Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting

Santa Cruz County, CA · 2019-06-11 · More Santa Cruz County, CA meetings · More California meetings

View original source →

Agenda

[4:16] Announcement by Board Members of items removed from Consent to Regular Agenda

[12:16] PUBLIC COMMENT

[43:00] Action on the Consent Agenda (Items 22-91)

[1:01:00] Consent Agenda

[1:01:00] Minutes of May 21, 2019 9:00 AM

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-443 : Accept claims as approved by the Auditor-Controller-Treasurer-Tax Collector

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-444 : Approve the reading by title of any ordinance considered for adoption that may appear on this agenda, and further waive a detailed reading of said ordinance, as recommended by County Counsel

[1:01:00] ORD-5299 : Adopt ordinance amending Santa Cruz County Code Chapter 7.130 relating to cannabis dispensary siting criteria (approved in concept May 21, 2019)

[1:01:00] ORD-5300 : Adopt ordinance repealing Chapters 7.89 and 7.114, and amending Chapter 5.60 of the Santa Cruz County Code, relating to the sale of flavored tobacco products (approved in concept May 21, 2019)

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-445 : Reject the claim of Stephen & Susan Poli, Claim No. 819-088, and refer to County Counsel

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-446 : Deny claim by T-Mobile West, LLC for refund of property taxes, as recommended by County Counsel

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-447 : Adopt resolution authorizing the temporary transfer of funds to school districts as required by California Education Code, and direct the County Treasurer to make the transfer of funds from the County Treasury pursuant to the approved resolution, as recommended by the Auditor-Controller-Treasurer-Tax Collector

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-448 : Authorize the Auditor-Controller to issue payments to claimants for excess proceeds on certain parcels sold at the March 2, 2018, Tax-delinquent Property Auction in the total amount of $51,107.17 no less than 90 days following your Board’s approval, and authorize the Auditor’s Office to transfer $64,295.37 of unclaimed excess proceeds to the County Tax Loss Reserve fund, as recommended by the Auditor-Controller-Treasurer-Tax Collector

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-449 : Adopt resolution accepting $1,333,835 in unanticipated revenue from Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP) and California Emergency Solutions and Housing (CESH) program; approve contract to distribute funding awarded through the HEAP/CESH RFP process by the Watsonville/Santa Cruz City & County Continuum of Care with Community Action Board for three programs: $459,182 for Watsonville Works! employment program; $422,835 for Rental Assistance Program, and $451,818 for Youth Homelessness Response Team; and take related actions, as recommended by the County Administrative Officer

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-450 : Approve nominations for the 2019 California State Association of Counties Challenge Awards, authorize the Board Chair or County Administrative Officer to sign and transmit nomination letters, and take related actions, as recommended by the County Administrative Officer

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-451 : Approve revisions to the County Policy and Procedures Manual, and take related actions, as recommended by the County Administrative Officer

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-452 : Accept and file report responding to preliminary recommendations of the Advisory Task Force on Justice and Gender, and request that the Advisory Task Force on Justice and Gender work with the Probation Department and Sheriff’s Office to determine the most appropriate way to collect data on and assess the housing needs of justice-involved women, as recommended by the County Administrative Officer

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-453 : Accept and file report on results of Parks Commission meeting, approve plans and specifications for parking lot expansion at the Government Center, direct the General Services Department to advertise for bids and set the bid opening for 3:00 p.m. on July 11, 2019, to return in August 2019 for award of contract, and take related actions, as recommended by the Director of General Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-454 : Accept and file report on the status of the private sector Living Wage Program, and adopt resolution setting the living wage at $17.38 per hour for those employees receiving benefits and at $18.96 per hour for those employees not receiving benefits, effective July 1, 2019, as recommended by the Director of General Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-455 : Approve FY 2019-20 Community Television Budget and Activity Plan, approve contract with Community Television, authorize the Information Services Director to sign, and approve an appropriation of $600,000 from Digital Infrastructure Video Competition Act Public Education Government fees for the Community Television capital budget in FY 2019-20, as recommended by the Director of Information Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-456 : Approve revised salary schedules reflecting salary changes for the Deputy Probation Officer Association and the District Attorney Inspectors Association, as recommended by the Personnel Director and the Auditor-Controller-Treasurer-Tax Collector

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-457 : Approve appointment of David Somerton as the Second District appointee to the Fish and Wildlife Advisory Commission, for a term to expire April 1, 2021, as recommended by Supervisor Friend

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-458 : Direct the Chair of the Board to send a letter of support for US Senate Bill (S.) 923, the Fighting Homelessness Through Services and Housing Act of 2019 (Feinstein) to our legislative delegation, as recommended by Supervisor Coonerty

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-459 : Approve the strategy to address concerns with the UC Santa Cruz (UCSC) growth plans and to help carry out the policies in Measure U approved by the Santa Cruz City voters last June; direct the County Administrative Officer to include a $60,000 allocation in the 2019-20 Budget to implement the strategy conditioned on the City of Santa Cruz allocating an equal amount; and direct the renamed “City – County Task Force to Address UCSC Growth Plans” to oversee the implementation of the strategy and provide regular reports to the Board, as recommended by Supervisor Coonerty and Supervisor McPherson

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-460 : Approve appointment of Serg Kagno as the Fourth District appointee to the Mental Health Advisory Board, as a representative of the general public, for a term to expire April 1, 2020, as recommended by Supervisor Caput

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-461 : Approve action to advance the County Administrative Officer to the next step on the publicly posted salary schedule, as recommended by Chair Coonerty

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-462 : Authorize the issuance of a proclamation honoring Betsey Lynberg, to be signed by all members of the Board, as recommended by Chair Coonerty

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-463 : Approve AB109 Adult Intervention and Treatment Services agreements with: Leaders in Community Alternatives in the amount of $212,110 for workforce and employment services; Encompass Community Services in the amount of $303,409 for mental health services; Santa Cruz County Office of Education in the amount of $300,019.72 for educational programming; Sobriety Works in the amount of $100,500 for the peer navigation program; Volunteer Center of Santa Cruz in the amount of $100,000 for community re-entry support services; and Volunteer Center of Santa Cruz in the amount of $200,000 for programs addressing criminal thinking, behavior and identity; and take related actions, as recommended by the Chief Probation Officer

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-464 : Approve realignment of appropriations for Fiscal Year 2018-19 for the District Attorney’s Office, as recommended by the District Attorney

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-465 : Approve emergency requisition with Coast County Glass in the amount of $52,535 for safety windows at the Blaine Street facility, as recommended by the Sheriff-Coroner

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-466 : Approve revenue and data sharing agreements with the CA Department of Public Health to provide data related to violent and opioid overdose deaths in California for the amount of $10,900, adopt resolution accepting and appropriating unanticipated revenue in the amount of $2,500 for fiscal year 2018-19, and authorize the Sheriff-Coroner to sign, as recommended by the Sheriff-Coroner

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-467 : Accept and file report on Whole Person Care - Cruz to Health pilot, and direct the Health Services Agency to return no later than October 2019 with the next update, as recommended by the Director of Health Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-468 : Approve 2019 Santa Cruz County Suicide Prevention Strategic Plan and authorize implementation of programs for suicide prevention, intervention and postvention, and direct the Health Services Agency to report back by March 2020, with anticipated costs associated with implementation, as recommended by the Director of Health Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-469 : Adopt resolution appointing Gail Newel, MD, to serve as County Health Officer effective July 1, 2019, pursuant to Section 101000 of the California Health and Safety Code, as recommended by the Director of Health Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-470 : Approve amendment to agreement with Front Street, Inc., in the amount of $36,000, to sustain behavioral health support services for clients of the Whole Person Care pilot, and take related actions, as recommended by the Director of Health Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-471 : Approve amendment to agreement with Dientes Community Dental Care in the amount of $10,000, to fund additional service delivery for Fiscal Year 2018-19, and take related actions, as recommended by the Director of Health Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-472 : Defer to August 2019 recommendations for development of the former Harbor Veterinary building located at 2250 Soquel Avenue, Santa Cruz, as recommended by the Director of Health Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-473 : Accept and file Collective of Results and Evidence-based (CORE) Investments report, Status of Phase 3 and Recommendations for Phase 4; and direct the Human Services Department to return to the Board no later than February 2020 with a status report on Phase 4, as recommended by the Director of Human Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-474 : Accept and file the Thrive by Three 2018-19 Implementation Progress Report, approve the proposed allocation distribution, and direct the Human Services Director and the Health Services Agency Director to return in September 2019 with a Thrive by Three status update, as recommended by the Director of Human Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-475 : Adopt resolution accepting unanticipated revenue in the amount of $243,336 from the California Department of Food and Agriculture for Unclaimed Gas Tax Revenue, and $34,000 from an Agricultural Civil Penalty assessed for violations of pesticide use laws and regulations; approve transfer of funds in the amount of $243,336 to the Agricultural Commissioner's agricultural programs trust fund, and transfer of funds in the amount of $34,000 to the Agricultural Commissioner's contribution to other agencies trust fund, as recommended by the Agricultural Commissioner

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-476 : Adopt resolution approving grant application for the Statewide Park Development and Community Revitalization Program, as recommended by the Director of Parks, Open Space & Cultural Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-477 : Approve amendment to contract with Lea de Wit in the amount of $18,000, for a new total not to exceed $126,000, for public art at Felton Discovery Park; adopt resolution accepting $18,000 in unanticipated revenue, and take related actions as necessary, as recommended by the Director of Parks, Open Space and Cultural Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-478 : Defer to November 2019 report on the Coastal Encroachment Policy, as recommended by the Director of Parks, Open Space and Cultural Services

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-479 : Defer to October 22, 2019 report on County Loan Programs to support development of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), known as the My House My Home Program and ADU Forgivable Loan Program, as recommended by the Planning Director

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-480 : Defer to August 27, 2019 public hearing on Public Safety and Hazard Management General Plan and County Code amendments related to the Noise Element and Airport Land Use; and to September 24, 2019 public hearing on Safety Element and implementing hazard/resource ordinances, including but not limited to those related to Coastal Bluffs and Beaches, as recommended by the Planning Director

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-481 : Adopt resolution authorizing application for, and receipt of, Senate Bill 2 Planning Grants Program funds administered by the California Department of Housing and Community Development in order to seek funding for preparation of the Draft EIR and costs of the Sustainability Policy and Regulatory Update, as recommended by the Planning Director

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-482 : Approve contract with Dudek, in an amount not to exceed $399,885, for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the Sustainability Policy and Regulatory Update; direct Planning to return on or before September 24, 2019, with a status update study session; and take related actions, as recommended by the Planning Director

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-483 : Approve amendments to two contracts for Tenant Based Rental Assistance services: with Housing Authority to increase the amount by $60,000 for a new total of $181,875, and with the Community Action Board to decrease the contract by $60,000 for new total of $61,875; and take related actions, as recommended by the Planning Director

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-484 : Approve payment of fiscal year 2017-18 Staples invoices in the total amount of $1,158.08 for July 2017 and September 2017, as recommended by the Planning Director

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-485 : Approve amendments to bylaws of the Historic Resources Commission relating to meeting dates and ex parte communications, as recommended by the Planning Director

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-486 : Approve fund transfers in the amount of $100,160 for the Twin Lakes Beachfront Improvement project; approve contract change order in the amount of $105,470.65, and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-487 : Adopt resolution accepting and appropriating $35,000 in revenue into the Surveyor budget, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-488 : Accept improvements and approve final cost of $223,732.25 for South County Striping project; authorize Clerk of the Board to file the Notice of Completion, and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-489 : Accept improvements and approve final cost of $664,783.68 for Main Street and Bridge Street Improvements project, and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-490 : Adopt resolution accepting unanticipated revenue in the amount of $6,093 from County Service Area No. 22, Kelly Hill, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-491 : Adopt resolution accepting $90,000 in unanticipated revenue from inspection of approved land division and commercial drainage projects, for the Construction Inspection budget, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-492 : Approve transfer of appropriations in the amount of $135,749 within the County Ben Lomond Post Closure Maintenance Budget to complete the Ben Lomond Landfill Sediment Pond Repair, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-493 : Accept improvements and final cost of $185,605.20, for Blue Ridge Drive PM 0.49 Storm Damage Repair Project, and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-494 : Approve lease agreement with the La Selva Beach Recreation District for the La Selva Beach Library facility; approve sub-lease with the Santa Cruz Public Libraries (SCPL) Joint Powers Authority; authorize the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works to make minor revisions to the sub-lease as requested by SCPL; and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-495 : Approve agreement with HF&H Consultants, LLC, in the not-to-exceed amount of $125,000 per fiscal year through June 30, 2023, to provide strategic planning for recycling and solid waste services analysis and consulting, and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-496 : Approve agreement with Stericycle Environmental Solutions, Inc., in the not-to-exceed amount of $175,000 per fiscal year through June 30, 2023, to provide transportation, recycling and disposal services for the County’s Household Hazardous Waste Collection Program, and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-497 : Approve amendment to agreement with Conley General Engineering, Inc., in the amount of $90,000, for a total contract amount of $340,000, for the Soquel San Jose Road PM 5.36 Emergency Winter 2016/2017 Storm Damage Repair project, and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-498 : Approve road closure for the 2019 Pleasure Point Street Fair Event on June 22, 2019, and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-499 : Adopt resolution accepting unanticipated revenue in the amount of $160,000 of Highway Safety Improvement Program funds for the La Madrona Drive Guardrail project; accept the low bid of Conley General Engineering of Santa Cruz, California, in the amount of $94,899; and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-500 : Approve amendment to agreement with MNS Engineers, Inc. in the amount of $20,000 for a new total amount not to exceed $90,000, for 2016 Storm Damage repair project Trout Gulch Road at PM 2.53, and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-501 : Approve the transfer of $65,000 within CSA 7 Boulder Creek to maintain the treatment plant as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-502 : Accept the low bid and award contract to Cal West Construction General Building, Inc. of Gilroy, California, in the amount of $261,150 for the Bean Creek Road 2011 Storm Damage Repair Project, and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-503 : Accept the low bid and award contract to Conley General Engineering, Inc., of Santa Cruz, California, in the amount of $301,680.50 for the Grove Street and Mountain Street Storm Damage Repair project, and take related actions, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-504 : Defer to on or before August 6, 2019 proposed code revisions and a procurement process in support of shared-mobility or mobility-as-a-service using the public right-of-way, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-505 : Defer to August 6, 2019 consideration of a plastic pollution ordinance, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-506 : AS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE FREEDOM COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT: Approve MNS Engineers, Harris & Associates, Quincy Engineering, and WSP for on-call construction management services through April 23, 2022, and authorize the District Engineer to issue purchase orders as needed, as recommended by the District Engineer

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-507 : AS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE DAVENPORT COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT: Approve MNS Engineers, Harris & Associates, Quincy Engineering, and WSP for on-call construction management services through April 23, 2022, and authorize the District Engineer to issue purchase orders as needed, as recommended by the District Engineer

[1:01:00] DOC-2019-508 : AS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE PAJARO STORM DRAIN MAINTENANCE DISTRICT: Adopt resolution authorizing submittal of a grant application for the Ocean Protection Council’s Proposition 1 Grant Program under the Water Quality, Supply, and Infrastructure Improvement Act of 2014 for a United States Army Corps of Engineers Continuing Authorities Program project in the lower Watsonville Slough, as recommended by the District Engineer

[1:01:22] DOC-2019-509 : Public hearing to consider ordinances amending Santa Cruz County Code Chapters 7.128 and 13.10 relating to non-retail commercial cannabis regulations and making findings of exemption from CEQA, schedule the ordinances for second reading and final adoption on June 25, 2019, and take related actions, as outlined in the memorandum of the County Administrative Officer

[1:38:39] DOC-2019-510 : The Board of Supervisors shall recess in order to permit the Board of Directors of the County of Santa Cruz Flood Control and Water Conservation District - Zone 5 to convene and carry out a regularly scheduled meeting

[1:46:23] DOC-2019-511 : Public hearing to consider confirming the established benefit assessments/service charges for County Service Area Number 12, Wastewater Management (CSA 12) for Fiscal Year 2019-20, as outlined in the memorandum of the Director of Health Services

[1:49:16] DOC-2019-517 : Public hearing to consider County Service Area 48 and County Service Area 4 Fire Protection Assessment Service Charge Reports for fiscal year 2019-20; adopt resolution confirming the service charge reports for CSA 4 and CSA 48, as recommended by the Director of General Services

[1:49:46] DOC-2019-512 : Public hearing to consider proposed 2019-20 benefit assessment/service charge reports for various County Service Areas; approve the Engineer's Report for CSA 9A - Residential Lighting, and adopt resolution confirming the benefit assessment/service charge reports, as outlined in the memorandum of the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:51:15] DOC-2019-513 : Public hearing to consider 2019-20 benefit assessment/service charge reports for Sanitation County Service Areas 2, 5, 7, 10 and 20, and adopt resolution confirming the 2019-20 benefit assessment/service charge reports, as outlined in the memorandum of the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:52:56] DOC-2019-514 : Public hearing to hear objections or protests, if any, to proposed 2019-20 Benefit Assessment rates for County Service Areas (CSAs): No. 15, No. 18, No. 26, No. 42, No. 58, and No. 59; consider submittal of all ballots for proposed assessment; and continue the public hearing to June 25, 2019 to allow for tabulation and certification as outlined in the memorandum of the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[1:54:41] DOC-2019-515 : AS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE DAVENPORT COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT: Public hearing on proposed ordinances amending the District Code to establish 2019-20 water and sewer service charges; schedule a public hearing on August 6, 2019, to consider the service charge reports, and take related actions, as outlined in the memorandum of the District Engineer

[1:57:00] DOC-2019-516 : AS THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE FREEDOM COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICT: Public hearing to consider 2019-20 Freedom County Sanitation District sewer service charge report and resolution confirming the 2019/20 sewer service charge report, as outlined in the memorandum of the District Engineer

[2:18:01] DOC-2019-518 : Consider ordinance amending Chapter 8.04 of the Santa Cruz County Code pertaining to County Election Campaign Contribution Control, and schedule the ordinance for final adoption on June 25, 2019, as outlined in the memorandum of the County Clerk

[2:27:50] DOC-2019-519 : Consider presentation of key findings of the regional Farmworker Housing Study and Action Plan for Salinas Valley and Pajaro Valley, and endorse goals and actions that would increase farmworker housing supply within the unincorporated area, as outlined in the memorandum of the Planning Director

[2:44:00] DOC-2019-520 : Approve the allocation of $3,500,000 in Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Funds toward purchase of APN 048-221-09 by MidPen Housing Corporation, and authorize the Planning Director to negotiate and finalize an Affordable Housing Agreement with MidPen related to acquisition and predevelopment activities for an affordable housing project, as recommended by the Planning Director

[3:02:07] APPT-2019-12 : Consider final appointment of Elisa Orona to the Workforce Development Board, as a local business representative, for a term to expire June 30, 2022 (nomination accepted May 21, 2019)

[3:02:20] DOC-2019-521 : Conduct a study session on the 2019-20 Capital Improvement Program, and direct Public Works to present the 2020-21 Capital Improvement Program, incorporating all changes that the Board adopts as part of the 2019-20 budget hearings in Capital Improvement Program related budget appropriations, on or before May 22, 2020, as recommended by the Deputy CAO, Director of Public Works

[3:16:00] DOC-2019-522 : Consider 2017-2019 Biennial Report and presentation on the Syringe Services Program (SSP), and direct the Health Services Agency to return in September and December 2019 with reports, as outlined in the memorandum of the Director of Health Services

[3:36:00] CSL-2019-7 : SCHEDULE A CLOSED PERSONNEL AND LITIGATION SESSION TO BE HELD AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE BOARD'S CONSENT OR REGULAR AGENDA, OR AT ANY OTHER TIME DURING THE COURSE OF THE MEETING ANNOUNCED BY THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE BOARD CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – PENDING LITIGATION (Government Code section 54956.9(d)(1)) A. Antonio J. Chavez, et al. v. Ralph Serrano, et al., and related Cross-Action, Santa Cruz County Superior Court Case No. CV182470 B. Virgil Kester v. County of Santa Cruz, Workers’ Compensation Appeals Board Case Numbers SAL0255522; ADJ3575747; ADJ1636867 Report of County Counsel - will be given at the conclusion of the closed session on any reportable action(s) taken in the closed session

Transcript

Download: Text · SRT

AI TRANSCRIPT

This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person — it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.

[1:23] 2019, Board of Surveys meeting and asked the clerk to call a roll.

[1:27] Good morning. Supervisor Leopold.

[1:28] Here, friend.

[1:30] Capit.

[1:31] A person?

[1:32] And chair, community.

[1:33] Thank you.

[1:34] And I'm going to ask you to join me in a moment of silence in the pledge of allegiance.

[2:04] Sposios, do we have any late additions or additions or deletions to the agenda?

[2:09] Yes, we have a couple.

[2:11] On the regular agenda item 10, there's a revised attachment, a page 151.

[2:18] On regular agenda item 11, there's a revised detachment A, packet page 185.

[2:25] On the consent agenda item 66, there's a correction, the item should read approve amendments

[2:32] to two contracts for tenant-based rental assistance services housing authority to increase

[2:37] by $60,000 for a total of 181,875.

[2:43] on item 69, there's a revised attachment, packet page, 1159.

[2:50] Thank you.

[2:50] Great, thank you.

[2:51] And now I'm going to ask my fellow board members if they have any items they'd like to pull from today's agenda.

[3:05] Yeah, I'm going to pull 663.

[3:12] So that is for the public.

[3:16] That's the approve and allocation of $3.5 million in low and moderate income.

[3:21] housing asset funds, sorts of purchase of APNO-48-221-09 by midpin housing and authorized

[3:29] the planning director to negotiate a funnel for the housing agreement.

[3:33] Okay, so we will make that item, like 20.1, it'll be heard this afternoon.

[3:48] If anyone is here for that item, and would like to speak to that item, you're welcome to do so during public comment if you can't come back for that item.

[4:00] Does anyone else have anything like to like the poll?

[4:04] Okay.

[4:06] Seeing none, let's move on to public comment.

[4:10] This is an opportunity for members of public to speak to us about a couple different things.

[4:14] First, they can speak to us about items that are not on our agenda today but are within the

[4:20] purview of the Board of Supervisors. That's public comment. Second, they can speak to us

[4:24] about items that are on the consent agenda. Third, you can speak to us about items that are on

[4:29] our closed session agenda. Or, for if you can't stay, because you have to get to work or you have

[4:34] another obligation and you want to speak to us about one of our regular item agendas. You can speak

[4:39] to us now but you won't be able to speak to us when that item comes up. I'd ask if you're interested

[4:44] and speaking to us during this part, it's a police stand up and get in a line and we'll

[4:51] have you come forward and talk.

[5:01] I know whether I should say you're honors or whatever, but I just wanted to make a brief

[5:07] statement about plastic.

[5:10] The item before you today isn't the last item you'll see about plastic.

[5:16] I don't want to preach to you about information that's fairly widely available to film

[5:21] blue, there are many other sources, it's everywhere, it's not just a surface, it's a 3000 feet,

[5:29] we already just proven that and it's all over.

[5:33] If we don't start asking grocery stores and other places to replace the plastic with other

[5:40] devices, we won't get in there and it will still show up on our shores and it will be ugly

[5:47] and so forth.

[5:47] So, and the fish will die, and I just don't want to go into all the information.

[5:52] It's readily available.

[5:53] All I want to say is, it's very important.

[5:56] You can do something about it.

[5:57] I've heard that there is a grocery chain for instance in England that's already done

[6:01] without plastic.

[6:02] Thank you very much.

[6:03] Thank you.

[6:07] My name is Tony Crane representing a group in Apthos, California, in Objection to the Second

[6:13] Story Program.

[6:15] It has come to our attention that County Council has requested that you not speak to our

[6:18] community too to the threat of a lawsuit.

[6:21] We have not made any such explicit threats.

[6:24] If we had in the beginning of this debacle two years ago, or you have misinterpreted

[6:28] anything, we have said recently, you can just regard that thought.

[6:32] That burden of fixing a problem you created should not be put on the fixed income retirees

[6:36] and young families in our community.

[6:38] If we thought our best action was to file a civil lawsuit, we would have done that a long

[6:42] time ago.

[6:43] In fact, we believe it is not necessary.

[6:45] We have not been collecting evidence for a lawsuit on just doing your job for you.

[6:49] You have sworn to uphold the law and I don't believe you are doing so.

[6:53] In lieu of a civil action, I have simply reported the crimes that we believe have occurred

[6:58] and that I have represented to you in the last several meetings and I have given that

[7:03] information to the district attorney.

[7:05] I've been presenting the evidence we possess in meetings to you two minutes at a time

[7:10] move any chance of plausible deniability. These are extremely serious issues that you have

[7:15] just regarded. I assume at the recommendation of County Council. In my estimation, they have

[7:20] made several errors along the way, including one email in which it appears that a member of County

[7:25] Council intentionally provided misleading information to the zoning department in the midst of

[7:32] So, let me be clear, we have not and do not intend to file a lawsuit against the county at this time. I stand here before you simply as a witness to and have credible evidence of acts by county and encompass employees that I believe amount to crimes against the taxpayers of California and especially the citizens of Santa Cruz County.

[7:53] So any directive from County Council not to communicate with a witness to a reported crime would be unwarranted and possibly obstructive.

[8:01] Thank you.

[8:07] Good morning.

[8:07] Supervisors.

[8:08] Mr. Plasios.

[8:09] My name is Mike McConnell.

[8:10] I'm the Division Director for Adult Services for the Human Services Department.

[8:15] We want to thank you for your proclamation.

[8:19] Recognizing June as elder abuse awareness months.

[8:22] I have a couple of our key partners with me.

[8:24] speak after me from the District Attorney's Office and Sheriff's Office. As a

[8:30] proclamation states, there are fewer than one in 24 reports of elder abuse and

[8:35] neglect that are actually brought to the attention of adult protective services

[8:39] are law enforcement. Last year in Santa Cruz County about 1500 reports were made

[8:45] to adult protective services, not stellar at math, but I think the actual numbers

[8:50] are probably much higher than that, and we just wanted to thank you for the proclamation,

[8:57] and also for your consistent support of programs aimed at preventing and stopping elder abuse.

[9:05] Thank you.

[9:05] Thank you for your work.

[9:08] Good morning.

[9:09] Todd Leverie.

[9:10] I'm a little bit sure of myself.

[9:11] Again, Teco, Mike, we just want to thank you very much for your proclamation and the help

[9:16] help that this does raise community awareness or this very serious crime. Thank you very much.

[9:25] Jeff Rosell District Attorney, I just wanted to say that elder abuse is something that we deal with

[9:33] on a daily basis, Ed Brown, who will you'll hear a few words from to my left deals with it in our office along with several other attorneys.

[9:40] And we just want to thank you for the support that we feel and that the citizens of our

[9:46] community feel and you have a commitment as you always have from the DA's office to provide

[9:51] education to assist in investigation and the prosecution of these cases.

[9:56] This is just want to thank you very much.

[10:00] I'm Ed Brown and when the prosecutors that prosecutes these cases, I want to thank the board

[10:04] for the proclamation.

[10:06] I also thank the community for the information we get, the banks, the neighbors, the stores

[10:11] to bring the information to us at let us prosecute these cases.

[10:15] Thank you.

[10:16] Thank you.

[10:16] Thank you for your important work.

[10:18] It's critically important that we have a great team that helps us protect seniors from abuse

[10:24] and I appreciate all the different departments that provide that service.

[10:33] Good morning.

[10:34] Dagmar, like we on, Liz Alvabeech.

[10:37] I'm here because I support the ban on the sale of plastic models.

[10:42] Mr. Leopold, I heard you last Friday on KZSU's book Shweckers.

[10:47] Thank you for taking my call or my text on the air.

[10:50] I understand you support the ban on the sale of plastic bottles,

[10:54] but that you need more community conversation.

[10:58] So here we are.

[11:00] And just a few facts to set the stage.

[11:05] You may already this might not be new information for any of you,

[11:09] but I find these facts,

[11:11] particularly startling.

[11:15] 12 million tons of plastic is dumped in the ocean every year.

[11:22] Of the five top pieces that are found on beaches, plastic bottles exist in the top five.

[11:32] Every minute, one million plastic bottles are sold throughout the world.

[11:40] And the most frightening of all statistics that I've come across recently is that by 2050,

[11:50] that is in 30 years.

[11:52] If any of you have children in elementary school, they'll be 30 or 40 years old starting their family.

[11:59] And guess what?

[12:00] There's going to be more plastic in the ocean than fish.

[12:06] So, I have a question both for the board and for the audience.

[12:12] I'd like to see a show of hands who supports the ban on the sale of plastic bottles.

[12:22] And my second question for the board is what are the action items that the board is looking at.

[12:30] This is start with a county-wide ban, first of all in the county buildings and events, and then

[12:39] for, for their own.

[12:41] Thank you.

[12:42] Thank you.

[12:42] Oh, and just let you know, in my three minutes, that was three million plastic bottles that

[12:47] were sold.

[12:48] Thank you.

[12:48] Those two minutes.

[12:50] Yeah, heading to both, and normally it's three.

[12:53] Star's enter, please.

[12:55] Thank you.

[12:56] Good morning.

[12:56] That was startling.

[12:57] My name is Bob Morgan.

[12:58] And I'll just follow up on what the lady said regarding plastics and looking forward to

[13:05] your August 6th on plastic reductions proposals that are being proposed by the county

[13:12] to come to you to review.

[13:14] I also want to say thank you for offering the Association of Counties Challenge Awards,

[13:22] recognizing different departments in the county, and in particular I want to recommend

[13:27] in zero waste headed by Tim Guncheroff as a very good recipient of that county challenge

[13:34] award, and I wish zero waste team good luck.

[13:38] I also want to comment on the approved contract for Dudek to begin the EAR process for

[13:45] the Sustainable Plan.

[13:47] I'm representing Sustainable Sokel, and thanking you for beginning that process, that contractual

[13:53] agreement with Dudek. We believe in the sustainable plan. We think it is an excellent

[13:58] document and we want to thank the Board of Supervisors for beginning the EIR process

[14:03] to get this sustainable plan regulated on the books and law. Thank you very much, supervisors.

[14:14] Good morning, supervisors. I'm Helen, you and historian, the assistant director for the

[14:18] community action board and I definitely support a plastic bottle ban. But I'm here this morning,

[14:23] really too think the Homosexual Partnership, a continuum of care for recommending and hopefully

[14:29] very soon you're bored for proving on your consent agenda this morning, three Homeless

[14:34] Emergency Aid Program contracts with our agency.

[14:38] So building on cabs successful existing programming we're very excited and honored to be able

[14:44] to expand our rental assistance to avoid eviction and homelessness, programming to an

[14:53] in addition to serving additional $5.25 per year, homeless and a company at-

[15:00] With youth and young adults, in achieving their housing, employment, and educational goals, with our collaborative

[15:07] partner, county office of education. And we're very excited to launch the Watsonville Works Experience Program in

[15:14] collaboration with our partner city of Watsonville Public Works to provide work experience for homeless

[15:20] residents of Watsonville and to provide that work experience, the housing and stability

[15:27] supports. All at the same time is promoting the health safety and really the

[15:33] beautification of the city of Watsonville. So thank you so much for your confidence

[15:38] in cab and delivering this impactful programming. And we want to thank you also for

[15:44] supporting effective solutions to homelessness, equity, equity, equity throughout the

[15:49] Thanks so much.

[16:03] If you could restart that, I'd appreciate it if you got it down to two minutes, Mr. Chairman.

[16:09] Please go ahead.

[16:10] That's outrageous.

[16:12] You can building a parallel government and it's been attack on local government for a long time

[16:17] and you know it.

[16:19] The founders of the country had studied various systems of government throughout history,

[16:24] and they found that the United States is not a democracy.

[16:28] Never was and never was and intended to be.

[16:30] We just pledge allegiance to the Republic.

[16:33] I can go through Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson,

[16:36] who talks about turning into dictatorships.

[16:40] John Adams has remembered a democracy never lasts long.

[16:43] It's soon wasted itself and burgers itself, James Madison.

[16:47] It's been incompatible with personal security rights.

[16:51] It has been shortened as it has been violent and it's death.

[16:55] And, of course, we have programs throughout the county that Zack Friend and Sam Farbe

[17:02] Long, too.

[17:02] It's their hope for democracy.

[17:04] Any educated person in the United States knows democracy is evil.

[17:10] The same person that's a media consultant on there has various people at his broadcasts.

[17:15] One of them includes many Ben Doka, who is co-chairman of Leon Fennett, is California

[17:20] Forward, who wants to get rid of 80% of the governments and you know it.

[17:23] Sam Far, the speaker on here, lied on KSCO, he lied before Democratic meetings, and he lied

[17:32] before this lady here, when she was a member of the Watsonville Council, and he said he

[17:36] don't know anything about agenda 21.

[17:39] Yet he wrote the front page saying he would introduce agenda 21 throughout the area.

[17:45] Agenda 21 is anti-American.

[17:47] And it has to do with regionalism and you are guilty of that.

[17:52] You've been expanding regionalism, which is no more than Soviets.

[17:56] And I'd like my extra five minutes, Mr. Coonerty.

[18:00] No, no, for a second.

[18:00] At the same time, no thanks.

[18:03] You're amazing.

[18:08] Next speaker, please.

[18:11] Hi.

[18:12] My name is Alisa The Kiwag, and I have the privilege to be the clinical and program manager of the

[18:17] Gemma Transitional Housing Program.

[18:19] We decided to come here today because we know that reducing

[18:23] recidivism, gender-responsive programming and addiction are

[18:26] really hot topics these days, and so I brought with me here

[18:29] a woman who can speak a little more closely to what her journey

[18:32] has been like with those three items, Jessica Postler.

[18:37] Hi, I'm Jessica Postler and I am a resident at Gemma

[18:41] approaching my graduation date.

[18:43] A year ago, if you had seen me in this building, it would have been for a very different

[18:47] reason. I was lost in my addiction and I was out committing crimes to support my drug

[18:51] habit. All of that has changed and although I put in the work the Gemma House gave me

[18:56] the structure support and a safe place to work on my recovery. I felt shaming guilt for

[19:01] the way I behaved in my addiction. The weighty's at Gemma have helped me work through that and

[19:06] become a healthy member of our community. They have encouraged me to build my sober support network

[19:12] through any volunteer my time to help the less fortunate with the food not-bombs program

[19:17] and cheered me on when I interviewed for the position as a manager at a local spa.

[19:26] Jim has helped me to completely turn my life around and I know there are hundreds of women

[19:30] like me in our community that need this program and I'm here to show you that the funding

[19:37] that you have offered has really changed my life and

[19:40] can change the life of others.

[19:43] Thank you.

[19:44] Thank you.

[19:45] Great story.

[19:51] Good morning.

[19:51] Jim Helmer, Sam Lorenzo Valley resident.

[19:54] As you enter into your budget hearings next week,

[19:57] I wanted to make a first off.

[19:59] I would like to congratulate the board and the RTC

[20:03] for the Highway 9 Complete Street Study in SLV as well

[20:08] as the passage of measure D. Highway 9 is often closed due to mudslides, trees down

[20:19] car crashes, and we have essential streets that border highway 9 that are your responsibility,

[20:27] like Bear Creek Road, Jamieson Creek, Alburode, Phelton Empire, and others. And most of

[20:34] roads are very steep, they've been carved into the sides of mountains, and in 2016 we had eight feet

[20:41] of rain fall on those roads and in 2018 we had another six feet of rain fall. Essentially it's

[20:50] critical, it's critical that our toe ditches are maintained every summer and our culverts and

[20:56] headballs are opened to provide for free flow of water. I commend our public works crews both locally

[21:04] as well as health trans for the good work they do.

[21:07] But as you enter your budget hearings,

[21:10] I would ask you, is there a possibility for new funding,

[21:15] dedicated funding for summer time, the tow ditch cleaning,

[21:19] not only in the SLV area, but certainly in the so-called

[21:22] hills in the core leadous Watsonville area.

[21:25] The last point I'd like to make is the San Lorenzo Valley,

[21:28] or the Bin Loman Park, for years it was a great,

[21:33] tourist attraction and swimming venue and all I ask on these hot summer days is

[21:40] our way we could open up the river again for our feet and our dogs and for just

[21:46] generally cooling down. Thank you.

[21:51] Hi, my name is Mimi Snowden and I'm here to talk to you just briefly about the cannabis

[21:59] ordinance, I spoke last week, I have been very negatively impacted by growing around me.

[22:06] And I would just hope and self my neighbors.

[22:09] So I would just hope that if you are planning on giving permits for cannabis growing, that

[22:14] you would allow people that border the agricultural properties that have residences or residential

[22:20] property, they need to be notified.

[22:22] Not being notified is really not okay.

[22:24] there are other issues that occur with cannabis growing that make life very difficult for a lot of us.

[22:30] The smell, the generators, the pesticides, possibly, the lack of knowledge on some of the cannabis growers. We had a grow next to us illegally last year. We were told it was legal. They left their trash. They lived in trailers. It's really not the kind of environment if you purchased your very valuable home and someone set up all around you that you probably want. But if you were going to get it, you would probably want some kind of notification before they were granted a permit.

[22:58] So I would ask that you consider that when you decide to pass that amendment.

[23:04] Thank you.

[23:05] Thank you.

[23:09] Good morning.

