[0:02] shortly]

[0:03] [Orange county board of

[0:03] supervisors-

[0:03] meeting will begin

[0:08] shortly]

[0:09] [Orange county board of

[0:09] supervisors-

[0:10] meeting will begin

[0:17] shortly]

[0:17] Chase good morning everyone.

[0:19] We'll begin our meeting with

[0:20] presentations starting with

[0:22] child abuse prevention month,

[0:23] and that's APRIL.

[0:25] Blue ribbon, a symbol of child

[0:28] abuse prevention possibility

[0:30] raises awareness and represents

[0:31] our commitment in taking a stand

[0:33] against abuse and safeguarding

[0:35] the well-being of children while

[0:37] encouraging others to do the

[0:37] same.

[0:38] I don't have the ribbon yet, but

[0:44] I do have blue, so we wear blue

[0:46] today, this month to show

[0:47] solidarity in the fight against

[0:52] child abuse and neglect.

[0:53] Child abuse takes many forms,

[0:55] whether it's neglect, physical

[0:57] or emotional abuse, online

[0:59] bullying or sexual exploitation.

[1:02] Young people today face many

[1:10] threats and challenges.

[1:11] In the united states 1 in seven

[1:16] children have been the victim of

[1:17] abuse and neglect during the

[1:18] previous year.

[1:21] In 1924 where almost 30,000

[1:23] referrals to our social services

[1:24] agencies due to suspected abuse

[1:43] and neglect.

[1:46] Children and family services

[1:50] division director lon english,

[1:53] deputy director scott burdennic.

[1:56] Deputy director ian wolf, deputy

[1:59] director rita wrangle, deputy

[2:00] director christy physician come.

[2:03] If you would please join us up

[2:06] here. It takes unite effort

[2:08] from teachers, health care

[2:10] workers, neighbors to law

[2:12] enforcement and nonprofits to

[2:15] prevent child abuse.

[2:16] Children who are mistreated and

[2:18] neglected are also more likely

[2:21] to be victims or perpetrators

[2:23] themselves of violence until

[2:26] future, abuse drugs, contract

[2:29] various diseases, especially

[2:32] mental issues, and have brain

[2:35] development delays, there's some

[2:38] statistics on that, and worse

[2:39] educational attainment and had

[2:44] fewer job options. Toxic

[2:48] stress, which in -- brain

[2:49] development can raise risk of

[2:52] issues such as post training

[2:53] stress disorder and long-term

[2:55] struggles with learning and

[2:56] attention and memory. Orange

[2:58] county is lucky to have a strong

[3:00] network of partners that focuses

[3:02] on prevention efforts through

[3:02] education, advocacy and

[3:05] community engagement. Children

[3:12] who receive is timely support

[3:14] services demonstrate a stronger

[3:15] academic performance and

[3:16] healthier behavioral

[3:19] development. Public health

[3:21] research confirms that

[3:24] preventing childhood trauma

[3:26] reduces adult depression,

[3:27] substance abuse, and their

[3:28] health challenges. So I'll

[3:30] start with our children, and it

[3:32] can unfortunately become worse

[3:33] as we become an adult. Each of

[3:37] us has a role in preventing

[3:39] child abuse whether it is

[3:40] mentoring a child, supporting a

[3:41] family in crisis or simply

[3:46] reporting signs of concern.

[3:49] They must remain vigilant not

[3:51] just in APRIL but year round

[3:53] about recognizing signs of

[3:54] abuse, offering support and

[3:55] fighting for policies that keep

[3:57] children safe. I encourage all

[3:58] orange county residents to learn

[4:02] the signs of child abuse and how

[4:04] to report concerns. If you ever

[4:06] suspect a child is being abused

[4:07] or neglected, please call our

[4:13] child abuse hotline at

[4:15] 714-940-1000. Or another

[4:20] number, 800-207-4464. Thank you

[4:21] to all of the parents, social

[4:24] workers, community partners, law

[4:25] enforcement, prosecutors and

[4:27] volunteers who dedicate

[4:29] themselves the same every day,

[4:30] and thank you to those who have

[4:32] joined us up on the dais for the

[4:33] great work they are doing. And

[4:36] it is your work that changes

[4:37] lives and ensures the future

[4:40] that our children are healthy

[4:45] and become active adults. I'd

[4:49] like to invite my cosponsor,

[4:50] supervisor sarmiento, but he's

[4:52] not able to join thus morning.

[4:54] But he and I together brought

[4:56] this item forward. I'd like to

[4:57] invite my colleagues, if any of

[4:59] you would like to say a few

[5:03] words. Vice-chair.

[5:04] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: good

[5:06] morning. I'm katrina foley,

[5:07] county supervisor representing

[5:09] the fabulous fifth district.

[5:10] The fifth district covers costa

[5:11] mesa where I live all the way

[5:15] down the coast to san clemente.

[5:17] APRIL is child abuse prevention

[5:21] month. Our children deserve to

[5:25] be at home and anywhere in the

[5:27] community, happy, healthy, and

[5:30] safe. The 2026 child abuse

[5:33] prevention month theme is

[5:35] pinwheel a possibility. This

[5:37] theme represents hope,

[5:38] resilience and the shared

[5:40] responsibility that we all have

[5:41] to every child in orange county,

[5:44] to be able to grow new a safe,

[5:46] supportive and nurturing

[5:49] environment. In 2025, as the

[5:51] chairman mentioned, we had

[5:54] nearly 30,000 reports of child

[5:56] abuse and neglect in orange

[6:00] county. These are documented

[6:03] calls to our child abuse

[6:08] hotline. Of those calls, 4,189

[6:09] represented calls that related

[6:12] to child abuse in district 5.

[6:17] In 2025, 31,055 children were --

[6:19] 3155 children were placed in

[6:20] out-of-home care due to unsafe

[6:22] conditions at home, that's

[6:24] throughout orange county. 242

[6:26] in district 5.

[6:28] Home should be the safest place

[6:31] for children. Thank you to our

[6:33] county's social services agency

[6:34] for your proactive efforts to

[6:36] reduce and prevent abuse,

[6:38] providing parents with resources

[6:39] for childcare, mental health

[6:41] support and financial

[6:44] assistance. Right now more than

[6:46] ever, we need to keep our eyes

[6:50] on the kids, as people struggle

[6:52] with financial burden, as people

[6:54] struggle with loss of their

[6:56] employment, as we see the cost

[6:59] of living increase in orange

[7:01] county, unfortunately, there is

[7:02] a tie often to child abuse and

[7:04] neglect. So we want to make

[7:07] sure, if you see something, say

[7:09] something. We extend our

[7:12] gratitude to all of the social

[7:14] worker professionals, health

[7:15] professionals, law enforcement,

[7:16] for your work to protect our

[7:18] young neighbors. And please do,

[7:20] if you see something, call child

[7:31] abuse hotline at 714-940-1000 or

[7:38] 800-207-4465. And report child

[7:47] abuse. Thank you so much.

[7:49] >>don wagner: let me start to

[7:50] say thank you to the exphairm

[7:52] supervisor sarmiento for

[7:52] bringing this forward and

[7:53] highlighting the importance of

[7:56] the issue. The truth is we

[7:57] always hear government come up

[7:59] and talking about, oh, it's for

[8:00] the children, it's for the

[8:02] children. This one obviously

[8:05] and truly is. And it's for not

[8:06] just the children today, but for

[8:08] future generations. You heard

[8:10] the statistics, from the

[8:11] CHAIRMAN About the number of

[8:17] cases, and we have the chance to

[8:19] see some of the stories behind

[8:21] those cases as we're dealing

[8:22] with lawsuits, et cetera,

[8:23] occasionally. And they are

[8:26] uniformly horrific. What also,

[8:29] though, happens is that so often

[8:34] an abused child is the product

[8:36] of a parent who was abused

[8:40] himself or herself and absent

[8:41] treatment, again, as you heard

[8:43] there my colleagues before me --

[8:45] absent treatment, that cycle

[8:47] perpetuates itself. And so we

[8:49] have an opportunity with a focus

[8:51] on this issue. Not just today,

[8:53] not just for this month, but as

[8:56] we move forward, focus on this

[9:00] issue. We can break that cycle.

[9:01] The men and women behind me, who

[9:03] are doing this work, are heroes.

[9:05] They work with hundreds of other

[9:07] heroes out in the community

[9:10] trying to break that cycle for

[9:11] our children and for our future

[9:13] generations. If you see

[9:17] something, say something.

[9:20] That's truth. In this case it

[9:22] matters -- that's trite. In

[9:24] this case, it matters. And if

[9:26] you see one of these people that

[9:27] they work with, thank them.

[9:30] They are truly, truly doing

[9:33] extraordinary work. Thank you.

[9:34] >>speaker: thank you, chair

[9:36] chaffee and the board of

[9:37] supervisors for this opportunity

[9:38] for us to honor and recognize

[9:41] the work being done to prevent

[9:41] child abuse and neglect. As you

[9:44] guys have heard, last year

[9:46] social services agency received

[9:48] nearly 30,000 reports of

[9:50] suspected child abuse and/or

[9:51] neglect. Prevention has really

[9:55] been the key in reducing child

[9:56] abuse. Through our strong

[9:58] partnerships we strive raise

[10:00] awareness, to help families

[10:02] access services before child

[10:03] welfare intervention is

[10:06] necessary. We invest in mental

[10:08] health services and parenting

[10:09] programs through our family

[10:11] resource centers where our

[10:12] families and communities are

[10:15] very familiar with. When a

[10:17] child does come into our system,

[10:19] we strive for stability and

[10:21] permanency through a family's

[10:23] finding and engagement,

[10:24] reconnecting our youth with

[10:25] relatives and other important

[10:27] people in their lives. I'd like

[10:30] to take the time to share a

[10:32] successful connection that we

[10:33] recently had. Through the

[10:35] efforts of our social workers, a

[10:36] child recently reconnected with

[10:40] an uncle living out of state. A

[10:41] video-call was arranged between

[10:43] the uncle and the child. The

[10:46] child overwhelmingly said, this

[10:48] is the first time I'm putting a

[10:50] family member's phone number

[10:52] into my phone. In addition to

[10:54] connections like these, we

[10:55] strive to place children with

[10:59] familiar faces, cultures and

[11:01] languages, reducing trauma and

[11:03] promoting healing. That's why

[11:04] I'm so proud to report that

[11:07] orange county remains the top

[11:09] county in california placing

[11:12] children with relatives. We're

[11:15] at 48% with foster -- with our

[11:17] foster youth played with

[11:19] relatives currently right now,

[11:20] something we should be very

[11:21] proud of. When family placement

[11:24] is not possible, we rely on all

[11:26] of you, our community, to step

[11:28] in. Fostering can be

[11:30] challenging, but the reward is

[11:32] greater. If you know someone

[11:33] that's willing to foster, please

[11:40] encourage them to contact us at

[11:42] ocforkids.Com. As always, as

[11:44] mentioned earlier today, if you

[11:45] suspect child abuse, please call

[11:52] our child abuse hotline at

[11:53] 714-940-1000. Thank you again,

[11:55] chair chaffee, and the board,

[11:56] and everyone in the community

[11:57] working to make our community

[11:58] stronger for our children.

[11:59] Thank you.

[13:07] [Applause]

[13:08] >>chair, doug chaffee: I know I

[13:10] have a blue ribbon. I just need

[13:12] someone to help me pin it on.

[13:26] But anyway...

[13:30] Our next presentation is for our

[13:31] national public health work

[13:33] that's being brought forward by

[13:37] my office and also our fifth

[13:39] district vice-chair, and so I

[13:42] might begin by making a few

[13:45] remarks. American public health

[13:47] association initiated the

[13:49] observance of national "public

[13:51] health week" to highlight the

[13:53] contributions of public health

[13:54] and encourage people to become

[13:56] part of a movement for a

[13:59] healthier nation. This year

[14:01] national "public health week"'s

[14:05] theme is "ready, set, action,"

[14:06] which emphasizes the importance

[14:08] of proactive steps to formulate

[14:11] a healthier future. This week's

[14:13] focus is on prevention and

[14:14] creating healthy lifestyle

[14:16] habits to make the future

[14:18] healthy. Public health is

[14:20] crucial for community

[14:23] well-being, playing a vital

[14:25] role, identifying needs,

[14:26] promoting healthy practices and

[14:30] supporting healthy lifestyles.

[14:31] The orange county department of

[14:33] health monitors and investigates

[14:34] the occurrence of disease,

[14:38] injury, and related factors in

[14:40] the community to develop and

[14:41] implement preventative

[14:43] strategies to improve the health

[14:44] of a public. We have a great

[14:53] lab that does research on agency public

[14:56] health team, jenna siren, the

[14:57] director of public health and

[14:59] nursing, darwin chang, director

[15:03] of environmental health, eileen

[15:05] curtly, assistant director of

[15:08] environmental health, la rush

[15:11] sha baker, health services

[15:14] manager, annabella balanos,

[15:20] program supervisor, danielle

[15:21] jaramillo, administrative

[15:23] manager. When discussing public

[15:25] health, we must also focus on

[15:28] health equity. Everyone needs

[15:31] the same opportunity to attain

[15:33] their highest level of health.

[15:36] Achieving health equity means

[15:36] breaking down systematic

[15:38] barriers that affect how our

[15:40] communities access information

[15:42] about public health and receive

[15:45] help. Public health

[15:46] professionals are important

[15:48] partners collaborating across

[15:49] sectors that can influence

[15:53] health outcomes. Public health

[15:55] professionals help individuals

[15:56] adopt healthier lifestyles by

[15:58] avoiding tobacco use, eating

[16:00] healthier, increasing physical

[16:02] activity, and preventing

[16:03] unintentional injuries at home

[16:05] and in the workplace. Thank you

[16:08] to our healthcare agency public

[16:10] health staff for their diligent

[16:13] work keeping oc healthy and

[16:14] safe. And thank you all of you

[16:18] for joining us up here. Before

[16:19] director air ron gives her

[16:22] remarks, I'd like to invite

[16:24] vice-chair foley to give her

[16:26] remarks and then open it up to

[16:28] my colleagues. Vice-chair.

[16:29] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[16:31] you. I also want to recognize

[16:32] DR. Which he knowsio quonking,

[16:34] who is our healthcare officer,

[16:35] who has joined us up here today

[16:36] as well. National "public

[16:39] health week". We are a healthy

[16:40] community here in orange county,

[16:42] and we are lucky because we have

[16:45] a lot of places where we can

[16:46] improve the quality of our

[16:48] health. We exercise at the

[16:52] beach. We can go to one of our

[16:54] many, beautiful, open-space

[16:57] parks and bike or walk. We have

[16:59] more yoga studios than probably

[17:02] anywhere in america. We have

[17:06] all kinds of places, even in the

[17:06] workplace, especially here at

[17:10] the county where we want to help

[17:14] encourage our workers to stay

[17:16] healthy, accessing wellness

[17:18] opportunities every day. This

[17:21] year's theme, "ready, set,

[17:23] action" highlights the urgency

[17:25] of advantages health equity and

[17:27] ensuring every resident gains

[17:28] access to the resources that

[17:31] they need to live a long and

[17:33] happy, healthy life. National

[17:34] "public health week" was

[17:37] organized first in 1995 as a way

[17:39] to advance policies, practices,

[17:41] and individuals dedicated to

[17:42] strengthening our nation's

[17:46] health. And living a healthy

[17:46] lifestyle means so many things

[17:48] to so many people. Just

[17:51] yesterday I was in sacramento

[17:54] advocating for a ban on nitrous

[17:56] oxide, from being sold here in

[17:58] orange county and across the

[18:00] state of california, reducing

[18:05] substance abuse from these types

[18:07] of products that are being sold

[18:08] to individuals, especially our

[18:11] young adults. Investing in

[18:14] seniors for their health by

[18:15] hosting free clinics with our

[18:18] partners at caloptima health and

[18:20] promoting clean air by

[18:22] transitioning to electric fleet,

[18:23] promoting electric vehicle

[18:24] charging stations throughout

[18:25] orange county so that we can

[18:27] reduce smog and pollution. Of

[18:31] course, our environmental health

[18:33] team tests our water toes make

[18:34] sure that our beaches and

[18:36] waterways are clean and free

[18:38] from bacteria and toxins. So we

[18:40] want to thank them. Our public

[18:42] health leaders in orange county

[18:44] do a tremendous job. They work

[18:46] tirelessly to make sure that

[18:49] orange county remains healthy

[18:51] and make sure that we are green

[18:53] and clean here in the county of

[18:57] orange. So thank you, to all of

[19:01] you, for all of your good work.

[19:02] >>don wagner: so one of the

[19:06] first things I did -- in fact,

[19:06] maybe the first thing I did when

[19:07] I moved to orange county back in

[19:10] the '90s was joined an

[19:12] organization dedicated to public

[19:12] health. It was the american

[19:14] lung association. Got founded

[19:16] years and years ago to fight

[19:18] tuberculosis. Has had some

[19:19] success on that front, but the

[19:21] work continues with the lung

[19:22] association. So I was on their

[19:24] board and PRESIDENT For a while.

[19:26] And then of course when covid

[19:28] came along it seemed like all of

[19:31] us were public health

[19:31] professionals, we all knew

[19:33] whether masks worked or did work

[19:36] and social distancing. We all

[19:37] seemed to know. But the truth

[19:39] is the experts and those

[19:41] questions are the folks behind

[19:44] us. And thankfully we got covid

[19:46] behind us. We ended up with,

[19:47] again, the remaining challenges

[19:48] that are still out there. And

[19:55] we do see measles. We do see

[19:57] the nile virus. We do see some

[19:59] environmental concerns spoken of

[20:01] by my colleague, the vice-chair.

[20:03] we have an enormous number of

[20:05] public health challenges in a

[20:07] diverse and x-acto oh they can

[20:10] be both -- community. And the

[20:14] men and women of the public

[20:18] health department do yeoman's

[20:19] labor on behalf the public. And

[20:22] those are the professionals whom

[20:23] we on the board of supervisors

[20:25] look for answers to the

[20:26] questions of what do we do, what

[20:28] are the good policies we pursue,

[20:29] and who we trust to be out there

[20:32] on the forefront in the

[20:34] community recognizing these

[20:37] problems and delivering to the

[20:39] extent possible that kind of

[20:42] robust, good health, good

[20:43] advice, good programs that,

[20:46] again, were talked about by my

[20:47] colleagues. So thank you to our

[20:49] public health department. Often

[20:51] you are unsung. When do you

[20:53] have a spotlight shined on you,

[20:55] it's because some bad things are

[20:57] happening. But these men and

[20:58] women rise to the challenge, and

[21:02] I want to thank them.

[21:03] >>speaker: good morning, and

[21:06] thank you so much, honorable

[21:08] CHAIRMAN Chaffee and honorable

[21:10] board. Obviously, I'm not jenna

[21:13] serin, but I am DR. Ck, your

[21:13] county health officer and here

[21:16] to present on behalf of both

[21:19] jenna theron, the public health

[21:20] director, as well as myself and

[21:23] the whole entire team., so

[21:25] yes, the theme is "ready, set,

[21:27] action," and there's a lot to

[21:30] do. You've probably seen all

[21:31] overnight news of what things

[21:33] you can do to prepare and keep

[21:34] our community healthy. We want

[21:36] to thank you. But just know

[21:37] behind the scenes we have a

[21:39] dedicated team that is working

[21:41] around the clock to help protect

[21:44] our community and allow for us

[21:45] to have such a vibrant

[21:47] community. So public health is

[21:50] the foundation of a healthy and

[21:51] thriving community, and since

[21:53] its establishment in 1889 when

[21:57] we only had 13,000 in orange

[21:59] county, we faced a

[22:00] a lot of

[22:01] different infectious disease

[22:02] outbreaks, and that was the

[22:04] foundation of our public health

[22:05] department. And as you see

[22:06] today, we are more active than

[22:08] ever. We are using all of

[22:10] advancements that we have to

[22:12] continue to detect outbreaks and

[22:17] address them. And this year we

[22:19] have made significant strides in

[22:21] improving health outcomes. Over

[22:26] the last year, the community --

[22:27] the communitiesable disease

[22:29] control division, which is a

[22:30] very small group, considering

[22:32] how big our county is, they

[22:34] conducted over 6800 case

[22:35] investigations and that means

[22:37] calling a whole lot of people, a

[22:40] lot of organizations to get down

[22:42] to you the terms of what

[22:43] actually caused an outbreak and

[22:44] where it actually started. The

[22:46] public health service clinic

[22:49] served over 17,000 families and

[22:50] patients reducing the spread for

[22:53] infectious disease. Our

[22:55] pulmonary disease services is

[22:57] one of our busiest tb clinics in

[22:59] the nation. We serve -- we have

[23:03] the sixth highest number of tb

[23:05] active cases compared to other

[23:08] states in the united states

[23:10] counties.. Our community

[23:12] nursing team provided health

[23:13] management support to over 6,000

[23:15] clients and our health promotion

[23:17] team provided education for

[23:19] families, schools, and equipping

[23:20] them with the tools to make

[23:21] healthy lifestyle decisions

[23:24] including distribution of 3,000

[23:26] dental kits and our public

[23:27] health laboratory, which is the

[23:29] newest and greatest here in

[23:31] california, analyzed over

[23:34] 2-1-1,000 lab samples giving

[23:35] healthcare providers diagnostic

[23:37] information for their patients

[23:39] and our environmental health

[23:40] division the information on the

[23:42] safety of our recreational

[23:42] drinking water. And I had the

[23:44] pleasure and honor to actually

[23:46] be on call this weekend and also

[23:49] got all of those calls, and we

[23:57] put our public health lab into

[23:59] action to rule out some suspect

[24:00] measles cases and they are

[24:04] working diligently. And 26,000

[24:06] health permits were issued to

[24:07] businesses including

[24:09] restaurants, industrial

[24:10] facilities, body art studios,

[24:12] waste sites, contributing to

[24:14] ensuring orange county's a safe

[24:16] place to live, work and visit.

[24:18] The program would not be

[24:19] possible without strong

[24:20] collaboration and partnership

[24:21] with healthcare system and

[24:22] community partners and everyone

[24:23] we serve. So on behalf of the

[24:25] healthcare agency, I want to

[24:26] thank our dedicated public

[24:28] health workforce for their

[24:29] expertise, our public health

[24:31] leaders, who continue to workday

[24:33] in and day out to protect all of

[24:35] our staff and our residents, and

[24:37] we sincerely appreciate the

[24:38] board's support in all of our

[24:40] efforts, and we want to thank

[24:43] you, paul, and happy "public

[24:45] health week".

[26:22] [Applause]

[26:23] >>chair, doug chaffee: we have

[26:24] one more presentation this

[26:27] morning being brought forward by

[26:28] vice-chair foley, so our

[26:33] airports fly friendly program.

[26:33] Vice-chair.

[26:34] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: good

[26:35] morning, everyone. Vice-chair

[26:37] foley again representing the

[26:39] fabulous fifth district where we

[26:40] host our orange county airport.

[26:41] And talk about a public health

[26:42] matter, we are work tirelessly

[26:44] at the airport to green it up

[26:47] and clean it up and make sure

[26:50] that the planes overhead are

[26:53] quieter, more friendly, and less

[26:54] polluting to our neighbors. So

[26:59] a few years ago we developed

[27:01] through our airport advisory

[27:03] team the fly-friendly program.

[27:06] The fly-friendly program

[27:08] encourages general off asian,

[27:11] jet operators and pilots --

[27:13] general aviation, jet operators

[27:16] and pilots to reduce noise foot

[27:18] print and adopt

[27:18] environmentally-sustainable

[27:19] practices. We launched the

[27:21] program in 2022 and john wayne

[27:23] airport partners with the

[27:25] general aviation community to

[27:26] advance responsible aviation.

[27:28] So the general aviation

[27:29] community are not the commercial

[27:30] planes. They're the small

[27:32] planes and the jets that fly

[27:34] out. And so what we've tried to

[27:38] do 17 courage through education

[27:40] to inform the pilots, who MAY

[27:42] not live here -- most do not --

[27:43] about the uniqueness of our

[27:45] orange county airport and how

[27:47] residents are right under foot

[27:50] as you leave the runway. And so

[27:52] they can fly a specific

[27:53] departure that is a quieter

[27:55] departure, that is less

[27:56] impactful on the neighbors,

[27:58] especially in the cities of

[28:01] newport beach and costa mesa,

[28:06] and they also can really

[28:08] encourage their operators to

[28:11] support some of our sustainable

[28:14] practices and also not travel

[28:16] late at night after the

[28:18] commercial curfew. So the

[28:21] curfew only applies to

[28:23] commercial flights. It does not

[28:26] apply to the general aviation

[28:28] and the settlement agreement

[28:29] that we have, which is, by the

[28:31] way, the most restrictive of any

[28:33] airport in america. So we're

[28:34] doing everything we can to

[28:35] fulfill the needs of the

[28:37] community in terms of their

[28:38] aviation and travel needs but

[28:40] while making sure that we are

[28:42] flying friendly overhead in

[28:43] orange county. Another way that

[28:45] we've been working to reduce

[28:46] noise aside from the general

[28:50] aviation is our airport director

[28:51] charlene reynolds has done an

[28:53] exceptional job with our team

[28:54] and talking with the commercial

[28:56] pilots to get them to change out

[28:58] their planes so that they are

[29:00] the cleaner, quieter planes, so

[29:02] that they are less impactful to

[29:05] the neighborhoods. So this year

[29:07] we recognize through our

[29:12] data-driven scoring system two

[29:14] fixed-based operators, both clay

[29:17] lacy and aci jet as well as 12

[29:19] awardees who really did a good

[29:21] job in reducing the noise over

[29:25] the neighborhoods. So for tier

[29:28] 1, we have baker aviation in

[29:29] first place. Second place is

[29:32] wheels up. Third place is net

[29:35] jets aviation. We wanted to

[29:37] highlight these pilots and

[29:38] operators because we want to

[29:39] make sure that the community

[29:44] knows these are the ones who are

[29:46] good -- flying friendly and

[29:49] being good neighbors. Tier 2,

[29:51] first up is air transport, ati

[29:54] jet. Second is jet edge, and

[29:56] third airshare. Tier 3, first

[29:58] up is charter airlines, second

[30:02] sun air jets, and third bellair.

[30:03] And then finally in tier 4, we

[30:07] have first place newport sea

[30:10] pines, llc, second avmax

[30:12] aircraft leasing, inc., and

[30:16] third mount olive holdings, llc.

[30:20] All of these general aviation

[30:22] operators and pilots are doing a

[30:23] great job of reduce noise and

[30:27] helping us to mitigate noise and

[30:28] encouraging eco-friendly

[30:30] aviation practices. So thank

[30:32] you for maintaining a friendly

[30:34] environment for our neighbors,

[30:36] and we want to ensure that we

[30:41] continue to have the premier

[30:43] airport, the best, largest

[30:46] airport in america two years in

[30:47] a row. So we're working on our

[30:49] third year and fly-friendly

[30:51] program is helping us to

[30:52] continue to be good neighbors.

[30:55] So I'd like to invite up from

[30:57] clay lacy aviation, who was able

[30:58] to be here. And by the way, a

[31:00] lot of these pilots don't live

[31:01] in the area, so we'll be sending

[31:04] their recognitions to them. I'd

[31:06] also like to invite up alex

[31:08] scott and land done jarvis, as

[31:13] well as our airport director

[31:14] charlene reynolds, and then I

[31:15] would also like to invite up our

[31:17] members from our airport

[31:27] advisory team to join us. Alex,

[31:54] did you want to make a comment?

[31:56] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: alex,

[31:57] you want to share --

[31:59] >>speaker: yeah. Like the

[32:03] supervisor said, you know, us at

[32:06] fbo, we try spread the word and

[32:06] our partnership at the airport

[32:09] is passing out flyers, our team

[32:10] trying to educate these pilots

[32:11] to be better neighbors for the

[32:12] community. So that's something

[32:15] we're trying to do. You can see

[32:17] baker aviation place to with us.

[32:19] They're one of our most-used

[32:21] tenants. They use our fbo.

[32:23] We're doing our best to be good

[32:24] neighbors to the community.

[32:25] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[32:30] you so much.

[32:40] [Applause]

[33:29] S.

[33:30] >>chair, doug chaffee: that

[33:30] concludes our presentations this

[33:32] morning. We'll be in our board

[33:34] meeting in about 10 minutes.

[37:49] Thank you.

[37:58] In the the board of supervisors

[38:07] meeting will resume shortly.

[38:19] The board of supervisors meeting

[39:04] will resume shortly.

[45:29] Morning everyone.

[46:45] [Pause]

[46:48] >>chair, doug chaffee: good again,

[46:50] everyone. And welcome to the

[46:51] meeting of the orange county

[46:53] board of supervisors for

[46:55] APRIL 14th 2026. Hopefully

[46:57] everyone has their taxes

[46:59] prepared and will file on time

[47:03] the deadline being tomorrow.

[47:05] Today the invocations will be

[47:09] offered by vice-chair foley.

[47:10] And pledge of allegiance will be

[47:12] led by supervisor nguyen. If

[47:21] you're able, please stand.

[47:21] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: good

[47:23] morning. Today we begin with

[47:24] gratitude for the people whose

[47:26] work makes public service

[47:27] possible each and every day.

[47:29] Let us remember that the county

[47:32] of orange is first and foremost

[47:34] people serving people. Without

[47:37] the dedication of county

[47:38] employees, care providers and

[47:41] frontline workers, we would not

[47:42] fulfill our responsibility to

[47:45] the public. During national

[47:46] "public health week" we

[47:48] recognize those whose daily work

[47:50] protects and strengthening the

[47:51] health of our communities, often

[47:54] with little notice and even less

[47:57] recognition. We give thanks for

[47:57] those whose work is visible

[48:00] every day and for those whose

[48:02] efforts are quieter but no less

[48:04] essential. Let us keep in mind

[48:08] that many people across public

[48:09] safety, health, social services,

[48:11] public works, parks, in-home

[48:13] care and county offices who help

[48:15] sustain the life of this county.

[48:16] We acknowledge those who care

[48:19] for residents most in need with

[48:22] patience, skill, and compassion.

[48:23] As we consider the decisions

[48:25] before us, let us do so with the

[48:27] understanding that strong

[48:29] communities depend on those who

[48:30] answer the call to serve each

[48:34] day. Thank you.

[48:36] >>janet nguyen: it's both an

[48:37] honor and a 45 to stand before

[48:39] you. As a proud american deeply

[48:41] grateful to the freedoms that we

[48:43] get to enjoy as citizens in this

[48:44] great country. But as we take

[48:46] this time to say the pledge,

[48:47] let's take a moment to think

[48:48] about the fact that just last

[48:50] week we had four american

[48:52] astronauts who -- who splashed

[48:54] down off of our california

[48:56] coast, returning home after a

[48:57] historic journey around the

[49:00] moon. How awesome is that in

[49:02] our generation, we get to watch

[49:03] that. It's a very powerful

[49:05] reminder that america remains a

[49:08] beacon of freedom, opportunity,

[49:10] and limitless possibility. As

[49:13] you join me in pledging to our

[49:16] great nation, remember our

[49:18] former and current servicemen

[49:20] and women and their families,

[49:21] because we couldn't be here

[49:23] today without them. Please join

[49:25] me.

[49:26] I pledge allegiance to my flag

[49:28] to the united states of america

[49:30] and to the republic for which it

[49:32] stands, one nation, under GOD,

[49:34] indivisible, with liberty and

[49:43] justice for all.

[49:44] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank you

[49:46] vice-chair foley and supervisor

[49:48] nguyen. A couple of reminders

[49:53] for today's meeting please use

[49:59] the main entrance for entering

[50:00] and leaving. All of the doors

[50:02] are alarmed and for emergency

[50:05] exit only. All phones should be

[50:07] muted and on vibrate at this

[50:09] time and for the duration of the

[50:12] meeting. A list of today's

[50:13] agenda with agenda requests to

[50:15] speak are located in the lobby

[50:16] outside the boardroom. The

[50:18] board will be breaking for lunch

[50:19] around the noon hour during

[50:20] which time we'll also recess to

[50:24] closed sessions. Parking

[50:29] validation for the p4 park lot

[50:31] is available. Please see the

[50:33] deputy clerk next to the podium

[50:37] to receive a parking validation

[50:38] card. Now I'll proceed to the

[50:39] agenda for this morning's

[50:41] meeting. The agenda contains a

[50:43] brief description of each item

[50:46] to be considered. Except as

[50:47] otherwise provided by law, no

[50:50] action shall be taken at any

[50:52] item not appearing in today's

[50:54] agenda. Agenda is divided into

[50:56] sections. All matters on the

[50:57] consent calendar are approved by

[50:59] one motion unless a board member

[51:03] or member of the public has a

[51:05] separate action on a specific

[51:06] item. If you wish to address

[51:09] the board, please complete a

[51:10] speaker request form located in

[51:13] the lobby outside the boardroom.

[51:14] Completed forms must be

[51:16] deposited in the box next to the

[51:18] podium prior to the reading of

[51:19] the agenda item beginning with

[51:24] the consent calendar. To ensure

[51:28] smooth conduct of the meeting, a

[51:32] speaker request must be turned

[51:34] in -- in the box next to the

[51:36] agenda there -- the podium.

[51:37] Speakers MAY address the board

[51:38] on up to three occasions with

[51:41] three minutes allotted to the

[51:41] speaker per occasion. When

[51:43] you're called to speak, please

[51:45] step to the podium. We request

[51:47] that you state your name and

[51:50] city of residence for the

[51:51] record. Please note the light

[51:53] on the podium. The green light

[51:55] means you have three minutes.

[51:58] The light changes to yellow when

[52:00] have you one minute. The light

[52:01] turns to red when your time has

[52:02] expired. We ask that you

[52:04] observe the time limits so that

[52:06] all who wish to speak MAY have

[52:08] an opportunity do so. When

[52:10] address the board, please

[52:12] address the board as a whole

[52:13] through the chair. I would ask

[52:15] the clerk to identify any

[52:18] changes to the agenda and any

[52:19] requests received from the

[52:21] public to pull an item from the

[52:23] consent calendar for separate

[52:26] consideration. MADAM Clerk.

[52:27] >>clerk, robin stieler: thank

[52:30] you MR. CHAIRMAN. Item 4 will

[52:33] be continued to MAY 19th,

[52:36] 2026, 9:30 A.M., and on the

[52:36] discussion calendar items 25 and

[52:39] 34 have been continued to

[52:43] APRIL 28th, 2026, 9:30 A.M.

[52:47] And s43a has been continued to

[52:51] MAY 5th, 2026, 9:30 A.M. And

[52:53] the public has requested a pool

[52:55] item 10 -- requested to pull

[52:57] item 10 from the consent

[52:57] calendar.

[52:58] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[53:00] you, MADAM Clerk. Colleagues,

[53:01] there any items on the consent

[53:03] calendar you'd like to consider

[53:03] separately.

[53:04] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I'd

[53:08] like to pull items 9 and 11,

[53:14] please. Otherwise move the

[53:15] consent calendar --

[53:17] >>vincente sarmiento: MR. Chair,

[53:19] I'd like to just make a comment

[53:21] on item 1 and 2, and I am going

[53:23] to be abstaining on item 11, not

[53:25] because I don't support. I

[53:25] think they're great

[53:27] organizations. But, again, the

[53:30] confusion with ab 2946, I'll go

[53:32] ahead and put my recusal --

[53:36] abstention on that, but comment

[53:40] on 1 and 2, supportive of those.

[53:40] >>chair, doug chaffee: did you

[53:42] want to make comments on 1 and

[53:43] 2.

[53:43] >>vincente sarmiento: yes, very

[53:45] briefly. Wait a minuted to give

[53:47] a shout-out to two these

[53:49] appointments, roy herndon who

[53:50] was with the orange county water

[53:51] district while I was there.

[53:52] Great selection there. He was

[53:55] really helpful on making sure

[53:58] that we address the pfas

[53:59] contamination in our wells and

[54:02] doing well head treatment there,

[54:08] and also nabil sacka. Both

[54:09] great appointments. And item 2,

[54:13] I want to congratulate maria

[54:15] linares from tustin. Her

[54:17] daughter was an intern of ours,

[54:19] and maria is very accomplished

[54:22] on her own. She was with the

[54:22] orange county business council

[54:25] and a former cal state trustee.

[54:26] So excellent appoints. I just

[54:28] wanted to give them a shout-out.

[54:29] Thank you, MR. Chair.

[54:29] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[54:31] you. We have a motion and a

[54:34] second on the items not pulled.

[54:36] Any objection? Those items are

[54:38] approved. Now we go to item 9.

[54:41] MADAM Clerk, was there -- was

[54:44] that just -- vice-chair, great.

[54:45] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[54:46] you, MR. CHAIRMAN. Item 9 is

[54:48] north strand beach access

[54:51] improvements. And the quitclaim

[54:53] deed with the headlands reserve

[54:55] llc. This is a project that our

[54:56] office has been working on with

[55:02] the county team and the north

[55:03] strand homeowners' association.

[55:05] In 2006, the headlands reserve

[55:06] constructed improvements along

[55:10] the north strand beach access.

[55:12] following construction, the

[55:13] headlands reserve intended to

[55:14] transfer the ownership of

[55:15] maintenance and improvements to

[55:18] the county. The transfer never

[55:21] happened, and so nobody was

[55:23] maintaining the fence and the

[55:25] area of this construction. So

[55:28] the fence between niguel shores

[55:30] community and the north strands

[55:31] beach access went without repair

[55:34] for nearly two decades. This

[55:35] agreement allows the county to

[55:37] assume responsibility of the

[55:39] walkway, stairs, fencing,

[55:40] landscaping, restrooms and the

[55:41] vital infrastructure both at

[55:44] strands beach and at dana point

[55:45] harbor, ensuring our beaches

[55:48] remain safe and accessible for

[55:48] residents and visitors. So I

[55:50] want to thank our county team

[55:54] for assisting in getting this

[55:54] quitclaim deed and this more

[56:01] than a couple-decades procedural

[56:03] item handled. With that, I'll

[56:03] move the item.

[56:04] >>chair, doug chaffee: second.

[56:05] Any objection? Item 9 is

[56:07] approved. Item 10, I believe

[56:08] the public pulled that one.

[56:16] >>clerk, robin stieler: yes.

[56:17] >>clerk, robin stieler: 10.

[56:17] Under Registrar of Voters-

[56:18] Approve various renewals of

[56:19] leases and licenses of real

[56:19] property for ballot drop box

[56:20] locations, five-year terms; and

[56:21] authorize Registrar of Voters or

[56:24] designee to execute renewals.

[56:25] And we have two requests to

[56:26] speak on item 10.

[56:27] >>chair, doug chaffee: please

[56:28] call the names.

[56:29] >>clerk, robin stieler: cheryl

[56:31] and kate.

[56:34] >>speaker: good morning. The

[56:37] concern with the drop boxes is,

[56:38] along with the new executive

[56:41] order requiring track to be on

[56:42] all mail-out ballot so they're

[56:44] tracked not only going out, but

[56:47] also coming back, drop boxes do

[56:49] not allow for this to happen.

[56:50] They are not encountered when

[56:53] they're picked up, so there's no

[56:55] understanding of how many are

[56:56] picked up until they get back to

[56:59] the robb. And at that point

[57:06] anything can have occurred. So

[57:07] there's no real chain of custody

[57:09] on this. When it comes to the

[57:11] cameras, these cameras are not

[57:13] monitored or controlled by the

[57:14] election officials. They're

[57:16] controlled by the places, if by

[57:18] chance they have cameras. And

[57:20] they're only asked to have

[57:22] something if somebody complain

[57:23] beside something that happened

[57:26] at this do box. So not are only

[57:27] they a blight on the community,

[57:30] it also is not in compliance

[57:32] with what we need to do to make

[57:34] sure that we can actually track

[57:37] what's going on there. So the

[57:40] other issue with this is it's

[57:42] actually part of the

[57:44] disinfranchise of in-person

[57:48] voters. We have over 250 blue

[57:50] usps boxes. We do not need

[57:53] another 124 random locations for

[57:54] these drop boxes to occur that

[57:56] have no chain of custody. And

[58:01] we have an amazing amount of

[58:06] disenfranchise of ours of when

[58:07] an in-person can vote versus

[58:10] somebody mailing in. So these

[58:11] are other issues that are

[58:12] creating a major concern. And

[58:13] major thing here that we look at

[58:15] is that you cannot possibly

[58:18] certify what you can't verify.

