Health & Human Needs Committee - Regular Meeting

To order then, it is 7.27.26 at 5.02 p.m. Can we please do a roll call?

Co-Chair Gailey?

Yes.

Co-Chair Beruchak? Supervisor Furman?

Here.

Supervisor Wegleitner?

Here.

Todd Campbell.

Campbell here.

Director Smith. Director Smith.

Yeah, she says I can't hear anything, but she is here and she's working to resolve the issue.

Thank you, Chair. And then Dr. Elizabeth Salisbury-Offshar is excused. You have quorum.

Excellent. Thank you so much. Next on the agenda is B, consideration of minutes. First, we didn't approve the June 15, so the June 15 meeting. Is there a motion to approve the June 15, 2026 meeting?

I'll move both minutes.

Okay, second. Second.

So then the second virtual chair, can we say the name?

Was it like, like, like Leitner moves minutes from the June and July meeting.

So we'll just take care of both of them at once. And Todd Campbell second. So moved. So yeah, is there any discussion or corrections for any one of the minutes that anybody has? All right, all in favor?

Aye.

Any oppositions? Any abstentions? All right, that motion does carry then. So both of those minutes are good. The next on the agenda.

I just want to check in quick to see if Director Smith is able to speak.

Yes, I can hear you all now. Thank you. Great.

Thank you, Supervisor Reigleitner. So those two are approved. I wanted to check too, is there any registrants tonight?

There are no registrants to speak, none.

Okay, thank you. So I'll move on to C then, fund transfers. Are there any funds transfers today? Not that I remember. All right. Hearing none, we'll move on. What's D is? Referrals. Any referrals? Didn't think so. We'll move on again. So E, we have presentations. And we did have Felicia for the opioid settlement funding program. She's going to do some updates. Thank you, Felicia.

Can you all hear me? Okay, perfect. Awesome. So I was able to get updates about all the contracts and everyone who's funded under opioid settlement. I will say just as a general overview, everyone is expected to spend all of their funds for 2026. I'll go into a little detail about all of them and I apologize for not getting this written up to you ahead of time. I didn't make the deadline for it to be posted so I'm just going to give a verbal update and when I have everything nice and typed out I will give that to you. So starting out with Department of Administration, I'm here. So my position is still funded. I was hired later in the year. So there is that difference that will be for the Department of Health Services. Compass Clinic is on track to be spending through. They've had over 1,100 units of service. So that's an hour of service time with an individual. That's what a unit of service is. So that's 1,100 units of services. That's 10 unique clients. And this was through June. So this isn't current. None of the information I have is exact, like up to date. But they are anticipated to spend through fully of their contract today. The medication-assisted treatment, this covers Vivitrol primarily for uninsured individuals. And currently, they usually use grant funding first. And once that's expended, then they use the opioid settlement. And they are on target to spend that opioid settlement through at the next six months of the year. Historically, that's how that's always been spent through. I see Heidi's hand.

Thanks, Chair. And I don't know if you want to wait for questions to the end or if you want to take them in order, whatever. I just wanted to, I just wanted to, I guess, clarify with the medication-assisted treatment, is that, are we talking, who's providing that? You're talking about a different program than Compass, right? Correct. Yep.

So it's the line that's... Yep, so we cover, it's the purchase of medications for treatment of opioid use disorders by contractors providing medication-assisted treatment. This is a flexible budget line. It primarily has Vivitrol through Journey Mental Health, other outpatient psychiatry providers, and then the jail. So people who are being discharged from the jail that are on Vivitrol, which is a long-injecting medication, It's about $1,300 per injection, so it is pricey, but it's a good service for us to continue to provide for those who are uninsured. So it's different than Compass.

Different than Compass. And for me personally, I think maybe waiting until the end so somebody can finish their presentation would help me stay on track a little bit so I don't get lost. So thank you.

