[0:02] Good morning. Today is your regular meeting of the Shasta County Board of Supervisors.
[0:06] It is Tuesday, May 27th, and the time is 9:00 a.m. We have all board members present
[0:11] along with CEO Dave Rickert, County Council, Joe Larmer, and from the clerk of the
[0:14] board, Stephanie Blankenship and Marcy Weinstead. We encourage those wishing to participate
[0:19] in public comment. Fill out a speaker request card and submit it to the clerk of
[0:22] the board's table set up in the foyer with Ms. Winstead. Speaker request cards for
[0:26] the items on today's agenda will be submitted to the clerk of the board before public
[0:30] comment period begins for each item turn things over to Ms. Blankenship. Thank you.
[0:34] Through the chair, I would like to remind everyone in attendance today of the boardroom
[0:38] rules of order as outlined in Administrative Policy 1101. Those can be found through
[0:42] the clerk of the board's website. This policy includes signage restriction, attendee
[0:47] seating, and overall conduct to ensure business is done in an orderly fashion and
[0:51] that all have an equal opportunity to observe and participate. Unless addressing
[0:55] the board, all those in the audience shall remain sitting in the chairs provided.
[0:58] Standing along the back wall of the boardroom is acceptable so long as no person
[1:02] blocks the ingress or egress. Media representatives may stand and use equipment to
[1:07] record proceedings in the area designated by the CEO near the South windows. Chester
[1:12] County remains committed to conducting orderly business in a professional and. Environment
[1:17] for anyone wishing to participate, attend, or otherwise engage with the Shasta County
[1:20] Board of Supervisors. We kindly ask that all attendees adhere to these rules. I'd
[1:25] like to also make a brief announcement regarding chamber capacity and public comment
[1:28] procedures. The maximum capacity for this room is 90 people with 62 fixed seats.
[1:34] To ensure we remain in compliance, tickets have been distributed for entry. If you
[1:38] leave the chambers before the meeting adjourns, we kindly ask that you surrender
[1:41] your ticket to the staff at the doors so that they may allow individuals with overflow
[1:45] tickets the opportunity to enter. If you leave temporarily for whatever reason, or
[1:50] to use the restroom, please make sure to have your ticket with you and be prepared
[1:53] to show it upon reentry. For those who have signed up to speak during public comment
[1:57] and were issued overflow tickets, please note that speakers will be called in the
[2:00] order their requests were received. If you're outside of the chambers when your name
[2:04] is called, you will be escorted in to make your public comment. Once you have spoken,
[2:09] you will be asked to exit the chamber so others may enter. When your name is called,
[2:13] get in queue here to my left, and thank you for your cooperation with that. I'll
[2:16] turn things back over to you, Chair. Thank you, Ms. Blankenship. At this time, I'd
[2:20] like to ask you to please stand for the invocation led by our pastor from the Anderson
[2:24] Seventh Day Adventist Church, as well as Shasta Lake Bible Fellowship, and please
[2:27] remain standing for the pledge led by Supervisor Kelstrom.
[2:33] Let us bow our heads for the word of prayer. Gracious and almighty God. We gather
[2:40] here today in a spirit of service and responsibility. We thank you for the opportunity
[2:46] to lead. To guide and especially to shape the well-being of our communities.
[2:54] Bless each member of this board of supervisors, the staff, the guests, and the presenters
[3:01] today. Bless them, Lord, with wisdom, discernment, and compassion as they carry out
[3:07] their duties. Grant them clarity of thought, unity of purpose, and strength of character.
[3:17] May their decisions be rooted in justice, fairness, and the common good. Help them
[3:24] to listen well. Speak kindly and act courageously. Lord, we ask your presence in
[3:31] this meeting today. May this room be filled with productive dialogue. Respectful
[3:38] collaboration. And the shared vision and commitment as we continually serve your
[3:45] people. May your name be glorified today. We pray all these things in the powerful
[3:52] name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. May your name be praised forever. Amen
[3:59] and amen. Thank you.
[4:04] To the flag of the United States.
[4:09] No. One nation, for God, indivisible liberty.
[4:20] Thank you, Pastor. Thank you, Supervisor Kelstrom. With that, we're gonna move on
[4:23] to our one, adopt the resolution which recognizes Patricia Patty Devine, senior social
[4:28] worker of the Health and Human Services Agency as Shasta County's Employee of the
[4:31] Month for May 2025. Supervisor plumber.
[4:36] Yes, I am gonna go ahead and read the resolution and to congratulate Patricia Devine.
[4:42] Uh, whereas the Board of Supervisors of the County of Shasta has adopted the Shasta
[4:46] County Employee recognition program to identify exceptional employees who deserve
[4:50] to be recognized and honored for their contribution to county service, and whereas
[4:55] such recognition is given to employees meeting the criteria of the program, namely
[5:00] exceptional customer service, professionalism, high ethical standards, initiative,
[5:05] innovation. Teamwork, productivity, and service as a role model for other public
[5:11] employees. And whereas the Shasta County Employee Recognition Committee has considered
[5:16] all current nominations for the Shasta County Employee of the Month. Whereas Patricia,
[5:21] Patty Devine started her career with the Shasta County as an eligibility worker won
[5:26] in May of 2022 and has quickly advanced to her current position as a senior social
[5:31] worker within the Health and Human Services Agency Adult Protective Services Unit.
[5:36] Patty manages to take on a full-time caseload while also training new employees until
[5:40] they are able to go out into the field. Patty is also known to take time out of her
[5:44] busy day to help staff with difficult cases and provide guidance to her colleagues.
[5:48] Community partners have stated that Patty is easy to work with, helpful, passionate
[5:53] about the work that she does and is knowledgeable during presentations. When adult
[5:57] protective services supervisors are unavailable, Patty steps in to lend a helping
[6:01] hand and is adaptable to the constant changes and challenges of the department. Within
[6:05] the course of Patty's employment, she was assigned to one of the longest adult protective
[6:09] services cases the department has seen. While working on the case, Patty was patient
[6:13] and kind, making sure that her client's needs were being met and despite the barriers
[6:17] encountered and despite the barriers encountered, even though it can be a stressful
[6:21] environment, Patty is clear and concise during difficult conversations and remains
[6:25] calm while assisting even the most upset clients to the best of her ability. Patty
[6:30] understands the complexities of being empathetic while setting boundaries with her
[6:33] clients and excels at creating and maintaining respectful professional relationships.
[6:38] Patty arrives to work each morning with a smile and greets everyone around her with
[6:41] a positive attitude. Patty is compassionate towards those that she interacts with
[6:45] daily and takes time to notice when an individual needs a bit of additional kindness.
[6:50] Patty demonstrates health and human services, core values of collaboration. Adaptability,
[6:55] respect, and excellence, both internally and externally, as she continues to work
[6:59] with her peers, community partners and clients. For the reasons stated above, the
[7:03] Employee recognition Committee recommends Patty Devine, senior social worker in the
[7:07] Health and Human Services Agency, be selected as the employee of the month for May
[7:11] 2025. Now, therefore, be it resolved that Patty Devine, senior social worker in the
[7:17] Health and Human Services Agency, is here by name Shasta County Employee of the Month
[7:21] for May 2025. And I will make a motion to adopt this resolution.
[7:31] Blankenship, do we have any public speakers?
[7:37] Sure, we do not. Is Christy coming out? We're gonna take a, yeah,
[7:44] uh, uh, uh, OK, come on up.
[7:47] Good morning. Um, good morning, Chair Cry and members of the board of supervisors.
[7:52] I'm Christina Black, the HHSA deputy branch director for Behavioral Health and Social
[7:56] Services. It's an honor to stand here before you today. Thank you so much for recognizing
[8:02] Patty Devine. Um, she's our senior social worker. For Shasta County Adult Protective
[8:08] Services as employee month for May 2025, Patty began her career with APS in April
[8:16] of 2023 as a social worker, excuse me, as a social worker. She quickly promoted to
[8:21] a senior social worker in March of 2024. This is a reflection of her dedication,
[8:29] professionalism, and exceptional skill set. She's a natural leader who leads by example.
[8:35] She communicates clearly and consistently celebrates the successes of her coworkers.
[8:41] Her co-workers describe her as a joy to work with and appreciate her positive attitude.
[8:46] She arrives each day with a smile on her face and never hesitates to offer kindness
[8:52] when someone needs it the most. In her current role, Patty plays a key part in onboarding
[8:58] and mentoring new staff. At one point, she has successfully onboarded 4 new team
[9:04] members, simultaneously ensuring each were well. prepared to serve in the field.
[9:10] Her compassion extends beyond the workplace. She demonstrates the same level of care
[9:15] and empathy with her clients as she does with her co-workers. Patty has managed numerous
[9:21] complex cases, including various forms of abuse, including challenging conservatorship
[9:28] situations as well. She consistently ensures her clients' physical and emotional
[9:32] safety, meeting them where they are in life. With an open mind and without judgment.
[9:39] Whether it's providing resources, addressing concerns, or simply offering a listening
[9:43] ear, she goes above and beyond to make her clients feel heard and validated. In addition
[9:51] to her primary responsibilities, she is always willing to step in and support her
[9:55] team. She is well spoken and has delivered many presentations in the community. More
[10:01] recently, she served as a panelist for Reading Restart. Addressing the sheltering
[10:06] of seniors in our community, we are fortunate to have Patty on the APS team outside
[10:12] of work. She is a cyclist, a runner. She enjoys spin class. She enjoys pickle ball,
[10:19] working out, and most of all spending time with her family. Congratulations, Patty,
[10:23] on this well deserved recognition.
[10:29] We'll go, we'll go ahead, go ahead and take that vote and supervisor plumber you
[10:32] can head down all those in favor I pass this 50.
[10:38] Could we invite Patty in
[11:00] I want to present you, Patty with this certificate. As well as some awards that we
[11:06] want to extend to you. So a Shasta County Rosewood pen, $30 gift certificate donated
[11:11] by the department head forum, $20 gift cert gift certificate donated by the sheriff's
[11:16] Administrative association, $50 gift certificate donated by the Teamsters Local 137.
[11:22] $25 gift certificate donated by the Teamsters Local 137. Another $25 gift certificate
[11:28] donated by the Teamsters Local 137 $25 gift certificate donated by the board of supervisors,
[11:34] and a $25 gift certificate donated by the United Public Employees of California UPAC.
[11:40] So thank you again for your contributions and thank you donors. Patty,
[11:48] Patty, you want to say a few words? Yeah, um, so, so thank you for all that came
[11:54] to support me in this. Um, I, I love my team. I love um the leadership that we have
[12:00] on our team as well. Um, I love my job. I love serving the aging community in Shasta
[12:06] County and um I consider myself very lucky to be doing that. So, so thank you for
[12:11] this huge honor and thank you for um making it such a special day for me.
[12:22] Oh, I'm sorry.
[12:27] Yeah
[13:19] Thank you, Supervisor Plumber. Moving on to RR2, receive an update from the county
[13:23] executive officer on county issues and consider action on specific legislation related
[13:27] to Shasta County's legislative platform and receive supervisors reports on county-wide
[13:32] issues. CEO Ricker. Good morning, Chairman Crime, members of the board of supervisors,
[13:37] Dave Ricker, County Executive Officer reporting. On Friday, May 16th, I spent an
[13:42] hour with HHSA leadership staff while they conducted all day financial training with
[13:47] expert consultants Leanne Link and Tracy Tedder. I found the information well presented
[13:53] and focused on key goals established by the CEO's office and the interim HHSA director
[13:58] Christy Coleman. Moving on to federal matters on May 14th, the US House of Agricultural
[14:05] Committee advanced a key item for counties by including language to reauthorize the
[14:09] Secure Rural Schools program in its portion of its portion of the reconciliation
[14:15] package. As you may recall, on April 8th, she asked the county to send a letter of
[14:20] support for Bill 1383, Secure Rural Schools Reauthorization Act of 2025. This demonstrates
[14:27] that our efforts along with others have impact on our legislature. This concludes
[14:32] my report. Thank you, CEO Rickert. We'll start to my left with supervisor Long.
[14:39] Thank you, Chair Cry.
[14:43] board report consistent with our policy affecting our community, our whole community
[14:50] of a substantial nature. I met with the Fire Safe Council, a couple of members on
[14:55] that, and also received a letter from a constituent that lives in District 2, and
[15:01] they were all discussing. FEMA money that has come through McConnell that it will
[15:08] go toward fuels mitigation reduction on the west side. And I had met with Vestra
[15:16] for this project back in October, and it sounded like the funds were going to start
[15:23] being released to start reducing fuels in our community for a fire hazard and apparently
[15:29] that's been hung up a little bit. I'm not sure exactly why that is yet, so that's
[15:34] going to be my next steps to take, which is see if I can help expedite the release
[15:39] of these funds to. To get some of the, the fuels reduction mitigation on some of
[15:43] the private property which is south of 299. So that concludes my report. Thank you.
[15:49] Thank you, Supervisor Long supervisor. All right, uh, on the 15th, I was at the Fallen
[15:54] Officers Memorial with a few of the other supervisors here, and then, uh, Thursday,
[15:59] Friday, and Saturday night, you could have found me at the Reading Rodeo all three
[16:02] nights. Um, and then on the 19th, on Monday, we had a Battle Creek watershed meeting
[16:06] in Manton. Um, I'll be bringing something at the end of my report here about that.
[16:11] Um, they're dismantling all the powerhouses all the way down the Battle Creek Canyon
[16:15] and um. So we had a meeting on Monday and then on Tuesday evening, we had another
[16:20] meeting uh up in Manton again. Um, I went to that after I'd gone to the CEC windmill
[16:25] meeting for the Hatchet Ridge project. And on the 21st, I went to an Anderson High
[16:30] School board meeting that I was invited to, but the door was locked when I got there,
[16:34] so apparently I was 10 minutes early. I don't know, reached out to somebody that
[16:37] didn't know anything about it, so I went home and I guess they did have a meeting
[16:40] after all. The 22nd I with Supervisor Long. We attended the wildfire mitigation meeting.
[16:46] Um, on the 24th, I did a Memorial Day celebration in Manton again, um, stopped, had
[16:51] lunch at Shingletown before I went to the Happy Valley Strawberry Festival. I also
[16:55] went to the Strawberry Festival the next day where I was a judge in the car show,
[16:59] and then uh yesterday I missed the IO Cemetery, um, Memorial Day event because I
[17:03] was speaking at the Anderson VFW Memorial Day event with Doug Walfo. Um, so what
[17:08] I want to bring is the, the watershed up in Battle Creek. Um, there Taking the dams
[17:15] out, they're taking the powerhouses out to restore the fish habitat, which is all
[17:19] great and good and fine. And um I've been going to these meetings for about 2 years
[17:22] now. In fact, I did a story with Mike Mangus here about 68 months ago. Um, my concern
[17:27] though is, uh, the water starts at North Battle Creek Reservoir. It's stored there.
[17:32] There's no power powerhouse there. There's just it's water storage, then it goes
[17:36] down into Camp McCumber and Lake McCumber there. Um, the residents around Lake McCumber
[17:41] now have realized that their whole lake is threatened, as is North Battle Creek Reservoir.
[17:46] Two ditches in between take water to Grayson Nora Lake, which, uh, apparently the
[17:50] PGE is filling back up, which surprises me. But I'd like to bring forward, I'd like
[17:55] to put it on the agenda and bring forward to the board, um, to send a letter to the
[17:59] Department of Interior, um, that we need to maintain, repair, and save the two dams
[18:04] at North Battle Creek Reservoir as well as Lake McCumber. So I could do it by myself
[18:09] as a District 5 supervisor. But I, I think it would hold more water with the entire
[18:13] board. So if we can get that on the agenda and one of the next agendas, I'd like
[18:16] to do a letter of support for that. That concludes my report. Do you want that to
[18:19] be the like the, the soonest possible or is there a specific date? Uh, as soon as
[18:23] possible, yeah, OK. Do I need to make that put down a motion? No, no, thank you.
[18:30] Harman.
[18:33] Good morning. Uh, on the 15th, uh, I went to the, along with the other supervisors,
[18:39] the fallen officers Memorial at the old courthouse on the 16th, uh. flipping pancakes
[18:46] at 5 a.m. I was pretty sure there wasn't gonna be anybody but there, but I was surprised.
[18:52] They started showing up at 5 a.m. so I put more pancakes than I ever flipped in my
[18:58] life, probably more than I'll flip in the rest of my life. But it was great, it was
[19:03] great to see the the community come out support of that. And then, uh, on the 17th,
[19:10] I think I mentioned this last time we had the barbecue at the ranch for the California
[19:15] Deer Association. We have a program for handicapped. Kids to, to be involved in hunting,
[19:22] it's pretty. It it's pretty uh. Um, I don't know, heartfelt. They have, they have,
[19:29] they go through a lot of effort to make sure these kids can get out there and do
[19:32] what they normally wouldn't be able to do other than this group of, of. Oh,
[19:41] they have special equipment for them to get, to get them out there, number one, and
[19:46] then they, and even uh it's just, it's just amazing to watch what people. Uh, will
[19:53] do, will go out of their way to accomplish to and and to watch the smiles on these
[19:58] kids' faces is amazing. On the 20th went to the uh Red Lion. The
[20:05] CEC, the California Energy Commission. Um, board was there and we, uh, listened to
[20:12] them. Pretty much all tell the same story we've told, which is no to the wind farm.
[20:18] I'm still not sure. I asked council how come we're still talking about it, but we're
[20:24] still talking about it so
[20:27] but be assured that we're going to keep pushing as hard as we can to make sure that
[20:31] doesn't happen. Um And then the most important thing I did in the last two
[20:39] weeks was The Memorial Day yesterday, if you've not, if you've not ever had a chance
[20:44] to attend the IO uh Veterans Cemetery, it was, it was pretty impressive. There's
[20:52] uh One of the, one of the high schools had a, had a band band there and the different
[20:58] ones that got up and spoke was uh I actually have a copy of the. Of the uh memorial
[21:04] service, if anybody has any interest in seeing who is all there, there was quite
[21:09] a list of um important people in our community that are that support and I think
[21:16] there's somewhere along the lines of close to 10,000. Uh, graves there for. Veterans
[21:24] with a piece of property on the other side of the road that'll that'll take another
[21:29] 25,000 in in our future. Hopefully we won't need those, but. Um, that concludes my
[21:35] report. Thank you. Thank you, Supervisor plumber. Thank you and good morning Pablo.
[21:41] Uh, was able to attend a multicultural event in Shasta Lake and ended up, um, which
[21:48] I didn't necessarily expect, becoming the MC for that, so but it was, uh. Uh, what
[21:53] was fun is that we saw, um, residents in Shasta Lake and around the county from probably
[21:59] about a dozen different countries, and, and so to see kind of the diversity there
[22:04] representing their different cultures was, uh, uh, a kind of, you know, a fascinating
[22:09] experience, um, had a number of, uh, items related to, uh, uh.
[22:17] What's happening in Visalia. So I did a trip down there, uh, last week where I was
[22:23] able to visit the three health systems and this is related to our three, and talk
[22:27] to them about their residency programs. They made a big push back in 2010, 2013,
[22:32] and so I was able to meet with the three health systems and then on the way back
[22:35] up, um, also met with, um, UCSF Fresno, which is in kind of on the way to
[22:42] becoming a medical school, uh, there's some nuance there. Uh, and talk with their
[22:47] vice dean who was responsible for starting, uh, Kaiser Permanente's Medical School
[22:53] and then met with a private medical school, uh, in Clovis, which is right outside
[22:56] of Fresno, um, CHSU California Health Sciences University, and so that was really
[23:02] helpful. Uh, I won't get into too much of the content of that because we'll be talking
[23:05] about that in our three, but, uh, what I will say is that it's, uh, it was very helpful
[23:09] to talk with people who have been on the same journey that were headed down. And
[23:14] learn from their experiences, understand kind of where the challenges are, where
[23:18] the opportunities are, um, and so that was really valuable and a big thanks to the
[23:23] team at, um, on the Visalia Board of Supervisors, particularly supervisor Amy Shulian,
[23:28] um, who helped set up that trip. And also got to talk with them because when I was
[23:32] talking to them about this trip they mentioned that they were doing some interesting
[23:35] things in terms of their health care within the jail and so talked with their team
[23:39] there uh about how they are um facilitating delivery of health services to uh county
[23:46] inmates and learn some things that are different from how we're doing it, not necessarily
[23:50] that we should adopt those, but it was a good kind of point of reference to explore.
[23:54] The other thing that I wanted to mention is that I've talked with two individuals
[23:59] over the past two weeks about different proposals that they're putting forth in terms
[24:03] of addressing homelessness, and I think that is, uh, you know, I love to see that
[24:08] people are coming forward to, um, bring innovative approaches and related to that
[24:13] I'm on the mental health, alcohol and Drug Advisory board and. Um, that board just
[24:17] approved, uh, in the innovation dollars, uh, an effort around suicide prevention,
[24:22] which is something I've talked, uh, quite a bit about since, uh, January and so I'm
[24:26] excited to see that go forward in terms of addressing, uh, you know, basically teaching
[24:31] resilience and skills, uh, for young people so that they're able to, um, find alternatives
[24:37] to dealing with stressors rather than self harm. And so excited to see if that will
[24:42] uh be successful. I think you know some, and I would just encourage the community
[24:46] if you have ideas and you wanna get active in addressing these problems to come forward,
[24:50] there is uh some innovation dollars still remaining in the Mental Health Services
[24:54] Act, um, and, uh, that will be changing as of next July when the Mental Health Services
[25:00] Act becomes the Behavioral behavioral Health Services Act so we kind of have this
[25:05] window where there's. Still those innovation dollars so just an encouragement to
[25:08] to get involved and the last thing I'll say is that we're also continuing to look
[25:12] for additional mental health, alcohol and drug advisory board members and specifically,
[25:17] uh, according to the bylaws they need to meet certain requirements and we're specifically
[25:21] looking for someone under 25 and then an educator. So if you know someone who might
[25:26] be interested and who fits those criteria would encourage them to uh apply for that
[25:30] position. Thank you. Thank you, Supervisor Plumber. Um, I'll just highlight a couple
[25:35] of things here that haven't already been spoken, but I do want to, uh, extend a big
[25:38] thank you, uh, on behalf of myself to the Reading City Council. I see that council
[25:42] member Danuk is here, so I'm very appreciative that you guys got that deal done,
[25:45] uh, for the rodeo. So that, uh, was very positive. Um, had a meeting this last week
[25:51] with uh nation's finest around our veterans, uh, homelessness initiative that supervisor
[25:56] Plumber originally brought forward. That's going in a really great direction. Nation's
[26:00] finest is now at the table. They are the largest facilitator of veterans services
[26:04] in Shasta County, so they're looking very forward to being a part of this process
[26:10] and doing a lot of the work they've been doing for years. We had I had a meeting
[26:14] with the district attorney. And a constituent around uh victim restitution, and that's
[26:20] gonna be something that I'll be talking about more in the future. At a youth options
[26:25] meeting, we said goodbye to Caitlin, who has been our three-year student rep. So,
[26:30] uh, youth Options is going to be looking for a new student rep and They have uh there's
[26:35] very, very big shoes to fill because she's great and is going off to college. So
[26:40] without going to all the other things, I will say, I will have again the CEC meeting
[26:44] we had at the Red Line. It was mostly just for public comment. There was only one
[26:49] commissioner in person. I believe there was. I mean, every commissioner had somebody
[26:55] there uh from their staff, maybe a senior analyst or public relations person, but
[27:01] I think they're getting that message loud and clear that we don't want the wind farms
[27:04] here in Shasta County, so hopefully that will continue with that. That concludes
[27:08] my report. We will move on to our 3.
[27:16] While Ms. Blankenship pulls that up, I'll read it what's in the agenda here. Take
[27:20] the following actions. Receive a presentation from healthcare consultant Chris Street.
[27:24] 2, consider findings regarding establishing a medical school and residency program,
[27:27] and 3, consider providing direction to staff. Mr. Street, great. Well, thank you
[27:32] for inviting me today as your uh healthcare consultant. Um, I was retained to identify
[27:39] Shasta County medical needs and provide solutions with long-term. Uh, sustainable
[27:45] capital plan, um, today we are fortunate to have Doctor Danuca who helped me in this
[27:50] process. Um, also we have, uh, Doctor James Postman, uh Posma who is the chairman
[27:57] of the board of Simpson University, and, uh, Doctor John Ayabe, who's the provost
[28:03] of uh Simpson University that helped me in this process.
[28:10] No.
[28:13] I guess I'm gonna use the button, no.
[28:24] Technology.
[28:59] Perfect. There we go. OK, um, so, uh, I, I think what drove this process is there
[29:05] was a lot of concern in the in the community and among supervisors that there was
[29:09] not enough primary care coverage uh for doctors in Shasta County, so I, I took a
[29:15] look and conducted a needs assessment. Variance analysis to primary care physicians
[29:21] and the basis of that analysis was the 2022 medical needs uh data analysis produced
[29:29] by Dignity Health North. Um this is required under the Patient Protection Act. Um,
[29:34] to be produced every 3 years, it justifies the nonprofit status of hospitals, and
[29:40] their reported primary care physician coverage was
[29:45] 180.5.5 being someone working part time for Shasta County. To
[29:53] him it was 119.2%, and California on average was 147.3. Um, and this is built
[30:01] off a 100,000 population, um, and what I found was there was about 123%, um, uh,
[30:08] the 180 would be about 123% coverage in Shasta County versus the state of California.