[23:10] Supervisors.

[23:10] Katherine today would save our shores.

[23:13] I have to imagine you saw the front page news yesterday regarding the study the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute published.

[23:21] Late last week about the extent of plastic pollution really crisis in our beloved Monterey Bay.

[23:29] It states among other stunning facts that in parts of the bay there are more swirling microplastics than in the great Pacific garbage patch.

[23:38] The study makes our local need to mitigate plastics very weak real.

[23:43] We are not talking about a non-visible, non-measurable, much-hyped way offshore phenomenon.

[23:49] This is, we are talking about the reality in our sanctuary.

[23:53] Santa Cruz and Save Our Choice has been at the forefront of the fight to stop offshore oil and gas.

[23:58] exploration and drilling in the establishment of our National Marine Sanctuary.

[24:03] We, therefore, cannot sit back idling and allow the Sanctuary our community work

[24:08] so hard to establish and protect from fossil fuel.

[24:13] Now, be polluted by one of the most ubiquitous fossil fuel products, plastics.

[24:18] The irony is tragic.

[24:21] Don't let this community down when action is most urgent.

[24:24] You signaled interest in taking bold action back in February when you passed a director of requiring the DPW to bring you recommendations regarding plastic pollution mitigation upon which you could act.

[24:36] We know we received the recommendations and we know they were broad and reflected the input of your commission on the environment and other agencies and organizations with which you instructed BTW to consult.

[24:49] We also know action has been delayed for May to June, and now until August, please don't let

[24:56] these delays to act continue.

[24:59] Nothing less than our marine environment, our sea life, our human health, and climate change

[25:05] mitigation is at stake.

[25:08] We continue to have faith in you.

[25:11] Please act.

[25:11] Thank you very much.

[25:16] Good morning.

[25:17] My name is Ali.

[25:18] I'm speaking on behalf of Sir Frider Santa Cruz, but also on behalf of the Monterey Bay, which

[25:22] doesn't have a voice. Millions of secretures that cannot touch you. I am also here in support

[25:27] of limiting our plastic production in Santa Cruz and what we allow to sell. I'm told that

[25:34] we're looking for more community support and I'm actually excited about that because I know

[25:38] this community and I know that we can pull people together and prove to you that this is what we

[25:42] want. We're a very tourist tourism driven place and to me I see the excitement of people coming

[25:49] here and seeing a different city as city that's ahead of everywhere else and a city that

[25:52] educates them on issues like this. I'm very confident that we're going to pull the community

[25:57] together so I'm really hopeful that you guys will also listen to us and make things happen

[26:02] because that's where the power is. We've always been really ahead of the rest of the country

[26:07] and the rest of the world and we're starting to kind of fall behind. The things that we want

[26:11] might seem radical but they're not, they're the way of the future. The world is heading toward

[26:16] living plastic production and we can be a really major part of that and we should be because

[26:24] of where we live. Thank you.

[26:30] Good morning to our community and board members. My name is Ashley

[26:33] Blake O. Draker. I'm with O. Sienna. I'd first like to thank you again for your November action

[26:38] to prohibit single-use plastic toiletry bottles in exchange for reusable options as well as the

[26:50] as expressed by others, hopefully that initiative will go county wide.

[26:57] In the light of the studies that were just shared conducted in Monterey Bay, it's clearer

[27:03] than ever that microplastics are a pervasive problem.

[27:07] They're in the bellies of the tiniest plankton to the largest whales and they're literally

[27:12] contaminating our waterways that are that we breathe and our own health.

[27:16] And recognizing that you had previously taxed the Department of Public Works with coming up with a range of recommendations for some priority single use plastic products, but that those recommendations have not yet been agendized for presentation and discussion at a public meeting yet, respectfully request echoing the comments of others, that those recommendations.

[27:40] receive a presentation and the opportunity for your thoughts and comments from the public at

[27:46] your first available meeting in August. I also wanted to mention it's my understanding that you

[27:52] have already supported two pieces of legislation SB 54 and AB 1080 that are making their way

[27:58] through the capital. So I want to thank you for supporting those bills and it's she and is

[28:07] will begin to set some high standards for single-use plastic policies in the state, and hopefully

[28:13] that will inspire action nationwide.

[28:17] But given that Santa Cruz County has a tremendous environmental legacy, we believe that

[28:24] you shouldn't be holding off to see what happens with that legislation, hopefully continue

[28:29] to support it, but also continue to move forward with taking action on other single-use products

[28:35] care that are pervasive in our county for the benefit of wildlife, human health, and our economy

[28:41] as well.

[28:42] Thank you very much.

[28:48] Good morning.

[28:49] My name is Becky Steinburner, I'm a resident of rural Aptos.

[28:53] I sent your board a communication light last night asking you to pull three items from the

[28:58] consent agenda.

[28:59] Number 43, you must pull because if you don't, you will be violating state law on the

[29:04] Brown Act by not publicly discussing Mr. Policios pay increase.

[29:09] to any of you planned to pull this.

[29:12] All right, is he no action?

[29:13] And I'm quite appalled that County Council will allow this to occur, but you will be violating the Brown Act by passing this and consent agenda.

[29:21] It is not public discussion.

[29:24] So I will move along and is quite a good transition into what I'd like to talk with you about.

[29:29] And that is your policy that you adopted almost a year ago.

[29:33] We're in members of the public, can no longer pull consent agenda items that they feel merit

[29:39] better public discussion.

[29:41] We are beholding to you to do it for us.

[29:45] I have written your board on many occasions.

[29:47] I have written individual supervisors on many occasions.

[29:50] The answer has always been no with one exception from supervisor capit.

[29:54] This began with his recommendations from Mr.

[29:58] Palacio to reduce public.

[30:00] I'm in and make board meetings run more efficiently. In March of last year, there was a subcommittee

[30:07] that included some of you. Supervisor Kennedy and Supervisor McPherson, along with county council,

[30:13] that group met again in May and Mr. Palacio came up with recommendations. Your board adopted

[30:20] those recommendations with the addition. Thank you, Supervisor Leopold, for asking that there

[30:24] be a report back to your board in six months on the effectiveness of them that reports

[30:29] never come. I have filed five public records act requests to get information, and I just

[30:36] want to point out reading from one in an email from Rachel Dan, a supervisor, co-inities,

[30:41] an analyst, two Mr. Co-inities, commenting, I guess if we're solely thinking of Becky,

[30:47] then sure it might save some time, and maybe Zack will decline to request a poll items. I

[30:51] think we should think about the other fact that the frequent flyers that staff is trying

[30:56] to quail or women, Marilyn and Becky, primarily.

[31:00] And this is an all-male board.

[31:02] The optics aren't great.

[31:04] I'm so not just so sure that these changes

[31:07] will make much of a positive difference

[31:09] and may just generate a negative perception.

[31:13] Thank you.

[31:14] Thank you.

[31:18] So what I read was just this.

[31:20] Right, so I'm starting to write here.

[31:23] Hi, my name is Rachel Spalding,

[31:24] and I'm just picking out from where Becky left off,

[31:28] I'm going to start at the beginning of the email from Rachel Dan to Ryan Cunity.

[31:33] Recommended action number three makes it seem like staff can change the policies and procedures

[31:38] with regard to board meetings without board approval.

[31:41] This can't be right, but I would like to ask about it.

[31:45] If this is the case, then I think that recommendation should be removed.

[31:48] It's ordered in a way that makes the direction difficult to understand.

[31:52] Number two recommendation says, approve attached policies and procedures changes.

[31:57] But we don't see the attachment, if it's adopting the Rosenberg rules, that's one thing, and I don't see a big issue with that.

[32:04] But if there are additional recommended rules, changes, then I think we should know what staff will be recommending before we put this out there.

[32:12] I'm a little uncomfortable that they are putting your name on this, though they are careful not to attribute the recommendations to your Bruce.

[32:19] In general, I guess this is okay, depending on the specifics, but I wonder about unintended consequences

[32:26] that we aren't thinking of that maybe cause this change to be more troubled than it's worth.

[32:33] For example, they are pushing this issue of not letting the public pull items and instead making

[32:38] the public go through the board member.

[32:40] Board members are then in the position of having to triage consent item request and be the

[32:45] one to make people unhappy if we say no.

[32:47] I'm not sure board members will say no, so what is the benefit in the end except making it look like we are less accessible to the public.

[32:56] Thank you.

[32:57] Thank you.

[33:01] Good morning.

[33:02] My name is Edgar Ross, I'm from Scotts Valley.

[33:05] I'm a guided-moderate-bay aquarium.

[33:06] It does sit at Henry Cow.

[33:10] I collected this and some more stuff that wouldn't fit on the trade.

[33:15] In the 20 minutes that took me to walk from the end of Highway 17 to here on Ocean Boulevard.

[33:21] There's lots of stuff here, lots of straws, as you probably guess, paper cuffs are not

[33:28] actually paper, they include a plastic liner that's how the coffee doesn't melt through

[33:35] and come into your lap when you're driving.

[33:40] These things were reworked and maybe 40 years ago, they didn't like the pollution of these things

[33:48] they thought that if they created a version that would break up in the little pieces, it would

[33:52] be better. But with a realized, is it the little pieces that are still plastic, there's

[33:57] still non-digestable by anything? And it's a little fish that get eaten by bigger fishes

[34:06] that eat the little stuff. This stuff that we can't even see. And I'll remove this because it

[34:10] I would like to thank you.

[34:16] Any members?

[34:19] It's hard breaking for me to bring this back up again on the 26th

[34:23] for the consent agenda, the bending of tobacco flavors.

[34:28] I am an ex-smoker at the same time, so I quit smoking myself.

[34:32] And I think it's a choice we make.

[34:34] But it breaks my heart as well to see all this business going to the internet

[34:37] sales and to other counties that other people benefit from.

[34:42] And as of today, I might lose one of my businesses and

[34:45] which has been there for 10 years, plus and I've always done the right things, follow the rules, and I've ran a clean tobacco shop, not a smoke shop.

[34:54] So please reconsider this if you can, begin to choose and ask the CHP's and the police departments on who runs the best clean shop.

[35:04] Please consider it. Thank you.

[35:13] Maryland Garrett I think coming here almost 20 years since I retired from teaching and are

[35:20] purpose and speaking as to advocate for public health, the well-being, the community community

[35:29] quality of life here. How try to bring forth facts on adverse policies and impacts from

[35:39] development and corporate policy. I've been focused on wireless technology. Your obligation,

[35:48] why we have government, is to protect the public and the community well-being. But what are

[35:55] you doing instead supporting big development, corporate interests? And you don't want to hear

[36:03] from the public, why are you here, if you don't want to hear

[36:08] or public input, and take it into consideration,

[36:13] and adjust your policies accordingly.

[36:17] Your censorship of the consent agenda items is outrageous.

[36:26] Thank you very much.

[36:26] Thank you.

[36:27] Thank you.

[36:29] Thank you.

[36:31] I've watched a Nevada County Board of Superbizers meeting the other day.

[36:36] What a contrast of listening to the public.

[36:42] There was an appeal case of a cell tower.

[36:45] The appellant has 30 minutes, so did AT&T.

[36:50] need to go back to the other policy and Ryan, you did this when you were on the Santa

[36:57] Cruz City Council two minutes for everyone. There's a lot of assault or demeaning of women

[37:05] demeaning of whistleblowers in this country and we need more people to speak out and give you

[37:13] direction and then public ensures. Thank you.

[37:21] Good morning, members of the board. My name is

[37:23] Senator Estadia, I'm an organizer with Copa and I'm here representing thousands of families

[37:28] that are part of Copa from our eight.

[37:32] I'm here to speak on item number 63 that was pulled for this afternoon. All across the county, I've been hearing numerous stories about congregations shrinking, because of the affordable housing crisis.

[37:45] Families overcrowding up to four or five families and one household teachers that are not able to afford to live in this county because of the housing crisis.

[37:55] We're here to support this allocation of funding because we believe this is part of the solution

[38:01] to start addressing the affordable housing needs.

[38:05] We support this allocation of funding that item number 63 allows and that we hope that this afternoon you do so as well.

[38:11] Thank you.

[38:21] Good morning, gentlemen.

[38:23] Stony Brook, and I'm here on behalf of your veterans, Lea as on to our Human Services Commission.

[38:30] I want to mention that on Thursday June 6th, the 75th anniversary of DDA, the Allied

[38:36] invasion of Europe to liberate world from Nazi domination.

[38:41] 156,000 troops, 6,000 vessels, and 11,500 aircraft participated in the largest amphibious

[38:49] assault in history.

[38:51] Although the war in Europe continued for another 11 months this marked the beginning

[38:54] of the end of World War II.

[38:56] On that single day, Santa Cruz County lost one of our sons on D.D. Army Sergeant Carl

[39:03] N. Riggs, H.24, and a graduate of Watsonville High School. He was a paratrooper and

[39:09] easy company, 566 Parasute Regiment, 100, and 1st Airborne. His infantry squad company

[39:15] commended for Sergeant Robert, a twin-engine C.47 in route to England from their drop zone.

[39:21] The plane was damaged by an aircraft fire over Normandy and crash in the lost of all 22 soldiers

[39:26] and crew.

[39:29] Overall, Santa Cruz County lost 97 residents in World War II and combat and other

[39:34] causes and hundreds more were wounded or traumatized. And we consider the county population

[39:39] of that time was approximately 47,000 people for the whole county. That loss must have had

[39:46] a tremendous impact on our community. Please remember to honor the sacrifices of these

[40:02] If I can get that name of the Watsonville High School, I'd like to make sure it's names

[40:07] on that memorial in front of the Watsonville High School.

[40:11] You could submit it here, and then I'll get it.

[40:16] Thank you.

[40:17] Next speaker.

[40:21] Good morning, Board.

[40:22] My name is Rafael Edmundis.

[40:23] I'm with the Monterey Bay Economic Partnership.

[40:26] I just wanted to make a couple of comments on the allocation to mid-Pen.

[40:33] As you may know, Monterey-Bacon, my partnership works on different initiatives.

[40:39] I'm working the housing initiative, which supports housing at all different levels, close

[40:47] to transit, close to services and work to prevent sprawl.

[40:52] I don't need to elaborate on the housing context in which we all work and operate in and

[41:01] which you make decisions in, I just wanted to say the given that we want to use every tool

[41:11] available and have every opportunity to work toward the issue that is central to almost

[41:22] all issues.

[41:23] We think about health care, education, workforce development, housing impacts, I used to be a teacher and I worked with housing because I realized whether I wanted to or not I had to deal with housing because before I stood, wakes up to go to school, she wakes up in the housing situation before an employer, an employee wakes up to work, same thing to housing situations there and that impacts

[41:53] outcomes and packs, the economy, et cetera, et cetera.

[41:57] So I just wanted to say, given that context and given what we know and hear all the time

[42:03] about the housing situation, I just want to say let's make sure we have every tool available,

[42:10] every opportunity to deal with this situation that impacts us on all levels whether we are aware

[42:18] of it or not.

[42:19] Thank you very much.

[42:20] Thank you.

[42:25] Thank you.

[42:25] Let's be our final speaker.

[42:29] I have anything to talk about.

[42:32] You know, it's very disrespectful.

[42:34] This is my victory hat from the threat from down below.

[42:37] People that are coming down from below, right, in the political system, just a corruption.

[42:42] There, you're imposing our barrier to sure, we're all, I want to be able to remind

[42:45] California residents, man, we're good Americans.

[42:48] This is a constitutional republic.

[42:49] You need to respect our brown right, right, right, and restore it.

[42:54] This is shameful.

[42:54] We might as well just get rid of the county board of cigarettes because you guys did the do nothing, right, and let Carlos Plaza exert him will save money.

[43:02] Because he's imposing all this arbitrary ruin. You guys are following his guidance.

[43:06] You know the American public, we, hey, this sounds scripted reality that people are watching my activism.

[43:11] I want to be able to share members of the public. We had a victory today, the American public.

[43:15] I took on the whole establishment in Santa Clara County on EBT, a being oppressed by the whole system, the whole corruption, and I prevailed.

[43:25] election.

[43:25] Code allows for members of the public to come up in here and to engage in VMM protests.

[43:30] We have a right to bring our political props into the challenge of the system and to keep

[43:33] it accountable.

[43:34] Listen, I'm not embarrassed of my humanity, I'm not embarrassed of my humanity because

[43:39] you guys want to sit here and pose this arbitrary rule and totally disrespect the

[43:43] American public.

[43:43] I find it very shameful.

[43:46] I had good things to say, but it's very shameful.

[43:51] I want to be able to share members of the public that we have a new heavy weight

[43:54] Mexican champion, and I'm proud of that.

[43:57] I've been American-born Mexican, and I won my victory as an American,

[44:02] and then respecting my constitutional rights,

[44:04] and I want to be able to tell people that, you know,

[44:06] I'm trying to get back home, because I'm in political exile, right?

[44:10] And I'm wearing this hat, I remember the public about this,

[44:13] after one of my activists, friends about this,

[44:14] so I can sport it, and I appreciate that.

[44:17] I appreciate the members of the public's prayers, emails,

[44:21] a support in helping me out. I appreciate Gary Arnold looking out for me. He's a good man.

[44:27] Thank you. Thank you. That concludes of a comment. I'm going to bring it back to the board.

[44:32] Unless there's anyone else who was waiting to speak. Okay. I'll bring it back to the board for

[44:37] action on the consent agenda. These are items 22 through 91 with the exception of 63.

[44:43] And I'll ask four members if they have any comments. Supervisor Friend.

[44:48] Thank you, Chair. Good morning.

[44:50] Just a couple of things I appreciated the work that the Parks Commission did in regarding to the parking lot work and that we're going to be seeing that item through on item 35 on item 35 on item.

[45:02] It's nice to see this sustainable plan going forward. Hopefully this process will move and a more expedited fashion moving forward.

[45:14] I know the

[45:30] to stand top of this storm damage even with some of the changes at the federal level, to

[45:34] know that we're moving forward to what we can do, especially out on tropical, to a mean

[45:37] a lot for the residents that live in the rural areas.

[45:42] Lastly, on Adam 87, I know this is a deferral regarding the shared mobility of new

[45:47] abilities.

[45:47] The service just to continue to express our concerns about scooters, which I know are currently

[45:53] banned within county code, but I think that it should maintain explicit that way.

[45:57] I think that a lot of the communities that have these shared mobility services, specifically

[46:01] the scooters, have a lot of safety issues, a lot of kids are getting hurt.

[46:05] And I have concerns with other communities that have done it.

[46:07] I don't think that that's something that we should allow here, so when that comes back

[46:10] in August, I'll be looking for that explicit ban on that regard.

[46:14] Thank you.

[46:15] Thank you.

[46:16] Supervisor Leopold.

[46:17] Thank you, Chair.

[46:18] Good morning.

[46:19] There are a number of items here on the consent agenda.

[46:22] I won't comment on all of them.

[46:24] I'll comment on a few of them that I feel are important on item number 34, which is the report on the preliminary recommendations from the Justice and Gender Task Force.

[46:36] I appreciate the work of our County Administrative Office on going with the Task Force.

[46:42] I think as we heard from the testimony this morning during oral communication that providing safe housing for women who are coming out of jail,

[46:53] can really make a difference and turn around people's lives.

[46:56] And so we need to continue to work on this issue to have these options if we want to

[47:03] lower recidivism and be a safer community.

[47:09] On item number 35, this is the issue of the parking lot and the Parks Commission, I was

[47:16] glad to see that the Parks Commission was able to weigh in on this.

[47:19] I think they came up with a reasoned set of recommendations on glad that it's something that

[47:28] we can do and meets a lot of different needs, which is providing more space for people

[47:33] here, as we've heard from previous testimony, but also making sure that there is some ongoing

[47:39] support for our parks department, which is always a need of resources and is very valued

[47:45] by members of the community.

[47:48] On item number 41, I appreciate the work that my colleagues,

[47:52] supervisor Cooody and McPherson did to work with the city of Santa Cruz

[47:56] on our UC Santa Cruz growth plans response.

[48:02] I think it's very important that when we look at impacts both on campus

[48:07] and off campus that those off campus impacts also include

[48:12] in the unincorporated area.

[48:14] In Live Oak, we have seen an increasing number of students who live there and you can always tell

[48:22] when the school year is over because the mattresses come out and everything else, but the impact

[48:29] of university growth is not just a city issue, it's a county issue and I just want to make sure

[48:34] in the work that goes on. I like the idea of hiring someone to help do the organizing around

[48:40] And I think that's critical when I appreciate the work by my colleagues.

[48:46] On item number 58, which is resolution approving a grand application to the state, I want

[48:54] to thank the Parks Department.

[48:56] The Farm Park is a park that was promised to the community over 20 years ago.

[49:02] We've been working very hard to build all the pieces of that park.

[49:07] I know the Parks Department is very committed to that, and I think that with the investment

[49:12] that we've made with the community is made, that it should be a very attractive grant application,

[49:17] and I have high hopes for success and given the recent success at the Parks Department is having grants,

[49:25] I have cautiously optimistic.

[49:29] On item number 62 and 63, I would just point out that these are two important items,

[49:35] or not 62 and 62 and 65, these are two very important items, items, in which we know

[49:46] that there's going to be a lot of input from the public.

[49:52] They both involve the planning department.

[49:54] One is around our public safety and hazard management general plan.

[49:59] amendments and one about the study session on what's going to be going into the EIR for

[50:05] the sustainability update. If we're going to be successful in looking at both these

[50:11] issues, it's going to be important for us to think about our agenda on the 24th to make

[50:17] sure that we have time to actually go over these issues sufficiently. I just want to put

[50:22] that out to the planning department that we need to be prepared for that because I think that

[50:28] What we heard from community members is they're ready for us to move forward with the EIR

[50:31] on the sustainability update, and I don't want to push off having that discussion

[50:36] before we start that process.

[50:40] On item number 72, I want to thank public works for their work on Main Street.

[50:45] This has been some work that's been long time coming, and I appreciate the efforts of the

[50:50] department to make sure that this safety improvements can be made for the school and the

[50:55] report it really makes a difference.

[50:58] And then, lastly, on item number 87, this is another deferral.

[51:02] This is our second deferral for the shared mobility and mobility as a service.

[51:06] I look forward to a robust item on August 6.

[51:10] The community is very interested in looking at the shared mobility opportunities and we've

[51:16] seen the success of jump bikes.

[51:18] And I hope that on August 6 we have a chance to really talk about that.

[51:22] Okay.

[51:22] You said there's some items that I'd like to come in on number one is the number 26 on

[51:28] flavor tobacco.

[51:29] I've heard from so retailers in my district concerned about losing revenue from the sale

[51:34] of mental cigarettes as well as other non tobacco products and the customers buy when they

[51:39] come in to buy their offices or if they're sourced by cigarettes.

[51:45] I agree that if we ban these products it would be ideal if nearby jurisdictions consider

[51:50] doing the same so that we don't really create an unfair competition.

[51:55] I'd like to give additional direction on that issue to the Health Services Agency to work

[52:00] with the other jurisdictions.

[52:03] In the ban on county and possibly adopt us having those other cities, possibly adopt us.

[52:10] Similarly, we're going to send report back to us in January of 2020.

[52:14] I think they would give them enough time to do that.

[52:16] On item number 40, I want to thank Senator U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein for recommending additional federal funding to address the homelessness issue.

[52:26] We need a greater investment to supplement the local and state funds.

[52:30] Meaning, for what is really a national program, it's everywhere, you go.

[52:35] On item number 41 that's been mentioned, I want to thank my colleagues, Supervisor Coonerty, for bringing

[52:40] aside into the board and happy to support it on UCSE growth.

[52:46] We have an obligation in this community and throughout the state of California to educate

[52:51] Californians in our university system and UCSC is a big part to play and that were to really uphold

[53:00] UC world-class research institution that it is. But we also are a small community and with

[53:09] finite resources and I think this gives us a voice with the university to help shape what the future

[53:15] looks like and how we mitigate the impacts, where there'd be in housing, water, transportation,

[53:22] and I'd like to say that as the University has grown and has had a substantial impact

[53:28] in our county, no question about it, that they have really come forward and done some really

[53:34] great work on reducing their use of water. I mean, they have thousands of more students

[53:38] and they're using less water than they did 20 years ago. They, the student of the Metro

[53:43] service of which I'm a board member. That's half of our ridership that goes to UCSC and

[53:48] they pay a portion of that to have that increased ridership. So UCSC has tried and succeeded

[53:55] in being a good partner with this county. We just want to make sure that when they are looking

[54:00] at this growth that is going to be going up or going throughout the UCC system that they have

[54:07] our voice and our concerns about how they address particularly housing and its impact on this

[54:13] community on this county in the future, but I think they have done some positive things as

[54:20] they have grown.

[54:21] So we shouldn't forget that.

[54:23] It is with us and it's going to stay with us and it's going to grow so we just have to

[54:26] see how we can make that impact as less severe on the rest of the community as possible.

[54:33] And number 44, the retirement of Betsy Lindberg, who lives in my district and public works

[54:38] department.

[54:38] And she has been stellar, she has been fantastic and working on several items and the public

[54:44] works department, and I just wish her well on a retirement.

[54:49] I'd like to see her come back from time to time and give us some advice.

[54:52] I'm sure she'd like to do that.

[54:55] But in number of 51, our new Health Officer, Dr. Gail Newell, we look forward to meeting with

[55:02] you and working with you and the future and congratulations.

[55:05] There's some serious issues health related as we know, and we're going to be discussing some of them today and later in the day.

[55:13] I also like to mention on item 64 and five, the Sustainable Santa Cruz County.

[55:19] I'm glad to see the environmental review coming forward that this has been a work in progress for four or five years,

[55:26] and it's going to be a real critical element in how this county grows in the future.

[55:32] And lastly, on an item's 85 and 6th storm repairs, I'm very glad to see the contracts awarded

[55:39] for a storm repair in Boulder Creek and near Scotts Valley.

[55:43] As it have been throughout the county, our public work department has been under the gun.

[55:47] We've had some benefits, of course, with Measure D and SB-1 being upheld from the state

[55:54] to get additional revenue, but Santa Cruz County has also been the, I had the storm and

[56:01] several of these storms that have happened in the last four, five years and some of them

[56:05] would we have half of the road repair work that needs to be done in the state of California

[56:10] or in our county. I know a lot of people are frustrated that there's damaged in roads and

[56:17] pop holes in front of their streets and so forth, but we're trying to address what we can as quickly

[56:22] as we can with the most heavily traveled roads for the safety of the travelers in our county.

[56:29] Public works really, and everybody in that department from Matt Machado, the director on

[56:34] down Steve Weisner in charge of the deputy in charge of the robber pairs, I think they should

[56:41] have a real.

[56:42] Thank you.

[56:42] Big thank you from all of us for directing what we can do with what we have in monetary resources

[56:49] as quickly as it can.

[56:50] It's a huge job, but we're getting it done,

[56:54] road by road, pothole by pothole.

[56:56] So thank you for your patience,

[56:57] but thank you to the Public Works Department

[56:59] for staying with us.

[57:00] Thank you.

[57:03] Thank you.

[57:04] Thank you.

[57:05] I'll just comment on number 62.

[57:08] That concerns the Watsonville Regional Airport.

[57:13] And I don't know, it's not clear.

[57:17] And it will be brought up August 27th

[57:20] in September, 24th, but it's a two mile radius around what's the alert port.

[57:28] We have the information on what, what change are we looking for?

[57:35] I don't know if you've got any idea.

[57:44] I'm sorry, I don't have that information in that.

[57:46] It is coming back.

[57:47] It is scheduled for August 27th, and we will be sure and get that information.

[57:52] Oh, here you go.

[57:56] These are changes to, this is David Carlson from the Planning Department, and these are

[58:00] changes to bring our county code in general plan policies in compliance with the State of

[58:04] California Airport Land Use Planning Handbook.

[58:09] But we're changing the noise all about, involves changes to the noise element and changes

[58:15] to the land use element and changes to one chapter of the county code to incorporate the requirements

[58:21] to the handbook into the county's policies and ordinances.

[58:25] Okay, the second restrict the airport from having flights is it's certain in hours.

[58:35] It does not involve restrictions on the airport and it involves restrictions on land use around

[58:40] the airport.

[58:41] Thank you.

[58:42] All right.

[58:43] Thank you.

[58:44] Did I draw any comment?

[58:47] Okay.

[58:48] And then, so I just have a couple of comments on the items today.

[58:52] On the item number 35, we just got government center parking.

[58:55] I was glad that the Parks Department, our Parks Commission was able to take a look at it.

[58:59] I'd like to ask General Services to look at, come back with a plan to bring us a couple more

[59:04] picnic tables for the remaining green area outside so people can enjoy their lunch in that space.

[59:11] On item number 45 on the AB 109 contracts, I want to appreciate the probation departments.

[59:16] real driven, being driven by outcomes and adjusting contracts accordingly.

[59:23] Unlike in the future, all board items regarding AB 109 contracts should include outcome

[59:27] data from the contractors previous AB 109 contract, if there was a previous contract so we

[59:33] can see how they did not only, how they plan to do going forward but how they did coming

[59:40] into it.

[59:41] And then on item number 56 was a thrive by three, I just want to say how thrilled I am with the progress this program is continuing to grow and continuing to have a really great impact on children and babies in our community and I want to become a model around the state and I really forward to the report.

[1:00:00] And then we're going to have in September around this. And I'm actually sorry, an item number 41, which is the UCSE growth and measure you. This is really a commitment that we made after the voters overwhelmingly approved measure you to say that when we look at the potential impact of 10,000 new students on campus, that we are going to advocate that for reduced impacts and traffic water housing, and all the ways and make sure that our voices heard among policy makers in Sacramento who are really looking for.

[1:00:30] driving these decisions.

[1:00:33] So now I'll look for a motion on item number on the consent agenda with the exception of

[1:00:37] item number 63.

[1:00:38] I will move the consent agenda as amended.

[1:00:40] Okay, a motion by Leopold and a second by McPherson, all those in favor, please say aye.

[1:00:46] Opposed?

[1:00:47] That passes unanimously.

[1:00:49] We're moving on to item number seven, which is a public hearing to consider ordinances

[1:00:52] of Mending Santa Cruz County Code, Chapter 7.128, and 13.10 to relating to non-retail commercial

[1:01:02] cannabis regulations and making findings of exemption from CEQA scheduled the ordinances

[1:01:07] for a second reading and final adoption on June 25th, 2019 and take related actions as outlined

[1:01:13] in the memorandum of the CAO.

[1:01:48] So, the report?

[1:01:48] Yeah, go for it.

[1:01:55] At the April 23rd Board of Supervisor meeting, staff stated that the last 10 months of code implementation

[1:02:01] have revealed the time-consuming nature of the use permit process.

[1:02:05] And this process is taking much more time than it was expected, especially for our existing

[1:02:09] commercial agricultural operators.

[1:02:14] Staff identified various areas of county code, which can be perceived as creating difficulty

[1:02:20] in the process and sought input on the board from the board on various recommendations.

[1:02:29] Our recommendations included the incorporation of a nursery and processor license type,

[1:02:35] aligning canopy and definitions with the state regulations, removal of general eligibility

[1:02:41] restrictions, increasing the cultivation area in the CAC4 and M zones, and removal of cultivation

[1:02:50] and size limits in the CA zone for indoor operations.

[1:02:55] These recommendations were incorporated into 7.128 and 1310 for the board to review at the

[1:03:02] May 14th reading, and these were provided to the Planning Commission for review at the May 29th

[1:03:08] meeting.

[1:03:11] While incorporating recommendations, staff identified a need for additional terms to make the

[1:03:16] modifications to code work, so we added several terms to the definition section and

[1:03:21] modified the canopy definition to mirror state regulations.

[1:03:28] We proposed incorporating a nursery license type to allow for immature plant growth, genetic

[1:03:33] development and cloning, so that growers don't have to pay state license fees based on mature

[1:03:39] plant canopy for nursery operations.

[1:03:42] These types of operations have to meet the eligibility restrictions in the T.P. and RA zones

[1:03:47] that the board has previously approved.

[1:03:51] Cannabis processing was previously included, but the activity of processing was not defined.

[1:03:57] To process cannabis means to dry, trim, store, and package.

[1:04:03] Processing is allowed as part of cultivation operations, but we are proposing to allow processing

[1:04:08] to be done at an independent offsite facility.

[1:04:12] We're proposing to incorporate a processor license in the CA, C4 and M zones, as staff is identified

[1:04:19] this as a gap in the market. Currently we have multiple outdoor growers cultivating cannabis

[1:04:24] who are not processing cannabis on site due to financial costs associated with complying with

[1:04:30] fire code. They are shipping all their cannabis off site and out of county, which is increasing

[1:04:36] stresses on our roadways and decreasing tax dollars for the county currently.

[1:04:43] Originally,

[1:04:44] eligibility restrictions were put in place to protect the local market but were proposing to remove

[1:04:50] the registration requirement based on only 2% of registrants have applying for a use permit

[1:04:57] and just over 10% have completed the pre-oplication process at this point.

[1:05:04] We're proposing to increase the cultivation area in the CA zone by differentiating the cultivation

[1:05:10] area from the canopy. This increase does not apply to the coastal zone and the canopy is the mature

[1:05:17] plant area or the flowering area where the cultivation area is the immature and mature plant

[1:05:23] area.

[1:05:24] This additional space will provide cultivators an extra 1.2 and extra 1.25% of the land for

[1:05:32] a single operator or up to 2.5% of the partial size for multiple tenants.

[1:05:40] We're proposing something similar for the C4 and M zones by providing additional space to cultivators

[1:05:47] to maintain sufficient immature plant stock to maintain continuous flower operations.

[1:05:52] This is in line with other jurisdictions and with state code.

[1:05:58] We're proposing to allow development in the CA zone of existing impervious areas,

[1:06:04] as long as the area was permitted or legally non-conforming.

[1:06:08] This development would not have a cultivation area limit tied to the size of the parcel,

[1:06:13] Similar to how cultivation size is not limited by personal size in the C4 and M zones.

[1:06:19] This would allow redevelopment of existing infrastructure and hardscape while restricting any takes of agricultural soil.

[1:06:27] The goal is to eliminate pressure on the C4 and M zones while preserving agricultural lands.

[1:06:35] We're proposing to change all use permits to level 3 for existing buildings in the CA, C4 and M zones,

[1:06:43] and allow crop conversions in the CA zone to be completed via a Level 3 review.

[1:06:49] This will decrease processing time for use permits by up to three months.

[1:06:56] Now, prior to the May 29 planning commission meeting,

[1:07:00] staff prepared a revised version of the use charts in 1310 based on board concerns expressed

[1:07:06] at the May 14th meeting.

[1:07:07] The revised use charts include a permit level of three or four for all cultivation sites in the CA, C4 and M zone parcels, which are currently a level four or six review.

[1:07:20] A review level four includes a public comment period of 21 days to provide feedback.

[1:07:26] All cultivation sites, which are adjacent to a park, or a...

[1:07:30] Partial with a different zoning and have a home will be subject to the level four review under the proposed version. Now, the planning commission recommended this version, and this is what has been provided to the board and the attachments.

[1:07:45] Questions?

[1:07:47] Any questions? Seeing none, let's open up for public comment. Is there anyone who can public would like to comment?

[1:07:56] Please line up if you have a comment today.

[1:07:59] Good morning, Darren's story with Santa Cruz County,

[1:08:04] cannabis alliance down in South County,

[1:08:06] a group of 20 farmers working on getting streamlined

[1:08:09] and getting these operations up and running.

[1:08:13] I hear a mention quite a bit about increasing tax revenues,

[1:08:17] but it's not really about that.

[1:08:19] It's about increasing jobs and economic vitality.

[1:08:22] It helps to reduce crime.

[1:08:25] Keeps kids off the streets and really just adds benefit

[1:08:28] to the community in general.

[1:08:31] I was down in Greenfield yesterday at a processing facility there.

[1:08:35] They built it from scratch.

[1:08:37] They provided 350 jobs to the local residents,

[1:08:40] and it's going pretty well.

[1:08:43] Not another facility somewhere that up in Mendocino,

[1:08:45] they're able to rehabilitate the Fetsor winery,

[1:08:49] which had been in disarray for over a couple decades.

[1:08:53] They now have 286 people on staff.

[1:08:55] They're continuing to make improvements.

[1:08:58] not of these are new buildings, they're just rehabilitating existing agricultural buildings

[1:09:02] and providing jobs, doing it right, doing it correct, working with the community, all the

[1:09:07] stakeholders, neighbors, you name it, just trying to create a new business and a new industry

[1:09:13] and we like to do the same thing here in Santa Cruz County. We've been trying to do this for

[1:09:18] over three years in the meantime that people in Greenfield and Mendocino are already up and running

[1:09:23] and providing quite a bit of jobs.

[1:09:26] And right now we have about 50 people on staff.

[1:09:28] We'd like to create a process and facility

[1:09:30] that would be similar to these facilities.

[1:09:33] Keep all those jobs and the economic vitality here

[1:09:37] in Santa Cruz County and hopefully some tax revenue as well.

[1:09:40] That's always nice, but it's not the main point.

[1:09:43] Thank you.

[1:09:45] Hi, Pat Mello.

[1:09:47] First, let me say thanks for going forward with these changes.

[1:09:51] it's really going to help at least the folks who are still struggling to make this work and

[1:09:55] the commercial acts on. But we've got a bigger problem. I think that all of you are aware

[1:10:00] at this point that we had hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of registrants folks who are

[1:10:05] interested in going from what was legal medical businesses now into this new state system of regulation.