Um, and then outreach, um, outreach, I, they will be funding their full or they'll be spending their full amount of money. They are on track to do that. Um, so far this year, well in 2020. 25, they have provided harm reduction trainings to about 150 individuals and distributed materials from seven to 78 individuals. This year through quarter one, they had already distributed harm reduction materials and supplies to 23 individuals. They maintain strong community partnerships and they're keeping their performance indicators. targeted so they are on track to spend and hit all of their target goals that they had a headset safe communities we heard from safe last to last meeting so they had kind of given an update so they are they will spend through they are also spending their one-time carryover that they had from 2025. And so they will spend that funding as well. And they'll continue to provide their prevention throughout the rest of the year. So they are, they did meet the four different school deliverables and they've, even the sources of strength program, like we heard, two weeks ago has continued to be spread into other schools and they've um total of 10 schools and over 233 um students have engaged in their program so pretty good outcome that's Right to here. Emergency management, they had a little bit of carryover from last year as well. So they added that into their budget. So it's a little bit more than the $141,000 that they had. They are on target to spend through, especially with the placement of the two new vending machines that hope to be placed. um, very soon. Um, they still have their opioid prevention specialist position that is fully funded, um, and she remains full time. Um, a little bit about the current vending machines. So some of the things that they, um, have in their vending machines could be nasal naloxone, IM naloxone, they have fentanyl and xylosing test strips, they have period packs, hope kits, they have hygiene, pill organizers, sharp disposals, gun locks, gloves, socks, lock boxes, and they kind of change things out per the season as well. So you'll see more winter items in the winter and more summer items in the summer. So far at the St. Mary's location, they have dispensed over 1,715 items out of that vending machine. And then the UW, they've dispensed 1,262 items. items out of that. Also noted that the fentanyl test strips kits are a three pack of three test strips, but we've only been counting them as one item because they're bundled together in a kit. So technically there are more items that have been dispensed. They continued the Leave Behind program with EMS as well. And they've distributed 244 Hope Kits with all EMS and fire agencies in Dane County. They also provide some Hope Kits to the Sheriff's Department for the venue movement. machine there as well. They have some funding left right now, but again, they are on target to spend that through with the placement of the harm reduction, the two other vending machines, those will, they'll need to purchase more supplies and things like that for that. Sheriff's Department, the reentry coordinator, they have made 733 individuals they've had contact with that are residents starting as of January 1st, and that is as of July 22nd, 2026. So that's pretty up-to-date data. They do have a few individuals that they continue to have contact with after booking. And then they provided me information about their harm reduction vending machine as well. So they've distributed this year 351 boxes of Narcan, 370 fentanyl test strip kits, first aid slash safe use kits, 175, and then hope kits, 166 hope kits as well. So that's just a general overview of some of the data points. I know it's kind of hodgepodge of different data points for each agency or each contract. And that's because that's what they've been collecting. So I just asked for data numbers that they had or that they had available. That was easy and a quick turnaround to total up and provide to me. So those are just quick summaries. If we want more standardized metrics going forward, I would suggest that we ask that like in the beginning of 2027, because everyone's collecting something a little bit different. And that's how the contracts are set up right now. And so that's the information I have so far.

Thank you. Thank you so much, Felicia. Now, if there's any questions from the committee members, we can Looks like none right now. Yeah, Heidi, Supervisor Weigleitner.

Thank you. The locations of the vending machines, you mentioned Meritor and UW. There's two. Are those the two locations? Okay.

So there's two that emergency management. So the opioid prevention specialist, she takes care of those two. And yep, that's correct that those are those locations. But there is one also in the sheriff's department in the jail. There's a vending machine when you walk right in there.

Okay.

And then...

On the medication-assisted treatment, and I don't know, and maybe Todd also could layer in here, but do we have, I guess, more details on who's accessing the services, who's providing the services? Yeah. it just felt a little generalized. So I was, and maybe I missed numbers, but.

Yeah. And, and Felicia did cover this a little bit. We do have a contract with journey mental health center for psychiatry. Okay. And there are, there are single providers of psychiatry. And so we, we will pay for those medications for the uninsured. Same is true for folks who are at the Dane County Jail who volunteer to have a Vivitrol injection before their release back to the community. So as those supplies dwindle, we will replenish those supplies with these funds. That's how it works. The provider invoices us, essentially, the department, and then we're sending out the number of doses that they need.

And the provider is Journey?

Journey and WellPay. Okay. Yes.

Okay. Do we know how many have received services? I'm sorry if I missed that.

Felicia, I don't think there have been any requests so far this year. Typically, these are requests that come in toward the latter half of the year as supplies dwindle and then agencies are looking to stock up.

Okay. It might be useful to kind of Is this the first year this program has used these dollars? Like, do we have a, I mean, I think you said they're on track to spend, but like, is that, I don't know, based on historical data when the second half of the year request coming kind of like. It is. It's not the first year. Yes. Okay. And then I don't see any other hands. I have one more, if that's all right, chair. Yeah. With the reentry coordinator, you said 733 individuals have been contacted, and we got information on the distribution of test kits. Do we know how many folks with opioid use disorder

were served um we do not but we could get that data so the person that actually would provide this data on a regular basis was actually on vacation so um captain splinter was you know working really diligently to get me the information that she could grab um she did highlight that they do make a lot of referrals for peer support and connection to treatment um so this re-entry coordinator is making a lot of those connections um and she did um

didn't have a number but verbally told me that they're a majority of them do have some kind of substance use disorder so thank you yeah so I think that's why it might be important to try to get some kind of standardization for metrics on what we want to do for it for the program so it's kind of equal across the board I don't know how we're going to do that but I think that would be really important. And yeah, I would like to know between like journey and reentry, kind of like the numbers that they're using, see if one's like greatly higher than the other. And then you're going to work on other stuff then Felicia, I forgot what the next step was for you to get more.