[30:16] So in my analysis, and this is a little difficult because part of Dignity's footprint
[30:22] goes into Northern Tehama County, but, um, what we found is a 64% deficit um
[30:30] from uh what was the number of primary care. Positions in Shasta County, the demand
[30:37] for the area, um, per 100,000 it would be about a 61% deficit, but with
[30:45] the other little community it's about I I found about a 64% deficit. Versus state
[30:52] of California, um, so in taking a look at this, I took a look at the current strategies
[30:57] and how you know we we're really addressing physician coverage and of course our
[31:02] biggest effort was in residencies and looking at the um uh the the national residency
[31:10] matching rates you see Reading Mercy and Regional, we had a quota of 10. We this
[31:16] is I believe in 23, this is the most recent data, a quota of 10, we match seven and
[31:23] we have three shortfall, all of which are in primary care. Now if you look at the
[31:28] university hospitals um such as UC Davis, USC, Stanford, what you're gonna find is
[31:35] they have a very high quota and, and they generally have a uh a full match, um. So
[31:43] you also have Shasta community here. They have, I believe, 8 residencies, but all
[31:50] those are filled with international students, you know, Caribbean graduates. I think
[31:55] that's not the same as what we're really looking for, but in looking at our population,
[32:01] about 180,000, are we getting a fair amount, a fair quota. For residencies of Shasta
[32:08] County, my analysis found that we're about 0.5% of the population, and so if you
[32:14] divide that through by the number of residencies, we're actually being treated pretty
[32:19] fair. Now one of the bigger issues for Shasta County, of course, is that we have
[32:24] older physicians. Almost a third of our physicians are 62 and older, and that's a
[32:30] big issue because doctors generally retire nationwide on average at age 62. Um, so
[32:37] if, if we're, if, if we're say gaining 6 positions and that's very optimistic that
[32:43] people would take their residency here in Shasta County, you know, come from an urban
[32:47] center, take their residency here, and actually stay, but let's just say 6 of the
[32:51] 9 stay that it would take us 33 years to basically cover the shortfall. Now you know
[32:59] people have ideas on telemedicine and this was a big push, especially in areas like
[33:04] in Tulare County, I think a supervisor plumber was down there. um, telemedicine was
[33:11] a big push in 2015, 2016, um, unfortunately it. With such a big push that it
[33:19] ran into all kinds of numbers of fraud and issues and the office of the Inspector
[33:25] General, the US Inspector General for I believe Health and Human Services found that
[33:30] there was a 7% telehealth fraud. In the data he analysis analyzed, which is about
[33:37] 60 billion annually, there's there was an effort in 2023 to extend
[33:44] telemedicine and build on the base that is stuck in committee since in the Ways and
[33:51] Means Committee since 2023, and nobody believes it's going out. I think we even have
[33:56] Christy Coleman here who would confirm that. So you know the third issue is um uh
[34:03] what about specialty uh physician coverage. So specialty physician coverage, I took
[34:09] a look at it, um, uh, and unusual to California, the average age.
[34:16] Uh, in Shasta County it's 41.7 versus California's average age of 37.6% and over
[34:24] 20% of Shasta County, um, residents are aged 65 or older. So if you look at this
[34:31] and you realize that seniors, you know, spend about $11,300 a year on health care
[34:37] versus say someone 18 to 34 spends 2 to 3000. Um, you're in a situation where we
[34:45] have very, very low coverage and we have very intensive need. So, um, uh, understanding
[34:52] it takes 7 to 10 years of postgraduate training and a high cost 250,000 or more um
[34:59] to become a doctor, essentially rural America has 20% of population and 10% of physicians.
[35:06] Um, for Shasta County and, and this is true, almost let's say 60 to 80 interviews.
[35:14] I came to the, the number I think we have a shortage in specialty care needs of 30
[35:20] to 54 positions, and I've laid them out as best I can. Now this is personal interviews.
[35:26] This is general understanding for people who are in this position and Doctor Danica
[35:31] is here who can, I, I, I think. You know, it gives some sense that these are pretty
[35:37] fair numbers of what we need right now. Um, taking a look at analyzing the idea of
[35:43] a medical school in Shasta County. Um, and, and this would be, there are two types
[35:47] of medical schools. There's allopathic, which are MD degrees, and then there's osteopathic,
[35:53] which are DO degrees. Both are recognized medical doctors. Both are highly respected,
[35:59] and there's many people I'm sure in the audience here who have a DO. Um, so taking
[36:05] a look at this, what about the idea of to address the rural physician shortage, doing
[36:11] recruit, educate, and return. And the idea would be, you know, what would it cost
[36:18] to do a medical school? What would it be like if Shasta County took its position
[36:23] of being the sort of hub and supporting the spokes of 14 counties because everything
[36:28] we know about Shasta County, shortage in primary care physician and shortage in specialty
[36:34] care physician is much more intense than the other counties. So you know, you've
[36:39] got an advantage here you want to get a 5 acre plot in an urban center that's 10
[36:44] to. $20 million you want to get a 50 acre rural location um with existing utility
[36:50] access is maybe a million dollars and if and if we were to build a medical school,
[36:55] this would be such an economic driver for the area. I think you could get the land
[36:59] donated. That's my belief. So what about Shaston Medical School, um, fully accredited,
[37:06] um, the difference is for an allopathic doctor or an MD doctor, they tend to focus
[37:11] on research. Um, and, and the scientifically based uses of medications and surgery,
[37:19] whereas the DO doctor, a doctor of osteopath tends to have more of a holistic approach,
[37:24] um, and both are highly respected, both would serve our needs. I went on a road trip
[37:30] to Western University in Lebanon, Oregon. This is a mill town that that went from
[37:37] about 19,000 people down to 11,000 people built a medical school. They're back up
[37:45] to 19,000. They built a second school, a school of physical therapy. They awarded.
[37:52] 7 doctors of osteopathic medicine, 47 doctors of physical therapy, they're moving
[37:58] from a 55 acre spot to a 132 acre spot where they're partnered with the Linbot Community
[38:05] College district, and they're building a bigger campus. Um, they're a small rural
[38:12] town punch above its weight. This school is in the top quartile for primary care
[38:18] in the United States. Most university hospitals in California do not have that honor.
[38:26] I did an analysis, a quick analysis of Um, with the time and the cost to put these
[38:32] schools together, obviously 100 students for a DO school is a much smaller effort,
[38:40] and one of the problems with building a medical school is you have to put up a large
[38:45] escrow account because nobody wants you to start a school and not finish it. So um
[38:50] for a DO school that's 30 million for an MD school that's 50 million. Look at the
[38:56] process, this is very. What's the right way to say profitable, very lucrative uh
[39:03] in intuitions for schools. Um, and this is what we'd be looking at, you know, uh,
[39:10] Western University comp entering class of 2024. Wouldn't that be great if that was
[39:16] our entering class in the next couple of years? Um, I have a presentation from Doctor
[39:22] Hall.
[39:38] Hi, everybody. My name is Norm Hall. I'm serving as president of Simpson University
[39:43] in my 8th year. In the university's 105th year, and it's a delight to come to you
[39:50] by video. I'm sorry I'm not with you personally because I had prior travel engagement
[39:56] with our denominational annual meeting on the East Coast. And nonetheless, I want
[40:00] to share with you that we've had tremendous momentum at Simpson University in recent
[40:05] years with the growth in our degree completion program. You've probably heard about
[40:10] the the recent North State Promise where we, uh, where we set up 50% off tuition
[40:17] for anybody that's wanting to transfer over from the junior colleges in our region,
[40:22] but more importantly recently on top of our excellent reaccreditation and our growth.
[40:28] I was approached by um uh representatives from the county of Shasta asking if I'd
[40:36] be interested in exploring the idea of a medical school and in fact I am it's uh
[40:42] we are where we at Simpson University, you're uh thoroughly accredited uh well established
[40:48] institution here in the North state, your hometown university. We're excited about
[40:53] exploring this notion of a medical school. I know that Mr. Chris Street has just
[40:59] given you a presentation which I'm sure was impressive. And now we need to turn our
[41:04] attention to. Uh, funding, uh, partnerships with hospitals and special accreditation
[41:10] opportunities, so I've agreed to partner with uh Doctor Paul Danua to take the next
[41:16] step in exploration of this, uh, very exciting idea. I hope that you have a great
[41:22] conversation tonight and you know you can count on us if it can be done, uh, we'll
[41:27] get after it. Uh, hope you have a great meeting. Thanks everybody.
[41:36] Can I take you take some questions, please, because, uh, Doctor Deuca wanna, uh,
[41:40] Doctor Nua, would you please come forward? I think that'd be great. Doctor Deuca
[41:45] can is is a leader in the health care community here. He's been incredibly helpful
[41:50] to me, um, you know, a really dedicated person to our community. We are very fortunate
[41:55] to, uh, welcome him.
[42:00] Thank you, Mr. S Street. Thank you supervisors, CEO Rickard and Mr. Street, and Dr.
[42:07] Norm Hall for all your hard work and dedication.
[42:12] What we face today are immense challenges, shortage of doctors and healthcare access,
[42:19] shortage of well-paying jobs, crisis of mental health and addiction. But I say
[42:26] that within those challenges lies an opportunity that presents itself for once in
[42:32] a lifetime. The question in front of us is, can we seize the moment? Can we rise
[42:39] to the occasion? Can we train our doctors and other healthcare workers locally?
[42:47] Can we ignite an engine? Of a new engine of economy that will bring wealth and prosperity
[42:54] to our citizens. Can we build an institution that will grow organically and expand
[43:01] exponentially. And will have a lasting impact. For the centuries to come. Can we
[43:08] do that? I ask all of you. And I say that we can. Because what we need.
[43:16] is right here, right here. Bold vision
[43:23] Our firm determination to see it through courage to dream and make it a reality.
[43:29] We have it right here in you, in you, and all of us. So we can do that.
[43:37] Our community is a very kind community. We live in a very kind community. You have
[43:42] been very generous to me personally and my family. They've given me everything I
[43:46] need and more than I deserve.
[43:50] I am absolutely honored to play my part in this endeavor. And I'm fully committed
[43:56] to do whatever is necessary to see it through. That is why we have started assembling.
[44:05] A community group of dedicated doctors and Eminent educators so
[44:13] that we can craft a strategy. And we can engage with the Stakeholders across our
[44:20] state. And strong partnerships can be built. For this endeavor.
[44:29] Because it will take a village, it is a big effort. It will take time. It will take
[44:35] all of our effort. It will take the whole village to do this, so we will need all
[44:39] of us. But I say that our work, what is our work, our work
[44:47] is to teach. Our work is to heal. Our work is to teach how to heal.
[44:56] I invite all of you. To start this journey with faith. With a high aim,
[45:03] bold ambition. and unwavering resolve. With God's grace we shall work together and
[45:11] we will bring an institution that will become an inspiration for our generations
[45:17] and will become a destination for the nation. May God be with all of us. Thank you.
[45:26] Yeah
[45:28] So we'll open, we'll open for questions. Does anybody have any questions, as this
[45:31] is, uh, oh, do we have, we have public comment, Stephanie? Mr. Street, don't you
[45:35] go ahead and take a seat, we'll take public comment. So Doctor Paul Danuka was actually
[45:41] our first speaker. I don't know if he wants to come back up. I think he's good, yeah.
[45:47] Then next we have David Halligan followed by Dolores Lucero, followed by Leslie and
[45:52] then Eris. How many do we have? If I called your name, please get in queue. We have
[45:56] 4 speakers, so they'll get 3 minutes each. Thank you. Good morning board. Mr. Street,
[46:03] that was quite the presentation. The numbers, I mean, it's gonna take me a week or
[46:08] two to digest those things. I don't know when the board received this packet because
[46:12] I didn't see it available online for this meeting today, so. Uh, just want to remind
[46:18] everyone that Mr. Street is the gentleman that had a CEO offer rescinded on April
[46:23] 6th of 2023. In fact, it was a 5-0 vote to rescind that offer. Mr. Cry, Mr. Kelstrom,
[46:29] you were part of that vote. I don't know the reasons why, but, uh. Anyway, it must
[46:35] have been something very relevant. I do. Thank you. I am aware that this presentation,
[46:41] a lot of it has already been presented to the city council on 121 of 25, and I believe
[46:49] there were some other presentations maybe to a Reading Rotary group as well. So,
[46:54] uh, the presentation on the state of the uh medical uh providers as well as the possibility
[47:01] of a medical school here in Shasta County. Um, it just appears that these were all
[47:09] presented free and very much appreciated to this county and to these organizations,
[47:14] but not to us today. Today's offer was $40,000 to present this offer and in fact,
[47:22] Mr. Lamour at one of the meetings when this was being discussed, he said, hm, yeah,
[47:26] it probably should have went out to an RFP, but but it didn't, and to me, um. Uh,
[47:33] just, it's another display of cronyism of, of you, Mr. uh Kevin Kry rewarding your
[47:39] buddy Mr. Street and not sending this out for others to review other organizations
[47:45] that are really given a lot to this community and continue to do so. The bid should
[47:50] have gone out. It was the right thing to do and it's about doing the right thing,
[47:55] gentlemen, thank you.
[47:59] Thank you.
[48:05] Sorry, Dolores Lucero, followed by Leslie, then Eris.
[48:12] You have
[48:16] First thing I like to say is I feel sorry for those veterans who fought for our country.
[48:22] Because
[48:24] they fought for justice for all.
[48:28] Oh, you have, you're being disrespectful for what I'm saying. I am. You know what
[48:34] I'm going to say. No clue. Yeah, then, then be quiet.
[48:40] You you appointed. Mr. Chris Street here who has no experience,
[48:48] no knowledge yet. Yet you have him do a presentation on
[48:55] license medical advice billing opinion he's giving medical advice without a license.
[49:03] We have so many of you are public officials, including the deputy of the sheriff.
[49:08] How many more officials do we have here? We have doctors. Who actually don't even
[49:14] care about by uh enforcing the law. In other words, they break the law. They're here
[49:20] breaking the law, giving an opinion about medical when actually it's a conflict of
[49:27] interest for Mr. Danuka to be involved in this whole thing, and you guys don't care,
[49:32] you three don't give a shit about the laws and. Yet you're breaking the laws and
[49:37] you're supposed to be holed up to the highest but yet you don't you actually are
[49:43] so sad and I'm so mad I can't even say what I need to say because you constantly
[49:49] breaking the law every meeting we come here you cause chaos chaos. You have people
[49:55] here all the time to give opinion. You pay people with no experience. Chris Street
[50:02] here. Chris doesn't have no experience, yet you allowed him to come up here. Why
[50:08] are you breaking the law? I want to know why do you think you have the authority
[50:13] and to break the law and to constantly just bring people here to do the same. And
[50:19] nobody here has the guts to have to be all these people who come up here and they
[50:25] clap, you know, thinking, oh, so cool we got Doctor Danuka. They're a bunch of sheep.
[50:31] That's what they are. Do you understand what sheeps are people just follow to kiss
[50:35] your ass. That's the. Bottom line, I'm not one of them. I believe in justice and
[50:41] I believe in doing what's right and I'll fight what's right and I'll say the truth
[50:45] when people like it or not. You'll have lessons come up here and she'll say, Oh,
[50:49] Dr. Denua, I love Doctor Danuka. You have people coming up here kissing butt. They
[50:56] sound so disgusting because that's what they do. I speak the truth and justice will
[51:01] prevail in the end after what we do, I will file complaints against the doctors uh
[51:07] for on the state medical. Next up, Leslie, followed by Ari. Thank you.
[51:17] Thanks for that introduction. Um, I missed the part where you diagnosed anybody or
[51:22] gave medical um advice, but, um, as a parent of a child who has special needs and
[51:29] needs a specialty service, I'm grateful for something like this. I go to UC Davis
[51:34] 4 times a year, um, at a minimum, and then once she's 18, the closest place she can
[51:40] get those services is Chico so I appreciate the idea of bringing something here.
[51:45] Um, during that presentation he talked about how Shasta Community Health's residencies
[51:51] are filled with international students versus local students was the point of that.
[51:57] So when you look at division in our community, search no further than those in the.
[52:02] Audience who reach for a reason to yell out racist and create an issue where none
[52:09] exists. He wants to boost our local economy. This committee wants to boost our local
[52:15] community takes students who need and deserve those. Options and those choices
[52:23] who can come here go here and then stay here so it's not a racist comment to say
[52:29] that we want to grow our local um and then Monique had some comments to make and
[52:34] she was late on putting in her thing so I want to yield my time and share with her
[52:38] if that's OK. Yeah, you, you can't, yeah, yeah, you can't. Next up,
[52:49] Eris, and that is our last speaker chair.
[52:57] Healthcare infrastructure matters. A local medical school could definitely be transformative,
[53:03] but only if it's led by people who are qualified, transparent, and accountable. Chris
[53:08] Street is none of these. He has no medical credentials, and a judge found that he
[53:13] has misused public funds when he was the treasurer in Orange County. Now he's vice
[53:18] president of New California, a far-right secessionist movement. Still, this board
[53:24] gave him a $40,000 no-bid contract despite rules requiring open bidding.
[53:31] $7000 has already been billed for conversations and research. That's public money.
[53:36] It's our money. Chris Street is not alone. The new register of voters has similar
[53:42] ties. Supervisor Kelstrom is linked to the Cottonwood militia. Chairman Kry has been
[53:47] flanked by known militia members on multiple occasions. This is not isolated. It's
[53:52] a pattern. You can dress it up, but these groups are sanitized fronts for authoritarianism.
[53:59] And this board is quietly building power through them. And as I name this, I also
[54:05] must hold space for Gaza, where over 15,000 children have been killed by bombs, starvation.
[54:11] It's tied to it. It is tied to it. It is connected. Don't cut my mic. This is my
[54:15] time and I'm reclaiming my time. It's connected. Let me finish. I'm reclaiming my
[54:19] time. Where over 15,000 children have been killed by bombs, starvation, and military
[54:24] violence. The genocide in Palestine is not random. It happens when fascist ideologies
[54:29] go unchecked, when human lives become disposable. We say the names, their names.
[54:37] Rajab, age 6 shot, and many more. Silence is complicity. Memory is resistant. I oppose
[54:42] Chris Street, California. The Cottonwood militia, the state of
[54:47] Jefferson,
[55:01] and any group rooted in hate or authoritarianism.
[55:04] I oppose. And the new. This is your 2nd warning. This is your 2nd
[55:11] warning. From holding contracts for power here. Not all who hear me are listening.
[55:16] All right, we're gonna go ahead and clear the room. We're going to go ahead and clear
[55:20] the room. So go ahead, we're going to remove you. You're not imagining you're not
[55:23] alone. The alarm bells are not anxiety. They're your instinct. OK.
[55:39] For the record, the Cottonwood Militia is a great organization and I love each and
[55:42] every one of those guys and gals.
[56:05] We have, we have direct orders from the sheriff on how these things have to be handled.
[56:12] You didn't have one.
[56:16] Please clear the room. I
[57:05] That's on red.
[59:21] You guys do that.
[59:26] I like
[59:31] Yeah.
[59:37] Per.
[59:49] It's like saying.
[59:52] Neurologist.
[1:00:08] Yeah, but can I make a slight direction?
[1:00:17] OK.
[1:00:47] Yeah
[1:00:52] When you spoke about residents from the Caribbean.
[1:00:59] but I'm on the board.
[1:01:04] to the right.
[1:01:10] That
[1:01:22] different OK
[1:01:40] All right, returning back to our 3. That's the last. Do we have one more public comment
[1:01:45] or is that it? Uh, that was it, chair. OK, we'll bring it back for board discussion
[1:01:49] and possible action. There is no cue, so supervisor Kelstrom. Yeah, great presentation,
[1:01:57] Mr. Street. That was awesome and um Doctor Danuka as well. um I don't know if he's
[1:02:01] still here or not, um, but I talked to a couple Anderson City council members yesterday
[1:02:06] at the Memorial Day event down here on this subject here, and, uh, one of them was
[1:02:09] going to try to be here, but they were both totally in favor of this thing. In fact,
[1:02:12] uh, one of them said that if you want to put it in Anderson, they would, uh, facilitate
[1:02:16] the permitting and licensing to get you down there. So, uh, Anderson's on board with
[1:02:20] you, as am I. Thank you. Supervisor long. Oh no. Oh, are you ready?
[1:02:30] Yeah, a plumber.
[1:02:33] Uh, Mr. Shi, could you talk us through how, uh, starting a medical school will lead
[1:02:38] to more, uh, local physicians, uh, in the research I've done, we know that
[1:02:46] increasing, uh, you know, if somebody goes to school here and is from here that does
[1:02:51] increase the chances that they will stay. Um, but oftentimes, uh, where they go and
[1:02:57] do their residency is a more powerful driver of where they end up practicing than
[1:03:01] where they went to medical school and so. Uh, is the idea that this will increase
[1:03:08] retention within our current residency programs and thereby increase the number of
[1:03:11] physicians that will remain in the community? Well, absolutely. I think that, you
[1:03:17] know, if, if you're from here and you went to high school here, you know, how would
[1:03:21] you like to be there at the high school graduation and say that Shasta County has
[1:03:26] reserved 10 number of positions that they'll find. Or support, you know, if you go
[1:03:33] off to college past the med cats, qualify for medical school, and come back to our
[1:03:37] medical school, I mean that kind of educational nexus is what's going on right now
[1:03:44] in Lebanon, Oregon. Lebanon actually has every kindergartener come to the medical
[1:03:51] school. They put on the little, you know, the, the earphones. They. Wear a little
[1:03:57] uh coat. They, they get the idea and teach these kids within the school system and
[1:04:02] also the community college district Linbot that this is available to you. This is
[1:04:08] about you. We want you we want you here in the community to, to stay here in the
[1:04:13] community and serve the people you know and you like to know. Um, I've had several
[1:04:17] parents who are applying to medical school and Doctor Duca can tell you about that,
[1:04:21] um. That you know are applying all over the country and have very little confidence
[1:04:27] that they'll even get into a California school um and the chances if you go to an
[1:04:32] urban center you're gonna have relationships maybe you never come back, but if you
[1:04:37] go across the country I think Doctor Danica's daughter right now is I, I believe
[1:04:41] she's in New York, right, she's in New York. She couldn't get into a school here
[1:04:45] in California, so, um. It's not fair to say that rural students are are discriminated
[1:04:52] against. But it's a much easier pathway and you know it's, it speaks to why only
[1:04:57] 10% of doctors are in rural communities, yet 20% of residents are in rural communities.
[1:05:04] So I, I think that it's all about local, it's all about solving that that that shortage
[1:05:09] in primary care, that shortage in in specialties and really building on this idea
[1:05:16] because we're gonna get very high in doctors. We're gonna choose to move to Shasta
[1:05:22] County. The reason I'm gonna choose to move here, it's very intellectually rewarding
[1:05:27] to be a professor in a medical school, but you also, you know, you spend 20 or 30%
[1:05:32] of your time at the medical school and you set up a very powerful practice, your
[1:05:38] name, your representation with, with the medical school, that's a powerful poll,
[1:05:43] and they expect to pull people pull patients in from. These 14 counties I keep talking
[1:05:48] about, you know, they used to be part of what Shasta County, Shasta County Reading
[1:05:53] was always the hub when I was a little kid here, and, and, and this is where it all
[1:05:58] came. I think if we put this together, we'll not only come from here and come back
[1:06:03] from here, but we'll also bring in kids, you know, coming in from the other counties,
[1:06:07] Siski, Butte, and areas will be the center that, you know, the hub that we want to
[1:06:13] be. And uh so if we, if we you know have you know a number of
[1:06:21] medical students graduate but we don't increase our residency program, then we might
[1:06:25] increase retention a bit by having some local students go and graduate and then they
[1:06:30] want to stay here but otherwise we'll be sending a lot of those graduates to other
[1:06:34] places around the state or the country to do their residency program, in which case
[1:06:39] they might not come back. So one of the things that you know you and I have talked
[1:06:44] about and others is having a two part strategy of considering to test the feasibility
[1:06:49] of a medical school while also seeing how can we expand our residency programs as
[1:06:54] well to ensure that there are sufficient opportunities that if we do have a bunch
[1:06:58] of graduates who are local, they have a spot to do a residency program here. Uh,
[1:07:02] and so. The other thing that um I wanted to uh talk about and I don't know if we
[1:07:09] can bring up the slide again with the numbers, that's possible.
[1:07:21] But uh the clearly there is an upfront investment uh but then getting to a sustainable
[1:07:27] where you are either generating a profit or breaking even is is important uh and
[1:07:34] could you talk us through kind of that analysis of how we are estimating kind of
[1:07:40] revenue when you are at full capacity and versus what we expect the operating expenses
[1:07:45] to be. Uh, so, and I know we are, we are in the preliminary phases on this front,
[1:07:50] but I think that's helpful in terms of understanding the finances of something like
[1:07:55] this. OK
[1:08:01] Hold on one second, we're gonna turn your mic on. Right, OK, it's obviously a huge
[1:08:06] jump to go from, you know, a DO school to an MD school. MD schools are known for
[1:08:12] research and other issues, but in, in, in, uh, Lebanon, uh, when I, uh, went on my
[1:08:19] tour, they talked about their strategy to, you know, to put money up front and, and
[1:08:25] not have such a huge burden, you know, on, on the dollars. Now you have to get. You
[1:08:30] know, this escrow account, this $30 million escrow account, but it's, it, it, it
[1:08:35] breaks when you hit break even, um, and how many years it can take you to get to
[1:08:40] break even. Um, I used $50,000 for tuition for a DO school and $60,000
[1:08:48] for an MD school. That seems extremely conservative. Um, I did make one error and,
[1:08:54] and I think you called me out. On it, um, and then I, uh, in the on to the right
[1:09:00] side 2nd row down 25, 30 and 7. I, I guess I didn't add the 7 in there, um, but you
[1:09:07] can see I think we came to the same sort of numbers, your analysis we came out with
[1:09:11] the same sort of numbers, um, for the, you know, time we break even, uh, and pay
[1:09:17] off the school, um, but, uh, you, you really start cash flowing very, very early.
[1:09:24] Um, in, in the medical school, these kids pay big tuition. These are not your, you
[1:09:30] know, um, what would you call it, college kids running around town. These are very
[1:09:34] serious students. Their parents are behind them. They're paying big money. They're
[1:09:38] gonna be living here, according to Lebanon, they just, you know, they spend money.
[1:09:43] It's been a great experience for Lebanon, but they went through the process by leveraging
[1:09:49] a relationship with another DO school in Pomona. So when you go to medical school,
[1:09:55] your first two years are, are sort of like serious hard science. And and you take
[1:10:02] anatomy class physiology, biology, these are hard science classes and uh uh the school
[1:10:09] in Lebanon leveraged a relationship with Pomona, uh, Western University Pomona, and
[1:10:16] so they were um doing teleeducation for many of those classes or actually sharing
[1:10:22] back and forth. um I've had similar conversations I think we would probably. One
[1:10:28] investigate how that process worked, but they told me that they went directly into
[1:10:34] revenue, um, and you know, off the start, but they, they enrolled 100 kids in their
[1:10:41] first class and then moved through the process so they went from 100 to 200 to 300
[1:10:47] to 400 in the school in their first graduation, um, and they have tremendous. You
[1:10:54] know, a number of students applying and they don't think that, you know, finding
[1:11:00] students are willing to pay isn't isn't the challenge. It's probably the start up
[1:11:04] and, and really more importantly, they said it was their own, you know, trying to
[1:11:09] get the commitment of the community to believe that they could do this, you know,
[1:11:13] everybody knows we have incredible kids they go to school here. I've been to some.