[58:18] And drop boxes are very

[58:20] difficult to actually control

[58:23] and verify. So I thank you for

[58:25] considering to take this off the

[58:28] list and vote no.

[58:30] >>chair, doug chaffee: MAY we

[58:31] have the next speaker, please.

[58:37] >>clerk, robin stieler: kate.

[58:38] >>speaker: good morning, board.

[58:42] And happy easter. So I want to

[58:43] ask why is this even on our

[58:48] agenda today? First of all, as

[58:50] the other speaker said,

[58:53] everything has to be gone -- all

[58:55] the ballots have to go through

[58:57] the post office and get a

[58:58] postmark by the 5th.

[59:02] Obviously we can't do that with

[59:06] drop boxes. Why has this not

[59:11] just been canceled so none of us

[59:15] here can waste our time and our

[59:17] money. Instead, we are here.

[59:19] So you say the drop boxes are

[59:22] free. Nothing is free in this

[59:25] world. Who gave the money for

[59:28] the drop boxes and who does

[59:31] somebody have to pay back?

[59:34] Also, as the speaker before

[59:37] said, where does the feed go?

[59:42] So if there is someone watching,

[59:47] where does it go? Does it go to

[59:51] joe-below? Who knows. So why

[59:53] are you wasting our time and our

[59:59] money today on this item?

[1:00:00] Instead what you should be

[1:00:02] wasting our time and money on is

[1:00:04] why don't you have the voters

[1:00:06] choice act here so we can all

[1:00:09] come and tell you how much we do

[1:00:12] not want the voters choice act.

[1:00:14] We don't want to be

[1:00:15] disenfranchised anymore. We

[1:00:18] want to come and vote on one day

[1:00:22] with paper ballots. And we want

[1:00:25] to show our id so that everybody

[1:00:27] knows we are citizens and we are

[1:00:34] doing our rightful duty to vote.

[1:00:39] Why are you wasting my time?

[1:00:41] And taxpayers' money on this

[1:00:44] today? Just floors me. Thank

[1:00:47] you.

[1:00:49] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[1:00:49] supervisor foley.

[1:00:50] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[1:00:51] you, MR. CHAIRMAN. Is MR. Page

[1:00:54] available? Is MR. Page here?

[1:00:59] He left? No, he's here. Not

[1:01:01] you, leon page. Bob page,

[1:01:04] registrar of voters. He left?

[1:01:09] Okay. Well, this is a licensing

[1:01:12] agreement for various locations

[1:01:14] so that the county can place a

[1:01:17] drop box at their property. We

[1:01:21] can't just go in and put

[1:01:23] facilities on private property.

[1:01:26] So this we're voting on is the

[1:01:29] licensing agreements with these

[1:01:32] various facilities. It is my

[1:01:34] understanding that these are

[1:01:36] not -- we're not paying for

[1:01:39] these. Is that right, MR. Leon

[1:01:40] page?

[1:01:41] >>leon page: thank you. Yeah,

[1:01:43] that's my understanding as well.

[1:01:44] At no cost to the county.

[1:01:45] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[1:01:47] And then what I wanted to ask

[1:01:50] MR. Page, who is not here, was

[1:01:52] what's the last day that ballots

[1:01:55] are collected from a drop box?

[1:01:56] It is my understanding that it

[1:01:59] is election day. Ballots are

[1:02:01] not collected from a drop box

[1:02:03] after election day. Is that

[1:02:03] correct?

[1:02:05] >>leon page: that's my

[1:02:06] understanding as well, that

[1:02:08] right when the polls close, the

[1:02:10] registrar of voters -- it's

[1:02:11] really tremendous effort

[1:02:12] orchestrated by the registrar,

[1:02:14] that he has personnel standing

[1:02:16] by at each and every location to

[1:02:18] lock the box right when the

[1:02:19] polls close.

[1:02:20] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[1:02:20] that's right. And I know that

[1:02:23] the drop box that's located near

[1:02:27] my neighborhood at tewinkle park

[1:02:28] is one that our neighbors use

[1:02:30] and is very convenient for all

[1:02:33] of us. And I track my ballot.

[1:02:37] You can go to ocvote.Com, and

[1:02:39] you can sign up to track your

[1:02:41] ballot. I get a notification

[1:02:43] when my ballot has been received

[1:02:45] at the registrar of voters

[1:02:46] through a text message. And

[1:02:49] then I get a notification when

[1:02:52] my ballot has been counted at

[1:02:53] the registrar of voters. So

[1:02:54] there is a lot of good tracking

[1:02:56] system there is. With that,

[1:02:58] I'll move the item.

[1:02:59] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[1:02:59] supervisor wagner.

[1:03:02] >>don wagner: thank you. I saw

[1:03:03] MR. Page come in with somebody.

[1:03:06] Is there somebody from his

[1:03:09] office here? Were they just

[1:03:12] here for the presentations? Why

[1:03:15] would you leave before the item?

[1:03:18] I ask rhetorically because

[1:03:18] there's nobody here to answer

[1:03:20] it. Can we continue this until

[1:03:22] next meeting and get an answer

[1:03:24] from MR. Page on these

[1:03:25] questions? I do the other

[1:03:27] MR. Page, our counsel, is

[1:03:28] correct. But is there an urge

[1:03:32] teens do this today? The

[1:03:34] election is JUNE 2nd. I'm

[1:03:37] aware of when the election is.

[1:03:41] Can we get MR. Page here later

[1:03:46] in APRIL to talk about this?

[1:03:49] Okay. Can you continue this

[1:03:52] till later today?

[1:03:53] >>chair, doug chaffee: well, we

[1:03:58] have a motion pending. I think

[1:04:04] we need to --

[1:04:04] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: we

[1:04:06] already is a motion on the

[1:04:06] floor.

[1:04:07] >>chair, doug chaffee: we have a

[1:04:08] motion to approve the item.

[1:04:10] It's been moved and seconded.

[1:04:12] Do we need to do a roll call?

[1:04:15] MADAM Clerk, just to be clear.

[1:04:19] And if that motion is not either

[1:04:21] approved or not, then we'll go

[1:04:22] to the continue --

[1:04:27] >>don wagner: well, point of

[1:04:29] order. Motion to table. Motion

[1:04:31] to table until later today.

[1:04:32] >>chair, doug chaffee: well, let

[1:04:35] me -- I would ask the maker and

[1:04:38] seconder of the motion to --

[1:04:38] >>janet nguyen: who was the

[1:04:41] maker, who was the second?

[1:04:42] >>chair, doug chaffee: wait

[1:04:44] until the registrar has a chance

[1:04:45] to get here. Is there any issue

[1:04:46] with postponing --

[1:04:47] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[1:04:48] whatever you want to do,

[1:04:48] MR. CHAIRMAN.

[1:04:49] >>chair, doug chaffee: I think

[1:04:50] it's fair that he needs to be

[1:04:53] here. This is his item, and so

[1:04:54] we should hear from him. And

[1:04:57] any questions that my colleagues

[1:04:59] MAY have will have a chance to

[1:05:01] be answered. So just hold this

[1:05:03] off. A vote on this will be

[1:05:04] done later when he arrives.

[1:05:06] We'll find out when he arrives.

[1:05:07] Hopefully we'll have some

[1:05:08] indication that he's here.

[1:05:10] We'll finish whatever item we're

[1:05:13] on and then go right to this

[1:05:13] item again.

[1:05:14] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[1:05:14] you.

[1:05:14] >>chair, doug chaffee: all

[1:05:16] right. Thank you. Supervisor

[1:05:17] nguyen, did you have any further

[1:05:20] comments? Okay. All right.

[1:05:24] Then we have vice-chair, you

[1:05:25] also asked to hear item 11.

[1:05:26] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I

[1:05:27] just need to make my record in

[1:05:32] terms of my abstention. In

[1:05:33] accordance with california

[1:05:35] government code 26227.5 which

[1:05:37] states within 90 days of

[1:05:38] preceding an election a member

[1:05:40] of a board who is on a ballot as

[1:05:43] a supervisor, district candidate

[1:05:43] of the board and has an opponent

[1:05:47] on that ballot shall not take

[1:05:49] any action related to spending

[1:05:50] district discretionary funds.

[1:05:51] With that, I abstain.

[1:05:53] >>don wagner: with that, I'll

[1:05:54] move the item.

[1:05:57] >>janet nguyen: second.

[1:05:59] >>chair, doug chaffee: we have 3

[1:06:02] votes in favor and two

[1:06:13] abstentions. The item passes. That concludes the

[1:06:15] consent calendar. And our next

[1:06:19] item...

[1:06:21] -- our next stem item 12.

[1:06:36] There we go. We have no

[1:06:38] requests to speak on agenda item

[1:06:38] 12.

[1:06:39] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[1:06:39] supervisor nguyen.

[1:06:40] >>janet nguyen: I'm just

[1:06:42] curious. This item asks for a

[1:06:43] waiver for the insurance. How

[1:06:50] does that impact us as a county?

[1:06:52] Has county counsel looked at it?

[1:06:57] Because it's different than the

[1:07:07] last -- nobody?

[1:07:09] >>janet nguyen: okay. Nobody

[1:07:11] wants to show up to our board

[1:07:12] meeting anymore. No, I'm fine

[1:07:15] with the item. I just -- it's

[1:07:17] more curiosity of whether -- how

[1:07:18] this impacts the county and if

[1:07:20] there's any procurement issues

[1:07:23] for us, waiving the insurance.

[1:07:25] But if it doesn't seem to be a

[1:07:30] concern, I'll move the item.

[1:07:31] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[1:07:32] second.

[1:07:33] >>chair, doug chaffee: I did

[1:07:35] have a question myself.

[1:07:35] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: do

[1:07:36] you know what paragraph the

[1:07:47] waiver is on? What page number?

[1:07:49] >>michelle aguirre: within the

[1:07:50] asr, it just speaks to the

[1:07:52] request for mutual

[1:07:53] indemnification. Risk

[1:07:54] management has reviewed and

[1:07:55] they're okay with it. But

[1:07:57] because of that, it does require

[1:07:59] a board approval.

[1:07:59] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[1:08:00] because I see it says in

[1:08:01] paragraph 12 consent to breach,

[1:08:04] not waiver. And that says -- I

[1:08:06] don't think that's the same

[1:08:07] thing.

[1:08:08] >>michelle aguirre: it's

[1:08:12] attachment c, is where the

[1:08:14] insurance related the

[1:08:18] modification information is in.

[1:08:19] >>chair, doug chaffee: do we

[1:08:20] have a representative from the

[1:08:24] D.A.'s office here?

[1:08:25] >>janet nguyen: I'm okay with

[1:08:27] it, MR. CHAIRMAN. I'll move it.

[1:08:28] It's just a question.

[1:08:29] >>chair, doug chaffee: I did

[1:08:34] have a question myself.

[1:08:37] >>speaker: good morning, sir.

[1:08:38] Misty daniels, assistant chief

[1:08:39] from the orange county D.A.'s

[1:08:39] office.

[1:08:40] >>chair, doug chaffee: this is

[1:08:42] apparently for investigator

[1:08:45] firearms training, if I read the

[1:08:45] sr right?

[1:08:47] >>speaker: that is correct.

[1:08:48] >>chair, doug chaffee: how often

[1:08:48] do investigators actually use

[1:08:50] their weapons?

[1:08:51] >>speaker: well, we're required

[1:08:52] by post for training for

[1:08:54] certification, so the rifle

[1:08:57] course requires a 16-hour

[1:08:59] certification. And then

[1:09:00] thereafter, our agency

[1:09:03] requirement is annual

[1:09:04] qualification. And then also

[1:09:06] our handgun. We train quarterly

[1:09:09] on that with annual scoring

[1:09:09] qualification.

[1:09:10] >>chair, doug chaffee: that's

[1:09:11] your training. But do we have

[1:09:13] actual incidents where the

[1:09:15] investigator needs the use of a

[1:09:15] firearm?

[1:09:17] >>speaker: we have not had to

[1:09:19] use our firearm, but we do have

[1:09:20] armed peace officers in the

[1:09:22] D.A.'s office that are

[1:09:25] authorized to carry a weapon in

[1:09:27] the course of their duties, yes.

[1:09:27] >>chair, doug chaffee: okay.

[1:09:29] I'm just wondering why if

[1:09:32] they're not being used the

[1:09:32] investigators actually need to

[1:09:33] be armed or not.

[1:09:35] >>speaker: so the investigators

[1:09:38] are defined by 830.1 of the

[1:09:40] penal code. They are sworn

[1:09:41] peace officers just like every

[1:09:43] other law enforcement agency in

[1:09:44] the county, sir.

[1:09:47] >>chair, doug chaffee: okay. So

[1:09:49] even though they don't -- it's

[1:09:51] been rare if they ever use those

[1:09:51] firearms.

[1:09:52] >>speaker: correct. And we also

[1:09:54] have task forces that are

[1:09:55] assigned to conduct field work.

[1:09:57] We do have investigators that

[1:09:58] conduct field work and are

[1:09:59] prepared yes.

[1:10:00] >>chair, doug chaffee: okay.

[1:10:01] Train something essential.

[1:10:01] Thank you.

[1:10:03] >>speaker: you're welcome, sir.

[1:10:04] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's been

[1:10:05] moved and second. Any

[1:10:05] objection.

[1:10:06] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I

[1:10:07] have no objection but I gave

[1:10:09] MR. Page the language that

[1:10:10] supervisor nguyen was concerned

[1:10:16] about so he could at least share

[1:10:16] out.

[1:10:18] >>leon page: and just so that

[1:10:21] they can answer your -- so I can

[1:10:23] answer your question, would you

[1:10:26] mind rephrasing it or restating

[1:10:26] it.

[1:10:27] >>janet nguyen: it says here

[1:10:29] they're requesting a waiver with

[1:10:31] the commercial general client,

[1:10:33] the auto liability as well and

[1:10:37] then also the -- saw the

[1:10:38] indemnification. But just in

[1:10:41] general, because I don't -- I

[1:10:42] didn't -- we didn't catch that

[1:10:44] from the last contract, and so I

[1:10:45] just wanted to know what's the

[1:10:46] difference between the last one

[1:10:47] and this one and why those

[1:10:50] waivers. But it's -- I can find

[1:10:52] out from the D.A. Afterward.

[1:10:54] It's not something that I would

[1:10:55] vote against.

[1:10:56] >>leon page: I think the answer

[1:10:59] in general is these are

[1:11:00] non-standard terms. It's

[1:11:02] non-standard in the way that

[1:11:03] we're seeking mutual

[1:11:04] indemnification. If we're sued

[1:11:09] because of their acts, then we

[1:11:12] defend us, if we're sued because

[1:11:13] of our -- they're sued box

[1:11:16] office our acts, then we have to

[1:11:17] defend them. That's not

[1:11:19] typically what we see. But

[1:11:20] that's the variation I think why

[1:11:22] you're seeing this language in

[1:11:24] the asr and the contract.

[1:11:26] >>janet nguyen: thank you.

[1:11:26] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's been

[1:11:27] moved and seconded. If there's

[1:11:29] no objection, the item is

[1:11:35] approved. Item, 13, please.

[1:11:37] >>clerk, robin stieler: under

[1:11:45] sheriff corner in...

[1:11:47] And we have no requests to

[1:11:47] speak.

[1:11:49] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[1:11:49] all-district item.

[1:11:50] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: move

[1:11:50] the item.

[1:11:51] >>chair, doug chaffee: any

[1:11:52] objection? Item is approved.

[1:12:12] Item 14, please. We have no

[1:12:14] requests to speak on agenda item

[1:12:15] 14.

[1:12:15] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's a

[1:12:18] district 3 and 5 item. Any

[1:12:21] objection? Items approved --

[1:12:22] item's approved. Item 15,

[1:12:37] please. We have no requests to

[1:12:39] speak on agenda item 15.

[1:12:40] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[1:12:41] all-district item. Moved and

[1:12:43] seconded. Any objection? Item

[1:13:08] is approved. Item 16, please.

[1:13:12] We have no requests to speak on

[1:13:12] agenda item 16.

[1:13:13] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[1:13:14] all-district item.

[1:13:14] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: move

[1:13:15] the item.

[1:13:16] >>chair, doug chaffee: moved and

[1:13:18] seconded. Any objection?

[1:13:19] supervisor sarmiento.

[1:13:21] >>vincente sarmiento: I'm sorry,

[1:13:24] MR. Chair. I thought button

[1:13:25] prematurely. It's for the next

[1:13:25] item.

[1:13:28] >>chair, doug chaffee: okay. So

[1:13:30] there being no objection, that

[1:13:31] item is also approved. Let's

[1:13:51] move on to item 17, please. And

[1:13:53] we have one request to speak on

[1:13:54] agenda item 17.

[1:13:55] >>chair, doug chaffee: please

[1:13:57] call the speaker.

[1:14:02] >>clerk, robin stieler: cheryl.

[1:14:05] >>speaker: this item coming back

[1:14:09] up again, the last time you gave

[1:14:13] the los angeles angels was $9

[1:14:16] million contract from the health

[1:14:18] department. When I asked for an

[1:14:21] accountability of what that $9

[1:14:24] million resulted in, I received

[1:14:29] from a public records request a

[1:14:30] detailed list of what date the

[1:14:32] checks were mailed. That was

[1:14:35] it. That is not a medicine

[1:14:37] trick that really makes any

[1:14:39] sense, to know what $9 million

[1:14:42] did. This one is for $200,000.

[1:14:44] It's supposed to be accounting

[1:14:46] for how many impressions you get

[1:14:49] from your signage, from handing

[1:14:52] out flyers. Millions of

[1:14:54] impressions, sweepstakes,

[1:14:56] bobbleheads, t-shirts,

[1:14:58] billboards do not equal results.

[1:15:00] Giving the money to a team that

[1:15:02] won't even acknowledge that they

[1:15:05] are in orange county is another

[1:15:08] travesty. The amount of

[1:15:09] ridiculous situations -- when

[1:15:11] somebody goes to a baseball

[1:15:12] game, they are not there to find

[1:15:14] out if they need mental health.

[1:15:16] They're there to cheer on their

[1:15:19] team, to have a hot dog, some

[1:15:21] nachos and have a good time.

[1:15:22] The fact that we're using this

[1:15:25] money in this, we have so many

[1:15:26] other places we could be using

[1:15:27] this money, that really would

[1:15:29] give you results. Theim people

[1:15:31] in are depressed or mentally

[1:15:34] ill, those people are not at a

[1:15:36] baseball game spending $100 or

[1:15:39] more to sit there and talk about

[1:15:41] how they're not feeling well.

[1:15:43] So this is an area where this

[1:15:45] money should be better utilized

[1:15:47] in an area that can be actually

[1:15:49] helpful. If you want to hand

[1:15:51] out brochures, if you want to

[1:15:52] have all of this kind of thing,

[1:15:55] go to the places where people

[1:15:57] are living homeless, where they

[1:15:58] have mental illness, where they

[1:16:00] have substance abuse. These are

[1:16:02] the people that need this help.

[1:16:03] These are the people that need

[1:16:05] to use this money. Thank you.

[1:16:05] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[1:16:06] you.

[1:16:06] >>clerk, robin stieler: no

[1:16:09] further speakers, MR. Chair.

[1:16:11] [Applause]

[1:16:12] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[1:16:12] supervisor sarmiento.

[1:16:13] >>vincente sarmiento: thank you,

[1:16:14] MR. Chair. And I apologize for

[1:16:16] hitting the button prematurely

[1:16:18] on the last item. I did want to

[1:16:19] make a few comments. This is an

[1:16:22] incredibly important item

[1:16:26] because it is funding towards

[1:16:28] campaign and strategy towards

[1:16:30] outreach for families and people

[1:16:31] going through behavioral health

[1:16:35] crisis. So I did want to just

[1:16:40] cite some of the data from last

[1:16:43] year, JANUARY 2025 through

[1:16:45] DECEMBER 2025, the calendar year

[1:16:47] showed the top, you know, users

[1:16:50] of our resource guides were

[1:16:52] people accessing information for

[1:16:55] child and youth mental health

[1:16:58] and substance use resources that

[1:17:01] over 1,000 requesters and users

[1:17:03] at that. The second next group

[1:17:07] that was the highest on this

[1:17:09] list were resources for preg

[1:17:10] canes and postpartum support.

[1:17:11] and then you go down, and it's

[1:17:14] for infants and young children.

[1:17:16] So I do think that, you know,

[1:17:20] it's important -- and I want to

[1:17:21] thank DR. Kelly for working with

[1:17:22] our office and talking to us

[1:17:24] about how we can best use these

[1:17:25] scarce resources. It's

[1:17:27] important for us to be able to

[1:17:28] reach everybody in our county

[1:17:29] who's going through trauma. But

[1:17:32] if we know where the need is,

[1:17:34] that's where I think we should

[1:17:36] be focused on. This contract

[1:17:37] would approve a significant

[1:17:40] investment to promote behavioral

[1:17:42] health messaging through the

[1:17:44] angels platform. I'm not a big

[1:17:47] fan, as I've always said, of the

[1:17:48] angels organization, just

[1:17:50] because they have a checkered

[1:17:54] past with the stiff anaheim. So

[1:17:56] it's -- you know, it's nothing

[1:17:57] against the fans. I think the

[1:18:00] organization has some issues.

[1:18:03] But my hope is that maybe we

[1:18:06] could talk about redirecting

[1:18:08] these funds to our own platforms

[1:18:10] that we are driving people to.

[1:18:16] I know that we have several

[1:18:17] platforms that we use, and some

[1:18:19] of them can be confusing. We

[1:18:22] have oc navigator. We have oc

[1:18:25] links. We have the hca website

[1:18:31] and 211. None of them are as

[1:18:32] user-friendly as I'd like them

[1:18:33] to be, and I think these monies

[1:18:34] could be better spent. Maybe

[1:18:36] trying to streamline, trying to

[1:18:38] coordinate, trying to make these

[1:18:39] a little bit more helpful for

[1:18:40] people that are going through

[1:18:41] trauma. When you're going

[1:18:43] through trauma, from personal

[1:18:44] knowledge, it's hard to navigate

[1:18:46] tricky websites, even on a good

[1:18:48] day. But residents on your

[1:18:51] worst day, it's even more

[1:18:52] difficult. So, you know, I also

[1:18:54] think that based upon what we

[1:18:57] saw on the users, I'd rather, to

[1:18:58] the establish the we are going

[1:19:03] to be outreaching and dedicating

[1:19:05] funds towards that, that we work

[1:19:07] with our community clinics, that

[1:19:08] we work with our hospitals, that

[1:19:10] we work with our schools,

[1:19:12] including community colleges,

[1:19:14] four-year universities,

[1:19:15] after-school programs,

[1:19:16] libraries, so all of those

[1:19:21] things I think are

[1:19:21] better partners for us to be

[1:19:23] able to reach the community that

[1:19:25] we see. I want to thank steve

[1:19:26] mcnally, who sent in a written

[1:19:31] message to the board, asks to be

[1:19:33] us to also reconsider this

[1:19:34] because I know he has a family

[1:19:36] member that he's been caring

[1:19:36] for, and he's been a really

[1:19:38] strong advocate. We want to

[1:19:39] thank him for his messaging.

[1:19:41] But I won't be supporting the

[1:19:43] item this morning. I think that

[1:19:45] what we need to do is

[1:19:48] re-evaluate these funds and, you

[1:19:49] know, hopefully re-purpose them

[1:19:51] to be able to come up with a

[1:19:52] system and a platform that will

[1:19:55] be very simple and easy for our

[1:19:56] families that have family

[1:19:58] members that are going through

[1:19:59] trauma or individuals themselves

[1:20:02] that MAY need some immediate

[1:20:04] support. So I would like to,

[1:20:06] you know, request and direct

[1:20:08] that the hca bring forward a

[1:20:10] proposal to engage a consultant

[1:20:12] and assess the full digital

[1:20:14] footprint that we have as it

[1:20:15] relates to mental health

[1:20:16] services that the county offers

[1:20:19] and oc navigator and develop a

[1:20:22] strategy to strengthen both the

[1:20:23] platform and our outreach. So,

[1:20:25] you know, I certainly appreciate

[1:20:28] the effort. I know this amount

[1:20:31] that's requested today is

[1:20:32] 800,000. I know all of a sudden

[1:20:34] a request for 3 million. So we

[1:20:36] were pairing it down. I

[1:20:37] appreciate it. But to the

[1:20:39] extent that we can use these

[1:20:41] funds and they are scarce, you

[1:20:42] know, in a way that will help

[1:20:45] all our families and really

[1:20:46] provide those services where the

[1:20:48] need seems to be, that's where I

[1:20:50] am, MR. Chair. So I will not be

[1:20:51] supporting this item.

[1:20:54] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[1:20:56] you,. Supervisor wagner.

[1:20:57] >>don wagner: thank you,

[1:20:59] MR. CHAIRMAN. I'll note out of

[1:21:00] the staff report there were over

[1:21:03] 2800 survey responses collected

[1:21:05] by hca indicating that a sports

[1:21:07] venue like this -- and we had a

[1:21:08] prior agreement with the

[1:21:11] ducks -- can be an effective

[1:21:12] place to advertise. And you

[1:21:14] know, specifically with respect

[1:21:17] to the questions raised by the

[1:21:18] public comment, I mean, look, we

[1:21:20] know advertising works. That's

[1:21:22] why it is a multibillion dollar

[1:21:25] industry. And we are seeing,

[1:21:27] specifically with baseball,

[1:21:30] attendance is up. And so

[1:21:32] getting those eyeballs that are

[1:21:35] in the stadium on these ads and

[1:21:37] letting folks know that also

[1:21:40] help available out in the

[1:21:42] community is important. It is

[1:21:44] simply not a reason to oppose

[1:21:46] this, that, well, those in

[1:21:48] crisis aren't going to baseball

[1:21:51] games. These ads in large

[1:21:53] measure are directed to family

[1:21:56] members, folks who are dealing

[1:21:57] with loved ones in crisis. And

[1:22:00] we are letting them know there

[1:22:03] are resources out there that

[1:22:05] this county puts a lot of money

[1:22:08] into to help your loved one.

[1:22:10] And what we're trying to do --

[1:22:11] is supervisor sarmiento was

[1:22:13] absolutely right about it. The

[1:22:15] ease or maybe relative lack of

[1:22:17] ease of some of the information

[1:22:21] you're trying to assess, but at

[1:22:24] least you've got somebody in the

[1:22:25] door when they're on that

[1:22:27] website or when they're

[1:22:28] searching for help for

[1:22:29] themselves or more importantly

[1:22:33] help for a loved one. And so I

[1:22:36] think the program has some

[1:22:37] demonstrated success. I think

[1:22:40] it's way too late in the game to

[1:22:42] say, advertisements just don't

[1:22:43] work. Of course they do.

[1:22:44] That's why it's that

[1:22:46] multibillion dollar industry,

[1:22:47] and we are aiming for families.

[1:22:49] Families are the key to getting

[1:22:51] loved ones into treatment. And

[1:22:52] I am all for this program. If

[1:22:54] it hasn't been already moved, I

[1:22:55] will move it.

[1:22:58] >>janet nguyen: I'll second it.

[1:22:58] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[1:23:00] vice-chair foley.

[1:23:00] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[1:23:01] you, MR. CHAIRMAN. I'll be

[1:23:03] supporting the item. I haven't

[1:23:04] supported this item since I got

[1:23:06] here because I think it's an

[1:23:13] ineffective way of marketing

[1:23:13] regarding mental health. I

[1:23:14] won't be supporting this item.

[1:23:16] If you go to a baseball game,

[1:23:20] you barely see the oc navigator

[1:23:22] promotion. And often it's

[1:23:23] followed by a beer promotion.

[1:23:26] And so it's almost like it's in

[1:23:29] conflict. So I don't think it's

[1:23:30] a very effective campaign. So I

[1:23:33] won't be supporting it.

[1:23:35] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[1:23:35] supervisor nguyen.

[1:23:37] >>janet nguyen: thank you,

[1:23:39] MR. CHAIRMAN. I appreciate

[1:23:41] supervisor sarmiento's comment.

[1:23:43] As I mentioned before, I do also

[1:23:45] want us to get into the

[1:23:45] community as well in terms of

[1:23:47] our outreach, but for those whoa

[1:23:49] don't know, I mean, orange

[1:23:52] county is the beacon of where

[1:23:54] baseball -- all the -- and I

[1:23:56] only know this because my son

[1:23:58] plays baseball, and he does it

[1:24:01] all day long seven days a week.

[1:24:03] And so all tournaments and

[1:24:04] everything of baseball comes to

[1:24:07] orange county. So we are a huge

[1:24:10] beacon of baseball, and our

[1:24:11] children -- lots of children and

[1:24:13] families go to these games. And

[1:24:15] this is another avenue for us to

[1:24:16] outreach them. I think it's

[1:24:18] reasonable for the contract. I

[1:24:19] mean, you know, it was in the

[1:24:20] millions of dollars. It has

[1:24:22] been scaled down. And I think

[1:24:25] there's good matrix, good

[1:24:27] numbers and effective. So I

[1:24:29] think we should move forward.

[1:24:31] Why we also should consider how

[1:24:33] can we use other fundings that

[1:24:35] we have scaled down to outreach

[1:24:36] to the individual communities,

[1:24:38] whether it's the community

[1:24:38] clinics, the different

[1:24:41] nonprofits that we all work in.

[1:24:44] But even in my district, most

[1:24:47] kids know it's baseball versus

[1:24:48] hockey, as I mentioned with the

[1:24:50] hockey contract, and so I'm

[1:24:52] supportive given the scope, the

[1:24:55] narrow scope and also how much

[1:24:57] more advantage we get in terms

[1:24:58] of reaching out to these

[1:24:59] children and families.

[1:25:00] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[1:25:02] you, supervisor. I also will be

[1:25:03] supportive. I would note that

[1:25:07] the ads do show up on tv when

[1:25:08] they're televising the game.

[1:25:10] You can see them, so it does get

[1:25:12] wide distribution. And this

[1:25:14] year so far the angels have been

[1:25:15] more fun to watch. So maybe

[1:25:18] we'll get better value out of

[1:25:20] this than in the past. Looks

[1:25:23] like we have 2 no votes. MADAM

[1:25:24] Clerk, would you please you came

[1:25:25] the roll.

[1:25:26] >>clerk, robin stieler:

[1:25:29] supervisor wagner. Supervisor

[1:25:29] nguyen.

[1:25:31] >>janet nguyen: aye.

[1:25:33] >>clerk, robin stieler:

[1:25:34] supervisor sarmiento.

[1:25:38] Vice-chair foley eyes nay.

[1:25:41] >>clerk, robin stieler: and

[1:25:41] chair.

[1:25:42] >>chair, doug chaffee: aye.

[1:25:48] Item passes 3-2. And now we are

[1:25:50] pleased to introduce bob page

[1:25:52] has arrived. Let's go back to

[1:25:58] item 10 now. And supervisor,

[1:26:01] you were wanting to ask

[1:26:02] questions.

[1:26:03] >>speaker: I thought heard that

[1:26:04] the consent was approved, that's

[1:26:06] why I left. I'm here to answer

[1:26:08] any question that you have.

[1:26:09] >>don wagner: I actually didn't

[1:26:11] have the question. It was a

[1:26:12] question of supervisor foley.

[1:26:13] You've answered my question,

[1:26:16] where were you? Got it,

[1:26:18] confused. Consent calendar was

[1:26:19] partially approved, but it was

[1:26:20] others I thought who had

[1:26:22] questions about the drop boxes

[1:26:23] and the pickup of the drop

[1:26:25] boxes. There was a public

[1:26:29] comment with relation to the

[1:26:33] postage, the deadline. And so I

[1:26:34] just wanted to give you the

[1:26:35] opportunity to address those. I

[1:26:37] don't know whether you heard the

[1:26:39] public comments, but it was

[1:26:40] supervisor foley who had the

[1:26:40] questions.

[1:26:41] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: well,

[1:26:43] if you want to answer my

[1:26:44] questions that already got

[1:26:47] answered, you can answer again.

[1:26:50] But so the first question was,

[1:26:52] this is a licensing agreement

[1:26:53] for different properties. Are

[1:26:56] we paying for these -- the right

[1:26:58] to put the drop boxes on these

[1:26:58] properties?

[1:27:00] >>speaker: we are not. These

[1:27:03] are 30 locations that currently

[1:27:03] have drop boxes installed, and

[1:27:05] because we want to continue to

[1:27:06] use those locations, we're

[1:27:07] bringing back those 30

[1:27:09] agreements to board for

[1:27:10] approval.

[1:27:10] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: and

[1:27:12] then there was a concern

[1:27:13] expressed by the public that

[1:27:16] drop boxes are not tracked,

[1:27:22] monitored, nor are there ballots

[1:27:24] picked up before the election or

[1:27:25] on election day. It's after the

[1:27:26] fact. You can address the

[1:27:28] procedure as it relates to

[1:27:29] collecting the ballots and

[1:27:31] securing the drop boxes.

[1:27:34] >>speaker: yes. So we unlock

[1:27:36] all of the drop boxes 29 days

[1:27:39] before election day, which is a

[1:27:40] monday.

[1:27:41] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: what

[1:27:42] day is that?

[1:27:43] >>speaker: for this upcoming

[1:27:44] election, that will be

[1:27:46] MAY 4th. And we then send

[1:27:48] two-person teams to every drop

[1:27:49] box daily except for the first

[1:27:52] two sundays. I give them two

[1:27:53] days off over that month period.

[1:27:55] So they are going to every box.

[1:27:57] When they arrive at a box, they

[1:27:59] are required to follow certain

[1:28:01] chain of custody and security

[1:28:04] steps. They unlock the box,

[1:28:08] remove the -- make sure that any

[1:28:10] ballot that was dropped fell

[1:28:11] within the ballot bag that was

[1:28:14] inside. They zipper up the bag,

[1:28:18] put a number, auditable sealle

[1:28:21] like zip-tied on the zipper and

[1:28:22] then keep it sealed for

[1:28:23] transport back to our office.

[1:28:25] They are then required to take

[1:28:26] several photos. A photo that

[1:28:28] shows that the box is empty,

[1:28:29] that the fire suppression device

[1:28:32] inside the box is still intact.

[1:28:33] They take another photo to show

[1:28:35] that they have locked the door

[1:28:38] and put a numbered seal on the

[1:28:39] door between the door and the

[1:28:42] rest of the box. They're also

[1:28:43] required to take another photo

[1:28:44] when they're back at their

[1:28:45] vehicle to show that they have

[1:28:46] the key that unlocked the door

[1:28:48] to the box because every single

[1:28:50] box has a unique key. There's

[1:28:52] no master key that allows

[1:28:54] somebody to open all 128 boxes

[1:28:56] that we have. They then, using

[1:28:59] a survey 1, 2, 3 app will

[1:29:00] forward those photos that they

[1:29:03] took to our office. We have a

[1:29:03] three-person team who's

[1:29:05] communicating with those folks

[1:29:08] in the field with 800 mega hurts

[1:29:10] radios. The team in the field

[1:29:12] calls and says I've sent in

[1:29:13] photos, I've completed my box.

[1:29:15] One of the three people in my

[1:29:17] office will review the photos.

[1:29:18] If they took the correct photos,

[1:29:19] they show what they, did they

[1:29:21] were supposed to do, they then

[1:29:23] clear them to go to the next

[1:29:24] box. We're doing that on a

[1:29:26] daily basis except for the first

[1:29:29] two sundays. Then on election

[1:29:30] day we recruit two to three

[1:29:32] county employees from other

[1:29:34] departments to be stationed at

[1:29:37] every single one of the boxes

[1:29:37] out in the field for an

[1:29:39] eight-hour shift. So they're

[1:29:41] helping, assisting voters who

[1:29:43] show up late to get their

[1:29:46] ballots into the box at 8:00

[1:29:47] P.M. On election night. They

[1:29:51] are making sure that the boxes

[1:29:53] are assign -- that they're

[1:29:55] assigned to is locked so there

[1:29:57] can be no more additional

[1:29:58] ballots put in those boxes. On

[1:30:00] election day we pick up in the

[1:30:03] morning. Those teams that are

[1:30:04] there assist and lock the box,

[1:30:06] they're not bringing ballots

[1:30:08] back at night. We send the

[1:30:11] two-person teams back out the

[1:30:12] next morning the day after the

[1:30:14] election to pick up the ballots

[1:30:16] and that were dropped in the box

[1:30:18] after our morning pick-up on

[1:30:19] election day and before the box

[1:30:21] was locked at 8:00. If there's

[1:30:24] a line of three people waiting

[1:30:25] at 8:00, the people who were

[1:30:27] stationed there will allow the

[1:30:30] last person in line to put their

[1:30:31] ballot into the box.

[1:30:31] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: and

[1:30:33] in the morning, you pick up the

[1:30:34] ballots, and then the box is

[1:30:35] locked until the next election,

[1:30:36] is that right.

[1:30:37] >>speaker: correct.

[1:30:38] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: and

[1:30:39] then there was a question by one

[1:30:40] of the members of the public

[1:30:41] about this executive order.

[1:30:43] Does that apply in this

[1:30:44] election?

[1:30:46] >>speaker: the executive order

[1:30:50] cannot create new law. So I

[1:30:51] must continue to follow existing

[1:30:53] state and federal law regarding

[1:30:57] elections. If the law changes

[1:30:59] and there are any -- so

[1:31:01] basically, the contents of the

[1:31:03] executive order, both the recent

[1:31:04] one and the one from last year,

[1:31:07] I view those as the PRESIDENT's

[1:31:08] policies regarding elections.

[1:31:12] But until congress or the state

[1:31:12] legislature actually adopt

[1:31:15] adopts any of those policies as

[1:31:17] law, they're not enforceable --

[1:31:19] they're not directed for me to

[1:31:19] do anything.

[1:31:20] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[1:31:24] you. I'll renew my motion.

[1:31:24] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[1:31:25] supervisor sarmiento.

[1:31:26] >>vincente sarmiento: yes.

[1:31:29] Thank you. And bob, just to

[1:31:30] kind of reiterate where maybe

[1:31:32] some of the placements of these

[1:31:34] are. We had eight of these

[1:31:37] boxes going in to anaheim. Six

[1:31:39] in santa ana and one in tustin;

[1:31:40] is that correct?

[1:31:43] >>speaker: yes. And just to

[1:31:45] reiterate, these 30 box that are

[1:31:46] currently in place, this is

[1:31:48] extending the time that we can

[1:31:49] have them there because we want

[1:31:51] voters to remember where the

[1:31:52] boxes are. We don't want to

[1:31:53] move them around every year. We

[1:31:57] have 128 boxes for this election

[1:31:58] that will be -- that are

[1:32:00] installed all overnight county.

[1:32:01] Four of them are currently being

[1:32:03] installed. We have an increase

[1:32:05] of voter registration since 2024

[1:32:07] which now requires us to have

[1:32:09] 128. We had 124 in 2024. You

[1:32:11] know, in a special election we

[1:32:13] had to have 128 drop box

[1:32:14] locations but couldn't do

[1:32:16] agreements and get places time.

[1:32:18] So we ended up doing staff

[1:32:20] location using like a school

[1:32:22] district office where somebody

[1:32:23] could walk in during business

[1:32:24] hours and drop often ballot in a

[1:32:26] box there. So we met the

[1:32:27] requirement, but we're actually

[1:32:30] now installing four additional

[1:32:30] boxes.

[1:32:31] >>vincente sarmiento: great.