[1:10:14] And we've done absolutely terrible about getting those folks in. And some of them weren't

[1:10:18] community members, some of them left.

[1:10:20] Most of them work community members and are still here.

[1:10:24] And my big problem with that is that we've actually pushed them

[1:10:28] into now, you know, not as criminalized, but a criminal channel.

[1:10:34] And now we're spending all this money, which we should be spending on thrive

[1:10:37] by three children, unmet needs in the community, on enforcement.

[1:10:43] So it's kind of just a, where did we go?

[1:10:46] forwarder backwards. And, you know, my, the main issue that it's not just these folks

[1:10:53] who now have to figure it out in this, you know, criminalized channel, it's that we took,

[1:10:58] you know, the whole Santa Cruz Mountains and what used to be by 7.126 legal gardens

[1:11:05] are now illegal. And, you know, we have no protections for the environment, no protections

[1:11:12] for the people who are going to use those products and no tax revenue at all off of any

[1:11:18] of those things.

[1:11:19] So we can sit here and celebrate the changes that are long overdue and necessary for a

[1:11:25] certain number of folks, but we really need to get moving on everything else, or all we're

[1:11:30] going to have is illegal cannabis in Santa Cruz Mountains, and that was not the goal.

[1:11:34] And you're right in your district, Bonnie Dune, only has illegal cannabis at this point.

[1:11:40] It's not a success.

[1:11:40] So, thank you. I'm really sorry. This is my hometown. I wish that all of you guys knew what it was like to have this happen.

[1:11:48] Thank you.

[1:11:54] Good morning. I'm Ray Pasquale. I have over 35 years experience in the highly regulated food and agricultural industries for major companies on the East Coast and the West Coast.

[1:12:02] Over the past 21 years, I served as a leader of the many of these companies as either present or CEO.

[1:12:07] I'm honored to represent our company, HQP, Incorporated, or High Quality Products, an extremely

[1:12:13] proud to serve as CEO of HQP in an exciting new legal industry.

[1:12:18] We are highly respected and highly established licensed cultivator and licensed distributor

[1:12:25] located in Mosslining, California, in the County of Monterey.

[1:12:29] I am here in hopes the Board of Supervisors will favorably consider amendments to Santa Cruz

[1:12:34] County's cannabis regulations.

[1:12:35] Our company supports the amendment to increase allowable canopy space, input, and pervious areas

[1:12:42] based on the discretion of the cannabis licensing official.

[1:12:47] Well, HQP currently operates our business in Monterey County.

[1:12:51] Our company has an acid purchase agreement for five acres in Santa Cruz County.

[1:12:57] In order to maximize the company's investment, our business client calls for redevelopment

[1:13:01] of these impervious areas in the commercial agricultural zone.

[1:13:05] Currently, cultivation in Santa Cruz County is limited based on parts of size, two-and-a-half

[1:13:09] for parts of size for single occupants, or 5% for parts of size for multiple occupants.

[1:13:15] The proposed amendment will change, but not only have a change in limit, but based on

[1:13:20] parts of size up to the discretion of the cannabis licensing official.

[1:13:24] High quality products has many young and energetic workforce that will provide a future

[1:13:29] foundation for our company.

[1:13:30] We currently employ total of 67 employees, about 40 of those, or 60% of workforce commute

[1:13:37] from Santa Cruz County to Monterey County.

[1:13:39] Our team members commute five days a week, and because we are a cultivator, we have several

[1:13:43] team members who cultivate during the weekends.

[1:13:46] The amendment to increase a allowable kind of space in pervice and would solidify our

[1:13:50] business decision and not restrict our investment on the Santa Cruz County.

[1:13:56] The benefits of operating the Santa Cruz County for our current employees will allow for

[1:13:59] to contribute, can you do seem to congestion a high travel?

[1:14:03] Thank you.

[1:14:04] Highways, well.

[1:14:05] So thank you very much.

[1:14:09] All right, Robert Kidney, I'm like Kid Allen Brothers.

[1:14:12] And I just wanted to speak today.

[1:14:14] I did want to thank the supervisors.

[1:14:16] I think since the last meetings in May, there has been a change in attitudes by the

[1:14:22] county towards trying to move the process forward, as far as applicants I want to appreciate

[1:14:28] that.

[1:14:29] House of support, the recommendations of the CLO, and I think the CLO was really working

[1:14:35] now to create a sustainable cannabis business in Santa Cruz County.

[1:14:41] The main message that I want to talk about today is we're not concerned, you know, if we

[1:14:47] can get through the process, we're not concerned about competing against Mendocino or Monterey

[1:14:52] or Carpenteria, because I think they're all pretty much going to be on a level playing field.

[1:14:57] But I've been going to a lot of different...

[1:15:00] Some seminars were there talking about the future. And in the future, when no one knows what it will be, if it will be legally, federally legal, but there's a good chance. And we know very well about competition from offshore. So I've just heard that there's going to be 50 to 100,000 hectares of cannabis now going to be grown in the Savannah of Bogotá. And I do know about competition from Bogotá and from Colombia.

[1:15:28] And I just want you to know that make sure that all of this effort we're putting into to build

[1:15:34] cannabis industry in Santa Cruz is in just a short-term blip with a lot of effort, but that five years now.

[1:15:41] It doesn't exist because we over-regulated, we overcast, and we put too many restrictions that we could be competitive on a world market.

[1:15:52] I think Santa Cruz has potential to have a very good, profitable cannabis industry if we grow good quality clean product for a local market.

[1:16:03] But I just want to make sure that we are able to have a business for a long term.

[1:16:07] Thank you very much.

[1:16:11] Okay.

[1:16:12] It's me, me, Snowden again.

[1:16:13] No, Mike.

[1:16:14] Mike, Mike.

[1:16:15] You already spoke to this issue.

[1:16:16] So, can I have a question, can I just know what a level four is, what the kind of levels

[1:16:24] in order to get permits?

[1:16:26] Well, that's what it was.

[1:16:28] The planning department has asked that question.

[1:16:29] That's fine.

[1:16:34] Good morning, Board.

[1:16:35] My name is Robert Singleton.

[1:16:36] I'm the Executive Director of the Santa Cruz County Business Council.

[1:16:39] I just want to say that our organization considered a lot of these changes, reviewed them,

[1:16:43] and just want to say we support the direction of your board's moving, and I'm making it easier

[1:16:47] for local business owners to bring their products to market, to make the process easier to

[1:16:53] conform to and ultimately just to make it so that more people are helping to produce and provide

[1:16:58] community and economic vitality here at Santa Cruz County. Obviously we think there should

[1:17:02] be a lot more done in terms of helping to facilitate these businesses and allowing for more

[1:17:08] legal access and more legal ability to start your business to get permanently and get up and running

[1:17:14] As I would cut down the black market and help generate more tax revenue, but this is a step in the right direction, so

[1:17:19] Just saying what the changes. Thank you.

[1:17:25] Good morning.

[1:17:26] And he was Jesse Roberto, and today I'm speaking to you as a member of community prevention partners and we do appreciate what the Board has done and

[1:17:35] the proposed changes we do support that and with that said, there is a strong need for local non retail cannabis businesses to be rapidly licensed and

[1:17:45] participating in the regulated market.

[1:17:48] Regulation benefits our whole community.

[1:17:50] It decreases youth access, supports responsible cannabis businesses, protects the environment

[1:17:56] and brings in tax revenue.

[1:17:59] So we also support the proposed public notice hearing at a level four for adjacent properties

[1:18:06] that are residential to the C.A.A. zones.

[1:18:08] And we also support an annual review process that also gives the public a chance to bring any concerns in at that time as well.

[1:18:20] The current reviews process through planning, as you all know, had not been entirely effective and inadvertently promotes an illicit market.

[1:18:29] So even with the recommendations today, we still have barriers in the licensing program and the planning department in order to meet the school of the 75 licensed businesses.

[1:18:43] We needed to continue to identify clearly name and address barriers to participation in the regulated market or else we will continue to have the opposite of what we intended and want as a community.

[1:18:55] We urge you to use these quarterly reports from the cannabis licensing office to assess incrementally

[1:19:05] if the shifts in this ordinance are working.

[1:19:08] And then be able to adjust accordingly in a timely manner and ensure that the system is working

[1:19:14] and that we're on track to meeting these licensing needs.

[1:19:18] We all stand for well-being of use of the environment of neighborhoods and of local individuals

[1:19:23] to be financially sound enough to meet their needs and stay in Santa Cruz.

[1:19:28] So, policy is one of the best tools to achieve that impact, but it only works when the

[1:19:33] regulatory system is designed to protect the community.

[1:19:36] It's working for.

[1:19:36] Thank you.

[1:19:37] Thank you.

[1:19:37] Thank you so much.

[1:19:44] Marlon Garrett, the last statement I want to pick up on that it only works when the

[1:19:59] a determination of exemption from sequo,

[1:20:04] California environmental quality at wood,

[1:20:10] you know, disclosed if this is harmful to the environment or not.

[1:20:16] And I think sequo is vitally important to any big projects

[1:20:24] or developments in here too.

[1:20:26] I've heard that some cannabis growing,

[1:20:31] they use rodent and sides or different pesticides on the crop.

[1:20:36] That's really environmentally damaging

[1:20:39] anyway you look out of the way it gets into the larger environment.

[1:20:45] The use of water is another question.

[1:20:48] What's happening to the drain so I think this should be changed

[1:20:54] to say that you require CEQA, California Environmental Quality Act, criteria to be met.

[1:21:05] That's, I think it's vital importance, that's my point.

[1:21:09] Thank you.

[1:21:10] Thank you.

[1:21:13] Speaker of final speaker.

[1:21:14] Anyone else?

[1:21:15] Secretary Kennedy, members of the Board, Kirk Schmidt, appearing, again, addressing new

[1:21:21] As to existing green houses on C.A. land, I support the changes that have been made, particularly

[1:21:29] the changes dealing with license registration to open it to a broader group instead of

[1:21:34] restricting it to pre-registerance and also the changes as to zoning.

[1:21:40] There were some minor errors that were cleaned up by the Planning Commission two weeks ago,

[1:21:47] And I appreciate that, however, there was one remaining error that I would not notice until now, and it deals with the definition of a greenhouses, which is definition of age.

[1:21:58] This in your proposal, and this is a new definition, and the word used is just incorrect. It says constructed of glass or an opaque material which allows natural light to enter.

[1:22:12] OPEC does not allow natural light to enter the correct order, which would be translucent,

[1:22:18] which transparent, much like government should be transparent instead of OPEC.

[1:22:22] So I request that you make this one minor change to definition H.

[1:22:28] And last May.

[1:22:31] In 2018, when you approved this ordinance the first time, it came back for the second reading of the following month.

[1:22:39] And it was bifurcated so that that portion of the ordinance that was not within the coastal zone could go into effect at that time.

[1:22:45] And I assume that this will be the same procedure of this occasion. Thank you very much.

[1:22:50] Thank you. That's our final speaker. I think I'll first turn to planning and ask you to quickly review the implications of a level four permit.

[1:22:59] as

[1:23:03] was asked.

[1:23:05] A level four permit is an administrative permit.

[1:23:09] There is however public noticing on two different occasions.

[1:23:13] The planning director or the staff is the decision-making body,

[1:23:16] but level four permits are appealable by anyone,

[1:23:19] and they would be appeal to the zoning administrator.

[1:23:22] Great. Thank you.

[1:23:24] Now, are there any other questions from my fellow board members?

[1:23:28] Well, maybe staff could just address the issue about the definition that was just brought up by our last speaker.

[1:23:38] Anybody want to give it a shot?

[1:23:40] I guess you drew the short straw.

[1:23:42] Yes.

[1:23:44] The term opaque was put in maybe incorrectly, but I we thought it was correct because we used opaque to me in a material where light can come in, but you can't actually see directly through it.

[1:23:56] because some greenhouses are made of a material that you can't see through, but it allows light to come in.

[1:24:03] So I will leave it at that.

[1:24:08] I don't know whether Council wants to weigh in.

[1:24:13] My impression was that it matches the definition in state law. I was just trying to find it.

[1:24:18] Perhaps we could move on and I'll see if I can find it.

[1:24:22] Okay. Are there any other questions?

[1:24:25] For comments?

[1:24:26] Super.

[1:24:27] I'll leave just brief on the comments.

[1:24:30] I think that my position on this is pretty well known.

[1:24:32] I appreciate the fact that the planning commission attempted

[1:24:34] to or did come back with additional noticing

[1:24:38] adjacent to residences.

[1:24:40] I still don't actually think it goes far enough.

[1:24:42] I think that we should recognize just in general

[1:24:44] on the noticing that.

[1:24:46] You'll now for overwhelmingly on cannabis-related issues

[1:24:50] in Santa Cruz County, you'd have more notice

[1:24:52] if a vacation rental was in your neighborhood

[1:24:53] than if the cannabis grow is occurring.

[1:24:55] And I just think that's a policy decision

[1:24:57] that board can make, but we should at least be honest

[1:24:59] about the fact that this noticing,

[1:25:02] especially if the administrative level really rarely changes

[1:25:05] the outcome with conditions and probably doesn't make

[1:25:08] them much of a difference.

[1:25:09] But with that said, I mean, I think that it's an attempt

[1:25:12] to at least provide information to neighbors

[1:25:14] with that work, getting it before immediately after the last vote.

[1:25:18] We did receive it a lot of concerns from people that way.

[1:25:21] I also think that this is a larger expansion on cultivation policy than it's actually been presented.

[1:25:27] It's really been proposed as to Minimus, but it's actually larger than that.

[1:25:30] I share Mr. Kidney on this concern about international competition, but I share it in a slightly different way,

[1:25:36] which is to say that one of the reasons that we have so many of these underused greenhouses is because of the issues that were brought up.

[1:25:44] My concern about allowing for the construction even on impervious locations is that it should the market collapse.

[1:25:51] As, by the way, has been predicted by a lot of people that come to before the board,

[1:25:56] then will be stuck with the exact same situation.

[1:25:59] We can't deregulate our way out of that situation on international competition,

[1:26:04] because there's a lot of other elements on labor rates, which is the number one drive on that,

[1:26:07] that the county has no impact on.

[1:26:09] So, realistically speaking, if you don't want the entire

[1:26:14] pop-ro valley to look functionally different in the next five years,

[1:26:18] and then the next five years after that, which is to say that you'd have a lot of new structures that serve no value, then you would want to be pretty restrictive on what you can allow these constructs, and this construct doesn't allow that.

[1:26:30] So, I just can't support it. I understand why staff is going that way. I respect the concerns from the community about the black market.

[1:26:38] I think a lot of the comments have been self-fulfilling

[1:26:41] prophecies.

[1:26:41] I mean, asking for regulation, allowing them to create a regulatory framework,

[1:26:45] and asking for deregulation, because you don't

[1:26:46] like what the regulation is, is a difficult policy

[1:26:50] making process, but it's a fluid process.

[1:26:53] Even if it's a bit opaque sometimes, it's a fluid process.

[1:26:58] But I'm not supporting it.

[1:26:59] And I think that there's more that can be done.

[1:27:01] I know that this issue is going to continue to come back to us.

[1:27:03] And I think, unfortunately, the only thing that's

[1:27:05] going to continue to come back to us is more and more

[1:27:07] of regulation and protections for neighborhoods and these agricultural areas, and I'm just concerned

[1:27:14] about what that I'll mean for the value moving forward, but I guess time will tell how that

[1:27:20] pans out.

[1:27:21] Thank you.

[1:27:22] Thank you.

[1:27:23] Thank you, Chair.

[1:27:24] Thank you for the comments from members of the public as everyone knows we spent a lot of

[1:27:29] I'm talking about this business, this industry, the change in laws and trying to come up with

[1:27:38] something that actually worked.

[1:27:40] I respect my colleague, Comin' Although, I don't agree, because, you know, that just

[1:27:46] this weekend, I went down to the Kitty Island Brothers farm for the Gerber Daisy festival.

[1:27:55] And it was a great event and I recommend everybody attend that festival whenever it gets put on.

[1:28:03] But you can just see the acres of green houses that sit empty.

[1:28:09] And thinking that that that that could be used in a successful way here in our county is a good thing.

[1:28:17] It helps a local business, a local farmer,

[1:28:19] people who contributed to the community to continue doing what they know how to do which is

[1:28:26] grow plants with flowers and contribute to the economic base of our county. We could live

[1:28:34] in fear of the future and say let's not do anything because we might be challenged in the

[1:28:42] future with international trade and so therefore we shouldn't do it. I don't agree. I think

[1:28:49] that the balance that's struck here, which is not going into agricultural soil.

[1:28:57] But using areas that have already been disturbed, or which there might already be in

[1:29:01] pervious surface, is a good balance.

[1:29:05] That is going to be a business decision by farmers and landowners about whether they want

[1:29:10] to make investments in their property, whether we want them to redevelop their spots,

[1:29:14] whether they want to invest in new technologies.

[1:29:16] And I think that's worthwhile, and I think that it will be no surprise to any of us here that over the next five years we're going to be doing a lot of recalibration, because a lot of our policy has been driven by the unknown, fear of the unknown.

[1:29:35] And as this state regulatory structure reveals itself and we try to fit in with that and it's clear what the market looks like.

[1:29:46] We're going to need to recalibrate.

[1:29:49] That's not necessarily deregulations.

[1:29:52] I would argue that's effective policy,

[1:29:54] because we shouldn't just stay the way.

[1:30:00] We think in 2008 or 2018, if we know more in 2020 or 2008. We're going to know a lot more about this industry.

[1:30:11] We're going to know about its impact. We're going to know a lot more about its economic contribution to the county.

[1:30:17] We're going to know a lot more about what's happening nationally or even internationally.

[1:30:21] And we will have to make changes to that.

[1:30:24] That's what we do, especially in an area,

[1:30:27] which we don't have any previous regulatory experience,

[1:30:32] and which there are so many differences

[1:30:36] county to county, state by state country to country.

[1:30:40] So I think these are reasonable changes

[1:30:45] that don't open the door too wide,

[1:30:47] but allow good commercial activity to go on,

[1:30:51] the addition at the planning commission

[1:30:53] to deal with those commercial ag properties

[1:30:57] that are joined residential or park properties,

[1:31:01] is a balance, and I think that's a good balance.

[1:31:04] And notification is important.

[1:31:07] And there's a lot of vacation rentals in my neighborhood.

[1:31:09] They all get those same blue cards

[1:31:11] that people will get now if they join CA Parks

[1:31:17] that is going to have cannabis. So I'm not exactly sure that they're going to be less regulated

[1:31:25] than vacation rentals. It's pretty light. That's a couple hundred dollars. It's a form for

[1:31:33] some people you fill it out once and that's it. The folks here have to go through a tremendous

[1:31:38] amount of investment. They have to clear a lot of regulatory hurdles. They have to be

[1:31:48] overseen by not only the local authorities, but the state authorities, and they have to pay a tremendous amount of taxes.

[1:31:56] And so I don't agree there, but I understand the point that he's making.

[1:32:02] He just wants to make sure we have a well-regulated industry.

[1:32:05] I think this is well-regulated, and commercial ag is a policy choice that we're making,

[1:32:11] which makes sense that plants grow in the places where we've designated for plants to be grown.

[1:32:15] So I would move the staff recommendations.

[1:32:19] So we have a motion, a second, a second, a second.

[1:32:23] Was there any other comments?

[1:32:24] Yeah, I just would like to, this has been a work in progress

[1:32:28] for, and we're still progressing, so to speak,

[1:32:30] and we still have a long way to go, maybe.

[1:32:32] But I do appreciate working with the agriculture department,

[1:32:36] county agriculture department.

[1:32:40] I know that we have worked to try to stay independent

[1:32:42] and make our own rules as far as possible, but there is also some, we have to recognize

[1:32:48] some state regulations too as we move along.

[1:32:51] But I do support the level four, proposed sites in your parks and residential areas.

[1:32:57] We have, we really, this has been an effort to strike a balance between lowering the

[1:33:03] various for cannabis industry and also protecting public safety and providing some public

[1:33:09] notification.

[1:33:10] And I think this is what we're proposing meets that balance.

[1:33:15] I do also support the losing of restrictions around pre-registration because I think

[1:33:21] that's been a tremendous stumbling block that we've had.

[1:33:25] We set up a program really in a way that was designed to give our local growers an advantage

[1:33:30] but it doesn't seem to have worked out that way to achieve the result that we were seeking.

[1:33:35] And so I do support what we're moving toward.

[1:33:41] I mean, I mean, I'm concerned about the medicinal marijuana aspect of this and us having

[1:33:46] that be available.

[1:33:49] And that will continue to work on that, I believe.

[1:33:52] And I also, I know that there are some concerns about, especially in the mountain areas,

[1:33:57] which is a lot of my district and the center runs of valley.

[1:34:00] They would like to have a commercial license.

[1:34:02] But there's many, many concerns, public safety concerns regarding fire, roadways, and so forth

[1:34:10] that is going to be very difficult for us to meet some of those requirements.

[1:34:15] I think to make that happen in a general response.

[1:34:20] But in general, I do support what has been proposed.

[1:34:24] And I thank everyone for their patience and working with this.

[1:34:28] And I do really do appreciate the office for our licensing officer, too.

[1:34:33] Thank you very much.

[1:34:35] Thank you.

[1:34:36] I think everything has been mentioned here.

[1:34:40] Excuse me.

[1:34:41] I think all the arguments have been mentioned.

[1:34:46] I guess what bothers me is this never stops.

[1:34:50] We keep backing up and we keep saying we're going to get rid of another restriction.

[1:34:56] We're going to get rid of this.

[1:34:57] We're going to keep, we've ridden some rules, and we finally have to enforce them.

[1:35:07] I do understand the state requirements,

[1:35:13] exactly if you could just clarify it for me here.

[1:35:19] We're allowing, we're going with the state regulation of this, or are we, we're lining with various pieces of the state regulations, specifically with the nursery license and with the processor license.

[1:35:35] We're not adopting other portions of the state regulations by any means. We're just aligning with them on those two aspects.

[1:35:44] So if we're not,

[1:35:49] anyway, let's go ahead and vote.

[1:35:53] Well, before we vote, I want to ask to be figure out the

[1:35:56] step-inational question.

[1:35:59] I find that the state law uses the word greenhouse.

[1:36:02] I can't find a definition for it.

[1:36:04] I suggest that since we are trying where we can to be consistent with

[1:36:08] state law, that you give us the authority to be consistent with

[1:36:12] state law after this meeting.

[1:36:14] I would add that to my motion.

[1:36:20] I'm supportive of the motion, and I'm going to call the vote, so just to be clear the motion before us is the staff recommendation with the additional direction for county council to make sure our greenhouse definition is compliant with state definitions or consistent with state definitions.

[1:36:38] Okay, all those in favor, please say aye.

[1:36:43] Opposed?

[1:36:45] Sorry.

[1:36:46] Okay.

[1:36:46] So that passed three to two.

[1:36:49] And we will now move on to our 1030 scheduled item, which is the Santa Cruz County Board of Directors

[1:36:56] Flood Control and Water Conservation District zone five.

[1:37:00] And I'll ask the clerk.

[1:37:04] Sorry.

[1:37:04] It was three to two with supervisor, friend and cat, but now we're moving to Zone 5 and I'm

[1:37:13] asked you to call the role.

[1:37:37] Do you want to call us on five roll?

[1:37:41] Direct?

[1:37:47] Direct, really, a poll.

[1:37:49] Here.

[1:37:49] Friend?

[1:37:50] Cabinet.

[1:37:52] Excuse me, chair, sir.

[1:37:55] And committee?

[1:37:55] Here.

[1:37:57] Are there any late additions to the agenda today?

[1:37:59] No, they're not.

[1:38:02] So, any additions to lesions or corrections?

[1:38:06] Okay. Let's move on to item number one, which is oral communication.

[1:38:09] It's an opportunity for members of public

[1:38:11] the speakers about items that are within the purview of

[1:38:13] zone five, but not on today's agenda.

[1:38:26] Good morning, Becky Steinburner.

[1:38:28] I have a request.

[1:38:30] I try to attend these flood control meetings,

[1:38:33] but it is always somewhat of an enigma to me.

[1:38:36] What zones cover what areas?

[1:38:38] They are never described in your agenda.

[1:38:41] And it would be very helpful to members of the public

[1:38:44] if they could understand what these areas,

[1:38:47] these specific zones are.

[1:38:51] I would like some clarification, I believe, that is our own five-covers

[1:38:54] Capitola.

[1:38:55] Is that correct?

[1:38:56] Thank you.

[1:38:57] So to that end, I would like to discuss with you a recent appeal

[1:39:02] that I brought before your board, regarding a self-assility

[1:39:07] that will because you didn't take action to stop it,

[1:39:12] be built in the flood zone,

[1:39:18] it will require a block of concrete, basically seven feet high.

[1:39:23] And I want to make clear that the building itself will not be flood-proofed as is required

[1:39:31] by the 50% significant improvement rule because of changes that were made in the project description.

[1:39:38] And that concerns me, especially with the rise in flood levels as climate change models are

[1:39:45] being predicted.

[1:39:47] And I really think that you're bored and the planning director need to take a look at these

[1:39:52] policies and make sure that the public will be protected in the event of increasing flood

[1:40:00] in the Reparion Zone.

[1:40:03] Thank you very much.

[1:40:07] Thank you.

[1:40:09] to move on to item number two, which is to approve zone five minutes.

[1:40:15] I'll make a motion to approve in a quick comment that to direct a much

[1:40:19] out of that we had talked about the possibility of coming back with consent items associated with

[1:40:24] zone five and seeing that happen. A number of these items appear to be things that could be on a

[1:40:28] consent calendar. I'll just recommend it action on the minutes with that additional

[1:40:33] comment.

[1:40:34] So, we have a motion, and we have a second, all those in favor, please say aye.

[1:40:38] Aye.

[1:40:39] That passes unanimously.

[1:40:41] Item 3, as the Board of Directors of the Santa Cruz County Flood Control

[1:40:44] Water Conservation District, so in 5, except in 5, the third quarter report for the fiscal year

[1:40:51] 2018 and 19, so in 5, expansion infrastructure revenue has outlined minimum random of the district

[1:40:57] Thank you, Chair and Directors, Matt Machado, the Zone 5 District Engineer.

[1:41:05] The item before you is the Zone 5 Extension Construction Revenue for our third quarter.

[1:41:09] The recommended action is to accept and file this report and I can answer any questions you

[1:41:15] may have.

[1:41:16] Any questions from the Board members?

[1:41:18] Any public comment?

[1:41:21] Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the Board.

[1:41:22] We'll recommend it.

[1:41:23] The motion by Leopold, second by friend, all those in favor, please say aye.

[1:41:27] Aye.

[1:41:28] That passes unanimously.

[1:41:30] Item number four is as Board of Directors of the Santa Cruz County Flood Control,

[1:41:34] Water Conservation Zone five, Consider Resolution, Accepting Uninticipated Revenue of

[1:41:40] $56,000 into the Santa Cruz County Zone five budget as outlined.

[1:41:45] Thank you.

[1:41:46] Thank you, Director.

[1:41:47] Thank you Chairman and Directors.

[1:41:49] The item before you is revenues that resulted from increased plan review and permit processing

[1:41:55] application fees for land development projects in zone five.

[1:41:59] The recommended action is to adopt the resolution accepting and appropriating and

[1:42:03] attestigated revenue of $56,000 into Santa Cruz County flood control and water conservation

[1:42:09] district zones five expansion construction budget and with that I can answer any questions

[1:42:14] even now.

[1:42:15] Move to approve.

[1:42:16] Hold on.

[1:42:16] Is there any public comment?

[1:42:18] Seeing not only about the board, we've got a motion by CAPIT.

[1:42:21] Second.

[1:42:22] Second by friend, all of us in favor, please say aye.

[1:42:25] That passes unanimously.

[1:42:27] On item number five, which is, as the board of directors of zone five,

[1:42:31] consider accepting and approving the proposed budget for 2019, 2020,

[1:42:36] zone five and the zone five expansion and circulation budgets

[1:42:38] as outlined in the memorandum of the district engineer.

[1:42:42] Thank you, chair and directors.

[1:42:43] I do want to highlight a few items in our budget

[1:42:45] our proposed budget this year. Under our Zone 5 Master Plan update, we've shown a proposed

[1:42:53] budget of just $70,000. We are hoping to get a better number for you. And as part of

[1:43:00] our final budget, we will be recommending that number to go to $600 and $70,000. We'll

[1:43:04] be pulling that $600 additional $600,000 from our capital reserves. We believe that that's

[1:43:12] going to be a budgetary number for the master planning effort.

[1:43:17] We hope to bring an item to you in the next three months to release an RFP for that effort.

[1:43:21] This is a critical effort for so-and-five so that we can better understand our deficiencies

[1:43:26] and look at a better streamlined process for development in the area.

[1:43:32] And so I just alert you to that.

[1:43:33] It's not shown here in your proposed, which is okay.

[1:43:36] We'll bring it as part of the final, but I think it's a critical item to share with you.

[1:43:41] With that, the rest of the items are fairly consistent with prior year, and I can answer any questions that you may have.

[1:43:49] The recommended action is to accept and approve the proposed 2019-2020 zone 5 and zone 5 expansion construction budgets.

[1:43:59] All right. Are there any questions? Seeing none. Is there any public comment? Seeing none? Come back.

[1:44:04] chair. I'll just say I look forward to this additional item being brought forward. I think it will help

[1:44:11] it get some clarity for development projects because right now it's a one-off thing and we don't always know and it creates a lot of

[1:44:21] lack of clarity about what's going on. So I look forward to that item. I would move the budget though as in the recommended actions as suggested here.

[1:44:28] Motion by Leopold. Second by friend, all those in favor, please say aye.

[1:44:34] Aye. Opposed? That passes unanimously.

[1:44:37] That adjourns are zone five meeting. We'll now come back to our regular Board of Supervisors meeting and we will

[1:44:45] take up item number eight, which is a public hearing to consider confirming the Establish Benefit Assessment

[1:44:50] Service Charge for County Service Area 12 wastewater management for fiscal years 2019-2020

[1:44:56] as outlined in the Director of Health Services.

[1:45:01] Good morning. I'm John Recker, Water Resources Division Director and the Health Services Agency.

[1:45:07] We're recommending that you adopt the service charge reports for the CSA-12 fees, which support various activities for management of onsite

[1:45:17] So, it's treatment systems, septic systems in the county.

[1:45:22] The fee levels are unchanged from previous years.

[1:45:27] We're recommending $6.90 for CSA-12, $18.54 for the San Lorenzo Valley, CSA-12A, and a range

[1:45:38] of $101 to $501 for the non-standard systems.

[1:45:43] We're recommending that your board opened the public hearing to hear any comments or protests.

[1:45:51] Close the public hearing and adopt the attached resolution, improving the assessment service charges for CSA-12.

[1:45:59] And I'd be happy to answer any questions.

[1:46:01] Are there any questions?

[1:46:03] Let's open the public hearing.

[1:46:13] Thank you, Becky Steinbriner.

[1:46:15] I live in the rural area.

[1:46:17] We have a septic tank and system.

[1:46:19] And I really appreciate this service to the county's world residents because it maintains good water quality in our systems water in our county's waterways.

[1:46:30] This is especially critical in the San Lorenzo Valley where Santa Cruz City takes some of it.

[1:46:37] It's a good amount of it's portable water supply and is looking to expand its place of use say delivery of water to the mid county area in water transfer.

[1:46:49] to come up with a regional solution for groundwater over draft in the mid-County area.

[1:46:55] So I'm very supportive of this service and I want to thank the Environmental Health for making it happen.

[1:47:01] Thank you.

[1:47:02] Thank you.

[1:47:03] Seeing no other speakers, I'll close the public hearing.

[1:47:06] Bring it back to the board for action.

[1:47:08] Second.

[1:47:09] Motion by McPherson.

[1:47:11] Second by Leah Pold.

[1:47:12] All those in favor, please say aye.

[1:47:14] Opposed.

[1:47:15] That passes unanimously.

[1:47:17] Moving on to item number nine,

[1:47:18] which is the public hearing.

[1:47:19] You can consider county service area 48 and county service area 4, fire protection assessment

[1:47:24] service charge report.

[1:47:25] For fiscal year 1920, a doctor resolution confirming the service charge reports for CSA 4 and

[1:47:31] CSA 48 as recommended by the Director of General Services.

[1:47:36] Let me ask if there's anyone have any questions.

[1:47:40] Let's open the public hearing.

[1:47:41] Would anyone like to speak?

[1:47:42] You know, I just want to question on CSA 48, I just want to point out that there's going to be some real financial challenges coming for that in the measure that just barely lost several years ago, but that's something that I think is going to need a good look at and maybe they would be commenting on that briefly as well.

[1:48:02] But I'm kind of sort of a serious 48 in particular.

[1:48:05] Thank you.

[1:48:07] Now, well up in the public hearing.

[1:48:11] Thank you, Becky Steinrunner, resident of rural optos.

[1:48:15] I really support County Fire, and I really want you to fund it.

[1:48:21] I understand what we're talking about today is just cost of living increase, but you've

[1:48:26] got to fund it in a good way, because this county residents, environment, tourism, all depends

[1:48:35] on good fire safety and good fire protection.

[1:48:39] One hundred eight million, eight, proposition 172 brings in so much money,

[1:48:48] 18 million dollars every year.

[1:48:51] That was supposed to go to fund some of County Fire.

[1:48:56] Zero goes to County Fire.

[1:48:59] Measure G, the half-cent sales tax was sold to the voters last fall

[1:49:04] when we were all worried about fire as funding, fire.

[1:49:09] I've submitted a public records act request

[1:49:11] where that measure table money will go.

[1:49:14] Zero will go to county fire.

[1:49:18] Now this has got to stop.

[1:49:19] And I understand that you're bringing something

[1:49:21] to the voters with a paper ballot to increase things.

[1:49:26] But I'm here to ask you, as a rural resident,

[1:49:29] Please fund county fire in a sustainable way.

[1:49:34] There's plenty of money coming in.

[1:49:36] All you have to do is give a little piece of that prop 172

[1:49:40] and measure G money to fund county fire and not take it away.

[1:49:45] That's what I'm asking.

[1:49:47] Thank you.

[1:49:49] That closes the public hearing and I'll bring back to the Board

[1:49:51] for action.

[1:49:53] We will approval the recommended action.

[1:49:55] Motion by Liverpool.

[1:49:56] Second by McPherson.

[1:49:57] All those in favor, please say aye.

[1:50:00] Aye.

[1:50:00] Opposed?

[1:50:01] That passes unanimously.

[1:50:03] Moving on to item number 10, which is the public hearing to consider the 2019-2020

[1:50:06] Benefit Assessment Service Charge reports for various county service areas.

[1:50:10] Approved the engineering reports for CSA-9A residential lighting.

[1:50:14] And a doctor resolution, confirming the benefit assessment.

[1:50:18] Service charge reports is outlined in the memorandum of the Deputy CAO Director of Public Works.

[1:50:22] Thank you, Chairman.

[1:50:23] Board of Supervisors, Matt Machado, Director of Public Works and Deputy CAO.

[1:50:27] The item before you as a public hearing, this is with regard to CSA 9A. It's a residential lighting district.

[1:50:36] There is a bit of a change this year and it's a really good one. It's positive one.

[1:50:39] The engineers report has increased the scope of services to include additional pedestrian safety improvements.

[1:50:48] And so the report here is for your approval, it does include a public hearing and so the recommended action today is to approve the injured report for CSA-9A, residential lighting, to hold a public hearing to hear objections or protest if any to the proposed 2019-20 benefit assessment and service charge reports for various county service areas and following the public hearing adopt resolution confirming the benefit assessment service charge reports for various county service areas.

[1:51:18] I will add that this report does not include an increase.

[1:51:22] There is no increase in assessment.

[1:51:23] This is just a scope modification.

[1:51:26] I can answer any questions you may have.

[1:51:27] Any questions?

[1:51:29] Well, I'll just say I want to express my appreciation to Mr.

[1:51:32] Mishado and the Public Works staff who have seen this through this chain will really help

[1:51:38] out in something that we hear about all the time, which is safety lighting for crosswalks,

[1:51:44] which could be very expensive in which we have resources that we haven't been able to tap until

[1:51:50] an engineering report was done.

[1:51:54] So I know this was on your list when you came here and you've been dogoted to make sure

[1:52:00] that it gets done and I'm glad we're at this day and I have a number of constituents who

[1:52:06] will be who I just spoke to on Friday night who was saying, once it gonna happen and are

[1:52:10] excited that we're finally making moving forward on this.

[1:52:14] Thank you.

[1:52:15] Thank you.

[1:52:16] Thank you.

[1:52:16] I'll open up the public hearing.

[1:52:19] Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the board for action.

[1:52:23] I will move approval of the recommended action.

[1:52:25] It's got a motion by Leah Paul, then a second by friend, all in favor.

[1:52:28] Please say aye.

[1:52:30] Opposed? That passes unanimously. Moving on to item number 11. As a public hearing, consider the 2019-2020 benefit assessment

[1:52:38] charge reports for sanitation county service areas 2, 5, 7, 10, and 20, and adopt a resolution

[1:52:46] confirming the 2019-2020 benefit assessment service charge reports as outlined in a memorandum

[1:52:52] of the Deputy CAO and the Director of Public Works. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Board of Supervisors.