[1:11:18] You know, some, uh, scholarship events. I mean, they're just terrific kids and they
[1:11:25] leave and you see the same thing and Leslie just told you her Leslie just told you
[1:11:30] her story about, you know, her daughter has to go to UC Davis. Annie couldn't be
[1:11:35] with us today. Her mother, 106 year old mother had an event and, and she's on the
[1:11:40] way to Davis right now. Didn't go to the local hospital, you know, we got transferred
[1:11:45] to the local hospital for surgery down to Davis. Um, I think that all should stay
[1:11:50] here and I think that that revenue would stay here. So I think we can do this. Early
[1:11:57] on and make the numbers work. Um, obviously we'll have to do a lot more analysis.
[1:12:03] Yeah, yeah, absolutely. I mean, because I think you know in this current model you
[1:12:07] net out at if your tuition stays at 50,000 with 100 students, you get to 5 million
[1:12:12] in revenue and based on the staff numbers, your operating expenses at that point
[1:12:18] would be, you know, roughly over 10 million so you wouldn't be making money kind
[1:12:23] of even at the 6th year, uh, and so that would be concerning but that can be something,
[1:12:28] you know that we. You know, would look into and would want more detail in terms of
[1:12:32] the assumptions of how you got to the staff numbers and uh but I think the other
[1:12:37] things and this is something we've talked about, you know, at length is when we think
[1:12:41] about a medical school and I appreciate the, you know, bold vision uh from Doctor
[1:12:46] Danuka uh but um you know and and I'm, you know, I find that inspiring at the same
[1:12:51] time if we need to make sure that we're, uh, approaching it in a way that addresses
[1:12:56] the key hurdles to making this viable. And there I've talked about, uh, and in my
[1:13:01] kind of research and conversations that there's 4 key hurdles that uh it comes to
[1:13:06] when it comes to starting a medical school. The first is getting enough high quality
[1:13:11] students as of this last year we're at the lowest medical school student enrollment
[1:13:16] that there's been in 10 years, um, in the, um, the Clovis school they mentioned that
[1:13:22] it's getting harder for them to get kind of the crop of students that they want.
[1:13:27] As they've gotten to their full capacity number now I think part of what you mentioned
[1:13:31] earlier in terms of partnering with an established school so you get that reputational
[1:13:35] bump right away can help with that. Uh, the other piece is faculty. I know that in
[1:13:41] um the school down there as well they've had trouble and they still have vacancies
[1:13:44] in terms of faculty and there are now 1 million, you know, population center. And
[1:13:49] so I think that is a key assumption that we need to test is can we attract the faculty
[1:13:54] and if we're pulling them from our existing physician practices we'll actually make
[1:13:58] the problem worse in the short term, uh, for our current, uh, you know, practices
[1:14:04] because we'll be pulling them out of practice even if it's 50% and they will be taking
[1:14:08] a pay cut, uh, in fact, in in Clovis they talked about that's often a 50% pay cut
[1:14:13] to go to teaching fully. Uh, and then the third thing, and this is when I was talking
[1:14:18] with the vice dean of UCSF Fresno who started the Kaiser one, he said, what's make
[1:14:23] or break is do you have enough clinical rotations? And what you were describing earlier
[1:14:27] is for 3rd and 4th year students, they don't, uh, they're not necessarily sitting
[1:14:32] in a classroom learning, they have to go and rotations and 3rd year there's 7 key
[1:14:35] rotations that they have to satisfy. And then in 4th year there's elective rotations
[1:14:40] and that equates to about 10 rotations per student per year. So if we had 50 students
[1:14:46] in 3rd and 4th year or 100 total students, that would be 500 rotations. That means
[1:14:51] that we would have to either find the locally 500 rotations, uh, which means we would
[1:14:58] have to convince physicians, surgeons, pediatric, OBGYN to take on medical school
[1:15:06] students, which will be a drag on their productivity and their revenue, uh, and so.
[1:15:11] It's not necessarily insurmountable, but it's something that we need to really make
[1:15:14] sure it is possible before we head down the road to, you know, to quote again, it's
[1:15:19] make or break and the challenge there too is that the hospitals don't control the
[1:15:23] physicians, so. They can't tell their physicians, oh, you have to take a medical
[1:15:29] school student and we'd have to go to the physician groups and ask them and see if
[1:15:34] we can get a sufficient number of them. uh, and then the final thing is in terms
[1:15:38] of residency programs there again I think we, we currently have a family medicine
[1:15:43] residency program and internal medicine program we don't have any of these 5 other
[1:15:48] residency programs that are part of the core 7. And so I think that they're to in
[1:15:53] order to retain those folks and give them the sufficient rotations, the other benefit
[1:15:57] is that the residents can train the 3rd and 4th year medical students and so as we
[1:16:03] look forward, I think it's great to, you know, I think this could be, you know, particularly
[1:16:08] if we partner with an existing institution that has done this before and that we
[1:16:13] could leverage their experience and potentially their reputation. that there could
[1:16:17] be a pathway to it, but I think we have to be open-eyed about the real challenges
[1:16:21] to this, uh, and do our homework to ensure that we've both gotten the support from
[1:16:26] the local community in terms of physician groups, the health systems, um, and also
[1:16:33] that we have, uh, run the numbers to ensure that this is feasible. May I respond?
[1:16:40] Uh, sure, I stopped I've had a lot of discussions with Doctor Danua, and, uh, they've
[1:16:47] just formed a committee and exploration committee of, of, uh, physicians and academics
[1:16:55] to flesh out a lot of these issues, um, but my role was to, is this possible to do
[1:17:01] so what I present you today is, you know, is a discussion that we weren't going to
[1:17:06] have three months ago. This is a very powerful statement for, you know, what, what
[1:17:12] is Shasta County. When I was a kid, as I said, it was the hub of the North. I mean,
[1:17:18] I, I talked to talked to Lebanon economically, all the stores that were all closed
[1:17:24] and paint was all, you know, falling off on the side of the buildings, all painted,
[1:17:29] all new, got a couple for lease, but you know they're leasing for good numbers. It,
[1:17:34] it brings in about 45 to 50 million per year. Just in their little community, so
[1:17:41] I, I think the next step is, is just as you said, we need to have those discussions,
[1:17:46] we need to do those projections. Thank you. Super.
[1:17:51] Can I just make one follow up point on uh the, the Lebanon Oregon example because
[1:17:56] I think it's important to have kind of some of the broader context there which is
[1:18:00] in 2004 they started a program called Northwest Track which was to try to. Uh, basically
[1:18:07] take 3rd and 4th year students from Pomona and have them go into clinical rotations
[1:18:12] in the Northwest and so they were testing the feasibility of that. They did that
[1:18:16] for 4 years before in 2008 they announced that they were going to start the medical
[1:18:20] school, uh, and so they went through this process of testing the viability. The school
[1:18:24] in Clovis did the same thing. They partnered with the school in Missouri which I
[1:18:27] know you, you've, uh, looked into as well, um, to test the viability because that's
[1:18:32] such a central point, um, as well and so. The other thing that's important to note
[1:18:37] about the uh the Lebanon Oregon example is that they were able to have a great partnership
[1:18:43] with Samaritan Health Services which which is a massive health system that's like
[1:18:48] many times bigger than any health system in our community and uh provided the land
[1:18:53] I believe or at least the 15 million up front for the capital expenditures and so.
[1:18:59] Um, there are some things that they had really going for them and they had taken
[1:19:03] the time uh to to test the viability and build the rotational slots up before launching
[1:19:09] into the medical school. Thank you, super long.
[1:19:13] Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mr. Street for the presentation. Appreciate that. Um,
[1:19:19] so, As I understand it, and, and I echo the sentiments of residency programs are
[1:19:26] critical and I don't see that work into this presentation too much other than what
[1:19:32] we already have with the three entities. Residency is the key to retention of doctors
[1:19:38] once they, because there's about a 50% chance that they're 50% difference um if they
[1:19:45] do a residency somewhere else and that they're going to come back versus when they're
[1:19:49] in the community and they're going to just stay where they finish their residency.
[1:19:55] So I, I think there's, it, it's missing the second component to this. Um, and another
[1:20:00] thing that um I'm trying to figure out is that, and I'm, I'm a strong advocate for
[1:20:05] a medical school, but you're looking for a partnership with a county. And the county
[1:20:11] will have to fund this upfront to the tune of 30 to $50 million you said for the
[1:20:17] escrow account, which could eventually get returned if you meet accreditation and
[1:20:23] some of the different features to this, but then you throw on the cost of building
[1:20:28] the building, acquiring the land, all the other things. This could easily be a $60
[1:20:32] million. Uh, venture up front that the county, if you're looking for a partnership
[1:20:37] with the county that we're going to have to debt service that, and I have great concerns
[1:20:42] with that. Would I'd love to have a medical facility and a training facility for
[1:20:47] doctors in our community? Absolutely. I'm just not sure it's the right combination
[1:20:52] for the county to be funding this exploration and so that's where I come. And
[1:21:00] uh the debt service and some of those issues are critically important to me because
[1:21:06] $60 million is a lot of money and I don't know, there's a lot of hurdles to clear
[1:21:11] like Supervisor Plumber had talked about, uh, rotations and doctors already in short
[1:21:17] supply and having to take themselves out of the picture to train um somebody in the
[1:21:23] residency program. There's a lot of issues and I'm just not sure that the county
[1:21:27] is is prepared to get into this business, um, albeit a medical school would be wonderful
[1:21:35] for our community. I, I will not take that away from anything and in combination
[1:21:39] with the residency, we could, we could start to solve some of these problems. So
[1:21:43] I worry about cash flow. I'm very conservative with the county's dollars and cautious,
[1:21:49] and you're asking for a $60 million plus debt service right up front, and I just,
[1:21:56] I, I don't see that we can afford that. Thank you. Thank you, Supervisor Long. Supervisor
[1:22:00] Harman. So just a quick question, can you, can you just maybe summarize a little
[1:22:06] bit? What uh Sorry. What you've done, and I know you've researched it or you've
[1:22:13] got interests out there, um, what, what do you see as uh maybe philanthropic or,
[1:22:20] or other grants that are, that we're looking at that might Take care of some of these
[1:22:28] concerns. The next step for me is to, to start looking at federal dollars, right?
[1:22:33] and state and federal dollars that we're just going in that process. We, we need
[1:22:37] to have an idea. I'm not here to be the advocate of the school. I'm here to be the
[1:22:42] consultant to say that it it appears to me you can do this school. You can you at
[1:22:47] least have an opportunity to go to the next level seriously to address these issues
[1:22:53] that Supervisor Long and Supervisor Plumber have have been talking about, but. It's
[1:23:00] now on the table. It's a discussion that needed to happen. It's now a discussion
[1:23:05] that, you know, it's going to take leadership. I, you know,
[1:23:10] CEO Rickert and I have had conversations about this, you know, it's, it's your opportunity
[1:23:16] to address a need that now is clearly not being addressed, but we need primary care
[1:23:23] physicians, we need specialty care physicians. Right, but so I, I,
[1:23:30] I'm sure there's grants, there's uh Shasta County by moving itself into a rural county,
[1:23:39] it is now, um, the healthcare is under the USDA, US Department of Agriculture, um,
[1:23:46] and they have very special programs for facility financing for, you know, grants
[1:23:51] and such like that. It's unusual for, you know, a county the size of Shasta. To be
[1:23:58] looking at these grants, I think you have real opportunities, um, and those discussions
[1:24:04] about specific dollars, you know, I'm gonna finish in the next month. So my belief
[1:24:10] is that um my role was to say, is this doable? here's how you can think about it
[1:24:17] and then put it, you know, here's the financing or or the way to treat it and then
[1:24:21] it really it's up to you as to whether you want to move forward or move on. And then
[1:24:26] that one last thing, then that. Advan the specific advantages of Simpson College
[1:24:33] being interested in being involved in. Well they're rather unique in that here's,
[1:24:39] here's a small, you know, rural college that's #1 or #2 rated in the state for nursing
[1:24:46] school. I mean, being a doctor isn't that far. Different from being a nurse. I mean,
[1:24:52] it has a lot of the same background, a lot of the same training, it's much more advanced,
[1:24:56] but you know, they're, they're already first and best as a small school and nursing
[1:25:01] in the state. Um, I, I, I think you gotta consider them as, as Norm Hall said, you
[1:25:08] know, they're the local, they're your local university, you know, they're already
[1:25:12] doing the program with, you know, the, the community college to offer half tuition
[1:25:17] for transfers. I mean they're pretty committed to this being their future. They'd
[1:25:21] like to be, they'd like to be a partner if that made sense. Sure, right, thank you.
[1:25:26] last, last comment, um, super long, so. If, if my timeline is correct, correct me
[1:25:34] if I'm wrong, but it would be approximately 4 years till the the program is
[1:25:42] up and running, about 8 years before the new doctors were graduating, uh, 11 years
[1:25:48] before you actually had practicing physicians coming out of the program to start
[1:25:54] to recover some of these costs that Supervisor Plumberer was outlined. So that's
[1:25:58] 11 years by my calculations that we're gonna be servicing debt or potentially. Now,
[1:26:04] if you have a proposal for federal funding to take care of the medical facility,
[1:26:09] I'm all ears because if we can get this paid for with other than county dollars,
[1:26:14] that's. a whole different story because I'd love to have a a a new medical training
[1:26:18] facility in in Reading, absolutely. But when we're talking about by my calculations,
[1:26:23] 11 years before we're producing actual practicing physicians, that's a, that's a
[1:26:29] decade out. And that's a significant time for us to be kind of on the hook for this
[1:26:35] debt service and try and, and we couldn't even get back the escrow funds until 6
[1:26:42] years, right? Um, I, I think those years, I think it'd be a little shorter than that,
[1:26:47] but the, the issue that's important is, you know, we, we need to investigate federal
[1:26:52] funding. Federal funding wants to investigate us. I mean this is the kind of project
[1:26:58] we would be really, I'm looking to be if we move forward on this, what's called the
[1:27:03] National Development grant because what we're doing here in Shasta County is a real
[1:27:08] county is going to be a framework. That other counties, other rural parts of America
[1:27:15] that have a problem as bad as ours or worse, you know, could, could copy we're, we're
[1:27:20] being forward because we can't and you know if that makes sense to move forward,
[1:27:26] that's a choice that you're gonna make, um, but I I I do believe that. You have incredible
[1:27:33] kids here. I think you'd have a tremendous gene pool to draw from. I think that you
[1:27:40] have physicians would come to the school, important, you know, especially physicians
[1:27:46] would come to the school, build a practice here, you know, build uh specialty capacity
[1:27:53] that we don't have. So I think we just need to have all those issues fleshed out.
[1:27:59] Thank you. All right, so I got a few comments then we're gonna wrap this up and move
[1:28:03] on. Um, so, uh, I appreciate a lot of the information that everybody shared. One
[1:28:09] of the things is we have to remember this was an exploratory process. We're $7000
[1:28:14] in there, uh, it, it, it's, it's actually become kind of comical to me that we're
[1:28:19] beating this up as if we're contributing $200 million today uh to a project. I mean,
[1:28:26] our, our consultant. was asked to bring some items back and let's not forget, Doctor
[1:28:32] Danuka won by a far greater margin than any of us up here, and he ran partially on
[1:28:39] wanting to do big things as it relates to medical care in our community. When I first
[1:28:44] heard that, I said, well, what would that look like? And that really spurred a lot
[1:28:49] of this conversation. Um, I remember uh supervisor Long, you were in Tahoe this week
[1:28:53] and I was in Reno in 1995. I had one of two AAU teams that were playing Memorial
[1:28:58] Day weekend in '95. Now all these years later, there's about 400 teams, you know,
[1:29:04] um, in our region from Chico to Reading. Um, Supervisor plumber, you moved across
[1:29:08] the country with your entire family coming here for Bethel Church. That was tiny,
[1:29:14] tiny and, you know, in Weaverville, and now it's a mecca. We can talk about it taking
[1:29:20] 4 years, 10 years, 11 years, but you know what gets done if you don't do anything?
[1:29:25] Nothing. And all we're doing, all we're doing right now is saying, can it be done?
[1:29:31] Can it be done? And when we talk about people taking pay cuts they have to teach,
[1:29:35] there's a physician in the back of the room, our health officer that took a pay cut
[1:29:38] to do this. I'm taking a pay cut. Harmon's taking a pay cut. I believe there's a
[1:29:42] lot of people in this community that will step up, take pay cuts, do whatever it
[1:29:46] takes to make this community better. And if we don't talk about doing big things,
[1:29:50] this area is never going to grow. With that, we're going to move on to our 4. There's
[1:29:56] no emotion. Up next we have uh public comment open time followed by consent. Oh,
[1:30:02] OK. Sure. Yes. I'd actually like to make a motion. Oh, yes, go ahead. If you, if
[1:30:08] you'd like to make a motion and, you know, I'm not sure.
[1:30:13] Good. Oh, so I'd like to make a motion to include, uh, uh, 4 things in the scope
[1:30:21] of work for the consultant, uh, going forward, and you know it sounded a little bit
[1:30:26] like you were being defensive. Frustrated or frustrating, sure, uh, not sure, frustrated.
[1:30:31] I'm frustrated. OK, you're frustrating. Uh, I'm frustrated.
[1:30:40] Oh no, I said frustrated. It might have sounded different. No, it sounded, it was
[1:30:42] frustrating. You just misspoke. So I'm frustrated. Yes, go ahead. Wow, OK. No, no,
[1:30:48] no, hold on. Not well, the passive aggressive stuff doesn't work. We're on, we've
[1:30:53] had this discussion. We're $7000 in to a process of saying can we do it. The hundreds
[1:30:59] of hours that have been spent, make your motion. Go ahead.
[1:31:06] To be clear, I said frustrated. It might have sounded like frustrating, but the other
[1:31:09] thing is that you know my goal is to uh continue to support this process
[1:31:16] and answering the questions we need to answer to ensure that it is successful in
[1:31:21] the long term and I think by asking the hard questions, digging into the details,
[1:31:27] looking at other examples, testing them, that's how we'll actually get to something
[1:31:31] that is successful. It's not to undermine it, it's actually to strengthen it. Uh,
[1:31:35] and so with that I'd like to make a motion that uh throughout the uh through this
[1:31:39] process that we include in the scope of work for the consultant that he uh reach
[1:31:44] out to the local physician groups and request a letter of support and intent to support
[1:31:52] this effort in the future that he reach out to the three health systems and request
[1:31:57] a letter of support and intent to support this process that he create a clinical
[1:32:02] rotations feasibility model. Uh, and that there is, uh, plans around a clinical rotation
[1:32:09] testing pilot that are developed.
[1:32:15] I would be willing to second that motion if you would like to add, I'd also like
[1:32:18] him to explore some of the grants out there, that possible grant funding. That's
[1:32:22] already part of it. Yes, uh, yes, Mr. Chairman, I, because this is the direction
[1:32:28] the staff, the most this can be is that, uh, direct staff to bring an amended contract
[1:32:32] for approval by the board. OK, supervisor or supervisor, uh, Councilman Danua or
[1:32:37] Doctor Danica, come on up, I have a couple of questions. Because here's, here's my
[1:32:41] concern, and supervisor Harman, I'll speak to you when it comes to amending contracts.
[1:32:46] Uh, when you, when you empower somebody in your company and you move in a direction,
[1:32:50] you set the course and there's nothing wrong with modifying it. I just don't want
[1:32:54] to slow this process down in terms of where we're getting to. So uh Doctor Danuca,
[1:33:00] um, you're already speaking to physicians, correct? Yeah, can I, may I clarify a
[1:33:05] couple of things? Yes, uh, yeah, absolutely. I'm actually president of North Valley
[1:33:09] Medical Association. I have, uh, been in close contact with a lot of physicians around
[1:33:14] our area, including those in Chico who are super interested in building a medical
[1:33:18] school. In fact, they would like to build in Chico, and we have a friendly competition
[1:33:23] that no we'll bring it in Shasta, but really it will be a consortium. So we have
[1:33:28] been talking with people all over the North state including Partnership Health, Mercy
[1:33:33] Medical Center, Shasta Community Health Center. So as the president of North Valley
[1:33:37] Medical Association, you have my full commitment to make that happen. I'm also talking
[1:33:41] with the actually they approached us, a large group of doctors who run the ER and
[1:33:47] the hospitalist group in our state and the serve dignity by duty. They reached out
[1:33:52] to us and asked us, Hey, can we partner with this project? So that's one concern
[1:33:56] I want to address. Second, I just, you had mentioned earlier about the shortage of
[1:34:00] quality students in our area. I would say absolutely we have absolutely great students
[1:34:07] in our area. In fact, uh, we have students who have had nearly perfect MCAT score
[1:34:13] and from top university had to go across the state. Uh, so in terms of faculty development,
[1:34:20] this in fact I foresee this. As building a partnership with the residency programs,
[1:34:27] and we absolutely want more residency program. I'm a big advocate of that. I was
[1:34:32] part of one of the people who brought internal medicine residency in Shasta Regional
[1:34:37] here. We want to bring surgery, OBGYN, psychiatry, those residencies, and many more
[1:34:43] fellowships we want to bring to this area. This will be actually a bilateral program
[1:34:48] which should be in residency are absolutely essential to a medical training, and
[1:34:53] this will be a synergistic symbiotic relationship between the medical school and
[1:34:58] the residency and the hospitals. So what I would say here is. I county should do
[1:35:04] what they need to do. My perspective is completely independent of the county or the
[1:35:11] city or the state or the federal government. We as doctors and educators will make
[1:35:18] this community group and we'll advance this agenda, we'll advance this project and
[1:35:23] we partner with the county as the county deems necessary and helpful. So we will
[1:35:28] do this and you do decide that, but we are going to do a lot of that work. Which
[1:35:33] you have been asking for. Thank you. Thank you, Doctor Nka. Well, yeah, I was gonna
[1:35:38] say with and with that answer, and you know sorry supervisor, but I think they're
[1:35:42] already going in that direction, so I'm gonna withdraw my second. OK. Well, uh, you
[1:35:47] know, and what I, what I'm trying to establish, and we know a lot more now to the
[1:35:51] point of many people have said that than we did at the beginning and so that's where
[1:35:55] why I think it justifies modifying a contract. And the reason I am doing that is
[1:35:59] because when we come to the end of this process and I imagine that there is going
[1:36:04] to be some type of ask for the county to continue to partner in some capacity. And
[1:36:09] I'm labeling those four things because in order for me to be comfortable with approving
[1:36:14] it, it will have to go further than having heard from you and others saying we are
[1:36:18] having conversations. I would like to actually have that work done by that point
[1:36:23] to ensure that you know those institutions have publicly said they are supporting
[1:36:27] moving forward. So that is the reason for my uh. Desire to clarify that in the work
[1:36:34] going forward. Supervisor Plumber, can you, uh, clarify again what the four amendments
[1:36:39] were? Uh, letters of support from local physician groups, letters of support from
[1:36:45] the three main health systems in, uh, Shasta County, a clinical rotation feasibility
[1:36:50] model, and a clinical rotation testing pilot plan. What was the last one? That's
[1:36:56] uh to uh figure out uh basically to pilot how we would do 3rd and 4th year rotations
[1:37:02] and have a sufficient number of them, whether that's partnering with another institution
[1:37:06] or we we already do that a little bit with UC Davis so figuring out how could we
[1:37:10] accommodate that number of clinical rotations and how can we test that to see if
[1:37:14] it will work. OK, I will uh make a second to your motion. May I just say
[1:37:21] this that you're absolutely right, we need to do all this work and it will be incumbent
[1:37:25] upon the doctors and educators group to do that work. That's all I just want to say
[1:37:31] I think with the amount of work that has already been done and the amount of research
[1:37:35] that has been done for $7000 I'll make a subsequent motion to just continue on as
[1:37:40] as we're going now. So we, we would, we wouldn't actually need a motion for that
[1:37:45] because they've already got a contract, so they would just they would just carry
[1:37:47] on as is vote on this one. Yeah, I, I would just like to ask a question and you can
[1:37:53] give it a head nod from the back of the room, but Doctor Danuka and Mr. Street, um,
[1:37:59] if you guys can come up to the podium, is that, does that, does that seem reasonable?
[1:38:05] being that you've already been given marching orders and I know you got your hands
[1:38:10] full. Well, I, I, I'm trying to get the finish line and I, I was instructed that
[1:38:15] we needed to have a shovel, shovel ready example by the end of July. I'm on that
[1:38:21] track. I think look at the progress we've made, you know, with small steps and, and
[1:38:26] now we're in the these discussions. I really appreciate. Uh, supervisor Clover's
[1:38:31] input and Supervisor Long's input because that tells me what I need to come back
[1:38:36] with, um, as far as some of these issues, of course, Doctor Vinuca has, you know,
[1:38:41] gone to the next level is forming an exploratory committee that in itself is progress.
[1:38:48] But I, I have an a I had a a plan. I said I'd get from here to there and David Rickert
[1:38:56] gave me very explicit, you know, instruction that he wants things to finish. He,
[1:39:01] he wants to have a completed study, uh, and we're on track to complete. Yeah, another
[1:39:06] thing Supervisor Harman is, uh. There's, there's other counties like Wanaka, the
[1:39:12] chair for uh Rossman, Glen County. I mean, we'll put these letters together. There's
[1:39:17] a lot more coming that is not even stated in terms of other, other counties that
[1:39:22] are looking at leaning in, how they're gonna lean in. I don't want to slow it down.
[1:39:26] We're gonna go ahead and take the vote before we take a vote, I'd like one last comment.