So you requested this to be also in writing, and I didn't have enough time to make the 1130 deadline on Friday. I didn't have all the information until today. So I will still type this out and summarize everything I shared today. so that you do have this in writing. And if there were any other data points, everyone that I asked was more than happy to share any other data. I was very general and just asking for high level data that they had just so that the subcommittee could get an idea of how these programs are really working. And they're all very successful, which is really awesome.

Okay. Heidi, we'll take one more and then I'd like to move on to the next agenda item.

Okay. I'm just wondering if any of the programs are collecting demographic data, if we have a sense of, you know, race, gender, age... of people utilizing their programs. Again, just also as we think about what data we may want to standardize, it's just good to know kind of what is being collected right now and where we might move.

Yeah, I can say that some of the programs would have that, but there is a lot that would not. Some of the outreach programs, things like that, naloxone trainings, you know, the best practices that we're not collecting all that demographic because we really want that to be low barrier, quick access to those resources. So Those would be areas we wouldn't have that data. And there would be some, like, I'm sure Compass would give us demographic information if we asked for it. And I'm not sure exactly what the Sheriff's Department, they might have some kind of information related to that as well. So we could get some here and there, but not across all programs.

And if we had some for some programs, that might just kind of be an idea of like who's using what service. It might not standardize all of the metrics, but that might be somewhere we can take a look at. All right. Thank you so much, Alicia. Really appreciate it. Keep up the good work. So yeah, I'd like to move on to the next agenda item, which is item F, items requiring community action, which we have the 2027 annual reports and recommendations to HHN. I know we kind of talked about this and there's a deadline. I don't know if we have any updates or how we're going to navigate this one. Are there any recommendations that we need to bring or kind of where we stand on that? Todd?

Supervisor Baruchek raised his hand first, so I'll defer. Supervisor Baruchek, go ahead.

Thanks. I was just going to remind, you know, remind the committee how I think I remember we planned to do this day. We're going to have a sort of directed discussion and try to agree on motions maybe that we could vote on for the next meeting. So I'm just going to throw that out there as something how I thought today's discussion would go. Obviously, I don't think it would be too late to change that structure if that's what the committee wants.

Thank you, Co-Chair Pruszczak. Any thoughts on that? Todd, maybe you can add to that.

Yeah, that's my recollection as well. I think our objective, knowing that we have a needs assessment that is going to get underway here, which will largely inform our recommendations to HHN next year for the 2028 budget. Given the progress report that we just heard, I would recommend that what we're looking at are probably recommendations that are supporting the status quo, even though that doesn't feel great or revolutionary or anything. But I think we have a lot of work to do to understand what we have budgetarily, what we want to distribute as far as the budget goes. um and also the areas of practice that we want to shore up with these funds um there's there's a lot that we need to do between here and there before we can get into the larger larger sweeping recommendations i would submit i think that's a good idea to surprise right leitner

Yeah, I think that's right. I think what's useful to HHN is thinking about the 2027 budget and if there's any changes to be made. And I agree with Todd based on the presentation. sounds like people are missing targets or meeting targets and there's nothing that's clearly calling for a change right now while we might, while we're going to move forward with a needs assessment. I do think that's a question we still have to decide as a committee. I think there's broad support for it, but I don't know that we've actually formally acted on it. So that would be something to include in our recommendation and the associated small amount of funding that's been requested for those stipends. A couple outstanding questions I have relate to direction around the staff positions and now this doesn't relate necessarily to 2027 dollars but money that's been allocated that's sort of still in the in the fund i mean you all have received um email from the controller office about like how much money we have in that fund and we have Previously, this committee has recommended the harm reduction drop-in center and the staff positions to do harm reduction within public health. And given that both of those are sort of on hold in abeyance or something right now, I do think it would be useful for the county board and HHN to have a recommendation, a feeling from this committee as to whether or not those things should move forward and when and how. So just laying that out there. And I don't know, Director Smith, if you have any other updates, like what the public health department is thinking with respect to those positions. I know we had some conversations at the HHN committee several weeks ago about that when it was re-referred.