[1:32:33] Thank you for having the

[1:32:34] coverage that you have, at least

[1:32:36] in my district. I appreciate

[1:32:38] that. Because I know many in my

[1:32:39] district have mobility

[1:32:41] challenges, accessibility issues

[1:32:43] that MAY prevent them, if not

[1:32:47] for having these locations

[1:32:48] convenient and available in

[1:32:50] their neighborhood. So I have

[1:32:52] to second the item. MR. Chair.

[1:32:53] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[1:32:55] supervisor wagner.

[1:32:57] >>don wagner: you did say

[1:33:00] something that caught my ear.

[1:33:01] 128 drop boxes. You clean them

[1:33:03] out on election day, and then

[1:33:05] you don't go back -- you lock

[1:33:08] them election night, all 128 of

[1:33:08] them.

[1:33:09] >>speaker: yes, sir.

[1:33:09] >>speaker:

[1:33:10] >>don wagner: and you don't go

[1:33:12] back until the next morning?

[1:33:13] >>speaker: correct.

[1:33:14] >>don wagner: I'm going to

[1:33:15] assume election day is probably

[1:33:17] one of the heavier davis use; is

[1:33:18] that fair?

[1:33:19] >>speaker: yes, it is.

[1:33:20] >>don wagner: is how many

[1:33:22] ballots are out there on average

[1:33:27] in those 128 boxes that, by

[1:33:28] definition, do not get counted

[1:33:29] on election night because

[1:33:31] they're still sitting out in a

[1:33:33] box somewhere?

[1:33:34] >>speaker: I would clarify that

[1:33:36] the ones we pick up in the

[1:33:38] morning MAY not get into the

[1:33:39] results that night either

[1:33:40] because it typically takes at

[1:33:42] least 24 hours between picking

[1:33:44] up a ballot and actually getting

[1:33:46] it through the scanner, all of

[1:33:47] the different steps we go

[1:33:49] through. But without looking at

[1:33:52] the last -- what's left to

[1:33:55] process report that we did from

[1:33:56] the last election, I'm going to

[1:33:58] estimate that on election day we

[1:33:59] will probably get at least

[1:34:01] 100,000 ballots deposited into

[1:34:03] drop boxes.

[1:34:06] >>don wagner: that are not in

[1:34:08] your initial results the first

[1:34:08] night.

[1:34:10] >>speaker: and if we picked them

[1:34:12] all up and brought them back on

[1:34:14] election night after 8:00, they

[1:34:15] still wouldn't be in the results

[1:34:17] until after election day.

[1:34:17] >>don wagner: is there any way

[1:34:20] to fix that? We used to be able

[1:34:21] to do that.

[1:34:24] >>speaker: yeah. What I would

[1:34:25] clarify about what we used to be

[1:34:29] able to do is that when people

[1:34:30] say I knew the results before I

[1:34:33] went to sleep on election night

[1:34:35] x number of years ago, what was

[1:34:37] known then was what the media

[1:34:40] was telling people. Election's

[1:34:43] offices always since the 1970s

[1:34:44] have had four weeks to complete

[1:34:46] the can having as progression

[1:34:46] ballots.

[1:34:48] >>don wagner: other than dewey

[1:34:50] defeats truman, how many times

[1:34:53] has that -- what the media says

[1:34:55] based on the report the first

[1:34:56] night, has it changed 30 days

[1:34:58] later any mean, the answer, bob,

[1:35:02] before the current system is not

[1:35:03] many.

[1:35:03] >>speaker: and I'm not going to

[1:35:04] comment on whether the media got

[1:35:06] things right or wrong. I'm just

[1:35:08] saying that election's officials

[1:35:10] throughout the state, we do not

[1:35:12] call elections. We certify

[1:35:14] them. And we have since the

[1:35:16] 1970s before we expanded.

[1:35:19] It's never taken us four weeks

[1:35:20] in orange county to you do you

[1:35:21] it. There's been laws in place

[1:35:22] in recent elections that have

[1:35:24] required me to wait four weeks

[1:35:26] before I certified. But even in

[1:35:28] those instances like the federal

[1:35:29] election and the presidential

[1:35:31] election in NOVEMBER 2024, we

[1:35:33] were done processing and doing

[1:35:36] all of our audits and

[1:35:36] reconciliation 22 days after.

[1:35:38] We didn't have to wait until 28.

[1:35:41] But the law made us. So I think

[1:35:42] similar for this election now,

[1:35:44] the law is that I cannot certify

[1:35:47] before 24 days before -- after

[1:35:51] election. Typically the two

[1:35:53] primary elections that have been

[1:35:53] conducted since I've been the

[1:35:56] registrar in 20 22, we've

[1:35:58] certified 17 days after. It's

[1:35:59] so possible we will be ready to

[1:36:01] certify a week before we're

[1:36:05] legally allowed to.

[1:36:06] >>chair, doug chaffee: back to

[1:36:06] vice-chair.

[1:36:07] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: one

[1:36:09] more question. A few weeks ago

[1:36:15] you gave me some data, and is it

[1:36:19] correct that about 80% of voters

[1:36:20] in orange county vote by mail?

[1:36:23] >>speaker: yes. It's -- since

[1:36:25] the county went in 2020 to the

[1:36:29] voters choice act model, it is

[1:36:32] typically ranged much -- most

[1:36:34] elections between like 83 and

[1:36:37] 86% vote by mail. In '24, the

[1:36:38] presidential general election,

[1:36:39] it actually -- the percentage of

[1:36:42] people voting in person actually

[1:36:44] increased to about 22.5%. So we

[1:36:45] saw a little bit of a dip, and

[1:36:46] when we came back to the special

[1:36:49] election, it was 89%. So it --

[1:36:51] you know, it depends obviously

[1:36:53] what's on the ballot and what

[1:36:54] voters people comfortable doing.

[1:36:56] We provide them with multiple

[1:36:58] different ways to get their

[1:36:59] ballot back and we want to make

[1:37:01] sure they're all available to

[1:37:02] them.

[1:37:03] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[1:37:04] you, MR. Page.

[1:37:05] >>chair, doug chaffee: okay.

[1:37:08] Glad to have this on the consent

[1:37:10] calendar. All right. We do

[1:37:16] have a motion. Any objection?

[1:37:18] I'm seeing none. So the item is

[1:37:19] approved. And thank you for

[1:37:22] being among the found. Thank

[1:37:22] you.

[1:37:25] >>speaker: apologize for going

[1:37:25] missing.

[1:37:27] >>chair, doug chaffee: now we're

[1:37:55] going to go on to item 18. We

[1:37:57] have no requests to speak on

[1:37:57] agenda item 18.

[1:37:58] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[1:38:01] all-district item. Moved and

[1:38:04] seconded. Any objection? 18 is

[1:38:23] approved. 19, please. We have

[1:38:26] no requests to speak on agenda

[1:38:26] item 19.

[1:38:27] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's a

[1:38:28] district 3 and 4 item. We'll

[1:38:30] move the item. Any objection?

[1:38:33] Item is approved. Item 20,

[1:39:01] please. And MR. Chair, we have

[1:39:03] one request to speak on agenda

[1:39:04] item 20.

[1:39:05] >>chair, doug chaffee: call the

[1:39:05] speaker.

[1:39:09] >>clerk, robin stieler: deborah

[1:39:12] jonathan.

[1:39:14] >>speaker: good morning. I did

[1:39:17] submit a written comment for 19

[1:39:19] through 22, but I wasn't going

[1:39:21] to speak on every one. I did

[1:39:22] want to address these contracts

[1:39:25] involve large-scale expansion of

[1:39:26] children and youth behavioral

[1:39:28] health services through

[1:39:29] third-party providers. My

[1:39:30] concern that the systems are

[1:39:31] being structured in a way that

[1:39:33] risk bypassing

[1:39:34] federally-protected rights under

[1:39:35] the individuals with

[1:39:37] disabilities education act and

[1:39:38] the americans with disabilities

[1:39:40] act. When services are shifted

[1:39:42] into contracted behavioral

[1:39:44] health pathways, family MAY lose

[1:39:46] access to procedural safeguards

[1:39:49] including transparency,

[1:39:50] individualized planning and due

[1:39:50] process protections that

[1:39:52] guaranteed under federal law.

[1:39:54] The plan also reflects, because

[1:39:57] it does correlate with the bhp

[1:39:59] plan with the meeting for the

[1:40:00] public comment tomorrow, the

[1:40:03] plan also reflects a shift in

[1:40:03] resources away from the

[1:40:05] prevention and every support and

[1:40:06] towards crisis housing and

[1:40:07] higher need population. As

[1:40:09] these changes are implemented

[1:40:10] through contract services,

[1:40:11] there's a risk that individuals

[1:40:13] might enter the system at a more

[1:40:16] acute stage. This dynamic can

[1:40:18] unintentionally increase

[1:40:19] reliance on residential

[1:40:20] placements and court-involved

[1:40:23] pathways including care court or

[1:40:25] conserve forship rather than

[1:40:26] supporting individuals early and

[1:40:28] preventing escalation. I'm

[1:40:29] asking this board to ensure that

[1:40:33] all contracted providers

[1:40:38] explicitly preserve idea and ada

[1:40:40] protections and that no child is

[1:40:43] diverted into systems that

[1:40:47] reduce parental rights or bypass

[1:40:48] educational safeguards. And

[1:40:49] that is it for me.

[1:40:50] >>clerk, robin stieler: no

[1:40:51] further speakers.

[1:40:52] >>chair, doug chaffee: is an

[1:40:55] all-district item. Any comments

[1:40:57] comments? Moved and seconded.

[1:40:59] Any objection? Item is

[1:41:16] approved. Item 21, please. We

[1:41:19] have nos have to speak on agenda

[1:41:20] item 21.

[1:41:21] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[1:41:22] all-district item. Moved and

[1:41:23] seconded. Any objection?

[1:41:26] Seeing none, item 21 is

[1:41:45] approved. 22, please. And we

[1:41:48] received one request on agenda

[1:41:49] item 22.

[1:41:50] >>chair, doug chaffee: please

[1:41:53] call the speaker.

[1:41:55] >>clerk, robin stieler: deborah

[1:41:56] donothan.

[1:41:57] >>speaker: good morning, again.

[1:41:58] I want to raise concerns about

[1:42:00] expansion and short-term

[1:42:01] residential therapeutic programs

[1:42:03] and similar placements through

[1:42:09] these contracts.. There's a

[1:42:11] risk that families are rooted

[1:42:12] into more restrictive

[1:42:14] environments without full due

[1:42:17] process or access to

[1:42:17] federally-protected educational

[1:42:19] rights. These pathways can

[1:42:22] intersect with guardianship or

[1:42:23] conservatorship proceedings in

[1:42:25] ways that significantly impact

[1:42:27] parental authority and long-term

[1:42:29] family stability. Again, that

[1:42:31] plan also reflects the shift in

[1:42:32] resources away from prevention

[1:42:35] and early support and toward

[1:42:37] crisis, housing and higher-need

[1:42:38] populations. As these changes

[1:42:40] are implemented through

[1:42:41] contracted services, there's a

[1:42:43] risk that individuals MAY enter

[1:42:44] the system at a more acute

[1:42:48] stage. This dynamic and

[1:42:49] unintentionally increase on

[1:42:50] reliance and residential

[1:42:52] placements and court-involved

[1:42:53] pathways, including care court

[1:42:56] or conservatorship rather than

[1:43:00] supporting individuals early and

[1:43:01] preventing escalation. These

[1:43:02] are vulnerable populations that

[1:43:05] would not have a grasp or maybe

[1:43:07] a clear understanding of the

[1:43:09] aspects of what they're entering

[1:43:11] into. So that is a definite

[1:43:13] issue as there's no safeguards

[1:43:15] in place in these matters. And

[1:43:17] that's it from me. Thank you.

[1:43:18] >>clerk, robin stieler: no

[1:43:19] further speakers, MR. Chair.

[1:43:21] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[1:43:24] all-district item.

[1:43:26] >>vincente sarmiento: second

[1:43:27] with comment.

[1:43:28] >>chair, doug chaffee: yes.

[1:43:29] Supervisor sarmiento.

[1:43:30] >>vincente sarmiento: I'm hoping

[1:43:32] somebody from hca will speak

[1:43:35] with MS. Donothan, the public

[1:43:37] commenter. I think her comments

[1:43:38] are well received. I am

[1:43:40] confident that there are the

[1:43:40] safeguards that we believe are

[1:43:43] in place but to the extent that

[1:43:43] you can help identify anything

[1:43:47] that you feel is not, you know,

[1:43:49] in compliance or isn't as strong

[1:43:51] as it should be, our staff would

[1:43:52] love to know, and our office

[1:43:54] will be happy to facilitate as

[1:43:55] well, thank you.

[1:43:56] >>chair, doug chaffee: been

[1:43:57] moved and seconded. Any

[1:43:59] objection. Seeing none, the

[1:44:02] item is approved. Item 23,

[1:44:04] please.

[1:44:05] >>clerk, robin stieler: 23.

[1:44:06] Under health care agency,Approve

[1:44:06] contract ma-042-25011555 with

[1:44:07] Clean Path Recovery llc for

[1:44:08] substance use disorder services,

[1:44:09] 7/1/26-6/30/29 ($12,600,000);

[1:44:11] renewable for two additional

[1:44:12] one-year terms; and authorize

[1:44:13] County Procurement Officer or

[1:44:13] Deputized designee to exercise

[1:44:14] cost contingency increase not to

[1:44:15] exceed 10% under certain

[1:44:19] conditions and execute contract.

[1:44:20] We have no requests to speak on

[1:44:20] agenda item 23.

[1:44:21] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's a

[1:44:40] district 3 item the item is

[1:44:43] approved. Item 24, please.

[1:44:43] >>clerk, robin stieler: 24.

[1:44:44] Under health care agency,

[1:44:44] approve amendment 4 to renew

[1:44:45] contract ma-042-23011144 with

[1:44:46] grandma's house of hope

[1:44:47] ($3,859,449; cumulative total

[1:44:48] $13,858,961), amendment 2 to

[1:44:48] renew contract ma-042-23010864

[1:44:49] with friendship shelter, inc.

[1:44:50] ($1,621,993; cumulative total

[1:44:51] $5,564,535), and amendment 2 to

[1:44:52] renew contract ma-042-23011145

[1:44:52] with colette's children home,

[1:44:53] inc ($715,007; cumulative total

[1:44:54] $2,860,028) For homeless bridge

[1:44:55] housing services, terms ending

[1:44:56] 6/30/27, each renewable for one

[1:44:57] additional one-year term;

[1:44:57] approve amendment 1 to renew

[1:44:58] contract ma-042-24010840 with

[1:44:59] kingdom causes, inc. Dba city

[1:45:00] net for behavioral health bridge

[1:45:01] housing services ($5,311,120;

[1:45:02] cumulative total $13,922,103);

[1:45:02] term ending 6/30/27; and

[1:45:03] authorize county procurement

[1:45:04] officer or deputized designee to

[1:45:05] execute amendments; approve

[1:45:05] amendment 3 to renew memorandum

[1:45:06] of understanding with city of

[1:45:07] costa mesa for pass-through

[1:45:08] behavioral health bridge housing

[1:45:09] grant funds, term ending 6/30/27

[1:45:09] ($1,147,021; cumulative total

[1:45:10] $4,819,571); and authorize

[1:45:11] health care agency director or

[1:45:13] designee to execute amendment.

[1:45:16] We have no requests to speak.

[1:45:16] >>chair, doug chaffee: a 2, 3,

[1:45:18] 4, and 5 item.

[1:45:19] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: move

[1:45:20] the item.

[1:45:21] >>chair, doug chaffee: item 24

[1:45:24] is approved. Item 25 has been

[1:45:27] continued. And item 26, please.

[1:45:28] >>clerk, robin stieler: 26.

[1:45:28] Under health care agency,

[1:45:29] approve amendment 3 to renew

[1:45:30] contract ma-042-22011163 with

[1:45:31] ahmc anaheim regional medical

[1:45:33] center for tobacco cessation

[1:45:35] services for 7/1/26-6/30/27

[1:45:36] ($500,000; cumulative total

[1:45:37] $2,500,000); and authorize

[1:45:38] county procurement officer or

[1:45:38] deputized designee to execute

[1:45:40] amendment.

[1:45:42] And we received one request to

[1:45:44] speak on agenda item 26.

[1:45:45] >>chair, doug chaffee: please

[1:45:47] call the speaker.

[1:45:49] >>clerk, robin stieler: paul

[1:45:56] hayek.

[1:45:58] >>speaker: one quick comment.

[1:46:02] Is this the unit at beach and

[1:46:06] orange in anaheim? If it is,

[1:46:08] the director's running it like a

[1:46:10] psych hospital with lock-down

[1:46:13] when they get general patients

[1:46:16] coming in. Up to two weeks, no

[1:46:17] contact. I can give you the

[1:46:18] name of a friend of mine that

[1:46:21] was in there under that, and

[1:46:24] their security is not even got a

[1:46:27] guard name on their uniform.

[1:46:32] They're all filipinos.

[1:46:33] >>clerk, robin stieler: no

[1:46:35] further speakers, MR. Chair.

[1:46:36] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[1:46:36] all-district item.

[1:46:37] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: move

[1:46:38] the item.

[1:46:39] >>chair, doug chaffee: moved and

[1:46:40] seconded. Any objection? Item

[1:46:44] is approved. Item 27, please.

[1:46:45] >>clerk, robin stieler: 27.

[1:46:46] Under john wayne airport,

[1:46:46] approve subordinate contract

[1:46:47] ma-280-26010906 with carahsoft

[1:46:48] technology corporation for

[1:46:48] glidefast implementation of

[1:46:49] servicenow, term ending 12/31/27

[1:46:50] ($332,762); authorize county

[1:46:51] procurement officer or deputized

[1:46:52] designee to execute contract;

[1:46:53] and make california

[1:46:53] environmental quality act (Ceqa)

[1:46:54] Exemption findings under ceqa

[1:46:58] guidelines section 15378.

[1:47:00] And we have no requests to speak

[1:47:02] on agenda item 27.

[1:47:03] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's a

[1:47:04] district 5 item.

[1:47:05] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: move

[1:47:05] the item.

[1:47:06] >>chair, doug chaffee: moved and

[1:47:07] seconded. Any objection? Item

[1:47:10] is approved. Item 28, please.

[1:47:11] >>clerk, robin stieler: 28.

[1:47:12] Under john wayne airport, award

[1:47:13] aggregate job order contracts

[1:47:14] ma-280-26010913 to all american

[1:47:16] asphalt and sully-miller

[1:47:18] contracting company for pavement

[1:47:19] maintenance and repair services,

[1:47:20] one-year term (Aggregate total

[1:47:21] $5,000,000); adopt JANUARY 2026

[1:47:21] job order contract unit price

[1:47:22] book-construction task catalog

[1:47:24] and technical specifications;

[1:47:28] and authorize county procurement

[1:47:30] officer or deputized designee to

[1:47:34] execute contracts.

[1:47:36] We have no requests to speak on

[1:47:37] agenda item 28.

[1:47:38] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's a

[1:47:40] district 5 item. Supervisor

[1:47:40] nguyen.

[1:47:41] >>janet nguyen: thank you,

[1:47:43] MR. Chair. I just have a few

[1:47:46] questions. I know that this

[1:47:47] exceeds -- this is a $5 million

[1:47:49] contract which exceeds the $3

[1:47:51] million threshold, and so on

[1:47:53] page 2, the staff states that

[1:47:55] the estimated need for the

[1:47:58] payment program is 3.6. So that

[1:48:01] leaves 1.4 in emergency repairs.

[1:48:04] Is that normal for how much we

[1:48:08] set aside for -- in case of

[1:48:09] emergency? I just want to make

[1:48:11] sure that we have more detail

[1:48:14] than just blanketed.

[1:48:15] >>speaker: good morning.

[1:48:16] Charlene reynolds, airport

[1:48:20] director for john wayne. To

[1:48:22] supervisor nguyen's question,

[1:48:26] yes, currently we have several

[1:48:28] large-scale construction

[1:48:32] projects at the airport,

[1:48:35] specifically taxiway ad and e.

[1:48:39] We have a lot of large, heavy

[1:48:41] equipment, constructing at night

[1:48:42] and sometimes accidents happen.

[1:48:46] And so that contingency, we have

[1:48:50] to immediately repair any

[1:48:53] taxiway work that we have so

[1:48:54] that we can keep the operations

[1:48:56] going on a daily basis. So we

[1:49:01] MAY not exspend but we have to

[1:49:03] have those funds available to

[1:49:07] immediately respond to any

[1:49:07] repairs necessary.

[1:49:09] >>janet nguyen: what's

[1:49:10] considered an accident?

[1:49:12] >>speaker: well, it could be the

[1:49:14] heavy equipment dropping

[1:49:17] equipment and/or use of those

[1:49:20] vehicles, putting divots in the

[1:49:25] taxiway. It can be a number of

[1:49:25] anomalies. However, safety is

[1:49:27] our number one factor at the

[1:49:31] airport, and so we have to

[1:49:32] immediately repair. We can't

[1:49:35] wait for, say, if it was caused

[1:49:37] by someone else, to file an

[1:49:38] insurance claim to have them pay

[1:49:42] for it. We must repair

[1:49:43] ourselves, utilize the

[1:49:45] contracts, and then we will

[1:49:47] actually go after the contractor

[1:49:48] for their mistake.

[1:49:52] >>janet nguyen: okay. So we are

[1:49:54] hoping then in the end to get

[1:49:57] reimbursed back for?

[1:49:59] >>speaker: in those cases, yes.

[1:50:00] >>janet nguyen: thank you.

[1:50:02] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: move

[1:50:04] the item.

[1:50:06] >>janet nguyen: second.

[1:50:07] >>chair, doug chaffee: any

[1:50:09] objection? Seeing none, item is

[1:50:10] approved. Item 29, please.

[1:50:11] >>clerk, robin stieler: 29.

[1:50:12] Under john wayne airport,

[1:50:13] approve subordinate contract

[1:50:14] ma-280-26011052 with dlt

[1:50:14] solutions llc for pmis platform

[1:50:15] with oracle software and

[1:50:16] support, three-year term

[1:50:17] ($811,518); renewable for one

[1:50:17] additional two-year term;

[1:50:18] authorize county procurement

[1:50:19] officer or deputized designee to

[1:50:19] execute contract; and make

[1:50:20] california environmental quality

[1:50:21] act (Ceqa) Exemption findings

[1:50:22] under ceqa guidelines section

[1:50:25] 15378.

[1:50:26] We have no requests to speak on

[1:50:27] agenda item 29.

[1:50:29] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's a

[1:50:30] district 5 item.

[1:50:31] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: move

[1:50:32] the item.

[1:50:32] >>chair, doug chaffee: moved and

[1:50:34] second. Any objections? Seeing

[1:50:36] none, item 29 is approved. Item

[1:50:38] 30, please.

[1:50:39] >>clerk, robin stieler: 30.

[1:50:39] Under john wayne airport,

[1:50:40] acting as the board of

[1:50:41] supervisors and orange county

[1:50:41] flood control district-approve

[1:50:42] aggregate contracts

[1:50:43] ma-080-26010424 with j. Orozco

[1:50:44] enterprises inc. Dba orozco

[1:50:45] landscape and tree company,

[1:50:47] landscape west management

[1:50:48] services, inc. And natures

[1:50:49] image, inc. For channel cleaning

[1:50:50] services, 6/10/26-6/9/29

[1:50:51] (Aggregate total $4,500,000);

[1:50:52] authorize county procurement

[1:50:52] officer or deputized designee to

[1:50:53] execute contracts; and make

[1:50:55] california environmental quality

[1:50:56] act (Ceqa) Exemption findings

[1:50:57] under ceqa guidelines section

[1:51:01] 15301.

[1:51:03] We have no requests to speak on

[1:51:04] agenda item 30.

[1:51:05] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's arch

[1:51:06] all-district item, and it is a

[1:51:08] part of our orange county flood

[1:51:11] control district item.

[1:51:13] Supervisor wagner.

[1:51:15] >>don wagner: real quick, do we

[1:51:22] have public works here? Good,

[1:51:26] MR. Rosa. Thank you. My

[1:51:29] question is not necessarily with

[1:51:31] this item. It's gonna kind of

[1:51:33] glance off this item and go

[1:51:35] elsewhere. But raises a

[1:51:39] question. As I read staff

[1:51:41] report, the -- we're asking for,

[1:51:45] not to exceed 4.5 million over a

[1:51:48] three-year term, and it is to

[1:51:51] keep the flood control channels

[1:51:56] free of debris, vegetation roads

[1:51:57] clear, et cetera. I got that

[1:51:59] right so far?

[1:52:01] >>speaker: yes. That's correct

[1:52:03] expwagz a large portion -- the

[1:52:05] main factor indeed it seems from

[1:52:06] the staff report for requesting

[1:52:08] the increase in the not to

[1:52:10] exceed amount stems from tighter

[1:52:12] restrictions on vegetation

[1:52:14] spraying, correct?

[1:52:15] >>speaker: correct.

[1:52:16] >>don wagner: environmental

[1:52:18] concerns. All right. Now,

[1:52:22] that's increasing our costs.

[1:52:27] You guys are doing a pilot

[1:52:28] project that voluntarily we've

[1:52:31] stopped spraying. When we're in

[1:52:32] compliance with the

[1:52:34] environmental regulations and

[1:52:36] new regulations haven't required

[1:52:39] us to stop, we're doing a pilot

[1:52:41] project, isn't this the pilot

[1:52:43] project? Doesn't this show us

[1:52:44] what's going to happen? We're

[1:52:46] going to have increased labor

[1:52:49] costs. We're going to have more

[1:52:50] vegetation that we're going to

[1:52:52] need to pull out by hand. We're

[1:52:54] going to fall behind. Isn't

[1:52:58] this -- doesn't this answer the

[1:52:59] pilot project question?

[1:53:04] >>speaker: so good morning. I'm

[1:53:06] edward with oc public works.

[1:53:07] These contracts specifically,

[1:53:09] they are separate from the ones

[1:53:10] that we typically use for the

[1:53:13] major vegetation removals in the

[1:53:15] channels. For these contracts

[1:53:17] that are coming before you

[1:53:19] today, these are more for

[1:53:21] general channel cleaning. And

[1:53:25] they do include some incidental

[1:53:28] vegetation removals. So however

[1:53:34] to your point, the manual re-do

[1:53:36] in general cost more than other

[1:53:37] alternatives -- the manual

[1:53:39] removal do in general cost more

[1:53:41] than other alternatives.

[1:53:42] >>don wagner: yeah, I'm not sure

[1:53:43] that it's necessarily

[1:53:45] incidental, but the point --

[1:53:47] okay. So why -- what's the

[1:53:50] point of our pilot project if we

[1:53:52] know about the necessity of

[1:53:54] increased costs, and quite

[1:53:57] frankly that we still fall

[1:53:59] behind?

[1:54:01] >>speaker: so the pilot project

[1:54:03] is going to take a look at it on

[1:54:07] a larger scale, on a full

[1:54:08] channel, and again, those are

[1:54:09] separate cats that we use for --

[1:54:11] >>don wagner: I understand the

[1:54:12] contracts are different. I'm

[1:54:13] not argue the contracts. I'm

[1:54:19] arguing the growing weeds.

[1:54:21] >>speaker: it will gives some

[1:54:22] real-time data based on an

[1:54:27] actual channel does have issues

[1:54:28] with vegetation management,

[1:54:29] invasive species, et cetera.

[1:54:32] >>don wagner: why does this

[1:54:33] current project and the current

[1:54:34] problem we're trying to solve

[1:54:37] with item 30 not give you that

[1:54:38] real-time data?

[1:54:39] >>speaker: well, with item 30,

[1:54:41] the majority of the contracts we

[1:54:45] do use it for kind of general

[1:54:48] channel cleaning as opposed to

[1:54:51] general channel clearance

[1:54:52] versus --

[1:54:52] >>don wagner: you are missing

[1:54:54] the point of the question.

[1:54:55] >>speaker: I apologize.

[1:54:55] >>don wagner: you're right.

[1:54:57] We're doing a lot of other

[1:55:05] things. But on the idea of

[1:55:07] pulling weeds, the expense of

[1:55:08] pulling weeds, the growth of

[1:55:11] weeds, that is an apples to

[1:55:12] apples comparison to what we're

[1:55:14] trying to do with this pilot

[1:55:16] project. Why do you need a

[1:55:19] pilot project if over here in

[1:55:21] item 30 you've got all this

[1:55:23] stuff going on and the weed cone

[1:55:25] sent in focus on weeds with me.

[1:55:28] How come that hasn't answered

[1:55:32] the bigger weed question?

[1:55:35] >>speaker: in a way, it does.

[1:55:35] It does.

[1:55:37] >>don wagner: and what is the

[1:55:37] answer.

[1:55:38] >>speaker: it is more expensive.

[1:55:40] >>don wagner: so why are we

[1:55:41] doing a pilot project if we know

[1:55:44] the answer?

[1:55:47] >>speaker: I believe that we do

[1:55:49] expect costs to be higher, but

[1:55:51] we're also looking at whether

[1:55:54] it's even feasible from a

[1:55:56] regulatory standpoint, from the

[1:55:58] standpoint of manage invasive

[1:55:59] species. There's other

[1:56:01] information that we'd like to

[1:56:01] determine as well.

[1:56:03] >>don wagner: I'll move the

[1:56:03] item.

[1:56:04] >>speaker: thank you.

[1:56:05] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I'll

[1:56:07] second but I have a question.

[1:56:08] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[1:56:08] vice-chair.

[1:56:09] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[1:56:09] you. Just for clarity, so this

[1:56:12] item is not related to the pilot

[1:56:13] project, correct?

[1:56:14] >>speaker: correct.

[1:56:15] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[1:56:17] And this item, it covers a lot

[1:56:19] of things like supervisor

[1:56:20] sarmiento and I are working on

[1:56:21] clearing the channels of all of

[1:56:24] the debris from encampments and

[1:56:27] making sure that we don't have

[1:56:30] trash and other materials in the

[1:56:33] channels. This contract covers

[1:56:35] that, correct?

[1:56:36] >>speaker: yes, that's correct.

[1:56:36] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: and

[1:56:39] this contract is not related to

[1:56:40] herbicide sprays, either.

[1:56:42] That's a separate contract all

[1:56:43] together, correct?

[1:56:44] >>speaker: yes.

[1:56:44] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[1:56:46] because I noticed in this

[1:56:47] contract it did not -- it was

[1:56:49] silent as to that topic. So I

[1:56:50] wanted to make sure that the

[1:56:53] community knows that as we work

[1:56:56] on understanding what are the

[1:56:58] regulatory allowances,

[1:57:00] prohibitions, and opportunities

[1:57:02] that in the interim, at least as

[1:57:11] it relates to the san juan and

[1:57:12] jabuco creek channels, we're not

[1:57:15] going to be spraying herbicides,

[1:57:15] correct.

[1:57:16] >>speaker: yes.

[1:57:19] >>speaker: and as far as the

[1:57:21] pilot project goes, the goal is

[1:57:22] to understand what we can do,

[1:57:24] what are the opportunities, how

[1:57:30] can we reduce toxic chemicals

[1:57:38] from? How can we better manage

[1:57:40] our contractors and make sure

[1:57:42] that they're complying with the

[1:57:52] law when they do have a contract

[1:57:53] for spraying? We've seen some

[1:57:54] of them are not being very

[1:57:57] careful and we want to make sure

[1:57:58] we avoid this as well, correct?

[1:57:59] >>speaker: yes.

[1:57:59] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: and

[1:58:00] then we have the study that

[1:58:02] public works was working on that

[1:58:05] was preceding any of these

[1:58:07] conversation, about the

[1:58:09] channels. They already had been

[1:58:10] working on the study since 2020,

[1:58:12] and we're hoping that will give

[1:58:13] some guidance as to what the

[1:58:21] future channels might look like

[1:58:22] as it relates to protecting

[1:58:25] habitat like the trout, right?

[1:58:25] >>speaker: correct.

[1:58:26] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: all

[1:58:26] right. Thank you.

[1:58:28] >>chair, doug chaffee: we have a

[1:58:29] motion, any objection? Seeing

[1:58:31] none, the item is approved.

[1:58:48] Thank you. Item 31. We have no

[1:58:48] requests to speak.

[1:58:50] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[1:58:50] all-district item.

[1:58:51] >>vincente sarmiento: move the

[1:58:54] item. And quickly I wanted to

[1:58:57] thank the board for its support.

[1:58:58] Hopefully everybody is going to

[1:58:58] be supportive of this item. I

[1:59:03] just wanted to give a shout-out

[1:59:05] to not alvarado and neutral

[1:59:07] ground who will be a

[1:59:08] subcontractor on this contract

[1:59:11] and who will serve as a primary

[1:59:13] provider for gang-impacted youth

[1:59:15] and will provide case management

[1:59:15] for those youth who have a

[1:59:18] difficult time with being

[1:59:20] contacted. They are a hard to

[1:59:24] reach population. They will

[1:59:26] conduct intentional outreach and

[1:59:28] engagement efforts for referred

[1:59:30] youth. Waymakers is also a

[1:59:32] subcontractor on this to provide

[1:59:36] clinical therapy mental health

[1:59:37] education and career and

[1:59:38] educational support in case

[1:59:40] management. So we want to thank

[1:59:41] them for all of the support that

[1:59:43] they're going to be providing at

[1:59:44] the boys and girls club in

[1:59:45] garden grove.

[1:59:46] >>chair, doug chaffee: been

[1:59:48] moved and seconded. The item is

[2:00:10] approved. Item 32, please. We

[2:00:12] have no requests to speak on

[2:00:12] agenda item 32.

[2:00:13] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's a

[2:00:18] district 3 item. Moved and

[2:00:19] seconded. Any objection?

[2:00:21] Seeing none, item is approved.

[2:00:39] Item 33, please. We have no

[2:00:43] requests to speak on agenda item

[2:00:43] 33.

[2:00:43] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[2:00:46] all-district item. Been moved

[2:00:47] and seconded. No objection.

[2:00:50] Item is approved. Item 34 has

[2:00:54] been continued. Item 35,

[2:01:10] please. And MR. Chair, we have

[2:01:12] received six requests to speak

[2:01:14] on agenda item 35.

[2:01:14] >>chair, doug chaffee: please

[2:01:15] you came the speakers.

[2:01:16] >>clerk, robin stieler: I will

[2:01:17] call three names at a time.

[2:01:18] Please line up behind the podium

[2:01:20] in the center of the room when

[2:01:23] your name is called. Yesenia,

[2:01:27] jennifer wang, and melinda

[2:01:39] woolen. Yesenia.

[2:01:40] >>speaker: good morning to the

[2:01:42] members of the board. As you

[2:01:43] discuss administration of

[2:01:47] in-home support -- my name is

[2:01:49] yesenia. As you discuss

[2:01:50] administration of home support

[2:01:51] services, it is necessary to

[2:01:53] look at the delivery of services

[2:01:55] as well. Assuming that the

[2:01:56] needs will be less or the same

[2:01:58] for the next three years is not

[2:02:00] being realistic. We are calling

[2:02:02] on the leaders of this county to

[2:02:05] invest in care in a way that

[2:02:06] makes fiscal sense. Thanks to

[2:02:08] the leadership of this board and

[2:02:11] investments made in the past,

[2:02:12] orange county has the strong

[2:02:13] in-home support service program

[2:02:15] that it has now. The great work

[2:02:18] of the in-home support service

[2:02:19] public authority and the service

[2:02:21] that delivers needs to be

[2:02:22] guaranteed to all who need in

[2:02:25] oc. For that, the public

[2:02:26] authority must take advantage of

[2:02:28] the opportunity to be able to

[2:02:29] increase the wanes and benefits

[2:02:32] of care providers, hence

[2:02:33] addressing the caregiver

[2:02:35] shortage and increased need for

[2:02:37] care. Therefore, the county

[2:02:38] budget needs to increase funds

[2:02:40] to the public authority in a way

[2:02:42] that allows for an increase in

[2:02:44] services. As of JULY 1st of

[2:02:46] this year, the state of

[2:02:48] california is committed to

[2:02:51] participate in this program up

[2:02:56] to $20 million in state funding

[2:02:58] if the ihs wages are increased

[2:02:59] in the next three years. In

[2:03:00] addition, a 17% investment in

[2:03:02] this program by this county

[2:03:04] would bring another $30 million

[2:03:05] in federal funding. That is the

[2:03:09] total of $50 million in matching

[2:03:12] funds, an investment of just 17

[2:03:13] cents to the dollar. We urge

[2:03:15] you to take advantage of the 10%

[2:03:16] option for state participation

[2:03:18] available to orange county from

[2:03:23] JULY 1st this year to 200029.

[2:03:25] We would be happy to discuss the

[2:03:27] funding option with the board as

[2:03:28] you make decisions on the

[2:03:29] delivery of in-home support

[2:03:30] services. In order to deliver

[2:03:33] the services, you must discuss

[2:03:37] the payment of ihs hours as

[2:03:37] well, not just the

[2:03:42] administration of it. Not only

[2:03:43] leaving thousands of

[2:03:44] constituented behind but it

[2:03:46] would be leaving money here on

[2:03:48] the that I believe could spent

[2:03:50] here in orange county. Thank

[2:03:53] you for your time.

[2:03:54] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I

[2:03:55] know my office has a meeting

[2:03:57] with you, I think it's tomorrow.

[2:04:00] But this item is only as the

[2:04:02] agreement, the memorandum of

[2:04:05] understanding to create the

[2:04:07] in-home healthcare's worker

[2:04:08] registry so we're not voting on

[2:04:11] the wages at this time, just to

[2:04:13] make sure everyone understands

[2:04:13] what we're voting on.

[2:04:14] >>speaker: yes. Thank you,

[2:04:16] ma'am. We understand it's about

[2:04:17] the administration, and we look

[2:04:18] forward having a conversation

[2:04:20] about the delivery of services.

[2:04:21] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[2:04:22] you so much. Next speaker,

[2:04:23] please.

[2:04:26] [Applause]

[2:04:27] >>speaker: good morning.

[2:04:29] CHAIRMAN Chaffee and members of

[2:04:30] the board, my name is jennifer

[2:04:33] wang, and I serve as the

[2:04:36] executive director of ascsc, an

[2:04:38] intergenerational and

[2:04:38] cross-cultural service

[2:04:39] organization grounded in a

[2:04:40] simple, yet powerful philosophy,

[2:04:42] to care for elders and children

[2:04:45] as if they were our own. Every

[2:04:46] day we work with seniors, people

[2:04:48] with disabilities, caregivers

[2:04:49] and families across orange

[2:04:51] county. And what we see is

[2:04:53] clear. Home care providers make

[2:04:56] it possible for people to live

[2:04:58] safely and with dignity in their

[2:05:00] own homes. That is why I'm here

[2:05:02] today in strong support of our

[2:05:04] home care providers asking you

[2:05:06] to invest in care and invest in

[2:05:08] our caregivers and providers.

[2:05:11] Every day our caregivers prevent

[2:05:13] unnecessary hospital visits,

[2:05:15] they reduce crisis-level care,

[2:05:16] and they provide stability for

[2:05:18] some of our most vulnerable.

[2:05:23] Without them,

[2:05:25] , face impossible

[2:05:26] choices and our systems face

[2:05:28] greater strain. Despite being

[2:05:29] essential, home care providers

[2:05:32] are underpaid, overworked and

[2:05:33] struggling to remain in this

[2:05:34] profession. When caregivers

[2:05:36] leave, the people they support

[2:05:38] suffer and so does our

[2:05:39] community. Investing in home

[2:05:40] care is a smart investment in

[2:05:43] people, stability, and long-term

[2:05:45] savings. In-home supportive

[2:05:46] services cost less than nursing

[2:05:49] homes or hospital care, reduces

[2:05:52] emergency 75s and saves public

[2:05:53] dollars while keeping people

[2:05:55] where they want to be, at home.