[1:39:30] So I was not in favor of the contract to begin with. I made that very vocal. Um,
[1:39:36] so that has been legitimately decided by our board and I respect that process. So
[1:39:41] that is why I am voting to second supervisor plumbers motion to put
[1:39:48] these additional uh alterations to the contract. Act originally, so doesn't mean
[1:39:53] I supported the original contract. I still don't, but going forward, I support his
[1:39:59] and I respect our board's decision at the prior time. So just out of curiosity, go
[1:40:04] ahead, you're gonna say something. Just out of curiosity, I mean, is there, um, what
[1:40:09] I guess we don't have to beat it up. I'm just, I, I'm, I'm a little surprised at
[1:40:13] the. Uh, what this group and Supervisor plumber's been a part of that. I've been
[1:40:18] a part of that. Doctor Danuka, Doctor Hall at Simpson, I mean, the amount of stuff
[1:40:22] that's been done in such a short amount of time, do you, do you think it's been a
[1:40:25] wasted $7000? Well, that's, that's a question you're asking for my opinion, so I
[1:40:32] like it. I will give you my opinion. My opinion is that this is a very complex issue
[1:40:38] and a matter. Um, I'm not in favor of the county partnering to develop a medical
[1:40:44] school uh with the debt service that I've outlined of $60 million that we're going
[1:40:49] to start paying debt service in a 10 year, 11 year lag time before we are producing
[1:40:54] physicians. That's the numbers don't make sense to me. I was not in favor of this
[1:40:59] to begin with because I didn't feel Mr. Street had the qualifications, so you're
[1:41:05] asking the question, the qualifications, and I, I think there are other avenues of
[1:41:11] people in our community that have been looking at the doctor shortage and recruitment
[1:41:16] crisis which is legitimate. We have, we don't. have enough doctors here and physicians
[1:41:21] and we don't cover all across all specialties. We tend to have, you know, more family
[1:41:27] care providers than we do some of our specialists. So it's a really complex problem,
[1:41:32] and I don't think this contract is going to produce something that's Um, going to
[1:41:38] meaningfully move the needle in that direction. So, but, but is it, is it troubling
[1:41:42] to you that the medical community had that study saying that we have 123% of the
[1:41:47] doctors needed? I mean, those are the experts you're leaning on and yet they were
[1:41:50] so off, it's embarrassing. It's embarrassing 123%. So I mean those are the experts
[1:41:56] you're leaning on and we're bringing something different. I'm just, I, what I'm excited
[1:42:00] about because again we haven't even talked about uh CEO Rickert myself going back
[1:42:04] to the USDA during NATO and having those conversations with or with uh Congressman
[1:42:09] the Mals office about a demonstration project and the and the possible, um, hundreds
[1:42:14] of millions of dollars that are out there for rural healthcare and again we got all
[1:42:17] of this for $7000 so
[1:42:21] I can I put you on the spot, CEO Rickard. And, and hear what you have to say. Before
[1:42:28] we go to a vote. Uh, well, what specifically would you like to hear, Supervisor Harman?
[1:42:34] Well, in regards to what uh Mr. Street was talking about, you specifically gave him
[1:42:40] marching orders. Yes, so we were given very clear direction from the board as far
[1:42:45] as coming back with a shovel ready project by the end of the term of his project.
[1:42:49] We've had a number of meetings, uh, a lot of research done by both Mr. Street and,
[1:42:54] uh, Supervisor, Plummer on this topic. I think we've made significant progress. I
[1:42:59] think some of the recommendations made and support, I think that's important is one
[1:43:03] of the biggest hurdles we have isn't the $60 million. Uh, target which we're hopeful
[1:43:09] that worst case scenario would involve uh participation by the county, but we're
[1:43:14] looking at grants, we're looking at state funding, federal funding, other participation
[1:43:18] from other entities, not just us, so those are all questions that have to be asked
[1:43:22] and will be brought back to the board for consideration, but um. Uh, there's some
[1:43:28] valid points and some good ideas I thought Supervisor Plummer brought forward as
[1:43:32] far as residencies and other very technical aspects that we have to look at, consider,
[1:43:37] and bring back for consideration. And at this point I think we're ready to bring
[1:43:41] in the the educational medical experts to bring it to the next level because there's
[1:43:46] only so far we can go with a limited amount of material we have. Thank you. Yeah.
[1:43:54] All right. We'll start to my left with uh Ms. Blankenship. OK, Supervisor Long. So
[1:44:00] we're taking a vote then on supervisor plumber's motion and you seconded it. Uh,
[1:44:05] yes, I support it. Supervisor Kelstrom. So I don't think there's any reason to amend
[1:44:09] the contract. I think they're already doing the work that is being asked here, so
[1:44:12] I'm going to vote no. Supervisor cry. Yeah, it's no, it's more bureaucracy. Supervisor
[1:44:17] Harman? No, and supervisor plumber. Fails 2 to 3. OK, moving on to public comment.
[1:44:25] Thank you, Doctor Danuka. Thank you, Chris. Thank you, Doctor Moo.
[1:44:31] OK, so, uh, chair, we have, um, let's see, we have 20 speakers, so they'll be limited
[1:44:39] to 2 minutes. Is that correct? Correct. OK. First up is Laurie Bridgeford, followed
[1:44:44] by Susan Wies, then Jayden Treadway, then Rich Glardo. If I called your name, if
[1:44:49] you could please get in queue. Thank you.
[1:44:54] I know it's the wrong
[1:45:14] Good morning Cha chair and board. Uh, I would like to thank the, uh, Shasta Lake,
[1:45:18] um, City for, uh, sponsoring and hosting us, and I'm sure I can speak for everyone,
[1:45:23] uh, on the gratefulness that we had a place to, uh.
[1:45:28] I'm so sorry that we've had to have some disruptions. I had to make an official complaint
[1:45:35] on the conduct behavior because of the disturbances, so that was sent to several
[1:45:41] of you. I don't know if I need to put one more in the box just for the heck of it,
[1:45:44] but um. Uh, I'm glad you, you are giving people warnings. It's, it's a hard thing
[1:45:50] to do, but it's, uh, it's we, we make a room safe. And business being safe when you
[1:45:56] feel safe coming up here and you don't need to have a sheriff person escort you.
[1:46:00] I, I, I hope I never need to have that. In fact, my last thing I want to say about
[1:46:04] conduct and behavior is we had at the other locations Stephen King outburst. Well,
[1:46:09] he's now in jail for what, attempted murder. There are people that do not know how
[1:46:13] to control themselves, and so I'm very grateful when we have sheriff or security.
[1:46:19] Uh, I'd like to just address in a little bit of time left on. Regarding the budgets
[1:46:24] coming up and um last week we had Doctor Moo give a presentation on COVID vaccine
[1:46:30] adverse reactions. Uh there is a meeting the day after last meeting, it was a seven
[1:46:35] hour meeting by the FDA um. 7 hours and we had one of our local persons uh won the
[1:46:41] lottery to be one of the uh public speakers and that was Doctor Brian Hooker and
[1:46:46] uh Ron Owens was also one of the lucky lottery winners. So it's a 7 hour thing. It's
[1:46:51] a toxic product. It should have a class one.
[1:46:55] Recall, it's dangerous. It's not safe. It's called the Class One, most severe reactions,
[1:47:00] which include death. So lots of people have been harmed and died from it. So I want
[1:47:06] this to be a warning to our county that we have been told alerted many, many, many
[1:47:10] times for years. This thing is still on the market for 5 years. Thank you, thank
[1:47:16] you.
[1:47:20] Susan Wiese, followed by Jayden Tredway, followed by Richardo, then Kim Moore. Yes,
[1:47:26] um,
[1:47:29] I'm here to talk to you again, 3 years into this talking to you, the board again
[1:47:36] about how you make decisions, your policies. I've been saying for 3 years now, over
[1:47:42] and over again. That it appears that there's a lot of backdoor deals going on here
[1:47:48] and I think it's very obvious to anybody that pays attention that this is the case
[1:47:54] and it's somebody mentioned it's a pattern, yeah, you have a pattern. Of hiring people
[1:48:01] that are not qualified, of getting rid of people who don't agree with your political
[1:48:05] agenda, at least that I've got to speak to Mr. Kelson, Mr. Cry and about that because
[1:48:11] that's your the past. We have new board members now, but You get rid of people. You
[1:48:16] have many people who are so qualified and because they don't meet your goals of being
[1:48:22] super conservative, you vote them out, you choose somebody else who agrees with your
[1:48:26] policies politically, and that is not where a board of supervisors should be directing
[1:48:31] their energies on politics, and that's what happens over and over again here, you
[1:48:36] know, you hired Mr. Clint Chris Street, he had no medical background.
[1:48:44] And I think there were only two people that were on the committee to choose him,
[1:48:48] I think, correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Rickard and one other person, and you know,
[1:48:54] to spend $40,000 on someone without opening it up to the public of people who want
[1:49:01] to join or apply for the job is unthinkable. I'm not saying he can't do the work.
[1:49:07] That's not my point. I'm not complaining about him. I'm complaining about your policies
[1:49:12] and how you hire.
[1:49:15] Clint Curtis, I went to his speech on Saturday. He might, he probably has, he has
[1:49:20] some good ideas and I, I'm, as someone said next to me, we're all for fair elections,
[1:49:24] all of us in this room and
[1:49:30] Next up, Jayden Treadway followed by Richardo, then Kim Moore, then Delbert Davis.
[1:49:39] What's the timer? I can't see this. You're going. And the number of homeless of Shasta
[1:49:46] County at our last count in 2023 was just about 1200 more than
[1:49:54] the previous year, and almost half of those were unsheltered encampments on the and
[1:50:00] on the streets. We do not yet have access to the 2025 count, so how many more do
[1:50:06] you suppose do we have now? The developing diamonds community plan to heal homelessness
[1:50:11] has determined through research and personal experience that the vast majority of
[1:50:16] the chronic homeless who are out of the loop for an appropriate shelter are neurodivergent.
[1:50:22] People that are inherently very intelligent, very creative, very focused on problem
[1:50:28] solving, but do not think and respond to their environment in the typical way. For
[1:50:34] that reason, they have been maligned and degraded for the whole of their lives and
[1:50:38] possibly and often generations prior. They do not fit into the typical shelter and
[1:50:45] developmental programs and refuse to be driven into them. Anti-camping laws typically
[1:50:51] cost the public up to $17,000 to dismantle for for 200 people, for our
[1:50:59] 600 encamped homelessness, that's $10.2 million for each suite
[1:51:07] plus the cost of locating the scattered remnants to provide mental health and basic
[1:51:12] life support services. In California to relocate them cost up to $44,000 per tent,
[1:51:20] and the neurodivergent that were forced into these shelters only returned to their
[1:51:25] encampments because the program's social environment and demands trigger their mental
[1:51:31] health crises. Data on the successes in homeless housing reports only show.
[1:51:40] Richard, followed by Kim Moore, then Delbert Davis, then Larry S.
[1:51:52] Uh, good morning. Whoa. Um It's a little highly unorthodox that you're using Mr.
[1:52:00] Larmer as your sergeant in arms. I think that's very irregular and actually very
[1:52:05] inappropriate. If you want to call a disturbance, have him issue his legal opinion,
[1:52:09] and that gentleman over there, that highly paid professional law enforcement officer,
[1:52:13] he's the muscle. Nothing else should be happening. Mr. Larmer should not be getting
[1:52:18] out of his seat. The militia 3 years ago. Supervisor Les Baugh talked about the militia
[1:52:24] at a meeting in a very positive light. The militia is constitutional at the state
[1:52:28] level and the federal level, 2nd Amendment, and we have a proud militia that I'm
[1:52:33] a member of in this county, proudly, by the way. Um, I know Mr. Uri is really good
[1:52:39] about following laws and bills, so Assembly Bill 331, he probably is already following
[1:52:43] it, and I hope he continues to report on that. I hope this board could do a letter
[1:52:48] of opposition to the state of California if maybe I've missed it to in order to oppose
[1:52:53] Assembly Bill 331. We have a local election petition going around now, perfectly
[1:52:57] constitutional, perfectly lawful, and the people that are lying saying that the things
[1:53:02] in there are illegal or gaslighting you. There are things in this petition that are
[1:53:07] perfectly legal and if there are some things that are um Controversially legally,
[1:53:12] they will be put into court through the severability process. So perfectly legal
[1:53:19] and constitutional to petition your government. This petition is in place because
[1:53:23] we don't like what the state is doing. That's the point. That is exactly the point.
[1:53:30] So no more lies about that. I would appreciate it, um. And I have one last thing,
[1:53:35] but I'll save it for our 4. Thank you. Moore, followed by Delbert Davis, followed
[1:53:42] by Larry S, then David Halligan. Kim, I'm gonna throw this in real quick, um, regarding
[1:53:47] Mr. Street's presentation, um, I want to state that I, I was in that category where
[1:53:54] you guys pay $11,000 annually, but I left because my doctor left Shasta Regional
[1:53:58] Medical Center and he went into a private practice. So now instead of the state or
[1:54:03] the feds having to pay $11,000 for me annually, I pay $1150 for myself, and
[1:54:10] I can go to the doctors whenever I want and I don't face these programs, and I think
[1:54:14] both of you two are lizards anyway. Residency program can be used at the Woodlands
[1:54:20] and I believe that every project, housing project, residential project that is receiving
[1:54:26] state or federal funding should have to participate in the residency program, and
[1:54:30] I'd like to see you guys using the existing campus of Simpson College. I'm not into
[1:54:35] spending a bunch of money on a new facility. I understand that big scam and how it
[1:54:40] works by when we had the builder come in Palm communities out of Irvine, California
[1:54:44] and build the woodlands. It's a Ponzi scheme. It's not helping the people and anybody
[1:54:49] who tells you it is, it's full of shit. So we need a meeting. Um, after arriving
[1:54:55] here, I realized that the section D, it's the right title, the right date that the
[1:55:01] wording has been changed. The good news is I have a copy of the original at home
[1:55:05] and I'm gonna go home and dissect it, and I'll be putting it on the projector during
[1:55:08] the next meetings. So, um, We, my biggest concern is that we have one tenant who's
[1:55:15] about ready to die, not because of a health condition, but because the county isn't
[1:55:19] doing their job and so I want a meeting with you guys. I wanna, I wanna try to save
[1:55:23] her life, but you need to pay attention. So we have another MHSA tenant who's running
[1:55:28] around right now. She's the one who's like leading to this other woman's death, and
[1:55:33] she's presenting herself as a peer support specialist to RPD, and she isn't. She's
[1:55:38] not a county employee. So this is dangerous crap. 2 minutes doesn't cover it. I need
[1:55:44] a meeting with you guys before this die. Oh. Delbert Davis, followed by Larry S,
[1:55:51] then David Halligan, followed by Dolores Lucero. Um, I lived in the Woodlands apartment
[1:55:57] for 8 years now. OK, ever since Pam took over, that's when the harassment started.
[1:56:04] Jeff has been targeting me for the last 6 years. He's making false claims against
[1:56:10] me and trying to get me evicted. I have a meeting with him tomorrow about my eviction.
[1:56:16] OK, HUD has told him to fix my. OK, my dishwasher has been broke for 5 years.
[1:56:24] My smoke detector for 3 years. HUD has told them to fix it and they refused.
[1:56:38] I need an app and I need with you able a meeting with you to be able to tell you
[1:56:45] more.
[1:56:48] Thank you. Larry S followed by David Halligan, then Dolores Lucero, followed by Jeffter.
[1:56:56] Morning board. In keeping with your jurisdiction to send letters, and I know you
[1:57:00] like to send letters, I want to recommend two quick letters that you might send to
[1:57:04] President Trump.
[1:57:07] Of the $5 trillion that the federal government receives. In taxes and revenue from
[1:57:13] the 50 states, California pays almost 13% of that. President Trump wants to withhold
[1:57:19] federal funding from the state of California.
[1:57:24] So tell President Trump. That he can keep his 610 billion. That the federal government
[1:57:31] sends California and we'll keep the $700 billion that we send to the federal government
[1:57:37] and we'll be $90 billion ahead. So tell Mr. Trump to put that in his pipe and smoke
[1:57:41] it.
[1:57:45] The other letter would go something like this. We heard glowing accolades from you
[1:57:50] yesterday at Arlington National Cemetery in terms of our fallen warriors. Honor valor.
[1:57:59] Love of country, defending of the Constitution. You read a teleprompter speech that
[1:58:04] was written by someone else and you read it very Wrote And without passion.
[1:58:12] You spoke of characteristics that you do not possess. You are unfit to be the commander
[1:58:18] in chief of the United States. We call for you to resign immediately. We're referring
[1:58:24] to our veterans and fallen comrades as losers and suckers and what was in it for
[1:58:30] them. And while you're at it, take that white supremacist Pete Hegseth with you.
[1:58:38] David Halligan, followed by Dolores Lucero, followed by Jeff Gorder, then Leslie.
[1:58:43] Thank you board. I want to go back to the scene of the train wreck at the last board
[1:58:47] meeting, the designated marketing organization, you know, uh, Nigel Skeets Group,
[1:58:53] the Shasta County Chamber, Mr. Cry, your, your donor, your election, uh, consultant.
[1:59:00] Well, let's, let's back that up and go to the 12:10 board meeting when the award
[1:59:04] was supposed to happen on the tourism and marketing branding. Reading Chambers scored
[1:59:08] 83A. Shasta Chambers scored 68.3%, well below 19.5% below that. The
[1:59:16] board met on 12/10, and they discussed the award. They decided to go another direction.
[1:59:22] Here's Mr. Cry with his change of mind.
[1:59:38] To say that I Put this on And then look at Budget
[1:59:45] adjustment of tourism and
[1:59:51] So that's just where I am. Sure you want to put that in the motion I'll put that
[1:59:56] in. So Mr. Kry decided to put that in a motion which passed 50 to revisit it at the
[2:00:02] June budget meetings, which I totally agree with you there, Mr. Cry, but what you
[2:00:06] did by saying that is you told all the other groups, you told the board, you told
[2:00:10] the community that you were putting this on pause and then you get on them because
[2:00:13] they didn't send this letter that was dated April 1st, that that's just totally BS.
[2:00:17] And then for you, Mr. uh Cry, to stand up here at the last board meeting and say
[2:00:22] that the uh the uh.
[2:00:27] Scores were sabotaged. That's what you said the scores were sabotaged. Where did
[2:00:31] that come from, Mr. Kelstrom? You were the one of the three that were on there. You're
[2:00:35] still sitting up there. What was sabotaged? I never heard you say anything about
[2:00:39] the votes or the scores were sabotaged, really sabotaged. Thank you, followed by
[2:00:44] Jeff Border. Followed by Leslie, followed by Judy Salter.
[2:00:54] I hate these meetings. I actually do. I hate you 3. I can't stand that you are
[2:01:02] part of the problem in this county. You make bad decisions. You have 4ky like a little
[2:01:07] puppet. He doesn't even know what he talks about or what he says. All he has to,
[2:01:12] all you have to do is Kevin pull his little strings. More dumber than he is now when
[2:01:17] he speaks and he acts like he's not gonna vote on what your vote because it's a done
[2:01:23] deal before you attend these meetings and that's that's the bottom line. This place
[2:01:28] is corrupt you waste and abuse and you commit fraud in this county. That's what you
[2:01:33] do, um, this, um, Mr. Clint Curtis. On the the town
[2:01:40] hall meeting they had and he announced his campaign during a private town hall meeting,
[2:01:47] you know, he violated multiple laws just being there and announcing him running for
[2:01:54] the registered voter, he actually violated some laws that you should be aware if
[2:02:00] he's an attorney. He actually violated multiple laws on that alone. So the laws he
[2:02:05] violated is actually uh let me see, there's multiple here. The first one is I'm gonna
[2:02:12] think it's very important is the First Amendment equal protection of viol equal protection
[2:02:19] of violation. You can't discriminate people to come and. Attend in the meeting he's
[2:02:24] talking about elections elections. The first thing he said he's gonna bring to to
[2:02:30] the counties transparency. How can he call transparency when he actually attended
[2:02:35] the meeting and he knows that he actually what Richard called it Richard called it
[2:02:41] something to do with black list. Uh, but I'll go out into it, but anyways,
[2:02:49] he broke multiple laws and you actually allowing him to break laws. Jeff Porter,
[2:02:57] followed by Leslie, followed by Judy Salter, then Suzie. Yeah, hire a liar. Thank
[2:03:04] you.
[2:03:12] Of.
[2:03:15] Yeah. So, please sit down.
[2:03:21] Uh, you may board may recall, um, in January of this year, Supervisor Cry spoke before
[2:03:26] a crowd of Trump supporters at the Capitol in Sacramento, and his, his final quote,
[2:03:32] his rousing quote to the throng was, quote, Our little county is as corrupt as anything.
[2:03:38] Um, now I, I suggested that we not appoint Chair Cry as our tourism and marketing
[2:03:44] director for that comment, but unfortunately his comment has turned out to be true.
[2:03:49] Uh, but it's projection on Mr. Kry's part. It describes the action that's occurred
[2:03:54] with this three member majority. Uh, the street contract was just one example. There
[2:03:59] are many more that I could name, but 2 minutes is not enough. The most recent was
[2:04:04] the tourism and designation contract, tourism marketing designation contract. Mr.
[2:04:09] Halligan said the motion by Mr. Cry in December was. Bring the matter back before
[2:04:15] the boards when 3 new members would be able to weigh in as to whether new bids would
[2:04:20] be given out. Then Mr. Cry said he's been talking to James Mazada of the chamber.
[2:04:26] Mazada writes Cry a letter on April 1st asking to be designated as the official marketing
[2:04:33] director. It's directed to cry. Well, apparently cry didn't want to address the situation
[2:04:39] because Nigel Street is his man and he didn't want to be connected, so he gives it
[2:04:44] to Mr. Kelstrom to bring up. It's just three little letters, folks, that's all it
[2:04:49] is. Was Reading Chamber. No. Were the other organizations that won out over
[2:04:57] Shasta Chamber notified? No. We just go forward and we give the contract or the designation
[2:05:03] to somebody that's contributed to cry or has done something. Think about that. Thank
[2:05:11] you. Leslie followed by Judy Salter, then, then Steve Hahn.
[2:05:17] And his lawsuit's gonna cost us how much? OK. So, um, long.
[2:05:24] We need to get together. We said we'd meet, get together and discuss. We haven't
[2:05:29] had that happen, so unfortunately this is how I get to talk to you. Your behavior,
[2:05:34] you got to do better. This the last couple of meetings I got up here after that Shasta
[2:05:41] no video and I told you that I thought that was out of bounds and unacceptable, but
[2:05:45] then your behavior has been the same. You have character assassinated multiple people
[2:05:51] that come up here to do business for the county. And people who live in glass houses
[2:05:57] shouldn't throw rocks. I'm sorry, I don't respect that. That was not that not OK.
[2:06:01] Think about things before you do it. It's, it's not a good look. Um. Anyway,
[2:06:10] I today today was an example of it and that's why I put it on there when you started
[2:06:15] your board report and you opened with the this is, you know, my county only business
[2:06:21] I appreciate every single thing they talk about in their board reports. I appreciate
[2:06:26] Chris Kelstrom's ability. And availability for the community to connect with him
[2:06:31] at every one of those events he attends. He is one of the most reachable supervisors
[2:06:37] that we have. I appreciate every Friday's Kevin's Coffee where people can come and
[2:06:42] approach him. I've been asking you for months for a meeting. This is where I get
[2:06:46] to talk to you, so I appreciate that they talk about meals they go to and meetings
[2:06:51] they attend and quirky attending different events on his ranch and hosting people
[2:06:56] and bringing people in because they're accessible. I appreciate that every time I've
[2:07:00] reached out to Matt I got a response, so. Maybe fix that. Um, and then also Clint
[2:07:07] Curtis, it's my honor, our honor that we actually got to host the interview where
[2:07:12] you announced your candidacy on Mountaintop Media. So, thank you. Judy Salter, followed
[2:07:19] by Moe, followed by Steve Kahn, then Benjamin.
[2:07:28] Um, I may be the one who's confused, but I just wanted to make sure that it was clear
[2:07:35] that Shasta Community Health has a residency program and has for 10 years, and all
[2:07:42] of their residents are locals. It's um
[2:07:49] SRMC has an internal residency program and those are foreign residents, so it's
[2:07:56] not community health and I think that distinction was not clear in the presentation
[2:08:03] so. Actually, Shasta Community Health has family practice residency
[2:08:11] and a nurse practitioner and physician's assistant fellowship. Mercy has a family
[2:08:18] practice residency and SRMC has an internal medicine residency.
[2:08:26] So if I were looking to go forward, I would want to expand those programs
[2:08:34] to meet the possibility that we could go, you know, to a medical school, but if we're
[2:08:39] going to put money anywhere, I would certainly want to see these residencies expanded,
[2:08:45] and I know conversation has been going on with UC Davis in an attempt to do this,
[2:08:51] so I hope that would end up being followed. Uh, you know, I was honestly hoping that
[2:08:57] when the board changed its composition that we as citizens might see some real
[2:09:05] progress on some critical issues. Instead, I find that favoritism is still taking
[2:09:13] place, taking precedence over experience and in some case qualifications. The pastor
[2:09:20] eloquently asks for wisdom for this board and fairness from you.
[2:09:29] Followed by Steve Kahn, followed by Benjamin No Wane, then C. Garnier. Last time
[2:09:36] I touched this I got shocked. Good morning board. Hello fellow constituents. My name
[2:09:41] is Monique Wile. Um, I've been coming in since September 19, 2017 and I just wanted
[2:09:47] to let you guys know, um. May 4th, 1992, my sister was kidnapped, raped, and murdered,
[2:09:54] and I wanted to come in here and say something completely different. And then I watched
[2:09:59] a very wise man with discernment, Dr. Danuka, come up here and he gave me goosebumps
[2:10:05] and he made me so happy for our vast future. This is a man laying the foundation
[2:10:11] for a future community of educated individuals, and I freaking love it. After my
[2:10:17] sister passed, I became a medic, a flight medic, a fire medic. Now my children are
[2:10:21] following in their mother's footsteps and hopefully in 11 years my son will decide
[2:10:26] to be a doctor because at one point I was studying for MCATs trying to get into Stanford
[2:10:31] because I wanted to be a vein harvester, cardiology. And um I had a stroke so my
[2:10:37] life completely went in a different direction, but I believe this school is something
[2:10:41] that can be tangible and, and it's, it's a, it's a notion of, it's a beautiful thing
[2:10:47] talking about educating a future of children to become our physicians. When I came
[2:10:53] in here, I got a phone call from Shas Community Health Center and I went out there
[2:10:57] while you were talking to Chris Street. I went out there to. Call them back because
[2:11:00] they called me about some other individual for a pediatric appointment. So I was
[2:11:05] trying to get a hold of him. I was on hold for 15 minutes just to tell them they
[2:11:09] called the wrong person. So they do have a program, but you gotta understand they
[2:11:13] switch positions every other year. So you're constantly seeing somebody new when
[2:11:18] you've got a chronic issue. I have gout in my right hip and I've already seen 3 physicians
[2:11:23] who have no idea what I'm going through. And my point being is that is not a residency
[2:11:29] that is efficient to help individuals with chronic situations. We need a school to
[2:11:33] educate the youth of today for the future.