Yeah, I believe we kind of process wise, it is still with the HHN committee. So I think maybe happy to also have it offline, but maybe a follow up conversation of what would be helpful. If there's any information that should go back to HHN to help make that decision with the positions would be helpful because that's not, you know, that's where it is right now. In regards to the drop-in center funding, it's kind of in a similar boat. We don't have, now that the Board of Health has not accepted the vendor for that go around of an RFP, we're at a stuck point where someone still has to tell us to do something. And I think the challenge is my understanding, but I think we should maybe check that with somebody who's more knowledgeable than me about our dual entity kind of rules and regulations. I believe that can potentially come from a number of places depending on what it is. So unfortunately, we're just we're kind of stuck in both places until somebody tells us a direction, but happy to give any information or put together anything that would help any of the bodies that kind of govern us help move that forward. Or again, I think it is still within since the funds still sit within. that line item that the comptroller provided. I do still think it could be recommended by this committee adopted by HHN to do something different with the funds for either one of those things at this point.

Thank you, Director Smith. And then real quick, Heidi, and then maybe we can try to structure how we want to make the recommendations and see if we need any motions on those.

Sure. I mean, I do think, like, one thing we heard in initial public hearings and before I was on the subcommittee was the need, you know, for syringe services and harm reduction services. And so, like, those were two big allocations that I would – and I think – perhaps in Dr. Elizabeth's recommendation, I think she also pointed out the need for syringe services programs. So I guess I would lean towards, if we're not moving forward with, well, one question for public health is, given the reduction in volume of the people utilizing public health services, is there... Is there a need for additional staffing? And if so, what is that? Or does public health think that might that funding might work better to provide similar services through a contracted provider in the community. So that's one question. And then sort of related is how do we ensure access to these sort of life-saving services while we also get a needs assessment and more strategically plan around these funds. So anyways, I do think that would be useful. And to the extent, you know, I just want to say something about a value is some consistency with that goal of, you know, providing that service where it will be utilized as that sort of critical life-saving measure on a,

at least an interim basis until we're more at least more informed by this process so so i would say it's still just as unfortunately as hard for me to answer this question as it was a few weeks ago um from an infrastructure standpoint not much has changed on the health department side so we still have two SSP locations that run Monday through Friday 7 45 to 4 30 p.m with 1.5 staff so at some point probably within the next few months yeah we are going to have to make a decision because we can't run two locations with 1.5 people we're not really making it work that well right now and so It's tough for me to answer because, yes, if the goal is to continue to operate two full service locations, one at our East Washington office, one at our atrium office, then, yes, we need more staffing to do that. Unfortunately, with the changes in interpretation to state statute, we have seen a significant drop off in volume. And so I do think there's an argument that could be made to do we need to operate two locations? And Dr. Elizabeth and I have talked about this because I was curious about her perspective and also curious about others. This feels like an appropriate time or space to talk about it, but we also feel like there's been an An inadvertent like monopoly that we've kind of created around our SSP service. And we've seen a lot of other providers who were in the space when we started kind of go towards either MAT or other harm reduction methods and treatment instead of offering what we would consider more like brick and mortar SSP type services. because a lot of people were coming to us and the needs were being met by us and a few other small providers. So the provider network has shrunk in the past six years from what we can tell. And so this is why it's a little more complicated to answer your question than I think you were anticipating, Supervisor Wekeleitner, so I hope I'm explaining it well. But I think it's challenging for me to say definitively whether we should invest more in public health operations to keep it going in the meantime versus try to put out a contract because I will be honest during when we were doing the RFP, For drop-in center, we had a question, and I can't remember if it was in the physical application or follow-up conversations we had with the applicants, so I apologize, but had kind of asked about if they were willing or planning to offer, like, SSP services as a part of their drop-in center model. And we only had one applicant that was planning to do that in the way in which it's structured in other places, like our health department and other places right now. other folks were planning to offer something similarly but not with the same availability of hours or maybe on a more limited basis but really wanted to focus more on the overall holistic drop-in center feel which again at the time with the landscape i think was okay with us because we knew it was being covered in other places I think that current interpretation of state statute and paraphernalia laws, we have also seen a bunch of providers not be as open about their SSP services because they are fearful right now of what that means. And so that is my very long-winded way of saying, I think there's a few different ways we can approach this. I think absolutely looking to make a more robust infrastructure around SSP through a contract, I think is a great idea. I'll be honest, if you asked me to name four vendors that I think would be like, yes, absolutely, we would want this money and could do this tomorrow. I think people are a little hesitant, but we have not talked to everybody at this point. So there could also be folks who are willing that maybe we're not aware of. But I do have concerns. I mean, like I said, point blank, we aren't going to be able to staff two locations with 1.5 people for much longer. And so that is definitely a concern of ours, especially amidst the county's budget crisis. We just, we're not going to be able to. And so from a holistic SSP infrastructure standpoint, I guess that's my offering to the committee. I'm worried. I do think we should do something about that. But I think there's a lot of different options we could pursue. I don't think any of them are necessarily better than another.