[2:05:57] Today we urge the board to

[2:06:00] invest in caregivers, providers,

[2:06:02] and the ihss program and to

[2:06:03] recognize care work as a

[2:06:04] critical infrastructure in our

[2:06:06] community. If we truly value

[2:06:09] our seniors, people with

[2:06:10] disabilities and families, then

[2:06:12] we must value the workers who

[2:06:14] care for them. Investing in

[2:06:16] care is investing in health,

[2:06:18] stability, and future in our

[2:06:19] community. I thank you for your

[2:06:21] time and leadership.

[2:06:22] [Applause]

[2:06:25] >>clerk, robin stieler: after

[2:06:27] molina, the last three speakers

[2:06:33] are yvette, chris, and barbara.

[2:06:34] >>speaker: good morning, board

[2:06:36] of supervisors. My name is

[2:06:39] molina, I work with alzheimer's

[2:06:41] orange county as a multicultural

[2:06:42] program coordinator for the

[2:06:45] spanish languages. For that,

[2:06:48] I'm here to read the statement

[2:06:51] of support in spanish, based on

[2:06:54] the community that I serve.

[2:08:57] [Spanish]

[2:08:59] Thank you.

[2:09:01] [Applause]

[2:09:03] >>chair, doug chaffee: next

[2:09:07] speaker, please.

[2:09:10] >>speaker: hi, everybody. Ioc

[2:09:13] supervisors. My name is yvette

[2:09:14] whilby. I'm the executive

[2:09:17] director of mosaic movement and

[2:09:18] an ihs provider. I'm here

[2:09:21] because at mosaic we serve

[2:09:22] children with disabilities here

[2:09:23] in orange county. I'm here to

[2:09:24] talk about the numbers because

[2:09:27] they are staggering. In

[2:09:29] california alone, 1 in 22

[2:09:33] children specifically 1 in 22

[2:09:34] 4-year-olds have been diagnosed

[2:09:37] with autism according to the

[2:09:40] cdc. Mosaic understands this

[2:09:45] demand. Autism cases in

[2:09:45] california's special education

[2:09:48] have also skyrocketed. From the

[2:09:52] early 1990s, from 14,000 cases

[2:09:54] to 2018, they've increased to

[2:09:58] over 120,000. See, these aren't

[2:10:00] just statistics, they're our

[2:10:02] neighbors, our neighbors'

[2:10:04] children, the children that we

[2:10:08] serve at mosaic. We talk about

[2:10:10] autism but rare leo oaths not

[2:10:13] just about autism. As many of

[2:10:16] these children face dual

[2:10:18] diagnoses, studies have shown

[2:10:20] that over 24% of children with

[2:10:22] autism have also been diagnosed

[2:10:26] with adhd. Beyond that, these

[2:10:30] children face significantly

[2:10:34] higher anxiety, gi disorders,

[2:10:37] sleep disorders, feeding

[2:10:39] problems in comparison to think

[2:10:41] of their neurotypical peers.

[2:10:46] This means one thing. One child

[2:10:48] requires attention of multiple

[2:10:50] medical and therapeutical

[2:10:51] specialists, and this is why

[2:10:52] they require a lot more

[2:10:55] supervision and a lot more

[2:10:57] funding. Behind every one of

[2:10:59] these statistics is a family in

[2:11:01] crisis. Our mosaic families

[2:11:05] rely on ihss to make care -- to

[2:11:06] make sure that they care for

[2:11:08] their children. The level of

[2:11:10] anxiety is crushing. Data shows

[2:11:14] that over 55% of parents, of

[2:11:16] children with significant

[2:11:17] disabilities experience

[2:11:19] depression, severe anxiety,

[2:11:21] stress just to name a few.

[2:11:22] These families go through so

[2:11:24] much stress and uncertainty

[2:11:26] already. They live in fear of

[2:11:30] what if, that dreaded "what if"

[2:11:31] question. What if funding

[2:11:34] stops, decreases? What if my

[2:11:37] child isn't safe? Families

[2:11:40] raising neuro divergent children

[2:11:41] need sustainable support, and

[2:11:42] funding that increase so that

[2:11:43] they can support their children.

[2:11:45] We need to ensure more money in

[2:11:48] the future. This program is

[2:11:50] instrumental. It ensures kids

[2:11:54] are taken care of by someone who

[2:11:54] understands their specific

[2:11:56] needs. And I want to make sure

[2:11:58] it's clear, adequate fund

[2:12:01] something not a luxury. It's a

[2:12:03] necessity. And it keeps

[2:12:04] families together. We are

[2:12:06] asking for sustainability for

[2:12:08] our families, and we don't want

[2:12:10] to go back, with we want to move

[2:12:11] forward and need this increase

[2:12:15] in funding. Thank you for your

[2:12:21] time.

[2:12:23] >>speaker: good morning,

[2:12:24] supervisors. My name is

[2:12:26] christopher duarte, the director

[2:12:27] of university of california

[2:12:29] irvine labor center. The uc

[2:12:32] irvine labor center produces

[2:12:34] research, education, and public

[2:12:37] engagement that connects worker

[2:12:38] lived experience in orange

[2:12:40] county, the forces shaping work.

[2:12:44] We do so by trancelating these

[2:12:45] dynamics into actionable

[2:12:47] knowledge. The center helps

[2:12:49] inform policy decision and

[2:12:52] debate. Our center's begun

[2:12:54] research on in-home supportive

[2:12:55] services workers. We hope to

[2:12:57] share that research with you in

[2:12:58] the forthcoming months when this

[2:13:00] research is complete. Our

[2:13:04] findings with this board and

[2:13:06] udw, the representatives of

[2:13:07] these workers. The center has

[2:13:10] done some exploratory research

[2:13:13] by myself and my faculty

[2:13:14] director, professor walter

[2:13:16] nichols, who's also chair of

[2:13:17] urban planning and public policy

[2:13:20] at the university of california

[2:13:23] irvine and could not be with us

[2:13:25] today. First I draw the board's

[2:13:26] attention to its own documents.

[2:13:30] The county's strategic plan for

[2:13:31] aging identified in home care as

[2:13:35] one of two significant barriers

[2:13:35] to independent living for adults

[2:13:41] in the county. 48,000 ihss

[2:13:43] providers are paid 46% below

[2:13:46] what it cost to live in orange

[2:13:52] county. The plan attribute

[2:13:52] ed the

[2:13:54] providers shortage directly to

[2:13:56] pay below this living wage.

[2:13:58] These 48,000 providers serve

[2:14:02] more than 55,000 residents. The

[2:14:04] economic policy institute

[2:14:05] calculates a single adult

[2:14:10] without a child needs $36.03 per

[2:14:12] hour to attain modest but

[2:14:13] adequate standards of living.

[2:14:16] Between 2025 and 2049, the

[2:14:19] california department of finance

[2:14:20] projects a 66% increase in

[2:14:23] orange county residents age 65

[2:14:27] and older. By 2060, this would

[2:14:29] be 1 in 3 residents over the age

[2:14:34] of 65. Analysis of data shows

[2:14:37] in 2025, more than 2.5 million

[2:14:39] authorized ihs care provider

[2:14:41] hours that he went undelivered

[2:14:43] simply maintaining the current

[2:14:45] provider ratio over the next

[2:14:47] decade will require 17,000 new

[2:14:51] providers. At a wage of 18.90,

[2:14:52] 46% below what the cost of

[2:14:53] living is in this county, we

[2:14:56] don't see a credible path to

[2:15:03] building that workforce. You

[2:15:05] hold the authority to set wages

[2:15:06] through the bargaining process.

[2:15:09] And we encourage to you use that

[2:15:12] authority to address wages and

[2:15:14] worker concerns and invest in

[2:15:15] workers and age residents.

[2:15:15] Thank you.

[2:15:16] >>chair, doug chaffee: MAY we

[2:15:19] have the next speaker please.

[2:15:25] >>speaker: yes, sir.

[2:15:28] >>speaker: I thank him for doing

[2:15:30] all of the stats because I know

[2:15:31] people's eyes roll around when

[2:15:33] that happens. Honorable

[2:15:34] supervisors, my name is barbara

[2:15:37] fairly, I live, volunteer, and

[2:15:39] worship in orange county. I am

[2:15:44] also a member of clue clergy and

[2:15:44] laity united for economic

[2:15:46] justice, a network of thousands

[2:15:48] of faith leaders and communities

[2:15:51] committed to supporting workers

[2:15:52] and immigrants in the struggle

[2:15:55] for dignity and justice and a

[2:15:57] resisting wage. I am here to

[2:15:58] stand in solidarity with the

[2:16:00] home care providers asking you

[2:16:04] to invest in care, invest in our

[2:16:06] caregivers and providers. I

[2:16:07] have been a caregiver in the

[2:16:09] past as a single mother, and it

[2:16:11] was very difficult to survive on

[2:16:12] that.

[2:16:14] And I think that you all

[2:16:15] knee nobody can survive on the

[2:16:18] wage that people are currently

[2:16:20] getting under the current

[2:16:22] contract. Typically they can't

[2:16:25] afford an apartment of their

[2:16:29] own, to live independently.

[2:16:30] I've been a domestic worker,

[2:16:33] I've been a caregiver, and now I

[2:16:35] am -- and I've been in a care

[2:16:37] giving home, and they were so

[2:16:38] understaffed that people were

[2:16:40] begging for help, and people

[2:16:41] were working so hard and

[2:16:44] couldn't keep up with it. It's

[2:16:48] a disgrace that in one of the

[2:16:52] richest counties, in one of the

[2:16:56] richest states in the united

[2:16:58] states that we cannot afford to

[2:17:00] take care of our caregivers.

[2:17:02] I'm a boomer, and I think all of

[2:17:03] you know that you have a boomer

[2:17:06] coming up for care, and whether

[2:17:07] you have independent insurance

[2:17:10] or not, you still have to be

[2:17:13] able to obtain a caregiver. And

[2:17:16] people are leaving the area.

[2:17:19] Without the help of my

[2:17:23] caregiver, who has disappeared,

[2:17:25] I would not be able to live

[2:17:27] independently, to volunteer, to

[2:17:30] donate food, to I go food out at

[2:17:33] judy's kitchen los alamitos.

[2:17:36] Also, we support mothers and

[2:17:40] homeless people who need food,

[2:17:42] they're food insecure, and

[2:17:43] diapers and wipes and baby food,

[2:17:45] and you will of a the best

[2:17:48] quality from our local donors.

[2:17:50] I really appreciate the people

[2:17:52] who I've been give -- who have

[2:17:53] been giving to us and who have

[2:17:55] supported us. And I brought a

[2:17:57] flyer so you know what they do,

[2:18:00] what we do. We serve cyprus,

[2:18:01] some people from long beach. I

[2:18:04] know it's not the county. Los

[2:18:07] alamitos, and all of the

[2:18:11] surrounding cities. And we have

[2:18:15] a senior assisted -- it's a

[2:18:16] senior-supportive housing on

[2:18:19] that property. And there are at

[2:18:21] least 40 senior couples who come

[2:18:26] for food every month. So please

[2:18:27] support the workers who make

[2:18:30] this all possible. Thank you.

[2:18:31] >>clerk, robin stieler: no

[2:18:33] further speakers, MR. Chair.

[2:18:34] [Applause]

[2:18:37] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[2:18:47] you. Let's see. This is an

[2:18:48] all-district item.

[2:18:49] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I'll

[2:18:51] move the item with comment.

[2:18:52] >>vincente sarmiento: second.

[2:18:53] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[2:18:54] vice-chair.

[2:18:55] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[2:18:56] you for your thoughtful comments

[2:18:59] today. This is a very difficult

[2:19:01] issue that we are challenged

[2:19:04] with here at the county, and not

[2:19:06] to be -- make it more difficult,

[2:19:08] but I want you all to know that

[2:19:10] insists sacramento yesterday. I

[2:19:12] met with the governor's office

[2:19:15] to address what is being

[2:19:16] proposed by the office, which is

[2:19:20] to eliminate the county funding

[2:19:24] from the state that is

[2:19:27] approximately $233 million that

[2:19:29] currently gets shared with the

[2:19:32] counties to help support the

[2:19:34] in-home healthcare supportive

[2:19:38] services caregiver program. And

[2:19:40] so if the state does that, that

[2:19:46] will be very dramatic for the

[2:19:47] counties. And in orange county,

[2:19:49] we only receive 5 cents on the

[2:19:51] dollar for property tax compared

[2:19:54] to, say, san diego gets 12 cents

[2:19:56] on the dollar. Los angeles 20

[2:19:58] cents. I think san bernardino,

[2:20:00] maybe 14. But we don't have a

[2:20:02] lot of flexibility in our

[2:20:04] current general fund. And if we

[2:20:09] were having to cover $230

[2:20:09] million, that would be a

[2:20:11] problem. So my reason to bring

[2:20:14] this up is to urge you to take

[2:20:16] some action and communicate with

[2:20:17] the governor's office.

[2:20:20] Communicate with the state

[2:20:21] legislature to discourage them

[2:20:24] from that proposal. That

[2:20:27] proposal would be very

[2:20:28] detrimental to the county. So

[2:20:31] thank you for bringing forward

[2:20:33] your concerns. As you all know,

[2:20:37] I agree. I feel that the wages

[2:20:39] that we have currently are

[2:20:41] immoral. I've said this many

[2:20:44] times. It's not a secret. We

[2:20:45] just have to figure outage

[2:20:46] answer and a solution. That is

[2:20:48] our challenge. So thank you.

[2:20:49] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[2:20:50] you, vice-chair. Supervisor

[2:20:50] sarmiento.

[2:20:51] >>vincente sarmiento: yes, thank

[2:20:53] you, MR. Chair. I simply wanted

[2:20:54] to take a moment to thank those

[2:20:57] who spoke. You spoke clearly.

[2:21:00] You spoke strongly about what we

[2:21:04] know is a service that is

[2:21:06] incredibly disproportionate to

[2:21:08] wages and salaries that you

[2:21:10] receive for the work. We know

[2:21:11] that without the work that you

[2:21:16] do, we would have to absorb it

[2:21:17] in a much more expensive way.

[2:21:19] So also receiving care from a

[2:21:20] family member, receiving care

[2:21:24] from a loved one is infinitely

[2:21:25] better than receiving it from a

[2:21:27] stranger. So we know that there

[2:21:31] is intangible non-quantifiable

[2:21:31] benefits to being able to

[2:21:33] continue with this. So I know

[2:21:34] that, you know, I want to thank

[2:21:37] the vice-chair for going up to

[2:21:39] sacramento yesterday. We've

[2:21:41] been, you know, constantly

[2:21:43] communicating with sacramento

[2:21:44] and the governor's office to

[2:21:47] make sure that they provide some

[2:21:48] relief, that they're more

[2:21:50] equitable with our county. We

[2:21:52] keep telling them, our county

[2:21:54] should not be receiving half

[2:21:56] what other peer counties receive

[2:21:58] for funding such vital services

[2:22:00] like this. We're not a donor

[2:22:02] county. We're not the affluent

[2:22:03] wealthy county that everybody

[2:22:04] believes. Come visit my

[2:22:05] district, and I'll show you

[2:22:07] people that are living below the

[2:22:09] poverty line. And I can attest

[2:22:11] to that. So to the extent that

[2:22:13] we hands with you're saying,

[2:22:14] this item really doesn't speak

[2:22:17] to that. But we understand your

[2:22:20] urgency as well. So just know

[2:22:21] that we are going to continue

[2:22:24] that. I would, you know, sort

[2:22:26] of echo what the vice-chair

[2:22:28] said. We need to speak with one

[2:22:30] voice as we're asking sacramento

[2:22:32] to be able to work with us and

[2:22:34] help us to the extent that you

[2:22:36] can give a shout-out to us you

[2:22:39] and say give these folks parity.

[2:22:39] There's no reason why orange

[2:22:41] county should be receiving half

[2:22:42] of what other counties receive.

[2:22:44] We have equal needs. We have

[2:22:46] needs that are just as demanding

[2:22:48] as san diego, riverside, you

[2:22:48] know, other counties of our

[2:22:52] size. So with that, MR. Chair,

[2:22:55] I'll second this.

[2:22:56] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's

[2:22:58] moved and seconded. Any

[2:22:58] objection? The item is

[2:23:03] approved. Now we come to item

[2:23:10] 36.

[2:23:11] >>clerk, robin stieler: 36.

[2:23:11] Under county executive office,

[2:23:12] select tap bfr acquisitions llc

[2:23:12] as primary and 1725 w 17th

[2:23:13] street llc as alternate

[2:23:14] proposers for development of

[2:23:15] 1725 west 17th street, santa

[2:23:16] ana; and authorize chief real

[2:23:17] estate officer or designee to

[2:23:19] negotiate option and lease

[2:23:20] agreements and return to the

[2:23:21] board of supervisors for final

[2:23:24] approval.

[2:23:26] And we have two requests to

[2:23:28] speak on agenda item 36.

[2:23:29] >>chair, doug chaffee: please

[2:23:30] call the speakers.

[2:23:31] >>clerk, robin stieler: scott

[2:23:46] mayor and todd cull.

[2:23:48] >>speaker: good morning. Scott

[2:23:52] mayor on behalf of proposer tap

[2:23:54] vfr acquisitions, llc. A

[2:23:56] pleasure to be here. The

[2:23:59] housing project proposed by tap

[2:24:01] includes 300 afford be housing

[2:24:03] homes with ample parking and

[2:24:06] includes a curated retail

[2:24:09] element along with an open

[2:24:11] community space we have named

[2:24:14] arrest tess. That will include

[2:24:16] interactive neighborhood benefit

[2:24:18] space supportive space for santa

[2:24:20] ana college and its students.

[2:24:23] As stated in the asr and as

[2:24:27] found by the county evaluation

[2:24:29] committee, our proposal in

[2:24:31] comparison to the other

[2:24:34] proposals provides a more

[2:24:37] balanced, mixed-use program,

[2:24:38] higher projected fiscal returns,

[2:24:41] and a private financing

[2:24:44] structure that reduces reliance

[2:24:46] on competitive, public subsidy

[2:24:49] programs. Thereby enhancing

[2:24:53] schedule certainty and reducing

[2:24:55] implementation risk. Our

[2:24:57] project will be privately

[2:25:00] financed with approximately $40

[2:25:02] million or what we call skin in

[2:25:05] the game. As opposed to

[2:25:08] reliance on public subsidies and

[2:25:11] bond financing proposed by

[2:25:13] others. Our project is

[2:25:15] supported by the los angeles

[2:25:17] orange county's building and

[2:25:19] construction trades council and

[2:25:23] its union members. And will

[2:25:25] include a local hiring

[2:25:27] initiative. Our project offers

[2:25:30] the highest fiscal return to the

[2:25:31] county. We will pay rent on

[2:25:34] lease commencement with

[2:25:35] percentage and participation

[2:25:37] rent well above that being

[2:25:40] offered by others and with a

[2:25:44] shorter lease term. As state in

[2:25:47] the asr and found by the

[2:25:48] evaluation committee, our

[2:25:50] proposal provides the county

[2:25:53] with multiple, diversified

[2:25:55] revenue streams, including an

[2:25:59] upfront option payment, earlier

[2:26:02] rent commencement during the

[2:26:03] construction period, percentage

[2:26:06] rent tied to project revenues

[2:26:10] andle participation in sale and

[2:26:20] refinancing proceeds our

[2:26:22] proposal is projected to

[2:26:23] generate approximately 1.8 times

[2:26:26] the stabilized annual ground

[2:26:27] rent compared to the other

[2:26:29] proposals before you, providing

[2:26:32] a greater, predictable, annual

[2:26:34] revenue and long-term fiscal

[2:26:36] upside for the county. Our

[2:26:38] proposal offers both earlier

[2:26:40] revenue generation and stronger

[2:26:42] long-term fiscal performance

[2:26:43] while delivering affordable

[2:26:45] housing and community benefits.

[2:26:46] In summary, our proposal

[2:26:48] provides the most competitive

[2:26:50] fiscal return to the county

[2:26:54] while also delivering affordable

[2:26:55] housing and community serving

[2:26:56] use.

[2:26:57] >>chair, doug chaffee: sir, your

[2:26:58] time is up. Thank you.

[2:26:59] >>speaker: thank you.

[2:27:00] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank you

[2:27:07] for your presentation.

[2:27:09] >>speaker: good morning, my name

[2:27:13] is todd caudle and with barry

[2:27:15] and shaun rawson, and we're here

[2:27:17] representing cnc development and

[2:27:19] waterford property company. We

[2:27:20] appreciated the opportunity to

[2:27:21] respond to the county's rfp for

[2:27:27] the 17th street sight. We

[2:27:28] have years of development

[2:27:29] experience here in the city of

[2:27:31] santa ana. We've previously

[2:27:32] developed over our career 12

[2:27:33] projects within the city of

[2:27:35] santa ana over the past 25

[2:27:37] years. We appreciate the

[2:27:38] board's consideration of our

[2:27:39] development and look forward to

[2:27:40] the opportunity of participating

[2:27:44] with the county to develop a

[2:27:45] 360-unit project that meets the

[2:27:47] needs of large families by

[2:27:49] having half of the development,

[2:27:52] 180 units with two and

[2:27:53] three-bedroom apartments, by

[2:27:55] having a project that is 100%

[2:27:57] affordable to families and

[2:28:00] individuals at 50, 80, and 100%

[2:28:02] of area median income. Having a

[2:28:04] development that will provide

[2:28:05] additional public benefit

[2:28:06] through the inclusion of a head

[2:28:08] start location to serve the

[2:28:09] residents of this community and

[2:28:11] the surrounding neighborhood in

[2:28:14] addition to santa ana college.

[2:28:15] Incorporating a preference for

[2:28:17] santa ana college students, and

[2:28:19] the provision of on-site

[2:28:20] community space to serve the

[2:28:21] riverview neighborhood, santa

[2:28:23] ana college and the wider

[2:28:25] community. Our project will be

[2:28:28] pursuing a buy right entitlement

[2:28:30] path using ab 2011 with our

[2:28:31] commitment to work with the

[2:28:32] city, with the county and with

[2:28:34] the surrounding communities to

[2:28:37] address concerns about parking,

[2:28:38] potential open space and project

[2:28:40] design. We will also be

[2:28:42] incorporating a prevailing wage

[2:28:43] requirement within the

[2:28:45] development for 100% of it as

[2:28:47] prevailing wage through the use

[2:28:49] of ab 2011. We appreciate your

[2:28:50] consideration and are available

[2:28:51] to answer any questions. Thank

[2:28:52] you.

[2:28:53] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[2:28:53] you.

[2:28:54] >>clerk, robin stieler: no

[2:28:56] further speakers, MR. Chair.

[2:28:57] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[2:28:57] supervisor sarmiento.

[2:28:58] >>vincente sarmiento, yes, thank

[2:29:00] you, MR. Chair. This is a

[2:29:03] district 2 item, and I know --

[2:29:05] boy, this seems like it's been a

[2:29:07] while that we've had this

[2:29:09] discussion about the future of

[2:29:12] this site. It's so a nine-acre

[2:29:15] site, 9.3-acre site on 17th

[2:29:16] street right across from santa

[2:29:19] ana college. It's one of the

[2:29:21] largest healthcare facility

[2:29:31] sites that we in the county own

[2:29:34] and now are going to relocate to

[2:29:35] elsewhere. It's former me

[2:29:36] because when my family arrived

[2:29:38] in santa ana and orange county

[2:29:40] in the mid-60s, I received

[2:29:42] much of our care from that

[2:29:44] healthcare agency. So my

[2:29:46] vaccinations, visits to go, you

[2:29:47] know, receive those were there

[2:29:50] at that site. It's some place

[2:29:53] that was an anchor for the

[2:29:54] community to receive its care,

[2:29:56] and so now seeing that the

[2:29:58] services are going to be

[2:30:00] relocated, we wanted to make

[2:30:02] sure that whatever, you know,

[2:30:03] became of that site was

[2:30:04] something that was going to

[2:30:06] serve a public purpose as well.

[2:30:12] So I want to thank our staff at

[2:30:15] real estate for doing a good

[2:30:16] job. I know this was initially

[2:30:17] rolled out in 2021. Back then I

[2:30:19] was the mayor of santa ana, so I

[2:30:20] got to see that iteration of

[2:30:22] proposals that were submitted.

[2:30:24] These are much superior, I want

[2:30:28] to thank you for that. There's

[2:30:30] a better, I think, understanding

[2:30:32] of what the community needs, you

[2:30:32] know, what the neighborhood can

[2:30:35] absorb and really what works

[2:30:36] there at that site. So I want

[2:30:38] to thank them for that. I want

[2:30:39] to thank my colleagues. And I

[2:30:40] know at that time, I think it

[2:30:42] was vice-chair foley who was

[2:30:44] care-taking this district before

[2:30:46] I arrived. And so we've come a

[2:30:51] longways since those rounds of

[2:30:52] proposals. I think all five

[2:30:54] proposals were strong. I think

[2:30:55] they were thoughtful, but

[2:30:56] obviously there were two

[2:30:58] proposals that rose to the top.

[2:31:02] And that was cnc waterford tap

[2:31:05] bfr. I want to thank them for

[2:31:08] their submittals and their time

[2:31:10] to meet with our office and walk

[2:31:12] us through. And I know they've

[2:31:15] met with all of the offices up

[2:31:16] here. This item was continued

[2:31:18] just to make sure we understood.

[2:31:19] We had a little bit more time,

[2:31:22] we've waited this long, why not

[2:31:23] wait two more weeks, I thought,

[2:31:24] just to make sure we understand

[2:31:26] it and we get it right. Of

[2:31:27] these two proposals, I think,

[2:31:31] you know, for me, what was

[2:31:33] dictating my decision, and it's

[2:31:34] not a unilateral decision, I

[2:31:36] know up here at the board we

[2:31:39] certainly show some deference to

[2:31:42] the supervisor whose district a

[2:31:43] proposal like this is located,

[2:31:45] and because this is a community

[2:31:46] that I've been raised in for the

[2:31:48] past 60 years, this is a city

[2:31:50] I've led both as a councilmember

[2:31:52] and mayor. I think it's

[2:31:53] uniquely important for me to

[2:31:55] share my thoughts with my

[2:31:56] colleagues as we make this

[2:31:59] decision. So a lot of what was

[2:32:01] important to me was making sure

[2:32:02] that the county received a good

[2:32:05] return on its investment because

[2:32:07] we know we're going to have to

[2:32:08] use proceeds from this

[2:32:10] development to make sure that

[2:32:12] our new healthcare agency where

[2:32:15] we're relocating both the

[2:32:18] clinical and the lab and the

[2:32:20] front-facing part of the

[2:32:21] healthcare agency are going to

[2:32:22] continue operating strongly.

[2:32:24] But I also wanted to make sure

[2:32:26] that that was balanced with the

[2:32:28] community benefits, that we know

[2:32:30] are essential to santa ana

[2:32:31] residents and central orange

[2:32:34] county residents. So we also,

[2:32:36] you know, took the time to meet

[2:32:37] with the neighborhood

[2:32:38] association, which is riverview.

[2:32:42] I want to thank martha molina

[2:32:46] who leads that. I have known

[2:32:47] martha, she was niece to former

[2:32:50] supervisor and los angeles

[2:32:52] county gloria molina, and so she

[2:32:53] knows public agency work well.

[2:32:55] We want to thank her for hosting

[2:32:58] us and allowing to us hear and

[2:32:59] listen from the neighborhood

[2:33:00] what it is that they were

[2:33:02] concerned with. As usual that I

[2:33:03] could have predicted because I

[2:33:04] know that one of the concerns

[2:33:05] for any neighborhood in santa

[2:33:08] ana is parking and impact and

[2:33:11] saturation of others that MAY

[2:33:13] make things a little bit more

[2:33:17] dense in their neighborhood. So

[2:33:18] that's important. But we also

[2:33:20] want to make sure that we

[2:33:21] understood what the college was

[2:33:23] thinking because that is an

[2:33:24] anchor stakeholder for all of us

[2:33:27] as well. I want to thank both

[2:33:29] proposers for meeting with the

[2:33:30] college, meeting with the

[2:33:32] neighborhood, meeting with the

[2:33:34] city, and specifically with

[2:33:35] councilmember jesse lopez, who

[2:33:37] represents that ward.

[2:33:40] Councilmember lopez is a very

[2:33:41] strong advocate to make sure

[2:33:44] that whatever's introduced into

[2:33:45] her arrested this she represents

[2:33:47] makes sense, it fits, and the

[2:33:48] neighbors are going to be

[2:33:51] supportive of that. So I want

[2:33:53] to thank all of them. I also

[2:33:57] want to thank both proposers for

[2:33:59] considering the labor and union

[2:34:02] aspect to this. I know that I

[2:34:05] heard from both of you -- one

[2:34:08] was talking about prevailing

[2:34:13] wage. The other I know, tap,

[2:34:15] made sure to offer up a date,

[2:34:18] have a letter of interest with

[2:34:20] the L.A. And orange county

[2:34:22] business trades for a project

[2:34:24] labor agreement. Those are

[2:34:25] nuanced. They're a little

[2:34:26] different. But to the extent

[2:34:28] that they're important, to make

[2:34:30] sure that this project will also

[2:34:32] create jobs. And so that's

[2:34:34] something that also is important

[2:34:35] to me. So I want to thank you

[2:34:38] for that. And I see andrew

[2:34:39] gonzalez from the trades in the

[2:34:42] audience and I also see doug

[2:34:44] mangione. It's good to see both

[2:34:45] of you. I thank you for take

[2:34:49] the time to meet with both

[2:34:50] proposals. So this is sort of

[2:34:54] a -- this is the right dilemma

[2:34:56] to have because we have two

[2:34:57] strong proposals and two that

[2:34:59] could do the work, two that are

[2:35:00] viable, two that are

[2:35:02] experienced. And I've had the

[2:35:04] benefit of working with cnc over

[2:35:08] the time -- over my years in is

[2:35:09] a santa ana as a councilmember

[2:35:10] and mayor. And their projects

[2:35:12] are some of the most quality

[2:35:13] projects that you'll find

[2:35:16] anywhere. But uniquely, when

[2:35:18] affordability and affordable

[2:35:19] housing is something that was

[2:35:20] questioned by others and said

[2:35:23] that's going to be substandard,

[2:35:24] low-income housing, project

[2:35:26] housing, they show that that's

[2:35:27] not the case. Affordable

[2:35:30] housing is no different than

[2:35:32] market-rate housing.

[2:35:32] Indistinguishable residents done

[2:35:34] well. So that provided the

[2:35:36] dignity to our working families

[2:35:37] to make sure that they could

[2:35:38] live in the communities that

[2:35:41] they worked in. I want to thank

[2:35:41] them for all of the work that

[2:35:43] they've done in the city that I

[2:35:45] grew up in and in the area that

[2:35:46] I now represent. So that

[2:35:48] dilemma, you know, the dilemma

[2:35:50] of being able to blend these two

[2:35:52] was tough. I want to say, you

[2:35:55] know, it took a lot of

[2:35:58] discussion with our team and

[2:36:00] with just the community. But I

[2:36:02] think while both proposals are

[2:36:04] viable, I think taps

[2:36:07] conventional financing offers a

[2:36:12] more risk averifies predictable

[2:36:13] path forward and appears more

[2:36:14] beneficial to the county and

[2:36:17] will provide a long, stronger

[2:36:19] long-term revenue to the county.

[2:36:21] I know that the revenue we can

[2:36:23] change, we can front load it, we

[2:36:25] can make it bounce. My opinion

[2:36:25] is that we keep it long term.

[2:36:29] We keep it consistent, level of

[2:36:30] funding rather than

[2:36:31] fronted-loading it. I think

[2:36:32] that's not necessary in my

[2:36:34] opinion but can certainly leave

[2:36:36] the adjusted. We're not going

[2:36:37] to do any negotiations from here

[2:36:39] in the dais simply just to give

[2:36:41] some direction. So I do think

[2:36:44] that, you know, the way that the

[2:36:46] revenues can be done over time,

[2:36:48] I think makes sense to me.

[2:36:49] Taking all this into account, I

[2:36:55] do believe that the staff

[2:36:57] recommendation for tap bfr is

[2:37:00] the stronger of the two,

[2:37:01] although, I know if we're not

[2:37:03] able to negotiate the terms that

[2:37:05] I will recite, from my nan

[2:37:08] should be included and MAY be

[2:37:11] revised in their proposal -- we

[2:37:13] certainly have a back-up order

[2:37:15] that would easily and seamlessly

[2:37:18] be able to pick up the with a

[2:37:19] fon and go from there. Some of

[2:37:21] the things I think I've seen

[2:37:23] from tap's proposal would be

[2:37:25] discussed as real estate

[2:37:26] negotiating terms and

[2:37:30] provisions, to explore deeper

[2:37:33] affordability, and a lower and

[2:37:34] more profound ami. That is

[2:37:35] important in santa ana. I know

[2:37:38] that for me, there are many

[2:37:40] develops that we have that are

[2:37:42] 30% ami. People -- and for some

[2:37:43] people in santa ana, that's

[2:37:46] still too expensive. So we need

[2:37:47] to make sure that there is some

[2:37:49] of that here. We also want to

[2:37:52] make sure that these units, the

[2:37:54] unit mix is more accessible for

[2:37:56] families. There are families

[2:37:58] that are large in the city that

[2:38:01] don't fit into a suite or into a

[2:38:02] one-bedroom. So we want to make

[2:38:04] sure that we have a better mix

[2:38:06] of units that include two and

[2:38:09] three bedrooms. We also want

[2:38:11] to, you know, say that this

[2:38:14] could be accomplished through

[2:38:15] maybe increasing density a

[2:38:17] little bit because I know that

[2:38:20] the tap proposal is for 300

[2:38:20] units.

[2:38:24] I know that the cnc waterford is

[2:38:26] three 60. So I think there's

[2:38:27] some -- 360. So I think there's

[2:38:29] some room for opening up and

[2:38:31] adding some additional units to

[2:38:32] the tap proposal, as well. And

[2:38:35] parking, which, as I said, a

[2:38:38] critical part of this, that the

[2:38:39] neighborhood, the city I'm sure

[2:38:40] will be concerned with, is to

[2:38:42] make sure that the ratio is one

[2:38:45] that is viable and won't have

[2:38:48] any sort of saturation into the

[2:38:50] adjacent riverview neighborhood.

[2:38:51] So those things are important.

[2:38:53] I know that maybe some of those

[2:38:57] requests will change the pro

[2:38:59] forma for tap, hopefully it

[2:39:00] won't. I think have you some

[2:39:03] room to increase the unit size

[2:39:04] and incorporate some of these

[2:39:06] changes. But I do think what it

[2:39:08] does is it is tailored better to

[2:39:10] the community that this is being

[2:39:13] introduced into. So I hope

[2:39:14] you -- you're able to work with

[2:39:16] our team and our staff to make

[2:39:21] sure that that is accomplished

[2:39:22] and I just want to say this

[2:39:23] hasn't been a simple decision.

[2:39:27] But what sort of gives me some,

[2:39:30] you know, some sort of pause and

[2:39:31] able to go forward is that I

[2:39:32] know if we're not able to work

[2:39:34] something out with one team, the

[2:39:36] other team can step right in

[2:39:38] seamlessly, again, to be able to

[2:39:39] go ahead and fit this. And I'm

[2:39:41] just glad that this development

[2:39:42] is going to be going forward.

[2:39:43] It's been a while. So I know

[2:39:45] that one of the things I think

[2:39:46] up here that we've been trying

[2:39:48] to do is make sure that our

[2:39:50] dormant sort of, you know,

[2:39:52] underperforming sites were able

[2:39:54] to, you know, start triggering

[2:39:56] them so they can start helping

[2:39:58] generate some revenue. We're

[2:40:00] not in the profit-making

[2:40:01] business. We're in the business

[2:40:02] of making sure we have funds so

[2:40:05] we can deliver resources and

[2:40:07] services that we know we all

[2:40:09] want. And in these days, you

[2:40:10] know, that is getting very

[2:40:12] tricky. So with that,

[2:40:14] MR. Chair, I'm going to be

[2:40:16] moving and recommending the

[2:40:16] staff's recommendation.

[2:40:17] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[2:40:20] you. Vice-chair.

[2:40:21] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I

[2:40:23] have some questions. I just

[2:40:25] wanted to get some

[2:40:27] clarification. I'll start by

[2:40:28] saying I think both proposals

[2:40:31] are excellent, and so we have

[2:40:36] good options on the table. With

[2:40:41] regard to the staff recommended

[2:40:44] proposal, the surplus land act

[2:40:47] exemption requires a 300-unit

[2:40:51] minimum with 25% of the units at

[2:40:53] 60% ami, as I understand it.

[2:40:55] And MR. Miller, are you the one

[2:40:56] to answer these questions? Who

[2:41:04] can answer? I just want to

[2:41:07] confirm that the ami levels for

[2:41:08] the affordable limits comply

[2:41:12] with the surplus land act

[2:41:13] exemption because the staff

[2:41:16] report did not address -- it

[2:41:20] just simply says "affordable."

[2:41:23] >>speaker: so supervisor foley,

[2:41:24] matt miller, chief real estate

[2:41:27] officer. The surplus land act

[2:41:30] exemption that was used, the

[2:41:31] board approved a resolution, I

[2:41:33] believe, it was on MAY 20th

[2:41:36] when we released the asr. The

[2:41:38] exemption is for 25% affordable.

[2:41:42] I don't believe the surplus land

[2:41:43] act has a specific dictate on

[2:41:45] the levels of affordability.

[2:41:45] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: can

[2:41:47] someone look that up, because

[2:41:49] it's my understanding it's at

[2:41:51] 60% ami. And I just want to

[2:41:53] make sure that the proposal has

[2:41:59] built that into the financial

[2:42:05] projections. Okay. And then

[2:42:07] the other question I have is as

[2:42:10] it relates to the -- you know,

[2:42:11] the leveraging of different

[2:42:18] bills, we have ab 2011,

[2:42:20] ab 2022 -- 2243, which requires

[2:42:21] prevailing wage and labor

[2:42:22] requirements on this project,

[2:42:23] correct?

[2:42:24] >>speaker: I believe so.

[2:42:25] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[2:42:27] So maybe this is a question for

[2:42:28] the applicant or the bidder,

[2:42:33] rather. Has -- have the

[2:42:37] financial assumptions taken into

[2:42:38] consideration the prevailing

[2:42:40] wage labor requirements?

[2:42:41] >>speaker: our understanding is

[2:42:43] that both of the proposers took

[2:42:44] that into account. They were

[2:42:46] asked that during the interview

[2:42:47] process.

[2:42:47] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay,

[2:42:53] great. And then I have a

[2:42:56] question for true america. Are

[2:43:11] they here?

[2:43:13] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: you

[2:43:15] can confirm that your financial

[2:43:15] projections take into

[2:43:16] consideration the prevailing

[2:43:19] wage and labor requirements?

[2:43:20] >>speaker: yes, ma'am.

[2:43:21] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: and

[2:43:23] secondly, have you ever done a

[2:43:26] project with 40% affordable

[2:43:27] without leveraging tax credits

[2:43:31] or bonds? Not you, but your

[2:43:32] client or partnership?

[2:43:33] >>speaker: you can repeat the

[2:43:35] question? I'm sorry.

[2:43:35] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: well,

[2:43:38] you said that you are not going

[2:43:43] to rely on what you called

[2:43:47] subsidies which is -- subsidies

[2:43:50] which is typically public

[2:43:52] financing or a tax voucher

[2:43:54] program. Has your client built

[2:43:57] a 40% affordable project without

[2:43:59] relying on tax credits before?

[2:44:00] >>speaker: true america was

[2:44:02] founded on missing middle. And

[2:44:04] we have a number of communities

[2:44:09] in our portfolio that we have

[2:44:10] bought and renovated and

[2:44:13] developed that are 100%

[2:44:15] affordable even that do not have

[2:44:17] the tax credits and bonds.