[2:11:39] Steve Conn, followed by Benjamin No Wane, followed by C Gardner, followed by Laura,
[2:11:44] then Michelle. If I called your name, please get in queue.
[2:11:52] Um, good morning, board, community members. Um, I, uh,
[2:12:01] this whole medical situation, I think it's great, you know, that years from now we
[2:12:06] possibly could have a medical school. I think there's a whole lot of ifs that were
[2:12:11] stated by street and a whole lot of estimates that are questionable. Um, but we're
[2:12:17] talking, I think a minimum of 11 years from now, and what I am concerned with is
[2:12:22] the lack of positions right now. I think we need, and maybe they're going to, we're
[2:12:26] only $7000 into it, which also, by the way, I think that even Street mentioned that
[2:12:32] some of the things mentioned here today is going to adjust his approach. So the fact
[2:12:37] that you don't want the public talking about it and you don't want the supervisors
[2:12:40] questioning it, I think is well. Not correct. Anyway, um. I'm
[2:12:48] very concerned about getting doctors here now and something that's going to affect
[2:12:51] and help people's health soon. So this may be part of the process, but I want to
[2:12:58] emphasize this point against perhaps Christ's will as far as affecting things going
[2:13:04] forward because he doesn't think that should be happening right now. But it's important
[2:13:09] to me, and I think it's important to most of these people that are not concerned
[2:13:12] mostly with what the health we start to get health or increased number of residents
[2:13:19] 11 years from now, but we get some more doctors very soon. So that's my concern.
[2:13:25] A lot of what Street did in his presentation was state what we already know, which
[2:13:29] was that we need doctors. So a lot of that, everybody was praising the presentation,
[2:13:34] but I didn't see a lot of meat there. Um, so anyway, I hope that things come out
[2:13:41] better and that we can head into a direction of getting more medical professionals
[2:13:46] soon. Thank you. Thank you. Benjamin No Wane, followed by C. Garnier, followed by
[2:13:52] Laura, then Michelle, then Casey. All right, so, um. I'm gonna speak about an item
[2:13:59] on the consent calendar. Um, I didn't think it would get a lot of attention and it
[2:14:03] is uh a letter that's being written to the state, so I just, I just kind of wanted
[2:14:07] to bring this to the public's attention. Um, so on the consent calendar is item C7
[2:14:13] is an item uh opposing Senate Bill 681. Uh, the letter claims the bill would reduce
[2:14:18] transparency by forcing landlords to bury costs inside rent. Now it's misleading
[2:14:24] and honestly kind of a bit backwards. SB 681 was designed to stop deceptive rental
[2:14:30] practices. It prevents landlords from advertising a low rent and tacking on special
[2:14:34] fees and essentials like trash, water, and air conditioning. It doesn't remove transparency,
[2:14:39] it actually creates it. It was actually not transparent it's how this item ended
[2:14:43] up here. So someone decided it was a good idea to draft this letter, but it's not
[2:14:47] on the regular calendar. It's buried in the agenda, hundreds of pages deep where
[2:14:52] members of the public will never see it unless they're digging through every file.
[2:14:56] Well, fortunately that's part of what I do. If you're going to speak on behalf of
[2:14:59] the public on a statewide housing bill, especially using language that distorts the
[2:15:02] intent, the public conversation should happen, not behind the scenes. Now SB 681
[2:15:09] is not limiting landlords, it's about protecting tenants from misleading pricing,
[2:15:13] and this letter doesn't reflect that, it reflects something else entirely. The public
[2:15:17] deserves better transparency from this board and whoever is shaping its messaging.
[2:15:22] Thank you.
[2:15:25] Gardiner followed by Laura, then Michelle, then
[2:15:32] clowns are really in full gear. Let's take a guy who was walking around town telling
[2:15:39] everybody, hey, I got the CEO job. Yeah, he is also a leader of an organization that
[2:15:46] does not recognize the state of California as legitimate. Oh, then this little YMCA
[2:15:52] thing happened. Oh, what's up with that? Yeah, evidently, uh, there was little allegation
[2:16:00] of sexual impropriety with a minor. Well, you know, we took a look at that evidently
[2:16:07] and oh, had pulled his nomination. But Mr. Street knows Mr. Street knows an awful
[2:16:13] lot about sexual functions and dysfunctions. He had a relationship with the cleaning
[2:16:18] cart in a hotel that damaged according to the court report, his sexual ability. Oh,
[2:16:26] OK. But then let's look at the financials. He was stripped of his financial uh abilities
[2:16:34] by a county after losing in court twice. To try and reclaim his position.
[2:16:43] This is a great guy.
[2:16:45] To lead Shasta County's endeavor. Wow. So you know what, Mr. Cry,
[2:16:53] we're gonna call it cronyism. It's blatant, just like your buddy Mr. Street, lost
[2:16:58] a million dollars. Don't worry, don't worry. I'm gonna fix you up. We'll get you
[2:17:05] a little thing, you can put a logo on your uh on your website saying, hey, Come to
[2:17:12] us. We are the representatives of. Yeah, he's the representative of Shafts County,
[2:17:17] all right, the representative of cronyism of corrupt business practices that continue
[2:17:24] to this day. And by the way, Kevin, you charged the county what,
[2:17:29] $3800 and deliver a Thank you. Laura, followed by Michelle, followed by Casey, then
[2:17:37] Ghost, then Dan. Um, good morning, board. Just briefly, I also oppose our
[2:17:45] county council getting up out of his seat to shush a member of the audience when
[2:17:50] in the back of the room we had anarchists that were completely out of control, whooping,
[2:17:56] hollering, and jeering people, mocking people. That's unacceptable to me that he
[2:18:01] targeted an elder who wasn't able to hear properly, who was talking at a loud volume
[2:18:07] instead of the true distractors in the back of the room. Also, I'd like to address
[2:18:11] some lies that are coming from folks on this board. I won't name names, but I'm here
[2:18:15] to discuss the Shasta citizen petition that would enact election reform at the local
[2:18:20] level. The ability of citizens to redress their grievances is within the purview
[2:18:24] of the US and the California state constitution, and the petition is is proceeding
[2:18:30] lawfully within the provisions of our constitutionally guaranteed rights. Furthermore,
[2:18:36] the petition. Um, process for charter counties is afforded for by the California
[2:18:43] government code. Article 11 of the California Constitution provides charter counties
[2:18:48] control over municipal affairs, and elections are defined in this article as a municipal
[2:18:53] affair. This amendment will restore the rights that were taken from citizens by citizens
[2:18:59] of Shasta County by tyrannical state overreach when AB 969 was passed in retaliation
[2:19:05] for ending the Dominion contract and moving towards hand counting. The effort of
[2:19:10] the citizens of Shasta County. It is well within the rights guaranteed them by law.
[2:19:16] What they are asking for has been legal in the state of California for 175 years.
[2:19:22] It is well within line of what the direction of the rest of the country is going
[2:19:26] and moving towards under the Trump administration. Thank you.
[2:19:32] Michelle, followed by Casey, then Ghost, followed by Dan. Good afternoon. I just
[2:19:39] wanted to say that um
[2:19:44] I mean it's been discussed enough about the problems with electronic ballots and
[2:19:49] in the short time that Clint Curtis has been here, he's, uh, saved us will be about
[2:19:55] $80,000 just in ballots alone. Uh, we were paying $2.20 a ballot, and we're doing
[2:20:02] it, we'll be doing it locally for 77 cents, 7.9 cents, and that figures out to be
[2:20:09] about. So thank you and uh my concern has been since the beginning. That that um
[2:20:15] it's so easy to uh manipulate things electronically and I've said it many times it's
[2:20:22] not a partisan issue for me or or for anyone. We just wanna make it as safe as possible
[2:20:28] and Clint Curtis has that knowledge. He's, uh, you know, been a, um, a programmer.
[2:20:34] He's a specialized as an attorney in that field, and he's, he's the only one that
[2:20:39] has that knowledge, so we're fortunate to get somebody like that. And then the last
[2:20:45] thing I wanted to say, um, at the last meeting that debacle with the people in the
[2:20:50] masks and everything, I spoke to Mr. Larmer and Mr. Rickett about that and Mr. Rickett,
[2:20:55] you were very um Kind to spend the time with me, um, and I heard that there was nothing
[2:21:01] we could do about it but it just so happened that same day RFK was uh starting um
[2:21:07] a conference I think with Congress and somebody in mass jumped up and he was startled
[2:21:13] and the sheriff. Or whoever was in charge took her immediately out and I understand
[2:21:18] that's a 403 law or something and if they're entitled to that, why can't we as just
[2:21:25] a small county be entitled to the same process and have the same respect? I want
[2:21:30] to come to a respectable meeting and um, you know, get things done and not be disrupted.
[2:21:39] Casey followed by Ghost, then Dan.
[2:21:45] Good morning. Um, I want to first of all, um, speak to Matt Plummer on, um.
[2:21:55] When he ran for the seat, he ran, uh, speaking about a Pew,
[2:22:02] uh, according to Pew, 20% of the public trust our government. This was with an interview
[2:22:09] with Chris Valton of Bethel Church. Yet since he's been on this board, he's
[2:22:16] consistently gas lit dozens of veterans and other patriots who've spent thousands
[2:22:21] of hours observing Shasta County elections, who observed a plethora of violations
[2:22:27] and a severely compromised system, and who demand change. You speak out of two sides
[2:22:34] of your mouth. You and long consistently voting against our fair elections here in
[2:22:40] Shasta County. And twice you used faulty data with no scientific evidence for your
[2:22:45] decisions to make, to make excuses for a very clear corrupt anti-God agenda.
[2:22:54] Our election system is not just broken, it's betraying us. The sacred rights of we
[2:22:59] the people are being trampled underfoot. Our voices, our votes, our very freedoms
[2:23:05] are under attack, silenced by a system that's failing to uphold the principles in
[2:23:10] which it was built to protect us. Think about this not so long ago, slavery was legal.
[2:23:17] Discrimination was legal, laws written by those. In power justify the oppression,
[2:23:22] but laws don't make something right. History has shown us that time and time again.
[2:23:28] So I ask you today, how long will we hide behind unjust laws? How long will we let
[2:23:34] our rights be eroded by a system that serves itself instead of the people? To those
[2:23:40] who say it's the law, so we must follow it, I say grow a backbone. Ghost followed
[2:23:47] by Dan.
[2:23:53] Hi, um, so I'm speaking right now because something deeply wrong and concerning happened
[2:23:58] earlier in this room. Uh, you silenced a constituent before she even had the chance
[2:24:03] to get to her point. Uh, she was removed without regard for her First Amendment right
[2:24:07] to speak as a member of this community. So I ask you, what was the reason for this?
[2:24:13] Uh, what threat did her words pose, uh, before she was even allowed to speak them.
[2:24:18] This wasn't about decorum as you so claim. This was about control. This council is
[2:24:23] supposed to represent all of us, not just the people that you agree with, and not
[2:24:27] those who have perspectives that make you comfortable. But time and time again, we
[2:24:32] see a pattern. Three members who hold a monopoly silencing dissent. Uh
[2:24:40] And uh shut down opposing views and consistently intimidate and bully both members
[2:24:46] on the board and the public that you serve. This is not a democracy. This is an abuse
[2:24:52] of power. And let's be honest, we know why you're doing it. We know about your open
[2:24:56] ties to extremist organizations, groups that promote white supremacy, division, and
[2:25:01] hateful ideologies that have absolutely no room in our community.
[2:25:07] When you align yourselves with hate, you lose any moral ground to talk about civility
[2:25:12] or order. You don't get to demand respect while silencing those that you were elected
[2:25:18] to serve. You don't get to talk about unity while aligning yourselves with division
[2:25:22] and people who dehumanize others. And you don't get to hide behind procedures when
[2:25:26] it's clear you're using them as weapons. The truth is that we see you, each and every
[2:25:31] one of you. We see through your tactics, your alliances, and the fear mongering.
[2:25:36] We will not be silenced as a community. You may control this mic, but you absolutely
[2:25:41] do not control the truth.
[2:25:45] Dan and Dan is your last speaker.
[2:25:50] I believe these are your glasses up here. Um, hello board. It's good to be back and
[2:25:55] be able to see you. I pulled in Shasta County earlier this morning and uh had another
[2:26:00] adventure across town to take care of, and now I'm here. The hostility in this room
[2:26:05] is unbelievable, and one of the guys mentioned Trump, and I've heard about Trump
[2:26:10] derangement syndrome, but there's a strong basis of Trump derangement back there
[2:26:15] inability to stay quiet while other people are discussing and giving information
[2:26:20] and sharing their opinions. They can't keep quiet. I appreciate what you're doing.
[2:26:24] I didn't plan on speaking on public comment, but I heard those comments and I couldn't
[2:26:28] be quiet. I was here for R4 and because of some other things that have come up, I'm
[2:26:33] going to need to take off. The 100,000 quote for the R4 is ridiculous. Have that
[2:26:38] substantiated. They're charging. For billing hours for
[2:26:43] county employees that are already on the clock, that the number for the attorneys
[2:26:49] was inflated because we used outside attorneys instead of using in-house, so the
[2:26:54] election commission should stand. So thank you for your listening. I'm sure that
[2:27:00] was our last speaker.
[2:27:04] All right, moving on to R4. Well, with that, I'll make a motion to approve the consent
[2:27:08] calendar. Second, we have a first by Supervisor Kelstrom. Second by Supervisor plumber.
[2:27:13] Thank you, Supervisor Kelstrom. All those in favor? I passes 50. Moving on to R4.
[2:27:23] Mr. Curtis, you would like to come on up.
[2:27:30] This is your item, so I'll let you. Uh, yes, well, originally I was proposing that
[2:27:36] we temporarily, you know, disbanded it, but I'm told we can't temporarily do anything,
[2:27:41] you have to completely repeal or not and um. Oddly enough, everything you do here,
[2:27:48] apparently everybody in California watches because I was at a meeting on Friday with
[2:27:52] other ROVs that had election commission to go up and said, don't let them suspend
[2:27:57] the commission, it will affect ours. So you guys have a lot more power than you might
[2:28:01] know you have out there. Every everybody's watching you. Um, but I have talked with
[2:28:05] other people. I talked with Mr. Plummer, and he made some good points that maybe
[2:28:10] instead of getting rid of it, we can just change the meeting schedule to like once
[2:28:15] a year or once every 6 months, and that way because their job is to report to you,
[2:28:21] not to me, they're actually watching me, right? They're watching me and telling you
[2:28:26] if I'm doing a good job or not. So it might be better to go with that route and then
[2:28:31] you don't have to try and bring it back and you don't throw out a commission that
[2:28:34] might be worthwhile, um. And it might have been a little arrogant on my part to think
[2:28:40] that since I don't need it because I'm gonna talk to every citizen who wants to talk
[2:28:43] to me that it wouldn't be needed in the future. In the future I can get hit by a
[2:28:49] truck tomorrow. You never know. So in the future you may go back to where the ROV
[2:28:52] office doesn't speak to the citizens and the opposite of what I'm doing now and so
[2:28:58] maybe it's worth keeping, but you can save the money by simply pushing the schedule
[2:29:03] out they can do their thing. They can meet with me one on one. I was looking to try
[2:29:08] and meet with groups and the Brown Act would kind of keep that from happening. So,
[2:29:14] um, you know, I thought getting rid would be easier a little quicker, but it might
[2:29:19] be a problem down the road. So I have, uh, I've accepted your proposition, sir.
[2:29:28] Any questions? Um, What was supervisor plumber? I mean, how many public comments
[2:29:33] do we have? 7? 12 chair. Um, just maybe it'd be good to state what Supervisor Plumber's
[2:29:40] proposition was before we take public comment just so people understand where this
[2:29:44] is possibly going. Oh, he just said that, you know, maybe getting rid of it is not
[2:29:49] a good idea because technically they wanna watch me as well. And so by getting rid
[2:29:55] of the election commission, I'm kind of destroying the process that's supposed to
[2:29:59] be watching me. And that's because I simply thought I would do it on my own, just
[2:30:03] run in there and talk to everybody and get everything accomplished because I'm gonna
[2:30:07] address everybody's concern. But Like he mentioned, you know, it's better to have
[2:30:13] it in position to actually report that I'm doing that as opposed to just telling
[2:30:18] you and I guess you are supposed to believe me, so it is better to have it in place.
[2:30:23] Um, there's a cost involved, but if you push back to the reporting period to 6 months
[2:30:29] or a year, once a year, they don't draw salaries, you know. Um, if I were you,
[2:30:37] I would probably take it off the suspension because it doesn't have any sort of legislative
[2:30:43] effect. It doesn't have a budget. All it does is collect data and give it to you.
[2:30:47] So if you're suspending it, all you're doing is keeping it from talking to you. Which
[2:30:52] doesn't really make any sense if that's its function. But that's my position. It's
[2:30:57] your board. They just watch me, so you can do whatever you feel like with it. Supervisor
[2:31:01] Plumber, if we were to keep this around, would you be appointing somebody? You have
[2:31:05] yet to do that. Yes, and the reason that I haven't is because it has been suspended,
[2:31:11] so I haven't prioritized um finding a candidate to appoint to it, but I do plan to
[2:31:16] do that. Want to take public comment. Stephanie will take public comment. Mr. Kurt,
[2:31:23] you want to take a seat? and chair, since last time I had looked at it, we do have
[2:31:26] 2 additional speakers. So altogether we have 14. We will start with Laurie Bridgeford
[2:31:30] followed by Rich Gardo, then Dolores Lucero. If I called your name, please get in
[2:31:34] you.
[2:31:52] Yes, regarding our 4, and the election commission, it's, it's too bad it's been on
[2:31:56] such a long suspension. We all know that we have some uh. Inappropriate people that
[2:32:01] were put there not to focus and help, and so they've already lost some time. I, I
[2:32:06] think once a year is not sufficient at all for the long standing uh ignorance and
[2:32:12] neglect and abuse that some of us had to take at the last election, so um. I don't
[2:32:18] see why if we did it once a month, that's 7 meetings and then maybe have it go into
[2:32:23] a 6 month span or something quarterly, but right now there's just so much to catch
[2:32:28] up with and um I, I really feel bad for the people that did a lot of the work and
[2:32:33] they were on the ad hoc committees and so on and so forth so um. Lots has been exposed
[2:32:39] and uh I'm glad Mr. Kurtz explained with more clarity as to them being able to report
[2:32:45] to the board as I understand it, if you're going to appoint someone, they can be
[2:32:49] in any district. I don't know that that changed, but is that correct? You can appoint
[2:32:54] anybody, right? OK, right, thank you.
[2:32:58] Rich Gallardo, followed by Dolores Lucero, followed by Patty Plum, then Bev. If I
[2:33:03] called your name, please get in queue.
[2:33:07] Stephanie, just out of curiosity, uh, council Larmer, when the, when the speaker
[2:33:12] is done, and then a speaker decides to come up, when does their clock officially
[2:33:15] have to start?
[2:33:19] There's nothing in the rules. The chair essentially can uh all that. Give it 5 seconds
[2:33:23] from the time the person vacates the, the, the mic to start the clock on the next
[2:33:27] speaker. Thank you.
[2:33:33] Thank you. Of course, I do agree with reinstating the commission. The 2 year election
[2:33:38] cycle goes extremely quickly. I would recommend at least quarterly meetings year
[2:33:44] round because that's only 8 meetings in a 2 year cycle, and I, and so off year on
[2:33:51] your elections, I think that doesn't matter quarterly, minimally. Um And yes, it's
[2:33:58] the voice in the will of the people. Thank you, Mr. Curtis, for realizing that it
[2:34:02] is, it is the voice of the people in a republic. That's how we are supposed to governors
[2:34:06] from the bottom up. Uh, if you want to get rid of some committees, how about the
[2:34:10] Committee on Aging? Take your wheat germ. Take your vitamins. Stop taking, yeah,
[2:34:17] I'm serious. Stop taking the flu shots and vaccines, that'll get rid of the Alzheimer's.
[2:34:22] How, how about that? Let's get rid of that one. OK, let's save some money there.
[2:34:26] Um, without a fair and transparent election, nothing else matters. And I sent to
[2:34:32] this board recently because I heard Mr. Long, uh, Lie to the people, say there's
[2:34:37] no fraud. You now have the you have the link, election fraud at heritage.org. There
[2:34:43] is fraud convictions all over the country. There are dozens in the state of California.
[2:34:50] Election fraud exists, so please don't say that anymore. It makes you look ignorant.
[2:34:56] OK. And I appreciate uh appreciate a good relationship with our, our registrar who
[2:35:02] I believe is going to allow for a much more fair and transparent election, and that's
[2:35:08] really all we want. Thank you so much.
[2:35:11] Dolores Lucero, followed by Patty Plum, followed by Bev, then Laura. If I called
[2:35:16] your name, please get in queue.
[2:35:22] What shall we start?
[2:35:28] To have someone to over to oversee the new ROV it's important because we don't trust
[2:35:36] him. I don't trust him. He already violated people's rights, he already discriminated
[2:35:42] other citizens by not allowing them to attend the meeting. They had a private meeting,
[2:35:49] so he violated those rights of those citizens. So, for someone to be appointed,
[2:35:57] who's going to be when you appoint You're the person that you want. Are you you three
[2:36:02] are going to be dictators to make sure that person that you don't like to be appointed
[2:36:08] by those, those other people who are going to be say I want this person. Are you
[2:36:12] gonna have the citizens to come up here to actually to slander them and say bad things
[2:36:19] about them so you don't appoint them and you're gonna vote no on them? Because that's
[2:36:24] what it's gonna come down to. You're gonna make. Sure that you vote against whoever
[2:36:28] they want. It's not an easy process. It's actually you violate people's rights and
[2:36:34] you constantly do that. You get frustrated, Chris. You act like you don't like your
[2:36:39] damn job. Stop breathing like if you don't like hearing me talk because that's how
[2:36:45] you act. This, it's important because we need, we need to make sure that he doesn't
[2:36:51] break the law. He already broke the law. We, I don't, we, I don't understand why
[2:36:56] you, you keep on picking people that keep on breaking laws. You don't are not here
[2:37:02] for transparency. That first meeting he did was not transparency. That's discrimination.
[2:37:09] He didn't allow people to attend that meeting. Don't you guys care or should I say
[2:37:15] you don't care because you don't. It's all about you're a.
[2:37:20] Big Cotty Plum followed by Bev, followed by Laura, followed by Antonia.
[2:37:27] Welcome. Thank you. I can't tell you how excited I am about what we experienced on
[2:37:32] Saturday and so many people here in the room from both sides, we gathered together
[2:37:37] and it was unifying and it was an opportunity for us to be educated and to see a
[2:37:42] path forward rather than complaining about the past and our current situation. And
[2:37:46] if you haven't figured out by now, you're a little bit late to dinner, but the kitchen
[2:37:50] is still open, get your plate. There's plenty of information to educate you about
[2:37:54] our condition with the election system. But going forward, I see us be able to um
[2:38:00] combine our efforts to meet with our ROV to get the information we need to create
[2:38:04] a path that makes sense not only for our county but also a template for others and
[2:38:09] um just people like Jeff and David and Susan that were there at the town hall meeting
[2:38:14] with uh Clint Curtis and Doctor Frank, it was exceptional to see us all be together
[2:38:19] and there was no yelling. Everyone was getting. Information that they need and it's
[2:38:23] understandable why people are upset because we get upset to think that we've been
[2:38:27] lied to, we have been betrayed. It's very insulting what's happened to us, but the
[2:38:32] idea of going forward with the election commission, um, we can have that in place
[2:38:36] and also an election committee that could be more, um, with the ROV and the ability
[2:38:41] without the restrictions to meet together and to uh provide uh solutions for all
[2:38:46] of us. OK, thank you.
[2:38:49] followed by Laura, followed by Antonia, followed by Michelle, then Jim Burnett. Welcome,
[2:38:54] Beth. Thank you. Um, I am here today to ask you not to dissolve the election commission
[2:39:01] since this is all started because of a lie, it was said that two of the commissioners
[2:39:06] were part of a lawsuit. Wrong. Was this being said deceitfully um to the
[2:39:13] citizens of Chasta County, they filed declarations as to what they observed, as did
[2:39:19] many others. What, what if a department. Had stole someone's money and employees
[2:39:27] so the entire crime. Do you feel that the employee should remain silent and there
[2:39:33] are no consequences for that supervisor um if our votes are stolen, is that not
[2:39:41] worse than anything physical that can be stolen? Our votes being stolen cannot be
[2:39:46] replaced and will eventually put us in danger of our freedom. It is not the victim
[2:39:53] that should be punished. It should be the one that did the crime. Um, it's been said
[2:39:58] that the commission has not done anything. That is wrong. Reports have been submitted.
[2:40:03] If you have not received them, then maybe you should need to find out why. Um, you
[2:40:09] need to keep the election commission. Thank you very much. Laura, followed by Antonia,
[2:40:15] followed by Michelle, followed by Jim Burnett.
[2:40:21] OK, good good morning again. Um, I just wanted to say that one thing that Clint Curtis
[2:40:27] said that really stuck out was that the purpose of the board was to or the purpose
[2:40:32] of the election commission was to report back to the board what the citizens have
[2:40:37] said and um for that reason I completely agree that we need to keep. This election
[2:40:44] commission going. There's been a number of reports made. The election commission
[2:40:49] brought forth out of town experts to speak and explain about the corrupted audit
[2:40:54] logs and the suspected breach in the voting system that we're using, as well as unauthorized
[2:41:00] time changes that occurred in 62nd increments that were um indicative of a possible
[2:41:07] breach in the system which needs to be investigated and um.