Thank you, Director Smith. And I did get the emails from Dr. Elizabeth, and it's my fault that I didn't get them out to everybody else. I really wasn't feeling well this morning, or actually all weekend, so I didn't get a chance to get those out. I think, too, Kelsey brought up a good point. If there are questions like that and things that need to go out, try to get them to me or co-chair Ruchak so that we can kind of get the information out to everybody individually. I do think it is really important to kind of look at the service program because it directly relates to, you know, overdose and disease. So I think that is something we could take a look at and see if our co-chair can help me out a little bit here.

Sure. Well, I just first of all, a question for our Ariel or whoever might know the is. The attorney, the city attorney's opinion. Relates only to pipes, right? Not syringes.

Correct syringes have their own exception in state statute.

And so did I hear you correctly that some of the providers are a little nervous because of that?

Yes, I haven't heard providers being nervous around the syringe part. I think we've been able to better educate people, at least on what we've received from the attorneys. And I've had conversations with law enforcement about syringes seem to be very clear based on everybody's interpretation. Okay. It kind of just depends on what your legal entity feels like they can defend. And I think that's what's really hard for our community members right now. We can't totally give them all of the advice we're giving because if you have to be represented in any way, shape, or form, your attorney might disagree with that. our approach. But for us, you know, case law, I think, has dictated tourniquets to be iffy. Apparently there's been some cases around that, but they're comfortable with us continuing to give out tourniquets under the state statute exception, for example. But there's a lot of items that our SSP has traditionally been providing to participants that we have, unfortunately, had to pull back.

Mm-hmm. That's frustrating, as we all know. So I took down some notes. And I have four, one, two, three, four, five bullets here. for potential motions. I don't know if they're in the format right now that ultimately our motion will be in, but I have support current funding levels and programs. So that's the status quo. Support the needs assessment, continuation of syringe services, reporting requirements for fund payees and required disclosure of outside funding sources for the fund payees. So I guess I'll put it. I can either, depending on what makes the most sense. Well, I'll just stop right there and see if anyone else wants to weigh in either in process or something substantive.

Thank you, Coach Prusak. Yeah, I think that's a good idea. I mean, those are what we talked about. There are four good motions, and I know we need to really move forward on some of this stuff. So before I go ahead and call anything, Supervisor Wigler, got anything real quick to add?

Well, I do think we don't, I mean, we could be general with the motion to say funding for, you know, syringe services program, but I do think it might be useful to sort of flesh out, do we, and I'm not sure we have enough information from public health yet, but like, do we, and so maybe I'm going to press you a little bit, Director Smith, and if we were to say, recommend that the department, I mean, I would hesitate to say we should just go to one location without really understanding what the impacts would be. Does that mean we're only at East Wash? Or does that mean we're only on the south side? Who are using those two different clinics? Like, how is that going to impact the community? I mean, so it's like, it's tough for me to say that, but maybe we could say... It makes more sense potentially to try to put something out for contract with a chunk of those funds that were going to be dedicated towards public health staffing, but maintain one public health clinic. you know, at least for now in the interim. And maybe we add some additional funding there to expand hours or make sure that folks can go on vacations and whatnot or, you know, but that we take a chunk. And so I guess that's what I'm wrestling with a little bit is not like, but maybe we can, you know, say that public health makes that decision based on what clinic they think is You know, being utilized the most and is going to have the least, you know, harmful impact or that, you know, that that loss of service will be felt least. That's kind of where I'm leaning and I think it might be useful for us to provide support. a little bit more in that realm. But otherwise, Colin, I think you hit the kind of the key points that I think would be useful to provide some direction for our recommendation to HHN and maybe have the chair and vice chair work on a draft, one-pager, two-pager, something to bring back to the committee for action at the next meeting.

Yeah, and that was my plan. So I can write these up as more formal sounding motions and then make sure I can discuss things with you offline to make sure that, or I mean, I guess there's no harm in us workshopping the language in the next meeting, but I'll make sure that those details about the syringe services are reflected, the ones that you just brought up.

Thank you, Co-Chair. Director Smith?