[2:44:18] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: but

[2:44:19] we're talking built from the

[2:44:22] ground up project, not an

[2:44:23] existing conversion. So have

[2:44:26] you ever done a build from the

[2:44:31] ground-up project that has 40%

[2:44:32] affordable that isn't

[2:44:35] reliability on tax credits or

[2:44:38] public financing in any way?

[2:44:40] >>speaker: no. We have a number

[2:44:44] of these that we own and we're

[2:44:47] building some right now. And

[2:44:50] there is -- there are a number

[2:44:54] of programs for financing these.

[2:44:57] It's fairly common today, but

[2:44:59] was, you know, less common

[2:45:01] before there was such a need for

[2:45:04] this type of missing middle

[2:45:05] housing.

[2:45:06] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[2:45:07] So --

[2:45:09] >>speaker: and we have built

[2:45:14] some projects that are

[2:45:16] affordable, that have regulatory

[2:45:19] agreements on them, that are not

[2:45:21] financed with credits and bonds.

[2:45:23] But not exactly in the same 40%

[2:45:23] mix.

[2:45:24] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: when

[2:45:25] you say missing middle, what's

[2:45:28] the ami that you are assuming?

[2:45:29] >>speaker: missing middle is

[2:45:30] generally 80 to 100.

[2:45:31] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[2:45:32] So that's why I want to get the

[2:45:35] answer to this question on the

[2:45:37] surplus land act exemption

[2:45:38] because it's my understanding

[2:45:40] that it's 60%. So I just want

[2:45:42] to make sure -- and maybe I'm

[2:45:43] wrong. But I want to --

[2:45:44] >>speaker: I believe there's

[2:45:46] some nuance to it because

[2:45:48] there's different definitions

[2:45:51] with hcd versus tcac, of what

[2:45:54] the affordable rents are. If I

[2:45:57] recall correctly, the surplus

[2:45:59] land act was 70% but I would

[2:46:03] defer to matt miller. All of

[2:46:04] our rents are underwritten to

[2:46:08] approximately 70% ami even the

[2:46:11] 1/3 deed restricted to 80% ami.

[2:46:13] And we will commit with our

[2:46:15] proposal to making sure that if

[2:46:20] we -- that we -- if we need any

[2:46:22] additional affordability to

[2:46:24] comply with, you know, the

[2:46:26] current or any future

[2:46:27] definitions of the state surplus

[2:46:30] land act that we'll follow that.

[2:46:32] We do believe that our proposal

[2:46:35] does meet the surplus land act

[2:46:37] but if there needed to be a

[2:46:37] change, we could commit to do

[2:46:38] so.

[2:46:38] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: and

[2:46:39] the reason I'm asking these

[2:46:40] questions is because the

[2:46:41] financials, they're very

[2:46:44] positive, okay. So that is a

[2:46:46] key consideration for us up

[2:46:49] here. And so if the financials

[2:46:53] are based on false assumptions

[2:46:56] or maybe it's slightly off

[2:46:56] assumptions, then it might

[2:46:57] change the whole financial

[2:46:59] outcome, right. So I just want

[2:47:03] to make sure. And then there

[2:47:06] was a section in your option

[2:47:08] term that I understand was for

[2:47:10] up to 30 months. What's the

[2:47:15] reason that you need that?

[2:47:17] >>speaker: supervisor, so we are

[2:47:22] required to negotiate our --

[2:47:22] comply with our lease and the

[2:47:26] terms of the option which

[2:47:28] includes due diligence on the

[2:47:29] site, possibly demolition of the

[2:47:32] site during the option period.

[2:47:35] We have to put together our

[2:47:37] financing for our construction

[2:47:39] loan and do all this in

[2:47:41] conjunction with the county.

[2:47:42] >>speaker: and also -- sorry.

[2:47:46] And also in conjunction with the

[2:47:49] city approval process,

[2:47:52] neighborhood outreach, community

[2:47:54] input. And we will be able to

[2:47:55] go through that process while

[2:47:58] we're going through the -- you

[2:48:02] know, the ab2011 2243 process.

[2:48:05] But we need to do a certain

[2:48:07] amount of that outreach up front

[2:48:07] before we submit.

[2:48:08] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: and

[2:48:09] the reason I'm asking that

[2:48:15] question is because, as

[2:48:16] indicated by supervisor

[2:48:16] sarmiento, we have a lot of

[2:48:19] these parcels in the county

[2:48:19] where they're entitled and not

[2:48:21] being developed. So we have all

[2:48:25] of these options out there that

[2:48:26] everyone seems to keep securing

[2:48:27] and meanwhile we don't get the

[2:48:28] benefit of the development for

[2:48:29] the county. And so that's --

[2:48:32] you know, I'm not interested in

[2:48:33] having some long option term

[2:48:36] more than what I understand the

[2:48:38] process -- you need about a year

[2:48:39] to get through the city and

[2:48:41] county process in terms of the

[2:48:44] entitlement process. So just

[2:48:45] curious. It doesn't have to do

[2:48:47] with financing; it's more about

[2:48:49] the entitlement. Is that what

[2:48:51] you're saying?

[2:48:51] >>speaker: yes, ma'am.

[2:48:52] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[2:48:56] All right. And then the --

[2:48:57] would the county be responsible

[2:48:59] for the demolition, the cost of

[2:49:02] the demolition for your proposal

[2:49:05] or would you take that cost on?

[2:49:06] >>speaker: this was addressed

[2:49:08] during the interview process.

[2:49:10] At this time, there are -- has

[2:49:11] not been any environmental

[2:49:13] testing of the building. So we

[2:49:15] would need to do some

[2:49:16] environmental testing of the

[2:49:17] building before we could

[2:49:18] estimate what those costs would

[2:49:22] be. And we are willing to take

[2:49:24] responsibility for the

[2:49:26] demolition and the cost but we

[2:49:28] would need to do some kind of

[2:49:30] adjustment or reimbursement

[2:49:31] process because today we can't

[2:49:33] really estimate whether there

[2:49:35] needs to be abatement or, you

[2:49:36] know, removal of hazardous

[2:49:38] materials or what that might

[2:49:40] cost. We are willing to take on

[2:49:41] the financial obligation,

[2:49:45] though, once we've been able to

[2:49:46] diligence the item.

[2:49:47] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: so

[2:49:48] that hasn't been included in

[2:49:50] your financial projections yet.

[2:49:51] >>speaker: correct.

[2:49:51] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[2:49:53] And then you heard supervisor

[2:49:57] sarmiento request additional

[2:49:59] affordability, larger units,

[2:50:01] more two bedrooms, three

[2:50:03] bedrooms. I think there was a

[2:50:06] request for parking. Would that

[2:50:08] change the financial

[2:50:09] projections?

[2:50:11] >>speaker: not significantly.

[2:50:13] We have been working on some

[2:50:15] schemes to look at changing the

[2:50:18] unit mix. We might have to

[2:50:20] reduce the retail commercial

[2:50:21] component slightly to

[2:50:23] accommodate more units or larger

[2:50:26] units. But we've believe we can

[2:50:27] do it without significant

[2:50:27] changes.

[2:50:28] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: my

[2:50:29] last question four, and then I

[2:50:33] have a question for the other

[2:50:34] bidder. You indicatedded that

[2:50:37] you have the support of the

[2:50:41] building trades. Do you have a

[2:50:42] project laborer agreement that

[2:50:44] you've already entered into?

[2:50:46] >>speaker: we have a draft

[2:50:48] project laborer agreement and a

[2:50:50] signed letter of intent that

[2:50:51] we've entered into.

[2:50:52] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[2:50:53] Great. Thank you. And I have a

[2:50:56] question for the other -- the

[2:51:10] representative, MR. Caudle.

[2:51:10] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[2:51:12] mentioned you have a project

[2:51:13] labor agreement. I'm not sure

[2:51:16] how you said it, but do you have

[2:51:17] an agreement with the building

[2:51:18] trades as well.

[2:51:18] >>speaker: we are planning on

[2:51:21] with the ab 2011 using

[2:51:23] prevailing wages within the

[2:51:25] project. I'll let shaun rawson

[2:51:27] with waterford speak to where we

[2:51:28] are.

[2:51:29] >>speaker: we have a draft

[2:51:30] letter of intent that is recent

[2:51:33] as of this morning, got approved

[2:51:37] by our bond counsel, and let

[2:51:38] andrew gonzalez snow that with

[2:51:41] the trades that that was

[2:51:45] approved. It is not signed.

[2:51:46] But we are committed to working

[2:51:49] with labor. We met with labor,

[2:51:52] with the trades in layuna, so

[2:51:55] josh lafarge and andrew, and

[2:51:57] we've committed to, that but we

[2:51:59] do not have a signed letter of

[2:52:00] intent as of today.

[2:52:00] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[2:52:03] Thank you for that. And as it

[2:52:04] relates to the affordability,

[2:52:05] and you heard my questions for

[2:52:07] the other bird, does your

[2:52:11] project comply with this surplus

[2:52:12] land act exemption as it relates

[2:52:15] to the affordability

[2:52:15] requirements?

[2:52:15] >>speaker: it's our

[2:52:16] understanding that it does

[2:52:17] comply.

[2:52:18] >>speaker: and what is your

[2:52:21] understanding of how it

[2:52:22] complies?

[2:52:24] >>speaker: so we have within our

[2:52:25] affordability, within the

[2:52:28] project, we have 36 units at --

[2:52:32] up to 50% of ami, 91 units up to

[2:52:35] 80% of ami. It's our

[2:52:36] understanding that we're meeting

[2:52:37] that requirement within those

[2:52:39] units for that 25% as a minimum

[2:52:41] requirement through the surplus

[2:52:41] land act.

[2:52:42] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[2:52:45] And then you heard -- well, I

[2:52:47] don't know what supervisor

[2:52:49] sarmiento thinks about -- I

[2:52:53] don't know if there's any more

[2:52:54] affordability required for him.

[2:52:55] You heard, though, that there

[2:52:56] was a concern about the

[2:52:58] financial projections and the

[2:53:01] revenue generated by -- for the

[2:53:03] county because, you know, a base

[2:53:04] of what we're trying to

[2:53:06] accomplish here is to be able to

[2:53:09] move and pay for our healthcare

[2:53:11] agency clinic to be at a

[2:53:16] different location. So can you

[2:53:18] address, is there -- you know,

[2:53:21] why would you put forward a

[2:53:22] proposal that doesn't accomplish

[2:53:22] that?

[2:53:26] >>speaker: yes. I didn't state

[2:53:28] my name when I spoke last time.

[2:53:31] I'm shaun rawson from the

[2:53:32] waterford property company.

[2:53:34] Supervisor, thank you for the

[2:53:36] question. We underwrote project

[2:53:38] within the guidelines of what we

[2:53:41] believed the requirements of the

[2:53:43] rfp were. We didn't see a

[2:53:45] provision specifically stating

[2:53:47] that a requirement was to

[2:53:49] underwrite relocation of the

[2:53:51] existing tenant. As of today,

[2:53:56] our team has gone about 2.5

[2:53:58] billion of bond issuances using

[2:54:00] essential ponds bonds. So it is

[2:54:02] definitely feasible to

[2:54:03] underwrite a relocation as part

[2:54:05] of the bond issuance where it is

[2:54:07] effectively -- it comes in as an

[2:54:10] upfront payment and then is

[2:54:11] amortized over the bond term.

[2:54:12] When that question was posed to

[2:54:14] us, we said that we can comply

[2:54:15] with it. The reason we didn't

[2:54:17] submit it that way is we didn't

[2:54:18] realize that that was a driving

[2:54:21] force. We were focused on the

[2:54:23] community aspects of our

[2:54:24] project, but we can definitely

[2:54:24] do that.

[2:54:27] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: and

[2:54:30] then the option term that you're

[2:54:31] requesting, what would the

[2:54:34] option term need to be?

[2:54:37] >>speaker: we currently have

[2:54:39] proposed up to a 36-month term.

[2:54:41] Although, we think we can go

[2:54:44] faster than that utilizing the

[2:54:45] ab 2011 with the buy right

[2:54:47] entitlement with the city. As I

[2:54:49] mentioned in my opening remarks,

[2:54:50] even though we're processing the

[2:54:52] buy right entitlement, there's

[2:54:53] still gonna be a lot of

[2:54:55] interaction, not only with our

[2:54:56] team here at the county but

[2:54:57] working in conjunction with the

[2:55:01] city of santa ana and the

[2:55:03] riverview neighborhood, which is

[2:55:04] important. We got together with

[2:55:06] them early in the process to get

[2:55:08] their initial feedback, part of

[2:55:10] that fed into how we designed

[2:55:12] the project and how we laid it

[2:55:16] out and how we work with the

[2:55:18] single-family neighborhoods. So

[2:55:19] we want to make sure we're doing

[2:55:21] that proper community outreach

[2:55:24] and we have 36 months in our

[2:55:24] proposal, to answer your

[2:55:25] question.

[2:55:25] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[2:55:27] Thank you so much. Those are

[2:55:28] you will of a the questions I

[2:55:28] have.

[2:55:29] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[2:55:30] supervisor wagner.

[2:55:30] >>don wagner: thank you,

[2:55:32] MR. CHAIRMAN. I'm trying to

[2:55:34] wrap my head around this. I

[2:55:36] think we have two good proposals

[2:55:41] here, but by struggle is quite

[2:55:44] honestly, as I look at them, I

[2:55:47] am not in step with staff's

[2:55:51] recommendation here. And so I'm

[2:55:54] trying to square that and show

[2:55:57] respect for staff. They're the

[2:55:58] experts, and they've gone

[2:56:01] through this in quite some

[2:56:03] detail. And they've come up

[2:56:07] with a recommendation, and now

[2:56:09] here we are at the dies, and we

[2:56:11] kind of say we're not

[2:56:12] negotiating from the dais, but,

[2:56:15] you know, we are. And frankly

[2:56:18] it looks to me like we're asking

[2:56:21] tap to be a little bit closer to

[2:56:24] cnc with the ami, with the

[2:56:30] larger units. And I'm wondering

[2:56:32] why we jump through those hoops

[2:56:33] instead of just say, all right,

[2:56:36] well, let's give cnc the first

[2:56:39] shot at it. And this has been a

[2:56:44] tough project. Done this a

[2:56:45] couple times already. So maybe

[2:56:48] we have to end up falling back

[2:56:53] on the tfa -- tap proposal. The

[2:56:55] things that trouble me that I

[2:56:57] heard are, you know, for

[2:56:58] example, there's the uncertainty

[2:57:03] about the surplus land act and I

[2:57:05] heard, and I took it down, if

[2:57:07] there needs to be a change in

[2:57:12] the ami, we will do so. Well,

[2:57:16] that's a pretty blunt assertion.

[2:57:17] I mean, it's not easy to build

[2:57:19] in the state of california

[2:57:21] nowadays. And to have a

[2:57:22] developer come up here and say,

[2:57:23] well, if the requirements are a

[2:57:25] little bit different, don't

[2:57:27] worry, we can fix it, that is

[2:57:32] not as comforting to me as the

[2:57:34] proposer might have said that.

[2:57:37] I don't think you can just

[2:57:39] blatantly say when you've got

[2:57:42] small charge ins and difficulty

[2:57:44] getting approvals and you don't

[2:57:46] have a buy right component,

[2:57:48] well, don't worry, we'll just

[2:57:49] change it. And what is one of

[2:57:51] the changes they're going to do

[2:57:53] with respect to, say, larger

[2:57:54] units? Reduce retail. What's

[2:57:57] the city think about reducing

[2:57:58] retail? You know, the city's

[2:58:01] gonna get their sales tax from

[2:58:02] the retail. Is the city going

[2:58:05] to approve it with the reduced

[2:58:07] retail? What's going to give?

[2:58:10] There are lots of moving parts

[2:58:13] of demolition. It's not in the

[2:58:15] proposal. We'll take care of

[2:58:23] it. But we MAY need

[2:58:24] need compensation on the back

[2:58:26] end. This is what the gentlemen

[2:58:27] at witness stand said. It's

[2:58:29] not, there we'll agree to take,

[2:58:31] it but when we do our due

[2:58:33] diligence and we see what's in

[2:58:34] there, maybe there's asbestos.

[2:58:36] Maybe there's remediation, we're

[2:58:38] going to have to get that

[2:58:39] compensated on the back-end. So

[2:58:41] all of a sudden the whole deal

[2:58:46] to me is less certain. Why?

[2:58:46] Because we're negotiating from

[2:58:49] the dais these different points.

[2:58:51] And so I don't think that's the

[2:58:53] way to do business. I think

[2:58:56] that's what got us in trouble

[2:58:59] when we had 17 street partners

[2:59:02] and the other 3 bidders -- or 2

[2:59:04] other bidders, the last time we

[2:59:06] did this process a couple years

[2:59:10] ago. I am just genuinely

[2:59:14] troubled by some of what I heard

[2:59:15] tonight -- today. And I also

[2:59:18] want to add one last thing. The

[2:59:25] idea that we can front load to

[2:59:27] help us pay for the public

[2:59:30] health lab and the move and all

[2:59:32] that's being done and kind of

[2:59:33] just saying, well, I'm not so

[2:59:36] interested in front load, I

[2:59:36] rather just have the money

[2:59:38] longer term, guys, we're all

[2:59:40] going into a budget next month

[2:59:45] that isn't gonna be pretty. And

[2:59:47] I think maybe we wouldn't in a

[2:59:50] perfect world want to front load

[2:59:52] and have some of that money

[2:59:53] available from the developer to

[2:59:56] do what we need to do with our

[2:59:58] public health lab. In a perfect

[3:00:03] world, we take the long stream

[3:00:05] income. But we all know we

[3:00:07] don't live in a perfect world

[3:00:09] and will have some budget

[3:00:10] challenges. So I don't want to

[3:00:12] just kind of discount the front

[3:00:15] load offer here. I'm not there

[3:00:16] yet. And MR. Miller, I don't

[3:00:17] have a question for you other

[3:00:23] than tell me why you're right.

[3:00:24] >>speaker: I didn't want to

[3:00:26] argue that I'm right. I wanted

[3:00:29] to clarify the surplus land act

[3:00:30] requirement. So the surplus

[3:00:32] land act mention that we're

[3:00:41] using is government code 54221

[3:00:43] 54221.1g, small I. You have a

[3:00:47] single parcel not less than 300

[3:00:49] units restricted to as least 25%

[3:00:52] of units to lower-income

[3:00:53] households as defined in

[3:00:57] government code section 50079.5,

[3:00:59] I'm association health and

[3:01:01] safety code. And it defines

[3:01:03] lower-income households at 80%

[3:01:07] of area ami. So based on that

[3:01:09] both of the proposals comply

[3:01:11] with the surplus land act.

[3:01:12] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: you

[3:01:16] left out a section.

[3:01:18] >>don wagner: but if they both

[3:01:19] comply.

[3:01:19] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[3:01:20] there's another analysis that

[3:01:22] has to go after that, which is

[3:01:30] the health and safety code

[3:01:31] 50053b-1d, definition of

[3:01:32] affordable rent, for lower

[3:01:35] income households whose incomes

[3:01:37] exceeds the very low income

[3:01:41] ceiling, equals 30% times 60%

[3:01:43] ami adjusted for family size

[3:01:45] appropriate. I mean, it's

[3:01:45] complicated.

[3:01:46] >>speaker: right, that's the

[3:01:47] calculation of the tent that

[3:01:48] would be charged.

[3:01:49] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[3:01:52] right. But that's the whole --

[3:01:53] >>don wagner: that's not the

[3:01:54] whole issue in the first place.

[3:01:55] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: but

[3:01:57] you have to base it on the rent.

[3:01:57] Anyway...

[3:02:00] It's enough to cause me to be

[3:02:02] concerned that it's not been

[3:02:03] analyzed.

[3:02:04] >>speaker: what I would say to

[3:02:05] the board's concerns is, you

[3:02:11] know, as we go through this rfp

[3:02:13] process, we, as staff on the

[3:02:17] evaluation panel, write the

[3:02:19] proposals and rate them based on

[3:02:20] what is proposed. We don't

[3:02:22] prenegotiate with them, we don't

[3:02:23] engage with proposers because

[3:02:26] then they start changing their

[3:02:27] proposals. To the extent that

[3:02:29] there are things that the board

[3:02:30] wants to see from either of the

[3:02:31] proposers that the board might

[3:02:33] go with, that would happen

[3:02:35] during the negotiation and we

[3:02:37] would report back to the board

[3:02:38] on the progress. So to preserve

[3:02:41] the integrity, we generally

[3:02:43] don't go back to a plopser and

[3:02:44] say, will you do this --

[3:02:45] proposer and say, will you do

[3:02:47] this on a staff level, because

[3:02:48] then you would have to go to

[3:02:49] each of the proposers and give

[3:02:51] them that ability to re-open a

[3:02:54] proposal. So to some extent, I

[3:02:57] think somebody mentioned this,

[3:02:59] it starts with a beauty contest.

[3:03:00] And once we've negotiated the

[3:03:01] specific terms and reported back

[3:03:03] to the board, then we're into

[3:03:04] the negotiation period where

[3:03:05] we're tweaking things.

[3:03:07] >>don wagner: but these aren't

[3:03:08] just little tweaks. These are

[3:03:10] big things like the ami. These

[3:03:12] are more three bedrooms rather

[3:03:15] than singles. These are pay for

[3:03:20] the demolition. Those are

[3:03:22] things that aren't, you know,

[3:03:24] just small deal points. Those

[3:03:26] could make or break -- and on

[3:03:29] this very property have made and

[3:03:35] broken prior proposals. And so

[3:03:39] I think that it's -- I think the

[3:03:40] simpler solution is if we want

[3:03:43] the ami change, if we want more

[3:03:45] three-bedroom units, then go

[3:03:47] with a proposer who is upfront

[3:03:48] saying, and that's in my

[3:03:50] proposal and I can pencil that

[3:03:52] in, and that works, and I've

[3:03:53] already thought about that, and

[3:03:57] I've got this buy right, and

[3:03:59] then we don't have to negotiate

[3:04:00] from the dais. We don't have to

[3:04:02] have these uncertainties. If a

[3:04:05] deal still doesn't get done,

[3:04:08] then we have a fall-back. So, I

[3:04:11] mean, I just think the cnc,

[3:04:13] given what I heard, are some of

[3:04:16] the questions we have about tap,

[3:04:18] the cnc one is the better one to

[3:04:21] lead negotiations with. That's

[3:04:23] kind of my thought, and where

[3:04:25] I'm looking for help is -- and

[3:04:27] you disagree. You've doubled

[3:04:29] down on, no, let's go on tap.

[3:04:31] And I'm trying to wrap my head

[3:04:32] around that.

[3:04:34] >>speaker: I generally don't

[3:04:36] disagree with what anybody says.

[3:04:39] You take our -- we take our

[3:04:40] direction from the board. We

[3:04:43] convened the ratings panel that

[3:04:43] made the recommendation. When

[3:04:45] you look at how close the two

[3:04:47] scores were, one of the things

[3:04:49] we did look at to some of the

[3:04:51] supervisors' earlier points was

[3:04:52] the revenue coming to the county

[3:04:57] to help defer the cost to the

[3:04:58] hca. So I think when you look

[3:05:00] at the 300-point variance, those

[3:05:02] are the things that account for

[3:05:03] that. So, you know, I think in

[3:05:05] the end, have you two very good

[3:05:07] proposers and you have two

[3:05:09] projects that I think the

[3:05:11] proposers can pull off. So it's

[3:05:13] hard to say, you know, that 300

[3:05:17] points is, you know -- I'm going

[3:05:20] to stake my claim on that. It's

[3:05:22] simply a recommendation based on

[3:05:22] the evaluation panel.

[3:05:24] >>chair, doug chaffee: maybe I

[3:05:28] should take a turn. In my

[3:05:31] nefarious past I have

[3:05:31] constructed affordable housing

[3:05:32] projects including the use of

[3:05:35] tax credits and other device, it

[3:05:38] might be used to lower the

[3:05:41] rents. Oi affordability is very

[3:05:47] undefined term. You say we're

[3:05:51] creating half the units as

[3:05:53] affordable. What does that

[3:05:55] really mean? You don't know

[3:05:58] unless you know the

[3:05:58] affordability of what we're

[3:06:00] really talking about. It's been

[3:06:03] a while since I read the

[3:06:04] regulations but the deeper you

[3:06:07] have affordability, the fewer

[3:06:09] units you need to provide,

[3:06:12] generally the things like bonds

[3:06:15] have been around for a while.

[3:06:18] And you have affordable units at

[3:06:21] higher rents, still it's within

[3:06:22] the parameters of how it's

[3:06:25] defined. Somebody tells me I'm

[3:06:26] building affordable housing.

[3:06:27] That doesn't tell me very much.

[3:06:29] I want to know at what levels

[3:06:31] are you providing affordability.

[3:06:34] We talked about one ami in

[3:06:36] orange county, that is the index

[3:06:38] that is used to determine the

[3:06:39] various rents, the median

[3:06:42] income. You apply the

[3:06:44] percentage that you attribute to

[3:06:46] a unit. If it's 30%, you take

[3:06:49] 30% of ami, divided by 12 and

[3:06:52] then that gives you a monthly

[3:06:54] rent with utility allowance. If

[3:06:56] it's 60%, you take a higher

[3:06:57] number and do the math and you

[3:07:00] get a higher rent when you do

[3:07:01] that. Some are at 80%. Some

[3:07:05] are at 100% ami. I don't know

[3:07:06] if that squares the actual

[3:07:08] market rent when you get up that

[3:07:10] high. Are you really providing

[3:07:13] affordable for where the market

[3:07:14] actually is? I don't know

[3:07:15] because you have to do some

[3:07:17] comparisons with market rent to

[3:07:17] see if you're giving a benefit

[3:07:23] to lower-income people that MAY

[3:07:25] pay lower present it really is.

[3:07:27] So I'm not concerned. I think

[3:07:31] the affordability is there. I'd

[3:07:35] like actually the mix of the

[3:07:38] commercial. I feel that's a

[3:07:43] component I should cnc should

[3:07:46] come back. I'd ask them to

[3:07:48] consider doing that because it

[3:07:51] provides not only a source of

[3:07:53] revenue for the city with sales

[3:07:55] taxes but it also provides jobs

[3:07:56] and services and you have kind

[3:07:59] of an element of workforce

[3:08:01] housing that people live there

[3:08:02] and might work in the commercial

[3:08:03] part, as well. So I like that

[3:08:05] mix. I think that's a good

[3:08:08] thing I wouldn't shrink it at

[3:08:12] all.. I also like the public

[3:08:13] spaces we talked about expanding

[3:08:14] the units. That should go

[3:08:17] higher. You're going to use up

[3:08:18] more land. And I am concerned

[3:08:19] about the livability of

[3:08:21] projects. If you squeeze it too

[3:08:23] much, well, then you're not

[3:08:26] going to be creating a liveable

[3:08:28] space with people living there.

[3:08:30] So I would suggest, though,

[3:08:31] there might be one way of

[3:08:33] lowering the rents, and if it's

[3:08:35] something that we could do at a

[3:08:38] later date, and that's add some

[3:08:40] project-based section 8 vouchers

[3:08:43] that would enable the rent of

[3:08:46] either project to provide lower

[3:08:49] rents. So I kind of like the

[3:08:52] mix where we have both

[3:08:54] components. We have two viable

[3:08:57] developers here, and let's see

[3:09:02] where it goes. I'm not too

[3:09:03] concerned about adding space to

[3:09:06] unit if it takes up more land.

[3:09:08] Because three units is quite

[3:09:10] substantial already. And so how

[3:09:13] do we make this a viable living

[3:09:15] space for a family with

[3:09:16] children? You don't want to

[3:09:18] squeeze things too tight. You

[3:09:20] want some recreation

[3:09:21] opportunitys and other things

[3:09:22] when you do that. So the

[3:09:25] livability of the project as a

[3:09:27] whole is important to me. So --

[3:09:30] and I also find interesting that

[3:09:32] one proposer is using private

[3:09:36] capital. That's so rare at the

[3:09:38] same time providing affordable

[3:09:39] housing. I did a little look at

[3:09:42] the cost of building because of

[3:09:45] the projects that use, for

[3:09:48] example, tax credits and bond

[3:09:49] financing. The professional

[3:09:51] fees and other types of things

[3:09:52] are very high. And the result

[3:09:55] is, the cost of building a

[3:09:56] project on a square foot basis

[3:10:00] is higher. So private capital

[3:10:04] actually allows a -- same labor,

[3:10:05] same materials, that type of

[3:10:08] thing but it actually brings a

[3:10:12] project home at a lower cost.

[3:10:14] And so I see that as an

[3:10:15] interesting comparison. It's

[3:10:16] just pretty rare when you see

[3:10:18] that all private capital is

[3:10:20] being used. So I like that

[3:10:22] because it's very smart

[3:10:25] certainty. The tax credits are

[3:10:28] competitive. In this case, it's

[3:10:30] bond financing. I remember a

[3:10:32] time when there wasn't enough

[3:10:35] bond financing to go around.

[3:10:38] It's an allocation process

[3:10:40] called the debt limit allocation

[3:10:40] committee.

[3:10:44] It's set up so that only so much

[3:10:46] bond financing that is tax

[3:10:48] exempt can be issued any given

[3:10:50] year. Otherwise, the federal

[3:10:52] government loses the interest on

[3:10:54] the normal thing. And there's

[3:10:56] some different categories that

[3:10:59] can use this financing.

[3:11:00] Hospitals, for example, can use

[3:11:01] this financing, this bond

[3:11:04] financing. And interesting, I

[3:11:07] mean, just about a month ago,

[3:11:08] st. Jude hospital fullerton got

[3:11:11] a $365 million bond allocation

[3:11:13] of these same kinds of bonds.

[3:11:15] And there's also an industrial

[3:11:17] base. We saw that being used by

[3:11:23] our airport people. The biggest

[3:11:26] basis for this financing is

[3:11:27] affordable house, and it's very

[3:11:29] competitive. I don't know if

[3:11:30] there's necessarily enough

[3:11:32] allocation in a given year. You

[3:11:34] MAY have to apply more than once

[3:11:36] to get what you want. It does

[3:11:40] carry with it a 4% tax credit

[3:11:42] provided if you meet the other

[3:11:44] things. So that's important. I

[3:11:45] like both developers, and I

[3:11:47] think staff got it right in the

[3:11:50] order of ranking. And so I

[3:11:51] support the staff

[3:11:52] recommendation. I'd like to

[3:11:53] just move forward. It's been

[3:11:56] way too long as a dormant piece

[3:11:58] of land, really. See what we

[3:12:02] can do with it. And I like the

[3:12:04] parking requirements a little

[3:12:09] bit better. And I'd like the --

[3:12:10] I think the neighborhood will

[3:12:12] accept it more so than if it's

[3:12:13] just purely nothing but

[3:12:15] apartment units. So if we're

[3:12:17] dictating from the dais as to

[3:12:19] what to do, yeah, let's see if

[3:12:21] we can make the units more

[3:12:27] affordable. If we can, if we --

[3:12:29] if cnc comes back because we

[3:12:30] couldn't do a deal correctly

[3:12:33] with the first choice, I would

[3:12:36] urge them to look at some

[3:12:37] commercial, and there it kind of

[3:12:39] gives a nice face to the street.

[3:12:41] It provides a buffer to the

[3:12:43] housing from the noise and the

[3:12:44] street and that kind of thing.

[3:12:48] And I think that's a good way of

[3:12:51] planning to do that. So I'm

[3:12:53] supportive of the staff

[3:12:55] recommendation. It does not

[3:12:57] finish anything right now. We

[3:12:59] have to negotiate, make certain

[3:13:01] that this city, which will

[3:13:02] process the application, finds

[3:13:03] it acceptable. That could

[3:13:06] change things. And then it will

[3:13:09] come back to us again where

[3:13:11] maybe we'll be sharpening our

[3:13:12] pencil its again and see where

[3:13:15] we wind up. So I do support

[3:13:16] staff recommendation. I see my

[3:13:19] screen is lit up. But I'm

[3:13:23] hungry. Okay. It's noontime.

[3:13:24] Supervisor nguyen. You haven't

[3:13:26] had a chance to weigh in here.

[3:13:27] >>janet nguyen: thank you,

[3:13:29] MR. CHAIRMAN. I just want to

[3:13:31] first thank both of the

[3:13:33] development firms for taking the

[3:13:35] time to meet with my office and

[3:13:36] actually walk us through the

[3:13:41] proposed projects. You know,

[3:13:45] I -- while I understand the

[3:13:46] staff's recommendation, you

[3:13:48] really look at it though, and

[3:13:50] it's only 300-point difference.

[3:13:52] So the not a lot. While both

[3:13:53] projects are strong, they are

[3:13:54] also quite difference in their

[3:13:57] approach. I think that at this

[3:13:59] point for me is I want to see

[3:14:01] more housing. And I believe

[3:14:04] that cnc project has a strong

[3:14:05] option for us as a county.

[3:14:08] Because it definitely, you know,

[3:14:10] what you've said, MR. CHAIRMAN,

[3:14:13] the much-needed housing. And we

[3:14:16] need to make sure that it's

[3:14:17] actually affordable. We can

[3:14:19] build more house, but if it's

[3:14:21] not affordable, then it makes it

[3:14:23] difficult. And if we go into

[3:14:28] negotiation with the first firm

[3:14:30] lots of things can change. And

[3:14:32] while it looks like they are

[3:14:35] providing more revenue right

[3:14:36] now, but then what's the

[3:14:38] demolition cost? That could

[3:14:39] completely change the game. It

[3:14:42] could be millions of dollars.

[3:14:44] Tens of millions of dollars.

[3:14:45] And, you know, you're looking at

[3:14:48] a difference of only 100,

[3:14:50] $200,000. Annually.

[3:14:51] . We're talking about

[3:15:02] demolition of an unknown. So by

[3:15:04] us not calculating that now and

[3:15:05] going into this, my fear is

[3:15:07] we're going to be negotiating

[3:15:07] ourselves out of things more

[3:15:10] than in of more of what we want

[3:15:11] with the first bidder because

[3:15:13] it's not clear on their proposal

[3:15:15] on what we currently want. And

[3:15:17] for me, for those of you who

[3:15:19] know when I was here the first

[3:15:23] time in the board of supes, I

[3:15:24] really wanted a childcare

[3:15:26] facility this area. It's a big

[3:15:27] deal. It's so important to a

[3:15:30] lot of our county employees.

[3:15:33] Most of you remember I -- my

[3:15:36] last day of chairing the board

[3:15:37] of supervisors, that evening I

[3:15:39] went straight to the hospital

[3:15:40] and gave birth the next day.

[3:15:44] And that was the longest board

[3:15:45] of supervisors' meeting we had

[3:15:50] that year in 2017. And so, you

[3:15:54] know, I was blessed and able to

[3:15:59] bring my babies to the county.

[3:16:01] and after board meeting, I would

[3:16:03] go straight upstairs. And so,

[3:16:07] you know, it's -- I think cnc

[3:16:10] has the head start childcare

[3:16:12] facility, and I think it's

[3:16:14] important. Also given that it's

[3:16:16] across from the college campus

[3:16:20] as well. And so that always

[3:16:24] attracts -- I'm very tracted to

[3:16:26] that myself and especially for

[3:16:27] the young families. And I think

[3:16:29] it's a huge asset to the

[3:16:30] college, the future residents

[3:16:35] and abroad. And so, you know, I

[3:16:37] would actually go into the

[3:16:40] negotiation. My two key

[3:16:42] improvements I would look at it

[3:16:45] is shorter-term, ground lease

[3:16:47] term, and also a greater revenue

[3:16:49] generation for the county. And

[3:16:51] I want to make sure that this

[3:16:53] demo costs is not going to

[3:16:55] off-set and take away all of our

[3:16:58] revenue that we've gained from

[3:16:59] these contracts. And given that

[3:17:01] this project has already --

[3:17:03] hasn't really been in play and

[3:17:05] fell out because the bidders

[3:17:07] could not meet their obligation,

[3:17:09] what they've stated in their

[3:17:10] proposals, I don't want us to go

[3:17:12] back there again. And that's

[3:17:14] where I'm very uncomfortable

[3:17:16] with the first option that the

[3:17:18] staff recommended. And again,

[3:17:20] like I said, it's only 300

[3:17:21] points difference. So I would

[3:17:24] actually be more supportive, cnc

[3:17:26] waterford is the first option,

[3:17:29] and tap would be the second

[3:17:33] option if cnc does not come in

[3:17:37] with what we need as a county.

[3:17:39] >>chair, doug chaffee: now we go

[3:17:41] back to supervisor sarmiento.

[3:17:42] >>vincente sarmiento: yes, thank

[3:17:46] you, MR. Chair. So, matt, if

[3:18:07] you could join us at the podium.

[3:18:09] I think our role is here to

[3:18:10] authorize you, MR. Miller, and

[3:18:12] your team to begin negotiation.

[3:18:14] right. It's not a settlement.

[3:18:16] It's not to say here's what you

[3:18:17] need to do. It's simply for you

[3:18:21] to go out and negotiate with one

[3:18:26] or both and bring something back

[3:18:28] to us, the most viable, has a

[3:18:33] solid return and -- north county

[3:18:35] but also meets some of their

[3:18:36] concerns and priorities I think

[3:18:40] you've heard today. Tell me,

[3:18:43] what -- you met with the city,

[3:18:45] right, that's important. That's

[3:18:47] an important partner that we

[3:18:48] need to hear from. What was

[3:18:51] your -- what did you hear from

[3:18:51] them?

[3:18:52] >>speaker: that's correct. In

[3:18:53] fact, there was a member from

[3:18:55] the city on the evaluation

[3:18:57] panel. And the city

[3:19:01] communicated to staff that their

[3:19:05] preference was that tap bfr

[3:19:06] proposal because they felt it

[3:19:08] was more conducive to the 17th

[3:19:09] street corridor with the mix of

[3:19:12] commercial and green space and

[3:19:18] with the -- a little smaller

[3:19:20] foot print and unit count. The

[3:19:21] city of santa ana is one of the

[3:19:23] few counties I think in orange

[3:19:25] county that's met the arena

[3:19:27] numbers. I don't know that 100%

[3:19:30] of the affordable project was as

[3:19:32] compelling to them as it would

[3:19:33] be to another city.

[3:19:34] >>vincente sarmiento: so to the

[3:19:35] extent that I had a lot to do

[3:19:37] with that, I will take some

[3:19:39] credit for, that I wanted to

[3:19:40] make sure that we met the needs

[3:19:45] not simply for our arena count

[3:19:46] but make sure to meet the needs

[3:19:52] of some of the families there.

[3:19:55] Talking about the rare

[3:19:57] overparking, do we know what the

[3:20:00] parking ratio is for both

[3:20:00] proposals.

[3:20:03] >>speaker: we do. I don't know

[3:20:04] offhand but the parking ratio

[3:20:07] for cnc water ford is lower. I

[3:20:09] do believe that both of the

[3:20:10] proposals would meet

[3:20:13] requirements, but there are --

[3:20:17] within 100% affordable project,

[3:20:18] there are parking allowances

[3:20:26] that they have.. I know when

[3:20:29] the first iteration around of

[3:20:30] these came to the board for this

[3:20:32] consideration some years ago,

[3:20:34] there were proposals at 600

[3:20:36] units, at 400 units. So we're

[3:20:38] far, far away from that, and I

[3:20:41] know that was being discussed up

[3:20:44] here. When I was mayor, I said,

[3:20:46] no, that's not going to work and

[3:20:48] I opposed those aggressively

[3:20:50] just because -- and we've

[3:20:51] already had some developments

[3:20:54] that have come into the city at

[3:20:56] that scale, and they are not

[3:20:57] working out well.

[3:20:59] Unfortunately, we've had many

[3:21:00] that have retail as part of

[3:21:02] those developments and they're

[3:21:04] still sitting vacant. So that's

[3:21:11] the concern with having a large

[3:21:12] retail commercial foot print.