[2:41:14] So these reports, most of them have not even gone before the board with the exception
[2:41:19] of one of them, and I would highly recommend that you take those reports that have
[2:41:24] already been submitted and actually bring them forth for a hearings for the public
[2:41:29] to weigh in and to hear what. You know, the commission produced. It's just respectful
[2:41:34] of the commissioners who volunteer their time and spent so many hours producing those
[2:41:39] reports, um, to actually utilize them instead of just letting them collect dust,
[2:41:44] um. So that for one, but also we need to keep this going. um, what has happened is
[2:41:50] that Joanna Francesca has broken over a half a dozen election laws and nobody is
[2:41:56] held to account. Um, that's a problem right now. um, we're faced with a situation
[2:42:01] that nobody wants to hear even of these violations when laws are broken. There should
[2:42:07] be accountability. We are a country of law and order. I firmly believe that we need
[2:42:11] to abide by the California election code, and I think that the citizens need to have
[2:42:17] a forum where they can express those grief. Thank you. Thank you.
[2:42:28] Antonio followed by Michelle, then Jim Burnett followed by Casey.
[2:42:34] Good morning board.
[2:42:37] Um, the election commission serves as the voice of people and plays a vital role
[2:42:42] in ensuring transparency and fairness in our election process. With the appointment
[2:42:47] of a new register of voters, ROV Glenn Curtis, the public must hear. Must hear
[2:42:55] finalized meaningful employment. Here his perspective on the commission before any
[2:43:02] decisions are finalized, which we already heard. What he has said, so we got that.
[2:43:09] Meaningful public engagement will be necessary. To implement much needed election
[2:43:17] reform, and the election commission can serve as an In valuable reform for
[2:43:24] those discussions, disbanding the commission before the public is fully assured of
[2:43:31] a fair and transparent electoral process would be premature. I strongly urge the
[2:43:37] board to reconsider this matter and allow the commission to continue its essential
[2:43:44] work in the safeguarding electoral integrity. Thank you. Thank you. Michelle, followed
[2:43:51] by Jim Burnett, followed by Casey, then Dan. I just wanted to say that this, I, I
[2:43:57] agree with Patty, it's we wanna just move forward in a positive way and to um
[2:44:04] investigate and look at how we can um do things better and really weigh this
[2:44:11] electronic um balloting versus just the hand counting. And I wanted to, I didn't
[2:44:17] get enough time, but not only, uh, was, uh, Clint Curtis saving us money but we have,
[2:44:22] I think we already 450 people that are volunteering to, uh, account. So, um, I heard,
[2:44:30] um. Joanna said that she had to hire several uh extra people 10 hour days for a month,
[2:44:37] so, uh, and we're doing this for the future for our children. I mean, most of you
[2:44:43] have children, grandchildren we want the votes to be as clean as possible and that's
[2:44:49] what we're after we're, I am not here for a fight. I, I want something to be improved
[2:44:54] for everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Jim Burnett, followed by Casey, followed by Dan,
[2:45:01] followed by Ronin. If I called your name, please get in queue.
[2:45:05] Good morning board. I too wish that the election commission can continue because
[2:45:12] the term we the people is only a phrase until you apply it to people supervising
[2:45:19] their own government. The people are the power. It should be bottom up, and nothing
[2:45:24] is exemplifies that as much as a committee to. Oversee the office of the ROB.
[2:45:32] Clint Curtis makes a great point in that he may, he may be great, he may be just
[2:45:38] what we need, but if something happens and we get somebody else in there, we're back
[2:45:43] square one. So unless we have the mechanism in place that will govern. The next ROB
[2:45:51] is for naught. People forget that ballots are as valuable, if not more valuable than
[2:45:57] money, because everything in our government starts with the vote of the people. The
[2:46:03] will of the people needs to prevail, and if the elections are in any way compromised.
[2:46:09] Then all of that breaks, but there are people that are getting enormously rich and
[2:46:14] powerful ostensibly based on what the results of an election are, but we don't trust
[2:46:19] the results of the elections unless we have full transparency and accountability.
[2:46:26] At every single level, and I believe that Mr. Curtis is going to provide that for
[2:46:30] us, but we still need to be watching like a hawk at every step of the way. Otherwise
[2:46:36] we're just delegating where we shouldn't be delegating. That's the reason we've got
[2:46:41] in this mess in the first place. We delegate our Our ability to hold elections to
[2:46:47] somebody that we don't know. Some people say they do know, but we really don't know
[2:46:53] unless there's hard, fast evidence in what we have now up until this point is a statement
[2:46:59] of vote, which means nothing to me. It's just a report that somebody thank you.
[2:47:07] Casey followed by Dan, followed by Ronine, then Margaret Hanson.
[2:47:15] Good morning again. Our election process is in dire need of reform. To rebuild trust
[2:47:22] and restore integrity, we must act together with urgency and determination. This
[2:47:29] is no small task. It demands hard work, dedication, and the support of every one
[2:47:35] of us who cares about fair and honest elections. We are fortunate enough to have
[2:47:40] devoted individuals like the 3 election commissioner volunteers who give their time
[2:47:45] so selflessly to serve this county. Their noble efforts show us what's possible when
[2:47:51] we commit to doing what's right. Dissolving the election commission would be a grave
[2:47:56] mistake. The recent election certified under duress by this board was marred by significant
[2:48:03] violations and troubling irregularities. This cannot stand. We deserve better. Our
[2:48:09] elections must be transparent, secure, and beyond reproach. So I urge you today to
[2:48:17] set aside political divides and focus on what should. Unite us, the shared commitment
[2:48:23] to a fair and trustworthy election system. Reconsider any approach that weakens our
[2:48:29] process. Stand with us to ensure Shasta County's elections reflect the true will
[2:48:36] of the people. Together we can rebuild the system we all take pride in. Thank you
[2:48:41] for listening and let's get to work. Thank you. Dan followed by Ronin, followed by
[2:48:48] Margaret Hanson, and lastly C Gardner.
[2:48:53] Well I'm back. I didn't think I was going to be back, but I thought public comment
[2:48:56] was before R1, 2 and 3, and I didn't want to wait. My customer can wait a little
[2:49:02] bit. We need to reinstate the election commission. Everybody in the room wants a
[2:49:06] fair, transparent election. There's no way to score argue against that. We've got
[2:49:11] a consensus right now. We all agree. Even Dolores wants the election commission back
[2:49:16] so you guys can keep eyes on it. The ROV is here. He wants it to be. We're going
[2:49:22] to hear shortly from the two of the commissioners we already heard from a third one.
[2:49:27] They want the commission there. The deceitful numbers about the cost of the commission,
[2:49:31] a volunteer commission needs to be. Welched and we need to look at the opportunity
[2:49:38] for the people to speak to the election commission and tell them what they want.
[2:49:42] We want a fair and transparent election. Everybody in the room agrees with that.
[2:49:48] So thank you. Thank you.
[2:49:52] followed by Margaret Hanson, and lastly C. Gardner.
[2:49:57] Hi there board. Um, as the last chair of the election commission, I agree with what,
[2:50:02] uh, Mr. Curtis said. For the record, there is um a budget for the commission, just
[2:50:08] for the record. Uh, I would recommend that there be a minimum of 3 to 4 meetings
[2:50:15] a year, uh, so that we can uh provide pertinent information and
[2:50:22] recommendations to the board in a timely manner, especially with elections, you know,
[2:50:28] pretty frequently. Uh, the board went to all the hassle and effort to appoint Mr.
[2:50:34] Curtis to the ROV position. It's not time to let up on election integrity issues,
[2:50:39] so please do not discontinue the commission. I would also like to reiterate that
[2:50:45] the commission should be reinstated immediately because the argument that two of
[2:50:49] the existing commissioners are party to a lawsuit against the county is not true.
[2:50:55] They have not been named in the lawsuit, and one of the supervisors and Mr. Rickert
[2:51:02] can be subpoenaed in the case, which is no different. Then the declarations submitted
[2:51:06] in the case that were written by two of the commissioners. So that argument is just
[2:51:11] totally bogus. So anyway, that's what I have to say. Thank you. Margaret Hanson,
[2:51:17] followed by C Gardner.
[2:51:22] Good morning. I'm speaking on my behalf, not for any of the group. So my
[2:51:30] recommendation would be to keep the um elections commission uh there's a lot of work
[2:51:37] going on behind the scenes individually and with um another person I would highly
[2:51:45] suggest that you appoint somebody and you as well uh when we had our conversation
[2:51:53] the first time that you know you were sworn in and you wanted to talk to me. And
[2:51:58] you asked me what was important about this or why not just the citizens coming up
[2:52:03] here and I told you I said that we are investigating things we bring these forward
[2:52:10] and the citizens aren't being listened to as much as we should be listened to because
[2:52:15] of you guys, I also asked you to appoint somebody that's not an activist but somebody
[2:52:19] that wants to work with the commission. So in all honesty it would be a good idea
[2:52:24] to keep it. It's an honor to serve. It was really an honor to serve um it's a lot
[2:52:31] of time consuming things, but I will say to you there's a lot of interesting stuff
[2:52:36] coming up. Thank you.
[2:52:39] And gardener is our last speaker. A lot of interesting stuff, but the fact of the
[2:52:46] matter is we've had an election commission for the last 4 years. People come before
[2:52:51] this board and spew at least 45 minutes, maybe an hour, every meeting about this
[2:52:58] and that, this and that, reams of data, reams of information that today was thrown
[2:53:04] out, at least halfway thrown out by the judge. Hobbs's cases are ridiculous, costing
[2:53:11] our county $107,000. The election commission costing $120,000 that we know about,
[2:53:19] but hey, you got money to burn on propaganda, and that's all. It frigging is right
[2:53:25] out propaganda. Hey, Clint was on to an idea. The election commission stands to be
[2:53:31] a legal liability. You're wasting money that could be possibly taken to a court.
[2:53:39] When you have the uh chair of the election commission get up and say, we demand that
[2:53:44] the county break laws. Well, guess what? That's illegal. That's flat out illegal.
[2:53:51] So we've got one commissioner who is the leader or a co-leader of a secessionist
[2:53:58] group trying to secede from the state of California because she believes that the
[2:54:03] state is an invalid entity where we get our money from, where we get our laws from,
[2:54:09] and by the way, we live in the state of California under the California Constitution.
[2:54:13] But hey, maybe we should keep that election commission because then Because basically
[2:54:19] you have no jurisdiction over elections. You should have been shutting this down,
[2:54:22] but you love propaganda and you want the taxpayers to pay for it. So you listen to
[2:54:27] all this crap what that should have been deferred over to the election commission.
[2:54:32] What a joke. It's a big propaganda. That's all it is. And taxpayers need to go understand
[2:54:40] that they are paying for this propaganda, this propaganda, see this.
[2:54:49] All right, bring it back to board discussion. Uh, Mr. Curtis, would you like to come
[2:54:53] up in case anybody has any other questions? I just wanted to clarify. Uh, just that,
[2:55:00] uh, I think the work we did in, uh, January and then, you know, in the following
[2:55:05] months around restricting the number of meetings, uh, was an adequate step in that
[2:55:10] direction, uh, as far as now and so, uh, I don't recommend any additional changes
[2:55:16] to a meeting frequency.
[2:55:22] Yeah, I don't have a problem with the what we had worked out in in January either.
[2:55:27] So, um, I'll make a motion to continue on and with the caveat that I would like Supervisor
[2:55:32] plumber to appoint someone to that commission and, uh. Well, I don't think supervised
[2:55:38] long is going to, but uh, so I'd be more than happy for him to do it also,
[2:55:44] but um, so what's on the agenda today is is to approve and repeal the the ordinance.
[2:55:50] So if you want to bring something else back at a later time, we can do that, but
[2:55:53] the only thing that is on. is to uh adopt an ordinance repealing. OK, got you. And,
[2:55:58] and under this agenda item the way it's listed, I'll get right to you supers along.
[2:56:02] Um, we can, we can have this discussion still right as it relates to the ordinance
[2:56:06] in this topic because I think that was one of the things when Mr. Curtis talked about
[2:56:10] bringing this forward, um. You know, we can only talk to one of their supervisors,
[2:56:14] so I think he wanted us all to, you can have the discussion about whether you want
[2:56:18] whether you want to adopt this and if you don't want to adopt it, what the other
[2:56:21] options are. OK, supervisor. Thank you, Chair Cry. Um, well, it's
[2:56:28] interesting.
[2:56:31] I was surprised when Mr. Curtis and Faircry came to me independently and recommended
[2:56:37] that this commission be dissolved and I was like, well, I've been advocating for
[2:56:43] that from before when I was on the campaign trail and also when I was newly
[2:56:50] seated in office, this issue has come up many times, um. The The
[2:56:58] Commission has has cost us a significant amount of money and we've
[2:57:06] proven unproven conspiracy theories bringing forward illegal recommendations, all
[2:57:12] those kinds of things, so it has never made sense to me. If there was something that
[2:57:17] was founded and there was evidence, then I could, I could get behind it, of course,
[2:57:23] because I want the free and transparent elections as much as anyone does. Um, so
[2:57:30] what has changed? I, I've thought a lot about this and we've elected Mr. Curtis,
[2:57:36] um, to the ROV position or appointed him, and, uh, by his own words he uh believes
[2:57:44] there is fraud and conspiracy theories and um wants to uh
[2:57:51] kind of uh fix uh something that was working and in my opinion. And so where do we
[2:57:58] go from here? So I consulted with a number of subject matter experts that are versed
[2:58:04] in this field, and the commission members have no authority. It's an
[2:58:11] advisory committee only. They cannot make any binding decisions. They cannot make
[2:58:17] any decisions at all. All they can do is make recommendations. And they as citizens
[2:58:24] do not have any investigative background or training to detect election irregularities.
[2:58:31] They can just say what their opinions are and they furthermore do not have any increased
[2:58:39] access into the internal areas of the ROVs office any more than any other
[2:58:46] citizen would. So I looked at the commission and thought to myself, this is
[2:58:54] not the, the platform to be an effective watchdog for good things or improper
[2:59:02] things in the election's office because of everything I just stated. Um, so with
[2:59:09] that in mind, I was, I was shocked that this made it as an agenda item. I did not
[2:59:14] bring this forward, but I am in support of disbanding the commission at this time,
[2:59:20] and that would, that's my statement. motion.
[2:59:27] Well, we, we've got this regularly for it's, it's being brought to a vote. Are you,
[2:59:33] are you putting that in the motion to Well, I think we're voting on it, right? there's
[2:59:38] not a motion. Well, OK, I'll make the motion that we dissolve the elections commission
[2:59:45] at this time.
[2:59:49] OK, in a second. Um, uh, council Lamor, do you also want to weigh in? I'll I'll weigh
[2:59:55] in. We'll move on. Supervisor Armor, do you want to weigh in? You're good. Uh, councilor
[2:59:59] Larmer, um, Supervisor Long just mentioned something about the, the commission. How
[3:00:04] many, we have like roughly I think 87 commissions. How many of the 83 to 87 in the
[3:00:08] county, how many of those supersede the board's vote?
[3:00:14] To be honest with you, I don't, I don't think any of them supersede. OK, so really,
[3:00:18] I mean, basically by your statement we should get rid of the planning commission.
[3:00:21] We should get rid of this, you know, everything, every commission should be gone
[3:00:25] based on what your statement was. So do you think we should get rid of the planning
[3:00:27] commission's budget? No, I do not, of course, because this commission has made illegal
[3:00:33] recommendations, has cost us a fortune, and we have not had any productive measure.
[3:00:39] From this and we've got someone that believes these theories that has been appointed
[3:00:44] by this board and is currently sitting as our register of voters. He can cover it.
[3:00:48] When in fact, when I had the conversation with Mr. Curtis after our board meeting
[3:00:53] uh some time ago when he was talking about this should be disbanded, he told me it's
[3:01:00] redundant. So you know this is and this is the conversation. I want to make sure
[3:01:04] everybody understands what supervisor or I'm sorry, what our ROV Clint Curtis was
[3:01:08] referring to when this was originally brought up was talking about holding a mock
[3:01:12] election I think within 90 days, correct? Right. Somewhere in there 90 to 120 days
[3:01:16] and I'm in full support of that when we start looking at costs of facilities, buildings,
[3:01:21] where can we trim anywhere we can within what we're already doing in elections. So
[3:01:25] that was one of the things that did come up. It is currently suspended and I do.
[3:01:29] Uh, support Supervisor Long or supervisor plumber or Supervisor Long putting somebody
[3:01:34] on that. What we don't have is we haven't had the election commission rowing in conjunction
[3:01:39] with any of our past two ROVs. What I've already seen with this group and yourself,
[3:01:44] it sounds like I wasn't in town, but it sounds like you had a town hall this Saturday,
[3:01:50] people were working together because that's really what it's about is we'd like to
[3:01:53] see the election commission. Uh, working in conjunction with the ROV and having those,
[3:01:59] uh, meetings be streamlined. I do agree with Supervisor Kelstrom about and Supervisor
[3:02:03] Plumber, I think actually said it originally that we did that work in January of
[3:02:06] what that schedule would look like. Um, I think you've been here a very short time,
[3:02:10] so I think we just play that out and see how that goes. So, and obviously our 4 failed,
[3:02:15] didn't have a second. So, I have a question for you. How did this? Uh, motion or
[3:02:22] how did this become agenized to dissolve the elections commission? Who put this on
[3:02:27] the Mr. Mr. Curtis, uh, originally asked to put it on and like any elected official
[3:02:33] of Noda Short, Laurie Scott, Leslie Morgan, Stephanie Bridget, she has one on here
[3:02:38] today. So, so this, this was brought by Mr. Curtis to you, the chair. Who agreed
[3:02:44] to put it on the agenda to dissolve the commission. Oh, absolutely. Yeah. Any time
[3:02:48] an elected official wants to bring anything forward, I'm going to let him whether
[3:02:51] I support it or not, but I'm not going to for sure and the conversation you had with
[3:02:56] me that this was going to be brought forward and basically you wanted to.
[3:03:04] Uh, make sure that it was known to be your motion, your position, so that I would
[3:03:11] not get sullied in the vote. Well no, it was strictly with with with the ROB just
[3:03:17] let you know I mean like for me I, I would 100% like I hate, I mean, uh, the bureaucracy
[3:03:24] of having, um, now that I've done this as long as I have, um, it's, it's really,
[3:03:29] it's really tough, but one thing I'll tell you is if we had a commission. That and
[3:03:32] we had a really big group of people that were against the sheriff, or we had a really
[3:03:35] big group of people that were against the assessor, the recorder, the treasurer,
[3:03:39] or the district attorney. If a citizen group felt strong enough to bring something
[3:03:43] forward and the election commission was created by uh at the time Supervisor Jones
[3:03:47] because there was a large number and a growing number of people very um. Unhappy
[3:03:52] and, and quite honestly, uh very uh well there was very a lot of distrust, so I think
[3:03:58] it's good to have citizen oversight. So if there's a group out there that thinks
[3:04:01] the sheriff isn't getting it done, by all means start a group and say, hey, let's
[3:04:06] have a citizen oversight committee on the sheriff. Other counties have those types
[3:04:09] of things. Here in Shasta County, we really only have one group that oversees an
[3:04:13] elected. Individual, I don't't say overseas, but has a committee that would report
[3:04:17] to the board, um, as it relates to another elected official, and that's the elections
[3:04:20] commission. And if, uh, Clint Curtis, our new ROV, said he wanted to get rid of it,
[3:04:24] I'm always gonna let any or any elected official bring something forward and not,
[3:04:28] not stop that, that movement. So, so originally I was, I would, if he said he wanted
[3:04:33] to get rid of it at this point, um, I would probably support it, but Right now, well,
[3:04:39] and that's where I'm going because we were at the employee appreciation luncheon
[3:04:43] and you and I had a private conversation with Mr. Rickert also and you brought it
[3:04:48] to my attention that this was going to come forward and was going to be dissolved
[3:04:53] and so no, I just said that it was coming forward and my thought originally was if
[3:04:58] Clint Curtis wanted to dissolve it, I thought there would be probably a lot less
[3:05:01] pushback, but obviously there's been some pushback, and I don't blame him. He says,
[3:05:04] hey, I think there's a lot of good. Um, you know, there's a, there's a lot of good
[3:05:09] conversations because again, when something comes forward to this body, we have no
[3:05:14] ability to do anything as it relates to the ROV. That's why for me, the planning
[3:05:19] commission, we have a lot of say so. That's why I would never get rid of the, I mean
[3:05:22] my answer to what you said is completely opposite. The planning commission gives
[3:05:26] us input and we can actually act, but the elections commission can give us input
[3:05:31] and there's very little we can do, almost nothing if the. ROV isn't on board. So
[3:05:35] that's why I think this committee, although I support their effort and I support
[3:05:38] their work, it's, it's, it's tough because we don't have the ability to actually
[3:05:43] carry anything out that the ROB doesn't support. Well, and in regards to the planning
[3:05:47] commission, they make a lot of decisions. Um, it's just when it comes to rezoning
[3:05:52] and some of those things that it comes up to the board for their recommendation with
[3:05:56] our decision. So there, there are a lot of recommendations and there are a lot of
[3:06:01] decisions so. Uh, that, that comparison is not the same and so I guess, I guess what
[3:06:08] my point is, is how, why are we here even discussing this. It sounded like this was
[3:06:15] something that you wanted to to do, and Mr. Curtis told me independently he wanted
[3:06:21] to dissolve this. So I'm just confused as a former detective, I stated quite clearly
[3:06:26] that an elected official wanted to bring it forward, and I'm going to bring it forward,
[3:06:30] so I did. No, I said you're a former detective, so I'm trying to help you connect
[3:06:33] these dots that he told me he wanted to bring it forward, so I brought it forward.
[3:06:39] Right, and in your defense, I did want to dissolve it because I thought it was just
[3:06:43] an impediment to me actually speaking to people like because I'm gonna talk to everybody,
[3:06:49] but that was arrogance on my part because I didn't consider, well, what if I'm not
[3:06:53] here? Then they have nobody that will actually work with them and nobody to watch
[3:06:59] them. So and then Mr. Plumber brought up, well, maybe they wanna watch you too. You
[3:07:04] know, which is good. That's a good thing. I didn't consider that, you know, most
[3:07:08] times you figure, oh, I'm perfect. No one want to watch me, but he brought it up
[3:07:11] and he's absolutely correct. So we're gonna, maybe they won't watch me too. So that's
[3:07:14] why I changed my position. We beat this up. We're gonna move on to our 5 at this
[3:07:18] point. We've taken a vote, Mr. Doctor Moo, if you'd like to come on up, I would like.
[3:07:22] Right to your presentation before lunch. We're moving on. Thank you, sir. 5. We haven't
[3:07:26] taken the vote. There was no second. OK. A motion gets made and then it has to have
[3:07:31] a second type of vote. OK. Doctor Moo, come on up to R5 receive a presentation from
[3:07:35] the Shasta County Health Officer regarding alcohol and other drug services funding
[3:07:38] legislation service numbers. Welcome and Bailey Cocker, and just to be really quick,
[3:07:45] we are going to get through this item quickly and then we're gonna take uh uh not
[3:07:50] open comment, we're going to take public comment for our closed session items and
[3:07:54] we will adjourn for lunch. Uh procedural question for for counsel. Does the board
[3:07:58] need to take a vote to take no action on R4? It would be it would be cleanest if
[3:08:03] they take no action. Yeah, we can't we don't. Yeah, I mean, if I, I was ready to
[3:08:10] take a vote if Council Larmer. OK, that's fine. I'll make a motion to take no action
[3:08:14] on our four. All right. All those in favor? I oppose. 41.
[3:08:23] Good afternoon, uh, Chair Cry and the members of the board. Uh, previous board had
[3:08:28] asked me to have a presentation on nitrous oxide and other substance usage in Shasta
[3:08:34] County. Um, traditionally this type of information is managed by alcohol and drug
[3:08:41] department, not necessarily public health. Uh, and also one of the responsibility
[3:08:46] for alcohol and drugs is to have an annual report to the board regarding, uh, substance
[3:08:53] abuse in Shasta County. So I'd like to introduce again uh Bailey Cocker, who is the
[3:09:00] administrator for alcohol and drug and also uh deputy branch director for behavior
[3:09:06] health, and she knows much more about the subject and uh I'm gonna have her uh present
[3:09:13] yeah. Uh, this issue. I am going to just talk about just one slide. Uh, this is about
[3:09:19] nitrous oxide. Uh, nitrous oxide is a gas that's mostly used for culinary and medical,
[3:09:26] mostly dental for their, uh, dental procedures. Uh, however, uh, it could be misused,
[3:09:33] and it has been misused for a long time, however, recently, Uh, through heavy social
[3:09:39] media promotion, lots of young, mostly young people are using it and unfortunately,
[3:09:45] uh, chronic usage or heavy usage could cause severe neurological disorder,
[3:09:53] hematological as well as uh heart and lung conditions. So this is a uh uh rising
[3:09:59] problem not just in our county but throughout California and other counties are discussing
[3:10:05] this as well. Uh, it's mostly sold in smoke shops where they're not dental office
[3:10:12] or uh honorary kitchen supply office, so. I'm gonna have the net.
[3:10:21] Good afternoon, chair, members of the board. So kicking off the rest of the presentation,
[3:10:25] I'm gonna go into Shasta County's model, which is a drug medical organized delivery
[3:10:30] system. Um, Partnership is our administrative resource in that model. Um, so I'll
[3:10:36] talk a little bit about beneficiaries serve. Some of the primary diagnoses and substance
[3:10:42] use used. So in 2020, Shasta County opted into the regional model with seven other
[3:10:49] counties. This is a way to address network adequacy in smaller rural counties to
[3:10:55] ensure that beneficiaries have access to appropriate. Levels of care based on their
[3:10:59] screening scores. So in this model we partner with Humboldt, Lassen, Mendocino, Modoc,
[3:11:05] Shasta, Siski, and Solano Counties. Um, Prior to this model, there were a lot of
[3:11:10] resources that weren't available through the state plan. Um, for example, um, residential
[3:11:16] services through medical beneficiaries were, um, was solely for perinatal clients.