[1:52:57] again, Matt Machado. Thank you for the introduction. I will just add that for all of these

[1:53:02] various CSAs for these sewer districts, we are proposing a moderate increase. It's a CPI

[1:53:11] increase of 4.5% to keep up with the cost of doing business in these sanitation districts.

[1:53:18] With that, the recommended action is to open the public hearing and hear objections or protests

[1:53:22] If any, to the proposed 2019-2020 Benefit Assessment Service Charge Reports for Sanitation County

[1:53:29] Service Series 257-10 and 20, to close the public hearing and to adopt resolutions confirming

[1:53:36] the 1920 Benefit Assessment Service Charge Reports for various Sanitation County

[1:53:40] service areas and with that I can answer any questions you may have.

[1:53:43] Any questions?

[1:53:45] Okay, I'll open the public hearing.

[1:53:47] Seeing none, I'll close the public hearing.

[1:53:49] for you back to the Board for Liberation Action.

[1:53:52] I will move the recommended actions.

[1:53:54] Motion by Leah Poll, second by McPherson,

[1:53:56] all those in favor, please say aye.

[1:53:58] Aye. Opposed?

[1:54:00] That passes unanimously.

[1:54:01] Moving on, item number 12 is public hearing

[1:54:04] to hear objections or protests of any

[1:54:06] to the proposed 2019-2020 benefit assessment

[1:54:09] rates for county service areas.

[1:54:11] 15, 18, 26, 42, 58, and 59.

[1:54:16] Consider submittal of all ballots for the proposed assessment.

[1:54:19] and continue the public hearing to June 25th, 2019 to allow for tabulation and certification

[1:54:25] as outlined in the memorandum of the day of PCA on the Director of Public Works.

[1:54:30] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Board of Supervisors, again, Madam Shauto.

[1:54:33] Thank you for the introduction.

[1:54:35] The increases, as proposed in these CSAs are driven by the people.

[1:54:39] When the people request additional services, we support them in their request of increases.

[1:54:45] That is before you, and as you outlined, the recommended action is open the public hearing

[1:54:50] to your objections or protests.

[1:54:52] If any, to the proposed benefit assessments for those listed CSAs to request a submittal

[1:54:58] of all ballots for the proposed 1920 benefit assessment, assessments for those CSAs and to continue

[1:55:04] the public hearing to June 25, 2019, to allow for tabulation and certification of the ballots,

[1:55:10] but that I can answer any questions you may have.

[1:55:12] Any questions? I'll open the public hearing. I'll see them. I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the board of deliberation action, but I will remove the recommended actions motion by the uphold.

[1:55:23] Second by friend all in favor, please say aye. I oppose that passes unanimously.

[1:55:31] Item number 13 as Board of Directors of the Davenport County Sanitation District, a public hearing and proposed ordnancement ordinances,

[1:55:38] amending the district code to establish the 2019-2020 water and sewer service charges scheduled

[1:55:44] public hearing on August 6, 2019 to consider the service charge reports and take related

[1:55:49] actions as outlined in a memorandum of the district engineer, Mr. Adler.

[1:55:53] Good morning, Mr. Chair and Board of Supervisors.

[1:55:56] Kent Adler, Assistant Director of Special Services with the Department of Public Works.

[1:56:00] On April 23, 2019, the boards set today as the date of the public hearing to consider

[1:56:04] an ordinance which establishes the water and sewer service charges for

[1:56:07] to have an important county sanitation district that will become effective on July 1, 2019.

[1:56:14] The water service charges are being proposed with an overall 4.4% increase with an individual

[1:56:19] maximum of 4.5%. The sewer service charges are being proposed with an overall 4.2% increase

[1:56:25] with an individual maximum 4.8%. The increase is necessary to adequately fund the maintenance

[1:56:30] and operations as well as capital improvements for the districts. For the district, we're recommending

[1:56:35] that the board takes the following actions. And there's a number of them. Number one, open the

[1:56:40] public hearing to consider the ordinance. Eight number 89, the Mending District Code, Title

[1:56:45] 3, Chapter 3.08, Article 3, Section 3.08, Point 1, 6, 0, through, 3.08, 1, 8, 0, 4, water

[1:56:54] service charges. And ordinance number 90, the Mending District Code, Title 4, Chapter 4.08,

[1:57:00] Article 3, sections 4.08, 0.160 through 4.0810 for service charges and close the public hearing.

[1:57:12] Two approved and concept ordinances, number 89 and 90.

[1:57:16] Three, scheduling the ordinances for final adoption on the next available agenda.

[1:57:21] Four, set Tuesday, August 6, 2019 at 9 a.m.

[1:57:24] or thereafter as the date and time for a public hearing on the service charge reports.

[1:57:29] On the service charge reports and five direct the clerk of the board to publish the notice

[1:57:32] of public hearing once a week for two weeks prior to the hearing and the newspaper of

[1:57:36] general circulation and I'm available for any questions.

[1:57:39] Thank you.

[1:57:39] Are there any questions?

[1:57:42] Seeing none.

[1:57:42] I'll open the public hearing,

[1:57:46] seeing no one to speak.

[1:57:48] I will close the public hearing quick note to folks who are waiting.

[1:57:52] We're going to do item number 14, we're going to take a 15 minute break and then come back

[1:57:55] to the remainder of the items this morning.

[1:58:00] So if you want to take a longer break, feel free right now.

[1:58:06] But so on item number 13, I'm looking for a motion.

[1:58:09] I would move the recommendations.

[1:58:13] All right.

[1:58:13] We've got a motion by McPherson, a second by Leopold,

[1:58:16] all those in favor, please say aye.

[1:58:19] Opposed, that passes unanimously.

[1:58:22] On item number 14 is the Board of Directors

[1:58:24] as the Freedom County Sanitation District, public hearing needs that are 2019-2020.

[1:58:30] Freedom County Sanitation District, sewer charges, reports, and resolution confirming 2019-2020.

[1:58:36] sewer service charge report is outlined in the memorandum of the District and Chair.

[1:58:40] Mr. Adler?

[1:58:41] Good morning again.

[1:58:43] On May 19, 2019, the Board approved the 2019-2020 service charges for the Freedom

[1:58:48] County Sanitation District, and set today as the date of the public hearing on the 2019

[1:58:52] service service charge report. In order to complete the 2019-2020 service

[1:58:59] charge repeat proceedings, the one that we necessary for board to open the

[1:59:02] public hearing, take testimony, consider objections, and protests. If any to the

[1:59:07] service service charge report and at the conclusion of the public hearing,

[1:59:10] adopt the resolution confirming the service charge report for the Freedom

[1:59:13] County Sanitation District, and I'm available for any questions. Any questions?

[1:59:18] We'll open the public hearing, seeing no one, we'll close the public hearing and bring

[1:59:23] back to the board for action.

[1:59:24] And the actions.

[1:59:25] Motion by Leopold.

[1:59:28] Second by friend.

[1:59:29] All those in favor, please say aye.

[1:59:32] Opposed?

[1:59:32] That passes unanimously.

[1:59:34] We're now going to recess to 11.

[1:59:36] 20, where we'll come back and continue our morning agenda.

[1:59:39] We

[1:59:43] were not going to get to that to the F.

[1:59:47] We got one.

[1:59:50] We got one, just coming in.

[1:59:52] I just want to tell you, I think Joe will.

[1:59:55] Toby got it.

[1:59:57] Yeah.

[1:59:57] We can get there.

[1:59:59] All right, I'll just.

[2:00:11] All right, and we'll re-camine. Thank you. And we're back and we're moving on to item number 15, which is to consider an ordinance

[2:00:34] of the county clerk.

[2:00:36] Hello.

[2:00:36] Hi.

[2:00:37] Gail Paloran, Santa Cruz County Clerk.

[2:00:39] And this ordinance would basically align our county ordinance with state law.

[2:00:44] Aligning us with the deadlines for filing the campaign statements.

[2:00:48] And as well as the statement of organization.

[2:00:51] Great.

[2:00:52] Are there any questions, Mr. Cabinet?

[2:00:56] I see on there at raises from 400 to 500 from individuals.

[2:01:01] I didn't see anything that limits unions or businesses from any limit at all.

[2:01:09] So that section was taken out.

[2:01:12] That was all taken out.

[2:01:13] That was taken out.

[2:01:14] Is there any limit on a business or a pack?

[2:01:19] No, because we basically aligned that with court case.

[2:01:23] So I'm going to hypothetically then they could give ten thousand dollars if they wanted to.

[2:01:28] There is no limit.

[2:01:29] Okay. I mean, why the drastic change? Why are we going from $1,000 to $1,000 to, we decided

[2:01:38] to go ahead and align it with what was currently happening in the courts in the law and the

[2:01:44] Plutachary Form Act. Okay, but nobody's challenging us? Not that I know it.

[2:01:49] Right. Okay. So, I'm a supervisor, Captain. I share some of your concerns.

[2:01:55] You know, I think one of the things that has kept Santa Cruz election politics rooted in the

[2:02:06] community is that we've had good campaign finance restrictions, and I appreciate the work

[2:02:11] that Ms. Pellarand does every day and the way she sports community and bring some changes

[2:02:18] that align with state regulations makes sense, but I think here in Santa Cruz, we should have

[2:02:25] a higher standard of the campaign process than other places, and our campaign restrictions

[2:02:36] has been for a long time, probably over four decades, that we had a contribution limit,

[2:02:43] And we didn't allow businesses to contribute and we had limits on how much political actions

[2:02:49] committee could be.

[2:02:51] And I think we should keep those limits.

[2:02:56] And I, you know, the section 8.04.050, I think that we should keep that that has our restrictions

[2:03:05] on business and labor contribution limits.

[2:03:10] I also think that we should keep the notification requirements lower, you know, it has been

[2:03:20] for a long time as someone contributes to $1,000 or more, that they have to be noticed

[2:03:26] that they have to file a forum.

[2:03:28] This would raise another piece in here that would raise the $2,000, I think, that we should

[2:03:34] maintain those limits, because those limits are helpful.

[2:03:36] So if we look to our neighboring county in Monterey County, the lack of limits have changed

[2:03:42] the nature of local elections and in my last re-election campaign, I spent $35,000, but

[2:03:50] Jane Parker spent close to a half million dollars.

[2:03:54] That won't be a good change for politics here in Santa Cruz.

[2:03:59] It'll change the nature of politics in Santa Cruz.

[2:04:03] I'm fine doing whatever the will of the board is.

[2:04:05] I know you're doing the best you can.

[2:04:07] Thank you.

[2:04:08] Just trying to keep it consistent.

[2:04:09] The limit, the individual limits will go up to 500.

[2:04:12] And then every two years, they'll increase by $25 beginning in 2022.

[2:04:16] It's the other pieces filled into this.

[2:04:19] But we still have the problem.

[2:04:21] What I'm worried about is we've become like Santa Clara County,

[2:04:26] and also Alameda County.

[2:04:27] I believe the few years back.

[2:04:29] to tell me the county had one candidate spent $2 million for a supervizorial seat and the

[2:04:38] one she was running against spent $1.5 million. And then Santa Clara County we had one

[2:04:48] about four or five years ago where it was in the millions of dollars also. So Santa Cruz is definitely

[2:04:55] We're actually one of just 15 of the 58 counties that have limits at all.

[2:04:59] And it gives too much influence to the people with a lot of money.

[2:05:05] Gotcha.

[2:05:07] So anyway,

[2:05:10] are you going to John and you saying that one stay with the 1,000?

[2:05:16] Yeah, I would recommend that we keep Section 8.04.050, which is currently, which is about

[2:05:25] business and labor union contribution limitations, and the other part that I would just change

[2:05:32] is a notification piece. I'm just looking to see whether it is. I think it's in 8.04.070.

[2:05:39] So the original statement of organization, like what qualifies you as committee, because current

[2:05:44] law has that at 2,000 that triggers you as having to file a 410 and you want to keep it out of

[2:05:55] office for clearing up something that happened during my campaign, I did get a contribution

[2:06:02] from a pack for $1,500, which was good news when I got it, but then I realized that it

[2:06:10] was over the limit. I talked to your office that I called FPPC or whatever, and they said

[2:06:17] basically I had to give it back, which I did. And then by the time they sent me a check

[2:06:23] for $1,000, it was July 1st, it was past the June election.

[2:06:31] So then I was stuck, I can only get one contribution rather than two.

[2:06:39] So anyway, I lived with it, and I think it's good.

[2:06:45] Okay.

[2:06:46] I just also want to thank County Council for all the work they did on this day and I, Jason and

[2:06:50] David, they did a tremendous job putting all this together for us.

[2:06:52] Thank you. So first let me see if there's any public comment.

[2:06:57] I see none. I'll bring it back to the board.

[2:06:59] Well, I would ask that this come back to us with the change in.

[2:07:05] We get the number one more time.

[2:07:07] 8.04.0.050, which is maintaining the language that's there.

[2:07:14] and the reporting requirements in 8.04.070, just so you know, super, as supervisor

[2:07:26] cap it and the

[2:07:30] And it's of $400 to $500, and the escalator every two years of $25, I'm not suggesting change.

[2:07:40] Unless there's a will of the board to keep it that the way this is.

[2:07:45] The last time we raised it was in 2009.

[2:07:50] I checked, I used my calculator, my inflation calculator, now is available, and to keep

[2:07:59] The same buying power for $400, it would be, you need to spend $476 from 2009.

[2:08:06] So I was the first concerned about it, and then if we have those $25 piece, we probably

[2:08:13] keep up with inflation.

[2:08:15] Yes.

[2:08:16] That's the intent.

[2:08:17] Okay.

[2:08:17] So we have all second.

[2:08:19] And a second.

[2:08:20] Is that an amendment?

[2:08:22] No.

[2:08:23] But I was just pointing out that I wasn't changing that individual contribution limit.

[2:08:31] And so, unless there's a will, the board did do that.

[2:08:34] I'm supporting, I'm asking the motion, I supported, I think, that I've been asked a lot about our campaign finance program here,

[2:08:43] and as a model across the state, I think that there's a sense across the country that, as I'm doing influence,

[2:08:48] and they're absolutely correct. I think that moving the number up in the individual contribution

[2:08:52] limit, by the way, puts us in line with a couple other counties, we're currently the lowest

[2:08:56] or one of the lowest in the state. But I think that the bigger concern isn't the individual

[2:09:00] contribution limit at $500. The bigger concern is clearly an unlimited amount of money being

[2:09:06] able to be contributed by business and political action committees, which, as Supervisor

[2:09:10] we pulled noted in some of our neighboring counties, people are cutting checks in the six

[2:09:18] appropriate. So I think that we should hold strong with our campaign finance if it's in the

[2:09:23] values of our community. It's much more of a grassroots proposal and so I'll second the motion.

[2:09:30] Okay. So we have a motion and we have a second. All those in favor please say aye.

[2:09:37] Opposed that passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

[2:09:42] Item number 60 is a presentation of key findings of the regional farm worker housing study

[2:09:47] and action plans for the Swedish Valley, and Power of Valley, and endorse goals and actions

[2:09:52] that would increase farmer work or housing within the unincorporated area as outlined

[2:09:56] in the memorandum of the planet director.

[2:09:59] We have Ms. Conway here to present to us today.

[2:10:09] Morning Board, Julie Conway, Housing Manager with the Planning Department, and please to be

[2:10:14] able to talk to you this morning about farm worker housing ever so briefly.

[2:10:19] As you know, farming was Santa Cruz County's first industry.

[2:10:22] It continues to play a central role in the economy,

[2:10:27] protecting agricultural land and preserving the viability of the industry

[2:10:30] is a foundational responsibility of the county.

[2:10:34] The industry is suffering dramatic impacts as a result of the shortage and expense of housing,

[2:10:39] making it difficult for farmers to find workers.

[2:10:44] Knowing this, the county was the first jurisdiction to join the city of Selenus

[2:10:48] when they initiated a farm or housing study in order to better understand the problem

[2:10:53] and identify approaches that could help to address it.

[2:10:57] A few key findings of the study finished in 2018 include

[2:11:00] that there is a severe shortage of housing for farm workers.

[2:11:04] A majority of farmers interviewed said labor shortage is the main challenge to their success.

[2:11:11] Shortage of housing is affecting the industry.

[2:11:14] In areas with a high percentage of farm workers,

[2:11:18] there is a high incidence of overcrowding,

[2:11:19] and farm workers are severely overcrowded.

[2:11:24] The majority of workers in agriculture live here year-round,

[2:11:29] and they live in larger than average households.

[2:11:33] The study establishes an immediate need for 1,314 units

[2:11:39] of farm worker housing in the Pauro Valley, 1,314 units.

[2:11:45] There are a number of steps that can be taken to address the need.

[2:11:49] First and foremost, to acknowledge the need and the community impacts of a shortage of housing and work with the city with farmers and others in the community to address it.

[2:12:01] To start this process, staff is recommending that the county adopt goals for the creation of two types of farmer for housing.

[2:12:09] The first type of farm worker housing are small, sometimes temporary projects.

[2:12:15] Under state law, farmers have the right to place housing for their employers on their land.

[2:12:20] The county can support farmers by updating the county code that treats projects of 12 units or 36 beds as an agricultural use like a barn.

[2:12:29] It can also provide clear guidance on where the housing can be created,

[2:12:33] how to meet other requirements such as systems development.

[2:12:38] This type of housing does not restrict the rent amount,

[2:12:42] but it does restrict the occupancy.

[2:12:45] The county will ensure that the housing targets farm workers

[2:12:48] and only farm workers consistent with state law.

[2:12:51] Staff is recommending that we target the creation of 300 beds

[2:12:55] of his type through clarification of the code,

[2:12:58] outreach to farmers and analysis of the obstacles to building the housing.

[2:13:04] The second type of farm worker housing is affordable rental housing for families.

[2:13:10] The majority of farm workers in the Power of Valley live in families.

[2:13:14] For this reason, legislation has been proposed and it's recently passed the assembly

[2:13:18] that would treat certain types of housing for farm worker families as an agricultural use as well

[2:13:24] similar to the smaller projects built by farmers.

[2:13:26] This type of housing would be narrowly defined and

[2:13:30] deep restricted to be affordable and available

[2:13:33] only to farmer-care families.

[2:13:36] By establishing a target for these properties,

[2:13:39] the county would be addressing a number of long-established housing

[2:13:42] element policies.

[2:13:44] Staff is recommending the county adopt a goal to identify sites

[2:13:47] that would accommodate 200 units of this type over the next 24

[2:13:52] months.

[2:13:54] Building housing for farm workers is consistent with the county mandate to support agriculture.

[2:14:03] First step in identifying sites for housing for farm workers is to establish this target of 200 units of housing.

[2:14:11] Viable multifamily rental projects have about 40 to 60 units.

[2:14:16] So it's similar in size to the recently completed PIP and Orchard Project.

[2:14:21] To meet the target, we would need to identify four or five sites.

[2:14:26] As stated earlier, the study made clear that the majority of farm workers live in families

[2:14:31] and most family members in the household work in agriculture.

[2:14:35] Families need access to services available in urban areas.

[2:14:38] And for this reason, sites that are adjacent or near urban services would work the best.

[2:14:44] There are excites that have a 2-3-acre portion of the site that is not ideal for growing and these would be the areas that we would want to evaluate for housing.

[2:14:55] Development by non-profit housing corporations such as Eden or Mid-Pants.

[2:15:00] Housing, we'll ensure that the housing is managed in a long term to meet the mandate of meeting the need for

[2:15:05] Farmorker Housing. So it's recommended that your board endures a county goal to increase this

[2:15:12] apply of Farmorker Housing and direct staff to undertake activities to support Farmorker Housing

[2:15:18] Supply and include status reports in the general plan annual report. And that includes my presentation.

[2:15:27] Any questions?

[2:15:30] I have a quick question.

[2:15:31] I also have a quick comment.

[2:15:32] Thank you for this.

[2:15:33] This is actually, although this is a short item.

[2:15:35] This is one of the most important things I think that we could actually accomplish in the

[2:15:39] South County, especially regarding some of the substandard conditions that many of the agricultural

[2:15:43] workers live in.

[2:15:44] I did have a question regarding item 3 subsection C, which deals with temporary housing.

[2:15:51] I just wanted to ensure that I had an understanding of what temporary housing really is because

[2:15:56] the county has a pretty strict program in regards to people being able to live and say

[2:16:01] RVs and their own property, even properties that can accommodate this.

[2:16:04] And I don't want to create sort of a two-tiered system where we deem it acceptable for agricultural

[2:16:10] workers to live in conditions that we've deemed unacceptable for the rest of the populist

[2:16:14] to live in. I would have a concern with that. Do we have a sense of what temporary housing

[2:16:18] would mean both in length and in use.

[2:16:21] Yeah, it's a really good point.

[2:16:23] And as part of our incorporating the employee housing

[2:16:26] act updates and state law into our code,

[2:16:30] it's one of our concerns.

[2:16:31] We know that farmers are very much interested

[2:16:35] in understanding how they can create this housing

[2:16:39] on their property.

[2:16:41] And we are concerned about it being decent safe and sanitary,

[2:16:45] and also that it not create environmental impacts.

[2:16:47] So, those are exactly the questions that we'll be grappling with before we take this update to the code back to you, which we hope to do within the next four or five months.

[2:17:00] Thank you.

[2:17:02] Supervisor Capit.

[2:17:03] Thank you.

[2:17:05] I'm all for the Farm Worker Housing.

[2:17:08] It does say there's no restriction on rental, we're talking about monthly rental price.

[2:17:15] What stops in abuse of that?

[2:17:19] And that's a good point.

[2:17:20] And again, we are referring to two different types of housing.

[2:17:25] That the small projects of 12 units to 36 beds to be consistent with state law,

[2:17:34] that the ability to create that unit, those units,

[2:17:38] is a right that a farmer has, and it is expected that they will be built privately,

[2:17:43] and that they will be built by a farmer to meet his or her needs.

[2:17:50] So we can restrict the occupancy and we will ensure that it is a farmer that's living in it.

[2:17:56] And it assumes that the farmer will charge whatever rent they need in order to create and operate that housing.

[2:18:05] Because again, what they need is housing for workers.

[2:18:08] We expect, as we see, that housing, that the majority of it is going to be housing that

[2:18:13] targets single individuals.

[2:18:16] And it may be designed really to meet the sort of a surge in that farmers need for planting

[2:18:23] and harvesting.

[2:18:25] Okay, that to be a very important state law would back up some sort of a stop gap from abuse

[2:18:34] of the cost of rent for the farm worker's family.

[2:18:40] State law prohibits the county from limiting rent on those units.

[2:18:47] On the other units, the second type, let's see if I can get back to it.

[2:18:52] The farm worker housing for families, those will be very strictly restricted as to the occupancy

[2:19:00] by farm worker families, and as to that affordable rent.

[2:19:05] So those are the ones that those are the sites we're looking for,

[2:19:09] four or five sites that will very specifically target

[2:19:13] farm worker families to be permanent, affordable housing.

[2:19:17] Okay, affordable rent would be tied to low and very low income.

[2:19:23] That's right, it will target the rents that.

[2:19:26] I don't know if anybody else here holds enough to remember an old song, but I'm not going to sing it because I can't sing.

[2:19:34] But at the end of it, it goes, I owe my soul to the company's store where they're working and then they're paying to the same owner of the one who's paying the higher prices.

[2:19:46] Do you remember that? Does anybody else...

[2:19:48] Of course.

[2:19:53] The board of supervisors sing along will be happening towards the end of the meeting.

[2:20:02] I'm glad we're doing this is very much needed for a critical industry to fill in need,

[2:20:09] but just to study established a goal of creating 53 hundred and we're looking at three and five,

[2:20:17] And we have to start somewhere, so I really think this is great

[2:20:21] that we're getting on to this.

[2:20:22] But we've heard about housing at one type or another,

[2:20:25] whether it's young families, or firemen, or police,

[2:20:30] or teachers, or whatever, but boy, this is upon us everywhere.

[2:20:33] We look for everything that people do in our community.

[2:20:38] As Monterey County doing a similar study,

[2:20:41] at Pius Parro Valley, it smells over.

[2:20:44] Yeah.

[2:20:45] So are they focused on the Pahro Valley section of Monterey County in the same type of goals?

[2:20:52] And that's a good question and of those immediate units that are needed 1,314 of those

[2:20:59] units are attributable to the Pahro Valley.

[2:21:02] And there is a very active process that has continued and it's actually been convened by

[2:21:10] and the jurisdictions in the part and the different entities that participated in the study

[2:21:17] continue to work on addressing some real solutions. One part of that was the state legislation

[2:21:25] that recently passed the Assembly AB 1783 that would extend the buy-right use for farm worker family

[2:21:35] housing. So I expect we'll be hearing a lot more about that. And there is very much

[2:21:41] an active follow-up on the part of all of the jurisdictions.

[2:21:45] I'm glad we're getting started on this. It's really important.

[2:21:49] This is one quick question.

[2:21:52] Maybe you said this and I missed it, but we can actually place those restrictions for

[2:21:59] farm workers only. I know it's always a problem with non-profit housing about what kind

[2:22:03] restrictions we can place on it.

[2:22:04] There's just a couple of circumstances that allow you to place to basically discriminate

[2:22:09] and favor as opposed to discriminated against, which is what our legal structure lets

[2:22:14] that up to do.

[2:22:15] And one of them is a very targeted funding and housing that is created to target specific

[2:22:22] populations.

[2:22:23] We will definitely be able to do that and that is allowed now for former housing.

[2:22:28] All right.

[2:22:28] Thank you.

[2:22:30] Now we're going to open out for public comment. Please come forward.

[2:22:40] Good. Still morning. Good morning. Again, Board, I'd like to highlight an undismonerary

[2:22:45] economic partnership. I just wanted to make a couple comments in support.

[2:22:52] What Ms. Conway is presenting here.

[2:22:55] And that, as was stated, is tasked, along with working with the City of Swinus, to help

[2:23:04] the implementation of the Action Plan, last 57 steps that focus on four areas, housing

[2:23:12] types, suitable sites, financing, and regulatory reform.

[2:23:16] It is, there's two separate values,

[2:23:21] Pajoton Slin is value, but it is a regional issue.

[2:23:25] And we're tracking progress and here to support

[2:23:30] the implementation of the plan as well as organizing subcommittees

[2:23:34] around those, those four areas of work

[2:23:38] and convening the oversight committee meetings,

[2:23:41] which was kind of way as a part of.

[2:23:43] And I just want to say we're here to help answer questions, support, and address the issues

[2:23:53] that we're so clearly presented just now.

[2:23:56] So feel free to reach out and know that we're here to help this.

[2:24:01] Thank you.

[2:24:02] Thank you.

[2:24:06] Good morning, Jane Bar with Eden Housing, Affordable Housing, Development, Development

[2:24:09] Santa Cruz County, and a member of the Farm Worker Housing Study.

[2:24:13] I want to thank the county for their participation and support of the study.

[2:24:19] The study showed the dire need of housing for farm markets to support our local

[2:24:24] ag industry and housing for farm workers also affects the large community as additional

[2:24:30] housing helps the end-met to reduce the end-met demand for housing.

[2:24:35] The suggestion goals and actions to increase farm worker housing in the county are achievable.

[2:24:40] I believe that we can even exceed the 200 allocated for non-Aglant and you don't

[2:24:47] want to be happy to partner with the county to meet these goals.

[2:24:50] Thank you.

[2:24:57] Hi.

[2:24:57] Good morning.

[2:24:58] Betsy Wilson with mid-Pen Housing Corporation.

[2:25:00] I just wanted to speak in support of staff's recommendations and underscore the need for

[2:25:05] farm worker housing, particularly out in the Watsonville area.

[2:25:08] We recently opened Pippen Orchards, which did not have any specific restrictions for farm

[2:25:13] workers.

[2:25:14] When you take those 46 units and you remove the small percentage of special needs units that were set aside for targeted populations,

[2:25:21] half of the head of households at PIP and Orchards are receiving the majority of their income from agricultural work.

[2:25:28] So we had 2,500 applications and it was a random lottery and half of the people living in that property are farm workers.

[2:25:35] So that really I think underscores the incredible need to target additional housing permanent housing for families who are working in agriculture down in Watsonville. Thank you

[2:25:44] Thank you

[2:25:46] All right that will conclude public comment. I'll bring back to the board for action

[2:25:52] motion by friend second by my fearsome all those in favor please say aye aye

[2:25:58] Opposed that passes unanimously. I'm going to think I think because we have Julie here and we have mid pin here

[2:26:04] Why don't we take item number 20.1, which is previously item number 63, that supervisor

[2:26:13] cap it pulled, and we'll do this side of now.

[2:26:21] They are related, actually, and that would be great.

[2:26:25] What I'll do is I'm going to go through this real quick, it's a lot of stuff I know, and then

[2:26:32] we can fold on it. But mid-pen has been a good partner in the past and I appreciate the way

[2:26:40] they look after their property.

[2:26:45] There's comments in the proposal that the city of

[2:26:51] Watteville pulled out of the 450 units that they were going to build in the same area, but

[2:26:57] different property. It says because of the lawsuit, that was one reason. The other reason was the

[2:27:03] housing market collapse and then all of a sudden there was no interest in proceeding forward.

[2:27:09] Then the other is in the wording, it's very unclear about 64 units or up to 80. It says up to 80.

[2:27:19] So I have a problem with that up to 80. I'd like to be more specific here. I do like the part where

[2:27:26] is low, very low income. That's good. Then it says 3,500,000 is available in the low to

[2:27:36] moderate income levels fund. But we're not going to have moderate income levels. Is that correct?

[2:27:43] The name of the fund that receives repayments from investments from the former redevelopment

[2:27:50] agency is called by state law the low and moderate income housing asset fund. So the name of

[2:27:58] that fund doesn't include the term moderate. The housing that will be built if mid-pend brings

[2:28:05] projects forward, all of the units will be deeply targeted to low, very low and extremely low

[2:28:14] And then later states that this is part of 174 units in different phases,

[2:28:26] and that's my concern, and I'll explain that in a second here, and I'm getting to impacts.

[2:28:34] Any time, I've seen this like a knee jerk reaction at one time we had the housing collapse

[2:28:42] and we didn't do anything.

[2:28:44] People were saying, oh, we can't build, we can't build, we're not going to do anything.

[2:28:48] Now we're saying that we have a housing crisis and let's build and build and keep building.

[2:28:54] We have to understand that I'm going by state statistics 528 children on a based on 174 units that

[2:29:08] three per unit if we're going to include a state statistic and you account the adults that

[2:29:17] about 870 residents and then miles on the roads on that concern would increase up to about

[2:29:27] 3,800 miles per day. Two cars, 11 miles per car, 22 miles. So that's one concern I have

[2:29:38] if we're talking about 172 units. I want to make it clear. I have no problem with 60 units,

[2:29:46] may be even 62, but I don't like the language of 174 possible.

[2:29:54] The answer to the question on the three, we're asking for 3 million out of the fund of three.

[2:30:00] Point 5 million. Is that correct? We're asking for a total of, we're recommending a total of 3.5 million. 3 million will be for acquisition. 500,000 will be for pre-development activities, which is very typical for our investment.

[2:30:18] I didn't see that wording. Is that a wording in there? Yes, it is.

[2:30:21] It is in there. The 500,000. It's in the executive summary.

[2:30:27] I didn't see it specifically.

[2:30:31] The other, we have to look at as public schools,

[2:30:34] especially elementary schools in the South County.

[2:30:38] They're basically full.

[2:30:40] They're not as full as they were about two years ago,

[2:30:43] but they're packed.

[2:30:45] So anytime we're adding this much housing,

[2:30:48] this quick, we have to also be looking out for a site

[2:30:53] for another elementary school.

[2:30:55] That's rather than reacting to Jerk to what a problem we have now, we have to think down the road.

[2:31:03] Okay, that also we have to worry about the Watsonville police and fire department.

[2:31:12] Basically, once we build in a city area that's surrounded by the city of Watsonville,

[2:31:18] we are heading towards, they would finally take over an annex that part.

[2:31:22] And then that would put a tremendous burden on the police and fire department there in Watsonville.

[2:31:29] And so I'm trying to get a, you know, some specifics.

[2:31:33] We also have water and garbage pickups that would probably end up going to the city also.

[2:31:39] And the other, what I don't see here, when we're doing all this building, we're not putting aside at least some acreage for parks.

[2:31:49] So what I would like to see is maybe a two acre park or something added in that area, so kids don't have to walk all the way across town somewhere and the cross streets and whatever, trying to get to a park to play a little bit of baseball or soccer.

[2:32:07] So, this could be a good plan, if we look ahead, we do it right.

[2:32:14] I'm just asking that we specifically say we're for 60 up to 62 units, and we dropped

[2:32:23] the language that we're also going ahead with 174 units.

[2:32:30] That could be brought up later.

[2:32:31] I don't want to vote for a locomotive, a train that's going forward, and then we can't stop it at any point.

[2:32:44] Thank you. Those are really important points that you've brought up.

[2:32:48] And the first thing that I'd like to be very clear about is that the recommended action today will allow mid-pan housing to acquire the overall site.

[2:32:59] That's the action today.

[2:33:02] There is no project being proposed at this time.

[2:33:06] Obviously, the only reason that we're recommending using low and moderate income housing funds

[2:33:12] for this acquisition is because we anticipate mid-pen developing a project as they seek input on the site.

[2:33:22] But I do think it's important to note that we aren't talking about how many units

[2:33:27] are going to be in a particular project or in a particular phase, I think you raise all the

[2:33:34] points that you raise are a big part of consideration for any project. And any project

[2:33:42] or really likely projects that will be coming forward will pay school fees to the PAHO

[2:33:48] Valley Unified School District. They will pay traffic impact fees. And the impacts of the

[2:33:54] development will be under consideration within any of those projects that are brought forward.

[2:34:00] So your points are well taken.

[2:34:03] Your point about the park is also well taken and I didn't bring it up with me, but you

[2:34:10] may remember from the earlier specific plan and planned unit development that the city and

[2:34:17] county did together, there was a significant park anticipated in the city area of the specific

[2:34:25] plan.

[2:34:26] And I would anticipate that that's an important need and certainly your interest in that

[2:34:32] is noted today.

[2:34:33] And I'll just pretty much come to a conclusion the we're talking,

[2:34:52] so basically it's, well, I want to get, you know, specifically what exactly we're voting on, and the public input, I've seen, I'm going to point out the city.

[2:35:09] I was on the city council before,

[2:35:13] and there was public

[2:35:14] important on that 450 project, which is not part of this,

[2:35:20] but it's right next door.

[2:35:23] The public came, we had people from the Bruins in Avenue,

[2:35:29] Rogers Street, Stanford Street.

[2:35:32] They would become thoroughfares going through there in order to connect.

[2:35:37] It got really bad, and the people speaking overwhelmingly said that they would go for maybe

[2:35:43] 200 units, right?

[2:35:45] The city of Watsonville came back on a four-and-a-three vote that 450 is what they were

[2:35:54] going to stick with.

[2:35:55] The public input was almost totally ignored.

[2:35:59] Totally ignored.

[2:35:59] So when I'm getting out here as we're going to have a lot of public input once we go past the 60 units for 62.

[2:36:09] I know it doesn't include brewing and being opened up right now, but if it does in the future on 174 units,

[2:36:17] or on what the city has planned for the acreage around us, that's going to be a huge issue.

[2:36:24] And there'll be a lot of pushback.

[2:36:27] So, I just, if you could read to me exactly what we're voting on right now, no extra language that's in here that says 174 units, and that I'm okay, but I'm going by what was presented to me in the explanation.

[2:36:46] Okay, so what are we exactly voting on? And nothing more that can be inferred.

[2:36:56] Yeah, the recommended actions are outlined in the staff report and they are to approve an allocation to mid and housing corporation of $3 million in low and moderate income housing assets funds for the acquisition and for the acquisition of the property and 500,000 and pre-development funding for the purpose of affordable housing development.

[2:37:18] that's action one. Action two is to authorize the planning director to negotiate and finalize

[2:37:24] an affordable housing agreement with mid and housing consistent with the terms outlined in

[2:37:30] This memo. Okay. So we have no numbers in there right now. Do we?

[2:37:36] The acquisition of this site, and it is the overall site, and I know you've seen the map involved

[2:37:43] it can be a little bit confusing, because there was, there were phases identified when the city

[2:37:50] was involved in their specific plan. That is no longer on the table, and it isn't anything

[2:37:55] the county has any jurisdiction under, but we have is just the county portion that was approved.

[2:38:03] It has been entitled.

[2:38:04] Sequinals is complete and it is only the county portion that we're talking about at this

[2:38:11] time.

[2:38:12] And I just want to make it clear.

[2:38:14] Carlos, you were a city manager and he remembers that I remembered on the City Council.

[2:38:19] I don't want to be in a mess in the future.

[2:38:23] I'm okay with 60 to 62, but I'm going to have a problem when we start adding number.

[2:38:30] So I should clarify that that overall large project that was a city and county joint project

[2:38:39] is not moving forward. The county did in title 200 units and we had to do this because of a state lawsuit.

[2:38:47] We entitled 200 units for the county portion of Actonson Lane and that is all that is being discussed with this action.

[2:39:00] Thank you.

[2:39:02] Just a brief question.

