tearaways to help say thank you to someone. We hope you'll take advantage of these opportunities to recognize those around you for their contributions.

Keep an eye open for emails announcing the start of the campaign as well as the arrival of those packets in your office.

And remember that the employee engagement team is open to anyone, and we're always looking for new members. If you'd like to be part of what we're doing or have comments or questions, you can reach us at employee_engagement@MendocinoCounty.gov.

Are you prepared? We're the office of emergency services, and we're committed to providing the most up to date and accurate information so that you and your family can stay safe during an emergency. Visit mendoready.org. It's our one stop shop for emergency information. You can sign up for emergency alerts, find your pre established evacuation zone on our current emergencies map, and find hazard and preparedness information.

Imagine you're faced with a disaster such as a wildfire and you're ordered to evacuate. I'll bet you wish you had more time in that moment. Now is your chance to buy yourself that time. Sign up for NCSEL and Mendo alerts on our website, mendoready.org. Do it today.

If you want your family to be as resilient as possible, it's important to take some time today and visit mendoready.org, where you can look up your pre established evacuation zones on our current emergencies map. You can also find important tools to help maintain your situational awareness such as the alert California wildfire cameras and the Caltrans road conditions cameras. We hope you'll take some time today to prepare so that your family can be Mendo ready. Thank you.

Are you prepared? We're the office of emergency services, and we're committed to providing the most up to date and accurate information so that you and your family can stay safe during an emergency. Part of being prepared is knowing your hazards and taking proper precautions. Visit mendoready.org. On the know your hazards page, you can find hazards for where you work, where you live, and where your kids go to school. On the planning prepare page, you'll find a plan template. It's important to know what you're gonna do, what you're gonna take with you, how you're gonna communicate, where you're gonna go, and how to get there.

One great way to prepare is to pack a go bag. Each member of your family should have their own go bag. Visit our website, mendoready.org, to get a list of items that should be in your go bag.

Gathering and organizing important documents before an emergency is an important part of preparedness. So visit mendoready.org today, where you can find a list of important documents that you should have ready near your go bag in case you have to evacuate.

Not every emergency requires people to evacuate. An emergency kit will have supplies for you to remain self sufficient for seventy two hours. Find a list of supplies for disaster kits on our website, mendoready.org.

A prepared community is a resilient community that will recover faster from disasters. So take some time today, visit our website, get yourself prepared so you can be Mendo ready.

A beautiful clean river doesn't start here. It starts here. What we put down our storm drains goes straight from our streets into our local creeks. Simple changes can make a big impact, like when you wash your car. The best solution is washing at a professional car wash. But if you wash at home, divert wash water to an area where it can soak into the ground, like a planter strip. Also, empty your bucket of dirty wash water in the sink. The wash water will make its way to the treatment plant where it is clean. You probably know how to pick up your pet's poop when you are out on a wall.

After all, it's the neighborly thing to do. But what about

the pet waste in your backyard? Pick it up regularly and especially before rain or irrigation water washes any of it into a backyard drain. Your pet's poo is full of bacteria and nutrients that can contaminate our creeks. Scoop the poo, bag it, and put it in your garbage. When tending to your yard or garden, check the weather and prevent over irrigation. Runoff of fertilizer, herbicides, landscape materials, compost piles, leaf debris pollute our creeks. Remember, the timing is every We

are going to continue on with agenda item R4, discussion and possible action including approval of the recommended Community Correction Partnership, CCP, budget for fiscal year twenty six-twenty seven in the amount of $8,700,629 excluding growth funds authorizing chief probation officer to update the approval budget by the amount of growth funds received, if any less mandated allocation to the local innovation subaccount by designating the funds as contingency or reserve and authorizing chief probation officer to implement the CCP budget. Mr. Locatelli.

Yeah. Good morning, chair, board, county staff. Eisen Locatelli, chief probation officer. So before you today, you know, I'd just like to do a quick reminder. This isn't a probation specific funding source.

Statutorily, I am the chair of CCP, and there's an executive committee that meets regularly, especially during February, March time to go through the budget. We voted, and this is the approved budget minus one executive member who did vote no. And I'll explain why when we get to that section. We've already seen the recommended action. You have a slide show presentation for quick highlights overview and question and answer option.

Turning into the presentation, you can see what we're projecting the base funds to be, and then you can see what the carryover is from previous years, and then the total available is what we're recommending for the budget. The projection is based on C SAC and I think I've explained this quite a few different times but it is a guesstimate. Last year, they estimated that we would get $4,820,796 That's what we were anticipating. The May revise came in, and it was $4,175,411 So you can see what a drastic difference that is, roughly 650,000. And then the actuals was $4,254,668.

So from what we built the budget on to what we actually got, there was a $566,000 shortfall. And so I've, you know, I've been pretty conservative of how we build budgets and why we're doing it. We don't we carry the contingency and we're not calling it a reserve because that's able to then roll right in for expenses. The board is authorizing the CPO to do that as necessary, so nobody is short and then coming to the board asking for general fund to contribute for those employees, or we're not cutting services to the community with our CBOs or our partners that we provide funds to. So that's the strategy behind that.

So this slide is page four and there's a correction. We were anticipating that this is what the sheriff's office will have. But when the sheriff showed up, his budget didn't ask for the 50,000 that you see in the star down on the bottom. Last year we had approved him to make claims above and beyond what he was budgeted for if there was parolees or PRCS folks in the jail who had significant medical transportation costs and the jail staff had to sit in hospitals. When they came forward this year with their budget, they didn't have that in their line item.