Yeah, so I will say... It sounds like I do think there's maybe a way to get to a happy medium if we're talking about like a little bit of a gap year, right? So because, Felicia, correct me if I'm wrong, but based on what we've chatted about, the landscape of SSP and harm reduction type services is going to be like a core component in the needs assessment. And so, okay, so... There could be, to answer your question more directly, Supervisor Weidleitner, in order to run like two locations, not changing where we are based off of my rough estimates of like how many people were serving today, which is vastly different than this time last year. I do believe one FTE could help us sustain the two locations for the time being. It is harder as we're having internal conversations to like pick one. they both have detrimental consequences to me that aren't really meeting the mission or the purpose if we close one. East Wash tends to get the most volume and engagement and also provides the most connection to other levels of care just based on its, I believe it's truly just based on its geographic location. But Atrium fills a geographic gap that seems to be lacking on the south side. And so while we don't always see the volume, we have the consistency of the people who go there and who have in the past been very connected to our staff and have given the feedback of like, this is the only place I have to go and I don't have abilities to get anywhere else. so it is where i i could see a world in which like one fte is helpful to us for maintaining for the time being while also working with felicia i think in concert with a needs assessment where i also feel like a micro rfp could be palatable of we're not maybe asking you to commit to a full-blown service but like do we have a community partner that would be willing to do mobile Like there are already some orgs that are already doing that, right? And can we help work with you where we know some of our geographic shortcomings are? And is there a willingness to do that or work together on a plan for that? That I think could also lend to the gap we're seeing and also the needs assessment we're building to give us better information for how to structure this in the future. So, as I was hearing others speak, I think that kind of came to my mind, maybe as a more direct answer to your question of what can we do? What is needed? And so I will offer that.

Thank you.

Thank you director Smith. Yeah, so it sounds like we got. For good action items kind of that we might. I'll ask a co-chair Bruchac to maybe help me. I'll get to Todd first, and then maybe you can kind of help me structure that if we need to bring anything to motion here or the next meeting. I know we're kind of coming up close to, I think it was maybe August 20th, if I remember right, that we got to kind of go to HHNs.

Yeah, well, you can go, you can take Todd's comment or question first. Todd?

Todd? Yeah, I was going to go in a bit of a different direction. I think Supervisor Wegleitner was right to bring up the dangling issues. The one that we haven't talked about is the funding for the drop-in center. And I guess more of a procedural question. if the subcommittee would choose to say, let's hit the reset button on that, let's pull the money back and then we can figure out where to go in the future. Does that mean then that the previously passed, that we would be recommending a previously passed resolution would be rescinded or just mechanically How would that play out?

That's a good question. Supervisor Wegleitner?

Yeah, I mean, I i am not entirely i mean i think right now the county board has passed a resolution authorizing that funding for that purpose so it could not be moved unless there was further county board action to amend the budget that allocated that, right? So I do think that's a really big decision and I think you're right that we haven't answered that question as a committee or we haven't reconsidered it necessarily. I mean, I do think we got, we did get public input about the importance for a needs assessment but I'm not exactly clear on where everyone stands in terms of does that mean the harm reduction drop-in is on hold pending the outcome of at least a 12-month needs assessment or not, right? And I'm interested in the opinions of you all here, but obviously this subcommittee had opinions previously recommended and the County Board acted to allocate the $800,000 for that purpose. So, and that was with 2024 budget, right? So I guess I'm just agreeing with you that we should probably make that clear.

Yes, thank you both, Todd and Greg Leitner. That's a really good point. That was originally my proposal and hard work that went into getting the drop-in center. The way the political con alignment is going now and everything that's happening, I don't know if putting it on hold for 12 months would be a good idea. I mean, if that $800,000 could be spent more efficiently somewhere else, I don't know if we do make a recommendation or motion to have the County Board reallocate that, because that's right, I remember that meeting and having it allocated to that. I think it would probably be a good idea, and maybe that could also be something. So we'll go to Director Smith and then Wegleitner, and then let's see if there's anything that anybody wants to vote on or take action on.

I do actually think Supervisor Weigleitner had her hand up before me.

Oh, did she? Sorry. Supervisor Weigleitner?

Well, I guess I would say I don't think it's appropriate for us to necessarily recommend reallocation of it ahead of a needs assessment.

Yeah.

If anything, I would say maybe there's a one-year boost of similar services that pending the outcome of the needs assessment. You know, I mean, it will sit in the fund, right? It will sit in the fund unallocated. Well, not unallocated. It's allocated, but it's not going to be spent. So I guess I'm more comfortable with it than that. I don't think we should be kind of doing something entirely different with that or recommending something entirely different might, what I would suggest is we either hold, wait and see how the needs assessment informs that or consider programming some of that for additional harm reduction services that then might be pulled back in. It's just that That could potentially also be disruptive if there's big changes in a year based on the needs assessment.

Yeah, I was going to say something similar. I think it'll be a lot harder if we go through the needs assessment and the needs assessment is like, you need a drop-in center and we've repealed it and have to start all over. But I do think similarly to if there's appetite for using some of the funds that were initially allocated to public health for positions that, like I said, we don't need at this point. I cannot justify three FTE, but one I think could help us sustain two locations. The funding that is kind of quote-unquote left over from that could also be used in the way that Supervisor Wegleitner mentioned of making more services that we already know are online or encouraging more home reduction options in that same vein in lieu of us putting out another funding opportunity for a drop-in center again and like thinking like this is another unfortunately but it is what it is gap year um to get us through having the needs assessment done and having the data and information to back up kind of the way we want to move forward thank you director smith um yeah i guess it gives us all something to think about i mean those are really good points too

I mean, if we wait the whole year and the recommendation is we need a drop in center, county and everybody else still doesn't want it and it gets voted down. I mean, just a lot of people die in a year. So many people die in a year. Then we get to that year, we get the needs assessment. Then we have to start all over with this, that, and the other thing. And then it's two years all of a sudden, now we got two years gone. And it's just, yeah, it's a hard decision. Campbell, did you have something to add? You had your hand up? Nope, okay.