[2:39:04] Is the property in the city or the city's sphere of influence?

[2:39:08] It is in the county and it is in the city's sphere of influence for sewer and water.

[2:39:15] You know, Ms. Wilson, remember we as little tortures at the city of Watsonville to get them to annex the previous project in.

[2:39:25] So, hopefully we won't have a repeat of that but when one comes time to build this project.

[2:39:32] Yeah, yeah.

[2:39:34] There were a lot of dotted lines, a lot of colors, hard to figure out.

[2:39:38] No, without a doubt, and when a project does come forward on an application is made for a project,

[2:39:44] It will be reviewed by Lafco, and all of those issues will be on the table, and they will be thoroughly discussed.

[2:39:52] And my last comment is, again, I've said it before, and we've seen some progress, not all the affordable housing is in District 4, but it goes countywide.

[2:40:05] We do have affordable housing being built in the live oak area, I think that's wonderful.

[2:40:11] We've had a lot of work done at the App to our area in District 2.

[2:40:16] That's remarkable also.

[2:40:18] So when we're looking at this, I just don't want to see it all in District 4 and not spread out through the rest of the county.

[2:40:26] To put too much pressure all in one area.

[2:40:28] And that's why I mentioned parks, and I mentioned schools, and I mentioned infrastructure.

[2:40:35] Thank you.

[2:40:37] Okay.

[2:40:38] Is there any public comment?

[2:40:47] Hi again, Betsy Wilson, mid-Pen Housing.

[2:40:49] Thank you for consideration of this item.

[2:40:52] A couple of comments and thoughts.

[2:40:56] I think it's a good idea for us to go and meet with the school district.

[2:40:59] Now that Pippin' Orchards is open, we've got students who are enrolling from there, so we'll

[2:41:04] get a good feel from the local elementary school as to what their capacity looks like and how our

[2:41:09] housing has maybe changed that or altered that. 67% of the folks who moved in to Pippin

[2:41:16] Orchard's already lived in Watsonville, Freedom or Pahara, so they're really already within

[2:41:20] the community there for a large part. And I think what you're seeing is folks

[2:41:24] are able to move out of overcrowded situations and into our housing units as opposed to

[2:41:29] folks from the outside. So we're really serving a need that's already existing within the

[2:41:34] community amongst people who already live there. As far as parks, so we do provide our own

[2:41:40] onsite amenities as you've seen and we're hoping to have some more generous space for that

[2:41:45] at this property. Additionally, Crestview Park is a two-acre park right adjacent to the property.

[2:41:51] So we already have a two-acre park that's right there within that area. And then I do want to

[2:41:59] The underlying entitlement for this site does require access to be taken off of brewing

[2:42:05] tin.

[2:42:05] So, Pippin Orchard comes off of Atkinson Lane, but the requirement under the EIR and

[2:42:11] entitlements is for brewing tin to be the access point for this location.

[2:42:16] So the 60 to 70 may be homes we can build in phase one will be over towards the Atkinson

[2:42:22] side because that's outside of the agricultural buffer, but folks will have to access the

[2:42:27] site from brewing tin.

[2:42:32] This site, the primary access for residents will be off of Brewington Lane.

[2:42:37] It will not be opened up. Brewington will not open up and connect to the 60.

[2:42:43] No it will. It must. That's the requirement under the entitlement.

[2:42:47] It doesn't come off of that concern Lane.

[2:42:49] So Wagner, Wagner is not.

[2:42:51] No, it would be brewing tonight.

[2:42:53] Correct.

[2:42:53] We're going to have a big problem on that.

[2:42:56] I've started speaking with the city staff and we'll be holding community meetings as well

[2:43:00] and doing our best to educate folks and be responsive to community interests.

[2:43:06] That changes a lot of neighborhoods in Watsonville by opening it up.

[2:43:14] Is that true?

[2:43:17] Brunton's.

[2:43:19] Yes, that was part of the original environmental impact report analysis was that Brunton was going to open up into this property.

[2:43:30] And it was part of measure you as well.

[2:43:32] Measure you included that plan as well.

[2:43:39] Good.

[2:43:40] I'm going to have to vote no one.

[2:43:42] Thank you very much.

[2:43:44] I think that concludes public comment.

[2:43:46] I'll bring it back to the board for deliberation and action.

[2:43:50] I will move approval of the recommendation.

[2:43:52] We've got a motion by Leopold.

[2:43:54] Second by friend.

[2:43:56] All those in favor, please say aye.

[2:43:58] Opposed?

[2:43:59] No.

[2:43:59] All right.

[2:44:00] That passes four to one with a surprise or capet voting now.

[2:44:03] Thank you very much.

[2:44:07] Getting back to our regular schedule.

[2:44:12] Then thank you everyone for your patience in waiting.

[2:44:16] We're going to move down to our 17, which is considered a final appointment of a list

[2:44:19] that we're going to run into the workforce development board as a local business representative

[2:44:22] for a term to expire June 30th, 2022.

[2:44:27] Is there any public comment?

[2:44:28] seeing non-abranded approval. Motion by Leopold. Second by McPherson. On favor, please say aye.

[2:44:36] Aye. Opposed. That passes unanimously. We will now have a steady session on the 2019-2020

[2:44:42] capital improvement program and direct public works to present the 2021 CIP incorporating all the

[2:44:49] changes. The board's adopt is part of the 2019-2020 budget hearings on the CIP. Related

[2:44:55] judge documents on her before May 22nd, 2020 as recommended by the CEO.

[2:45:00] A.o. Director of Public Works. Deputy, say aye, Director of Public Works.

[2:45:05] Thank you, Chair. Board of Supervisors, and good morning, or good afternoon. Matt Machado, and I am

[2:45:13] part of a team this morning. We've got a great team assemble to give you a presentation and

[2:45:18] opportunity to dialogue about our updated capital improvement program. Our team this morning

[2:45:25] consists of Steve Weeser.

[2:45:27] He's our assistant director in public works.

[2:45:31] We have Michael Beaton, our GSD director,

[2:45:36] and we have Jeff Daphne, our director of parks.

[2:45:38] So we've got a great team assembled.

[2:45:41] But the team is much larger than that.

[2:45:42] There was quite a few staff members

[2:45:46] from each of our departments to contribute

[2:45:47] to this program, into this document.

[2:45:51] It was led by Amy Miyakusu from public works.

[2:45:55] she did a great job and all of our staff contributed greatly so we're very proud of it and

[2:46:01] what that will get started.

[2:46:04] Can we turn his on?

[2:46:06] Mine going.

[2:46:07] I may be hit it.

[2:46:11] That's okay.

[2:46:12] I don't really need it.

[2:46:20] Thank you.

[2:46:33] There you go.

[2:46:37] Excuse our set up here.

[2:46:42] All right.

[2:46:42] Here we go.

[2:46:45] So Santa Cruz County's Capital Improvement Program is a five-year program, it's the implementation plan for projects that we've planned.

[2:46:55] It does establish a logical process.

[2:46:58] That's critical.

[2:46:59] It's a forecast for our next five years.

[2:47:01] We do update it annually, so it's not just a five-year go.

[2:47:05] And probably one of the most critical elements of a CIP is that it's physically constrained.

[2:47:13] And so there are certainly more needs in the county than resources.

[2:47:16] But the CIP is an effort to prioritize those projects that we can identify resources to

[2:47:23] begin project development or project implementation.

[2:47:26] The projects do include public works, county facilities, libraries, health safety and parks.

[2:47:32] Each project page does include the project type, the status, the description of background,

[2:47:39] estimates, funding sources, and schedule, as best we know.

[2:47:48] As part of our countywide Primo Continuous Improvement efforts, we are proposing and implementing

[2:47:54] a once a year update to the CIP in the past, this was twice a year, and it took quite

[2:48:00] bit of resources and did not add much value.

[2:48:05] So we think this is an improvement and we're excited about the new efforts.

[2:48:12] The format of course will continue to update and improve as we get the bugs out of it.

[2:48:17] This is our second year with the new format and of course it supports transparency and

[2:48:23] efficiencies.

[2:48:29] So one of the areas that we're really going to focus on is the program versus unprogrammed

[2:48:35] project areas. So the program areas are those that have been budgeted some funds. Some of them

[2:48:43] completely budgeted, some of them just to get started. And in the unprogrammed section, are

[2:48:48] those projects that do not have funding identified yet, but are important to the county and

[2:48:54] to each of your districts. And this coming year, we plan to truly vet out the unprogrammed section

[2:49:00] to get better descriptions, better estimates, so that when we talk about the future, we have a better vision

[2:49:07] of the needs and the resources needed to bring those projects into the program sections.

[2:49:16] Next up, we will highlight a handful of public works projects.

[2:49:21] And at this time, I will turn it over to Assistant Director Steve Wiesner.

[2:49:28] Thank you, and good afternoon.

[2:49:29] Okay, so I'm going to talk about the public work section of the CIP, and you know, it's arranged by district and there's a few different ways to look at this.

[2:49:39] I'm going to present to you today based on we have a lot of projects in the CIP, really dozens and hundreds if you include the storm damage repair projects.

[2:49:46] So I'm going to describe the projects by their category according to the programs that public works is responsible for.

[2:49:52] So, most of the projects that we have in the CIP

[2:49:54] fall into five basic categories would be

[2:49:57] Pave in Management, Bridge Projects,

[2:50:00] Community Development and Congestion Management Projects,

[2:50:03] Stormed Management Repair Projects,

[2:50:05] and Community Service Area and Special District Projects.

[2:50:09] So, looking in the CIP, you're going to find a number of

[2:50:11] Pave Management Projects,

[2:50:13] and I know it's no secret to you all that the county struggled

[2:50:15] with identifying funds for its Pave Management Program

[2:50:18] in the past decade, decade and a half.

[2:50:20] However, with the passage of measure D locally,

[2:50:24] the new waste hauler's franchise fee for road impacts,

[2:50:29] and some federal highway regional surface transportation funds

[2:50:33] that we get annually.

[2:50:35] The county now has a much more robust paid management program,

[2:50:38] and we'll be putting out annual resurfacing projects,

[2:50:41] utilizing these resources to address the needs.

[2:50:44] So listed here are projects that are funded

[2:50:46] and are currently in the queue for construction.

[2:50:49] on their page numbers or reference there, and I think I should say that you guys are welcome to ask any questions.

[2:50:54] I think we'll have some time for Q and A at the end of the presentation if you want to say them for that.

[2:51:01] Okay, moving on to bridge projects.

[2:51:03] So the county is responsible for approximately 150 roadway bridges county wide.

[2:51:08] Many of these bridges are near or at the end of their useful lives, or have some type of geometric or structural deficiency,

[2:51:14] which requires some sort of rehabilitation work or in some cases full replacement.

[2:51:20] The good news is that the federal highway bridge program is alive and well and it provides funds for these critical needs.

[2:51:27] The county currently has 16 bridges in the program and they're all at various stages in development.

[2:51:33] And we anticipate rolling out building one of these at approximately about a rate of one per year.

[2:51:38] We currently have one in construction that's down in the southern Coralitos area of the county.

[2:51:45] It's the Redwood Road Bridge, which is over attribute area to Brown's Valley Creek,

[2:51:51] and construction is anticipated to be completed this summer.

[2:51:54] But you can expect to see, like hopefully, about one a year for the next many years.

[2:51:59] Okay, moving on to the community development slash congestion management projects.

[2:52:04] So, this list is comprised of a variety of projects that impact our county maintain roads.

[2:52:10] They're road widening projects, they're traffic signal installations, operational improvements,

[2:52:17] some are streetscape projects and pedestrian facility and bike lane projects.

[2:52:22] So, some of these projects you'll note that are left over from the previous redevelopment agency era

[2:52:27] and have just a small amount of what we call...

[2:52:30] Feed money from say traffic impact fees so that we can continue development of the project and seek out grant funds, you know, for these needs.

[2:52:39] Others on the list are actually long-time community development projects that have been around for a while that will be implementing within the next few years.

[2:52:46] And they include a myriad of roadway and roadside improvements to modernize or beautify, say, a downtown core area, you know, and improve traffic operations.

[2:52:57] So, and then you're also going to note that there's others listed here, which are strictly

[2:53:01] for traffic improvements, such as signalized intersections, right-hand turnpockets, things

[2:53:07] of these nature, and these projects are all at various stages of development.

[2:53:13] So, moving on to storm damage repair, Project X.

[2:53:16] So, as your board is aware, the list here represents the monumental task that the Department

[2:53:23] public works in our county has in repairing the many roads that were damaged as a result

[2:53:27] of the 2016-2017 storms.

[2:53:30] Today, we've completed permanent repairs to nearly 30 sites.

[2:53:34] However, we still have almost 170 sites left to repair, which is currently estimated to cost

[2:53:39] around $75 million.

[2:53:42] In the department, we continue to work with our state and our federal partners to deliver

[2:53:46] these projects.

[2:53:48] And while we're confident in our own abilities to repair our roads, we have had some difficulty

[2:53:52] and securing all the necessary funding as your board is aware, and also we're utilizing

[2:53:59] most of our SB1 funding as our required local match for these repairs, and we anticipate

[2:54:05] that'll be for many years, for a few years anyway, 35 years to come. So, you know, in this

[2:54:11] program, we're just going to continue to deliver these projects. We're going to work very closely

[2:54:15] with CaloES, FEMA, FHWA, Cal Trans, and our state and federal legislatures along with the county

[2:54:21] and your board to make sure that funding is available to enact these repairs.

[2:54:25] You know, we made really resolute and this is a big focus for the road department, for sure.

[2:54:31] Okay, moving on to community service areas and special district projects.

[2:54:37] There's a number of projects in here.

[2:54:39] Public Works is responsible to maintain and operate and administer many community service areas, CSAs, and special districts throughout our county.

[2:54:49] And many of these CSA's and special districts are set up to provide services like wastewater

[2:54:55] collection and treatment systems and also clean drinking water facilities as well.

[2:55:01] So several of these projects listed here, they're also in various stages of development

[2:55:04] and we'd have to be happy to answer any questions at the end of the presentation.

[2:55:08] So with that, I think I'm turning it over to Michael, who's going to cover the county facilities

[2:55:12] summary.

[2:55:13] All

[2:55:19] right, for the county's facility side, this CIP plan has actually been a partnership of three main departments, and I'd like to call it the

[2:55:27] Sure, microphone on. It is on. Okay. Sorry, I'm going to go closer.

[2:55:32] All right, so this has kind of been a big partnership between the Department of Public Works, General Services and Parks. I like to refer to us as the Larry Curley and Mo.

[2:55:41] I'd like to say I'm Mo.

[2:55:47] For the county facilities, we've been working pretty good on developing systems in place to evaluate the projects that we have coming to our to your board.

[2:55:57] Identified today are going to be some of the highlights of some of the projects that we currently have.

[2:56:02] Some of them have been completed that we're just waiting to come back to the board on.

[2:56:05] For example, the first two items on the list,

[2:56:07] the 1080 MLA and first floor remodel,

[2:56:09] which had an estimated cost of about $6 million.

[2:56:12] It expanded our behavioral health unit.

[2:56:14] I'm sorry, our federally qualified health center

[2:56:16] by additional 10 to 14 exam rooms.

[2:56:19] The construction is pretty much complete

[2:56:20] with some final finishings.

[2:56:22] We're ponding having a notice of completion

[2:56:24] to this board in August.

[2:56:26] We also have the Watsonville Health Center remodel,

[2:56:29] which was a remodel of the waiting area

[2:56:34] And the addition of three exam rooms for the Watsonville Health Center that is also complete and will be returned to your board in August

[2:56:41] We're just working at some small finalization of some items

[2:56:45] We also have the behavioral health unit, which is in a behavioral health office unit, which is in the South County

[2:56:51] It is identified to hopefully be ready for occupancy July 1

[2:56:55] We are finalizing the fire system with the fire marshal this week

[2:57:00] We are also looking at finishing the landscaping and the art component to that project within the next month or so.

[2:57:08] We do plan on having again occupancy of that building by July 1.

[2:57:12] We also have the 1080 Emeline HFEC replacement project.

[2:57:16] This is currently underway with plans and specs as well as coordination with the

[2:57:23] the Canadian Rearoof Project as they kind of go both hand in hand.

[2:57:28] The Government's Summer Rearoof for this building is currently identified in the

[2:57:33] planning and specs phases to identify how we can mitigate some of the rain buckets

[2:57:39] that we have holding the roof leaks at bay.

[2:57:45] As well as we are also working on the Harbour Vet site to work with the Health Services Agency

[2:57:49] to determine programming as well as some cost-modelings on the different ideas that they are

[2:57:54] working on for programming for that site.

[2:57:57] And we're planning coming back to the board sometime in June, if not later, with a little bit of a better plan.

[2:58:04] With that said, we have brought some pictures to kind of identify a long way.

[2:58:09] To kind of identify some of the, since we can't bring the board to the sites at this time, we've brought some pictures to the board.

[2:58:17] We have an example of the 1080 first floor remodel, which is an example of a medical exam room.

[2:58:23] We also have the 1080 MLINE exterior paint project that was completed.

[2:58:32] We have a picture of the behavioral health unit building that I just spoke about in Watsonville.

[2:58:36] As you can see, the hunting is up, the paint's on.

[2:58:38] We are just working on landscaping at this time as well as some fire code.

[2:58:43] The picture to the right is the Watsonville Health Center remodel.

[2:58:45] That's the new waiting area.

[2:58:53] So, sir, July 1, is that correct?

[2:58:58] Yes, it is actually done now.

[2:59:00] We're just working on some final finishings for the building,

[2:59:04] but it is done July 1.

[2:59:06] Yes,

[2:59:09] please.

[2:59:10] Thank you.

[2:59:12] In addition, just to highlight some two other projects that we've completed this last year,

[2:59:15] which is the 1070 M.O.A.M. Siding Project,

[2:59:18] as well as the Davenport Communication Project, and those are the total costs.

[2:59:23] With that, from here, we'll transition this over to Director Gaffney, who I believe is Larry.

[2:59:28] Thank you, Mo.

[2:59:29] I appreciate it.

[2:59:31] Jeff Gaffney, Director County Parks, and I'll see if I hold it up.

[2:59:34] There we go.

[2:59:36] I think it likes me better.

[2:59:37] So thank you for listening to some of our projects today.

[2:59:41] We have over 30 somewhat projects that we would like to get done in County Parks,

[2:59:45] but we're highlighting a few of them for you today.

[2:59:48] Shannickler Park, as you may or may not be aware, the heart of Shannickler is actually Leo's haven.

[2:59:53] It is fully funded in under construction right now, and things are going well.

[2:59:56] Very happy to have that moving...

[3:00:00] Long on a good timeline, hoping that everything works out, fingers crossed.

[3:00:06] A heart of so-called, this is a completion of the so-called village plan, and we actually were

[3:00:11] very lucky, and actually, I'd say it was some skill with our grant folks in the department as

[3:00:17] well, that we were able to obtain at 1.5 million our grants, so we do have full funding for this project.

[3:00:23] This will connect together main arteries within the community of so-called, and be able to

[3:00:29] can walk to school from a couple of different routes and also do some really solid protection

[3:00:34] of the repairing corridor along there.

[3:00:37] Simpkins Family Swim Center, as we all know, this Swim Center is very popular and it is

[3:00:44] also over 20 years old, there are a number of deferred maintenance items that need to be addressed

[3:00:49] as well as plant construction for a library annex as part of the facility.

[3:00:54] So we're hoping to coincide that construction with the improvements that we can get done

[3:00:58] at that time, we are short a little bit on the funding,

[3:01:00] but we'll continue to look for grants for that.

[3:01:04] Aptos Village Park, a very well-used park, very popular.

[3:01:09] We also have the recent construction of the Aptos Village

[3:01:11] Project itself, in conjunction with that,

[3:01:14] there was a small park that was dedicated to the county.

[3:01:18] So some of the project maintenance that we need to do

[3:01:20] in Aptos Village Park here, probably should be coordinated

[3:01:23] with that to make sure we're not redundant in our services

[3:01:25] that we provide.

[3:01:26] We also have some cosmetic improvements we can do, and probably replace some of the appliances.

[3:01:32] This has become a popular place for weddings, so we'll probably really do some

[3:01:36] improvement in landscaping as well.

[3:01:41] Seek Cliff Village Park, we're very happy to have the opportunity to get a bathroom in

[3:01:45] here.

[3:01:46] This always the big thing for us is we love when we get a bathroom in, so we're hoping to

[3:01:50] get a bathroom and a skate park here within the next six to 12 months.

[3:01:55] And that is, because we're fortunate enough to have a couple of benefactor stepping forward

[3:02:01] to probably help us out with a couple of portion of that project.

[3:02:05] We're working with them right now.

[3:02:06] It's a damn important landing.

[3:02:07] Also a bathroom.

[3:02:08] It can't really go wrong with that.

[3:02:09] It's only taken us three years, but we're there.

[3:02:11] We're actually hoping to do a construction this summer.

[3:02:14] And once again, we get excited about bathrooms at parks.

[3:02:19] And then South County parks.

[3:02:20] We're actually working with both the city of Watsonville and the Fairbord and a couple of

[3:02:25] non-profits.

[3:02:25] We're looking to see where we can best utilize the funding that we have down in South

[3:02:30] County to provide youth services, primarily looking at the potential for soccer fields.

[3:02:36] We're working with a couple of specific identified individuals, stakeholders down there,

[3:02:43] that have some ideas on how we can best utilize it, but I'm taking direction and support

[3:02:47] from the city of Watsonville Parks Department right now.

[3:02:51] I felt an nature discovery park.

[3:02:55] This also, we should be looking at opening bids on June 18th,

[3:02:59] and we think we've reached the complete gap on the funding for this right now,

[3:03:03] as long as our estimates hold,

[3:03:05] we actually will have this completely funded and hopefully built

[3:03:08] almost in conjunction with the library's completion,

[3:03:12] probably within six months after that we're hoping.

[3:03:14] So that concludes the parks courses.

[3:03:16] So as we wrap up here, I would like to also share the recommended action today.

[3:03:23] The action is to direct public works to present our next year's CIP program incorporating

[3:03:29] all changes of the board will adopt as part of the 1920 budget hearings in capital improvement

[3:03:36] program related budget appropriations on or before May 22nd of 2020.

[3:03:40] So next year's update.

[3:03:42] So with that, we are all here and available to answering your questions you may have.

[3:03:49] You bet.

[3:03:52] Hula had college in 152.

[3:03:55] Which is easily,

[3:04:01] has that been to put off again?

[3:04:04] Well, we are wrapping up the final design currently and completing the right-of-way acquisition needed.

[3:04:12] We are short-funded and so we're pursuing funds to complete that project through construction.

[3:04:18] but being shelf-ready is of real value, and so as we wrap up that design and right away this summer

[3:04:25] we'll be in a good position to secure the funds needed to complete the project.

[3:04:30] We don't yet have a schedule because of the funding but we're pursuing it currently.

[3:04:35] You've had, and real quick, the road divided reflectors are constantly road.

[3:04:41] They were coming off. I had a big bag of somebody collected them all off the road.

[3:04:47] what caused that is it was just a lack of glue or the lack of what you know yeah I can't

[3:04:56] really actually say until I'd look at the look the specific situation but thanks for

[3:05:01] noting that and you know obviously we'll have our crews take a look at that and reinstall

[3:05:04] and we're this somebody lives out there brought me two big bags probably about 50

[3:05:09] reflectors I'll make a note of that thank you

[3:05:13] And then the behavioral health center really looking forward to getting that going.

[3:05:20] I want to thank you very much for having that project and the South County.

[3:05:25] And then, Parks, it does say 250,000.

[3:05:30] We have a little bit more than that, don't we?

[3:05:32] From leftover from before.

[3:05:34] It just depends on specifically that there.

[3:05:36] If you're what fund you would specifically be talking about.

[3:05:38] So that's the money we've allocated to work with this city.

[3:05:41] wants to know, but there are some other funds that we have in South County.

[3:05:44] Does that include any new funding that we get from the measure we passed and what was

[3:05:50] measured G?

[3:05:51] That does.

[3:05:52] That's so that was the the portion that was included.

[3:05:55] Yeah.

[3:05:55] There was somebody before to the correct.

[3:05:58] Yes.

[3:05:58] Sorry.

[3:05:59] We have funding in several different.

[3:06:03] There's several different funds depending on the development area and or projects that

[3:06:07] we have.

[3:06:07] also you're probably talking about the unfunded mandate money I think is what you're talking

[3:06:11] about yes we also have some funding that's correct thanks a lot I appreciate it we're going to

[3:06:16] we're going to finally find a place yeah absolutely we're working very hard to and the city

[3:06:20] watching those we're very lucky to have the city parks director down there we do he's very motivated

[3:06:25] and I think we're going to find something together I just want to say ball for parks and everybody's

[3:06:31] district that I just want to make sure we have one of our.

[3:06:36] It's like that line of animal farms, parks should be everywhere except more parks in my district.

[3:06:42] Yeah, this is very encouraging to see that we're able to do some things and I really appreciate

[3:06:48] that good comprehensive report that we have here.

[3:06:52] This is where the people really want to see what we're doing to make better living conditions

[3:06:59] for them, whether it be on the road or in the parks or in the health care facility.

[3:07:03] So if you've covered all the bases and I think you've spread it around very well too.

[3:07:07] So I really appreciate that.

[3:07:09] I know how those and each of our districts are just very excited about the prospect of getting

[3:07:16] to some things done very late.

[3:07:17] So thank you very much.

[3:07:21] Yeah.

[3:07:21] Thank you.

[3:07:22] I just have a couple of questions.

[3:07:25] First of all, I appreciated the inclusion of the agenda on East Cliff Drive.

[3:07:30] I've, you know, what we've seen from the Twin Lakes Beach Fund project is when we make these investments that they make a big difference in the lives of people who live in those neighborhoods and the people who visit the area. Twin Lakes Beach gets over 500,000 visitors a year.

[3:07:48] And it started to do even the first prep work on looking about how we can make it easier for

[3:07:56] people to walk from that beach up to East Cliff Village shopping center changes of the

[3:08:02] economic dynamics in the neighborhood, it increases the livability of her people who live there.

[3:08:09] And it's been a long sought after project that I hope that we would have gotten done before.

[3:08:18] redevelopment one away and now you know we have to find other sources but I

[3:08:22] think what we saw with twin-like speech front is that there you know there's

[3:08:26] support from groups like the Coastal Conservancy and the Commission to support

[3:08:30] these kind of projects that increase coastal access and so getting it to

[3:08:35] just a fall on the list of projects that are never going to get done means that

[3:08:39] we have a better chance of moving this forward so I appreciate that work. I did

[3:08:44] We have one question on the Highway 17 to so-called Court or Re-Surfacing Project.

[3:08:51] North Rode of Gold is listed on there.

[3:08:53] I was a tentative meeting with North Rode of Gold's residents over the weekend concerned

[3:08:58] about fire safety, but part of that is related to the condition of the road.

[3:09:02] We do have some storm repairs there that I know we're not going to get done until 2020, but

[3:09:08] is resurfacing, what can I tell them about the $800,000 that's listed here that might be

[3:09:16] used on Northford Air Gulch?

[3:09:18] So the idea for that project is to implement it as soon as possible.

[3:09:22] I believe that's stiff funding that we have is that right, Casey?

[3:09:26] We've got stiff funding, few more hoops to jump through, then if it was RSTP funding, we'll

[3:09:31] say that.

[3:09:33] But our goal with these resurfacing projects is to get them out on the street as soon

[3:09:37] possible and we try to combine roads where it makes sense geographically so we can get

[3:09:42] you know better bang for our buck. What we'll do in situations where we're re-surfacing

[3:09:47] roads that have existing storm damage will try to make a logical kind of terminate.

[3:09:51] You know before the damage and afterwards but I certainly wouldn't want to stop us from

[3:09:56] re-surfacing you know miles of roadway when we're waiting for you know 100 feet of road

[3:10:01] to be repaired.

[3:10:02] North for the Air Gulch waited five or six years for the damage from the 2011 storms to be

[3:10:09] done.

[3:10:10] And then in the 2017 storms it took some more hits.

[3:10:13] And so the residents understand that Mother Nature is cruel to that road, but the resurfacing

[3:10:20] would really help them out in a lot of different ways.

[3:10:23] And so anything we can do to advance that would be a long way with that neighborhood who's

[3:10:28] waiting for repairs and understands the permitting issues and the funding issues with the storm damage repair.

[3:10:35] Agreed, and I think we have that project specifically program for not this summer, but the following summer, construction 2020.

[3:10:41] All right.

[3:10:42] On parks, one of the things we talked about with Measure G was our capital investments being frontloaded.

[3:10:53] And so people would see that right away, and I want to get your sense of what you think is as going to happen at the farm park at a near-term

[3:11:03] Before the end of the year. Let's say

[3:11:06] I

[3:11:06] Definitely we're pushing everything we can to get something to happen at farm park. It's been a long time coming as you mentioned earlier today

[3:11:12] And we hope to at least get

[3:11:16] Construction started on potentially the bike pump track and or even a

[3:11:20] a taught lot in or the playground area, I don't know that we can get the bridge and that was the

[3:11:26] one thing I was really hoping we could get done this summer, but that may not happen.

[3:11:29] Yeah, I mean, one of those elements that getting done this year would be a go along way to

[3:11:37] telling the folks and so Cal that we're actually moving forward on this project. Absolutely.

[3:11:42] And then the last thing on the harbor vet building, I know that we had a deferral letter today.

[3:11:46] I'm really looking forward to seeing that project.

[3:11:50] And I think there's a real critical need for crisis

[3:11:54] stabilization or something else at that site.

[3:11:57] And so whatever we can do to fast-track that

[3:12:00] will be a long way to addressing a county-wide concern,

[3:12:04] as well as the first district concern.

[3:12:11] I'll be brief and not actually speak specific to my district

[3:12:14] about a more macro component of how the CIP reads,

[3:12:16] and specifically the unprogrammed.

[3:12:18] I appreciate that you are taking a second look at it and maintaining it at least in the short

[3:12:22] term, because as all of these, as all of my colleagues know, we receive a lot of requests

[3:12:28] for service that we cannot initially need, but I think people want to know that it's

[3:12:32] within the system.

[3:12:33] They want to know that it's being looked at, there's been some sort of design, it's been

[3:12:36] costed out, but it's something that's a priority for the county, even if it's not an immediate

[3:12:39] county.

[3:12:39] Something you can point to to show that it is on a list, should there be potentially a federal

[3:12:45] infrastructure bill or something, an infusion of money that we didn't anticipate

[3:12:47] paid. So maintaining that list is important, I believe. I know that it may be cluttered up a little

[3:12:53] bit of the CIP, but it's an important thing for us to be able to point to and I just wanted

[3:12:57] to ensure that that does maintain its existence since the CIP is moving forward. Thank you.

[3:13:11] Hi, good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the Board. Toby got a long-term resident of

[3:13:16] Live Oak. I want to thank the comments of the supervisors already today. I'm standing up here to support

[3:13:21] The project that is a community development project in the list is the Pedestrian Improvement Project, the East Cliff Drive from 7th to 12th otherwise known as B-03-67, it's in the next last page in your recommended CIP.

[3:13:37] Three reasons why I'm here will number one first and foremost is public safety. There's no safe way to make it your way as a pedestrian around that section of East Cliff Drive that wraps around Chwan Lake.

[3:13:50] Number two, it's a vital connection between the county and the city that people use all the time.

[3:13:57] It's part of the sanctuary scenic trail, but it's a gap that we have.

[3:14:01] Number three, it's just completion.

[3:14:02] Don't think of this as a project by itself.

[3:14:05] This project was on a list on the former redevelopment implementation plan for ever along with

[3:14:10] the fifth and like project and the severe successful twin-like speech run program.

[3:14:16] So this is a really continuation of an existing project,

[3:14:19] and we really would like to see it come to reality.

[3:14:22] A couple other quick considerations.

[3:14:24] There's some future undergrounding that might help us along.

[3:14:27] It's mostly within the counties right of way,

[3:14:30] so property acquisition is minimal,

[3:14:32] and it's consistent with your strategic plan.

[3:14:35] So thanks to your staff for putting this,

[3:14:38] resuscitating it from the unfunded CIP list

[3:14:40] into your CIP, and I'm just here to really ask for your support

[3:14:45] to keep this a county priority. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your

[3:14:50] testimony. I know as someone who works in the public sector. You understand

[3:14:52] how difficult this can be and I can appreciate your continued advocacy. Sure. So that concludes

[3:14:59] public comment.

[3:15:00] Right back to the Board of Directors. I just had with the uncertainty of the federal level of some of the federal highway issues. How much would that impact, what we have here, I would be in the transportation sector. I'm sure, but just generally, or do we still wait to try to get them in, I could hit us in the face, but how much of an impact could that have?

[3:15:22] Sure. So if we continue to struggle with the federal highway side as you alluded to,

[3:15:30] that would put a bigger burden on our SB 1 funds for a longer period of time, so that would be less

[3:15:36] future resurfacing dollars. And so that could certainly delay out some of those future

[3:15:42] more general road maintenance type projects. That was our vision for that SB 1 funding was to go into

[3:15:48] roadway resurfacing and maintenance.

[3:15:51] Today we're using as a match for the Federal highways and the FEMA projects.

[3:15:55] And if Federal highways, if we do lose some of that funding, then that would put a greater

[3:15:59] burden on SB1.

[3:16:00] So, it could hurt our maintenance program dramatically.

[3:16:05] Thank you.

[3:16:06] All right.

[3:16:07] So, thank you very much.

[3:16:09] Is this an exception file?

[3:16:12] I don't.

[3:16:12] I'm moved to recommend it.

[3:16:13] Perfect.

[3:16:15] So, motion by, we uphold, second by friend, all those in favor, please say aye.

[3:16:21] That passes unanimously.

[3:16:22] Thank you.

[3:16:24] Thank you.

[3:16:25] We're now going to move into closed session.

[3:16:28] Will there be any reportable action?

[3:16:30] Okay.

[3:16:32] And then we'll return at 1.30 for our afternoon agenda.

[3:16:53] Yeah, we're there.

[3:16:54] They walk it up.

[3:16:55] Yeah.

[3:16:55] I mean it's going to start a little bit.

[3:16:59] I mean it's going to start a little bit.

[3:16:59] I'm going to operate the remote.

[3:17:01] That one's up.

[3:17:03] We'll look into it.

[3:17:04] This is going to start to slide.

[3:17:08] We'll try to start stoking about the conservatory.

[3:17:10] So it's going to start.

[3:17:12] You saw it never.

[3:17:14] That's not going to be enough.

[3:17:17] I don't know what else we'll do.

[3:17:19] That's not going to be enough.

[3:17:21] Yeah.

[3:17:23] That's not going to be enough.

[3:17:25] I don't think that's a problem.

[3:17:26] I don't think that's a problem.

[3:17:29] But in our initial population, we have a lot of people

[3:17:31] that are bald and the herd.

[3:17:34] So I think we can end up having a wide and towards the lake

[3:17:37] that helps a lot of the area.

[3:17:39] And we have a lot of places that we've been waiting for

[3:17:41] and we're even the redeemed fall on the outside.

[3:17:43] It's very, very expensive.

[3:17:45] And when this week's fall, we're not going to have those big places.

[3:17:48] We've got a couple of children.

[3:17:50] I think they're going to die.

[3:17:53] space there's no way everything is about wait something so we use a distance there is

[3:18:03] all

[3:18:13] right good afternoon everybody I'm going to call the meeting back to order I do

[3:18:18] want to announce that the air conditioner is broken so it's hot and here it's not just the

[3:18:23] potential debate we're about to have but it's actually a short of air conditioning so they're

[3:18:28] working on it and hopefully it'll improve in a few minutes so we are going to consider

[3:18:34] the only item on our agenda for this afternoon, which is consider that 2017 to 2019 by

[3:18:40] Annual Report and Presentation of the Surin Services Program, SSP, and direct the Health

[3:18:45] Services Agency to return in September and December 2019 with reports as outlined in

[3:18:50] a memorandum of the Director of Health Services.

[3:18:54] And we have Mimi Hall here to present.

[3:19:11] Thank you.

[3:19:11] I'm very pleased to be here and thank you Chair Coonerty and Honorable Members of the Board.

[3:19:16] I'm here with our intro-

[3:19:18] Hold on.

[3:19:18] Do you have your-

[3:19:19] I want to go close to the microphone.

[3:19:22] Is that better?

[3:19:23] Yes.

[3:19:24] Okay.

[3:19:25] Good afternoon.

[3:19:27] I'm here with our interim health officer, Dr.

[3:19:30] David Guilerducci, and also our director of

[3:19:33] Nursing, who also oversees the Suringe Services Program

[3:19:37] in our Public Health Division, Jen Herrera.

[3:19:41] And we will be-

[3:19:46] requirement to come to the board by annually with report on our syringe services program.

[3:19:51] And I'd like to start off by telling the board that we've worked really hard as a health

[3:19:56] services agency, particularly over the last year, to strengthen our program and our services

[3:20:02] to capitalize and leverage all of the other services that we have expanded over the last couple

[3:20:08] of years, ranging from whole person care, integrated behavioral health, drug medical expansion,

[3:20:14] and our medication assisted treatment program to create a situation in which the syringe services

[3:20:21] program is truly something that is a gateway to the other services that we provide and we feel

[3:20:28] like we've made great strides in that and the other thing that I wanted to mention is we find ourselves

[3:20:36] in a situation today where as a new director I look back over the years and I see that the

[3:20:43] operations of our program has slowly been sort of limited and constrained year after year and we hope

[3:20:49] that we can turn the tides for that and ensure the board that we have the capacity,

[3:20:55] the interest and the ability to provide excellent oversight for this program and use it as, again,

[3:21:01] a lever to enter people into recovery and health care.