[3:11:27] So looking at this slide, this gives a little bit of a snapshot point in time for
[3:11:32] fiscal year to date when this was pulled the services that are being provided. And
[3:11:37] so on the left side there you will see all of the different members and the services
[3:11:42] that they've received. The unduplicated count at that point in time was 1,308. And
[3:11:48] then on the right side is the total number of visits. Um, so as you can see, so NTP
[3:11:53] and OTP is narcotic treatment provider and opioid treatment provider, and so that
[3:12:01] would be your mat services, things like that, and so those are going to be something
[3:12:04] that clients are accessing more frequently as opposed to recovery or discharge services.
[3:12:10] Um, prior to our regional model, um, we did not offer recovery, discharge, crisis
[3:12:17] intervention, um, or anything of that nature, so opting in opting in enabled us to
[3:12:24] expand services.
[3:12:29] On our next slide here, you can see um the primary and secondary diagnosis. So this
[3:12:34] is based off of partnership claims data. So anyone coming into the system of care,
[3:12:41] whether it's for substance use as their primary or they're coming in for something
[3:12:46] medical related with a secondary diagnosis of substance use disorder. Um, these numbers
[3:12:52] aren't aligned or they don't match the other page because this is a shorter period
[3:12:56] of time, but the other page or the other set of data was July through March, and
[3:13:03] then this is only January through March data. And again, we can look at um opioid
[3:13:10] being the highest diagnosis, and so that relates back to the other page as well with
[3:13:16] why we are seeing such a high number of the NTP and OTP services.
[3:13:23] This is from our internal tracking, and so this the data set ends as of last fiscal
[3:13:29] year just because claims data can have a 12 month lag, that's the time frame that
[3:13:34] they have to submit claims and then. Some of the reasonings that we
[3:13:42] could kind of correlate the increases for is at the time that this model was going
[3:13:46] live, it was also around the time that fentanyl was coming on board. I think also
[3:13:52] with any program as you start to see and have more knowledge on what's available
[3:13:57] in services, things tend to grow as well. This is not an unduplicated client count.
[3:14:03] This could be somebody receiving services in multiple months.
[3:14:11] This slide shows just a brief snapshot of all of our different funding streams, um,
[3:14:16] and so this, uh, we have our substance use block grant funding, our mental health
[3:14:21] block grant funding, and then the partnership health plan, which is the per user
[3:14:24] per month funding. Um, and so this is just a very high level oversight of at the
[3:14:31] point in time what our spending look like to date.
[3:14:37] And then this slide is our county programs, and so this is everything that we provide
[3:14:42] through our licensed facilities within Shasta County mental health and drug and alcohol
[3:14:48] services. And so we have our collaborative court programs, which is the Addicted
[3:14:53] offender program and the behavioral health court. Those referral sources come through
[3:14:57] the court and probation. And then clients have the option to receive services um
[3:15:03] internally or contract or referred out, um, depending on their needs. Um, CalWorks
[3:15:09] behavioral health team that is through Cal Works, um, they are referred over. Um,
[3:15:15] if they meet criteria, so everyone going through cow Works orientation gets um the
[3:15:20] application so that they can opt into those services if they need them. Um, the core
[3:15:26] program is co-occurring recovery enhancement. So what was noticed by previous county
[3:15:32] staff in about 2021 is that we had clients coming into our access department for
[3:15:37] mental health services that were being turned away because they had um co-occurring
[3:15:42] substance use disorder services as well. So They were being told to go get sober
[3:15:47] first and then come back for mental health. So that program was really tailored to
[3:15:52] identify those clients to be able to connect them immediately because sending somebody
[3:15:56] out to get help is that just does not work well for anyone. The other really great
[3:16:03] thing about our programs is that we currently have uh clients or staff that were
[3:16:10] former participants in these programs now working for us. So being able to bring
[3:16:15] that lens to the to the table is really helpful to support.
[3:16:23] Support our clients because they've been through it and they understand what it looks
[3:16:27] like and what the needs are. This is just a brief overview of the number of graduates
[3:16:34] for each of these programs over the last 3 years. We did see a dip in some referrals
[3:16:40] for certain programs, and so we expect that for women's recovery in particular, because
[3:16:46] they were hit by COVID, that that should increase going forward. And then lastly,
[3:16:53] just really quick, here are some new initiatives and legislation coming out. SB 43
[3:16:58] expands the definition of grave disability to include substance use disorder, behavioral
[3:17:05] health transformation, or MHSA to BHSA will allow us to pay and fund programs that
[3:17:11] are just for substance use disorder. is essentially another collaborative court process
[3:17:18] that we've been working with the DA and other county agencies to set up a referral
[3:17:22] process for that and alignment with our other services, and then we did just close
[3:17:27] an RFP for our sober living so that we will be getting additional beds and resources
[3:17:33] for our specific clients as well. So we're in the contracting phase for that. And
[3:17:39] that is all, and I'm happy to answer questions.
[3:17:45] To about plumber. Thank you Bailey and Doctor Mou, uh, and it's been great to see,
[3:17:52] uh, a good bit of this information at the Mental Health Alcohol and Drug Advisory
[3:17:55] board meetings as well. Uh, the, I had two questions. One was regarding on that,
[3:18:01] uh, one slide with the horizontal bars, uh, where there's 1300 members or so. The,
[3:18:09] what I was wondering is, um, do is that out of the total partnership members for
[3:18:15] Shasta County and what is, what is the total partnership members? I believe that
[3:18:22] is 66,000. Let me see.
[3:18:33] Yeah, 66,676 were um enrolled in the um the partnership health plan,
[3:18:41] um, and that was as of December of 2024. OK, so it's actually quite a small percentage,
[3:18:46] uh, who are participating in SUD services out of that total. Yes, looking back on
[3:18:53] previous years of data, so right now the data for 24, 25 is a little bit volatile,
[3:18:58] for lack of better words, just because there is such a long lag time, but looking
[3:19:02] back at 23, 24, um, we finished that year out with serving 1,827
[3:19:10] beneficiaries. OK, thank you. And then the one slide where you had uh funding sources
[3:19:17] with remaining balances. Mhm. The, is that for this fiscal year, meaning it will
[3:19:23] uh it will end in June 30th? Yes, um, and with budget hearings starting next month,
[3:19:30] there will be updated data for that as well, um, because we are pretty on trend to
[3:19:35] be spending uh those full allocations. And the ones that we have been a little bit
[3:19:40] uh less than a lot of that is tied to staffing. OK, yeah, because it looked like
[3:19:45] there was a decent portion of each of those balances that were still remaining. I
[3:19:49] don't know when that was as of February or March I wanna say, so OK. But what you
[3:19:55] are saying is that we are on track to spend those full amounts or we are able to
[3:19:58] roll them over into a future year. Um, so they don't roll over for the grant funding,
[3:20:04] um, but we do have another allocation. So both of those grants are non-competitive
[3:20:08] by annual grants, um, and so, Uh, so we applied last year. This
[3:20:16] is our first year of funding, and then we will have that same amount of funding for
[3:20:20] the next year. Um, but like I said, I think that during budget hearings we'll have
[3:20:25] a lot more, um, updated information on where our true projections are. OK, thank
[3:20:32] you. Mhm. Supervisor Arman. Hi Bailey. So that the chart, if we go
[3:20:40] back
[3:20:42] and it was trending up that one and you, you mentioned, you mentioned that that um
[3:20:51] That wasn't necessarily more people because some of them are coming back every month
[3:20:58] several times but that's not necessarily showing a an alarming. I know everything's
[3:21:05] pretty alarming but uh. It's not as alarming as it looks. No, our number of beneficiaries
[3:21:11] have been pretty stable over the last couple of years. The change with this that
[3:21:16] I anticipate, you know, again with any changes we can tie it back to all different
[3:21:20] kinds of Environmental factors or community things like that. For this, the 2121,
[3:21:28] 22, 22, 23, that's really when fentanyl was hitting and coming into the systems and
[3:21:34] so with that or any opioid use disorder, that's going to increase the services. Because
[3:21:39] it's a daily, weekly, um, more regular thing than, say, you know, uh outpatient or
[3:21:45] recovery services, those types of things, because that includes not services. So
[3:21:50] I think that that is likely tied to why there's such a significant increase with
[3:21:54] the actual services. Is that, is that an indicator of the, the addiction being so
[3:22:02] strong that they're, I know you're building the clientele, but for lack of a better
[3:22:07] description. So with opioid use disorder, um, you know somebody that
[3:22:15] does engage in medically assisted treatment, that is something that they could be
[3:22:19] on for the rest of their life just because, you know, and I'm not the doctor is still
[3:22:24] here and has any input, but you know that's something that changes them physiologically
[3:22:31] and so. That type of medication may be something that their systems need to function
[3:22:38] for the remainder of their life. It's so the the addictions. Very strong.
[3:22:45] Yes or get away from. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you.
[3:22:54] No, I think, one quick. What's, uh, what's PUPM stand for? Per user per month. OK,
[3:23:01] thank you, Doctor, Ms. Carter, thank you both very much. Appreciate you coming in.
[3:23:06] Thank you. And just to confirm, we don't have any requests to speak for this item.
[3:23:10] OK. All right, so we're gonna take um Public comment or closed session items are
[3:23:18] 12 and 13. Do we have any speakers? We do not share. Where are we going for closed
[3:23:25] session? Uh, the board will be headed into the community room. OK. With that are
[3:23:30] adjourned, we will be, we will not be back, or not adjourned, sorry, we are at recess.
[3:23:36] We'll be back not before, uh, looks like one o'clock. We will not be back before
[3:23:43] one. With that, we're recess.
[3:23:50] Returning from closed session, Councilors in reportable action. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[3:23:57] On item R12. Uh, no reportable action on Rood versus Lockwood, uh, Littlefield
[3:24:05] versus County of Shasta, uh, permission to hire counsel and defend the claim has
[3:24:09] been given. Border versus David J. Rickert and County of Shasta, uh, hire outside
[3:24:16] counsel and defend the claim permission is given. And our 13 no portable action.
[3:24:24] All right, thank you. Moving on to our 6. This is out of the CAO's office. I'll let
[3:24:31] Stuart Newel introduce it. Chair, I'm actually gonna defer to Deputy CEO Erin Britain.
[3:24:38] OK.
[3:24:45] Hold on one second, your microphone's not on. Stewart's already 0 for 1. There's
[3:24:50] a demerit for Stuart. OK, one more time. Stephanie's not here and the wheels just
[3:24:54] totally fall off. Go ahead. Good afternoon, chair crime members of the board and
[3:24:58] retained Deputy County Executive Officer. On January 7, the Board of Supervisors
[3:25:03] voted unanimously to establish an ad hoc committee to draft a strategic plan and
[3:25:08] assigned supervisors plumber and Long to that committee. On March 25th, the board
[3:25:12] heard a presentation on the activities of this group and considered a recommendation
[3:25:16] by the ad hoc committee to hire a consultant to complete the strategic plan, including
[3:25:21] public engagement activities to ensure the strategic plan reflects the priorities
[3:25:24] of the public. The board expressed a desire to have the strategic plan be developed
[3:25:29] in-house rather than by a consultant with the exception of the public engagement
[3:25:33] and information gathering. The board agreed the public engagement and information
[3:25:38] gathering piece should be completed by an objective neutral third party to ensure
[3:25:42] there is no undue influence by the members of the board or staff. The board voted
[3:25:47] 50 to have the ad hoc committee draft an RFP for the board to consider. Before you
[3:25:52] for consideration today is this draft RFP. The RFP does not include a maximum compensation
[3:25:57] as the committee felt it was best to leave the amount for the board to consider and
[3:26:01] give direction on. The board could choose to have staff issue the RFP without a max
[3:26:05] compensation. However, it's generally a better idea to include a max compensation
[3:26:10] so applicants can submit proposals that align with the resources the board is willing
[3:26:14] to commit to this process. With that, that is the end of my presentation. I will
[3:26:20] turn it over to supervisors plumber and long for any additional information.
[3:26:26] We have any public comments? No, chair, we have no public comment for this item.
[3:26:32] All right, Supervisor Plumber Long, either one of you wanna go first? So I just say
[3:26:38] that we worked on uh refining the scope of this, I think to to be in a good place
[3:26:42] where it defines clearly what we are looking for and has a clear set of deliverables
[3:26:46] that uh we are hoping will be produced through there and so I feel comfortable with
[3:26:51] the direction of this. So max compensation. Max compensation, uh, so we're gonna,
[3:26:59] the idea is to see what comes in, uh, and then we can, that's one of the rating criteria
[3:27:04] that we use to evaluate uh is cost, so that will go into the factor of which one
[3:27:11] we ultimately select. Is there anybody that's um Supervisor long is there anything
[3:27:15] you want to add to that? No, I was just gonna ask, uh, you mentioned it's advisable
[3:27:20] to have the upper ceiling. What would you set that up for what we've Considered.
[3:27:28] So I mean I would say if I were going in I would probably set it at $50,000 as a
[3:27:33] max compensation at the high end. um I don't advise that we go in without a max compensation
[3:27:38] because what we could get is these great proposals that are $200,000 and well, not
[3:27:44] just that, it wastes people's time. Like the people that created it. I mean, we create
[3:27:48] RFPs for my company and I mean we'll have 80+ hours of 2 or 3 people into one. Yeah,
[3:27:55] I mean, my recommendation if we're gonna get, sorry if we're gonna get something
[3:27:58] that is within what we can afford rather than getting kind of the Cadillac version
[3:28:03] we're like we love that but we can't really afford that that setting kind of our
[3:28:07] max, you know, ceiling, not to say that somebody couldn't come in lower than that
[3:28:11] max ceiling, obviously that would be a consideration which a supervisor plumber put
[3:28:15] um. I mentioned is one of the criteria on rating it. Yeah, I mean, one of the um
[3:28:21] CEO Ricker, do you have any thoughts about, about this? Other than what Mr. Berin
[3:28:26] has shared, I mean, I know I haven't got to speak to either supervisors plumber or
[3:28:29] long about it because they're on the ad hoc committee, so.
[3:28:33] Yes, Mr. Chairman, my, my, my general focus is on, uh, long-term capital projects
[3:28:38] and efficiently use the resources and focusing on that specific aspect of it, the
[3:28:43] community engagement portion, um, if the board feels that's a component they want
[3:28:48] to add to this project, that's at the board's discretion. I mean, um. So, supervisor
[3:28:55] uh lumber Long is, is the next steps for this, the com the, we, we do the community
[3:29:01] engagement component and then something is brought forth, is that Yes, as, uh,
[3:29:09] as part of this process, the key deliverable would be that they would present a set
[3:29:13] of priorities for goals for the county out of this process that is derived from both
[3:29:18] the community department heads, uh, staff as well, and that that would be used as
[3:29:24] kind of the foundation for the strategic plan and that that would help us understand
[3:29:29] kind of what are the key priorities of the county. And and Supervisor Plumber, um,
[3:29:33] and I haven't asked you this before, but. Where would you cap this based on your
[3:29:37] professional expertise because I don't want to go in too high and I don't want to
[3:29:40] go in too low because addressing the problems that we could have where we get Cadillac
[3:29:46] plan and all kinds of stuff that we don't want to pay for. So where would you professionally,
[3:29:53] does 50 sound reasonable to you?
[3:29:57] I'm sorry, sorry. Yeah, I think we had talked about this likely being a 3 month process,
[3:30:01] uh, and so if we assume, uh, $15,000 a month, uh, I think
[3:30:08] that's likely to be reasonable for this. Yeah, so I'm gonna make a motion that we
[3:30:13] cap it at $10,000 because I, I think I mean we're already almost we're going into
[3:30:18] our 6th month of working on this, right, 5th month, and we're talking about another
[3:30:22] 3 months. We're gonna have a strategic plan. Uh, in a year, and I think our strategic
[3:30:27] plan, I mean, capital projects that we have like a possible medical school, we have
[3:30:30] the sheriff's alternative custody program, we have some uh things coming around,
[3:30:35] uh, homelessness and the veterans in, I mean, What else is there? I mean, what are
[3:30:39] the big other issues that you guys are working on the strategic plan with? I'm just
[3:30:42] curious. I, I can't imagine it taking a year and $50,000 to tell us what we already
[3:30:47] know. I, I, I'm, I'm, I'm just curious and I'm not saying. That people that do that
[3:30:53] work, you know, that's great, but we're That's my motion. I'm gonna say, cause I
[3:30:58] would like to see Noa Short, Aaron Britain, and Dave Rickert knock this out. And
[3:31:03] if someone wants to come, I mean, maybe the Reading Chamber wants to step up or somebody
[3:31:07] wants to step up and lead the community engagement thing who's already integrated
[3:31:10] in the community. So I'll make my motion really clear. I say we cap it at $10,000
[3:31:15] and then we turn this over to Noda, Aaron and Dave, Matt and Allen, you guys stay
[3:31:20] involved if you, if you would like and let's get something brought back. You know,
[3:31:24] by early August. That's when. And you know, just, I just want to say that, you know,
[3:31:30] we're certainly willing to work on this. I think that this direction was from the
[3:31:34] board to have somebody that was, you know, not already involved in county business
[3:31:38] and so that they could get, you know, a view from the public like what the public
[3:31:43] wants to see that could help. this process that wouldn't be, I mean, I would try
[3:31:47] not to be biased, but I will tell you I, you know, I'll give one example I look at
[3:31:52] the rodeo. The rodeo has been screaming for that for years. They've spent hundreds
[3:31:56] of thousands of dollars getting to a place that everybody was screaming about 5 to
[3:32:01] 8 years ago when this came up. Like, it's ridiculous spending that kind of money
[3:32:06] getting to a destination that everybody already knew. So I mean that that's my motion.
[3:32:11] Well, in, in discussion if we're doing board, it's been seconded right, so I think
[3:32:17] we stay with the 50 because it was the express clear intent of this board that we
[3:32:24] did not want the boards. Thumbprint all over this and any kind of potential leaning
[3:32:29] on anybody to develop a project, so we wanted to spend adequate resources to get
[3:32:36] it done professionally because we're going to be living with this, you know, if it's
[3:32:40] going to be something that's put together with a lot of Internal biases, then it's,
[3:32:45] it could be worse product than not having one at all. So I would stay with the 50
[3:32:51] and that's why I asked Matt's question or supervisor plumber, the question as to
[3:32:55] what would be reasonable because we've already agreed and I think right now we would.
[3:33:04] We've got an estimated cost of 150,000 written in here, and we cannot change it up
[3:33:10] at this point. The board already voted and we would be, this would be a question
[3:33:16] for council. I believe we are prohibited from coming back. Within one year under
[3:33:22] Rosenberg's to modify terms of what we already voted on and we need to stand tall
[3:33:29] with what we already voted on because we can't bring this back for another board
[3:33:34] decision. We've already decided this. So, so that, that wouldn't be correct. If,
[3:33:40] if the board uh lets an RF a contract, you can always bring it back and modify the
[3:33:45] terms of that. I mean, I, I, I think $10,000 is not sufficient to have a professional
[3:33:52] outfit do this, uh, so I think, you know, $7000. Well, first of all, that invoice
[3:33:59] only carried through a short portion of the time, right, not even the full duration
[3:34:03] of the time period in which he's done the work leading up to this. Now it'll be 40,000,
[3:34:09] uh, and that's for a very specific area. We're talking about a county-wide strategic
[3:34:13] plan which is much broader and we're saying we're asking them to do it in half the
[3:34:17] time that we're asking that consultant to do it. So I think to even be on par with
[3:34:22] that consulting effort that it makes sense to uh make it around 50,000. And so I'll
[3:34:28] make a substitute motion that we approved the RFP as stated with a cap of $50,000
[3:34:33] and I will second that motion.
[3:34:37] OK, and, and, and. Just correct me, just I'm trying to clarify this, but Rosenberg
[3:34:43] says we can't bring this back within a year unless it's a 4-fifth vote, right, to
[3:34:47] suspend Rosenberg. No, no, that's not correct. So, what you guys are approving here
[3:34:53] is, is an RFP. If you wanted to bring it back and modify its terms because you didn't
[3:34:58] get any responses, that's not a violation of any rule. What would be a violation
[3:35:02] of a rule is if you, you put a certain item on, you guys voted that you did not want
[3:35:07] to move forward with. A particular item and then you place it on another agenda shortly
[3:35:13] afterwards. That's what Rosenberg is trying to prevent, essentially taking multiple
[3:35:18] bites at the same apple, um, but modifying a contract or modifying an RFP after the
[3:35:25] fact is completely appropriate. So you're, you're saying the only thing Rosenberg
[3:35:31] would cover with the 4 5th vote within a year would be the elimination of all discussion
[3:35:37] about having an outside RFP, right, and Rosenberg is a is essentially rules of order,
[3:35:44] um, you know, it's not, doesn't have the the power of government code. Yeah, and,
[3:35:51] and my, are you guys? Yeah, and, and my thing is when I see all the sheriff deputies
[3:35:55] and the sheriff himself here, I just think, man, I don't want to spend $50,000 when
[3:36:00] we're trying to get the DHE program and because this, this, this money comes from
[3:36:03] the general fund, correct? See, uh. Uh, CEO, what's that? Yes, correct, yeah, so
[3:36:09] I, I mean $10,000 was really just if there's a community organization or somebody
[3:36:13] that says, hey, I want to pitch in and help out the community and I can lead the
[3:36:16] citizen group because we know it's going to be the same 50 to 75 people they're gonna
[3:36:20] show up somewhere. They're gonna put Post-it notes up, which I think is great, but
[3:36:24] the more I've worked with auditor controller Noa Short, Mr. Berta, and Dave Rickert,
[3:36:28] I think. The process you guys have been under with the amount of knowledge and back
[3:36:33] history of the money that uh Aaron and Nova possess, I think we can get a great direction
[3:36:38] and if someone wants to step up in the community for that money and it's really them
[3:36:42] pitching in as much as it as it is anything else. A lot of people ask, how can I
[3:36:46] get involved? Well, here's a way a civic organization could get involved. Um, and,
[3:36:51] and lead the community uh component of that. So we, we'll take the substitute motion
[3:36:55] of the 50001st and depending on how that goes, we'll take the 1 for 10. We'll start
[3:37:01] to my uh left with uh. Nice. Good catch. We'll, we'll start to my left with supervisor.
[3:37:08] Supervisor Wong. So this is the subsequent motion by Supervisor plumber. Yes, correct.
[3:37:14] Supervisor Kellstrom. Supervisor cry. Supervisor Harman.
[3:37:19] Supervisor plumber. Yes. All right, fails 23. We'll take the substitute motion. Uh,
[3:37:24] we'll start to my right with supervisor plumber. Supervisor plumber. No. Supervisor
[3:37:29] Harman. There's the substitute motion for the 10,000 authorizing of the 10,000.
[3:37:37] So
[3:37:39] Wasn't that a primary motion? This, this is, oh, I'm sorry, the prime, the primary,
[3:37:43] the primary motion. I'm sorry, yeah, it was my original that's the original motion.
[3:37:47] You're, you're back to your primary motion. Sorry primary that's what it got, yeah,
[3:37:50] supervisor. Yes. Supervisor cry. Yes, Supervisor Kelstrom. Sorry. Supervisor long.
[3:37:57] No, OK. Passes 32. And then, uh, CEO Ricker, when do you think, uh, how fast can
[3:38:02] that get out and we can turn that around and get moving on it. I will work with staff.
[3:38:06] We'll get out as soon as we possibly can, and uh we'll try to shift the end of August
[3:38:10] deadline to bring up the proposals. I know we had spoken a little bit very briefly
[3:38:16] about, you know, some counties have like these 7 binders up on the shelf that collect
[3:38:20] dust. So this is, uh, gonna be very it's gonna be very financially focused, very
[3:38:25] financially focused, very outcome driven, yes, with metrics. Thank you, sir. All
[3:38:29] right, moving on to uh R 7. District attorney discussing consider directing
[3:38:37] staff to create alternately staff legal secretary, 1 and 2 classifications. Welcome,
[3:38:42] Ms. Bridget. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Cry, members of the board of supervisors,
[3:38:48] Stephanie Bridget, District attorney. Yes, so we're here to talk about changing the
[3:38:52] legal secretary classification for the county. Um, as it stands right now, there
[3:38:57] is one classification, and that's just simply legal secretary. The request is to
[3:39:03] consider to add alternate classifications to have a legal secretary 12 position.
[3:39:10] Um, while this impacts my office, it also impacts other offices. It impacts the public
[3:39:15] defender, uh, probation department, HHSA, the Public Guardian, um, as well as County
[3:39:22] council. Um, all of those impacted departments are supportive of having this classification
[3:39:29] for Legal Secretary 12. Um, so that's going to be the request. I can't speak for
[3:39:35] the other departments, but just to, to speak to, to my office just a little bit on
[3:39:40] this issue. Um, the legal secretaries is really a very critical position in the office.
[3:39:48] Um, every single case in my office literally begins and ends with the legal secretaries.
[3:39:54] Um, and it takes a lot of time to become proficient in that position. Um, as it stands
[3:40:02] right now, with legal secretary not having an alternatively staffed 12, and just
[3:40:06] having legal secretary, that position will top out at 4.5 years. So there really
[3:40:13] is no career advancement offered for that position. And in my office, as I said,
[3:40:20] it impacts every single case. Just uh to give you an example, um, our legal secretaries
[3:40:26] starting from our intake, they are responsible for filing every single criminal case.
[3:40:32] They're typing up all of the criminal cases, um, where attention to detail is paramount.
[3:40:38] I mean, it's so important for the rights of our citizens that we have. People who
[3:40:43] are properly trained and have been in those positions for a long time. Uh, they're
[3:40:48] responsible for warrants, for getting people arrested and to show up in court, getting
[3:40:53] those ready. Um, every piece of evidence that we need to prove a case goes through
[3:40:58] their hands. They're responsible for ordering, for uh obtaining, for marking, for
[3:41:05] delivering everything to defense counsel, every photo, every video, um, every Birth
[3:41:12] certificate, death certificate, medical records, anything that we have to have to
[3:41:17] prove a case goes through them. It, it, and I know I've presented here before about
[3:41:23] how many cases we have. We get close to 10,000 cases per year that this legal secretary
[3:41:30] team is in charge of every single piece of evidence involved, and that takes a substantial
[3:41:37] amount of time. To really learn and become proficient in all of that, um, every witness
[3:41:42] that we need for court, they're responsible for doing all the subpoenas, handling
[3:41:48] the phone calls, explaining to not only witnesses and victims and the public different
[3:41:54] parts of the legal process, knowing the difference between if they're coming up for
[3:41:59] a preliminary hearing or a trial to make sure that they're answering those types
[3:42:03] of questions. Um, our motions, all the motions that we're filing before court, before
[3:42:09] trial, during in trial, they're the ones that are handling that, that they're getting
[3:42:13] them all in final form, getting them approved, getting them filed. Um, they are doing
[3:42:20] all the motion work that we need during trial, assist really being the right hand
[3:42:25] person to the attorney in trial with their exhibits, their jury instructions. I mean,
[3:42:30] it's a really an integral part of the office is the legal secretary position. It
[3:42:35] takes years for a person to learn that job, to be proficient in that job, so that
[3:42:40] we can make sure that they, you know, they're not making mistakes because they don't
[3:42:45] have the years of experience. They don't have the training, they don't, they haven't
[3:42:49] seen every type of motion, every type of case. It takes them years to go from handling.