Coach here, Bruchac? Yeah, I guess... What if we just, if we don't do anything with the drop-in center resolution, then the funds are still there. The authorization is still there. So is that a reasonable decision just to not do anything with that? Make any recommendations related to that since it's there? Got it.

My suggestion would be to distinctly say that we recommend this money be put on hold. It has been allocated, but Given the questions, given the needs assessment, we had an inconclusive study earlier on the feasibility of doing a drop-in center. I think with all those factors, it just makes sense to make sure we're sticking the territory, I guess.

Anything else to add, co-chair? No, I actually kind of really like that recommendation. I don't know exactly how it's worded, but is there a motion on that?

I'm taking notes here. I think I might make it easier to formally write them up. If the committee is okay coming back in a couple weeks, whenever our next regularly scheduled meeting is, then that would still be in time for our deadline.

Okay.

And I'll come with the more formal motions and we can take votes. Again, that is negotiable.

That would be really helpful for me as well. So again, thank you for patience, everybody. I'm new to this. I'm still kind of learning the procedures and everything like that and get motions out. So I think that would be really helpful if we had a structured list that we can come back and just all kind of look at, vote on it and get that done. Before we move on to the next agenda item, which I'd like to get to pretty quick. So I'd like to try to keep these meetings as close to an hour as possible. Chair, Supervisor Weigleitner had her hand up. That's how I was going to go right before we move on to the next agenda item. I'd like to call on Surprise Wagner.

Thanks, Todd. This is just for Colin. I just want to make sure Arielle's recommendation is distilled. I think what I heard her say is we would instead of having three FTE, recommend funding for three FTEs as previously authorized, we would recommend to HHN that that be reduced to one FTE, and the remainder of the funds would go towards, I think, an RFP for SS syringe services program, and maybe if we wanted to provide more detail on what that might look like, We could, or we could kind of maybe follow up in the future. But just to that question, and I agree with Todd, maybe we're not recommending a change in the harm reduction allocation, but we're also not recommending we move forward ahead of the needs assessment. But we should spell that out so HHN is clear on that. Thanks.

Yep, understood. It's noted.

Thank you, Supervisor Wegleitner. Excellent. I think we got a good plan then. Co-Chair Bruchac will kind of get those motions written up. Me and him will talk about that offline. Make sure we come to the next meeting ready to vote on those so we can have it in time for HHN reports. Excellent. Possibly I'd like to move on to the next agenda item, which will be 3G reports to committee. Do we have any reports to committee members? Hearing none, we'll move on to H. Future meeting items and dates. This is one thing where I'd like to have just a brief conversation. I don't think we had anything else on the calendar because we were thinking about changing it at one point. Let's see here. We've got August coming up that I don't think is on Legistar, and then I don't think the rest of the year. So I don't know how we want to move forward with our cadence. Supervisor Weigleiner?

I was hoping, planning on meeting on the 10th so we could finalize and act on the kind of recommendation we discussed here, which will be two weeks from today, and that would be a week and a half before a report to HHN. If that works for folks, I think that would be helpful.

So the 10th is two weeks from now? Is that on a Monday again, a regular meeting?

It would be like our regular cadence. And I think after we deliver that report, then we can probably slow down for a little bit because it's budget time and everybody's busy and in a lot of meetings. But I do think we would need to meet on the 10th to sort of act on our recommendation ahead of the presentation to HHN.

I think that can be treated. Sorry.

I was going to say, I think that can be treated as a motion. So I'll second it.

All right. So we had a motion. I have a second. I'm sorry.

I need to write the motion. What is the motion?

I don't think we really need a motion. We just need to know if it works for folks. And I'm hoping it does since we've sort of been meeting on this regular basis for a little bit.

Yeah, I should check with everybody else too. I just wanted to note I won't be able to make that meeting. Okay. Neither will I. Yes, I think I remember that too, that Smith would not be able to make that one either. And the next meeting after that wouldn't be until...

I don't know. I mean, we need to find a date to meet again before the 20th. So that's what we should figure out right now. I don't know. The 3rd or the 17th or a different day other than Monday. Pretty open except for Thursdays generally.