It's my preference that if we're, as a board, going to approve an expenditure that it's in a line item, so in May we're going to go back and actually vote once it's on the agenda and we've met the Brown Act requirements to put that there. So actually the CCP has approved $1,913,234 to the sheriff which would have bumped the contingency up by $50,000 The total that the Board of Supervisors is approving is the exact same. There's no change for you. It's just a line item change to what the CCP has approved. And after our May meeting I expect it to look exactly as the board sees it today, but I wanted to explain that to you.

So next. So this is the breakdown for the board and for the public of what each of the departments is expending their funds on. All of the departments, this is what they requested, and this is what they were authorized to receive. So I know last year there was conversations about maybe there's other ways to give the sheriff more. This is what the sheriff's requesting and this is what he voted to approve.

So hopefully this year we don't have those conversations. In fact, on that last slide, saw the hospitalization at the very bottom, and it was still asterisked. So probation, same thing. You can see exactly what the FTEs are for, where the funding is going, what we're paying for as if for electronic monitoring, staff, sanctions and incentives for our PRCS populations. There are sanctions matrix and an incentive matrix for things like getting their GEDs or driver's licenses.

To use sanction matrix, we have to have an incentive matrix. It's in statute. So next, again, just by department, you see district attorney, you see public defender. The public defender's office, when we get further on, is where some of the dissent came from.

Sir, can I interrupt you real quick? I believe we have a question. Supervisor Wayne? Yeah, if

you can go back two slides. Forward one. That last item, AB109 planning and administration costs, I see a lot of the expenses broken down by a fraction of full time employee. This one's not. And I was curious, is that because it's outside resources, or it's just hard to associate with staff?

So two years ago in the CCP budget was $100,000 and it went to all counties and they got to break it out. The governor decided to strike that to CCPs. So we no longer were paid to do the administrative or the planning. And if we don't have to do the planning, didn't have to submit it to the state any longer. But we still obviously have to run the meeting, I'm still required to sit before the board and do the CCP presentation, put all these slide shows together. So the cost instead of coming directly from the state is just baked into the budget and pulled out this way.

Okay. Thank you.

So again, just each department that gets money has a slide with what its expenditures are for and what the cost amount is for the board to review later or the public to see. This is some of the CBOs or the service provider slides, so you can see GEO reentry. Some of you have come to that. You seen the graduations. You've seen the presentations by Geo.

It's the day reporting center. Geo is the company name. It operates across the street from you in a combined space with my pretrial unit, and they're there daily meeting with folks in the jail. They start the programming with some of them, and then when they're released, there's a reentry program where they're working with them. Ford Street sober living environment.

We're able to have a contract with Ford Street to put folks into their SLE. That one's a little bumpy with CalAIM rollout and partnership. We're still working through that to see. CalAIM may be picking up a good portion of that, so we haven't been expending the full amount with Ford Street due to the CalAIM and partnership, but there's a way for us to still put folks into an SLE so they're not on the streets or living in other people's houses that might still be using drugs. Mendo Lake Alternative Services, that contract bounced back and forth between probation and the DA for many years out of the general fund.

CCP took that over, I want to say it was last year or the year before. And that's an alternative for folks to get community service hours in lieu of incarceration and to do some community restoration projects. They work at the fairgrounds, hospice, goodwill, just to name a few of the places. This year, we came up with this idea last year, but all the recruitments didn't work out. This year I think we're very close to having somebody identified to go into this public safety grants position.

They'll be overseen by my department, but they'll work for CCP as a whole to go after specifically criminal justice grants, and not just write the grant, but then oversee it. Often, a lot of our departments are passing on grants because of the amount of time and work that you have to do the reporting requirements, so this could be a way to bring in funds to the criminal justice system and hopefully offset some of the general fund costs or to bring in new programs that we don't currently have. Gives you variances, changes, which percentages are going up. I mentioned a no vote and public defender's office went up 10% and there was one of our executive members that didn't want that percentage to be as high as it was. Everybody else, all the other votes were yes for every other department and the overall budget minus the one.

As a percentage though, they're pretty in line with some of our cost increases or other things that are going on service wise throughout the departments that are providing or backfilling the work from AB 109. Some of that just talks to you about what some of the changes were from fiscal year twenty five-twenty six. The sheriff's office did some adjusting of who their FTEs are. Probation did the same adjusting some of our staffing that we're paying for. Sam, just more highlights for you to see some things we've already discussed.

So in our bylaws, how our reserve is created is the growth funds. When the growth funds come in, we don't know what those are going to be. But when we do get them, based on performance that we do, 15% of those are pulled directly from the growth, which isn't part of our budget and put into a dedicated reserve with how to pull those reserves. It specifies how we can access those. The innovation subaccount, the growth fund automatically by statute, 10% is pulled out and put into the local innovation subaccount, and then the remainder, the other 75% is rolled into the contingency for the next year, and that's how we're able to build our budgets.

And that gives you a, you know, since inception, what has come in in the base, what has come in in the growth. You can see the variables in growth. Some years there was a really high amount and some years there's zero. I've talked about this before when I took over, DCP was in a deficit. They were always looking back about three years and authorizing expenditures to those levels, so we were getting about 80% of what we needed.

We didn't have a contingency or a reserve, and we didn't have a policy for it either. So now we have bylaws, policy, and contingencies as well as reserves, and we're able to float when we have anomalies. So you could see we're estimating $26.27 at that number, but I told you we ended up $566,000 short from the estimate the state gave us last fiscal year. So we're projecting to expend a number, and I'm hopeful that, you know, even if we're going over by February, which was what was happening this year, that we're still going to be able to cover that for the next four to five years, even if we don't clip spending. I don't believe we're going to need to because every time we get a growth that comes in, that raises our base the same amount going forward.