[3:21:14] We all want the sales tax on

[3:21:16] them, but unfortunately filling

[3:21:17] them, finding tenants, to be

[3:21:19] able to sustain them is

[3:21:20] extremely difficult. Go visit

[3:21:22] the site on first street and

[3:21:24] elks lane right off the 5

[3:21:26] freeway. There is

[3:21:28] commercial front, retail front

[3:21:29] that's been sitting vacant I'd

[3:21:32] say for the past six years. So,

[3:21:34] good luck with some of the

[3:21:35] retail and commercial here on

[3:21:36] 17th street because just east

[3:21:38] of this development there's an

[3:21:40] old north gate gonzalez market

[3:21:41] shopping center that continues

[3:21:43] to sit there vacant. So to the

[3:21:46] extent I would say as guidance,

[3:21:47] not to negotiate, but just so

[3:21:50] you'll know where my head is

[3:21:52] at -- again, let me remind

[3:21:52] everybody we've had close a

[3:21:54] month to deal with these

[3:21:55] proposals. So a lot of the

[3:21:58] questions I think we're asking

[3:22:04] up here I hope they were asked

[3:22:05] of you, MR. Miller, when we

[3:22:07] received these proposals and to

[3:22:09] date, and I hope everybody has

[3:22:10] had an opportunity to work with

[3:22:12] both of these applicants, but

[3:22:14] it's like we're seeing this

[3:22:15] almost for the first time. In

[3:22:20] any event, I think maybe where

[3:22:24] we can give some additional

[3:22:26] guidance, and I would suggest

[3:22:29] is, you know, let's take this in

[3:22:31] a matter of order, and maybe you

[3:22:32] could work with both teams. I

[3:22:34] think everybody is struggling

[3:22:35] because we have two very

[3:22:37] competitive and strong proposals

[3:22:38] from teams that have done really

[3:22:40] thoughtful work here, which is,

[3:22:41] again, a blessing and a dilemma

[3:22:43] at the same time. Maybe what

[3:22:45] you could do is in order of,

[3:22:47] again, the recommendation that

[3:22:49] you saw, and to me -- what moves

[3:22:51] me is where was it sitting

[3:22:52] and -- where was the city, and

[3:23:02] has the city seen this? And I

[3:23:05] understand MR. Peskapur, who was

[3:23:08] the director of planning, was on

[3:23:09] the panel. Somebody from the

[3:23:11] city was on, that I know he's

[3:23:13] the new director of the planning

[3:23:13] department across the street.

[3:23:17] So it's important that they saw

[3:23:21] this, they see the differences,

[3:23:23] the benefits, but gins

[3:23:24] cooperating that opinion and

[3:23:26] sounds like everybody else, with

[3:23:28] respect to labor, with respect

[3:23:29] to santa ana college, both have

[3:23:32] been approached by both parties.

[3:23:34] So that due diligence is strong

[3:23:36] on behalf of both teams. So I

[3:23:38] don't doubt that for a second.

[3:23:41] I just think that now at this

[3:23:43] point, if we're struggling,

[3:23:45] having a difficulty making a

[3:23:46] decision, and I don't think it

[3:23:47] needs to be unanimous, I

[3:23:50] continue to say, because I think

[3:23:53] to the chair's point, that's how

[3:23:54] I analyze this, as well, with

[3:23:57] respect to the tax credits and

[3:24:00] bonds. You really don't know

[3:24:01] whether you're going to be

[3:24:03] successful because you don't

[3:24:06] know the pool of other proposals

[3:24:08] that you're applying with. It

[3:24:11] could be a very robust pool of

[3:24:13] applicants with good projects.

[3:24:16] And there is uncertainty and,

[3:24:19] you know, it's -- it's not as

[3:24:20] clear. It could be delayed as a

[3:24:23] result of there being some very

[3:24:26] strong competition in the pool

[3:24:27] of tax credits that you're

[3:24:28] applying for, depending on what

[3:24:30] the cycle looks like. I think

[3:24:33] when it comes to conventional

[3:24:35] financing, I think it's more

[3:24:38] certain, this is a viable

[3:24:39] mixed-use development, it's

[3:24:39] right in the center of the

[3:24:41] county. This isn't going out on

[3:24:44] a limb. It's your typical, you

[3:24:46] know, public, private

[3:24:48] partnership on a development for

[3:24:50] housing where it's, you know,

[3:24:52] sorely needed right in central

[3:24:53] county. I don't think it will

[3:24:54] be a stretch for any lending

[3:24:56] institution to provide that sort

[3:24:57] of financing.

[3:24:59] So I don't see that as much of a

[3:25:03] risk. Again, I agree with the

[3:25:05] chair. I have seen really

[3:25:07] strong projects struggle because

[3:25:09] they compete against other

[3:25:11] prisons that are equally strong.

[3:25:13] And so it is a very speculative

[3:25:16] thing for us to be able to say

[3:25:17] one will be sooner or quicker

[3:25:19] than the other. I think that

[3:25:23] actually going out to the

[3:25:24] conventional, you know, market

[3:25:26] will be quicker on this point.

[3:25:30] And I know time is not so much

[3:25:32] of the essence but we certainly

[3:25:34] would like to see this stood up

[3:25:37] and move forward. So maybe we

[3:25:38] could adjust the direction and

[3:25:41] say could you concurrently in

[3:25:43] order of what staff recommended

[3:25:48] see what we can do with one

[3:25:49] partner being tap first and then

[3:25:51] seeing if they can achieve

[3:25:54] better affordability, which, you

[3:25:55] know, which is almost blending

[3:25:56] these two together. If it

[3:25:58] doesn't work for them, if it

[3:26:00] doesn't seem to be able to

[3:26:02] pencil out, they're not able to

[3:26:05] make that -- the adjustments

[3:26:06] they've heard, then, you know,

[3:26:09] you have cnc waterford to maybe

[3:26:10] work with them and see, look,

[3:26:15] can you provide us a better

[3:26:16] return and something more

[3:26:19] similar to what I think tap is

[3:26:21] recommending. So that seems to

[3:26:21] be the only way out of this

[3:26:24] unless we just simply, you know,

[3:26:26] flip a coin. So I don't know if

[3:26:28] there's a better approach. But

[3:26:29] maybe you can recommend

[3:26:29] something.

[3:26:31] >>speaker: well, we'll always

[3:26:32] take our direction from the

[3:26:35] board. But I think to your

[3:26:38] point, you know, if we take it

[3:26:42] subsequently we can go to tap

[3:26:43] bfr, do the negotiations and

[3:26:48] then go back to report to the

[3:26:49] board on closed sessions where

[3:26:53] we are. And then we can take

[3:26:54] direction from the board whether

[3:26:56] to move forward or to move on to

[3:26:57] the next proposer.

[3:26:58] >>vincente sarmiento: well, I

[3:27:07] don't know if -- . I want

[3:27:09] whatever is some of the most

[3:27:11] beneficial proposals here to

[3:27:13] come back to us with some

[3:27:14] adjustments I think that you

[3:27:15] heard.

[3:27:16] >>speaker: and what I'm trying

[3:27:21] to address is a variety of

[3:27:24] you -- you know, looking at cnc

[3:27:25] waterford, they didn't take an

[3:27:27] exception to the demolition cost

[3:27:30] but they kind of included it in

[3:27:31] their site work. In any case,

[3:27:33] both will have to do their due

[3:27:34] diligence and get a better hand

[3:27:37] on what that cause you will be.

[3:27:38] But as we move through those

[3:27:39] good mornings and the issues are

[3:27:40] clarified more, we'll have more

[3:27:41] information to report back to

[3:27:50] the board on the status and that

[3:27:51] would be our intent anyway. I

[3:27:54] would see that working kind of

[3:27:55] subsequently as we would meet

[3:27:57] with the primary proposer to try

[3:27:59] to clarify some of those, get

[3:27:59] some better information and then

[3:28:01] report back to the board on the

[3:28:02] status. Ultimately any option

[3:28:04] lease will have to be approved

[3:28:05] by the board so we want to make

[3:28:07] sure that when we bring it, that

[3:28:08] that is appropriate.

[3:28:09] >>vincente sarmiento: and that's

[3:28:10] the direction that we're asked

[3:28:12] to give today.

[3:28:14] >>chair, doug chaffee: back to

[3:28:14] vice-chair.

[3:28:14] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[3:28:22] you, MR. CHAIRMAN. So this is

[3:28:24] tough bruise we have one, two

[3:28:29] very good projects that -- good

[3:28:30] proposals, rather, that also

[3:28:31] have, you know, a negligible

[3:28:35] difference in points, right.

[3:28:37] Secondly, the -- there's some

[3:28:39] uncertainty about what was

[3:28:42] included in the financial

[3:28:46] projections. The one project is

[3:28:50] proposing stabilize rent at

[3:28:51] $573,496 annually.

[3:28:53] . The other bidder is

[3:28:57] proportion $257,096 annually.

[3:29:02] . I'm sorry, 316,400 annually.

[3:29:05] , which is a delta of 257. So

[3:29:07] it looks on paper as proposed

[3:29:11] that I had we're going to have

[3:29:12] $257,000 annually.

[3:29:15] more rent that we would recover

[3:29:16] based on the staff report and on

[3:29:23] the information that I have.

[3:29:26] But they're -- you know, I guess

[3:29:27] I'm not convinced that the

[3:29:28] financial projections for the

[3:29:31] one project are based on rent

[3:29:33] and not on household, based on

[3:29:35] our discussion here today. And

[3:29:36] so that's something I'd want to

[3:29:39] get confirmed. I'd want to know

[3:29:42] that the pro formas are based on

[3:29:44] rent because that is what is

[3:29:45] required under the surplus land

[3:29:48] act exemption. So what I would

[3:29:51] propose is that instead of doing

[3:29:52] this, go negotiate with one and

[3:29:54] then see what happens with that

[3:29:55] one and then go to the other

[3:29:57] one, I would like us to

[3:29:59] negotiate simultaneously with

[3:30:02] each of these proposers and get

[3:30:04] the best deal. Because at the

[3:30:07] end of the day, I think all of

[3:30:09] us want the best deal. We want

[3:30:11] the best deal that generates the

[3:30:12] most revenue for the county,

[3:30:15] both upfront and long term. We

[3:30:17] want the best deal that

[3:30:19] generates the -- a development

[3:30:22] that meets the needs -- that the

[3:30:24] supervisor representing district

[3:30:30] 2 has suggested in terps of a

[3:30:31] larger unit, two bedrooms, three

[3:30:35] bedrooms. Address parking, more

[3:30:38] affordability. So I guess I

[3:30:39] would ask supervisor sarmiento

[3:30:41] if you would be willing to

[3:30:43] direct staff to go forward in

[3:30:45] negotiating to get with both

[3:30:46] bidders to come back with what's

[3:30:50] the best deal based on some key

[3:30:53] conditions. One, that we

[3:30:57] confirm the rent issue as part

[3:31:00] the financial projections. Two,

[3:31:04] that is the issues receipted to

[3:31:04] more affordability are

[3:31:08] addressed. Three, that they

[3:31:10] have two and three bedrooms, not

[3:31:13] just singles and one bedrooms,

[3:31:15] four, that the demolition is

[3:31:16] paid by the bidder, regardless

[3:31:19] of who the bidder is, that the

[3:31:22] demolition costs are paid by the

[3:31:27] bidder. Five, that we get an

[3:31:29] upfront payment to be able to

[3:31:31] move our healthcare agency as

[3:31:34] opposed to having to get trickle

[3:31:36] in over time kind of reimburse

[3:31:40] the county for that. And 6,

[3:31:43] that there is a condition that

[3:31:45] this is a project labor

[3:31:47] agreement request all of the

[3:31:48] trades, not just a few of them,

[3:31:49] that it is with the building

[3:31:50] trades and carpenters and

[3:31:53] laborers. And then, seven, that

[3:31:54] there is a childcare facility as

[3:31:57] part of this, because I agree,

[3:31:59] and I liked that component, the

[3:32:00] head start. You know, I'm a

[3:32:02] head start graduate myself. I

[3:32:04] do value the importance of those

[3:32:06] kinds of programs. So, you

[3:32:08] know, those are -- that's what I

[3:32:10] would ask, supervisor sarmiento,

[3:32:11] if you would be willing to agree

[3:32:13] to so that they could negotiate

[3:32:14] with both and get us the best

[3:32:16] deal and then bring it back in

[3:32:18] 30 days, and then we go with the

[3:32:20] best deal since, I think, all of

[3:32:22] us like both projects.

[3:32:24] >>vincente sarmiento: I do

[3:32:24] answer?

[3:32:25] >>speaker:th going to take a

[3:32:27] lot longer than 30 days.

[3:32:27] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: how

[3:32:30] many days do you need,

[3:32:31] MR. Miller?

[3:32:32] >>speaker: I actually can't

[3:32:32] answer that right now.

[3:32:33] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I

[3:32:35] could negotiate this deal in 30

[3:32:37] days. So come on, how many days

[3:32:39] do you need?

[3:32:40] >>speaker: I would say six

[3:32:41] months.

[3:32:43] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: six

[3:32:47] months? Why?

[3:32:48] >>speaker: you're asking me,

[3:32:49] you're talking about doing --

[3:32:50] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: then

[3:32:51] we're not ready to vote on it

[3:32:53] today if you need six months.

[3:32:54] >>speaker: you're talking real

[3:32:55] estate good mornings with two

[3:32:57] parties which are going to

[3:32:58] require revisions of their

[3:32:59] projects and then full pro

[3:33:02] formas, right. What we have

[3:33:05] right now are not full pro

[3:33:06] formas with all of the back-up

[3:33:07] information. So we need to give

[3:33:10] them time to change their

[3:33:12] projects and then to negotiate

[3:33:13] the terms.

[3:33:13] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: well,

[3:33:15] then you're telling me that we

[3:33:16] can't even vote on this today if

[3:33:18] it's going to take six months to

[3:33:19] find out what the pro formas

[3:33:21] are, we shouldn't be voting on

[3:33:23] it today at all. That doesn't

[3:33:24] make sense to me.

[3:33:26] >>speaker: all we're asking for

[3:33:27] today is the authority to

[3:33:29] negotiate. And if we're going

[3:33:30] to negotiate with two parties,

[3:33:33] it's going to extend that

[3:33:38] timeframe. If we're asking for,

[3:33:39] say, best or final offers, then

[3:33:41] that's probably a 30 or 60-day

[3:33:44] process. I guess it depends on

[3:33:46] how in depth we're getting into

[3:33:49] negotiating the project. So if

[3:33:52] I were to come back with final,

[3:33:53] full projects and documents for

[3:33:55] the board, that would be six

[3:33:57] months. If we're talking about

[3:33:59] in essence the best and final

[3:34:01] off, then I would say 30 to 60

[3:34:01] days.

[3:34:02] >>vincente sarmiento: MR. Chair,

[3:34:03] I can offer something up since I

[3:34:05] made the motion to move forward

[3:34:08] with staff's recommendation?

[3:34:08] MR. Miller, do you think it

[3:34:11] might be more reasonable, looks

[3:34:13] like, you know, we'd like to

[3:34:15] hear from both mistake be can'ts

[3:34:17] a little bit more on some of the

[3:34:19] questions. And, look, I could

[3:34:21] come up with a laundry list of

[3:34:22] specific questions. I didn't

[3:34:24] want to do that. You know, from

[3:34:26] up here, we can meet off-line.

[3:34:27] I think we can meet with all

[3:34:29] board offices to get some more

[3:34:31] specifics of what they'd like to

[3:34:33] understand but I think you need

[3:34:35] to have some clear direction on

[3:34:38] what your team needs to do next.

[3:34:39] So I think what we're saying,

[3:34:41] we're saying the same thing.

[3:34:43] You MAY want to be, you know,

[3:34:46] speaking with cnc as you speak

[3:34:49] with tap. I just think the

[3:34:49] sequencing matters. Again, who

[3:34:52] are you going to call first?

[3:34:53] Who is the team going to spend

[3:34:54] time with? Some team MAY say,

[3:34:56] look, they're spending more time

[3:34:58] with the cnc team and not enough

[3:35:00] time with us. That's tricky to

[3:35:02] say go negotiate with both. I

[3:35:04] would just say, if we can to the

[3:35:08] CHAIRMAN's point, work with the

[3:35:12] recommended staff, what staff

[3:35:14] recommended, a choice first as

[3:35:17] you also work with cnc sort of

[3:35:18] in sequence. That to me is

[3:35:20] something that makes the most

[3:35:22] sense. I think it will give you

[3:35:24] some ability to go ahead and,

[3:35:25] you know, make sure your time is

[3:35:27] used well. I would say come

[3:35:30] back to us in 60 days with an

[3:35:31] update to see what you have.

[3:35:33] Maybe you're further along in 60

[3:35:33] days and you know that one of

[3:35:36] the teams just can't do what

[3:35:37] we're asking them to do. And

[3:35:39] that's what I would just say oh

[3:35:43] basically what we're asking for

[3:35:44] is a continuance I guess, just

[3:35:47] go back and incorporate this and

[3:35:49] give us an update on sort of

[3:35:50] prenegotiations or discussions.

[3:35:51] >>speaker: I think it would be

[3:35:59] better if the board not only has

[3:36:01] to pick a proposer but allows us

[3:36:03] to go and negotiate, whether

[3:36:03] it's one proposer or another,

[3:36:05] and based on that we can report

[3:36:06] back to the board in closed

[3:36:06] sessions.

[3:36:09] >>speaker: I would say in -- is

[3:36:11] 60 days sufficient to have those

[3:36:11] discussions, maybe not

[3:36:13] completed, but at least to

[3:36:15] update us to see where we are?

[3:36:16] >>speaker: yes. If we're

[3:36:17] getting in essence best and

[3:36:19] final offers and reporting back

[3:36:20] to the board, I think we can do

[3:36:23] that in 60 days. We're

[3:36:24] obviously not going to have kind

[3:36:25] of the full, you know, package

[3:36:28] of documents and all of that,

[3:36:28] but --

[3:36:29] >>vincente sarmiento:

[3:36:30] understood. But you'll at least

[3:36:32] have a better understanding from

[3:36:33] both teams whether or not

[3:36:34] demolition will be a challenge,

[3:36:36] whether it's maybe increasing

[3:36:38] the density so there's a better

[3:36:41] unit mix and more profound ami,

[3:36:42] whether that's even possible.

[3:36:44] Maybe they say, look, doesn't

[3:36:45] work for us. You know, we're

[3:36:47] going to go ahead and gracefully

[3:36:49] bow out. But at least we'll

[3:36:50] have a better understanding in

[3:36:53] 60 days once you have these

[3:36:54] conversations with both teams

[3:36:55] than what we have to now,

[3:36:56] because right now you're being

[3:36:58] asked very specific questions

[3:37:00] that I think, again, to your

[3:37:02] point, yeah, they could take as

[3:37:03] long as six months if you want

[3:37:06] to come back and answer these

[3:37:06] questions, that many of them

[3:37:08] should have been answered with

[3:37:10] your team, you know, in

[3:37:12] discussions. But in any event,

[3:37:14] here we are. MR. Chair, that

[3:37:17] would be my suggestion, that we

[3:37:18] give MR. Miller some opportunity

[3:37:22] to go ahead and discuss with

[3:37:23] both teams whether or not either

[3:37:26] one of them could address and

[3:37:29] incorporate some of the

[3:37:30] alternative --

[3:37:31] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I'll

[3:37:31] second that.

[3:37:33] >>janet nguyen: are we going to

[3:37:33] negotiate both? It was one

[3:37:35] first and then now two.

[3:37:36] >>vincente sarmiento: well,

[3:37:37] they're going to have to call

[3:37:39] one team. You can't call them

[3:37:40] both concurrently.

[3:37:41] >>janet nguyen: it's so not.

[3:37:42] >>vincente sarmiento: well,

[3:37:43] you're going to be talking to

[3:37:45] both. You have to.

[3:37:45] >>janet nguyen: so the motion is

[3:37:46] to negotiate with both at the

[3:37:49] same time or are we doing one

[3:37:53] and then the other? Because I'm

[3:37:54] confused.

[3:37:55] >>speaker: what I would

[3:37:56] recommend judging from what the

[3:38:00] school board saying is to give

[3:38:04] authority to ceo's office to

[3:38:05] engage with both proposers and

[3:38:08] get best and final offers based

[3:38:10] on your input today and then

[3:38:12] report back to the board in

[3:38:14] closed sessions within 60 days.

[3:38:15] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[3:38:17] that's the motion I would

[3:38:17] support.

[3:38:19] >>vincente sarmiento: if that

[3:38:21] make the most sense, I think,

[3:38:23] MR. Miller, for you to be able

[3:38:24] to sort of move and incorporate

[3:38:27] what's been said up here.

[3:38:29] Although, a lot of it has sort

[3:38:32] of despair rate, but I would

[3:38:32] support that.

[3:38:33] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: but

[3:38:35] to me the critical component is

[3:38:37] the pla and the ami

[3:38:39] confirmation, that the ami rent

[3:38:42] is accurately included in the

[3:38:43] financial projection.

[3:38:44] >>don wagner: if we're just

[3:38:46] going to blurt out -- for me,

[3:38:48] what's most important --

[3:38:49] >>chair, doug chaffee: if I MAY,

[3:38:51] if I MAY, I think we're handing

[3:38:53] staff an impossible task.

[3:38:56] There's only so much staff, and

[3:38:57] I still feel the staff

[3:38:58] recommendation is where we

[3:39:01] should go, and then staff can

[3:39:02] take our comments and work with

[3:39:04] the first choice, see if that

[3:39:07] can be incorporated to a certain

[3:39:10] extent. And I think both teams

[3:39:12] must be shaking their head, why

[3:39:14] are we doing business with the

[3:39:15] county when you hearle all of

[3:39:18] this stuff going on. So on the

[3:39:20] rents, I think to give meaning

[3:39:22] to, it we don't talk in terms of

[3:39:23] percentages. We talk about

[3:39:25] calculating the rents, what

[3:39:33] would they actually be based on

[3:39:36] the percentage of ami, and

[3:39:37] compare it with market rents,

[3:39:45] are we really getting the --

[3:39:46] aaffordability out of this?

[3:39:48] Looking at one of the project

[3:39:53] mixes here, it says 50% ami, 18

[3:39:55] units, one bedroom, 9 two

[3:39:57] bedrooms, 9 three bedrooms,

[3:39:59] well, let's see what that

[3:40:01] actually translates into. We're

[3:40:04] between skirt 50. And then

[3:40:08] another category, 50 and 80 ami

[3:40:09] and then a number of units under

[3:40:12] each spot. What does that mean?

[3:40:15] Where are the between 50 and 80?

[3:40:16] Are they all at 79? And then

[3:40:18] we've got a urge about of them

[3:40:20] at 100% of ami, what does that

[3:40:21] translate into? And half of

[3:40:24] them are not affordable at all.

[3:40:27] And I have to do that to make it

[3:40:28] pencil. Have to pay for their

[3:40:29] financing and have to pay for

[3:40:31] their operationle auto expenses

[3:40:32] and all of those things and

[3:40:34] repairs, the whole bit. So I'd

[3:40:35] like to see what does that

[3:40:38] actually mean in terms of actual

[3:40:39] dollars per unit when we're

[3:40:42] talking about these different

[3:40:43] percentages and compare them

[3:40:50] with market rates.. Are we

[3:40:53] really getting into

[3:40:54] affordability? Because we're

[3:40:57] talking -- using the term

[3:40:57] "affordable" without even

[3:40:59] knowing what it translates to.

[3:41:01] I'd like to see what that

[3:41:02] actually means. And I don't

[3:41:04] want to see negotiating back and

[3:41:06] forth between two parties.

[3:41:09] That's hard. It's like

[3:41:11] you're -- what did the other guy

[3:41:13] say, well, I'll do that, too.

[3:41:19] Kind of gets nutsy. So I think

[3:41:21] if -- we should follow staff's

[3:41:22] recommendation. We start with

[3:41:23] one, keep us informed. Let's

[3:41:25] see how far we can incorporate

[3:41:30] some of the board concerns, and

[3:41:31] if there's a problem, we might

[3:41:33] ask to you switch to the other

[3:41:36] developer. So I don't want

[3:41:37] to -- a dual discussion going

[3:41:38] on. I think that's impossible

[3:41:41] for staff to do. It's too much.

[3:41:43] So that's where I am. And I see

[3:41:45] supervisor wagner, where are new

[3:41:45] new.

[3:41:46] >>don wagner: all right. So

[3:41:48] real quick, I want to make sure

[3:41:52] you understand, or at least you

[3:41:54] know what I think you're now

[3:41:55] being instructed to do, and that

[3:41:59] is to go to tap and negotiate

[3:42:02] over the ami to get it closer to

[3:42:04] what cnc's got, to negotiate the

[3:42:08] number of units, get more three

[3:42:10] bedrooms like cnc's got, to go

[3:42:13] talk about front loading it like

[3:42:17] cnc is offering, to clarify the

[3:42:21] demo, like cnc is offering, and

[3:42:23] to re-evaluate that retail

[3:42:26] because, as the two supervisors

[3:42:26] who used to represent the

[3:42:28] district have said -- and

[3:42:30] supervisor who currently

[3:42:33] represents it has said, renail

[3:42:34] that area is challenging. So go

[3:42:36] see if that really works or if

[3:42:38] you have to back away from

[3:42:40] retail like cnc. That's what

[3:42:44] I'm hearing you being asked to

[3:42:47] do. And I'm just wondering,

[3:42:48] guys, why don't we just cut to

[3:42:52] the chase and start with cnc?

[3:42:55] I'm a no on this item -- I don't

[3:42:57] even understand it, and it's

[3:42:58] like, let's go get tap to give

[3:43:03] us a project proposal like cnc.

[3:43:04] That's silly. Cut to the chase.

[3:43:08] I'm a no on this one.

[3:43:10] >>chair, doug chaffee: okay.

[3:43:12] One no vote. Supervisor nguyen,

[3:43:13] do you have any comments you'd

[3:43:15] like to make?

[3:43:18] >>janet nguyen: yeah. I'm very

[3:43:21] confused on the two bids. So

[3:43:22] I'm not going to be supportive

[3:43:25] of that either at this point.

[3:43:27] The other part is, you know, if

[3:43:30] we're talking about what kind of

[3:43:32] points I have to add to what

[3:43:34] supervisor wagner says, we also

[3:43:35] talked about -- there's two of

[3:43:36] us who talked about the head

[3:43:39] start program, which cnc has.

[3:43:42] So we're really telling tap to

[3:43:45] just make their proposal similar

[3:43:48] to cnc. So I'm not sure what

[3:43:49] our benefits are. And, you

[3:43:52] know, the revenue that is

[3:43:54] projected right now or offered

[3:43:58] to us, one base on more because

[3:44:00] of the commercial. What happens

[3:44:01] if the commercial doesn't get

[3:44:03] rented snout do we still get

[3:44:05] that guaranteed revenue or does

[3:44:07] that decrease because there's

[3:44:10] nobody -- there's no occupant

[3:44:11] there? So that's where, you

[3:44:14] know, I think we need to -- for

[3:44:15] me, again, go back to the

[3:44:16] revenue is important. The

[3:44:17] number of years is important.

[3:44:20] And a lot of these deal points

[3:44:21] that we've talked about is

[3:44:23] important. And so I just don't

[3:44:25] think going in, you know, the

[3:44:27] current motion I think is very

[3:44:30] confusing for me, and I don't

[3:44:35] think staff -- I don't think we

[3:44:36] all understand exactly what it

[3:44:38] is, so I'm not there to support

[3:44:41] the current motion.

[3:44:42] >>chair, doug chaffee: I'm not

[3:44:46] sure what the current motion is.

[3:44:48] >>speaker: I believe at outset,

[3:44:50] supervisor sarmiento, and robin,

[3:44:53] you can correct me if I'm wrong,

[3:44:55] moved to staff recommendation.

[3:44:56] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: that

[3:44:58] wasn't the motion.

[3:44:59] >>clerk, robin stieler: that

[3:45:00] motion had no second.

[3:45:01] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: the

[3:45:02] motion was made by you. You

[3:45:05] stated the motion, and then

[3:45:06] supervisor sarmiento -- I said

[3:45:08] could I established if he would

[3:45:11] agree to that, and that's

[3:45:12] what -- his motion. I'll

[3:45:14] withdraw my second if we don't

[3:45:15] have the vote.

[3:45:17] >>chair, doug chaffee: why don't

[3:45:18] we start fresh. Supervisor

[3:45:19] sarmiento, if you'd like to make

[3:45:21] a motion, state it and we'll see

[3:45:22] if you can get a second.

[3:45:24] >>vincente sarmiento: sure.

[3:45:25] Sounds like there's two votes

[3:45:28] for cnc for negotiations to go

[3:45:29] forward about them. I am going

[3:45:33] to change my motion and direct

[3:45:37] staff to move forward with cnc

[3:45:37] waterford. Have discussions

[3:45:39] with them. One of the things

[3:45:42] I'm very disappointed about with

[3:45:47] cnc waterford is that when you

[3:45:52] presented ranges of ami, you

[3:45:54] said 30 to 50%. When I asked

[3:45:56] where we are at chair's point,

[3:45:58] you said they're at 50. So

[3:46:00] don't bring us ranges. Bring us

[3:46:01] a number. And then you said it

[3:46:03] was at 50. I thought, why did

[3:46:06] you start at 30? That was a

[3:46:07] disingenuous way to start, and

[3:46:09] that's what really disappointed

[3:46:13] me. So when you say 50 to 80, I

[3:46:15] said, which is it, where does it

[3:46:16] fall? You said 80. Well, then

[3:46:21] why did you give me a 50 to 80%

[3:46:23] range? So that is not, you

[3:46:25] know, a genuine way to start

[3:46:27] discussions. I hope that that

[3:46:29] changes. You're gonna be given

[3:46:32] an opportunity do that. Just

[3:46:32] simply -- this is a mess. This

[3:46:34] is a very unfortunate discussion

[3:46:36] that we're having up here. But

[3:46:39] I want to be able to get these

[3:46:42] discussions started, moving

[3:46:43] forward, and if you can't meet

[3:46:48] some of the challenges that our

[3:46:49] team, who are going to be

[3:46:50] negotiating on behalf of the

[3:46:52] county -- if you can't address

[3:46:54] them, please recite them early

[3:46:55] so we can go ahead and move on

[3:46:57] to the second runner-up. So

[3:46:58] that will be my motion, to

[3:47:01] change this and just to move

[3:47:04] forward with the cnc waterford

[3:47:04] team.

[3:47:06] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I'll

[3:47:07] second that.

[3:47:09] >>chair, doug chaffee: I'm going

[3:47:10] to oppose that motion because I

[3:47:13] think it is an affront to the

[3:47:15] rfp process that we went through

[3:47:17] and it went through the scoring

[3:47:20] and I think -- I like the

[3:47:21] commercial. I think that will

[3:47:24] be very viable where it's at.

[3:47:26] But that's a high risk. If

[3:47:28] anything, I think it mitigates

[3:47:32] other risks. And I think the

[3:47:35] rfp process -- you gave it your

[3:47:37] shot and you based it than. And

[3:47:45] now we keep changing the rules.

[3:47:46] I don't like that. If we want

[3:47:50] to start over with a new rfp and

[3:47:52] the criteria we can do that. I

[3:47:53] won't be here by the time I

[3:47:55] think that revolves around. But

[3:47:58] I like staff recommendation. I

[3:47:59] don't like a dual negotiation

[3:48:01] going on. It's very hard on

[3:48:03] staff to do that. And I think

[3:48:07] it's confusing as to that. And

[3:48:10] it occur -- it encourages

[3:48:11] lobbying to continue. I don't

[3:48:12] like that either. So I'm going

[3:48:21] to oppose that motion.

[3:48:21] Vice-chair.

[3:48:22] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[3:48:25] you. So, look, I have a very

[3:48:27] different view on the dual

[3:48:28] negotiation. I think we get the

[3:48:33] best deal for the county by

[3:48:35] negotiating -- negotiating the

[3:48:37] best deal. And I don't know why

[3:48:40] when we have two proposals that

[3:48:42] are pretty close, why we

[3:48:44] wouldn't do that. Look, there's

[3:48:51] is things that I like about the

[3:48:53] true america proposal. I think

[3:48:54] the commercial will be fine

[3:48:55] because you have residential

[3:48:56] that's all right there and

[3:48:58] they're going to use those

[3:49:05] retail stores. I don't feel

[3:49:07] comfortable today with the

[3:49:09] projections because there's so

[3:49:11] many things that have been said

[3:49:14] here today that are different

[3:49:17] than what maybe I thought a week

[3:49:32] ago. And that relates to the

[3:49:33] rent projections and the

[3:49:35] demolition projections. I like

[3:49:37] the cnc project for different

[3:49:40] reasons. I like the two, three

[3:49:42] bedrooms. I don't like that we

[3:49:43] don't make as much money. I

[3:49:44] don't like that about that

[3:49:46] project. I don't think that

[3:49:47] that's good for the county. So

[3:49:48] I don't -- you know, if you're a

[3:49:50] land owner and you've got two

[3:49:53] bidders to buy your property,

[3:49:53] you're going to negotiate the

[3:49:54] best deal that you can from the

[3:49:56] two bidders. Why would you

[3:49:59] negotiate with one, concluding

[3:50:00] the other when you can play them

[3:50:01] off of each other and get a

[3:50:08] better deal for the county? I

[3:50:09] don't know why you would change

[3:50:12] your mowing. It doesn't make

[3:50:22] sense to me. So I'm not

[3:50:23] prepared to negotiate with only

[3:50:26] one because we have some basic

[3:50:27] foundational affects that we

[3:50:28] don't have information about.

[3:50:29] And, you know, maybe there's a

[3:50:32] way that we can continue the

[3:50:35] item to clarify some of these

[3:50:37] foundational facts. I don't

[3:50:37] know.

[3:50:38] >>chair, doug chaffee: would you

[3:50:39] like to make a motion to

[3:50:42] continue this to the -- next

[3:50:46] month or something like that?

[3:50:47] To kind of cool this thing off a

[3:50:50] little bit. I'm not sure, what

[3:50:50] do we have as a motion.

[3:50:52] >>vincente sarmiento: a motion

[3:50:55] to move forward with cnc water.

[3:50:56] >>chair, doug chaffee: was there

[3:50:58] a second?

[3:51:01] >>vincente sarmiento: yes,

[3:51:02] supervisor nguyen.

[3:51:03] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[3:51:04] supervisor sarmiento, I have a

[3:51:05] question, would you be willing

[3:51:06] to make a condition of the

[3:51:12] motion that you include the pla?

[3:51:13] >>vincente sarmiento: well, I

[3:51:17] think based upon what MR. Miller

[3:51:18] heard, that was something that

[3:51:21] was -- something I started with.

[3:51:26] So the pla, having, you know,

[3:51:27] discussions with the college,

[3:51:29] with the neighborhood, all of

[3:51:31] those things are implicit

[3:51:32] reducing the ami. So I think

[3:51:33] all of those are incorporated in

[3:51:35] my direction to him as he speaks

[3:51:37] with one or both teams.

[3:51:38] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: well,

[3:51:39] I think we just have to clarify

[3:51:40] that because today they didn't

[3:51:48] have that when they came here.

[3:51:50] The pla is different than the

[3:51:51] prevailing wage.

[3:51:52] >>vincente sarmiento: sure.

[3:51:53] yes.

[3:52:01] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[3:52:02] >>chair, doug chaffee: the

[3:52:04] motion is to flip the two; is

[3:52:05] that what it is.

[3:52:08] >>vincente sarmiento: correct,

[3:52:08] MR. CHAIRMAN.

[3:52:10] >>chair, doug chaffee: and are

[3:52:11] we through discussing or do we

[3:52:15] want to spend another hour or so

[3:52:20] so? I ask the clerk to call the

[3:52:21] roll..

[3:52:22] >>clerk, robin stieler:

[3:52:23] supervisor sarmiento.

[3:52:25] >>vincente sarmiento: yes.

[3:52:26] >>clerk, robin stieler:

[3:52:27] supervisor nguyen.

[3:52:28] >>janet nguyen: yes.

[3:52:29] >>clerk, robin stieler:

[3:52:31] supervisor wagner vice-chair

[3:52:32] foley.

[3:52:32] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: you

[3:52:34] can clarify what your

[3:52:36] expectation is, supervisor

[3:52:39] sarmiento? What's the timeline?

[3:52:40] What's your expectation?

[3:52:41] >>vincente sarmiento: we're

[3:52:42] simply giving direction to

[3:52:45] MR. Miller and his team to

[3:52:46] negotiate this development

[3:52:48] project with cnc waterford based

[3:52:51] upon what he heard as direction

[3:52:53] and for him to come back to us,

[3:52:56] as he would have under staff

[3:52:58] recommendation to speak with

[3:52:59] tap. So it's simply to start

[3:53:02] discussions with cnc waterford.

[3:53:03] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: so it

[3:53:04] would incorporate the things

[3:53:06] that we all said we'd like to

[3:53:06] see.

[3:53:07] >>vincente sarmiento: yes.

[3:53:08] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I'll

[3:53:09] support the motion.

[3:53:11] >>clerk, robin stieler: and

[3:53:13] chair chaffee.

[3:53:14] >>chair, doug chaffee: no.

[3:53:16] Motion carries 4 to 1. At this

[3:53:18] hour, do we want to finish our

[3:53:19] business agenda and come back or

[3:53:20] do you want to go to closed

[3:53:24] sessions now? Closed sessions.

[3:53:25] All right, MADAM Clerk, would

[3:53:28] you read the closed-session

[3:53:46] items?

[3:53:46] >>clerk, robin stieler: cs-1.

[3:53:47] Under county executive office,

[3:53:48] conference with labor negotiator

[3:53:48] -pursuant to government code

[3:53:49] section 54957.6

[3:53:50] agency negotiator: jamie newton,

[3:53:51] chief human resources officer

[3:53:52] employee organizations:

[3:53:53] association of orange county

[3:53:53] deputy sheriffs (Aocds), orange

[3:53:54] county employees association

[3:53:55] (Ocea), orange county attorneys

[3:53:56] association (Ocaa) International

[3:53:56] union of operating engineers

[3:53:57] (Iuoe), association of county

[3:53:58] law enforcement managers

[3:53:59] (Aclem), american federation of

[3:54:00] state, county and municipal

[3:54:01] employees (Afscme) Orange county

[3:54:01] managers association (Ocma),

[3:54:02] teamsters, and workers

[3:54:03] represented by united domestic

[3:54:04] workers of america (Udwa) And

[3:54:05] other non-

[3:54:06] represented employees

[3:54:06] re: terms and conditions of

[3:54:08] employment.

[3:54:09] Cs-2. Public employee

[3:54:11] appointment-pursuant to

[3:54:12] government code section

[3:54:16] 54957(B):

[3:54:18] title: county executive officer

[3:54:19] scs3. County counsel-

[3:54:20] conference with legal counsel-

[3:54:22] existing litigation-pursuant

[3:54:23] to government code section

[3:54:25] 54956.9(D)(1):

[3:54:27] name of case: mohammed

[3:54:30] abuershaid v. County of orange,

[3:54:31] orange county superior court

[3:54:31] case no.

[3:54:32] 30-2022-01241335-cu-oe-cjc

[3:54:33] scs4. County counsel-

[3:54:34] conference with legal counsel-

[3:54:35] existing litigation-pursuant

[3:54:35] to government code section

[3:54:37] 54956.9(D)(1):

[3:54:38] name of case: jose adan

[3:54:39] hernandez cisneros, et al. V.

[3:54:39] County of orange, et al., orange

[3:54:40] county

[3:54:41] superior court case no.

[3:54:46] 30-2024-01416672-cu-pa-cjc

[3:54:48] we have no requests to speak on

[3:54:49] the closed-session items.

[3:54:49] >>chair, doug chaffee: we are

[3:55:01] adjourned to closed sessions.