I can do the third, unfortunately, other than that, I'm out until the 24th, which is past the deadline. But I, if you all have quorum, I also don't have to be here.

Yeah, that's the main thing is we have a date that works for quorum so we can get something accomplished here. Supervisor Perlman, did you?

Yeah, I would just say I can't do the third, I can do the 17th, but Director Smith is way more important than me. So you can get quorum with Director Smith, please, please.

like to think we're all as equally as important here um do we know when elizabeth is back from wherever she is i don't know i had it on an email but i would take me a while to find it and so um co-chair for shock yeah what's our quorum number here nine three three point five i think maybe um kelsey could you maybe confirm that for me so four

It's there's seven committee members. So the rule is the number of committee members divided by two plus one. So I don't know how that goes. I know it'd be 3.5 plus one, which is 4.5. So what I believe I was trained was four makes quorum. Does anybody back me up on that?

I think there's vacancies hurt us actually, right? Because... And then they... I'm supposed to have nine people. Oh, okay. Because what I was trained was, even though we don't... Oh, no, you're okay.

You guys know more than I do. But I can check on it if you want. But if we have Ariel on the third, we have... Oh, wait, we don't have Baruchak, right?

I can do the 3rd.

You can.

Yeah, I would just have to. I do have another meeting, but this one because we're voting. I don't know if there's any votes in that other meeting, so I would prioritize this meeting. On the 3rd. So I'm actually I can do the 3rd the 10th the 17th. So I'm easy.

You can do the 3rd. I can you do the 3rd.

I can do the third.

And then Chair Gailey, can you do the third?

Yes, I can be available anytime.

I believe that would be quorum. Do you guys think we're good?

I'm okay with that. All right, so again, maybe somebody can help me clarify here. Does that need a motion we need to vote on it or no? Okay, so let's plan on that. If everybody disagrees, let's try to get a meeting on the 3rd so we can get some of this stuff talked about. I think hopefully we all trust each other to make decisions and move this along. And if something goes wrong, we can talk about that after. So Kelsey, it looks like the next meeting will be on the 3rd. And then our scheduled meeting was going to be on the 10th. We might not have a quorum that day. I don't know if we do. I don't know if we'd need to meet that day. But if not, with the regular cadence, go ahead, Elsie.

Excuse me, Chair. Sorry about that. We do not have any meetings scheduled for the rest of the year. So you are advising me as your staff person to schedule it and register on August 3rd. And there is no other scheduled because in the... May meeting, they said, let's slow it down when budget starts. So that's why I hadn't scheduled anything out from there.

Thank you. I do remember that.

I think, yeah, after the third, we could probably. restart on in september um the 24th of august is probably fine but you know maybe just have one meeting in august one in september on the 21st or the 14th um i guess that would be fine with me i'm i'm pretty new here so maybe maybe uh maybe i'm wrong um god

I suggest we set the next meeting on August 3. If we wrap up our business, then we can talk about meeting a month out. If we don't wrap up our business, then we'll have to find something before the 20th.

Uh, Fred Furman. For out some advice. I mean, there's no reason you have to decide when your next meeting is at this meeting. There's value in that because you have a group of people here and you, you can talk through possible agenda items and possible dates. Um, but you know, a doodle can be done. Um, and I, you know, I, I don't think, in my opinion, I don't think we should just set a meeting date just to set a meeting date if we don't have an agenda item to talk about. Um, September, October, early November gets very, very busy with budget. If there's a reason to meet, absolutely, we should find the time, meet. But if there's nothing specific on the agenda, and we may not know that, August 3rd, don't put something in the schedule, but you can absolutely send out an agenda at some point or doodle then an agenda at some point and say, we're meeting because we have to. Perfect. This part of the agenda is just supposed to be helpful because you have everybody in the room, but I wouldn't force a meeting if there's nothing there. That's my two cents.

Very helpful. Thank you so much. So I think let's do that. Let's set the next meeting for August 3rd and we can kind of reconvene then. And going forward, if we have something, we can put it on there. If we have lots to talk about, maybe we can go out a little bit. I would like to give people as much notice as possible because I know people are busy and have families and that way Kelsey can get stuff done. But yeah, I think that's great. Thank you. So Kelsey, can we please put that August 3rd, the next meeting? And then we'll talk about if we need the next date then. Is that okay with everybody else? Perfect. All right. So we got that. I'd like to move on to the next agenda item, which is public comment. And I believe we didn't have anybody registered tonight and we don't. So we can move on to other business. Is there any other business allowed by law for tonight? I think we got that too. So next is adjournment. Can I have a motion to adjourn this meeting?

So moved.

So moved. We got Heidi. Can I get a second?

Second.

Second by Smith. Thank you very much. I think we're getting somewhere, everybody. I really appreciate your time. And I'll see everybody August 3rd.