So if we can stay on track, if we stay fiscally solvent, if we stay away that we're doing business, we'll be able to grow as supervisor Williams has pointed out during normal general fund conversations, we're going to grow our base and our growth more than inflation is happening. And so we're at CCP we should be solid and not needing to come to the general fund covering the FTEs, covering any potential COLAs or raises that the board is giving the employees that are in these units. And then we now have a potential to have a one time expenditure for technology related reasons for CCP department. Talking to the sheriff, those would be things like new technology for virtual options for court appearances which help reduce transportation costs, waiting costs for public defenders and DAs and probation officers sitting around waiting for inmate transportation. There's some potential for efficiencies in the one time expenditure category out of our contingency.

Yeah, so the revise, the state, I mean these are things that are variables we can't control but we're prepared to adjust. All things I've already explained. And that's the end of the slide show presentation for CCP, Community Corrections Partnership. Happy to answer any other questions.

Supervisor Hashtag.

Chief, I appreciate that you're putting in there the analysts to go after the law enforcement grants because I think that's something that you have been envisioning for a long time and I am glad it's coming. It's in the budget. My question is, do you see that as continuing because the funding is so

variable? The group committed to a two year pilot project to see what could happen if we're successful, the money that's brought in, what programs we have and then we'll review. If we do it right, then of course we'll be bringing in enough grants and reasons to keep it going. It should offset itself if we're doing it correctly. If we didn't do it right, then we would cut the program and look for another way.

But I'm hopeful that in two years from now, when I'm back before you talking about this, that it's a successful program and that it potentially has even grown staffing wise and that the county is bringing in far more revenue because of it.

Right. Well, great success on it.

Yes, Supervisor Williams.

Do you have any sense of the stability of the grant opportunities? When we look at HR1, it looks like it's mostly targeted to hurt our county. What do you see for these grant programs? Are there any opportunities opening up?

There's always grants available in the criminal justice arena, and some of them are noncompetitive. And so those ones, you know, is low hanging fruit. Some of the competitive grants are built for rural counties, you know, Prop 64, then some of the marijuana related grants. It's just the administration of them and only having 10% sometimes built in for the government and then the CBO getting the 90, just the fiduciary responsibility often, the juice isn't worth the squeeze. And so if we had somebody that's outside of our FTEs who's able to monitor these, apply for these, and hit all the supervision requirements and the reporting requirements, that's a win for the county and it could help offset general fund or bring in programs that we're just not able to sustain as the government.

If we do get awarded any grants is that something that we could attach to the CEO report or you could give our regular department head item?

Yeah, I could do it at R1 section, but also, you know, they're going to work in probation and reporting to us, but these grants will be identified by the public defender, the sheriff, and then they'll utilize this staff because they'll have the department expertise and help the person apply for it. And then the person would go to that department while they do that work, they'll be inside the probation department. And then we'll report that to the CCP executive committee and your board if that's your wish.

Yeah, I would like to hear about it. I suppose whether if we've received a grant, that's big news. But even if it's just lessons learned, if we don't receive one and we have a change in strategy for how to iterate on the next round, I think that's also valuable.

And I believe your current policy requires me come before when we're applying for these grants, so you'll get that opportunity to know what we're going after as well.

Alright. Just a quick question for me. Under sheriff's office parole hold costs, could you describe that a little bit and the need?

Yeah, so obviously AB 109 changed how inmates go to state prison or to jails. If it's a non non non, they're being housed in a jail instead of a prison. Parole, they've gone to a state prison and they've come out on a supervision by a state agency and when they violate, they no longer go back to a state prison, they go to a county jail. So there's multiple ways to address that as a sheriff's department. You could ask for FTEs to deal with the workload increase.

Some small counties would want a straight bed day rate. So, you know, for each day that a parolee is sitting in the jail, you would have a number associated with the cost of that and you would multiply it. When this started, the sheriff at the time wanted the FTEs because, you know, as costs go up for employees, CCP is essentially covering their races where a bed day rate, you know, is a flat number that you're only getting paid for if you have a parolee in the system. So this is kind of a double dipping in a way. You're getting the best of both worlds by having FTEs and a bed day rate cost, and I think the CCP executive committee is probably topped out about where we are right now for the parole holds as a flat line item plus FTEs.

If it were to raise, I know that I personally would want to pick one or the other, but I'm comfortable with the sheriff's office where they are right now with the FTE pays plus the parole bed day rate pay.

Thank you. I'm not seeing any other questions, so we'll go to the public. You were finished, correct?

Yes, this one is completely done.

Thank you, sir. We'll go to the public for this item. Anybody in the room? Madam Clerk?

Seeing no comment online.

Okay, back to the board for action or discussion. Supervisor Hashtag.

I'll move the recommended community corrections partnership budget for fiscal year twenty twenty six to twenty seven.

Second. Okay.

First by supervisor Hashtag, second by supervisor Williams. We'll vote by the button.

The motion carries unanimously.

Thank you. And then item R5, discussion of possible action including acceptance of the Mendocino County Juvenile Justice Plan, date 03/20/2026, representing Mendocino County's comprehensive multiagency juvenile justice plan, CMJJP, approval of the juvenile justice crime prevention act, JJCPA, budget for fiscal year 2627, and authorization for the chief probation officer to implement the JJCPA budget. Mr. Locatelli, whenever you're ready.

Alright. Good morning again, board chair, county staff, Eisen Locatelli, chief probation officer. Essentially the same story as the CCP. I'm the statutory chair of the Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council. On this one you have what's called the consolidated plan, and for those who don't like acronyms, on the very back page of this plan there's a whole acronym legend, and there's a lot of them.