[3:21:06] So with that,

[3:21:11] today, you'll be hearing the general overview that you will receive today

[3:21:16] is the background of the County Suringe Services Program, the recent opportunities that I

[3:21:21] briefly spoke of just now.

[3:21:23] An overview of our program, Dr. Gailor Ducci, will be going over the relevant programmatic

[3:21:29] data.

[3:21:29] And then finally we will end with the recommendations that we have as an agency for your board to consider,

[3:21:39] and I'm going to go ahead and turn it over to Jen Herrera.

[3:21:44] So as a reminder, there are four ways to lawfully provide syringe services in California.

[3:21:51] The California Department of Public Health may authorize syringe services programs anywhere in the state.

[3:21:56] City and county governments may authorize SSPs in their jurisdiction, physicians and pharmacies may provide an unlimited number of syringes without a prescription to anyone over the age of 18 and syringes may be prescribed.

[3:22:10] HSA's Surringe Service Program received its authorization through the county.

[3:22:17] A syringe services program provides clean syringes and safe disposal of use syringes.

[3:22:22] they have existed since the 1970s. In the 1980s, baby came more widely available, playing a

[3:22:28] central role in dramatically reducing age.

[3:22:30] A V-infection among people who inject drugs. SSPs are one piece of the harm reduction paradigm for promoting health and safety with people who use drugs.

[3:22:39] And it's never just the syringes. It's always part of a system of care.

[3:22:45] The program is at the intersection of multiple epidemics. It is a well-known evidence-based intervention to prevent HIV and hepatitis C.

[3:22:53] Research indicates that it is also an effective strategy to prevent overdose and other infectious diseases, such as wound botulism, hepatitis A,

[3:23:02] and a craditis and skin is off tissue infections.

[3:23:06] The core purpose of the syringe services programs is to create a safer and healthier community

[3:23:11] by reducing the risk of exposure to infection and disease and by acting as a gateway to integrated services.

[3:23:18] Accessible clean syringes and supplies allows person who inject drugs, the option of using clean equipment with every use.

[3:23:26] This reduces the risk of sharing and reusing equipment which reduces the prevalence of disease and infection in our community.

[3:23:33] By being accessible, the SSB is a gateway for services for a population that does not typically engage with health and social services.

[3:23:42] In this operational period, the landscape of our health systems has evolved on the federal state and local levels.

[3:23:48] The opioid crisis in the state's HIV getting to zero strategic plan has led to the following funding priorities across HSA in the community.

[3:23:55] Whole-person care, drug medical organized delivery system,

[3:24:00] integrated behavioral health, and medication assisted treatment.

[3:24:05] Since 2017, HSA has increased integration

[3:24:08] of these broad reaching initiatives.

[3:24:11] This new capacity created an opportunity to optimize

[3:24:13] SSP as a venue to reach populations who are homeless,

[3:24:17] mentally ill, and struggling with addiction.

[3:24:20] Populations who otherwise would not

[3:24:22] access available health and social services.

[3:24:24] In February 2019, the SSP was reorganized from a stand-alone part-time program to operate within the public health division's communicable disease unit.

[3:24:34] Collaborative planning resulted in a new multidisciplinary staffing structure, which includes public health nurses, public health staff, and certified addiction counseling staff.

[3:24:44] With these changes, the program's metrics and performance indicators are being evaluated for sustainable continuous quality improvement.

[3:24:50] The evolution of the SSP during this operational period supports an improved gateway to healthcare, treatment, services and support.

[3:24:59] Even with HSA's expansion, there are many barriers for people who inject drugs to access services,

[3:25:06] some of which include the Sigma run substance use, personal trauma, being isolated, lack of trust in the system,

[3:25:13] not being ready for change, and the inaccessibility of health and social services.

[3:25:17] It is difficult to outreach to this population since some have not access healthcare in years.

[3:25:23] The Surringe Services Program creates opportunities to connect persons to inject drugs with health and social services.

[3:25:30] People access SSP to reduce harm to themselves in the community.

[3:25:34] With this action, they have a shared responsibility to contribute to a safer environment.

[3:25:39] The SSP builds rapport with participants in a safe space, providing education, referrals, and warm hand-offs to various services.

[3:25:46] It's not just the syringes, the SSP supports an effective system of care.

[3:25:53] Santa Cruz program has three components with very specific goals.

[3:25:57] Distribution and collection has a goal of reducing the risk of exposure to infection in disease in Santa Cruz County

[3:26:02] through safer injection practices.

[3:26:05] Safety disposal has a goal of eliminating syringe litter in public spaces through proper syringe disposal

[3:26:10] and enhanced referrals has a goal of linking participants to clinical, behavioral and social services

[3:26:15] when they determine they are ready for change.

[3:26:20] For distribution and collection, the HSA Divisions Partner

[3:26:23] to provide one for one sewerage distribution

[3:26:25] and collection services at the M-Line

[3:26:27] and Watsonville Clinic locations.

[3:26:30] For a safe disposal, HSA has partnered

[3:26:32] with the Department of Public Works

[3:26:33] to increase coordinated and ongoing

[3:26:35] sewerage disposal in the community

[3:26:37] and maintains three sharpskiyos throughout the county

[3:26:39] for public use.

[3:26:41] The program also provides free personal sharps containers

[3:26:44] and safe disposal education

[3:26:45] for all SSP participants.

[3:26:48] For enhanced referrals, the program maintains a multidisciplinary staffing structure and coordinates

[3:26:53] with clinics, IVH and other services for stream-line referrals.

[3:26:58] The program also provides on-site rapid HIV and hepatitis C testing as well as on-site

[3:27:03] Narcantraining and Distribution.

[3:27:08] Good afternoon, Mr. Chair, boards, board members.

[3:27:12] I'd like to go over some of the data that we've collected through the SSP and I obviously

[3:27:17] We won't read this entire chart to you, but some of the key takeaways I believe are we've

[3:27:24] seen about 7,500 visits across the county for SSP services, this encompasses about 870

[3:27:33] individuals.

[3:27:35] We think we know that the majority of these patients go to the M-Line Clinic, although the

[3:27:40] Watsonville Clinic also sees quite a few.

[3:27:43] Most of these patients are male, most of them inject heroin, although 50% of this group also use

[3:27:50] methamphetamine, which is a significant issue as well.

[3:27:56] Our KIA has actually been quite successful in terms of collecting syringes, and as you can

[3:28:01] see, there has been a 300% increase over the last two years, or three years rather.

[3:28:07] And so that continues to be a significant source of return needles, but when you look at what

[3:28:14] that our SSP sites, the two sites, you see that there's a pretty close match between the number

[3:28:21] of syringes collected and the number of syringes dispensed. In fact, in 2018 we actually collected

[3:28:28] more syringes than we dispensed. And so, I think what that shows between the two slides is about

[3:28:36] 900,000 needles. Obviously, since we've only distributed 600,000, that there is a significant

[3:28:44] source of other needles out there in the community.

[3:28:48] Over the years, we've seen a gradual decline in the number of clients that come to our

[3:28:54] services, but the number of syringes distributed has actually increased.

[3:29:00] And this might seem to be a curious relationship.

[3:29:02] The reason for this, we believe, is something called secondary exchange.

[3:29:06] And this is a phenomena where one person may go on behalf of many other people, bring their

[3:29:13] ranges in on there be half and collects ranges back, you know, sterile

[3:29:18] ranges back on there be half. And so we may find more of this kind of

[3:29:22] proxy relationship happening. We believe that this is continues to be a

[3:29:27] important thing to do because these are people that what otherwise not

[3:29:32] necessarily come themselves to the site to get claims ranges. So we believe

[3:29:37] from a safety perspective in terms of preventing disease that it's important.

[3:29:42] And however, we do lose the opportunity to actually interact with the individuals and the

[3:29:47] social services that we want to hook them into, the mental health, the clinical services,

[3:29:52] vaccinations and testing.

[3:29:55] So there's a little bit of a double-edged sword.

[3:29:57] We do believe that secondary exchange is important.

[3:30:00] But also need to find ways to increase access to patients that otherwise would not come to us directly at the two clinic sites.

[3:30:10] Looking at HIV, fortunately, the numbers are relatively low, but these are newly diagnosed cases over the years.

[3:30:17] And as you can see, there's been a gradual decline, a significant proportion continue to be persons who inject drugs, the PWID.

[3:30:26] That is probably an artifact of not only new infections, which we believe continue to happen

[3:30:33] despite our efforts, but also our improved detection techniques.

[3:30:37] Now that we have more access to that inject drugs, we're able to test them and identify infections

[3:30:45] that otherwise would not be identified.

[3:30:48] So part of what you're seeing here is that artifact.

[3:30:53] There we go. Hepatitis C, kind of a similar situation here and it would appear on the face

[3:31:00] as though the program itself is not working because it looks like infections are going

[3:31:04] out, but I again want to stress that what we're actually seeing here is increased detection

[3:31:08] and not necessarily new infections. So it's important that we identify people with Hepatitis

[3:31:14] C so that we can make sure that they get the appropriate treatment. In some cases there's

[3:31:19] actually a cure for this, but that can't happen unless we know that they're infected.

[3:31:26] For hepatitis B, we are seeing, again, a similar trend, a downward trend, they're relatively

[3:31:32] known low numbers.

[3:31:34] As you may know, back in the late 90s, hepatitis B vaccinations became routinely available

[3:31:41] to adolescents.

[3:31:42] So I think in the blue bar, what we're seeing mostly here are patients that did not get vaccinated

[3:31:48] for one reason or another, and as the older age groups, of course, probably acquired their

[3:31:53] infections, and never did have an opportunity for vaccinations, so that is a service

[3:31:58] that we offer.

[3:32:01] And then finally, you may remember back in 2017, we had a significant hepatitis A outbreak.

[3:32:07] And you can see that hepatitis A would happen every once in a while in the years prior to 2017.

[3:32:13] But in 2017, this outbreak was clearly amongst the group of people who inject drugs.

[3:32:20] And I think what's important here is that in the orange or the yellow bar, rather, is that

[3:32:27] this is actually a disease process that is so communicable that it broke outside of this kind

[3:32:32] of traditional risk group.

[3:32:34] And so when we think about vaccination, we're, you know, we obviously are concerned about the

[3:32:41] of people who inject drugs, but this is also an issue that affects people who are outside of that community,

[3:32:48] in general public. And my last slide here is what we call an epidemic curve that shows, again,

[3:32:56] the sort of smoldering infection rate for hepatitis A and then this rapid increase that happen in June and July

[3:33:02] of 2017 and again mostly in the PWID group. But as you can see, that's the orange

[3:33:10] the blue bar shows infections in people who are not PWID or a person who inject drugs.

[3:33:19] So you can see how it transferred from one group to the next, right?

[3:33:23] And then the blue line that you see there actually represents the vaccinations that we performed at the SSP.

[3:33:30] And this is I think a good demonstration of how the SSP is kind of the tip of the spear in terms of managing these kinds of outbreaks.

[3:33:38] because as we increased our vaccinations, the PWID group went down as did the people in the non-PWID group.

[3:33:48] So I think it's an important public health avenue to reach people that otherwise are very difficult to reach.

[3:34:00] During this operational period we received feedback on the SSP from the civil grand jury in the SSP advisory group.

[3:34:07] We've used this feedback to develop our recommendations for the program.

[3:34:12] In 2017, the civil grand jury published the following findings and recommendations in its report on the SSP titled Sharper Solutions.

[3:34:21] The findings include that the SSP currently operates without a budget or permanent staff, which hinders the success of program goals.

[3:34:29] Limited hours, space, and staff, hamper referrals to counseling, treatment, and support programs, reducing the number of people receiving assistance.

[3:34:36] Some injection drug users don't travel to SSP sites, thus preventing them from receiving assistance from other health programs.

[3:34:45] The recommendations from this report include that HSA should devote more time and resources to community outreach to promote rehabilitation and counseling of SSP clients.

[3:34:55] HSA should implement a mobile needle exchange unit to increase access to SSP services.

[3:35:01] And HSA should post hazardous waste signs with a single contact number for advice or reporting

[3:35:07] available 24-7 in areas where syringes are commonly found.

[3:35:13] On April 30, 2019, the SSPs advisory group provided the following recommendations, which

[3:35:20] align with best practices noted by the California Department of Public Health.

[3:35:24] This includes increased accessibility of the SSP, maintain secondary exchange, ensure dedicated

[3:35:31] resources for the SSP, improve awareness of current law that prevents criminal prosecution

[3:35:37] for possession of syringes and associated materials, transition to a needs-based distribution

[3:35:42] of syringes, increase accessibility of syringes disposal kiosk, utilize the citizen-connect

[3:35:48] application to report syringe litter, and formalize the advisory board membership.

[3:35:55] Given this feedback, we recommend that your board direct the HSA to implement the following

[3:36:00] recommendations to the Surringe Services Program.

[3:36:05] Expand SSP hours at the Immeline Campus in Watsonville,

[3:36:08] Hust Center up to 20 hours per week,

[3:36:11] as staffing resources become available

[3:36:12] from collaborating programs.

[3:36:15] Incorporate SSP into the homeless person's health project

[3:36:18] clinical field services.

[3:36:20] Collaborate with a California Department of Public Health

[3:36:23] to complete a study of Surringe Liter

[3:36:25] to be conducted in Santa Cruz County

[3:36:27] and return to the board by September 24, 2019 to report on the findings and provide recommendations.

[3:36:34] And choose the results of this orange-liter study to develop a pilot program to reduce public

[3:36:38] orange-liter using the Citizen Connect application and return to the board by December 31, 2019 with a proposed plan implementation and evaluation for the pilot program.

[3:36:55] Thank you, Jen, and Dr. Villager-Ducci.

[3:37:00] With that, I would like to end our presentation by summarizing that the focus of our

[3:37:06] syringe services program is, as Jennifer Herrera mentioned, three-pronged.

[3:37:11] The primary focus is to ensure that we reduce the risk of exposure to diseases that can be

[3:37:17] experienced by persons who inject drugs.

[3:37:20] The second goal or the second prong of our program is to focus on syringe litter regardless of the source of syringe litter and it's clear to us.

[3:37:30] That much of the source of syringe litter comes from outside HSA's program, we feel like public safety is an important and we see ourselves playing a role in overall syringe litter regardless of where it comes from.

[3:37:42] And then thirdly, we really do focus on engaging the community and its stakeholders. We've had a lot of discussions internally amongst staff about methods where we can more efficiently communicate to the public, towards stakeholders.

[3:37:58] And also to those who utilize our services, we recognize that we can learn a lot about how to improve our services and how to reduce the community impacts of those services.

[3:38:09] By talking to the people who avail themselves of the services that we provide.

[3:38:16] Because they provide the most information on how we can best meet their needs as well as serve the needs of the community.

[3:38:22] So with that, we have these recommendations before the board and I will say that these recommendations do fall short of best practices and we do recognize that.

[3:38:34] We make these recommendations based on the funding, the capacity, and the staffing that we have at this moment.

[3:38:41] I would like to add that in the governor's budget that's been proposed.

[3:38:45] And there is funding for specifically for HIV, STDs, and Hepsy, and it's an ongoing allocation

[3:38:55] to local health jurisdictions.

[3:38:57] And there's also $40 million airmarked for chemical disease control.

[3:39:02] And we haven't put those into our budget request for this year, because it's not finalized.

[3:39:08] The budget will be finalized on June 15th.

[3:39:11] Governor has 12 days to respond, but there is a potential source of funding for us to expand

[3:39:18] services if the board would so allow. And three of those funding streams for HIV, STDs,

[3:39:25] and Hep-C will be ongoing allocations. Thank you.

[3:39:30] I want to open it up now for board member questions.

[3:39:38] I mean, there's, I have a lot of questions

[3:39:40] comments. So, I mean, I think I could maybe let's, let's wait and hear from the public.

[3:39:48] So, if you are interested in speaking today, I'd actually to please line up if you can.

[3:39:55] And we'll take testimony.

[3:40:01] This too, yeah.

[3:40:04] Dear supervisors, my name is Rick and Chalberg. I live in the Soquel. I'm a member of John

[3:40:10] of Paul's district, lived here in Santa Cruz in 2002, and I love living here, and I'm

[3:40:20] really concerned about where we are today. We have the numbers on number of homeless people

[3:40:28] here, I think the count is up for debate, but roughly, the number of chronically homeless

[3:40:37] people here has gone from 54 to 62 percent. Just a data point. There's roughly 40 percent

[3:40:44] who have mentally issues, 40 percent who have persistent drug issues and these numbers

[3:40:49] don't change.

[3:40:52] 30 percent of these people visit Yale at least once a year as well. I mean,

[3:40:58] I'm bringing this up because you can context of the program here, it matters, because these

[3:41:02] are the customers for this program, largely.

[3:41:06] Now I have a question on the objectives for the syringe program in the mission statement

[3:41:11] that's available online.

[3:41:12] They're really just two objectives.

[3:41:14] Not three.

[3:41:15] Sounds a little bit surprised today.

[3:41:17] Maybe the documentation needs to be updated, but it's about to avoid the spread of disease

[3:41:22] and to address the concerns around syringe later.

[3:41:26] That's it.

[3:41:28] So I don't know where the additional objective comes from.

[3:41:31] I would strongly recommend that you add an objective, though, about rehabilitation and providing

[3:41:37] a way out of drug use.

[3:41:40] To do that, you need to close a massive loophole that you're having in this program.

[3:41:45] The thing that you guys call the secondary exchange, it's not working.

[3:41:50] The only way for that to work is to have professionals who are trained, who are out there

[3:41:56] to provide services to cover all three objectives, assuming that we have those.

[3:42:03] Having someone, I can, I'm sorry, I appreciate it, thank you.

[3:42:08] And we got your, we got your emails earlier.

[3:42:12] Thank you.

[3:42:13] My name is Jennifer Hastings, Dan Hastings, and I'm a family practice physician practicing

[3:42:18] for over 20 years in this community.

[3:42:20] I'm currently at in Compass Community Services, providing MAT, and I work at the Health Improvement

[3:42:26] partnership. I just want to state my support for this range program that the county is proposing.

[3:42:32] I would love to see it move closer to best practices. The comment that was made about

[3:42:38] treatment is incredibly important and one can never force treatment. That is, it needs the

[3:42:43] principles of harm reduction and engagement which was the third piece. And so within engagement

[3:42:49] of both users and our community, I think we can move towards success. But I encourage our community

[3:42:55] to work together and that the principles of harm reduction are incredibly important.

[3:43:01] They follow principles that are working towards evidence-based practices, decreasing this

[3:43:07] spread of disease, increasing healthy behaviors, but we can't do that with force.

[3:43:13] Thank you.

[3:43:17] Hi.

[3:43:17] Good afternoon.

[3:43:18] My name is Gabrielle.

[3:43:19] I am a constituent of John Leopold.

[3:43:21] I'm also a member of Take Vaccina Cruises Needle Solutions Team and I also happen to be an

[3:43:27] So the team asked me to take a look at a practice that's been happening recently and that is a third party non-profit group going to the Syrian services program and using

[3:43:41] signing up as clients and getting hundreds of needles under the open secondary exchange provisions.

[3:43:49] So the question was, is that permissible under the Health and Safety Code, I'd term into

[3:43:54] no?

[3:43:55] Is that permissible under the SSP's own policies and preach seizures?

[3:44:00] No.

[3:44:01] There's only two ways that a syringe program like that can be authorized.

[3:44:05] One is by the state and one in accounting such as this is by the county board of suit

[3:44:10] providers.

[3:44:11] And there has been no authorization by this board for a third party group to be passing out

[3:44:21] The code makes it very clear that it has to be both board and the health officer, not just the health officer unilaterally.

[3:44:30] It's also not permissible by the SSP's own policy.

[3:44:36] Clients and SSP participants is not defined, but obviously that would mean IV drug users or close friends and family.

[3:44:44] So some just suggestions to close this loophole, so it doesn't happen again.

[3:44:52] The policies and procedures could be amended to add a cap on the number of syringes

[3:44:56] given out a secondary because we recognize there will be situations.

[3:45:00] Where there needs to be a secondary exchange, so limit that number or explicitly state that syringes can't be picked up and distributed by a whole unauthorized group.

[3:45:13] And then also on page 12 of the syringe policy, there's a list of reasons for termination of participants, so that could be amended as well. Thank you.

[3:45:25] Hey, my name is Sharon. I'm a 43 year resident of Santa Cruz County and I'm a

[3:45:31] constituent of a supervisor, Mick Fiercen. First I want to thank you all for this

[3:45:37] presentation. I know that was a lot of hard work and I fully support the county

[3:45:42] in expanding its syringe services program, increasing hours. If you can get more

[3:45:47] staff, I'm happy to hear there's possibly more money allocated for that. I think

[3:45:53] It's extremely important that clients that come in here

[3:45:57] get the wrap around services that are available.

[3:46:02] The window of opportunity, when an addict wants to get clean

[3:46:05] is so small, I'm in long-term recovery from the addiction.

[3:46:10] I was blessed to have somebody to talk to to hold my hand

[3:46:13] through that time and she was a long string of people

[3:46:18] that helped save my life.

[3:46:19] when I was in treatment, I read something alcohol and drugs gave me wings and then they took

[3:46:25] away this sky. That might not resonate with everybody, but I finally saw that somebody knew

[3:46:33] how I felt. And addiction is complicated and can't be summed up in one sentence, but it gave

[3:46:39] it words. And I've been graced with over 27 years clean now and comforted and knowing that if a

[3:46:49] of opportunity to open up that someone could say here, come on, let's get you in treatment.

[3:46:56] Secondary syringe services run by volunteers cannot offer that.

[3:47:01] And I took a look at the Santa Cruz County harm reduction coalition Facebook page,

[3:47:06] and saw a post that said, at it is hate speech to oppress drug users.

[3:47:11] Those are not the people you want handing out syringes that are people that are suffering out there.

[3:47:16] that narrative and delivering needles is assisting them in suicide on the installment plan.

[3:47:23] And I don't talk about this from judgment. I talk about it from the experience.

[3:47:28] That's it. Thank you.

[3:47:34] Hello board members. My name is Gus Gusman and I've been a heroin addict for 15 years

[3:47:40] and lived here all my life. I was part of the law and partner of the met program and also

[3:47:51] The syringe program, you know, it worked for me, I was part of that, and accountability

[3:47:56] part.

[3:47:57] You get one needle, you get one needle back, you know, you get five, you get one back.

[3:48:02] I hear that, you know, and I don't know where it comes from, but that needle exchange promotes

[3:48:10] drug use.

[3:48:11] And 15 years of me using, I never once heard anybody say, well, I saw the needle program,

[3:48:18] I'm going to go use some Maryland, you know, it doesn't work that way, you know.

[3:48:24] But it worked, before I was involved in a New York sin program, I got diagnosed with

[3:48:32] hepatitis C, you know, and I wish I had that long time ago, maybe I wouldn't have gotten

[3:48:38] it.

[3:48:39] But, you know, it's time that the county that you get involved in this addiction potential

[3:48:53] for spreading diseases is really big, you know, I believe in the program and, you know,

[3:49:01] I hope for the best for this county.

[3:49:03] Thank you.

[3:49:09] Good afternoon.

[3:49:11] My observation of the SSP is that in order for it to be successful in this primary mission,

[3:49:16] which is to stop the spread of disease, two things must happen.

[3:49:21] The program must be as transparent as possible, and addiction must be taken seriously.

[3:49:26] Today, neither has happened.

[3:49:29] The program policies last published revision was five years ago, despite their own requirements

[3:49:34] that they'd be updated annually.

[3:49:35] You guys said nothing.

[3:49:37] The SSP claims that they are unable to physically count collected syringes, I'd dislike those who say they can't do something.

[3:49:46] One for one is a non-starter for me.

[3:49:49] Figure out how to do it. You're all college graduates.

[3:49:52] It should be easy for you. I've got a GED.

[3:49:55] And I can think of half a dozen ways to do it safely.

[3:49:58] Include the public and every opportunity before making changes to the program.

[3:50:02] As anyone reached out to the neighbourhood surrounding, the MLA clinic, regarding expanded hours.

[3:50:10] If an opioid addiction is a health crisis and treated as such, secondary exchange must

[3:50:15] be eliminated from the program services.

[3:50:18] I would cite that the recent example of the coalition road show and the death misery

[3:50:23] and destruction they were allowed to create, addicts need to be seen in a clinical setting

[3:50:27] by health care professionals, or subject to local oversight.

[3:50:37] Hello, my name is Carol Pohamis.

[3:50:39] Thank you for listening to my comments.

[3:50:42] I'm a retired teacher and high school principal.

[3:50:45] I ran two environmentally focused high school programs in Santa Cruz County.

[3:50:50] And in the course of our study we would take kids high school students out to the beach to beach cleanups routinely.

[3:50:57] Ten years ago was extremely rare to find a needle on the beach.

[3:51:00] Now, it's extremely rare not to find one.

[3:51:04] I understand the whole concept of harm reduction, and I believe in it.

[3:51:08] I also don't think it should come at the cost of public safety.

[3:51:12] We need to have accountable programs.

[3:51:14] We need to have programs with expanded hours of necessary, run by professional people

[3:51:19] who again can offer counseling to people at that golden moment when they might be open

[3:51:24] to the suggestion.

[3:51:25] to allow volunteers who are untrained, even though eager, to distribute hyperduring needles is irresponsible.

[3:51:36] Please think about that.

[3:51:44] I, my name is Mai Dal and I am of been a resident amount of hermen for 20 years.

[3:51:49] And I'm here today to offer my strong support for the Nail Exchange Program and for the harm reduction coalition as an active part of San Cruz initiative for the health of its city.

[3:52:00] Today, June 11th, would have been my older sister's birthday.

[3:52:04] She died a couple of years ago at the young age of 62 of early onset Alzheimer's that was

[3:52:09] no doubt due to the chronic use of opioids and prescription drugs.

[3:52:15] I've asked this question over and over and over all this time.

[3:52:18] Why my older sister?

[3:52:19] Why not?

[3:52:20] Me or my older brother?

[3:52:22] We came from the same privilege background growing up in Cupertino attending one of the best

[3:52:26] high schools.

[3:52:26] What I do know is that this is a very complicated

[3:52:30] It had questioned to which there are no simple answers, answers I have racked and searched for, and that I'm still searching for years later.

[3:52:37] What was already an epidemic years ago, when my sister became a chronic user, is only worsened by several waves since then, and it's been hitting our community, especially hard since the introduction and chronic use of pharmaceuticals.

[3:52:53] The long-term effects are only starting to be felt by this way.

[3:52:56] The bottom line is no one in this room will be unaffected by chronic drug use,

[3:53:02] either they're owned or by a family member.

[3:53:05] They are all your family members, the chronic users in this city.

[3:53:08] They may be in another city, but we shouldn't be othering them anymore than those people

[3:53:15] we seek to hopefully help our own family members in another city.

[3:53:19] Pretty much my entire family abandoned my sister when she was struggling with her opioid use.

[3:53:26] So we do we want to abandon our citizens in this, I don't have a problem with people not caring,

[3:53:35] or bearing their heads and their heads in the sand about it.

[3:53:39] But I do have a problem with them throwing branches and intimidating and harassing anyone willing to help.

[3:53:46] Please I implore you, bring these vital services to our county.

[3:54:06] I board members of my name is Jennifer Rainford Brown and I'm here in support

[3:54:11] of the County Surin Jax S program.

[3:54:13] I am part of the harm reduction coalition and I have been out for every single outreach.

[3:54:20] I'm an employee right now of Beckin and Dickerson and I'm a biomed tech.

[3:54:26] I also work for the Public Authority here in Santa Cruz.

[3:54:30] I have a degree in political science, I'm masters in criminal law, from the College of Women

[3:54:35] and Mary in Virginia.

[3:54:37] I have been part of harm reduction for a while, I have a son who has a substance used

[3:54:44] to sort of use 25.

[3:54:45] He's in Virginia.

[3:54:47] He's OD3 times.

[3:54:49] He has now contracted hepatitis and he is in and out of rehabilitation because they actually

[3:54:57] beds there. So they, I am here because the county allows what the state allows. And

[3:55:08] they help in safety codes. 1, 2, 1, 3, 4, 9, 0.1, 3, allow secondary exchange. If we

[3:55:18] didn't do that, things like my neighbor who just contracted HIV because she didn't know she

[3:55:25] was having sexual intercourse with a man who had HIV or was HIV or AIDS and now she is 49

[3:55:36] years old and she never used to drug in her life.

[3:55:41] I'm asking you guys to just go buy what the state recommends in Rona, Virginia.

[3:55:48] They went buy what best practices here in California and they almost eliminated serenity

[3:55:54] later. It was horrible. And open up the beds, open up the hours, just allow us to refer

[3:56:04] people more people to services.

[3:56:08] Please.

[3:56:21] Good afternoon. My name is Erin McLaughlin. I'm a senior manager of Residential Services

[3:56:27] for encompass community services. And two of our programs are C. C. Boyde and Santa Cruz

[3:56:34] recovery services, which are substance use disorder treatment plans.

[3:56:41] I am speaking in support of the county syringe services program, and here's why.

[3:56:49] To decrease the rates of HIV and hepatitis in our community and to increase treatment opportunities for people in this county who struggle with opioid addiction.

[3:57:04] A study by the CDC in 2018 found that syringe distribution programs decrease the frequency

[3:57:11] of syringe sharing and reuse, and this has significant impacts on decreasing the rates

[3:57:17] of infectious diseases like HIV and hepatitis, which is often spread through sharing needles.

[3:57:25] The study also found that people who participate in programs like the syringe services program

[3:57:30] are more likely to seek treatment for substance use disorders.

[3:57:35] This program is an important part of the continuum of care, and Santa Cruz that leads

[3:57:40] clients to participate in the treatment programs like SIRR and CCAPWETA.

[3:57:48] So in closing, I'd like to urge your support for this very important program, which helps

[3:57:54] people in Santa Cruz County find their way to treatment and ultimately, a path towards health

[3:58:00] recovery. Thank you very much.

[3:58:06] Good afternoon. I'm a constituent of

[3:58:09] Zach friend. My name is Katrina Liesma. I'm a nurse and associate

[3:58:13] marriage and family therapist working at the Medication Assisted Program

[3:58:17] and in Compass Community Services. Matt services are not directly involved

[3:58:21] with the Suringe Services Program but I serve the same clients and we are part of

[3:58:26] the substance use disorder treatment services for this county. Our

[3:58:30] production is much more than needle exchange.

[3:58:33] It is a practical approach to help people change with safety, front and center.

[3:58:38] What I see by working daily with this population is that meeting with people exactly where

[3:58:43] they are leads to trusting relationships where people are more likely to ask for help,

[3:58:48] make safer choices, seek and receive medical and behavioral healthcare, and keep coming back.

[3:58:54] Because of the surge services and other outreach programs, many of my clients and our

[3:59:00] community members have been linked to our services, which help them recover and stop using.

[3:59:06] I support an expansion of the SSP. Services Santa Cruz County needs to adopt a

[3:59:11] harm reduction model of care for providing these services. Thank you.

[3:59:17] I'm crashing. Sorry, can I ask you, ma'am, can I ask you a question?

[3:59:22] So I'm pleased to come to the floor to come back to the microphone.

[3:59:25] Which is where everyone here is interested in getting more people connected to treatment and

[3:59:30] lining the syringe services. We constantly ask how many people from syringe services are getting

[3:59:36] Matt and getting rolled and the answer is we don't know because it's anonymous. But if you

[3:59:42] just made a claim that you get a lot, can you tell me what percentage of your new clients

[3:59:47] are SSP users or they monthly users? How do we know this?

[3:59:54] That's a really good question. I don't have specific numbers. I can tell you that this

[4:00:00] Population tends to be rather chaotic. They can't remember things. Their day to day living is really chaotic, so they don't necessarily track these kind of things.

[4:00:15] I can't give you numbers, but I'm sure we can probably find some at some point. But I know that the continuation of care as other people have spoke of, the connection to all these services happens as a partnership, a community partnership.

[4:00:28] it's a porous, a non-porous system, and I see people that come in and out of all these different

[4:00:35] services, outpatient, inpatient, raw scamp, treatment, out, you know, the whole thing, right?

[4:00:43] So I think going forward would be very good to get this information.

[4:00:46] Right now it's anecdotal.

[4:00:47] Right, thank you.

[4:00:48] Thank you.

[4:00:52] I can just add there is also lots of documented research if you wanted us to share that with you

[4:00:56] outside of Santa Cruz.

[4:00:58] I'm more, yes.

[4:00:59] I'm interested in Santa Cruz, but yeah.

[4:01:01] Okay. Good afternoon. My name is Savannah O'Neill and I'm a manager at the National

[4:01:05] Hermit Action Coalition, which is a national capacity building in advocacy agency.

[4:01:09] I have 12 years of providing volunteer search service programs. I'm a addiction, treatment

[4:01:14] counselor and social worker. And I first worked in search exchange programs here in Santa Cruz

[4:01:19] in 2008 for five years. In my current rural, I work statewide to strengthen community-based

[4:01:25] perm reduction programs, link people to care, and build safer communities.

[4:01:29] I support county run, organization run, and volunteer run programs across the state, all who provide

[4:01:34] essential life-saving services.

[4:01:36] I support expanding services and Santa Cruz County, currently only 20% of Santa Cruz residents

[4:01:41] live within five miles of a syringe exchange program, making it really difficult for people to

[4:01:46] access.

[4:01:47] So with the additional mobile services, we know we would reach more people.

[4:01:50] When we look at HIV rates, hepatitis C rates, and overdose across all California counties,

[4:01:56] and we compare to Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz is at a high comparative rate of a potential HIV

[4:02:00] outbreak, and Santa Cruz has far more restrictive and less services than most counties

[4:02:05] in California, reducing people's chances to connect and the most marginalized people.

[4:02:11] In 2017, hermediction coalition, the National Organization conducted a need assessment

[4:02:16] where we talk to 70 people who use drugs and providers in the county, and we heard that they were

[4:02:22] mostly only having contact with outreach workers, and those outreach workers were essential

[4:02:26] links to healthcare and treatment offering people support in the field. For these reasons, I support

[4:02:31] the expansion of services that we know are based in evidence, save lives, reduce infections,

[4:02:35] and treat people with humanity. I also support because people in the county want these services,

[4:02:40] and they want to be a county that stands in support of public health. Thank you.

[4:02:47] Hi.

[4:02:48] Good afternoon.

[4:02:48] My name is Jenna Haywood.

[4:02:49] I'm also with the national harm reduction coalition that was my colleague Savannah.

[4:02:54] I won't repeat some of what she said about the statistics we know in Santa Cruz.

[4:02:57] But I will share that I'm also someone who is an IV drug user for over a decade.

[4:03:02] And I now do consider myself to be in recovery.

[4:03:04] And I want to talk about the fact that we need more, not less tools for people who use drugs,

[4:03:09] people seeking recovery, or people just seeking to stay alive and whatever state they happen to be in a net day.

[4:03:14] So when I hear a lot of people talk about the fact that secondary syringe programs are not equipped to

[4:03:20] actually serve the needs of people who use drugs, I want to talk about my own experience with peer-based support.

[4:03:26] That yes, I have used medical providers and I have gone to the doctor for support,

[4:03:30] but when I struggle with my recovery, I go to peers because I know that is what works for me.

[4:03:35] And so why wouldn't that model of peer-based services and harm reduction also be effective?

[4:03:40] And in fact, we know that it is.

[4:03:42] there is ample evidence to show that peer-based support is what works for people.

[4:03:47] I also want to mention that we have advocated at the National Heart Reduction Coalition

[4:03:51] for money in the state budget this year for peer navigators to link people to treatment who

[4:03:57] access services that syringe services programs. So it is at the governor's desk right now.

[4:04:02] There'll be $15 million every authorized syringe program syringe services program can have a

[4:04:08] peer navigator. Why did we do this? Because we talked to people who use drugs that said

[4:04:12] We want to get into treatment.

[4:04:14] We don't necessarily trust mainstream medical providers all the time for different reasons

[4:04:18] because of oppression, because of trauma.

[4:04:21] And so there actually are going to these programs, and that's what's helping to link them

[4:04:24] to care.

[4:04:25] But programs don't have enough money to do that warm hand off, to actually help somebody

[4:04:29] get to the treatment provider.

[4:04:31] And so with this funds, hopefully it will pass, and this will allow Santa Cruz some

[4:04:36] more resources to meet that unmet need.

[4:04:40] but we have to support all of the different kinds of ways of reaching these people, and that's why

[4:04:45] I encourage you to expand these services, but also to really rethink the secondary syringe.

[4:04:49] It's legal and it works. Thank you.

[4:04:57] Hello, my name is Patricia Olson-Riman, and I am a 40-plus-year resident of San Andrews County,

[4:05:04] and my children have come to go on the public school here. My husband has his own business here,

[4:05:09] and I've been working in the non-profit world for over 20 years here.

[4:05:12] Right now, I am the program manager of the San Cruz AIDS Project at in Compass Community Services as well as I work with the in Compass Matt program.

