[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.
[4:06:03] >>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