So I'll try not to use all of the acronyms. I'll try to say it the best I can. So that plan is a 29 page document for the public. It looks like this. It's an attachment for this agenda item.

The slideshow is our version of trying to do a cliff notes for you, something a little easier to follow, digest, and understand why we're doing this. You have your agenda summary so you know you're accepting the plan and you're approving the JJCPA budget, which is the Juvenile Justice Crime Prevention Act funds. And we'll just quickly go through what we're doing here and why. The JJCC is responsible for developing the comprehensive multi agency juvenile justice plan. There's contributing information in here from when you go to the next page of the slide show.

These are the folks that are represented on the JJCC. They're statutorily required memberships. So again, I'm the chair, and then you have your sheriff, your DA, public defender, city police department representative is UCAIA, MCOE, County Office of Ed. We hold the meetings there on their campuses, Ukiah and Unified School District being the largest campus, largest group from the school districts attends. Our social services department, mental health, superior court, and then we have community based folks that are there.

You also, your chairs are statutorily required to be on this committee, so Chair Norvell is in attendance this year, and keep going. You'll see what our requirements are, is to meet no less than twice a year where we do the budget in the spring, and then in the September meeting we do the outcomes from what the expenditures were. We're required to submit to OYCR, which is the Office Office of Youth and Community Restoration, the expenditure plan. That's why we do this in April so that we can meet our deadline by the May 1 for reporting to them. And then we meet in September because we have another deadline October 1 to report what happened to the money and what we did and what our program outcomes were.

So just gives you again, we met on March 20, the program was approved. Some of the funding on the next page, most of this is prevention intervention. This is really how we're able to help give money to CBOs, some of the community based organizations, to do some of the prevention intervention work. So hopefully, you know, if you do a lot of work upstream, hopefully there's not a lot of downstream costs. Operating a juvenile hall can be costly, not only in dollars to the county, but impacts to the community, families.

Having kids incarcerated, taking them out of their daily lives and putting them into a justice setting can be traumatizing, but it could also be a way to save their lives, to get them off of drugs back into school. The snack pack program, you know, is a, in my opinion, a really good program. I think personally having to worry about food when you're a kid, you know, it's troubling. So if we can keep the kids going to school, I think they have their best chance of being successful and out of the criminal justice system. So this is a way for our homeless families to ensure that their children, you know, are fed on the weekends and holidays when the schools aren't offering their meals.

The GREAT program is a way for us to get into schools at the fourth grade level as probation officers and law enforcement and make connections with kids, teach them resistance to gang programs, let them see our faces in a setting that isn't, you know, a traumatic event when we're responding to a situation that's already happened. If they know us before those events, you know, we'll have better relationships. So school districts have wanted us to provide this and we're able to with great. Currently, the only certified instructors in our county are probation officers. I've been trying to get the Ukiah Police Department and Fort Bragg Police Department through the certification process.

They're not offered very often and they're out of state, but we'll be able to fund this through the JJCPA grant when those trainings become available. Both those agencies want to teach with us. So that's great. And then IMPACT is an internal program we use as a way as an alternative to some incarceration and an incentive based way to get kids motivated. MCYP, the Mendocino County Youth Project, we provide funding.

They can do direct referrals from the school if there's a low level situation to get services or we can refer to them also if we have low level crimes and we think that's a more appropriate way to handle it rather than being in a juvenile hall. And then the restorative justice youth court, some of you may remember teen peer court. That's what that program is. RCS is currently running it. It was a grant that the county got where we were just the fiduciary overseer of it.

That grant expired. It was a three year grant. A lot of the juvenile justice advocates wanted us to continue this and so we were able to fund it out of the JJCPA. We had to scale back the cost significantly but it's still a viable program in the county as an alternative to incarceration. And it's also a way for schools to directly refer to the program without involving the justice system.

So that's your budget for the JJCPA. That's your slideshow presentation. The consolidated plan is the 29 page document. It has all of the stakeholders' opinions. A couple paragraphs from each of the stakeholders are in there about what they think the system's lacking needs, strengths, our outcomes, some of the crimes that we're seeing, our programs really that we're offering in custody are listed in here and what we're spending some of our dollars towards with the CBOs who provide services inside the juvenile hall.

So that's what this agenda item was. I'm open for questions. That's the end of the presentation.

Thank you. Supervisor Williams. Yeah, I think part

of the success of the program may be attributed to the continuity of leadership. You've been at this for a long time. And your team's general attention to outcome detail. When you draft recommendations for how to budget funds for the upcoming year, what do you see as the most impactful programs of

the past?

Do the needs change over time and that's why we have to reevaluate which programs to budget? Or are there outcomes that were so substantial that we want to try to repeat those programs in coming years?

Yeah, good question. When I look at program outcomes and the data, those are all things that we're considering whether we want to continue with the program. You want to get stakeholder feedback, so our stakeholders or the incarcerated youth asking them if the programs are working, checking to see if it's having an impact, checking on the recidivism data, checking on two years ago, I would have told you we had hardly any females in juvenile hall, but we didn't really need a program dedicated for females. That isn't true today. Forty percent of the population in the last six months has been female, so bringing in the girl circle as a program.

Just looking at trends and trying to anticipate and adjust accordingly.

Supervisor Heshczyk.

Well, thank you for the presentation and the plan. I really enjoy reading it, and, I move the recommended action. Second.

Yeah. I just have one question. On on the meals program, there was a lot of discussion and comments around that, all positive at the last meeting. What I found interesting was how the meals get delivered and all the people involved in that. Could you talk about that just a little bit?