[4:05:22] I'm only here to just say a couple things and mostly is that it's highly imperative that we support the SSP.

[4:05:30] If not the best practices watching the presentation was really wonderful to watch, but the 20 hours a week was kind of a little bit of a discrepancy for me.

[4:05:41] Working in the nonprofit world, we are working in the frontline, very rarely do you come

[4:05:45] to a situation such as this and see reports such as the presentation today, we're working

[4:05:50] with the people every day.

[4:05:52] And we are seeing their suffering, we're seeing the disease and how it's progressing and we're

[4:06:00] seeing their isolation and depression and anxiety.

[4:06:04] And so I think, but I just want to say, as I just, you know, we really want to support

[4:06:09] the county's program. And I want the county to work with us. I think that's the other key

[4:06:14] thing. I think there's a missing link and really working together with encompassed

[4:06:18] resources that map program in the Santa Cruz AIDS project. We're seeing the people at our

[4:06:23] offices and we need to be able to have that relationship with the county to work with them

[4:06:28] closely so that we can have them over and have them do the hand warm off to the medical

[4:06:33] services there. Thank you.

[4:06:40] Good afternoon board. My name is Damon Bruder. I'm an addict and a

[4:06:44] I'm here with my personal experiences.

[4:06:46] I'm here with my family, my grandchildren.

[4:06:49] Nobody that I've heard speak so far today is against the Serenance Service's program.

[4:06:54] Everybody is for harm reduction.

[4:06:57] Everybody believes that harm reduction does good for our community,

[4:07:00] whether it be the addicts or just your average citizen.

[4:07:04] Nobody wants to step on a needle.

[4:07:06] That's part of harm reduction, keeping the citizen safe as well as the clients.

[4:07:11] That being said, as an addict, I needed to have

[4:07:16] wraparone services to help me get clean and sober.

[4:07:19] I needed to be able to walk into a place and get told,

[4:07:21] hey, there's an option for you.

[4:07:23] Hey, there's a place you can go, hey, are you okay?

[4:07:25] We're here to help you.

[4:07:27] That doesn't happen in the field.

[4:07:29] Any?

[4:07:30] Expansion of the SSP should be done under the umbrella of the county and our health services agency.

[4:07:36] Ms. Hall misherter, I have both shown a great interest in being more transparent and fixing

[4:07:42] and tweaking the things that are wrong with the program and trying to make it better for everybody.

[4:07:47] More work and hard for that. Part of their advisory panel at the moment, hopefully hoping to be

[4:07:52] more help to them in the future. What we need, we need more hours of accessibility for the SSP.

[4:07:59] We need more beds for the people that need help.

[4:08:02] There has to be a bed available when people want help.

[4:08:05] And we need to close the loophole of the secondary exchange.

[4:08:09] We need to put a cap on that of approximately 50 needles per secondary exchange.

[4:08:13] The secondary exchange that was going on by the harm reduction coalition dropped the client

[4:08:17] numbers seen at the SSP by over 40 percent in a three month time.

[4:08:22] 40 percent of the people that used to go and get their supplies from the SSP stop going.

[4:08:28] stopped having access to medical, mental health and recovery possibilities because the secondary

[4:08:34] exchange took needles to them. It was room service. Please do something about that loophole.

[4:08:41] I'm available anytime, anytime anybody wants to talk one-on-one. I'm easy to find.

[4:08:50] Hi, my name is Savannah Carlson. I graduated from Cabrillo and I work as a caregiver with adults

[4:08:55] with developmental disabilities and Santa Cruz. I'm here today to support every expansion of

[4:09:01] services around harm reduction. I hope that the Board of Supervisors State can vote to allow

[4:09:05] the program to begin to move towards the advisory groups recommendations, which are backed

[4:09:09] by local and national data on how to best support public health. The program has been stopped

[4:09:14] from enacting breast practices for a long time, and it's time to move towards science-backed

[4:09:18] policies, which all forms of harm reduction are. Also to make it personal, my mom has been

[4:09:24] addicted to heroin for a long time, and I am honestly grateful that she doesn't live here. She

[4:09:29] I live in a county where services are much more expanded, including peer-based support, and those policies have saved her life multiple times.

[4:09:38] I wouldn't have a mom without them.

[4:09:40] Thank you.

[4:09:50] My name is Olympia.

[4:09:53] I'm a recent graduate from the Community Studies Program at the UCSC.

[4:09:56] I've lived in Santa Cruz for almost four years.

[4:09:58] And in the past year I spent six months doing a participatory observation at the Homeless

[4:10:03] Persons Health Project and also volunteering at the county, Sir and Services Program.

[4:10:08] During my time at HPHP and SSP, I met people who were current and past drug users, some

[4:10:13] of whom access county services regularly visiting the exchange on a weekly basis.

[4:10:18] Many clients I built relationships with, however, were not accessing SSP for a very

[4:10:22] idea of reasons.

[4:10:23] The data presented on SSP demonstrates a clear need for programs like this in our community,

[4:10:28] However, after six months of outreach, it became clear that SSP sees only a fraction of drug users in our community.

[4:10:34] While the lack of ours at SSP was one of the barriers to accessing services,

[4:10:38] a trepidation of entering county buildings guarded by security officers,

[4:10:42] as well as mobility issues preventing people from actually getting to the online campus

[4:10:46] to exchange needles seem to be an even larger barrier.

[4:10:49] In order to fulfill its goal of acting as a gateway to integrated services,

[4:10:53] services. The Syrian service program should be complemented with mobile exchanges and street outreach in order to engage with folks who aren't able to access the online campus or the Watson Bill location.

[4:11:04] As has been stated in previous comments today, harm reduction means people meeting people where they're at and that means symbolically but also physically, which is what mobile exchanges do.

[4:11:14] Thank you.

[4:11:19] Good afternoon.

[4:11:20] My name is Josie Roberto, and I'm speaking to you today as a concerned mother.

[4:11:27] I have four adult children, two teens, and two three young children including my grandchildren.

[4:11:35] They're all being raised in Santa Cruz County.

[4:11:38] I am here in support of the Suringe Services Program and Best Practices.

[4:11:43] I'm not as versed in what that is, but I can tell you my experience in the community and my concern about prevention and about how the compassion for all our community members and what I've seen.

[4:12:00] We spend a lot of time downtown and local beaches and on Westcliffe and we do participate in beach cleanups and we have found needles.

[4:12:09] we have interacted with people on the streets and I think it's important that the board

[4:12:17] remember they are human beings and I teach my kids and raise them to treat people with respect

[4:12:23] even if they seem you know doesn't mean I want them to know them but treat people with respect

[4:12:29] we don't know where they've come from and what they've seen and what they've been through

[4:12:33] and you know I'm going to remind the board what we've been doing in our cannabis industry for the

[4:12:38] for years, you, the Board, encourage us to, instead of attacking other members in our community

[4:12:45] or other programs or other neighbors, you encourage us to listen to their side with respect.

[4:12:53] You encourage us to make the compromises necessary to come to agreements and I thought that

[4:12:58] was really important lesson. I actually bonded with the people that were absolutely opposite

[4:13:04] side of the scale as what I believed in, and by finding that common bond and respect, I think

[4:13:11] that the county can find a way to not demonize these people, and to not attack these other

[4:13:18] programs, because they're coming from a place of compassion, and they want to help.

[4:13:22] Thank you very much.

[4:13:27] Hello, my name is Danny Driesdale, I'm a constituent of Zach Friend and a lifelong resident

[4:13:32] I was born and raised here.

[4:13:35] I'm speaking with strong and unequivocal support

[4:13:37] for all possible strengthening of the county SSP.

[4:13:41] And I have the same level of support for our secondary exchange program.

[4:13:45] I'm a proud and active volunteer with the local harm reduction

[4:13:48] coalition's secondary outreach efforts.

[4:13:50] I got there every week.

[4:13:52] I believe that my support to other addicts as their peer

[4:13:54] is deeply important to the health of our community.

[4:13:58] I went to Aptos Junior High and Aptos High School.

[4:14:01] It was there when I was 13 years old that I started using drugs very heavily when I was 14 and became a daily user of cocaine

[4:14:08] That same year. I found out that my mom also had the same addiction when she was my age and I spent my entire teenage years struggling with that

[4:14:18] Because of the common beliefs around addiction that are especially prevalent in Santa Cruz. I came to believe that I was broken

[4:14:23] I was racked with shame and I almost took my own life on multiple occasions and kids here should not be growing up with that shame and post on them

[4:14:30] A community that believes itself to be progressive should not be flooded with these narratives

[4:14:34] that I learned as a teenager, and it should definitely not have some of the most restrictive

[4:14:37] programs in the state.

[4:14:39] But as I'm learning now, Santa Cruz is a massive aberration.

[4:14:42] It is specifically, is a specifically regressive community on the question of drugs.

[4:14:46] I blame that fact directly for my traumatic teenage years.

[4:14:49] There is no doubt of the support of the claims of opponents of harm reduction, the SSP, or

[4:14:53] the secondary exchange.

[4:14:54] The arguments against secondary are in complete contradiction with public health research.

[4:14:58] But as a queer person, as a trans...

[4:15:00] I can't help but remember the AIDS crisis. Public health data and the stories of victims were completely ignored, leading directly to the loss of many thousands of lives.

[4:15:09] There was a point in the AIDS crisis early on where half the country believed that all AIDS victims should be quarantined and forced into that kind of care.

[4:15:17] And we have the same kind of messed up, misinformed public opinion here in Santa Cruz and I don't think that should Trump public health opinion. I don't think it shouldn't Trump the need for care that me and my fellow volunteers provide every week in this county.

[4:15:36] Good afternoon, Board of Supervisors. My name is Melissa Friedburn. I am a registered nurse. I'm a former

[4:15:42] mat nurse. I'm a nurse who worked at your local jail and I currently am a supervisor at a state

[4:15:47] prison in Sullivan. I come here to advocate for vulnerable populations like I have since the beginning

[4:15:54] of this campaign. Drug addicts deserve the same level of medical care and outreach that every citizen

[4:16:01] in this county deserves. And what that means is that we don't leave this population in the hand

[4:16:08] of unqualified. While they mean well, it is misguided. Untrained volunteers going and handing

[4:16:16] out needles and Narcan and not being able to offer somebody HIV Hep C testing on site, not really

[4:16:24] understanding what that means when they hand the Narcan. I understand that. I am that nurse who

[4:16:30] to a man down of an inmate who is blue, who is dead.

[4:16:36] I pump on that chest.

[4:16:37] I administer five doses of Narcan in a correctional setting,

[4:16:42] where, yeah, I work around a lot of people who don't think

[4:16:45] and feel the same way that these people are still human beings.

[4:16:48] Even after they've committed a crime and they're incarcerated,

[4:16:51] because what's missing from this conversation with all these people

[4:16:54] is that the end result of a heavy duty drug addiction

[4:16:58] is that you will end up dead, you will end up incarcerated, or you will recover.

[4:17:04] There is nothing else. There is nothing else, unless you are extremely wealthy,

[4:17:09] and you can maintain a heroin or meth addiction over the course of your lifetime,

[4:17:14] and that is paid for by someone else. So I am in full support of the county taking this program back,

[4:17:21] and stopping secondary exchange by people who are not trained, they cannot link people to services,

[4:17:28] they have zero data to support that they can help anybody.

[4:17:32] And until they come under the umbrella of the county, you have to stop this.

[4:17:46] Hi, my name is Dana Anderton.

[4:17:48] I work for the HIV education prevention project of Alameda County.

[4:17:53] I'm here because I originally moved to Santa Cruz when I was four and I lived here until I was 27.

[4:17:58] And I really, I really feel like I call this place home because it was the place that

[4:18:03] raised me and it's the place that I really feel like is special in California.

[4:18:07] I'm also here because I wholeheartedly support the Surge Service Program and all of its best

[4:18:13] practices in harm reduction.

[4:18:17] I have lived in this county.

[4:18:19] I've been homeless in this county.

[4:18:20] I spent a primary portion of the time that I lived here in the mountain area of Santa Cruz.

[4:18:26] I first moved up to Lampico and I lived in Boulder Creek and the moment and felt all over

[4:18:30] that area.

[4:18:31] I can tell you because it is a more removed area.

[4:18:36] It is very difficult to get access to the program in Santa Cruz and throughout my entire

[4:18:40] time growing up, I knew people who suffered from addiction who really needed to help the

[4:18:44] certain services program offered in Santa Cruz and it was very difficult for any of them

[4:18:49] to get down there.

[4:18:51] I work in data so I can tell you from a data perspective, from a science perspective, secondary

[4:18:56] service is work. All of these programs, all these best practices actually work. They help save

[4:19:03] the county money. They help reduce syringe litter. If we really want to see reduce syringe

[4:19:09] litter, if we really want to see more people in recovery, if we really want to see this county

[4:19:12] get more help expanding. The syringe services program in every way possible is the best way to do

[4:19:18] that and there's lots of data that shows why. So please, if you could do.

[4:19:29] Good afternoon, I'm stuck

[4:19:30] program and I'm like to refer to this item 20, you got it as 20.i, exhibit 9, it's in

[4:19:43] your folders and it's from the Office of AIDS, the California Office of AIDS and it says

[4:19:52] The Department of Public Health advises syringe exchange programs to needle-based distribution

[4:20:02] policies with a goal of ensuring that participants have a new, sterile needle each time

[4:20:08] they use.

[4:20:10] Under the program that you currently have at I'm Aline, you're doing a one for one exchange,

[4:20:20] which is not needs-based, and now there's different levels of exchanges, there's like

[4:20:25] the one plus where people can get more than one needle,

[4:20:31] and what is the best practice

[4:20:34] according to this document is the needs-based where the person comes in, and they might have needles,

[4:20:42] they might have put all their needles into a bin somewhere. So having the ability to

[4:20:50] get the number of needles they need is what's going to be the healthiest thing.

[4:20:55] I had friends that died of AIDS, and it's possible that that epidemic could come back

[4:21:04] if you let it.

[4:21:07] So I would urge you to work with the harm reduction coalition to work out a way that that program

[4:21:15] can exist in this county and help them work with the different areas where they want to

[4:21:24] do distributions and go into those areas and do public relations with you and the health

[4:21:32] department to ensure that these things happen.

[4:21:36] Thank you.

[4:21:42] My name is Danny Conthritis, I'm the Health Service Manager of the Medication Assistance

[4:21:45] treatment program for the County of Santa Cruz, I would urge you to accept or approve the

[4:21:54] county's recommendations. I say this because I started at the county in 2016 and I worked

[4:22:01] in the Surin Service Program for about a year and a half and through that I was able to connect

[4:22:06] with people that probably nobody else could connect to. And through those services I was able

[4:22:10] to get people into IVH to especially mental health, to medication assisted treatment and sometimes

[4:22:15] that is just building a relationship with people. Every single time they come in, yeah they might

[4:22:19] not be looking good. But hey, you got an app says let me get you to the nurse. Are you ready

[4:22:23] for treatment yet? Here's my phone number. Every single time. Here's my phone number. Here's the

[4:22:27] brochure. Here's some other services. You might not want to.

[4:22:30] Okay, but here, keep it just in case you want to later, or you change your mind. All of our drug and

[4:22:34] alcohol counselors, we have five drug and alcohol counselors underneath me who all are doing shifts

[4:22:40] in the syringe service program. And all of them are providing those services, are connecting

[4:22:44] people to services throughout the county, whether that's whole person care, IBH, drug,

[4:22:49] medical, connecting to in-campus, C-suppway, they Santa Cruz, residential, alto, whatever

[4:22:55] drug program that is. But it's basically just working with people, where they're at and providing

[4:22:59] the services and we're just laying it out for them.

[4:23:01] You know, we're showing them love when sometimes somebody else won't show them love, right?

[4:23:04] And we're being a voice or advocate for them when they're sometimes they can nobody can

[4:23:08] hear their pain or what's going on with them.

[4:23:10] Some of these people have severe trauma, severe stuff that you don't know or nobody knows that

[4:23:14] they've never shared what people, I have watched people come from the bushes and have nothing

[4:23:20] when we didn't have the map program and watch the warehouse in there and we were still rolling

[4:23:24] it out, they would get homeless, try to find a bus or a ride to HP HP to get mad, and

[4:23:31] continually strive and struggle, and that came through this range service program.

[4:23:35] One of those persons, a couple of those persons wanted to come here today, but they were

[4:23:38] not able to, because they're working, they're getting housing some of the other persons,

[4:23:41] but they got full-time jobs now, they're going to college, they're working, I'll be coming

[4:23:45] drug and alcohol counselors, and they're doing a lot of awesome amazing work, and they're

[4:23:50] helping people else recover too.

[4:23:52] Thank you.

[4:23:58] Good afternoon. My name is Matt Nathanson. I have been a resident of Santa Cruz City in the county for 25 years. I'm a constituent of supervisor communities. I also am a public health nurse.

[4:24:10] I've worked for 21 years in homeless services for this county. And I'm here to speak in support of the recommendations.

[4:24:17] I actually think there is more that we could be doing, but I think they represent a political compromise

[4:24:24] of where sort of the community is at.

[4:24:28] I don't think they necessarily represent the best science.

[4:24:31] But the good things in it, I guess what I would want to say is first of all,

[4:24:35] Santa Cruz used to be a leader in syringe exchange.

[4:24:37] Back in the 90s when I started working here, we were a model for other places,

[4:24:42] and I think that was largely in response to the HIV epidemic at the time.

[4:24:46] I think part of the problem has been over the last several years, we've lacked leadership in the health department to move forward on this issue and I'm really excited today to see the health department leadership bringing forward these proposals.

[4:25:01] I think that's great. I think what I want people to, there's a lot of focus on this syringe and as a nurse, my view of this is, if somebody's going to be injecting drugs, I want them to be injecting drugs with a clean needle every time.

[4:25:14] Because every time they use a dirty needle they're at risk of contracting as we've heard HIV, hepatitis, there's lots of people with endocarditis in the hospital with really severe abscesses, there's a huge economic cost as well as personal costs.

[4:25:29] So you, from a medical, from a nursing perspective, it's just like somebody who shoots insulin for their diabetes. I want them to not reuse their needles. I want them to use clean needles.

[4:25:39] There's no moral judgment there, it's just about people safety.

[4:25:43] I also think that I'm glad that there is the study about syringe litter.

[4:25:47] I think that that issue causes a lot of fear for people and I understand that, but you

[4:25:53] can ask your epidemiologists how many people in the county have contracted HIV or hepatitis

[4:25:57] from an accidental needle stick in the environment stepping on it versus how many people

[4:26:02] have gotten it from sharing needles, you'll find the numbers are dramatically different.

[4:26:06] Anyway, I'm out of time. Thank you.

[4:26:14] You can pull it down.

[4:26:16] No, no, no, no.

[4:26:17] The other one.

[4:26:18] The other one.

[4:26:18] What's going on?

[4:26:20] Don't start.

[4:26:21] Which reset my time.

[4:26:24] Hi, my name is Anne Elisea.

[4:26:26] And everyone I came here with today lives in Santa Cruz County.

[4:26:30] Okay, let's make that clear off the bat.

[4:26:32] We can talk about this for a long time.

[4:26:34] And I'm proud to say that everyone, at least that I've heard that is stood up

[4:26:39] is not against SSP.

[4:26:40] that's not what this is about.

[4:26:42] We're for our harm reduction.

[4:26:44] We believe that that is absolutely part of the answer.

[4:26:48] I do sit on the sheriff's advisory team,

[4:26:51] and the harm reduction coalition did come in,

[4:26:55] and I did get a chance to hear them out.

[4:26:58] I was really alarmed.

[4:27:01] And I, hopefully all of you have read all the holes

[4:27:03] that have been put into this harm reduction coalition

[4:27:07] and state application that went through,

[4:27:09] but things like questions about data.

[4:27:13] So how many people did you refer to to rehabilitation

[4:27:16] or any kind of services?

[4:27:17] This person is hit rock bottom.

[4:27:20] They have said, I need help right now.

[4:27:24] What do you do now?

[4:27:26] Are you ready?

[4:27:26] Let's grab that person, throw him in the back of your car

[4:27:28] and get him where they need to be.

[4:27:30] The answer was, I have no information about that.

[4:27:33] Do you follow up? Do you call it like find that guy? Hey, you know, what happened with that? No

[4:27:40] This is secondary services problems this idea of getting needles from the SSP and calling ourselves a client. This is shady

[4:27:51] This is shady things and I want you to look through all this shadyness that all of us have been seeing on this state application

[4:28:00] which I see Swiss cheese that doesn't have this many holes in it and I want you to think about

[4:28:05] what we're doing, who we want to be as a county.

[4:28:07] I want every single person who wants help to find it.

[4:28:10] And I know you guys read the grand jury findings and those weren't all their findings.

[4:28:15] It's things like that.

[4:28:16] Little bits of information that are kept out of the conversation

[4:28:20] when they're brought to you and when they're brought to the community.

[4:28:23] Thank you.

[4:28:27] Hi, I'm Denise Ellerick and I'm the supervisor of friends constituent and I was at a different meeting that Anne Elisey is speaking about

[4:28:34] Because I explained the data that we do collect we have collaborated with Mimi Hall and Jessica Altman's we collect data on male female age do you use the SSP

[4:28:45] the locks on distribution, all that, and we turn it over to Jessica, so the county data

[4:28:49] includes our secondary data. And you need to know that excessive data collection is not

[4:28:55] best practices for any syringe program, be it the public health department or all volunteer.

[4:29:01] And what I'd also like to highlight, I know everybody wants to see how many people are cured,

[4:29:05] but curative substance use goes a spectrum of it can be decades. And so if somebody doesn't use

[4:29:11] for one day, and they're on suboxone,

[4:29:13] but then the next day they use that still a win.

[4:29:16] And it's going to be very hard

[4:29:17] to ask for measurable outcomes on substance use curing

[4:29:20] when you're not using an evidence-based practice program.

[4:29:24] The real measurement of effective program

[4:29:27] is when you get that client into medication

[4:29:29] assisted treatment, are they HIV-negative?

[4:29:32] And do they have hepatitis C?

[4:29:34] And do they have hemocarditis?

[4:29:35] Are they dying in the hospital of pneumonia

[4:29:37] from an unsafe, unclean injection?

[4:29:39] Those are measurable outcomes that we all have control over and I value the search program

[4:29:46] Incredibly I don't have a fake account. I go in there. We talk by name. I'm a surpa. I met people that asked for this program because it was raining cats and dogs

[4:29:55] The programs closed on Mondays the holidays. They were closed on Fridays after things

[4:30:00] And people were incredibly needy. They are in wheelchairs and walkers of mud. It was an insane winter. And I look forward to connecting with our community. I have driven people to the SSP. I have driven people to the MLN clinic for wound care. I drove a gentleman. I have driven two men to the emergency room. Long story. I'm not going to waste my time on that. But there is a way to connect people to services. And it's done every day all over the state of California. We're not here to talk about any supplemental program.

[4:30:30] We're here to say thank you to Mimi.

[4:30:32] Thank you to Jen.

[4:30:33] Go with expansion of your program.

[4:30:35] Thank you very much.

[4:30:43] Good afternoon.

[4:30:44] I was a supervisor, community, and Board of Supervisors.

[4:30:47] My name is Eddie Kappa.

[4:30:48] The Achavez, and I'm the CEO of Bajo Valley Prevention and Student Assistance located in the

[4:30:53] heart of the Paro Valley in Watsonville.

[4:30:56] We provide counseling and outpatient substance abuse services to youth, living in the greater

[4:31:03] and that, of course, includes our beautiful community and app toss.

[4:31:07] We are very proud to be a partner in the county's behavioral health continuum of care.

[4:31:12] And when I say behavioral health, I'm talking about mental health and substance abuse services.

[4:31:18] Well, at PVPSA, we work really diligently to prevent youth from swimming deeper into the continuum of need.

[4:31:27] We recognize that there are people along that entire continuum and so it is therefore imperative that we provide services no matter where people are at in that swimming pool whether that the shallow end or at the deep end.

[4:31:43] And therefore I'm here today to say that the SSP proposal before you is a very sound and very public health-minded approach to addressing the needs of the people on the deeper end of the pool.

[4:31:57] It articulates a very comprehensive and systematic approach to increasing the opportunity for wellness for those individuals while ensuring the public's health.

[4:32:10] I want to thank the county team for being so diligent with conducting all the research and gathering the information needed to present to you a very articulate and a very research-based proposal.

[4:32:22] I am very excited to be a partner knowing that I have partners around me that do have expertise

[4:32:29] in working with folks that are in that deeper end of the pool and I stand ready to work with

[4:32:35] them in whatever way possible to expand whatever service needs to be done, but I will continue

[4:32:41] to try to prevent our youth swimming deeper into the pool. Thank you.

[4:32:50] Chairman Kennedy, members of the Board, I'm Arnold Lath, I'm a resident of Boulder Creek,

[4:32:57] and former currently a retired health officer.

[4:33:02] All I can say to all of you is, do what needs to be done to decrease the amount of

[4:33:12] substance use in this community.

[4:33:13] By doing, by increasing the availability of the syringe services program, you will, in fact, do that.

[4:33:24] By increasing the syringe services program, you ultimately will decrease the amount of syringe waste in the community, not increase it.

[4:33:37] By allowing the county to increase their hours, give them as much flexibility as you can by doing that.

[4:33:48] You will decrease the substance use in this community and you will decrease the amount of syringe waste in this community.

[4:33:57] All the evidence shows that. All the science shows that.

[4:34:03] Please follow the evidence, follow the science, don't do what some people in Washington do and reject the evidence and the science that supports these programs because they do in fact prevent disease, they do in fact decrease the amount to syringe waste in the community.

[4:34:27] And more and as importantly, they save a lot of illness and a lot of resources that have to be used to correct serious disease.

[4:34:42] Thank you.

[4:34:47] Hi, my name is Eric.

[4:34:50] So at the beginning of the presentation, the director said that this that SSP is not just about needles.

[4:34:59] But the third party is about needles.

[4:35:02] When you've got two people handing out 600 needles a day,

[4:35:06] they're not sitting down, they're not doing testing.

[4:35:08] They're not having pure counseling.

[4:35:10] They're handing out needles.

[4:35:13] And I think one to one is the way to go.

[4:35:18] So the numbers show that there are fewer visits,

[4:35:21] but more needles being handed out.

[4:35:23] So again, that's not consistent with it being not just about the needles.

[4:35:28] Finally, I'm not a health service worker. I'm a finance guy. I know money. I know numbers.

[4:35:35] So, they say that they collected more needles than they distributed by weight. So, I have to ask you.

[4:35:41] If I came and paid my property taxes by weight, would you accept the container and trust me?

[4:35:47] Thank you.

[4:35:55] Hello, my name is Craig Reinerman, I'm a 30 year resident of Santa Cruz, retired professor at UCSC, and a member of the Serene Services Program Advisory Group.

[4:36:08] I was around in the early 90s when we did a evaluation of the Santa Cruz AIDS project, Santa Cruz Needle Exchange project, under Santa Cruz AIDS project.

[4:36:20] And I was struck by how many people we learned, that was the first step, showing up and

[4:36:29] exchanging yields was the first step they had ever taken in their lives to take responsibility

[4:36:34] for their own health.

[4:36:37] Nothing has convinced me otherwise since then.

[4:36:41] Serene services do not close drug problems by themselves.

[4:36:46] And I'm here just to add my voice to support the expansion of the hours and the services,

[4:36:53] the connection to HP, HP, and particularly the distribution of fentanyl strips, which

[4:37:00] will help prevent overdose deaths.

[4:37:03] Thank you.

[4:37:05] Thank you.

[4:37:09] Good afternoon.

[4:37:10] Just one second.

[4:37:10] Is this our final speaker?

[4:37:11] Is anyone else like to speak to us?

[4:37:14] This will be our final speaker.

[4:37:15] Good afternoon, everyone. My name is David Junini and I'm a recovered alcoholic and drug

[4:37:21] and drug addict 29 years clean and sober. But it's emotional for me because what I see

[4:37:29] Thanks for watching, and I'll see you in the next video, and I'll see you in the next video.

[4:37:30] For me, is so much possibility, so much can be done when we have an opportunity to interact with someone who's in the throws of addiction.

[4:37:44] Being able to garner the trust of that person, when they make that rare decision to do something about the situation that they're in, that is a golden moment.

[4:37:57] And, however you decide to structure this program, I would advise you to keep in the back of your mind the possibility of having trained professional addiction counselors available when a person has that golden moment where they wake up and they decide that maybe I can do something about my life.

[4:38:24] Maybe I don't have to continue to live this way.

[4:38:29] Whatever, however, you structure this program,

[4:38:32] please keep that in mind.

[4:38:34] Thank you.

[4:38:38] So that concludes the public comment.

[4:38:40] I'll bring back to board for deliberation discussion.

[4:38:42] First, I want to begin by thanking everyone

[4:38:45] who came out today.

[4:38:46] That's the most thoughtful and respectful conversation

[4:38:50] I've heard around this issue in 15 years in politics.

[4:38:54] And I think we're all much closer than often, not least, on social media, we appear and I want to thank everybody for the thoughtfulness and for taking the time and sitting in a warm room as well to make sure your comments are heard.

[4:39:13] I'm going to call myself first, I have some broad comments, and then I supervise it with

[4:39:20] Pearson and I have some motion that we'd like to bring forward, and then have discussion

[4:39:27] and changes.

[4:39:29] So the first thing I want to say is, I very much support SSP, and I think, and I want to congratulate

[4:39:36] them for the for the good work they do and the public health staff at the county are absolutely

[4:39:43] amazing. I've seen them from early childhood and babies all the way through disease prevention

[4:39:49] and Dr. left heroic efforts around hepatitis A last year saved many lives. It was stated that there

[4:39:57] were three goals for the SSP program and I believe that there are three goals but I believe that

[4:40:03] We've over-emphasized one at the exclusion of the other.

[4:40:07] And when we talk about reducing needle litter, the goal has to be there is no needles in

[4:40:15] our parks, beaches, neighborhoods, or other public spaces.

[4:40:18] Once a week, a parent comes up to me and says, I no longer, or a grandparent, I no longer

[4:40:24] take my child to a park, to the parks, or to the beaches, or to the library, because

[4:40:29] I, we went once and there was a needle or I heard about a needle.

[4:40:32] Now I can tell them what the epidemiologists say, but that is not a conversation that they want

[4:40:39] to have or will believe.

[4:40:41] And so, Father, beyond children, there is no conversation that I can have where my child

[4:40:51] steps on needle.

[4:40:52] It's okay because the relative chance of disease or small.

[4:40:55] It has to be a zero-prosability.

[4:40:58] And when you have whole substance sections of our public, no longer engaging in our public spaces out of fear, that's a public health crisis, and it needs to be treated as seriously as the spread of disease.

[4:41:10] Similarly, the efforts to expand access to treatment, and I commend the HSA staff whose expanded treatment, and hopefully we'll continue to expand it going forward.

[4:41:21] And the work from people like Danny at HSA, I mean, that is exactly what the kind of outreach

[4:41:30] and compassion and passion that we need to help people with good treatment.

[4:41:36] So the short answer is we have an obligation to serve the needs of the entire community,

[4:41:39] and I'm not sure the answer to too many needles is more needles.

[4:41:43] Santa Clara has seven times our population and gives out one third of the needles that we give out

[4:41:49] in just 12 hours of clinic time. Monterey has 12

[4:41:53] two times population and gives out 20% of the needles

[4:41:57] and their disease data is not different than ours

[4:42:00] in fact, Santa Clara is better than ours.

[4:42:03] And in fact, we followed science and we are now giving out

[4:42:07] three times the needles that we're giving out in 2014.

[4:42:11] We haven't seen a statistically big difference

[4:42:14] in the amount of disease and yet there's far more need

[4:42:17] waste that I ever remember they're being.

[4:42:21] So I think we need when we look at this to figure out how we approach this in a way that

[4:42:27] will work in this community.

[4:42:29] The slide about the reduction in the number of clients from September 17, of 385 clients

[4:42:37] to 167 clients last month or an April means that we're not having any of those conversations.

[4:42:43] Means are we're not connecting people to services and we don't have people like Danny who's who's

[4:42:49] Those that's half the conversation to guess to have with people and we that means that we both are getting fewer people

[4:42:56] Referred to treatment, but we also when we talked about and rightfully

[4:43:00] Celebrate our hep A response which wasn't spread through dirty needles, but was because we had a relationship

[4:43:06] We have half the relationships that we had in September of 2017 to be able to do with the hep A outbreak

[4:43:13] For leaders, the downtown streets claim has cleaned up so far, and it's not even a year yet,

[4:43:20] 6000 needles.

[4:43:23] It was not the purpose of the downtown streets team to be a needle abatement strategy.

[4:43:29] They just happened to be out cleaning trash and it's job training program.

[4:43:32] But for that program, which had nothing to do with needles, we would have 6000 needles in

[4:43:40] our community.

[4:43:40] We have 217 reported by state of our shore, thousands by the city parts of our men, thousands

[4:43:45] by community members.

[4:43:47] We have to figure out a way to drive that to zero.

[4:43:50] So when we look at some of the solutions, I'm absolutely supportive of Kiosk, I've gone

[4:43:53] to city council members and asked them to put up Kiosk.

[4:43:57] But we had a Kiosk at the Gateway Camp.

[4:43:59] There was 20 feet away.

[4:44:00] We had HP HP, there was a stone throw away, and there were hundreds of needles on the ground

[4:44:06] in our waterway when that camp disbanded.

[4:44:10] with a kiosk, with services there.

[4:44:14] When I look at systems, this isn't connect,

[4:44:17] I, in general, like the idea,

[4:44:19] but SAMHSA's goes spend $700,000 a year

[4:44:22] to have a 24th seven needle program,

[4:44:25] and SAMHSA's goes an unmitigated disaster

[4:44:27] for needle waste.

[4:44:28] So it's trying to figure out how we address that

[4:44:33] without spending $700,000 a year,

[4:44:36] and because once we have a system connect app,

[4:44:38] when somebody reports that,

[4:44:39] I'm going to expect as a homeowner if I find a needle in front of my house that somebody

[4:44:43] will be there within the hour to clean it up.

[4:44:46] That is an expensive proposition and I've tell you talking to city Santa Cruz they're not

[4:44:52] going to send people they expect us to send people we're distributing needles so the

[4:44:55] County is going to be running a countywide program trying to connect.

[4:45:02] And then we look at expansion, whether it's, and I do believe I am supportive of some expansion, but if you look at HPHP, coral street is a complete public health and public policy failure right now.

[4:45:16] You have every child that's trying to participate in a summer program, driving through an open air drug market.

[4:45:22] It's totally unacceptable situation and to add yet another service into that area without talking to the neighbors and without having a strategy.

[4:45:30] For what's going on, you cannot have coral street look the way it is and ask to expand programs.

[4:45:36] Similarly, I am supportive of Hispanic, but if you look at, but if the third problem is

[4:45:42] really about community outreach, how many conversations have we had with the neighborhoods

[4:45:46] before we tell, before we advocate for expansions?

[4:45:52] So I think I want to support, and I will support SSP, I will support the very good public health

[4:46:01] people who are trying and expansion of treatment, but we just can't keep saying, we have

[4:46:08] these schools of winter payment, and then, I mean, but for the fortune of bringing the downtown

[4:46:13] association, connecting with Street's team, there's 6,000 needles that would have been picked

[4:46:18] up by citizens, parts workers, or somebody else.

[4:46:21] And that's 6,000 needles that shouldn't have been picked up in the first place.

[4:46:25] And so I think I appreciate the efforts but it's not working right now and so it's very, very challenging

[4:46:34] to advocate for expansions when it's very much not working.

[4:46:39] And in other counties that have much, much smaller programs, even though they're dramatically larger, their programs are working.

[4:46:47] So it's hard to figure out what exactly is going on here when you want to look at the data and you want to look at best practices.

[4:46:55] Thank you for indulging me.

[4:46:58] And I'm going to ask, I'm going to ask,

[4:46:59] I suppose, first of all, we'll work

[4:47:01] away around the board, everyone can have comments.

[4:47:03] Thank you.

[4:47:04] I agree with that.

[4:47:05] I, you know, string exchange, excuse me.

[4:47:07] This string exchange has been an important

[4:47:09] element in reducing our communicable, but disease.

[4:47:12] Nobody disagrees with that, and it's proven

[4:47:14] positive outcome here in elsewhere.

[4:47:16] And I'm really grateful for it.

[4:47:18] And I want to thank the Health Services Department,

[4:47:21] agency to having brought this report to us and having to air this out as we should do probably

[4:47:29] more than each every two years. But I think that we have the county does have an obligation

[4:47:35] to find out what our program may be contributing to or against or for the program. Needle exchanges

[4:47:45] has been in my district and supervisor cap, it's district up to now.

[4:47:50] I'm also troubled as stated that according to SSP, we've seen the number of unique

[4:47:57] ID clients fault 40% in the past four years, but then we also have syringes that we're

[4:48:08] giving out a nearly tripled, we're seeing fewer clients and giving out more needles.

[4:48:17] That's troubling to me.

[4:48:18] That doesn't seem to fit, right?

[4:48:19] Doesn't make good math to me.

[4:48:22] We must help more people treat their addiction rather than just manage it.