[3:57:27] Supervisors has recessed to

[3:57:30] closed

[3:57:34] closed sessions but will begin

[3:57:55] momentarily.. Test test.

[3:58:02] Captioning standing by...

[3:58:06] The county of orange board of

[3:58:09] supervisors meeting will begin

[3:58:50] shortly.

[3:58:57] [No audio]

[3:59:19] >>chair, doug chaffee: we're

[3:59:20] back from our closed sessions,

[3:59:21] and so we're coming back to

[3:59:24] finish our meeting. Counsel, do

[3:59:25] you have anything to anything to

[3:59:26] report from our close session.

[3:59:27] >>leon page: thank you,

[3:59:29] MR. CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to

[3:59:31] government code section

[3:59:33] government code section 54956.9

[3:59:35] b and c and d, the board met in

[3:59:36] closed sessions to discuss the

[3:59:38] items referenced on today's

[3:59:41] agenda, scs1, 2, 3, and 4. With

[3:59:45] respect to cs3 in the matter of

[3:59:47] mohammed, the board unanimously

[3:59:50] rejected the plaintiff's demand

[3:59:52] and confirmed the county's prior

[3:59:53] settlement offer. In this case

[3:59:57] the plaintiff claims that he was

[3:59:59] defamed by the former and now

[4:00:01] deceased senior assistant

[4:00:04] district attorney kerry lagal

[4:00:08] bo. With respect to scs4, the

[4:00:11] board unanimously approved the

[4:00:14] plaintiff's last -- when the

[4:00:15] settlement is finalized, copies

[4:00:16] of the agreement will be made

[4:00:17] available through the office of

[4:00:18] ceo risk management. The board

[4:00:20] took no other reportable action

[4:00:23] in closed sessions today. Thank

[4:00:23] you.

[4:00:24] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[4:00:27] you, counsel. MADAM Clerk, next

[4:00:28] item was 37?

[4:00:32] >>clerk, robin stieler:

[4:00:33] >>clerk, robin stieler: 37.

[4:00:34] Under county executive office,

[4:00:35] approve recommended positions on

[4:00:35] introduced or amended

[4:00:36] legislation and/or consider

[4:00:36] other legislative subject

[4:00:39] matters.

[4:00:40] We have no requests to speak on

[4:00:42] agenda item 37.

[4:00:43] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[4:00:45] all-district item. The item is

[4:00:47] approved with no objection. We

[4:00:47] move on to item

[4:00:48] >>clerk, robin stieler: 38.

[4:00:48] 38.

[4:00:49] Under county executive office,

[4:00:50] rescind existing record

[4:00:50] retention schedules and approve

[4:00:51] new or revised record retention

[4:00:52] schedules for

[4:00:53] auditor-controller, county

[4:00:55] counsel, john wayne airport, oc

[4:00:57] community resources,

[4:00:58] sheriff-coroner and county

[4:00:59] executive office as outlined in

[4:01:00] the recommended actions; approve

[4:01:02] revised county records

[4:01:04] management policy and authorize

[4:01:05] county executive office to make

[4:01:06] changes under certain

[4:01:07] conditions.

[4:01:13] This item does rare 4/5ths vote

[4:01:14] of the members present. We have

[4:01:17] no requests to speak on agenda

[4:01:17] item 38.

[4:01:18] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[4:01:19] all-district item. Moved and

[4:01:20] seconded. Any objection?

[4:01:24] Seeing none, item is approved.

[4:01:24] Item 39

[4:01:25] >>clerk, robin stieler: 39.

[4:01:25] .

[4:01:25] Under county executive office,

[4:01:26] acting as the orange county

[4:01:27] flood control district-approve

[4:01:29] river view golf course lease

[4:01:29] with city of santa ana, 25-year

[4:01:32] term; renewable for five

[4:01:33] additional 5-year terms;

[4:01:34] authorize chief real estate

[4:01:35] officer or designee to make

[4:01:36] changes under certain conditions

[4:01:37] and execute lease and related

[4:01:38] documents; adopt resolution

[4:01:39] making required findings under

[4:01:40] orange county flood control act

[4:01:42] and surplus land act; and make

[4:01:43] california environmental quality

[4:01:44] act (Ceqa) Exemption findings

[4:01:45] under ceqa guidelines section

[4:01:48] 15301.

[4:01:50] And we have no requests to speak

[4:01:52] on agenda item 39.

[4:01:52] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's a

[4:01:55] district 2 item. Moved and

[4:01:56] seconded. Any objection?

[4:01:59] Seeing none, item is approved.

[4:02:00] Item 40, please.

[4:02:01] >>clerk, robin stieler: 40.

[4:02:02] Under county executive office,

[4:02:03] approve 2026 county grants

[4:02:06] policy manual, effective 5/1/26,

[4:02:07] and authorize the county

[4:02:09] executive officer or designee to

[4:02:10] make changes under certain

[4:02:13] conditions.

[4:02:15] And we have one request to speak

[4:02:19] on agenda item 40, and that is

[4:02:20] jenora.

[4:02:21] >>chair, doug chaffee: please

[4:02:41] call the speaker. Donora.

[4:02:44] >>speaker: good afternoon to

[4:02:45] everyone, board of supervisors,

[4:02:48] bear with me. I am super

[4:02:49] stressed, and I want you guys to

[4:02:52] hear me out. I will breaking

[4:02:54] news out in miami for the whole

[4:02:57] world to hear what went wrong in

[4:02:59] orange county dealing with

[4:03:02] federal government. I lost my

[4:03:05] trust on all you guys.

[4:03:06] >>don wagner: point of order.

[4:03:08] This is the grants policy

[4:03:09] manual.

[4:03:11] >>speaker: that agenda no. 40, I

[4:03:14] need to find out because --

[4:03:16] >>don wagner: this is the grants

[4:03:18] policy manual. Move the order

[4:03:19] of the day.

[4:03:21] >>speaker: I put in application

[4:03:24] in huntington beach and urge you

[4:03:25] guys to tell.

[4:03:26] >>chair, doug chaffee: ma'am,

[4:03:27] you're not addressing the

[4:03:29] agenda. If you'd like to come

[4:03:32] back -- if you'd like to come

[4:03:34] back with the general public

[4:03:35] comments.

[4:03:36] >>speaker: no, there's something

[4:03:38] about I need for you guys to

[4:03:39] explain it because english is my

[4:03:41] second language so I could

[4:03:43] respond. But I want you guys to

[4:03:45] bear the stress that I'm dealing

[4:03:46] with in dealing with government,

[4:03:48] forcing me to be homeless.

[4:03:49] That's what I want guys to hear

[4:03:53] me out, but I'm stressed out.

[4:03:55] But item 40, that's the agenda I

[4:03:57] want to speak. Somebody has to

[4:03:58] say this is what it is, and then

[4:04:01] I answer. Because you have to

[4:04:03] let me know and then I explain.

[4:04:05] I've been dealing with the board

[4:04:07] since 2019. So agenda item

[4:04:08] 40 --

[4:04:10] >>don wagner: move the item,

[4:04:10] MR. CHAIRMAN.

[4:04:11] >>chair, doug chaffee: ma'am,

[4:04:12] this concerns grants and

[4:04:14] applications, and your personal

[4:04:16] circumstances don't really fit

[4:04:17] fit in this.

[4:04:17] >>speaker: right here, it says

[4:04:20] the application and agenda a

[4:04:24] grant is money, right? Grant is

[4:04:24] money.

[4:04:25] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: this

[4:04:29] is our policy. It it's nothing

[4:04:30] to do with money going to you.

[4:04:31] >>chair, doug chaffee: ma'am, do

[4:04:33] you have any comments on any of

[4:04:34] the items?

[4:04:36] >>speaker: yes. On the item is

[4:04:39] government is taking care of my

[4:04:40] insurance and housing. I work

[4:04:42] 40 years --

[4:04:43] >>chair, doug chaffee: ma'am,

[4:04:44] you're off the agenda. I'm

[4:04:45] sorry. Please come back for

[4:04:46] general public comments for what

[4:04:48] you're saying.

[4:04:49] >>speaker: okay. Thank you. I

[4:04:50] just want to make sure that I

[4:04:52] will breaking news in miami so

[4:04:54] congress and washington should

[4:04:56] hear me out, why should I be in

[4:04:59] private house assistant.

[4:05:00] >>chair, doug chaffee: I heard a

[4:05:02] motion from --

[4:05:03] >>speaker: I understand. Thank

[4:05:03] you.

[4:05:04] >>chair, doug chaffee: is there

[4:05:08] a second? Approved. Let's go

[4:05:18] on to item 41, please.

[4:05:19] >>clerk, robin stieler: 41.

[4:05:19] Under county executive office,

[4:05:20] county executive office-

[4:05:21] approve grant

[4:05:21] applications/awards submitted

[4:05:22] by john wayne airport,

[4:05:23] sheriff-coroner, health care

[4:05:24] agency and approve ratified

[4:05:24] grant application/award

[4:05:25] submitted by

[4:05:26] sheriff-coroner in 4/14/26

[4:05:27] report and other actions as

[4:05:28] recommended; and adopt

[4:05:28] resolution authorizing

[4:05:29] sheriff-coroner or designee to

[4:05:30] execute, submit application and

[4:05:30] grant assurance to california

[4:05:31] office of emergency services for

[4:05:32] fy 2025 emergency management

[4:05:36] performance grant ($664,164).

[4:05:37] We have no requests to speak on

[4:05:40] agenda item 41.

[4:05:41] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[4:05:43] all-district item. Moved and

[4:05:45] seconded. Any objection? The

[4:05:50] item is approved. And let's

[4:05:59] see...

[4:06:00] What's our next item?

[4:06:03] >>clerk, robin stieler: 42.

[4:06:05] Under county executive office,

[4:06:06] approve contract amendments

[4:06:09] under orange county contract

[4:06:11] cost reduction program; approve

[4:06:13] amendment 3 to extend contract

[4:06:14] amr0121 with public consulting

[4:06:15] group llc for supplemental

[4:06:17] security income, state

[4:06:18] supplemental payments and social

[4:06:19] security disability insurance

[4:06:21] client advocacy services, 7/1/26

[4:06:22] -6/30/27 ($297,000; cumulative

[4:06:23] total $1,641,000); and authorize

[4:06:24] county procurement officer or

[4:06:24] deputized designee to execute

[4:06:27] amendments.

[4:06:30] We have no requests to speak on

[4:06:30] agenda item 42.

[4:06:31] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's wan

[4:06:32] all-district item.

[4:06:33] >>don wagner: move the item.

[4:06:34] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[4:06:34] second.

[4:06:35] >>chair, doug chaffee: any

[4:06:37] objection? Item is approved.

[4:06:38] On to 43.

[4:06:39] >>clerk, robin stieler: under

[4:06:41] county executive

[4:06:42] office, approve amendment 5 to

[4:06:43] extend contract with alight

[4:06:44] solutions llc for benefits

[4:06:45] administration services, 7/1/27

[4:06:47] -6/30/30 ($12,337,520;

[4:06:48] cumulative total $34,658,601);

[4:06:49] and authorize chief human

[4:06:49] resources officer or designee to

[4:06:52] execute amendment.

[4:06:53] We have no requests to speak on

[4:06:54] agenda item 43.

[4:06:55] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's an

[4:06:56] all-district item.

[4:06:57] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: move

[4:06:58] the item.

[4:06:59] >>chair, doug chaffee: item is

[4:07:01] approved. We go to our

[4:07:04] supplements. Item -- supplement

[4:07:05] 43a.

[4:07:07] >>clerk, robin stieler: 43a has

[4:07:11] been continued to MAY 5th,

[4:07:11] 2026.

[4:07:12] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[4:07:21] supplement 43b, please.

[4:07:21] >>clerk, robin stieler: s43b.

[4:07:22] Under chair chaffee-establish

[4:07:23] la 28-olympic preparedness ad

[4:07:23] hoc committee, consisting of

[4:07:24] vice chair foley and supervisor

[4:07:26] sarmiento.

[4:07:27] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[4:07:28] supervisor nguyen.

[4:07:29] >>janet nguyen: I appreciate you

[4:07:31] bringing this forward. I think

[4:07:33] the olympics provides a very

[4:07:35] special opportunity for us to

[4:07:36] bring economic development to

[4:07:38] our community and activate

[4:07:40] spaces around the county for our

[4:07:41] residents. So what I'm asking

[4:07:43] the committee to also look at is

[4:07:44] we should be taking advantage of

[4:07:47] the opportunity by co-hosting

[4:07:51] designated olympic fun fan zones

[4:07:52] through -- throughout the county

[4:07:54] for all the districts. You

[4:07:55] know, whether it's supporting

[4:07:57] multicultural festivals,

[4:07:59] partnering with youth sports

[4:08:00] organizations to get our local

[4:08:01] athletes involved, but to bring

[4:08:04] out families. So I'm hoping and

[4:08:05] asking the ad hoc committee to

[4:08:07] look at that as you move

[4:08:08] forward.

[4:08:09] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: big

[4:08:10] part of the plan. Yes. Thank

[4:08:10] you.

[4:08:11] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank you

[4:08:16] for that suggestion. I know

[4:08:17] this has been kind of a

[4:08:19] difficult time to be find money

[4:08:22] for the olympics. I know on

[4:08:24] other boards such as our

[4:08:26] transportation boards, they're

[4:08:28] being asked to provide special

[4:08:28] transportation but the money

[4:08:30] hasn't come yet. So we're

[4:08:32] reaching a point where it will

[4:08:34] be difficult because there needs

[4:08:37] to be prep time, and if the

[4:08:38] money is off too late, it will

[4:08:40] be hard to provide the

[4:08:43] transportation. So with that,

[4:08:45] it's an important assignment,

[4:08:46] and we do have a couple of

[4:08:47] venues in orange county. And so

[4:08:50] with that, if there's no

[4:08:51] objection, congratulations,

[4:08:54] vice-chair and supervisor

[4:08:55] sarmiento, and your willingness

[4:08:57] to serve in this capacity.

[4:09:00] Thank you.

[4:09:01] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: no

[4:09:02] motion required.

[4:09:03] >>chair, doug chaffee: okay.

[4:09:06] Got it. Supplement 43c.

[4:09:07] >>clerk, robin stieler: s43c.

[4:09:08] Under internal audit-approve

[4:09:10] subordinate contract

[4:09:12] ct-079-26010886 with macias gini

[4:09:12] & o'connell, llp for ethics

[4:09:14] program audit, 4/15/26-4/14/27

[4:09:15] ($71,000); and authorize county

[4:09:15] procurement officer or

[4:09:16] deputized designee to execute

[4:09:20] contract.

[4:09:23] We have no requests to speak on

[4:09:24] s43c.

[4:09:26] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[4:09:26] it's all-district item.

[4:09:27] >>vincente sarmiento: second

[4:09:28] with comment.

[4:09:30] >>chair, doug chaffee: go ahead.

[4:09:30] >>vincente sarmiento: very

[4:09:32] briefly, I want to make sure

[4:09:33] that this audit includes a

[4:09:35] review to potential

[4:09:36] recommendations to bolster our

[4:09:36] current campaign finance and

[4:09:40] ethics ordinance. And with

[4:09:44] that, maker of the motion will

[4:09:44] incorporate that.

[4:09:45] >>janet nguyen: I have questions

[4:09:47] and comments, MR. CHAIRMAN.

[4:09:48] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[4:09:49] supervisor nguyen.

[4:09:49] >>janet nguyen: thank you. I

[4:09:50] support this item but have

[4:09:52] concerns about the scope and

[4:09:53] duplication that I think are

[4:09:55] worth clarifying on the record

[4:09:57] because I want to make sure we

[4:09:58] are building on prior work and

[4:10:02] not re-doing what we have done.

[4:10:04] So, you know, it's important for

[4:10:06] us to look at the terms that's

[4:10:09] being used here, ethics program

[4:10:11] is very broad and not clearly

[4:10:14] defined. The scope works as the

[4:10:15] contractor can evaluate any

[4:10:18] activities. What does that

[4:10:19] mean? Without clear boundaries,

[4:10:22] this risk becomes a much broader

[4:10:24] review. What's the scope? So I

[4:10:27] just want to make sure that we

[4:10:29] are focused and continue to

[4:10:31] build on and improving what

[4:10:34] we've done and not re-do

[4:10:35] everything since the board has

[4:10:36] already approved those items in

[4:10:37] the past.

[4:10:38] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[4:10:40] you. Vice-chair, do you have a

[4:10:44] comment? Oh, okay. If there's

[4:10:46] no -- I think we had a motion

[4:10:48] and a second. If no objection,

[4:10:50] the item is approved. MADAM

[4:10:51] Clerk, please read the next

[4:10:54] item.

[4:10:54] >>clerk, robin stieler: s43d.

[4:10:55] Under county executive office-

[4:10:55] approve memorandum of

[4:10:56] understanding (Mou) With city of

[4:10:57] huntington beach for capital

[4:10:57] improvement and services,

[4:10:58] huntington beach navigation

[4:10:59] center, 4/14/26-6/30/26

[4:11:00] ($500,000); and authorize county

[4:11:01] executive officer or designee to

[4:11:03] execute mou.

[4:11:06] We have no requests to speak on

[4:11:07] s43d.

[4:11:07] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's a

[4:11:08] district 1 item.

[4:11:10] >>janet nguyen: I'll move it. I

[4:11:11] just want to thank the office of

[4:11:12] care coordination and the city

[4:11:14] for this partnership and as we

[4:11:16] move forward. This is a good

[4:11:17] avenue for us to continue to

[4:11:19] partner with our local cities.

[4:11:21] >>chair, doug chaffee: moved and

[4:11:22] second. If no objection, the

[4:11:25] item is approved. Let's go on

[4:11:26] to supplement 43e.

[4:11:27] >>clerk, robin stieler: s43e.

[4:11:28] Under sheriff-coroner-approve

[4:11:28] contract ma-060-25011725 with

[4:11:29] praeses, llc, for consultant

[4:11:30] services for inmate

[4:11:31] communication system services,

[4:11:31] 4/23/26-4/22/29 ($866,250);

[4:11:32] renewable for seven additional

[4:11:32] one-year terms; and authorize

[4:11:33] county procurement officer or

[4:11:34] deputized designee to execute

[4:11:37] contract.

[4:11:40] We have no requests to speak on

[4:11:40] s43e.

[4:11:41] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's a

[4:11:48] district 2 and 3 item. With no

[4:11:50] objection, motion carries. Item

[4:11:56] is approved. Now we go on to

[4:12:03] 43f. Let's take f, g, h, I and

[4:12:04] j all together please.

[4:12:05] >>clerk, robin stieler: s43f.

[4:12:05] Under chair chaffee-approve

[4:12:06] allocation of $55,000 from

[4:12:07] fourth district discretionary

[4:12:09] funds to the friendly

[4:12:10] center, inc.; make related

[4:12:10] findings under government code

[4:12:11] section 26227; authorize county

[4:12:13] executive officer or designee to

[4:12:14] negotiate and enter into

[4:12:15] agreement as necessary; and

[4:12:15] authorize auditor-controller

[4:12:18] or designee to make related

[4:12:21] payments.

[4:12:22] Under chair chaffee-approve

[4:12:23] allocation of $2,000 from fourth

[4:12:25] district discretionary funds to

[4:12:25] anaheim high school alumni

[4:12:28] association, inc.; make related

[4:12:30] findings under government code

[4:12:31] section 26227; authorize county

[4:12:34] executive officer or designee to

[4:12:35] negotiate and enter into

[4:12:37] agreement as necessary; and

[4:12:38] authorize auditor-controller or

[4:12:39] designee to make related

[4:12:44] payments.

[4:12:45] S43h. Under chair chaffee-

[4:12:46] approve allocation of $100,000

[4:12:47] from fourth district

[4:12:48] discretionary funds to olive

[4:12:48] community services, inc.; make

[4:12:50] related findings under

[4:12:51] government code section 26227;

[4:12:52] authorize

[4:12:53] county executive officer or

[4:12:54] designee to negotiate and enter

[4:12:56] into agreement as necessary; and

[4:12:57] authorize auditor-controller or

[4:12:58] designee to make related

[4:13:01] payments.

[4:13:03] S43I. Under chair chaffee-

[4:13:04] approve allocation of $1,500

[4:13:06] from fourth district

[4:13:08] discretionary funds to dana

[4:13:09] point women's club; make related

[4:13:11] findings under government code

[4:13:13] section 26227; authorize county

[4:13:15] executive officer or designee to

[4:13:16] negotiate and enter into

[4:13:18] agreement as necessary; and

[4:13:21] authorize auditor-controller or

[4:13:21] designee to make related

[4:13:24] payments.

[4:13:25] S43j. Under chair chaffee-

[4:13:26] approve allocation of $50,000

[4:13:27] from fourth district

[4:13:28] discretionary funds to community

[4:13:30] health initiative of orange

[4:13:31] county; make related findings

[4:13:32] under government code section

[4:13:33] 26227;

[4:13:35] authorize county executive

[4:13:38] officer or designee to negotiate

[4:13:38] and enter into agreement as

[4:13:40] necessary; and authorize

[4:13:42] auditor-controller or designee

[4:13:45] to make related payments.

[4:13:48] We have no requests to speak on

[4:13:49] these items.

[4:13:49] >>chair, doug chaffee: these are

[4:13:51] all mine. I move for approval.

[4:13:53] moved and seconded. Supervisor

[4:13:53] foley.

[4:13:54] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[4:13:56] you. I just wanted to make my

[4:13:57] abstention for the record.

[4:13:59] According to california

[4:14:02] government code section 26227.5

[4:14:04] which states within the 90 days

[4:14:05] preceding an election a member

[4:14:08] of the board who's on the ballot

[4:14:11] as supervisor and district

[4:14:15] candidate on the board has an

[4:14:18] opponent on the ballot shall not

[4:14:21] be taking any action related to

[4:14:22] spending district discretionary

[4:14:22] funds.

[4:14:23] >>vincente sarmiento: and I will

[4:14:25] be abstaining for the same

[4:14:26] reasons stated by the

[4:14:29] vice-chair. It does not mean

[4:14:30] because I don't support your

[4:14:32] items but it's because of

[4:14:33] ab 2496.

[4:14:33] >>chair, doug chaffee: I'm not

[4:14:36] running for anything. So I'm

[4:14:38] going to vote for it. I think

[4:14:41] it passes with 3 votes and 2

[4:14:43] abstentions. Thank you. Let's

[4:14:44] do supplement 43k.

[4:14:45] >>clerk, robin stieler: s43k.

[4:14:46] Under oc public works-approve

[4:14:48] orange county traffic committee

[4:14:49] report dated 3/12/26, item a and

[4:14:51] direct oc sheriff-coroner to

[4:14:53] assign adult crossing guard at

[4:14:55] intersection of meandering trail

[4:14:56] and grassy knoll lane, las

[4:14:57] flores; adopt resolution

[4:15:00] approving item b establishing 25

[4:15:03] miles per hour speed limit on

[4:15:05] saddle way between ranch canyon

[4:15:07] and pablo way, rancho mission

[4:15:11] viejo; approve item c and direct

[4:15:12] oc sheriff-coroner to assign

[4:15:14] adult crossing guard at

[4:15:16] intersection of foster road and

[4:15:18] silverwood drive rossmoor; adopt

[4:15:19] resolution approving revised

[4:15:21] orange county traffic committee

[4:15:23] bylaws to replace oc development

[4:15:25] services representative with a

[4:15:27] resident representative from

[4:15:28] first supervisorial district;

[4:15:29] and make california

[4:15:30] environmental quality act (Ceqa)

[4:15:31] Exemption findings under ceqa

[4:15:35] guidelines section 15301.

[4:15:38] And we have no does speak on

[4:15:38] s43k.

[4:15:42] >>chair, doug chaffee: this is

[4:15:42] an all-district item.

[4:15:44] >>janet nguyen: I'll move it

[4:15:45] with comment.

[4:15:46] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I'll

[4:15:47] second with comment.

[4:15:48] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[4:15:48] vice-chair.

[4:15:49] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[4:15:51] you. I really appreciate the

[4:15:52] las flores community who asked

[4:15:54] our office about a solution in

[4:15:57] 2025, the safety of students

[4:16:01] traveling from las flores

[4:16:02] elementary and middle school,

[4:16:03] and I appreciate the orange

[4:16:04] county sheriff's department and

[4:16:05] working with our traffic

[4:16:07] committee as well as the ceo's

[4:16:09] office to find a solution. Last

[4:16:11] month the traffic committee

[4:16:14] unanimously approved the adult

[4:16:15] crossing guard at intersection

[4:16:17] of meandering trail and grassy

[4:16:19] knoll lane. This crossing guard

[4:16:21] is just a piece of all of the

[4:16:22] different safety and road

[4:16:24] improvements we've made in the

[4:16:26] un-incorporated area. No turn

[4:16:29] on red on antonio, and always

[4:16:31] stop in painted crosswalks at

[4:16:34] saddle way and ivy way near

[4:16:35] boulder pond, park and "no

[4:16:38] parking" signs on ribera and

[4:16:40] allowing bikers to use the bike

[4:16:44] lanes and then a speed limit on

[4:16:46] senso reduced from 30 to 25 as

[4:16:48] well as a reduction on saddle

[4:16:49] way in rancho mission viejo. So

[4:16:51] thank you to our team for

[4:16:53] helping us find solutions for

[4:16:55] our community concerns.

[4:16:57] >>chair, doug chaffee:

[4:16:58] supervisor nguyen.

[4:16:59] >>janet nguyen: thank you,

[4:17:00] MR. CHAIRMAN. I also wanted to

[4:17:01] thank oc public works for

[4:17:03] working with our residents over

[4:17:05] in rossmoor and adding a

[4:17:07] crossing guard at intersection

[4:17:11] of foster road and silver wood

[4:17:13] drive which is nearby the lee

[4:17:14] elementary school. We

[4:17:16] appreciate that. The community

[4:17:17] came together, asked us, and

[4:17:20] staff has accommodated and

[4:17:22] worked with the rossmore

[4:17:23] residents. I also do want to

[4:17:25] say thank you, too, because we

[4:17:28] are adding a member from the

[4:17:30] first district into the orange

[4:17:31] county traffic committee. It's

[4:17:33] very helpful for us because we

[4:17:35] haven't been able to voice our

[4:17:37] concerns or comments at these

[4:17:39] committee via a representative.

[4:17:42] So we appreciate oc public works

[4:17:45] staff adding a position in for

[4:17:47] the first district. Thank you,

[4:17:47] MR. CHAIRMAN.

[4:17:48] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[4:17:49] you. It has been moved and

[4:17:51] seconded. If no objection, the

[4:17:55] item is approved. And then we

[4:18:00] come to the supplement m, I

[4:18:00] believe.

[4:18:03] >>clerk, robin stieler: l. 43l.

[4:18:04] Under county executive office-

[4:18:04] approve investment division

[4:18:05] reorganization from treasure-tax

[4:18:06] collector (Ttc) To county

[4:18:08] executive office (Ceo); direct

[4:18:09] ceo and auditor-controller (A-c)

[4:18:10] To facilitate necessary

[4:18:11] position, encumbrance,

[4:18:12] appropriations, revenue and net

[4:18:13] county cost changes from ttc;

[4:18:15] direct a-c to revise

[4:18:16] appropriations and revenues

[4:18:17] under government code sections

[4:18:18] 29125, 29130 and 25252;

[4:18:19] direct ceo human resource

[4:18:29] services to amend master

[4:18:32] position control; and authorize

[4:18:34] county procurement officer or

[4:18:36] deputized designee to execute or

[4:18:37] amend agreements, documents and

[4:18:38] related changes to investment

[4:18:42] division as necessary.

[4:18:45] This item does require -- excuse

[4:18:49] me, action 1 and 2 requires a

[4:18:51] 4/5 vote and we have received

[4:18:56] one request to speak on s43l.

[4:18:58] >>chair, doug chaffee: please

[4:18:59] call the speaker.

[4:19:03] >>clerk, robin stieler: sherry

[4:19:06] freidanrick.

[4:19:09] >>speaker: I'm sherry

[4:19:11] freidanrich, the treasurer tax

[4:19:11] collector and work for the

[4:19:13] people of orange county. This

[4:19:15] proposal is another step of the

[4:19:18] board trying to strip me of the

[4:19:19] dually elected treasurer of my

[4:19:23] legally defined duties and my

[4:19:25] ability to perform my fiduciary

[4:19:27] duties. The board has without

[4:19:28] transparency to the public

[4:19:30] dismantled many protections and

[4:19:30] oversight measures put in place

[4:19:32] after the bankruptcy of orange

[4:19:35] county in 1994 that lost 1.5

[4:19:37] billion of the public funds when

[4:19:39] interest rates rose. These

[4:19:41] changes increased risks to the

[4:19:44] public funds. Changes include

[4:19:45] loosening restrictions in the

[4:19:46] investment policy approved last

[4:19:48] year that allowed for

[4:19:50] longer-term investments. The

[4:19:52] investment pollin creased the

[4:19:55] duration allowed to double from

[4:19:56] 1.5 years to 3 years and

[4:19:58] increase the medium-term notes

[4:20:00] maturities from 3 to 5 years.

[4:20:02] One example of increased risk to

[4:20:04] public funds is the board has

[4:20:05] purchased longer dated callable

[4:20:08] securities of approximately 25%

[4:20:10] of the pooled funds as of the

[4:20:12] end of FEBRUARY of which the

[4:20:13] majority of the pooled funds are

[4:20:15] owned by the school and the

[4:20:15] community college districts.

[4:20:18] This type of security carries

[4:20:19] significantly greater risk to

[4:20:22] the public funds and the nature

[4:20:24] of a callable feature creates

[4:20:26] uncertainty in cash forecasting,

[4:20:28] adding additional potential risk

[4:20:30] to the portfolio. The board

[4:20:31] purchased the securities at a

[4:20:32] time when the market expected

[4:20:35] interest rates to drop. Instead

[4:20:36] over the last month, market

[4:20:38] interest rates have risen, and

[4:20:39] these riskier securities have

[4:20:42] probably lost some value in this

[4:20:42] higher rate interest

[4:20:45] environment. This interest rate

[4:20:47] environment continues to be

[4:20:48] volatile and puts potential risk

[4:20:50] on the pooled funds at a time

[4:20:51] when the county and the school

[4:20:54] districts MAY need significantly

[4:20:55] more liquidity than normal over

[4:20:58] the next year or two. Based on

[4:21:01] the state's significant billion

[4:21:02] dollar expected deficit and

[4:21:04] settlements. Taking an

[4:21:07] additional -- take on additional

[4:21:08] interest rate risk by stretching

[4:21:10] out duration with riskier

[4:21:11] callables to earn higher yield

[4:21:13] MAY not prove to a winning

[4:21:14] strategy to protect public funds

[4:21:17] and safely protect the people's

[4:21:19] money. When investing the board

[4:21:20] is a trustee and subject to the

[4:21:21] prudent investor standard, state

[4:21:24] law is clear that the board can

[4:21:26] delegate to the treasurer as

[4:21:28] defined via state law to invest

[4:21:32] or reinvest the funds of the

[4:21:35] county and the treasurer as the

[4:21:37] fiduciary for discretionary

[4:21:39] funds, the board still is

[4:21:40] currently investing funds of

[4:21:42] other separate local agencies in

[4:21:43] the pooled funds and that

[4:21:44] appears to be another violation

[4:21:45] of law. In closing, the board

[4:21:47] continues to regularly interfere

[4:21:49] in my ability to carry out my

[4:21:51] legal, statutory and fiduciary

[4:21:53] duties. The board actions have

[4:21:55] created a clear and present risk

[4:21:57] to all treasure tax collector

[4:21:59] operations. Thank you.

[4:22:00] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[4:22:00] you.

[4:22:01] >>clerk, robin stieler: no other

[4:22:02] speakers, MR. Chair.

[4:22:03] >>chair, doug chaffee: this is

[4:22:05] an all-district item.

[4:22:06] Supervisor wagner.

[4:22:07] >>don wagner: thank you,

[4:22:08] MR. CHAIRMAN. This is an item

[4:22:11] to move staff from the treasurer

[4:22:13] tax collector's office to the

[4:22:18] ceo, as I understand it, to do

[4:22:19] indeed -- indeed dot supervision

[4:22:21] that has been done in the first

[4:22:22] place. So all of the things

[4:22:23] about what the county's gotten

[4:22:26] into and market pressure,

[4:22:28] et cetera that we just heard are

[4:22:30] entirely irrelevant to this

[4:22:31] particular item. I want to lay

[4:22:33] that out there. I also want to

[4:22:36] make sure that we're all clear

[4:22:38] that our predecessors on this

[4:22:40] board were challenged in the

[4:22:42] bankruptcy when they failed to

[4:22:46] exercise oversight over and

[4:22:48] out-of-control treasurer tax

[4:22:49] collector. This board in

[4:22:52] contrast to that has in fact

[4:22:53] exercised oversight when we

[4:22:56] found issues coming out of that

[4:22:59] office. And so the situation is

[4:23:02] not just like the bankruptcy.

[4:23:05] Indeed, the situation is 180

[4:23:08] degrees different from the

[4:23:09] situation of bankruptcy. What

[4:23:11] we are doing is working to

[4:23:13] exercise that oversight control

[4:23:15] that, like it or not, state law

[4:23:21] has vested in this board, and we

[4:23:24] have the professionals in place

[4:23:26] that are making these decisions.

[4:23:28] they are being watched. And all

[4:23:29] we're trying to do here, and it

[4:23:33] should be applauded by ttc, if

[4:23:34] she's really concerned about

[4:23:36] oversight, we're trying to bring

[4:23:37] some of those oversight staff,

[4:23:39] some of that staff in-house

[4:23:41] where they can do their job that

[4:23:43] much better. So for that

[4:23:45] reason, I not only reject the

[4:23:47] entire nonsense we just heard

[4:23:50] from the ttc, but do move the

[4:23:50] item.

[4:23:51] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[4:23:51] second.

[4:23:52] >>chair, doug chaffee: moved and

[4:23:53] second. Vice-chair, anything

[4:23:54] you want to say.

[4:23:55] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: yes.

[4:23:57] Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN. And

[4:23:59] unfortunately, the treasurer tax

[4:24:00] collector left the room before

[4:24:06] she could hear us respond after

[4:24:08] basically stating false

[4:24:08] statements about our decisions

[4:24:12] up here. So I want to address

[4:24:13] this. We have not voted to

[4:24:17] loosen any restrictions on our

[4:24:19] investment policy. Is that

[4:24:25] correct, MS. Aguirre? Or

[4:24:28] MS. Ingleby, whomever is the

[4:24:30] right person to answer the

[4:24:37] question.

[4:24:39] >>speaker: good afternoon. Kim

[4:24:40] ingleby, chief financial officer

[4:24:43] for the county of orange. In

[4:24:44] fact, we actually have an

[4:24:45] investment policy that the board

[4:24:47] has approved for the past two

[4:24:48] years to actually strengthen

[4:24:50] controls aligned with all of our

[4:24:52] legislative requirements, and

[4:24:54] the staff that are performing

[4:24:56] the investment functions are the

[4:24:58] same staff that have been

[4:24:59] performing the investment

[4:25:01] functions under the ttc, which

[4:25:03] now we're just trying to way

[4:25:04] line so that we have the

[4:25:05] function and the authority in

[4:25:05] the same department.

[4:25:08] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[4:25:10] And then the issue of the longer

[4:25:15] data collecting securities, you

[4:25:18] can address -- you can respond

[4:25:20] to that accusation?

[4:25:22] >>speaker: yes. So long story

[4:25:25] short, we had a special

[4:25:28] investment that was for about

[4:25:30] $500 million that came term and

[4:25:31] we decided to leave it in the

[4:25:33] county pool. So we had more

[4:25:35] funds to invest. Over the past

[4:25:37] we've only dealt with mutual

[4:25:39] funds and treasuries. And so

[4:25:41] now we have diversified

[4:25:44] comparable to our surrounding

[4:25:46] counties and with the consultant

[4:25:48] of -- under the advisement of

[4:25:49] consultants that we work with,

[4:25:52] we did see that the interest

[4:25:57] rates were favoring more of a

[4:25:58] long-term -- which we had the

[4:26:00] ability to do so with the

[4:26:02] additional funds. And so we did

[4:26:09] so. So now we have some midterm

[4:26:13] notes. We have some -- more in

[4:26:14] the mutual funds that we do

[4:26:16] provide a monthly and a

[4:26:17] quarterly investment report

[4:26:19] where we are constantly looking

[4:26:24] at liquidity, the cash

[4:26:28] projections are yield, net

[4:26:30] yield, our gross yield. And

[4:26:33] it's being monitored also by the

[4:26:34] new investment oversight

[4:26:36] committee. So it's heavily

[4:26:38] monitored, heavily watched, and

[4:26:39] we also have more people now

[4:26:40] involved in the process.

[4:26:41] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: okay.

[4:26:45] And do you have any concern that

[4:26:47] the decisions are putting the

[4:26:50] county at risk, greater than we

[4:26:52] would have been a year ago?

[4:26:55] >>speaker: no, I do not. I

[4:26:57] value the consultants that we've

[4:27:00] had. We're always looking at

[4:27:03] various employment rates,

[4:27:05] comparing ourselves to the other

[4:27:08] counties. We are right in line

[4:27:10] with where we should be, our

[4:27:13] yield is actually higher than

[4:27:17] the 90-day treasury note, which

[4:27:18] is what we look at. So I'm

[4:27:22] confident in the team. They

[4:27:26] live investments. They are very

[4:27:29] knowledgeable. And I'm very

[4:27:30] proud of the investment team

[4:27:30] that we have.

[4:27:32] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[4:27:32] you.

[4:27:33] >>chair, doug chaffee: all

[4:27:35] right. This item has been moved

[4:27:38] and seconded. Any objection?

[4:27:41] The item is unanimously

[4:27:43] approved. You're abstaining?

[4:27:48] Anybody else? Okay. We needed

[4:27:49] 4 votes, with very 4 votes with

[4:27:51] 1 abstention. The item is

[4:27:54] approved. Thank you.

[4:27:55] .

[4:27:58] Now we come to supplement 43m.

[4:27:59] >>clerk, robin stieler: s43m.

[4:28:00] Under county executive office-

[4:28:01] approve 2026 state budget

[4:28:01] request priorities list; and

[4:28:02] direct staff to work

[4:28:03] with contract lobbyists and

[4:28:04] statewide trade associations to

[4:28:05] advocate for critical state

[4:28:09] budget funding.

[4:28:13] No requests to speak on s43m.

[4:28:15] >>chair, doug chaffee: this is

[4:28:16] an all-district item, I believe.

[4:28:17] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: hov

[4:28:21] the item.

[4:28:21] >>chair, doug chaffee: without

[4:28:22] objection, the item is approved.

[4:28:26] Now we come to a public hearing,

[4:28:31] which is item 44.

[4:28:31] >>clerk, robin stieler: 44.

[4:28:32] Under oc community resources,

[4:28:33] acting as the orange county

[4:28:34] housing authority-public

[4:28:35] hearing to consider adopting

[4:28:36] updated orange county housing

[4:28:37] authority administrative plan

[4:28:38] and adopting orange county

[4:28:39] housing authority annual pha

[4:28:40] plan, fy 2026-27; and authorize

[4:28:41] executive director of orange

[4:28:42] county housing authority or

[4:28:43] designee to finalize and

[4:28:44] transmit both plans to U.S.

[4:28:47] Department of housing and urban

[4:28:53] development.

[4:28:54] >>chair, doug chaffee: well,

[4:28:55] thank you. And I'm going to

[4:28:56] open the public hearing. And do

[4:28:58] we have any public speakers,

[4:28:59] MADAM Clerk?

[4:29:00] >>speaker: we received two

[4:29:06] requests of paul hayek and

[4:29:12] donora. I believe paul left the

[4:29:21] room already. So donora.

[4:29:25] >>speaker: hello, everybody.