Yeah. So this is a it's an MCOE program, and they had a grant and to my knowledge, the grant ran out. They had volunteers and donations but it wasn't sustainable and the program probably was going to fall apart. They came to our committee, pitched the idea, and how the meals are delivered is voluntary through UPS brown truck through the county. They do it for free.

They're running already, so they'll put the meals in and do the delivery to the sites, and then the school does the administration, packages it, and sends it out. You guys had a proclamation on volunteers. This is another example of the volunteers in the county plus MCOE plus the partnership with JJCC to ensure that you know, our less fortunate populations throughout the county, countywide, are receiving services. You know, a lot of services seem to be city focused, whether that's Chicaia or Fort Bragg, and this program really does outreach into around Valley, Anderson Valley, some of our less fortunate areas.

Thank you for that. Okay, I'm not seeing any more questions. We'll go to the public. Seeing anybody in the room, madam clerk.

Seeing no comments online.

Okay. Back to the board. And I believe we've had a motion and a second. We'll vote by the button.

The motion carries unanimously.

Okay. Item R6, discussion of possible action, including acceptance of the Mendocino County California Juvenile Justice Realignment Block Grant annual plan for fiscal year twenty six twenty seven dated 03/20/2026, acceptance of the JJRBG budget for fiscal year twenty six twenty seven, and authorization for the chief probation officer to implement the JJRBG budget. Mister Locatelli?

Good morning again, chair, board members, county staff. Eisen Locatelli, chief probation officer. This one is a little different than the previous two. This is a probation specific funding source, and it is because of SB eight twenty three, which closed the Department of Juvenile Justice or California Youth Authority, depending on what you remember of it. But it was essentially the state prison system for youth, and it requires all the counties to deal with the deep end of the juvenile justice system.

So essentially, if a youth were to commit murder in the old days, theoretically, they could go to the state system. The state system, by the time I became chief, had two prisons in California, and they've closed those and essentially 58 counties are now responsible for replicating that. You can understand the economies of scales issues that this has created. The chief probation officers of California, my state association was opposed to this. I believe Mendocino County itself voted no and was opposed to this legislatively.

So now we're stuck dealing with those impacts and some of those impacts go through this plan. So I'll go through it with you with that introduction, which might be a little biased. I admit I was opposed to this. I lived through this, and I've tried to implement it. There may be some others who agree with this theory.

But I'm an operator of it, and so that's my opinion. So the plan, again, there's a 33 page attachment. That's the realignment block grant annual plan we're required to submit to be able to receive these funds to deal with the offsets. I have requested at different points from county council an opinion as to, how you can expend these funds. The statute hasn't been tested thoroughly.

I think we're most likely going to need case law at some point because if you ask the Office of Youth and Community Restoration, they'll verbally tell you that it can be used for a more expansive thing than the statute says. We don't currently have any youth in SecureTrack, so we don't have an expense, in my opinion. That's the way the statute reads. But there are some who believe that you can use it for prevention or intervention to stop kids from coming into a secure track. So I haven't taken that approach yet.

Not sure what would happen if you were expending money and the state said ultimately that that was wrong. I think county council's working on the issue and one day the county, in my opinion, you know, it's a prop 30 protected source. If they were to try to take the money that we have back, I think that they would have a responsibility to take the realigned population back. But those haven't been fully tested or vetted yet, so it's a little bit more opining on my part than I usually like to do for the board. I generally try to stick to facts, but I think that will be an issue that you may see surface in the next few years.

So going through the slide show, I basically explained how this came about. These are the laws that changed and what the timing that this happened in. So the funding formula was set, and it's going to be revised. So, you know, again, the states set something and then they're revising it as they go. So, you know, some people would use building the plane as they fly.

Some people would say, you know, it wasn't fully understood how the realignment was going to be funded, what were the percentages that we were going to get. When you go to the funding page, you can see some of the other difficulties running this program. You can see projected versus actuals. It's really hard to budget when you have swings like that when you're projecting to get 836,000 and you get 380,000 or you have the flip where it's projected to get 332,000 and you get 802,000. So the plan here, I've said this for quite some time, is unless we have three or four youth, we wouldn't want to operate our own secure track.

To reopen a C unit would cost the county roughly a million dollars plus or minus, so what we would do is save these monies in case we have youth that are in this situation and we would use our contracts. So, you know, if you had essentially two or three kids in this scenario, you're looking at over 7 and 50,000 to $800,000 to cover those costs to send them out of county for that year. So if we were to have two kids in this scenario in the small county minimum is 250,000 we wouldn't even be able to cover that and that's part of my objection on SBA 23 and this closure these costs used to be more like $25,000 a year per kid and now you're looking at about $350,000 because counties can say what the price is. There's no state system that controls it in the cost of scales, you know, we already talked about that. Also, I was in a position when our kid was at DJJ and they closed it and the kid was going to come back.

I believe I got 43 no's from counties before the forty fourth county agreed to take the youth. There's nothing that requires a county to accept our youth, unlike the state system where this happened. You don't have a choice. Counties have choices to take other kids' counties, so we're not currently even though we contract with other counties, we have their kids come to us not for a secure track. We don't have any secure track in our facility, and the reason is we have a linear juvenile hall at this point, and it's in my opinion the best interest not to put a 14 year old with a 24 year old.