[4:48:27] And I do agree with much of what supervisor clearly said, if it's proper to like to move

[4:48:37] motion. It's a pretty lengthy one of one I've thought about and would like to move

[4:48:43] a motion to prove the recommended action and to accept HSA Bionial Report for SSP, and

[4:48:52] that we give this additional direction. There are seven points that have been down.

[4:48:59] Direct HSA to reduce the maximum number of clean syringes exchanged per person, per visit,

[4:49:05] at SSE sites from 150.

[4:49:10] Suringes returned to the county should be in clear containers as to be visible to staff receiving the syringes and be weighed.

[4:49:18] This step will more closely align our procedures with our board approve one to one exchange policy.

[4:49:25] Second, in order to encourage more people to use primary exchange as a six-month pilot,

[4:49:32] That we direct health services agency to increase the hours at the M-line and lots of

[4:49:38] ill clinics to 15 hours per week and to conduct a community meeting to address any concerns.

[4:49:44] I would ask for a report back in six months to determine whether the increased hours and fewer

[4:49:50] needles per visit serve the purpose of encouraging greater use of our exchange.

[4:49:56] Number three, direct the county administrative officer to manage a 90-day waste-stream assessment

[4:50:02] using mark syringes to determine the extent to which syringes exchange by the county, this

[4:50:08] county, are contributing to the needle litter.

[4:50:13] That's an unnecessary answer to question now.

[4:50:15] The assessment should be conducted by an independent provider that is needed the county or state

[4:50:20] department of health.

[4:50:22] The assessment will be confidential and conducted for a period of time with specific markings

[4:50:27] It's not made known to the SSP clients and the results reported back to the board within six

[4:50:33] months of completion.

[4:50:36] For, correct the Health Services Agency to return to the board by September 24th, 2019 with

[4:50:42] an ordinance to change the SSP advisory group to a seven member SSP advisory commission subject

[4:50:50] to the Brown Act with one seat appointed for district and two seats appointed at large.

[4:50:57] five direct health service agency to work with the local jurisdictions to explore additional

[4:51:03] options for installing safe sharps disposal containers at HSA's expense if jurisdictions

[4:51:09] agreed to the placement of the containers.

[4:51:15] Six direct the HSA to start tracking the number of SSP clients successfully referred to

[4:51:21] assist in treatment.

[4:51:25] And lastly, number seven, on mobile services and the homeless person's health project,

[4:51:30] while there may be benefits to the county providing additional services by public health

[4:51:36] in the future.

[4:51:36] Now it's not the time.

[4:51:38] Given our concerns about the current exchange, and mobile exchange should involve community

[4:51:43] input about appropriate sighting and timing, if that decision is to be made, there's the

[4:51:50] motion I have.

[4:51:50] And I'll second that.

[4:51:52] Supervisor Capit?

[4:51:56] I think we're pretty much ready for a vote.

[4:51:59] I want to thank everybody for coming here.

[4:52:04] And it's an honor to be a part of the board

[4:52:07] and actually showing everybody where I had

[4:52:11] of what it looked like it was coming down from the state.

[4:52:16] It was very disorganized.

[4:52:18] And we've always been on top of this for quite a while

[4:52:23] and we're trying to improve it.

[4:52:26] So we're ready to go.

[4:52:27] I think this is good for South County and it's...

[4:52:31] So, I think it's a slam dunk on the vote.

[4:52:35] Supervisor Leopold.

[4:52:38] Thank you, Chair. Thank you for everyone's testimony today.

[4:52:43] I really appreciate it, and I continually learn from the public as I engage in conversations about this.

[4:52:51] I've had the place of watching needle exchange or Syrian services over the past 25 years,

[4:52:58] when the county passes first ordinance about this in 1995.

[4:53:03] I was the executive director of the AIDS project.

[4:53:07] And so over that period of time,

[4:53:09] I've seen the ups and downs of this program.

[4:53:14] And there's a couple of things that stand out to me.

[4:53:17] One is that when there has not been a strong institutional program,

[4:53:22] volunteers have filled the gap, because we are a compassionate community.

[4:53:26] And so, as that way, when it started back in 94s, the first time, I became aware that there was a needle exchange program in Santa Cruz, eventually the Santa Cruz AIDS project took it over, and then as that organization was suffering great difficulties, volunteers then showed up again as street outreach supporters.

[4:53:52] their actions cause the county to take the program over, but we have consistently shrunk

[4:54:00] our program, and that has resulted in volunteers stepping up to fill the gap, because

[4:54:10] regardless of how you compare us to other counties, we have people who inject drugs in Santa

[4:54:16] Bruce County.

[4:54:19] The other thing that is kind of clear to me is that when you have a well-run program

[4:54:28] that's actually following best practices, it can do good things.

[4:54:32] And for 15 or 17, or maybe more of those years, that there was some kind of needle exchange

[4:54:41] certain services program, we didn't hear and did not see needle litter in the same way that

[4:54:49] we have in the recent past.

[4:54:53] We should not feel comfortable with the level of needle waste

[4:54:57] in our community. It's unacceptable, it's unhealthy,

[4:55:04] and we shouldn't just look at that as an

[4:55:12] waste problem that HSA is connected to it because there's a public health strategy that involves

[4:55:19] needles and then there are needles out in the community.

[4:55:24] It doesn't mean that HSA is the one that's responsible for that and there was a needle

[4:55:30] little problem before HSA was involved.

[4:55:33] So, you know, this idea that somehow that our program is the cause of this is just not born

[4:55:41] And it, it was not born out by looking at other communities that also have need a little program problems.

[4:55:49] Santa Cruz is not the only community that has a need a little problem.

[4:55:54] And that is also a recent vintage in other communities.

[4:55:58] As the state laws have changed about the accessibility of needles, there are other places to get needles.

[4:56:04] And as a result, there are more needles in our community and other communities.

[4:56:12] We should not sit still or assume that it will just take care of itself.

[4:56:21] We need to be aggressive in that.

[4:56:25] And that's aggressive in terms of having places where people can place needles, having people

[4:56:30] to clean up needles, working with other jurisdictions to also do the same.

[4:56:36] We have tried to get other communities that where their residents have complained about

[4:56:43] needles to take kiosk, and we have been rejected consistently with a few exceptions.

[4:56:51] So as I look at this motion, I think that that is a failed strategy to just say let's

[4:56:59] to work with them. If Grand Street Park or cows beach or another park or coral street has needles,

[4:57:07] we should work to place kiosk there. Not wait.

[4:57:15] We should also use good science that we do care

[4:57:19] about that. We had a science march here in Santa Cruz County. We said that we cared about

[4:57:24] good science. We criticize legislators for not following good science. And so we shouldn't

[4:57:32] accept something that I understand the perfect, I understand the motivation for people wanting

[4:57:40] to do things, but it's not backed up by the research. It's not backed up by the science.

[4:57:48] And so it's hard for me to support an arbitrary cut from a hundred to fifty. Why should it be

[4:57:55] seventy-five? Should it be twenty-five? Should it be cut at all?

[4:58:01] When I see, when I understand

[4:58:04] the concerns about the number of needles giving out and the reduction in the number

[4:58:09] of individuals coming into the SSP program, we could look at that as saying, you have the

[4:58:17] so little, under 10 hours a week, that you have to increase secondary exchange because we're

[4:58:24] just not available to people. And so people that people who are in need find someone to

[4:58:30] take their needles in because nine hours isn't enough. So maybe we should increase the number

[4:58:38] of hours and look at that impact in six months and assess whether that actually gets more

[4:58:47] people through the door and into the program into the things we say we care about.

[4:58:53] Because I think HSA has worked very hard to tie in their syringe services program with

[4:59:04] trying to connect people to clinics and services and it takes really good staff to be able

[4:59:12] to do that.

[4:59:13] We need dedicated staff, people who are used to doing it because say what you will about

[4:59:19] the harm reduction, Rocho, and I understand the concerns that were raised there.

[4:59:27] But the idea that someone's out there trying to help people and that a secondary exchange

[4:59:33] is a bad thing if they don't include hep C testing or HIV testing.

[4:59:39] When I was at the AIDS project, we had health outreach workers who regularly met with people.

[4:59:43] They didn't give out needles.

[4:59:44] That wasn't something the AIDS project did, but they gave out condoms, they gave out supplies

[4:59:51] for people to inject carefully and they worked to get them into testing.

[4:59:58] And we actually, at that time, had...

[5:00:00] Much more robust testing program and community testing spots that we don't have today, or the same kind today.

[5:00:13] When

[5:00:18] we went to link our successful and recognized program of homeless person's health project, with the problems down a choral street, you know, they aren't the reason.

[5:00:36] that there are problems down the course street.

[5:00:38] We place the program because that's where the people were, right?

[5:00:42] And so I believe in community outreach and community meetings.

[5:00:47] I think that that's critical.

[5:00:50] But let's not say that our effectiveness in placing programs

[5:00:54] where the problems are, are the reasons

[5:00:56] where we shouldn't do something for that population.

[5:01:00] That was the whole strategy to begin with.

[5:01:04] I take everybody at their word.

[5:01:07] I didn't hear people speak about us against the Syrian service program.

[5:01:11] I heard a lot of support for it.

[5:01:13] And I'm grateful that we're past that part of the discussion.

[5:01:17] And I think we should try to use science wherever possible

[5:01:20] because it's a very loaded issue.

[5:01:28] And there's a lot of emotion in it.

[5:01:30] And sometimes a motion doesn't make the best policy.

[5:01:34] Science helps makes it the best policy.

[5:01:37] And we can't let the perfect get away

[5:01:41] of the good, understand that.

[5:01:44] And so I see that the staff has come with something

[5:01:47] that's not perfect.

[5:01:50] It's good, not perfect.

[5:01:53] And we have to be aspiring to following the best practices.

[5:01:59] the state office of AIDS, the National Association of Counties, the National League of

[5:02:05] Cities, the Republican Congress Congress that funded needle exchange last year, these

[5:02:13] aren't crazy left-wing anarchist organizations, right? I mean, these are reputable

[5:02:23] organizations, organizations that we are part of, we choose to be part of, and

[5:02:29] and they support this activity, and we know public health works too, because if you look

[5:02:37] at our safe RX campaign as provided in the data, we can see that the opioid prescriptions

[5:02:42] have gone down because of the interaction and the public education that's gone on.

[5:02:50] When I look at this motion, I can't support it.

[5:02:54] It's far too broad, reducing it for 150 to me that does not seem like anything that's backed by science.

[5:03:06] It feels completely arbitrary.

[5:03:10] Six-month pilot about extra hours.

[5:03:14] That might be something that will work.

[5:03:18] The waste stream assessment, again, I don't even know whether it's possible to do this.

[5:03:24] I don't know what it would cost to do this.

[5:03:26] It's hard to support something that is so amorphous that you can't figure out exactly what

[5:03:34] it is you're buying into, and to try to figure out what, I think it came back with a suggestion

[5:03:42] about how that would be done and what would be cost, we can make an assessment of it, but

[5:03:47] just given today what's written here, I don't feel like I could sign on to it.

[5:03:53] When I look at the SSP Advisory Commission, you know, I remember when we set this up and we

[5:04:00] have a bunch of professionals on there and law enforcement was invited to participate and a

[5:04:08] a couple of the members spoke today, Damon, and Dr. Rinerman, both spoke, I think you're

[5:04:17] both on it. And we have a bunch of health professionals, and it seems like those people

[5:04:23] who actually know something about disease prevention are useful. And whether there should be

[5:04:29] other people as part of that. Okay, that's a good idea too,

[5:04:36] but I want us to be directed

[5:04:38] by good public health data and science, not just emotion. When it comes to working with local

[5:04:47] jurisdictions, I think we should have something a little bit stronger. For instance, I think

[5:04:52] we should direct the chair to write a letter to the mayor of the city of Santa Cruz and ask

[5:04:56] them to respond back to us.

[5:04:59] So there's something in writing, because I've had those conversations.

[5:05:02] And every council member, I talk to you and say, well, yeah, sure, that sounds like a good

[5:05:06] idea.

[5:05:06] But we never get it to the place where there's one actually place unless there's a crisis

[5:05:12] as there was with the Rossing Campman.

[5:05:14] So I think that we should have something stronger and ask them to tell us that they don't want

[5:05:20] these things.

[5:05:21] So there's citizens can understand that they don't want to participate, that it's in writing

[5:05:26] because the county has key us in the warehouse ready to deploy, but we don't have, we don't

[5:05:33] have support from cities to place them. It's not, it's not the magic bullet. It won't

[5:05:38] make the problem go away, but we should at least attempt to place these because we've seen

[5:05:43] that where we place them, at least it collects some of the needleways that's in our community.

[5:05:50] I don't know the answer about SSP clients successfully referred because, again, you might make

[5:05:57] the referral, but if they never show up, it's hard to, I don't know what the appropriate

[5:06:04] measure for that.

[5:06:06] It's an admirable goal.

[5:06:10] And if we want to hold off on the mobile services until we see what's happening with the expanded

[5:06:16] hours great, but for all I can tell from the discussion that's going on about the harm reduction

[5:06:22] roadshow, is that there appears to be people using drugs outside the city of Santa Cruz. And

[5:06:32] we should think about how we get those services available to people outside the city of Santa Cruz.

[5:06:40] And mobile services were once part of the array of services that we had for exchange, and

[5:06:47] stop for various reasons, and maybe we need to think about that again.

[5:06:51] We don't have to do that right away.

[5:06:52] I don't think the staff was suggesting right away, but I'd be happy to come back and

[5:06:58] take a look at that.

[5:07:00] We should not accept need of waste, and we should do everything we can, and we're going to have

[5:07:05] to spend money in order to help clean up the community.

[5:07:11] We should use the best science to make decisions about how to practice public health, because

[5:07:16] We've seen that when public health practice does those best practices, we have good results.

[5:07:24] And we should operate not about trying to limit this, but trying to make it successful.

[5:07:30] Actually, meets the need. And the research tells us if you have a program that does a better job of meeting the need, you can actually see less litter. That is, there is national research on that. We got information in our packet about state research on that. That's clear. And so if we're committed to that, we have to take in all those pieces. We can't just pick and choose from that. So I don't support the motion and I hope that we can.

[5:08:00] talk about making some amendments to it in the hopes to make it stronger.

[5:08:06] Thank you, Chair, before we're using our health professionals for heat stroke treatment

[5:08:10] I'll try and make this a much faster here.

[5:08:13] I think that we can actually get to a motion that can be supported by the majority of the board.

[5:08:17] I have two brief questions of the health staff.

[5:08:20] The first one is just on the point here of reduction from 150.

[5:08:26] Do you have a number of a sense of what the average giveaway per person would be?

[5:08:30] What the reduction would mean as far as access components?

[5:08:34] I agree.

[5:08:35] Let's do a visorally a poll that this is an arbitrary cut.

[5:08:37] The question is what does that cut actually mean,

[5:08:41] as far as that delivery services would be concerned?

[5:08:44] I think there's a difference right between 50 for primary

[5:08:49] and 50 in a secondary exchange.

[5:08:52] We're saying that essentially you treat all exchanges as

[5:08:55] primary exchanges.

[5:08:56] So for people who are primary exchanges, obviously cause a reduction of people who are getting,

[5:09:04] or operating secondary exchanges, with the idea that we're trying to drive, I'd like to see

[5:09:09] 100% increase the number of people that use the clinic, so we're trying to drive that up.

[5:09:16] So there's a lot of people who are using secondary exchange, who aren't coming there, and this

[5:09:20] would obviously drive them trying to get those people there.

[5:09:23] So, I got that, but I mean, then you would do something that regulate the secondary exchange.

[5:09:28] I mean, so, meaning that you might be going out at the wrong way.

[5:09:31] If what you're trying to do is eliminate an independent or non-transparent or whatever

[5:09:38] adjective you want to use, third-party exchange, and everything would be under the controls of the county,

[5:09:42] then make that statement, I mean, just ban them.

[5:09:45] But then what you would do then is then not regulate what the county says is the best practice

[5:09:50] in the distribution under that regulated model because those are mutually exclusive things.

[5:09:54] So what I'm asking then is what the reduction from a hundred to fifty would mean.

[5:10:00] I did actually hear by the way remarkable amount of common ground even though people were approaching it differently, which was interesting.

[5:10:09] So I think that there's a way to actually get there that would even if people didn't actually recognize it actually make this motion something that could be done.

[5:10:16] So if we went from 150 had detrimental and essence with that fee, to me, I would be willing to keep it

[5:10:24] at 100, unless I could be shown that there's a reason that the reduction would actually

[5:10:28] do something that would meet the public health interests that are being expressed or concerns that are being expressed from my colleagues.

[5:10:33] Ms. Hall?

[5:10:35] So that's actually moving in the wrong direction.

[5:10:38] We were very conservative in our request to the board, because we recognize that we're not close to best practice.

[5:10:45] What we're trying to do is balance what capacity and resources that we have and expand it slowly.

[5:10:53] I truly believe, and I believe that Dr. Guilerjuchi and Jen, you may also chime in.

[5:10:59] But I think the first thing that we need to do is expand access and availability.

[5:11:04] The primary reason I believe that we're seeing this large reduction in folks physically coming in is because we don't have access.

[5:11:12] being open 10 hours a week or five hours a week and Watsonville does not.

[5:11:18] And so I believe you were open 10 hours a week in 2014 and you had 40% more people.

[5:11:24] So the hours haven't changed and you're seeing what has changed.

[5:11:28] What has changed is that someone in the community or a few someone's in the community

[5:11:33] recognize the gap and decided to step in.

[5:11:36] So my understanding of how the secondary exchange started was last Memorial, a year ago Memorial Day.

[5:11:42] I wasn't around, but from what I understand of the history

[5:11:45] that County was closed on a Monday on a county holiday.

[5:11:49] And it started kind of informally to provide the service to folks

[5:11:53] because we only provided three days a week.

[5:11:56] So if we have a county holiday on a Monday and or a Friday,

[5:12:00] that three days a week turns into two or one days a week.

[5:12:03] And what we have heard in terms of feedback from our clients is that

[5:12:08] they'll carry around a hundred needles waiting for our students

[5:12:11] Because they're not exactly sure that they can actually access us every time we're open.

[5:12:15] And so I think it would be more prudent to allow us to expand our hours, see how those hours change.

[5:12:24] Because now we have different items that play now than we may have had a couple of years ago.

[5:12:32] The other thing that I want to say is our program has changed dramatically.

[5:12:36] When I first got here, I've been director for seven months.

[5:12:39] When I first got here, our exchange was located, and I will call it a hole, like a 100-square-foot hole, in the back end of our building, our clients have a proper waiting room.

[5:12:51] We have changed that so that there is a dedicated space. It's bright, it's open, it has privacy, has the ability to conduct multiples exchanges at one time.

[5:13:00] every one of Danny's mat staff, they staff a shift.

[5:13:05] Everyone of those shifts are staff by public health nurse.

[5:13:09] Everyone of those shifts.

[5:13:11] So I would say that the changes that we've made have just happened

[5:13:14] very recently and it's only been since February that I'd asked Jen

[5:13:18] to transition this under the communicable disease unit.

[5:13:22] And we've made these changes.

[5:13:23] So I asked the board allow us to test the changes that we've had

[5:13:27] to continue to document the successes that we have, grant us what we're requesting so that we can

[5:13:34] come back and show if it makes a difference. What I really fear from a scientific standpoint

[5:13:39] is that we pick some kind of arbitrary marker or information and make an assumption that that means

[5:13:46] some certain kind of outcome. You know, we are a program is staffed by epidemiologist, a physician,

[5:13:53] in public health nurses, my self as a public health professional,

[5:14:01] certified addiction counselors.

[5:14:02] I feel like we have the best brains on staff, and we have a great community advisory group

[5:14:09] as well.

[5:14:10] And so I feel, but come at this from DeRainville, which is I believe all that, and I want

[5:14:15] more people to go to return, who we're, who we're using in a line, who's stopped using

[5:14:21] online to return to MLINE to do all the things that you want.

[5:14:25] But in a world of secondary exchanges, they won't return because, because, and there may

[5:14:31] be lots of public health reasons for both, but if we want to eliminate secondary, as a policy

[5:14:36] matter, if we want to eliminate secondary exchanges and in an anonymous system, somebody comes

[5:14:41] in with 100 needles, how do you know it's their needles and they're not getting some from

[5:14:45] somebody else?

[5:14:45] It doesn't seem to be a way to eliminate a secondary exchange without reducing this number.

[5:14:52] Well, may I make a suggestion?

[5:14:54] I think a better way would be to ask staff to examine what that way could be.

[5:15:00] So I admit we have a lot of work to do. There was a constituent that said we had an updated our policies and procedures.

[5:15:06] Again, we've been really busy revamping this program and we're happy to address our shortfalls.

[5:15:11] But one of the things that we can do is examine our secondary exchange practices.

[5:15:16] We have talked about things like having training standards, protocols, policies, having certain kinds of entities,

[5:15:25] enter into agreements to conduct exchange on our behalf.

[5:15:28] There are all kinds of possibilities for us to provide that I think

[5:15:33] the accountability that the board and some of the public is looking for

[5:15:36] and we're happy to pursue that.

[5:15:38] We could come back to the board in September after putting some thought

[5:15:42] into that and provide some recommendations for the board.

[5:15:45] I think that that's a better path than to choose, you know,

[5:15:52] reduce the number that we exchange, then to kind of take a stab at different strategies.

[5:15:57] And then we can test that and see if it really works.

[5:16:03] American, continue on this.

[5:16:05] So that answer the question and for me, I'm comfortable with it being, so, so I, we all

[5:16:11] received, you know, over a thousand emails and contacts associated with the harm reduction

[5:16:17] road shown a lot of suggestions.

[5:16:18] So overwhelmingly what people said, except for the outliers, right, was that they wanted

[5:16:23] this to be run by the county, that they wanted it to be under the county's control.

[5:16:30] I think one of the things that's important is that you have to accept the fact that that

[5:16:32] means an expansion of county services, what that actually means. I mean, I don't know that

[5:16:36] everybody's necessarily internalized with that really means, but that actually means that

[5:16:39] you'll see more hours. What I would like to see before we move into a world of mobile that

[5:16:44] may have externalities that we can account for yet is to at least expand the fixed point

[5:16:49] to a point that we can at least say that it is or is not meeting the need of the community

[5:16:54] after a certain period of time. What I'm seeing here is a movement toward that number

[5:16:58] too, but I think that we should move toward what's being requested, which is of 20 hour a week

[5:17:03] on that with the same six-month return. I think that some of these other recommendations are actually

[5:17:08] okay. I'm maybe in sight disagreeing with my colleague on item four, which was in creation of this

[5:17:13] group, the SSP advisory group, because I think there should be community buy-in too, and I think

[5:17:18] And one of the ways that you do that is actually by having community members that aren't necessarily from the field sometimes have say and input into the system because as you can see most of the people that are showing up are from the community and feel a lot as sense of powerlessness in regards to a program that they don't really understand that they don't feel like they can control and feel like is being thrust on them in a way that they aren't having any kind of input in and I don't think that's reasonable. I think that there should be that that element.

[5:17:45] I agree with my colleague as well that the chair should write the letter on number 5.

[5:17:49] I think number 6 is what it is.

[5:17:51] And for number 7, I just think that you adhere to the same timeline of a six month return.

[5:17:55] So I mean, I think that there's a way to do this, which is I'm going to make a proposal

[5:18:00] and amendment to the motion and we'll see whether we can get there.

[5:18:03] I think that we eliminate number 1.

[5:18:05] I think we change number 2 to 20 hours.

[5:18:08] I think we can try number 3 because we'll see whether it works.

[5:18:10] But I think that we may find out that it actually doesn't.

[5:18:15] I'm fine with keeping number four.

[5:18:17] Number five, I say we re-worded to say direct the chair to write local jurisdictions

[5:18:20] and request a response.

[5:18:23] Number six, we'll see whether tracking SSP clients is possible.

[5:18:26] And number seven, that should be a six month as well.

[5:18:30] I'll make that as an amendment to the motion.

[5:18:32] I would, it's a second, it would, it would just be helpful on number three.

[5:18:38] If we could get some report next week about what is my cost, I mean, we're doing budgets, hearings, I have no idea whether this is a $5,000 thing or a $50,000 item and it would just be good to know as to whether that's it's actual possible and so if I would I want to second your motion and I hope that you see that as a friendly amendment.

[5:19:06] with a, with a, come back during budget to explain what, what number three would mean financially?

[5:19:11] I guess, I, well, I would say this, which is, on the number one, okay, but we don't,

[5:19:23] we're not going to expand hours until we know what their plan is to reduce secondary exchange,

[5:19:28] because if you're just expanding hours and it's just more needles out the door,

[5:19:32] like bringing forward a plan that matches the hours that makes people comfortable, but just

[5:19:39] expanding hours, and then maybe having a secondary plan that we don't know yet is okay.

[5:19:46] Yeah, I just the second area, I mean, somebody can come in and get hundreds of needles, and we don't

[5:19:51] have any idea where they're going. I get it. We just, I think the board's unanimous in that

[5:19:59] the question is whether or not what you're proposing gets you there and we're trying to get

[5:20:04] the board's trying to get there. And I think that it may not be just if you can cut it down

[5:20:09] to 25 needles, 50 needles, and I saw 10 people, 15 people show up from a road show that are

[5:20:16] ready to get another 50 people that will now just be 50 people with 50 needles. So I mean if you're

[5:20:21] trying to get rid of the secondary exchange, there's going to get more people to show up with less

[5:20:24] needles to each person. That's not accomplishing your goal. Your goal is-

[5:20:29] So if those people show up, they're by land and by land and by land.

[5:20:32] Maybe Ms. Hald, you have an idea of what it would take to come back to us with a plan

[5:20:38] for increased hours and managing the secondary exchange in a more meaningful way.

[5:20:48] I mean, is that something that could be done in biogas, or September?

[5:20:53] I mean, I think, well, I think the interest here and the chair can correct me if I'm wrong.

[5:20:59] I think we do have an interest that we want as many people as possible going into this county

[5:21:05] program that we feel like has all the elements that we want.

[5:21:10] And so the question is, how do we best get there?

[5:21:14] And if the concern is secondary exchange and we want to try to find a way to do hours and have some limits on

[5:21:22] Well, let's talk about what that plan will look like.

[5:21:27] And it doesn't stop us from doing the advisory commission.

[5:21:30] If this waste thing is, you know, whatever that is,

[5:21:36] but before we expand hours, we get information about what that program

[5:21:40] might look like with expanded hours and costs.

[5:21:43] I think that's a win for everybody.

[5:21:47] So I will say that the current program that we have,

[5:21:49] We dramatically changed our program from what it looked like six to nine months ago to what

[5:21:54] it looks like today, without expanding more dollars, what we did was we took advantage

[5:21:59] of leveraging the additional staff that we had that we were able to acquire through pragmatic

[5:22:04] health, through our Matt grants, through whole person care, and we layered the staff that

[5:22:09] we already have to ensure that their expertise was lent to the Surgeon Services program.

[5:22:15] And so it's not so siloed as if we need X number of new dollars in order to expand these

[5:22:21] hours.

[5:22:21] We'll mean as going to the drawing board, taking a look at how we schedule people's shifts,

[5:22:27] so I think that there's a positive bill.

[5:22:30] That increasing to 20 hours could cost no extra dollars. There's a possibility that we find a way that we feel is better that would cost extra dollars.

[5:22:40] And I think that we would have an idea of what those extra dollars might be after the governor's budget passes.

[5:22:45] Regarding the key asks, we do have key asks sitting in a warehouse ready to be rolled out.

[5:22:52] I'm absolutely, actually I had talked with staff about rolling out those key asks in some of our other jurisdictions or maybe other areas of the county.

[5:23:00] And in the case where it was in other jurisdictions, I agree with you, supervisor Leopold.

[5:23:05] I believe that if we didn't have a syringe services program at all, we would still have a syringe

[5:23:10] litter problem.

[5:23:12] I was able to order a box of 100 syringes from Amazon for less than $18.

[5:23:17] And they were delivered to my doorstep, nobody asked me if I was over 18 or where I lived.

[5:23:21] So I know that there is an ability to access syringes through other methodologies.

[5:23:26] The people who have homes aren't ordering from Amazon and leaving syringes in the street.

[5:23:31] No, I understand that.

[5:23:32] I was going to say about the Kiosk.

[5:23:34] We had actually talked about internally with staff that we would be willing to fund the

[5:23:39] cost of servicing the Kiosk for the first year, and if it showed that they were well-utilized

[5:23:44] and other municipalities have an agreement with that municipality to take over the cost, because

[5:23:49] it is for the benefit of that municipality.

[5:23:51] So, there are lots of different options that we could.

[5:23:53] So let me just say, from my, our motion is that we would maintain the, we were maintaining

[5:23:58] those in perpetuity.

[5:24:00] We're the ones disturbing the needles.

[5:24:02] We will pay for the chaos.

[5:24:03] We're going to pay for the, the cleansing.

[5:24:05] So my expectation of what I was going to send to the cities was that, that HSA would, would maintain

[5:24:13] that on or on going basis.

[5:24:14] And I would say that there are, um, about just over 2,000 tons of needles a year we collect

[5:24:20] in the Kiosks, over and above what we distribute and collect in our personal services, they're

[5:24:28] coming from somewhere outside of our program.

[5:24:30] So just to address this issue though, we were asking something very specific, and so Chair,

[5:24:35] I hear what you're saying, what Supervisor McPherson is saying is that you don't want to extend

[5:24:38] hours until you know that the secondary exchange is, there's a plan for that correct?

[5:24:43] Could a plan come back on September 24 for addressing the secondary exchange issue that I think

[5:24:50] the board unanimously has a concern with.

[5:24:53] I believe so.

[5:24:54] Okay.

[5:24:55] Then why don't we just.

[5:24:56] Okay.

[5:24:57] And why don't we, if this is true then, then we would get rid of number one, in essence, we would

[5:25:05] get rid of number two contention upon this coming back.

[5:25:09] So number two would come back on September 24th with a plan for how to manage the secondary

[5:25:14] exchanges.

[5:25:15] We would keep number three.

[5:25:16] We would keep number four.

[5:25:17] of the comeback going budget hearing, so we know we are fine.

[5:25:21] Excuse me, on number three, the budget hearing, I'm sorry, Mr. Plasios.

[5:25:24] Number five would be the direct to chair.

[5:25:27] Number six would say, number seven would also,

[5:25:33] well, we had a six month after we actually increased the hour.

[5:25:39] So it would be six months past the time of when those hours were increased.

[5:25:43] So that's all fine, although I would expect that you would hold a community meeting

[5:25:47] in advance in the, in fact, the neighborhoods before expanding hours.

[5:25:53] Yeah, we're happy to do that.

[5:25:55] Yeah, and I hope that when we hold meetings that an involves both supervisors who represent that area.

[5:26:01] You know, I represent the Amaline area, the vast majority of it, and a lot of surrounding neighborhoods as well.

[5:26:08] So I would hope that in the future when we do that, that we have meetings that both our offices are aware of.

[5:26:15] Sure?

[5:26:16] So those are, I pose those as an amendment and there is a second to the amendment.

[5:26:24] So I think I think we're accepting them as friends.

[5:26:27] All except those is friendly amendments.

[5:26:30] So we're going to come back.

[5:26:32] It budget hearings on number three.

[5:26:34] That's correct with the cost estimate and feasibility analysis.

[5:26:38] Because this is just something that people just want to get an assessment.

[5:26:42] You're right.

[5:26:42] There's nothing we can do about these orders, you know, through Amazon or wherever, that's

[5:26:47] out of our hands.

[5:26:48] We just have to try to do manage our situation better than we're managing it.

[5:26:52] Now, and I want to say that my hats off to the Health Services Agency and everybody's

[5:26:57] working on this, this is not easy, this is not always friendly, sort of speak, but I think

[5:27:07] there's a vast room for improvement and it's not your fault for why we need to improve it.

[5:27:14] We just need to improve it because it's not working well right now and there's two parts.

[5:27:21] As we go to stop the expansion of communicable diseases and reduce the number of improperly

[5:27:30] discarded syringes. That's the key point. Probably that we want to get to as much as anything

[5:27:35] right here. We just have to earn the trust of the general public and they don't have it in

[5:27:40] our syringe exchange program right now. Thank you. And so I think I think we're all close to it.

[5:27:47] Let me just say, I think a waste stream study is science and that waste stream saves it all

[5:27:52] time and we have a lot of talk about it. It's our needles, it's not our needles, it's for mammals

[5:27:56] on, like, we should know where the needles are from.

[5:28:00] And also, the Citizens Connect proposal in this thing,

[5:28:03] as I pointed out, is a several hundred thousand dollar a year,

[5:28:07] running a 24-7 county-wide cleanup operation.

[5:28:10] I agree, is a major, major cost.

[5:28:14] If we're going to do it in a way that the community expects,

[5:28:16] which is, if I see it, and you don't, for my house,

[5:28:18] I expect to be cleaned up within an hour or two.

[5:28:21] That is no small task.

[5:28:23] So let's be clear that if we're serious about addressing need a leader, we're looking at a huge expenditure.

[5:28:31] And that is why we're suggesting that we attempt a pilot, gather information, do a process of evaluation and report back to the board,

[5:28:38] because it allows us a chance to evaluate the success or lack of success and what the resources may be needed.

[5:28:45] And I do want to say I appreciate the board working together.

[5:28:48] I know that there are members with different points of view and I appreciate the public and as well as our staff.

[5:28:55] I think we have an amazing staff that has worked really hard especially in the last year to take this program from what it is and what it has been, which is harm reduction.

[5:29:07] But grow it into something that brings so much hope to our community and they ability to really meet people where they're at,

[5:29:15] get them into any kind of service, whether it's healthcare services, medication assisted treatment.

[5:29:20] And I do believe that with all of the expansion of the services that we've had on the

[5:29:24] behavioral health and the health care side, that this is our way to reach our most at-risk

[5:29:30] clients.

[5:29:30] And so I wanted to thank the Board for their work and also our staff.

[5:29:34] All right.

[5:29:34] Are we clear on the motion?

[5:29:35] I do have a question.

[5:29:36] Thank you, Chair.

[5:29:39] Does your recommendations and amendments supervisor McPherson circumvent the recommendations that the HSA has made on their report?

[5:29:50] Thank you.

[5:29:52] Okay, so we have them.

[5:29:54] Except we are accepting the HSA report.

[5:29:58] All right.

[5:29:58] Yes.

[5:30:00] Okay, so we have a motion. One last thing, the syringe-liter study, don't we want that also to move forward?

[5:30:09] I did. I mean, so, this question is super seeding. That's what, to be clear,

[5:30:19] what?

[5:30:19] The number three supersedes the recommendation from.

[5:30:23] We reviewed health. From us, we reviewed the orange county study and it wasn't what we were trying.

[5:30:31] It doesn't provide the information that we were trying to get out.

[5:30:35] So we thought this would be a better use of time.

[5:30:37] No, the waste streams assessment is you're saying in place of or in place of or can it be in addition to?

[5:30:45] I mean, is there a, maybe I looked to staff on this.

[5:30:50] I don't know whether the California Department of Public Health is paying for that study.

[5:30:55] So it's no cost to us.

[5:30:56] And so I'd like the Belt and Suspenders method, right?

[5:31:03] I mean, if we can do this waste assessment and do this study and have a couple of points,

[5:31:08] because our goal is to reduce needle litter in our community.

[5:31:14] And the best ways to do that, and to figure out where it's coming from, right?

[5:31:18] I mean, that's what we're interested in.

[5:31:20] So that's why I'm asking the question, if someone else is paying for the study and the staff

[5:31:24] It's still work on it.

[5:31:28] I don't see the downside.

[5:31:30] I feel like we're asking a lot of staff

[5:31:32] between now and September on a small program.

[5:31:37] I'd like to do this and then come back.

[5:31:41] And if we don't get the answers, we need.

[5:31:44] We can go to and we can engage in the state.

[5:31:48] But is it too much to me to ask?

[5:31:51] No, it was a recommendation.

[5:31:53] And to answer your question, yes, the state is fine.

[5:31:56] advancing it, they have federal dollars as well as state dollars, and they use a consultant

[5:32:00] that has been doing this type of work,

[5:32:04] so it's part of the reason we made the recommendation

[5:32:06] is because we can have an outside entity that runs the office of AIDS due to this on our

[5:32:12] behalf, and then use that data to develop our litter program.

[5:32:17] So I just, I think we accept the report.

[5:32:21] We do the this study. We do the change the the amended motion. That's that's what we're voting on.

[5:32:33] And you're fine with the maker? Sure fine with the second. Okay, I'm sorry. So one quick.

[5:32:40] So the recommendations with the friendly amendments and then maybe including seven of your recommended or see of your recommended actions.

[5:32:50] Correct.

[5:32:51] It is seen.

[5:32:52] Okay.

[5:32:52] Thank you.

[5:32:53] Great.

[5:32:54] Okay.

[5:32:54] Thank you.

[5:32:55] We got a motion and we have a second.

[5:32:56] All those in favor.

[5:32:57] Please say aye.

[5:32:59] Opposed?

[5:33:00] That passes unanimously.

[5:33:03] We are going to adjourn to our budget hearings which will be available next week.

[5:33:07] Starting at 9 a.m.

[5:33:09] Here on Monday.

[5:33:10] I'm

[5:33:18] surprised as well you can do it in a report in September, but you're going to have to do it.