[4:29:27] I'my quality decent citizen. So

[4:29:28] when I don't understand, I have

[4:29:30] to ask. I'm super stressed

[4:29:33] because you guys' government

[4:29:35] have forced me to be homeless,

[4:29:37] and I worked 40 years and pay

[4:29:40] taxes. All I ask is the city of

[4:29:41] huntington beach put in an

[4:29:47] application to subsidize like

[4:29:50] federal out of washington. They

[4:29:53] subs died me for 40 years and

[4:29:54] pay taxes and you guys forced me

[4:29:58] to be homeless. Nothing should

[4:30:00] have never happened, I never

[4:30:03] drink, drug or smoke. My

[4:30:04] family, they are angry and

[4:30:06] they're passion my information

[4:30:07] around the world because I'm an

[4:30:09] original refugee brought by

[4:30:12] federal. They wanted to restore

[4:30:13] integrity and the whole country,

[4:30:17] california, chicago, texas, and

[4:30:19] new york because you guys are

[4:30:20] supporting illegal aliens, and

[4:30:22] I'm an immigrant. And I don't

[4:30:25] see the sentence amiento talking

[4:30:27] about the illegal immigrant from

[4:30:30] cuba. And I was told to talk to

[4:30:31] jen went and I have not been

[4:30:33] able to make an appointment with

[4:30:35] her. She represents huntington

[4:30:36] beach, and his chief here have

[4:30:38] not made me that appointment.

[4:30:40] so I'm trying to figure out what

[4:30:42] step I need to take because my

[4:30:44] family in miami is very upset

[4:30:47] and cuba, and they say you have

[4:30:48] to let the whole world know now

[4:30:51] that you speak english, thank

[4:30:53] GOD for america, because you're

[4:30:54] helping america be great in the

[4:30:56] process. And the meantime, all

[4:30:59] I ask, tell travis subsidized

[4:31:01] the two bedroom by 40 years that

[4:31:03] I work and pay taxes and I feel

[4:31:05] safe, so I will not continue

[4:31:08] being in my car. My only

[4:31:10] granddaughter, they won a

[4:31:12] four-year scholar youship, she's

[4:31:14] crying in a different state,

[4:31:14] saying grandma, why are you

[4:31:17] blocking me from coming to see

[4:31:19] you when I was in your bed? You

[4:31:20] think it's right for me to say

[4:31:22] come and see me in my car

[4:31:24] because the board of supervisors

[4:31:28] supporting illegal aliens?

[4:31:30] She's coming in MAY. So

[4:31:32] hopefully before she comes I can

[4:31:35] say you can come and see me in

[4:31:37] my place now. 40 years I work

[4:31:39] and pay taxes in huntington

[4:31:40] beach, and jenna went, shers one

[4:31:42] of the members, but I've been

[4:31:44] dealing with andrew do since

[4:31:46] 2019. He's in prison now.

[4:31:50] That's all I ask. Thank you.

[4:31:51] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[4:31:53] you. Is there one more speaker.

[4:31:54] >>clerk, robin stieler: no.

[4:31:55] He's not present.

[4:31:56] >>chair, doug chaffee: all

[4:31:58] right. I'm going to close the

[4:31:58] public hearing and bring it

[4:32:00] back. We are acting not

[4:32:01] necessarily as the board of

[4:32:02] supervisors but rather as the

[4:32:04] board of commissioners for the

[4:32:06] orange county housing authority,

[4:32:07] and with that, this is an

[4:32:08] all-district item. Are there

[4:32:12] any comments that --

[4:32:12] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I'll

[4:32:13] move the item with comment.

[4:32:14] >>chair, doug chaffee: all

[4:32:17] right. Is there a second?

[4:32:18] Second. Please go ahead,

[4:32:18] vice-chair.

[4:32:19] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I

[4:32:21] just wanted to let the community

[4:32:22] know that part our

[4:32:24] administrative plan changes are

[4:32:26] to deny assistance of any

[4:32:27] household member appears on a

[4:32:30] saifnlingsder registry, and in

[4:32:31] limited cases approve housing

[4:32:33] funding agreements after

[4:32:35] construction starts to support

[4:32:36] affordable housing in

[4:32:38] high-opportunity areas. Move

[4:32:38] the item.

[4:32:40] >>chair, doug chaffee: it's been

[4:32:43] moved and seconded by supervisor

[4:32:44] sarmiento. If there's no

[4:32:47] objection, the item is approved.

[4:32:49] And we go on to item 45, which

[4:32:53] is another public hearing.

[4:32:55] MADAM Clerk

[4:32:56] >>clerk, robin stieler: 45.

[4:32:56] Under oc public works, public

[4:32:57] hearing to consider adopting

[4:32:58] resolution authorizing oc

[4:32:59] agricultural commissioner to

[4:32:59] abate weeds and combustible

[4:33:00] vegetation on private properties

[4:33:02] in unincorporated areas; direct

[4:33:03] oc agricultural commissioner to

[4:33:04] provide fire hazard reduction

[4:33:05] weed abatement cost report and

[4:33:08] itemized report of costs

[4:33:09] incurred prior and after 7/1/26.

[4:33:17] Cs-1-cs-2)

[4:33:18] >>chair, doug chaffee: I'm going

[4:33:19] to open the public hearing.

[4:33:22] MADAM Clerk, do we have any

[4:33:22] speakers.

[4:33:23] >>clerk, robin stieler: we do

[4:33:23] not.

[4:33:24] >>chair, doug chaffee: we don't

[4:33:26] have. So I'm going to close the

[4:33:26] public hearing and bring it back

[4:33:28] to the board for consideration.

[4:33:30] This is an all-district item.

[4:33:31] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: move

[4:33:31] the item.

[4:33:32] >>chair, doug chaffee: moved and

[4:33:34] seconded. Is there any

[4:33:34] objection? Seeing none, the

[4:33:41] item is approved. Now we come,

[4:33:43] I guess -- are we at public

[4:33:44] comments, MADAM Clerk.

[4:33:47] >>clerk, robin stieler: yes.

[4:33:48] >>chair, doug chaffee: please

[4:33:48] call the speakers.

[4:33:49] >>clerk, robin stieler: we

[4:33:50] received 10 requests. I'll call

[4:33:53] three names at a time. Steve

[4:33:56] rocco, deborah and greg

[4:34:09] arrowsmith.

[4:34:11] >>speaker: I'd be a lot more

[4:34:13] likely to believe in GOD you

[4:34:14] trust if there was a cross

[4:34:16] there. I don't think I ever

[4:34:19] heard the word "jesus" come from

[4:34:20] any of your mouths all the times

[4:34:22] I've been here. But you did

[4:34:23] spend a great deal of time at

[4:34:26] the last session talking about

[4:34:27] andy do and congratulating

[4:34:28] yourselves and how you had him

[4:34:31] arrested and all that. Well,

[4:34:32] discretionary funds. You know,

[4:34:34] I'm an exenglish teacher and I

[4:34:36] know what discretionary means.

[4:34:36] And there's wiggle room for

[4:34:41] that. A matter interpretation,

[4:34:41] he wanted to help his family,

[4:34:45] and he wound up not doing that.

[4:34:47] And his wife and two daughters

[4:34:50] got away scot-free. Well, and

[4:34:51] then you congratulate yourself

[4:34:53] because our D.A. Is trying to

[4:34:55] get some of the millions that he

[4:34:59] stole back. Which brings me to

[4:35:01] presentations. You know, you

[4:35:04] like to set this month for that

[4:35:04] and that month for something

[4:35:06] else. You had your perfect

[4:35:08] opportunity to have sexual

[4:35:11] pervert month. We had cesar

[4:35:13] chavez, who now is no longer

[4:35:14] okay politically. You know you

[4:35:17] can see his painting on broadway

[4:35:19] and tenth street. It's as big

[4:35:20] as a building. And then we have

[4:35:22] a bill cosby thing who was in

[4:35:24] the news again after three years

[4:35:26] in prison. He gets to pay

[4:35:29] millions more. And then we have

[4:35:32] spitzer. Spitzer. Spitzer and

[4:35:35] his exboss row caucus. You

[4:35:38] know, you guys covered up the

[4:35:40] crimes that he committed against

[4:35:43] me, entered my house over half a

[4:35:45] dozen times without a search

[4:35:48] warrant. Used their neighbors

[4:35:51] for a recall. You brought me to

[4:35:52] court, actually sitting right

[4:35:54] there, leon page, brought me to

[4:35:56] court so that the public would

[4:35:59] never hear about it. That was

[4:36:01] measure s in orange. And you

[4:36:02] call yourselves -- you don't

[4:36:04] know what you call yourselves,

[4:36:08] but it's not good. Well, all

[4:36:11] that, the man's a pervert. You

[4:36:13] know, you congratulated

[4:36:15] yourselves about MR. Andy do.

[4:36:16] What are you going to do about

[4:36:18] spitzer? He likes to fool

[4:36:21] around with women, you know,

[4:36:22] pinch them and say terrible

[4:36:23] things and demean them and all

[4:36:26] that. Not just him, but the

[4:36:28] entire D.A.'s office does, that

[4:36:30] the male ones. And they caught

[4:36:32] them. They've got all kinds of

[4:36:34] evidence on them. They owe

[4:36:37] money, which you paid for.

[4:36:40] Well, not you. Actually it's

[4:36:40] me. It's the taxpayers. You

[4:36:42] have already paid it. And why

[4:36:44] isn't spitzer paying for this?

[4:36:46] Why isn't he in jail? Why

[4:36:48] haven't you seen the fbi about

[4:36:49] him? Why is he walking around

[4:36:51] free? He's already proven that

[4:36:53] he hates americans. He pulled a

[4:36:56] gun on a christian, and yet

[4:36:58] you're proud of yourself because

[4:37:02] you put one of you people in --

[4:37:04] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[4:37:09] you, sir. MAY we have the next

[4:37:14] speaker, please.

[4:37:16] >>speaker: good afternoon, I do

[4:37:18] want to begin. I'm deborah

[4:37:21] donothan, and I want to begin by

[4:37:22] acknowledging supervisor vincent

[4:37:25] sarmiento and his office for

[4:37:27] already reaching out to me today

[4:37:30] as well as the behavior

[4:37:31] healthcare agency services

[4:37:35] regarding their plan from --

[4:37:37] it's going to be at the public

[4:37:38] hearing tomorrow. I want to

[4:37:39] speak more broadly about the

[4:37:40] county's behavioral health

[4:37:42] system and its intersection with

[4:37:43] education and family rights. We

[4:37:45] are seeing significant public

[4:37:47] funding directed toward

[4:37:48] contracted behavioral services.

[4:37:51] However, families are not seeing

[4:37:53] corresponding access to

[4:37:54] appropriate legally compliant

[4:37:56] care. There's a growing concern

[4:37:57] that these systems as structured

[4:38:00] MAY function outside the

[4:38:02] protections required under idea,

[4:38:03] the individuals with

[4:38:05] disabilities education act, and

[4:38:07] adults with disabilities act.

[4:38:09] Particularly when they intersect

[4:38:10] with school systems and family

[4:38:13] decision-making authority. When

[4:38:14] prevention and early supports

[4:38:16] are rued, which is proposed in

[4:38:19] this plan, while crisis and

[4:38:20] high-intensity services are

[4:38:22] expanded, the system can

[4:38:23] unintentionally create

[4:38:24] incentives for individuals to

[4:38:26] enter care at a more acute

[4:38:28] stage. That can increase

[4:38:30] reliance on residential

[4:38:32] placement and court-involved

[4:38:35] systems such as care court and

[4:38:35] conservatorship rather than

[4:38:36] supporting individuals earlier

[4:38:38] and present ising escalation.

[4:38:39] When authorities shift families

[4:38:42] to contract or court-appointed

[4:38:43] systems, protections MAY still

[4:38:44] exist on paper but become much

[4:38:46] harder to enforce and practice.

[4:38:47] At end of the day, protection is

[4:38:49] not just about services being

[4:38:51] offered, it's about whether

[4:38:53] individuals and families can

[4:38:54] understand, access and enforce

[4:38:56] their rights within those

[4:38:59] systems, as I addressed earlier

[4:39:00] with these vulnerable

[4:39:02] populations. I also want to

[4:39:04] note, concerns regarding

[4:39:05] overlapping legal representation

[4:39:08] across school districts,

[4:39:08] guardians ad litem and

[4:39:10] contracted providers, these

[4:39:11] overlapping roles raise

[4:39:13] questions about conflicts of

[4:39:14] interest and whether families

[4:39:16] are receiving fully independent

[4:39:18] and fair representation. I

[4:39:20] respectfully ask the board to

[4:39:21] ensure transparency,

[4:39:22] accountability and full

[4:39:25] compliance with federal

[4:39:27] protections as these systems

[4:39:29] expand, as it appears with the

[4:39:30] plan being proposed. Because I

[4:39:32] will not be able to attend the

[4:39:34] subsequent meeting or tomorrow's

[4:39:35] meeting, I want to ensure these

[4:39:36] concerns are clearly placed on

[4:39:38] record today. So thank you for

[4:39:39] your time.

[4:39:40] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[4:39:42] you. MAY I have the next

[4:39:43] speaker, please.

[4:39:44] >>clerk, robin stieler: after

[4:39:50] greg, donora, brian kay and nick

[4:40:00] kolev.

[4:40:06] >>speaker: happy day. You know,

[4:40:09] at the last meeting I asked

[4:40:10] supervisor sarmiento if he's

[4:40:12] learned that he's accepted that

[4:40:15] I'm -- I live in his district

[4:40:17] and that he's my supervisor.

[4:40:19] And I'd like to ask him, are you

[4:40:20] aware of the fact that I am in

[4:40:24] your district and I am your

[4:40:45] constituent? Okay. So you

[4:40:46] don't want to answer that

[4:40:46] question.

[4:40:48] >>chair, doug chaffee: it is not

[4:40:49] our custom to respond.

[4:40:50] >>speaker: you do answer them

[4:40:52] when you want to. Doug chaffee

[4:40:53] at a recent meeting was

[4:40:55] complaining about the

[4:40:57] whistle-blower program and

[4:40:59] saying how ineffectual it is and

[4:41:02] how it doesn't do its job

[4:41:02] properly.

[4:41:03] >>chair, doug chaffee: I've made

[4:41:05] no such comments sir.

[4:41:06] >>speaker: you've made those

[4:41:08] comments all the time. You

[4:41:09] couldn't deduct me, you

[4:41:10] challenge me, and I'll go back

[4:41:12] and get a copy of the meeting

[4:41:13] and see if I can find where you

[4:41:15] did say that. But the concern

[4:41:16] that I have is more that you

[4:41:17] have somebody who's stood before

[4:41:20] you as a whistle-blower

[4:41:22] presenting evidence, and then

[4:41:23] you accuse that person of not

[4:41:25] being a whistle-blower, of not

[4:41:27] being that kind of person. And

[4:41:28] you never showed any proof to

[4:41:33] substantiate your statement.

[4:41:35] You know, at the last meeting

[4:41:36] katrina foley did spend an

[4:41:38] extended amount of time talking

[4:41:40] about the swag, the t-shirts,

[4:41:42] the jackets and other items.

[4:41:46] And now in her term of being on

[4:41:47] the -- as a supervisor for a

[4:41:49] number of years, she's come a

[4:41:51] long way and she's learned that

[4:41:54] sometimes you need to research

[4:41:55] and see what's really going on.

[4:42:00] And I'm curious, as katrina

[4:42:01] foley -- I can't ask her

[4:42:02] directly but has katrina foley

[4:42:04] spent time to research the

[4:42:05] charges that she's filed against

[4:42:07] me and then claim that she

[4:42:08] doesn't have filed against me.

[4:42:09] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: for

[4:42:10] the record, I have no charges

[4:42:11] filed against him.

[4:42:12] >>speaker: so when I go to

[4:42:14] criminal court, I'll be

[4:42:15] dismissed, is that correct.

[4:42:16] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: I

[4:42:17] have no charges filed against

[4:42:19] him. I can't speak to whatever

[4:42:20] he's talking about.

[4:42:21] >>speaker: well, I have a court

[4:42:23] date, and you are listed as the

[4:42:40] complaining party. You know

[4:42:42] what's really sad is I gave each

[4:42:44] and every one of you 20 to 30

[4:42:45] seconds to respond and, you

[4:42:46] could have responded and you

[4:42:47] could have resolved the

[4:42:50] petitions that are before you.

[4:42:53] You've chosen to go against your

[4:42:54] own statements saying that if

[4:42:56] you want to call attention to a

[4:42:57] matter, the person will be

[4:43:00] heard. And when a person stands

[4:43:01] here, you intentionally ignore

[4:43:03] them. Happy day.

[4:43:04] >>chair, doug chaffee: MAY we

[4:43:25] have the next speaker, please.

[4:43:28] >>speaker: I'm very sorry. I am

[4:43:31] super stressed. Never feel this

[4:43:33] way in my life. I have a

[4:43:36] wonderful life. Both parents

[4:43:39] were pastor pentecostal and they

[4:43:41] took us to church seven days a

[4:43:42] week to share the love. And I

[4:43:44] took care of government working

[4:43:49] 40 years and pay taxes, and I

[4:43:50] said, government, whatever, they

[4:43:53] let me down. They love cubans

[4:43:56] and cuba loves america. So when

[4:43:58] they told me that I qualify for

[4:44:00] subsidy in any city, a

[4:44:01] townhouse, I say, thank you, my

[4:44:03] american dream. 40 years that I

[4:44:08] work and pay taxes. Why I've

[4:44:10] been forced to be homeless? I'm

[4:44:13] a legal immigrant. I don't even

[4:44:17] hear we sent to come into

[4:44:18] talking about hispanic from

[4:44:23] cuba. You know, so americana

[4:44:26] psycho, and janet nguyen, you

[4:44:27] haven't went what I went through

[4:44:29] and andrew do since 2019. And

[4:44:32] why should I end up in my car

[4:44:34] waiting for someone to do the

[4:44:40] right thing, fear for my safety?

[4:44:41] My family is telling me,

[4:44:44] breaking news, let the whole

[4:44:45] world know what happened. And

[4:44:52] all I ask, tell travis subsidy

[4:44:54] the unit that I put in

[4:44:54] application, the first one

[4:44:55] before it was built in

[4:44:58] huntington beach, even

[4:45:01] lieutenant bed for huntington

[4:45:02] beach knows that. And now

[4:45:06] people moving in, young girls

[4:45:08] that have not proved 40 years of

[4:45:09] work and pay taxes like I've

[4:45:11] done. And nobody seems to care

[4:45:13] for me. And I'm a legal

[4:45:14] immigrant, protected under

[4:45:15] federal government. That's why

[4:45:18] they're trying to restore

[4:45:19] integrity in the whole country.

[4:45:21] I'm hoping somebody call travis

[4:45:23] and say make it happen so she

[4:45:25] won't continue to live in her

[4:45:29] car, please. Thank you.

[4:45:30] >>clerk, robin stieler: last

[4:45:34] three speakers are nick kolev,

[4:45:38] nathan hill and reverend barbara

[4:45:43] fairly.

[4:45:45] >>speaker: CHAIRMAN Chaffee,

[4:45:47] everybody here, good afternoon.

[4:45:49] Nick kolev, civil rights

[4:45:51] activist, civil engineer from

[4:45:57] santa ana. I'm here today to

[4:46:02] mention, to pay respect to the

[4:46:04] russian-american outstanding

[4:46:09] U.S. Marine youree platnikov,

[4:46:13] who was murdered in the base of

[4:46:14] okinawa, japan exactly in the

[4:46:17] eastern time 1998. This murder

[4:46:20] is still not resolved. I got a

[4:46:21] lot of trouble trying to stand

[4:46:24] for him to do the right things.

[4:46:30] And I am here to mention it for

[4:46:33] 612 days I cannot get a

[4:46:36] signature on this stipulation to

[4:46:37] get the court order. The judge,

[4:46:42] who is looking at it, is steven

[4:46:44] hickling. He's a rookie judge,

[4:46:46] less than a year, but he is the

[4:46:48] right judge because he has

[4:46:53] experiences as an attorney in

[4:46:53] california state for retirement

[4:46:56] funds. He said yes in the first

[4:46:59] hearing, did not produce the

[4:47:02] order on FEBRUARY 18th, and at

[4:47:05] second hearing on FEBRUARY 27,

[4:47:08] he said, oh, I took it just in

[4:47:10] submission. It's in the court

[4:47:13] transcripts. I am going to file

[4:47:14] probably a federal court case,

[4:47:16] and I am going to look for

[4:47:19] serious compensation. We are

[4:47:20] talking for millions of dollars,

[4:47:22] because in a situation like

[4:47:24] this, you cannot appeal no

[4:47:26] action of a judge. What the

[4:47:29] court of appeal are going to do?

[4:47:31] You don't like it but it's

[4:47:33] administrative procedure. His

[4:47:35] salary after 90 days is supposed

[4:47:37] to be is a extended, just like

[4:47:39] the salary of the previous judge

[4:47:43] who is julia palafox. And like

[4:47:46] this, many judges, the ceo of

[4:47:48] the court david yam sake doesn't

[4:47:52] care. The legal counsel here is

[4:47:53] supposed to be in charge of all

[4:47:54] of the administrative procedures

[4:47:56] in the county. He doesn't care

[4:47:58] either. And we are going to be

[4:48:02] surprised with the court case or

[4:48:04] confrontation. And what is my

[4:48:06] choice? If I cannot appeal it,

[4:48:09] I already did it. The court of

[4:48:11] appeal did it and went to

[4:48:12] california supreme court.

[4:48:13] California supreme court didn't

[4:48:16] take it because it's just

[4:48:18] administrative procedure. Doing

[4:48:20] a personal confrontation with

[4:48:23] the judge, with the

[4:48:25] administration, what you advise

[4:48:27] me? Definitely I'm not going to

[4:48:29] abandon my retirement at age of

[4:48:30] 69.

[4:48:32] It's political, behind it is all

[4:48:36] my troubles is anti-defamation

[4:48:39] league and chabad lube 75. If

[4:48:43] those guys are the official

[4:48:46] government institution, thank

[4:48:48] you..

[4:48:49] >>clerk, robin stieler: no

[4:48:51] further speakers, MR. Chair.

[4:48:51] >>chair, doug chaffee: all

[4:48:55] right. Now we're back to our

[4:48:58] own comments. Ceo aguirre, do

[4:49:01] you have any comments? Thank

[4:49:02] you. Colleagues, any comments

[4:49:03] at this time?

[4:49:05] >>janet nguyen: I have two,

[4:49:08] MR. CHAIRMAN, if that's okay.

[4:49:08] >>chair, doug chaffee: all

[4:49:12] right. Anybody else? Okay.

[4:49:15] These are general comments. Are

[4:49:17] you referring to memorials?

[4:49:18] >>janet nguyen: they're not

[4:49:19] memorials. They're comments.

[4:49:20] >>chair, doug chaffee: okay.

[4:49:21] Please go ahead.

[4:49:23] >>janet nguyen: thank you. I

[4:49:24] mentioned a little earlier but I

[4:49:25] wanted to just talk about it

[4:49:27] more extensively. I wanted to

[4:49:29] give an update on items

[4:49:30] pertaining between the county

[4:49:33] and acmd. As you know, I've

[4:49:34] been appointed again by the

[4:49:36] CHAIRMAN To sit on aqmd board

[4:49:39] and have been working with their

[4:49:41] leadership on two innovative

[4:49:42] environmental projects at our

[4:49:45] landfill. I want to thank our

[4:49:48] CHAIRMAN Aqmd board chair and

[4:49:49] also vice-chair and the aqmd

[4:49:54] city council -- city mayor

[4:49:55] rodriguez from the city of yorba

[4:49:59] linda for joining me -- actually

[4:50:00] rodriguez helped and worked with

[4:50:02] me to bring together to the

[4:50:04] baumann to learn more on the

[4:50:06] issues at the county. So

[4:50:08] specifically at the baumann

[4:50:11] landfill in irvine, oc waste and

[4:50:11] recycle something proposing a

[4:50:13] way to increase capacity of

[4:50:14] organic waste and reduce

[4:50:16] emissions in the process. This

[4:50:18] was going to cost the county up

[4:50:20] to $5 million to purchase the

[4:50:20] state's emission reduction

[4:50:24] credit. After work extensively

[4:50:28] with aqmd, our executive officer

[4:50:30] there and the staff there, it

[4:50:31] has been agreed that the county

[4:50:34] could use our existing credits

[4:50:35] to off-set that cost, which

[4:50:37] brings that amount to zero cost

[4:50:38] to the county. And so we've

[4:50:40] had -- we were able to get a

[4:50:44] savings of $5 million. On top

[4:50:47] that, he -- our ceo over at aqmd

[4:50:49] also gave the green light for us

[4:50:50] to use our existing credit for a

[4:50:52] new method to capture emissions

[4:50:56] and convert them to renewable

[4:50:57] energy that he will the landfill

[4:50:59] processes produces several types

[4:51:02] of gases which apparently flare

[4:51:04] into the air. This method

[4:51:06] itself would reduce 81%, taking

[4:51:08] almost more than 159,000

[4:51:10] vehicles often road annually.

[4:51:12] . This in itself, we would have

[4:51:15] to purchase more than $15

[4:51:18] million in emission credits but

[4:51:20] again now we can use what we

[4:51:21] currently have, which is another

[4:51:23] savings of $50 million to the

[4:51:25] county. So it's -- I'm

[4:51:27] extremely pressed with our great

[4:51:29] engineers at the landfill,

[4:51:29] really appreciate the inland

[4:51:32] phil staff as well, and the

[4:51:33] technology and the thinking

[4:51:35] outside the box, they're really

[4:51:38] trying to help bring down the

[4:51:38] emissions in orange county, but

[4:51:41] on top of that, we were able to

[4:51:42] now have saved oc waste and

[4:51:45] recycling $20 million. And so

[4:51:45] again, thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN

[4:51:47] for joining me and helping us,

[4:51:50] working on this since last year.

[4:51:52] So it's a big, big project.

[4:51:53] Obviously there's -- once these

[4:51:55] permits are finalized in the

[4:51:57] next few months, we can -- the

[4:52:00] projects can begin and we can

[4:52:00] actually celebrate the savings

[4:52:05] and also the lessening 159,000

[4:52:07] cars -- well, equivalent to

[4:52:09] 159,000 cars often road in

[4:52:10] orange county. So it's very

[4:52:12] exciting. Again, thank you to

[4:52:14] MADAM Ceo and oc waste

[4:52:18] management staff for getting us

[4:52:20] as far as we are now. And the

[4:52:22] next item, again, I mentioned

[4:52:25] last meeting our annual free pet

[4:52:26] expo is on APRIL 25th from

[4:52:30] 1:00 to 4:00 at the center park

[4:52:32] west in huntington beach behind

[4:52:34] cathy MAY's restaurant. It's

[4:52:38] off offed wards. There will be

[4:52:39] plenty of free park. We will

[4:52:41] have more than a couple dozen

[4:52:43] local businesses, rescues and

[4:52:44] local animal hospitals working

[4:52:46] together to educate the public

[4:52:47] on animal welfare, and the

[4:52:48] county is covering the dog

[4:52:50] licensing fees and the city of

[4:52:52] huntington beach is covering the

[4:52:54] cat licensing fees. And so

[4:52:55] adoption will be free for

[4:52:57] residents from all over orange

[4:52:59] county and anybody else who we

[4:53:00] would like you to come by,

[4:53:02] please, and adopt the animals

[4:53:04] because they would love to find

[4:53:05] a forever home. Again, a big

[4:53:08] thank you to oc animal care

[4:53:10] staff and wags for providing the

[4:53:12] pets and also the city of

[4:53:13] huntington beach, as well.

[4:53:14] Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN.

[4:53:15] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank you

[4:53:19] for comments. Vice-chair?

[4:53:20] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: thank

[4:53:22] you, MR. CHAIRMAN, thank you,

[4:53:23] supervisor nguyen for excellent

[4:53:26] work supporting the county's

[4:53:28] efforts. And we are all trying

[4:53:30] to do our part and yesterday as

[4:53:32] I mentioned, I went to

[4:53:35] sacramento first to testify for

[4:53:37] senator blake spears' bill,

[4:53:39] which is also co-authored by

[4:53:43] senator um berg. Sb-936, which

[4:53:45] the county helped to cosponsor.

[4:53:49] This bill past out of the senate

[4:53:50] standing committee on business

[4:53:51] professions and economic

[4:53:56] development 10 to 0. It had

[4:53:58] previously past out of the

[4:53:59] public safety committee and now

[4:54:00] we're on our way to

[4:54:01] appropriations. And this is the

[4:54:04] bill to ban nitrous oxide and to

[4:54:07] regulate the size, the flavoring

[4:54:10] and the -- who can sell nitrous

[4:54:11] oxide and for what purpose in

[4:54:12] the state of california. So

[4:54:14] really appreciate my colleagues'

[4:54:16] support. Also we met with the

[4:54:18] governor's office to advocate

[4:54:20] for our budget priority. Some

[4:54:23] of the things that we past today

[4:54:25] to make sure, especially as it

[4:54:29] relates to hr1 and our social

[4:54:31] service agency demands and the

[4:54:33] funding losses that we have the

[4:54:37] state step in. Counties are all

[4:54:38] collaborating together on this,

[4:54:39] the urban counties and the

[4:54:42] governor's office had basically

[4:54:44] expressed that the message is

[4:54:47] being received. Everybody's on

[4:54:48] message, unified, that the state

[4:54:50] needs to prepare some funding

[4:54:53] for our counties to help sport

[4:54:54] social service safety net. And

[4:54:58] then I wanted to also thank

[4:54:59] congressman derek tran, who

[4:55:01] presented us with the $250,000

[4:55:03] check for our -- from our

[4:55:05] community project funding for

[4:55:07] the oc house finance trust for

[4:55:12] affordable housing construction.

[4:55:13] Hr7148 was signed into law

[4:55:16] FEBRUARY 26th. Then funding

[4:55:18] sports development of 2700

[4:55:19] permanent affordable house

[4:55:22] units, and we will leverage the

[4:55:26] 250,000 into $1.25 million in

[4:55:27] affordable housing financing.

[4:55:29] So this investment is part of

[4:55:31] our $14 million funding package.

[4:55:32] Supervisor sarmiento sits with

[4:55:35] me on the orange county housing

[4:55:36] finance trust, and we're doing a

[4:55:39] lot to try to help fill gaps and

[4:55:42] build more housing. I wanted to

[4:55:46] also ask that we take a look

[4:55:46] and -- I meant to mention this

[4:55:48] earlier because this was in one

[4:55:51] of our items. MS. Aguirre, as

[4:55:54] it relates to our copiers or any

[4:55:56] other leased equipment, if you

[4:55:58] could please have procurement

[4:56:02] look into whether or not we're

[4:56:03] being charged tariff fees on a

[4:56:06] monthly basis as it relates to

[4:56:09] these kinds of contracts because

[4:56:13] it's come to my attention that

[4:56:15] businesses in the area are

[4:56:17] getting charged tariff fees on a

[4:56:20] monthly basis. And so give --

[4:56:22] and if it's a copier, it might

[4:56:23] be based on involve printing,

[4:56:26] which could be extremely

[4:56:28] expensive for us as a county.

[4:56:31] So wanting to make sure that we

[4:56:32] understand these extra costs

[4:56:34] that have been added in that are

[4:56:37] outside of our normal contracts,

[4:56:39] especially in light of the

[4:56:41] tariffs being ruled

[4:56:42] unconstitutional. I'm not sure

[4:56:44] how we have to pay tariffs

[4:56:46] anymore. So if we could look

[4:56:48] into that and have procurement

[4:56:50] maybe take a look at some of our

[4:56:52] billings to make sure we're not

[4:56:53] overpaying. Thank you.

[4:56:54] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[4:56:56] you, vice-chair. Supervisor

[4:56:56] sarmiento?

[4:56:57] >>vincente sarmiento: yes, thank

[4:56:59] you, MR. Chair. I'll be brief.

[4:57:00] I only have a couple of things.

[4:57:02] I want to start with something

[4:57:04] not so pleasant. There have

[4:57:06] been recent online threats

[4:57:08] resulting from a smear campaign

[4:57:09] targeting the islamic society of

[4:57:12] orange county. Unfortunately,

[4:57:14] these have been fueled by

[4:57:15] misinformation circulated on

[4:57:19] social media by a notorious

[4:57:21] anti-muslim islam phobic group

[4:57:22] and individuals that hide behind

[4:57:25] their keyboard. I just want to

[4:57:26] make clear that everybody knows

[4:57:29] I stand with the muslim

[4:57:31] community in condemnation of the

[4:57:34] recent vial, disgusting attacks

[4:57:37] on isoc. I personally witnessed

[4:57:39] isoc service not only the muslim

[4:57:40] community but also the broader

[4:57:42] orange county family. It's

[4:57:44] assisted the unhoused, provided

[4:57:45] groceries to the food insecure,

[4:57:47] set up educational programs and

[4:57:48] participated in interfaith

[4:57:51] partnerships. Just last meeting

[4:57:53] I believe we recognized for the

[4:57:55] first time contribution from the

[4:57:57] muslim uncommunity by

[4:58:01] recognizing eid al-fitr for the

[4:58:04] first time here. Sadly we must

[4:58:05] focus on the safety and

[4:58:06] well-being of our neighbors who

[4:58:08] attend services there in isoc

[4:58:10] and over 500 young studentsen

[4:58:12] rolled in their stool school

[4:58:14] there on campus. This is a

[4:58:16] 50-year institution that's been

[4:58:17] not only there for the muslim

[4:58:20] community but also the larger

[4:58:22] orange county community. They

[4:58:24] are located in garden grove. My

[4:58:25] office is committed to working

[4:58:27] with the orange county muslim

[4:58:29] community to rise and request

[4:58:31] that law enforcement investigate

[4:58:33] and if necessary prosecute those

[4:58:34] proliferating this hate speech.

[4:58:36] So that is very unfortunate, but

[4:58:38] let me move to something a

[4:58:38] little bit more pleasant and end

[4:58:41] with this. This past saturday

[4:58:43] was our third annual sponsorship

[4:58:48] of the orange county animal

[4:58:50] care's pet pantry. Our office

[4:58:54] sponsors this a few times a

[4:58:55] year, and the orange county

[4:58:57] animal care does this every

[4:58:59] second saturday of the month

[4:59:01] where free pet food and other

[4:59:03] pet supplies are provided to

[4:59:04] county residents who are

[4:59:04] struggling financially to feed

[4:59:07] their pets. It's a drive-thru

[4:59:08] event, and the need is so vast

[4:59:10] that people line up as early as

[4:59:12] 4:00 in the morning because the

[4:59:13] line can stretch over for a

[4:59:16] mile. I want to thank monica

[4:59:18] and everybody at oc animal care

[4:59:20] and all the volunteers,

[4:59:21] especially don, who is the

[4:59:23] volunteer coordinator. We had

[4:59:28] people there from -- volunteers

[4:59:31] from boeing, pacific life, chase

[4:59:33] bank and uci. This event was

[4:59:37] the biggest yet. We had over

[4:59:38] 423 vehicles come through and

[4:59:40] receive support. There were 38

[4:59:43] volunteers. 804 dogs and

[4:59:46] puppies, 957 cats and kittens,

[4:59:49] 24 rabbits, 52 birds for a total

[4:59:52] of 1,be 787 pets that were

[4:59:55] served. And over 31,000 total

[5:00:02] pounds of food distributed. If

[5:00:05] you ever find yourself with

[5:00:06] nothing to do on a saturday

[5:00:07] morning, please go join

[5:00:09] everybody. It will fill your

[5:00:10] heart to see somebody walk away

[5:00:16] with food that's now got their

[5:00:19] pets. There was a person who

[5:00:20] said he goes without eating

[5:00:22] sometimes just to get food for

[5:00:24] his pet. We broke records on

[5:00:25] saturday. I want to thank the

[5:00:27] team there. And with that,

[5:00:28] MR. Chair, those are my

[5:00:28] comments.

[5:00:29] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank you

[5:00:30] for your comments. Do we have

[5:00:35] any memorials? Go ahead,

[5:00:36] vice-chair.

[5:00:39] >>v. Chair, katrina foley:

[5:00:40] >>v. Chair, katrina foley: today

[5:00:42] I'd like to ask that the board

[5:00:44] adjourn today's meeting in

[5:00:46] recognition of sergeant bill

[5:00:49] stewart of balboa island.

[5:00:52] Sergeant stewart passed away on

[5:00:54] JANUARY 12th, 2026. Born in

[5:00:57] 1929, he was a young age of 96

[5:00:59] years old. We remember bill for

[5:01:02] his devotion to preserving our

[5:01:03] local balboa island history and

[5:01:05] his remarkable service to our

[5:01:07] country. At just 12 years old,

[5:01:08] bill began his storied career

[5:01:11] and service to our great nation

[5:01:13] enlisting as an army air force's

[5:01:15] ground observer corps after the

[5:01:19] attack on pearl harbor. Bill's

[5:01:20] school journey intertwined with

[5:01:22] his military service. He left

[5:01:24] high school early at age 17 to

[5:01:26] rejoin the army air corps.

[5:01:29] After graduating from the eighth

[5:01:31] army signal corps school in

[5:01:32] japan, he later attended cal

[5:01:35] tech on the gi bill before

[5:01:36] returning to service for the

[5:01:38] korean war. Bill's career

[5:01:41] blended his technical expertise

[5:01:42] and leadership as he served as a

[5:01:45] radar unit chief in casablanca

[5:01:48] and working on aircraft radar in

[5:01:52] guam. In 1962 he famously

[5:01:53] supervised the rescue and rest

[5:01:56] occasion of the -- restoration

[5:02:01] of the uss potomac, fdr's

[5:02:03] presidential yacht of which he

[5:02:04] sailed back to the united

[5:02:05] states. For his service he

[5:02:07] earned a world war ii victory

[5:02:09] medal and recognized as the

[5:02:10] youngest veteran of world war

[5:02:12] ii. Bill shared 22 years of

[5:02:14] marriage with barbara miller

[5:02:16] until her passing. Then he

[5:02:18] found joy in his 40-year

[5:02:21] marriage to bobby booth.

[5:02:22] Locally bill remained a

[5:02:25] constant, positive presence on

[5:02:26] balboa island known for his

[5:02:27] commitment to giving back to

[5:02:29] others. He served eight years

[5:02:31] as the treasurer for the balboa

[5:02:33] island improvement association

[5:02:34] and volunteered for nearly every

[5:02:36] major local event, from the

[5:02:39] annual opening day parade to the

[5:02:40] veterans barbecue. Bill's

[5:02:42] legacy of service to our country

[5:02:45] and community lives on in the

[5:02:47] proud flag pole at balboa park

[5:02:49] from which he spearheaded the

[5:02:50] planning and installation. He

[5:02:52] further served as a guardian of

[5:02:54] local history by leading the

[5:02:56] veterans division at the balboa

[5:02:58] island museum, spenting the

[5:02:59] stories of local vets in --

[5:03:01] cementing the stories of local

[5:03:02] vets in our local history. Bill

[5:03:04] is survived by his wife bobby,

[5:03:07] children brad and susannah,

[5:03:08] stepdaughter vicki

[5:03:09] and grandchildren and

[5:03:11] grandsons. Bill also received

[5:03:13] my veteran of the year award,

[5:03:16] and I was able to present it to

[5:03:20] him and share with the american

[5:03:24] legion 291 team, which he was so

[5:03:27] thrilled by. I send my

[5:03:29] heart-felt condolence to balboa

[5:03:30] island community and to bill's

[5:03:32] many friends and family members

[5:03:34] and I request today that we

[5:03:35] adjourn today's meeting on this

[5:03:37] day APRIL 14th, 2026 in honor

[5:03:39] of bill stewart. He will be

[5:03:40] sorely missed.

[5:03:41] >>chair, doug chaffee: thank

[5:03:43] you. Are there any further

[5:03:45] memorials, comments among my

Board Meeting

Agenda

Transcript