So technically you could have up to 25 year olds in a juvenile hall if they were to commit a crime like murder on their sixteenth birthday and that's the longest they're going to be kept under this law. It's up to their 20 birthday in a juvenile hall, in a county. We're hopeful that we can continue to contract with counties that are much bigger than us. That would be Shasta County, Sonoma County, and I believe Merced County are the three that we're currently contracting with in these scenarios in Madera, but we haven't actually used that before. So continuing, these are some more of the challenges that we're facing, some of the things that we're doing in preparation.

Juvenile halls weren't built for long term housing. I would find it difficult to imagine somebody spending eight years in our juvenile hall structurally. It wasn't built for that, but we are trying to have more vocational opportunities and higher education opportunities for the kids who graduating or who have graduated, working with MCOE to do that. The school is in juvenile hall, but it's run by MCOE, not by Indecino County probation. The last couple pages just show you some more of the annual plan, what we're doing, partnerships that I mentioned, and then the JJRBG budget shows you what came in, the carry forwards, where the expenditure were, and those are the years that we did have kids in secure track.

We currently have none. We did have two, one because they were returned to us from DJJ and another who committed a crime in the court, put them in a secure track, and we contracted with Shasta. So those are what the expenditures are for. The one change, which did cause a little somebody to vote no on the plan, OYCR is responsible for doing investigations as it relates to the Youth Bill of Rights. We didn't have that before.

That didn't exist. BSCCs are a statutory authority who comes in and does regulation inspections. OICR now does these new inspections. And so what I've said is if the state is going to create additional workloads for county and there is a funding stream that they should be billed for it and so I put that in the plan. I ran that through county council's office as long as it was in the plan and it's directly related to this law change.

It seems to be an agreeable funding source for that work and if we track it, time code it to the work that's created by any of this work, seems a valid expenditure. But we've never actually done it. It's in the plan now. In case it comes up, we could bill to it. That would be one different something different in the plan.

It won't be very much, but it's more of a principle issue for me. And that is basically the full JJRBG. There's 30 pages or 33 pages, as I mentioned, in the full plan. The acronyms were described in the other. You have all of the statutory required folks who are on this subcommittee. Their departments and names are all in here. And then some of our crimes trends are also found in here. And then the programs and services that we're offering.

I'm not seeing any yes, Supervisor Williams.

Another solid presentation. Thank you. I would move approval.

Okay. No more questions. Go to the public. Nobody in their own. Madam Clerk?

Seeing

no comments online.

Thank you. All right. We have a first by Supervisor Williams.

Second.

Second by Supervisor Hashtag. We'll vote by the button.

The motion carries unanimously.

All right. That's all three presentations. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, sir. Our next item, r seven, discussion of possible action, including adoption of resolution of the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors approving and disapproving certain exceptions from the county road standards for Bella Vista subdivision, project Ukiah area, the sponsor's transportation. Yes, sir.

Mr. Chair, ladies and gentlemen of the board, I'm Howard DeShield, your director of transportation. With me here today is Deputy Director Jason Wise, who oversees our land improvement and reviews our development plans. We've written obviously, the applicant is appealing the department's decision to ask for well, they're appealing our decision to ask for reinforced concrete pipe for the storm drains in the Bella Vista subdivision and our standard is for vertical curves and they are appealing the issue over roll curve. Years ago, as this developer bought the Gardens Gate, was Gardens Gate was going to be maintained.

The roads were going to be private. They were going to be maintained by an HOA. I said I would support road curbs. We would still support road curbs. The developer gave us a design memo that basically gave some other jurisdictions with road curbs. We selected the one from Santa Rosa with rebar reinforcing. They don't like that. They want the one without rebar reinforcing. Well, the standard from Sacramento has a larger base section, so it's stronger to withstand wheel loads for people who roll onto curb. So we would still be open to not doing rebar and doing the Sacramento standard.

That could be worked out. I feel much stronger about the concrete storm drains because it's my understanding to take these roads into county maintenance, which would put the department responsible for the curb gutter sidewalk and storm drains as well as the road surface. And these storm drains are rather deep in places if, because they're plastic, heaven forbid, there was a firestorm and a fire ever got started in them, these plastic pipes a little chimney every so often which is the curb inlet where water goes in. But in dry conditions it's just open to burn. There's lots of air and lots of opportunity for that.

Also because there's other utilities going to every house, have water service, you have electric service because everything's underground, have sewer service, digging up and replacing damaged storm drain pipes would cause us to interfere with a lot of utility that exists in the road. And I just think it's better to make that initial investment, buy something durable like concrete pipe, reinforced which concrete pipe, won't burn, won't rust, and won't be a future major maintenance consideration. So my memo goes into much more of the details. I know that the applicant's memo counters with an article from the Paradise Fire where it shows that the plastic water lines weren't negatively impacted. But you've got to understand water lines are generally full of water, and they're also not vented to the surface regularly, you know, even if they were empty to allow them to burn or be damaged.

So that's my short introduction. We're here to answer your questions and I'll let the chair take it to the appealing applicant.

Thank you, sir. Supervisor Williams? Yeah, I have a

question about the specific language in the title and the recommended action. It calls for approving and disapproving. I read disapproving as not synonymous with denying. I would think of disapproving as withholding approval, whereas denying would be a final determination. Was this intentional, or should we treat it as synonymous with denying? When I look at, I don't know, subdivision, ACT, CEQA, I see deny as the choice word, not disapprove throughout.

I'll double check the language in tab H. That may have been what I was looking at. And I'll get back to

you.

Thank you. I'm not seeing any more questions. We can go to the public on this. Nobody in the room. Madam Clerk?

Seeing nobody online.

Okay. Back to the board. Supervisor Mohan.

Thank you. I'd like to thank the Department of Transportation for working with this applicant. I know that there's been a lot of conversations around both of these subjects, and I appreciate the applicant's interest in continuing to move forward with this project. I would like to move the alternative action to modify for the HDPE piping for the storm drain system and for the rolled curbs without the rebar.

Anyone else? Supervisor Haschak.

I just want to be clear on what that motion was. You wanted to allow the HDPE pipe and the rolled curbs without rebar?

Correct. To not require the use of rebar in the curbs.

Supervisor Williams? Yeah, I'm

not too concerned about the rebar in the curbs, but I don't feel there's enough information to make an informed decision about the long term impacts of having flammable material in the storm drain. So this is one of those decisions where I want to see this project move forward. I've been pushing as hard as anyone. But I don't want Howard to come back ten years from now and say, I told you so. And I think there's a real potential given the climate conditions, fire propensity in that area, that he could be right.

Supervisor Klein?

I'd like to second Supervisor Myron's motion.

Okay. I have a question for you, if you could come back up. It sounded like you were either up in the air on the reinforced IRBs. Is that correct?

Well originally under the TAB H exception, the applicant can bring engineering evidence to us for us to consider an alternative. And they gave us several examples. One had rebar to reinforce the road curbs, because obviously now you have traffic driving on them at intervals regularly. And then one of them had the rebar to make them stronger. Another example had a stronger base section, in other words, more rock under it.

And we would have continued discussing that within. Our real sticking point was the concrete storm drain, because that's where the big money is if it ever had to be replaced. And that is the big one for me. Because you can fix the curb. It's on the surface.

If you have to dig down four, five, six feet, you're wiping out all the improvements above which are very expensive and interfering with a lot of utilities. There's never going to be easier time to put concrete pipe at the bottom of that trench than when you the ground is bare out there and nothing is built, and then everything will be built on top of it.

What was the developer's attitude towards the concrete and your hard line on that? Was it, if this is what we decide they're going to pull stakes and leave?

Have always won plastic for a lot of the reasons they indicate. It's easier to work with. It's lighter. They had those arguments in their letter. I get that. The initial cost would be less for them. The replacement cost at a future date would be much more. That's my argument back. And in this case, this is, I believe, the developer intends to pursue putting these roads into the county maintained system. It would be an expense to the road fund at the future to have to make those repairs.

Thank you, sir. Supervisor Williams.

Well, that's my concern. If it were my project and I were handing it over to the county to maintain, I'd probably be looking at the cheap solution to. Right? The upfront cost is less. But I don't have any sense I don't have any expertise here on how long those plastic pipes are going to last, what condition they'll be in ten, twenty years from now. Am I sticking with the next generation in this county a major expense?

If they don't burn, they'll be very durable. The plastic pipes will. I admit that.

Do we have any information on these pipes burning elsewhere?

I looked online for some of that. And a lot of jurisdictions, including Mendocino County in the past, a lot of the subdivisions we've done, we have put in either concrete or metal pipe. We weren't using plastic. We did use it in the Vichy Springs development. And I will admit, after the fall of twenty seventeen, I kicked myself for using it at Vichy. I wished I hadn't.

What is the cost differential?

What's that?

What is the cost differential roughly?

Pipe itself, I understand, per foot, just buying it at the yard, is about the same. It is, as the developer indicates in their memo, it's harder to work with. It's heavier, harder to fit other things around it because it's rigid and you have to saw through with a concrete saw versus just cutting it if it's plastic. So it is harder to work with. Is more initial cost of construction.

Do we have any ballpark? Mean are we asking for a $50,000 upgrade or a $2,000,000 upgrade?

You would have to ask the developer. Can't tell you.

So chair I think

you need more. I've been really good about following the board's rules as unenforceable as they are that I haven't abstained. This is the first time. I don't want to vote against this project in any way. It's critical. But I also put some weight on the director's opinion that if this were handed over to the county and we had a fire right away and we had to dig the thing up. We don't have budget for that. I mean I would rather the county subsidize the project and do it right than get stuck with infrastructure that we have to maintain it at public's expense that's wrong.

Thank you. Supervisor Mohan.

Thank you. For me, I guess my question to the director, just so I'm very clear, the HCPE pipe would be long lasting. It does possibly cost less to put in, also possibly cost less to maintain from route intrusion and other things. Your major concern as the director of transportation is in an absolute firestorm.

And

I appreciate that greatly. Also, I think given the changes in climate change, we all should be concerned about that. However, I think that in this instance, that is not my major concern. I think that if there were to be a major firestorm, we're going to have plenty of other damage to have to deal with. And I don't think that it's appropriate to hold this developer to a standard that other developers may not have been held to, especially considering that the applicant has provided information to this board about why HCPE should be accepted and how we could move forward.

So my motion still stands. And if we don't have any further questions, I call for a vote.

Thank you. I do have one question. Davichie Springs, you said you kicked yourself for that. Could you explain why?

Because we went with plastic. We went with this pipe. So if there were a hot fire up there, it's possible we'd be faced with this burden on the road fund. I wished at that point I'd have asked for concrete. But I agree. I wasn't thinking about fire much before 2017.

Okay. Thank you. You bet. Yes, sir.

Deputy County Council, Matthew Kudrowski. Just to clarify, I appreciate and respect the alternate motion. If we can make it a tentative motion so I can revise the resolution to make the findings in the alternative and try and bring that back after closed.

Okay.

Supervisor Williams?

Can staff also bring back an analysis of whether there's a real fire risk here? Is this theoretical or is this something that other counties have had to pay for? Right now where I stand is I'm abstain. I don't have enough information.

Supervisor Haschak.

Well, this is, you know, we do need the housing, but we also need the respect our Department of Transportation or Public Works Director and his opinion on this and it just seems like if we go with that plastic we are kind of setting ourselves up in the future for this potential economic crisis disaster and that's not really a good situation to be in. So I would vote no on this motion just because I don't think that we should go with the plastic. Should take the advice of the experts that we have. And also I think with the curb, it does seem reasonable to either have the rebar or a greater depth of the base just because people will be driving up on those curbs and it's going to break down and at some point we'll probably be responsible for that too.

I'm sorry, this will be my last question. But you mentioned the alternatives of the reinforced curve versus the deeper base. Where was the applicant on either of those?

Well, originally, when they verbally spoke to me, said, yeah, I'll submit a tab H. I'll go with roll curve. They gave us several alternatives from other jurisdictions and we picked the one from Santa Rosa, Sonoma County with the rebar in it because the rebar reinforces it, there's less chance of it breaking, it just makes it stronger. Again, it's one of those things that's easy to do while you're pouring it. It's a lot of work to do after it breaks. And I'm always thinking about ongoing maintenance costs because if these roads are accepted into the county maintained system, then that will be a burden on the road department.

Right. So if the board were to decide not to require the reinforced, is the applicant open to the deeper base? Pardon me? Okay. Well, let's bring him in.

Hello. Sorry. I sorry. I was in another meeting, and I didn't I thought this is gonna be after lunch.

No worries.

I I'm coming in really cold, so I don't know some of the conversation. On the WorldCurve, which I just just caught the end of am I still on? Yes. Okay. Thank you.

It's not easy to put in the ream the rebar, and that was an oversight from myself and my engineer on showing that as a as an example. We did not see that Santa Rosa had that as a standard. It's pretty common to just not use rebar. When we talk to the company that would do the sidewalk construction, rebar complicates it because we can no longer really use a machine. From what I understand, it's really a for concrete strength, it's two things.

It's the sub base compacted to 99%, I believe. So your AC or the sub base of that. And then the number of sacks of concrete you use, generally, it's a four sack bag. So it's number numbers of sacks per yard if I'm speaking correctly. And in this case, I believe the standard is six. So we're it is a stronger concrete.

Okay. And then there was the the major concern seems to be around the plastic versus the concrete in the storm. Correct. Yeah. Would you like to speak on that?

Yeah. So it's a construction cost that is essentially tripled for the reinforced concrete. The high density polythene pipe is a pretty common material that's used. We have no problem, like, compromising or or doing some sort of assurances that anywhere where this pipe could daylight, we can put the concrete, you know, x number of linear feet. But, like, I believe these reinforced concrete pipes come in four sections of four.

So if it's four eight twelve or some number like that, we're happy to to compromise on that. The plastic pipe is a common construction material that's used that we're using for everything else, all the other services, water. If we're using gas, gas would use it. You know? So I understand, and I'm not trying to downplay any concern as someone that lives at the the foot of Paradise. But Paradise is using that that pipe to to put in where their reinforced concrete is falling apart, where their iron ductile is is, rusting. So it's a common building material.

Thank you. I believe we have one more question. Supervisor Williams,

is Paradise using it for water or

I storm don't remember the article that I found. I put it in the in the packet, and I just kinda came across it when I was rushing to get this elevated.

Do you do you have any evidence for us that this material, if there were a fire, would not need to be replaced?

I don't have anything that specifically I think it I think it depend it's situational is probably the best anecdotal evidence.

And then are you planning to ask the county to take over these roads as part of our maintained network? Or are these going to be private roads in perpetuity? I guess my sense is if it's private, you can put whatever pipe you want in, right? It's not going to be a county expense. But if you're asking the county to absorb the future maintenance expenses, we would rather do have the roads done to county standards. Can you guide us on which it is?

Yeah. We were looking that these would be public roads.

So you turn it over to the county to maintain?

Correct.

What what do you what do you think the ballpark cost is in using the concrete? You said it's three times as much, but three times what? If

Labor, trucking, mostly.

What what what is the base cost? Is it three times

Oh, like a dollar per linear foot? I don't have off the top of my head.

You don't have a a rough total?

No. I yeah. I'm getting I'm getting into construction world and I'm not

Yeah. Appreciate that. I don't know about this either, but my my concern is I don't know if we're talking about $50,000 or or $5,000,000. Right? If it's 5,000,000, I guess, we're gonna have to use the wrong material. But if it's a nominal cost, I would rather the county not be in a position to maintain something that's much more expensive in the long term.

Yeah. I don't think it's I don't think it's a nominal cost. It's probably in the high 6 figures.

Okay. Good? No I'm not good. Are you finished with your position?

There's a position nobody wants to be in and that we don't have enough information to make a good decision. Chair what do you recommend?

I recommend we go to the public. Anybody in the room? No? Madam Clerk?

Seeing no comments online.

Okay. Back to the board. So I'm going look to legal here real quick about your request for a tentative

motion? Sure, if We I have a motion of a first and a second. What we would like to do and I was just talking to the CEO in terms of logistics, but what we'd like to do is be able to bring that back as a red line so everybody knows what it is that they would be voting on related to the first and second before you take a vote. So if we could come back after the closed session. Or we might be able to bring it back prior to going to closed session.

Deputy County Counsel, Matthew Kudrowski. Tab H requires findings to be made. So if we are changing the final decision of the resolution, I just have to update the findings. And right now, the current motion would say, essentially, the applicant's position. So, you look to their documentation and bring something back as soon as I can today. I think my thought on that tentative is more of the idea of, are there three votes in support of that for me to go forth and do that work?

Supervisor Williams, did you have another question?