[3:42:56] You know, a small misdemeanor case load, working their way through intake, low-level
[3:43:01] felonies, and then ultimately up to where they can handle serious and violent felonies,
[3:43:07] where they can handle child molest cases and, and murder cases. So this is a very
[3:43:12] important, very extremely important uh position in my office, and really, the success
[3:43:19] of every single one of our prosecutions depends on those positions. Um. But with
[3:43:26] 4.5 years until they are talked out at a legal secretary, unfortunately it causes
[3:43:31] retention issues. We have people who they look for other positions. They maybe move
[3:43:37] somewhere within the county or once they've got the experience, they move out into
[3:43:41] the private sector um and work as a legal secretary there. So as a county, I want
[3:43:47] us to be um more enticing not only to bring these people in, but also to retain them
[3:43:54] once they're here. Um, it would help with recruiting. Uh, there are many counties
[3:43:59] that offer multiple layers of legal secretary position. We'd be competitive with
[3:44:04] them, with the private legal secretary, um, For private firms in our county as well,
[3:44:11] um, a person right now when they look at the, the job flyer for legal secretary,
[3:44:17] they don't see any career advancement. Legal secretary, and that's it. So we would
[3:44:23] be not only more enticing for recruitment, but we'd be more enticing for retention
[3:44:29] and we'd be able to differentiate those. Secretaries who are in the 1st 123 years
[3:44:34] of their career really learning the technical skills that they need and still have
[3:44:40] career advancement up to a legal secretary too. Um, so that, that's how it is from
[3:44:44] my office and I'm just hopeful that you guys will approve our ability to go from
[3:44:50] Legal Secretary 1 to Legal secret 12. Thank you, um, supervisor Long.
[3:44:59] I just saw him click his first I, sorry, did I, did I, no, I, I just looked down,
[3:45:05] so, OK. Hello, DA, um, thank you for the presentation. Um, so if, if, uh, it takes
[3:45:12] 4 years to go through the full steps of a legal secretary, how many steps would that
[3:45:19] include? How many years would it take to get to the top of a legal 2? Well, it's
[3:45:23] going to depend on how quickly a person can be promoted. Um you know, some people
[3:45:28] may work their way through all of those steps through a legal secretary one before
[3:45:33] they ultimately make it to a 2, so then they would have the same steps A through
[3:45:38] F, I believe, a legal secretary too, or you could have someone who You know, trains
[3:45:44] much quicker, becomes much more proficient, and they get promoted when they're step
[3:45:50] 1E or step 1B up to a 2. So it's going to vary depending on each individual persons
[3:45:57] and their ability, but it is going to add additional years. And then, and then they
[3:46:01] could come into the next rank 2. Um, at a mid-step, or would it always go to the
[3:46:08] bottom of the next range? It depends on where they're at when they promote to a tube
[3:46:12] because if, yeah, that's what I was going to say is there overlap then with the minimum
[3:46:18] for a tube being below the top for a 1. Because that could cause them to go in at
[3:46:23] a higher step and where I'm going with all this is you had said, um, I think it was
[3:46:28] in there 34,000 was going to be the total cost to implement. Um, that's for my office
[3:46:33] because there are other other offices that are impacted. I believe the total is just
[3:46:39] under 70,000. Um, for all the impacted. Yeah, there were 34, 23 for the public defender
[3:46:46] or for the probation and 8200 bucks for county council. And it would depend on each
[3:46:52] of those departments who they feel is uh at the ability to promote to a 2. OK. Thank
[3:46:59] you. Certainly. It was part of your question, OK, um. Any anybody else
[3:47:07] Well, yeah, I, I'll just chime in and I mean. And I, you know, this Bridget, it sounds
[3:47:13] good. I'm just right now I'm looking at, you know, Reading is claiming a $5 million
[3:47:18] deficit, which is about $8 million. Um, I think Anderson has about $2 million deficit
[3:47:23] and Haman County has about a $5 million deficit. So the one thing I always brag on
[3:47:28] is our CEO has kept us, you know, fluid and, and, and in the black, and I mean, So,
[3:47:35] I, I, you know, I'm, I'm probably gonna lean towards his recommendations, which,
[3:47:39] you know, is, once we change this classification, we're going to open up the floodplas
[3:47:43] to change a lot of classifications and a lot of departments, so. Um, I, I looked
[3:47:48] at your budget yesterday, um, I'm that far in that, um, there was a lot of asks in
[3:47:53] there. This was one of them, um, but there was, I mean, quite a few asks, so I'm
[3:47:58] probably gonna decide on the, on the side of leaving the status quo at this point.
[3:48:02] So thank you though. Uh, yeah, absolutely. Um, just to One thing I want you to consider
[3:48:08] would be the cost of not doing it would be, um, you know, the turnover that we have
[3:48:15] and the hiring, retraining, um getting a person trained and qualified up to the position
[3:48:22] to hold the cases and it's not just a Internal impact on my office. Unfortunately,
[3:48:29] it's an impact to people who are charged with a crime. It's impact of victims, it's
[3:48:33] an impact to witnesses when we're dealing with positions, um, especially that are
[3:48:37] this crucial in the office. So, I, I feel like there's a financial impact of not
[3:48:42] doing it, maybe not as um tangible or his ability to um quantify it so easily, um,
[3:48:48] but it is, you know, it's a, it's a position I've advocated for for a while, so,
[3:48:53] but thank you, thank you. I'll just, uh, I'll, I'll say that I'm not necessarily
[3:48:57] opposed to it, but I definitely, I'm not gonna vote for it today because we have
[3:49:01] the budget hearings in a couple of weeks and I would rather have all the asks. In
[3:49:07] one bucket and kind of go through them because to, to bring this one out then if
[3:49:11] something else comes up in the office that we want to adjust, then we can't go back.
[3:49:16] No, but what I'm saying is I want to discuss this at budget time with all the other
[3:49:19] positions across all the different, so I'll be voting no. To budget plumbing. Yeah,
[3:49:27] I appreciate the relatively inexpensive approach to trying to increase retention
[3:49:33] because I do think a lot of the other strategies for bringing more people are much
[3:49:38] more expensive. Uh, so you know I, I generally support this. I do see the sense in
[3:49:44] kind of having this as part of the budget conversation which I, you know, is in a
[3:49:48] week or two, so. Um, that feels appropriate to me, but I, I think finding innovative
[3:49:54] strategies that are relatively inexpensive, uh, like this, uh, makes sense and are
[3:49:59] a good way to address the cost of turnover that we are experiencing. Right.
[3:50:06] Is there uh, anybody that wants to, um, I'll, I'll just say. I agree with you guys
[3:50:13] that it's, it needs to wait. So we with the rest of the budget. I mean, I, I think,
[3:50:21] I mean, that's the, I know the, the budget hearings are gonna be, I mean, there's
[3:50:25] a lot of departments that are looking for a lot of positions and there's gonna be,
[3:50:28] and I would personally, this is just me, this goes to any department head that would
[3:50:31] be listening as I think it's uh I want to invite them into that process to say, look,
[3:50:37] this is what we have who, not everyone's gonna be happy, obviously. I'm talking about
[3:50:43] even in departments or offices, so, uh, counsel Larmer, do we have to, I know this
[3:50:48] is discussed and consider directing staff, do we have to take a We have to take a
[3:50:53] motion. You do not on this, OK. Anybody else have any questions for district attorney?
[3:50:57] I really appreciate you coming in, and I know we'll run this back in 2 weeks. Sure,
[3:51:01] yeah, I, I'll just incorporate this piece into my presentation at that time. OK,
[3:51:06] I'm going to make a motion. Um, I would make a motion that we approve the reclassification
[3:51:12] of Legal Secretary 1 and 2. I think it's important for Recruitment for retention
[3:51:19] for all the reasons I understand budgets and but this is a reclassification at this
[3:51:25] time and I think it's critical to stabilize a department that is historically been
[3:51:30] facing a lot of turnover and a lot of a lot of issues within there and I think um
[3:51:37] some of the questions I had were. Where would you start? Where would you stop some
[3:51:42] of those kinds of things? I think it'll be a little more seamless than than we might
[3:51:46] be considering, and I don't even know if the 34 is is accurate that it would cost
[3:51:51] that much, but um so I will make that motion that we reclassify at this time our
[3:51:57] 7, Legal secretary 1 and 2.
[3:52:02] Uh, question, uh,
[3:52:05] if this is brought up through the budgetary process, is, uh, would that then and
[3:52:12] say that was approved as part of the budget, would that then have to come back later
[3:52:17] or the legal classification to be created or would that happen as one step in the
[3:52:22] budgetary process? So Monica and the HR staff would bring a resolution reclassifying
[3:52:28] those. Have to approve it um as a resolution. Separately from the budgetary process.
[3:52:36] And then, um, say we were to approve this resolution now, does this authorize funding
[3:52:42] for the subsequent fiscal year or would that still have to come through the budgetary
[3:52:45] process? You do not have a resolution in front of you right now, right now you only
[3:52:49] have a direction and a possible or a discussion and direction of staff. So, um, Monica
[3:52:54] would uh bring something back if that is what you directed staff to do. So just so
[3:53:00] that I can clarify real quick, as part of the budget process, if you guys made a
[3:53:03] decision at the budget hearings, we bring back for budget adoption at the end of
[3:53:08] June, any sort of reclasses or new positions comes as part of a salary resolution
[3:53:12] that comes with the budget adoption papers. OK.
[3:53:19] Yes, I'm OK waiting then if that's part of kind of a comprehensive process. So is
[3:53:23] there a second to supervisor Long's motion? Seeing none, motion fails. Thank you,
[3:53:28] A Bridget. Appreciate it. See you in a week or two. Thank you. All right, moving
[3:53:34] to our 8.
[3:53:41] Jessica, yes.
[3:53:45] This is a presentation from Well Path on inmate healthcare and Services in Shasta
[3:53:49] County's jail brought to me by Sheriff Johnson, asked me to sponsor it, so of course
[3:53:54] I did because he's the sheriff. I'd be crazy not to. Welcome Jessica. Thank you.
[3:53:58] Thank you very much. Um, good afternoon, Chair Cry and members of the board. We are
[3:54:03] grateful for the opportunity to be here today to present and introduce ourselves
[3:54:07] to you and additionally provide a few level high-level company updates. My name is
[3:54:13] Jessica Maslam. I'm the vice president of Partnership Development for California
[3:54:17] For Well Path, um, and I'm based out of Sacramento. I'm also joined today by my colleague
[3:54:22] Velvet Hood. Um, I'll start a little bit with a little history on our organization
[3:54:27] and our company. Um, WellPA has been a long, long-term correctional healthcare provider
[3:54:33] in California. We've been doing this since 1984 with our first contract under the
[3:54:39] California Forensic Medical Group, which is still part of our organization. Um, we
[3:54:44] started in Monterey County in 1984. Currently today we work in 30 of the 58 counties
[3:54:51] in California, providing adult correctional healthcare and behavioral health through
[3:54:56] the state. 18 of those include partnerships with probation, providing services to
[3:55:03] those, um, the county's youth population. At Wellpath, we work hard to achieve the
[3:55:08] highest standards in the business.
[3:55:12] We have accreditation in 10 counties throughout California through the National Commission
[3:55:16] on Correctional Healthcare. We've had a 100% success rate in obtaining accreditation
[3:55:22] and have a team of professionals dedicated to achieving and maintaining the standard.
[3:55:27] We've been a proud partner with Shasta County since 2016, and we do remain dedicated
[3:55:32] and focused to improving and delivering compassionate, high quality care to underserved
[3:55:38] and vulnerable populations in a very challenging clinical environment. We have a
[3:55:43] strong partnership with Sheriff Johnson and his team and appreciate all of the collaboration
[3:55:48] and support we received from the sheriff's office. Our team of dedicated professionals
[3:55:53] led by Ms. Hood over here ensures the core values of the organization are put to
[3:55:58] practice daily. And with that, I will turn it over to Velvet to provide an operational
[3:56:03] update.
[3:56:06] So shit, I'm done. h. Thank you, Jessica for the introduction. So again, my name
[3:56:14] is Velvet Hood. I, I serve as the regional vice president for Northern California.
[3:56:20] I have the privilege of overseeing operations in 21 facilities, including Shasta
[3:56:24] County. I would like to begin by acknowledging that it is no secret that providing
[3:56:29] healthcare today is more challenging than ever in delivering care in a custodial
[3:56:33] environment as yet another layer of complexity. Despite these challenges, our organization
[3:56:39] remains steadfast in our commitment to maintain our core principles. Everything we
[3:56:44] do is guided by our five Ps. That's to invest in our people, collaborate with our
[3:56:49] partners, optimize our processes, all to provide exceptional care to our patients
[3:56:56] and deliver outstanding performance. We recognize that no organization is without
[3:57:00] its challenges, and we embrace the importance of continuous improvement. I am personally
[3:57:06] committed to advancing initiatives that reinforce our core principles and ensure
[3:57:10] that our healthcare delivery aligns with the evolving needs of Shasta County. The
[3:57:15] county has been a trusted and valuable partner to us, providing essential support
[3:57:20] and resources that have enabled us to deliver medical services. As we look to the
[3:57:26] future, we see meaningful opportunities to strengthen this partnership. Working together
[3:57:31] to optimize healthcare delivery, promote the health and well-being of those in our
[3:57:35] custody, reduce risk and liability exposure, and remain responsible stewards of public
[3:57:42] resources. We have institutional knowledge that gives us a strong understanding of
[3:57:47] facility operations. The culture, the capabilities and limitations, and historical
[3:57:53] perspective on past challenges, all of which enable us to best align efforts, make
[3:57:58] informed decisions, and provide strategic direction. We would like to extend our
[3:58:03] sincere appreciation to Sheriff Johnson and his team for their continued transparency
[3:58:08] and collaboration. Their commitment to regular meetings and active engagement has
[3:58:13] fostered a strong solution-oriented partnership that continues to support the success
[3:58:18] of our shared mission. There have been ongoing productive discussions around opportunities
[3:58:24] to enhance care and service delivery. One such example is the shared recognition
[3:58:29] to improve operational efficiency in the high-risk booking area. This effort is focused
[3:58:36] on reduction of booking times to expedite the return of arresting officers to duty,
[3:58:43] minimize risk exposure, and above all improved care outcomes. A potential solution
[3:58:49] under consideration is the addition of a dedicated registered nurse during peak booking
[3:58:54] hours to support timely medical clearance and reinforce safety for both staff and
[3:59:00] individuals in custody. These discussions reflect our shared commitment to continuous
[3:59:05] improvement, implementation of best practices, and achieving better outcomes for
[3:59:10] those in our care. We also want to recognize and thank our health service administrator,
[3:59:15] Melissa Gibson and our regional director of operations, Dave Garzoli. They have been
[3:59:19] an integral part of the team. In closing, I'm going to turn it back over to Jessica.
[3:59:26] I get the fun one that may be on everybody's mind, but no secret some of the challenges
[3:59:31] our organization has gone through in the past year regarding the bankruptcy, and
[3:59:35] we know that's been a concern with the partners and what's going to happen at Wellpath.
[3:59:41] Are we going to stick around or are we going to be out? So I do have some good news
[3:59:44] to share on that front. I will say last November we filed for Chapter 11, which is
[3:59:51] a reorganization. With that our operations remained the same. We didn't reduce any
[3:59:57] footprints. We maintained our contracts with all of our partners and staffing levels.
[4:00:02] Everything remained the same. We were having issues with payments to some of our
[4:00:06] providers in the community. I think at this point most have been addressed through
[4:00:11] the bankruptcy. Everybody's been paid up. If not, that is happening. Everybody is
[4:00:16] getting paid. I will say on May 8th, here's the good news, we successfully completed
[4:00:22] our financial restructuring processes and emerged from Chapter 11, so we are officially
[4:00:28] out as of May 8th and no longer in bankruptcy. Um, through this process, uh, we've
[4:00:35] strengthened our financial structure to support our business for the long term, which
[4:00:40] that last year, we were not there. So it was something that was necessary in order
[4:00:45] for us to continue to remain in business moving forward. Um, we continue to be committed
[4:00:50] to the core values that define us, unwavering quality and patient care, stability,
[4:00:55] relationships, and trust. Um, I will say we are better positioned than ever to be
[4:01:00] a strong partner for years to come and a stable organization. We value our relationship
[4:01:07] with you and are committed to continuing to innovate how we deliver correctional
[4:01:10] medical and mental health care in Shasta County. Serving you and your patients remains
[4:01:15] our top priority. As a financially stable and stronger company, you can expect Wellpath
[4:01:21] to continue. Invest in the welfare of your patients. We're committed to support Shasta
[4:01:25] County by developing solutions that improve overall service delivery, patient outcomes,
[4:01:31] and the big one, reducing risk and lawsuits to ensure county dollars are maximized
[4:01:36] when it comes to jail healthcare. Again, we thank you for allowing us the opportunity
[4:01:41] on your very, very busy agenda today to be here, and we welcome any further discussions.
[4:01:48] I know that data is a really important thing to see, and we are open to sharing and
[4:01:54] would like to be more actively involved in those conversations with you all and transparent
[4:02:01] with the county. I think this is the first time our organization has been to a board
[4:02:06] of supervisors meeting to present. Um, and we hope that it's the first of many more
[4:02:11] to come because we want you to know that we are open to being transparent, to answering
[4:02:17] any questions, um, and anything you might need from us. So thank you again.
[4:02:24] Absolutely. Does anybody have any questions? Uh, supervisor plumber.
[4:02:30] My understanding is that the challenge that led to the bankruptcy had to do with
[4:02:35] lawsuits which you alluded to, uh, one, I guess, is that correct? And, and if it
[4:02:39] is, uh, you mentioned being on a stronger footing now, what, uh, you know, what structural
[4:02:45] changes have been made that will, you know, protect against that risk in the future
[4:02:51] or try to minimize that risk? That's a great question. Um. From
[4:02:58] the the kind of downfall of where we ended up where we were, it actually was really
[4:03:03] a lot of it had to do with the COVID-19 pandemic because we are a private organization
[4:03:09] that was funded and ran through public equity firm. We were not given funding from
[4:03:17] the federal government that many other folks were able to obtain and receive, so
[4:03:21] we were taking that out of hide for a long time, so COVID was a big one. Um, in addition
[4:03:26] to inflation and then just the labor market in general, um, it wasn't sufficient
[4:03:32] enough for us in our contracts, um, so those were the real three main reasons why
[4:03:39] we ended up where we were. And then in terms of addressing that, is that, it sounds
[4:03:44] like you know those drove up your costs and so does that mean that you are asking,
[4:03:49] you know, I mean the natural thought in my head is that that means that then you
[4:03:52] you need more money in terms of the contract with the county, am I? Connecting the
[4:03:57] dots there. You, you are, sir. Yes, you are. Um, one of the things that we're trying
[4:04:03] to do is be more innovative and how we look at correctional healthcare. I know it's
[4:04:07] hard to replace people with technology, um, but we do telehealth as well. We're looking
[4:04:13] at ways to cut costs, but not, not cut costs of what we're paying staff. That is
[4:04:19] something we will never do because we see that with many other companies that do
[4:04:24] that. And then you get a contract and you can't staff it. So we look at the labor
[4:04:29] market, we look at your specific labor market, and we fall in line with that. I would
[4:04:36] say that we have gone to counties and we've talked about these costs increase. We're
[4:04:42] trying to keep it as reasonable as we can as we can and also try and find different
[4:04:47] solutions and not go above and beyond where we need to be, but You know, try to keep
[4:04:54] it to contain the cost for you all. I would say that's not so much related to the
[4:04:59] bankruptcy though, it's just the wage inflation in general, especially in uh medical
[4:05:04] services that would drive those conversations. And then are you all involved in the
[4:05:11] conversations around um the Cal aim justice involved initiative with where inmates
[4:05:18] can re-enroll in Meal 90 days pre-release?
[4:05:25] Yes, um, we have went live with Cal Aim in a couple of our counties already. Um,
[4:05:31] we have been working actively with the consultants if, if the counties have went
[4:05:35] through consultants. Such as what HMA I I will say I was part of the earlier conversations
[4:05:43] um with the sheriff's office and HMA a bit. um, we have made ourselves available
[4:05:49] if the consultants of the county um that are handling counting, we, we are equipped,
[4:05:54] we're ready, whatever you guys need. We're trying to not say, well, the medical contract
[4:05:59] needs. A ton of staff, but what can we do within the current staffing that we have
[4:06:04] with discharge planning and try and maximize what the foundational contract has to
[4:06:11] maximize those dollars for accounting. But we are very involved as Velvet said, we
[4:06:16] do have some experience because we are in Yuba County and that was one of the first
[4:06:20] counties that went live so. We're learning all of the tweaks, so when it gets to
[4:06:25] you guys, um, we'll have some probably invaluable experience as as the provider with
[4:06:31] case notes required. I think we're having a pretty good success rate with the claims
[4:06:36] that have been submitted to the federal government. We were actually pretty surprised
[4:06:40] thinking that. So many of them would be kicked back and I don't know if you know
[4:06:44] the percentage. I think it was 60% were approved, so there were 40 that that 40%
[4:06:50] that needed minor tweaks though with the case notes that I think we cleared up and
[4:06:55] we're able to get a good good success rate on turnaround on invoicing. Thank you.
[4:07:01] Welcome. Thank you, Supervisoraltro. Yeah, um, you guys used to be in our juvenile
[4:07:05] hall here in Chessa, Ninja, and then you no longer are now. That's correct. OK. All
[4:07:10] right. And who did they use out of curiosity? I mean, I'm sure you don't want to
[4:07:12] say competition's name, but Right. I'm Juvenile Hall uses Community
[4:07:20] Health Center. OK. All right. Thank you. Harman. So can I assume by all by all them
[4:07:27] officers sitting behind you that they're supportive of you? That's what I'm sorry.
[4:07:32] They're supporting you. I would say so, yeah. I hope so. He's he's
[4:07:39] typing about it right now. No, that I, I appreciate. That you didn't go chapter 13
[4:07:48] as a businessman, that's, that 13 is the easy way to go and you guys did 11 and I
[4:07:53] commend you for that. Took took care of your obligations and kept going and and uh
[4:08:00] and you should be commended for that. Thank you. Thank you sir. Well, I'm, I'm glad
[4:08:04] Sheriff Johnson um talked about bringing you guys up, glad he did. I know, um. Healthcare
[4:08:11] doesn't matter if it's uh citizenry of any type, those incarcerated, etc. it's very,
[4:08:17] very crucial and very important I think to have those conversations. So I appreciate
[4:08:21] this first effort in coming and sure we'll be in touch in the future. So thank you.
[4:08:27] Can I add one more thing? Supervisor plumber. Um, I do think in to speak to your
[4:08:32] comment about transparency and data, I think it would be interesting to see some
[4:08:36] data at a future date around uh cost per inmate in terms of healthcare costs and
[4:08:41] what are the key drivers of those costs in terms of different conditions and ailments,
[4:08:46] uh. And also in particular um we heard earlier about um opioid use disorder and how
[4:08:53] with our medical population that is a really significant portion in the primary diagnosis
[4:08:58] and so understanding a bit more of your treatment protocol for that and uh what the
[4:09:03] costs are associated with that so um that would be really helpful to hear in the
[4:09:08] future, I think you. Absolutely, thank you. Thank you. Thank you as a plumber. All
[4:09:12] right. Thank you. Thank you for your guys' time.
[4:09:17] All right, moving on to R9. This is a presentation sponsored by Supervisor Plumber.
[4:09:24] From the Shasta Substances Coalition regarding opioid overdose deaths in the county.
[4:09:29] Hello, Ms. Phillips. How are you doing?
[4:09:33] I'm doing great, thank you so much. I have a PowerPoint, so it's right there.
[4:09:42] I always get nervous.
[4:09:45] Stewart. Right there. Great. OK.
[4:09:54] Well, good afternoon, um, Chairman Cry supervisors. I really appreciate the opportunity
[4:10:00] to come before you again. Um, my name is Jill Phillips, and I am, uh, the facilitator
[4:10:07] for the Shasta Substance use Coalition. Um, Let me see this here.
[4:10:16] Hey.
[4:10:21] Can you help me here a little bit here this? I'm sorry. Just the arrows, right, yeah.
[4:10:29] There we go.
[4:10:32] OK. that one that one should be the next one. OK, so I'm sort of couching this as
[4:10:38] a progress report and a good news report too. So, um, uh, the SASA Substance use
[4:10:44] Coalition is comprised of three primary uh committees on the screen you see there.
[4:10:51] We have over 35 participating organizations. I think last year it was 25. Um, I
[4:11:00] wanna give a shout out to our community volunteers and a special shout out to our
[4:11:04] community volunteers and the Health Alliance in Northern California that acts as
[4:11:08] our fiscal agent. We have 4 main areas of our work plan. Um, today I'm gonna talk
[4:11:16] to you about 2, primarily about 2 of those areas um related to overdose-related deaths
[4:11:22] and also um improving access to treatment. So the good news is that in 2024,
[4:11:30] we had a 43% reduction in overdose deaths due to fentanyl. And
[4:11:38] um The first quarter looks like we're going to stay down, so the numbers are too
[4:11:45] small, the first quarter to be able to report. So uh we're, we think that we're still
[4:11:51] going on a good trajectory as far as overdose deaths.
[4:11:56] I'm gonna talk about some of those um activities that we think has made it have made
[4:12:01] a difference um one is that we have formed the naloxone action team. And we work
[4:12:09] together to coordinate our overdose, I mean our naloxone distribution. We have
[4:12:17] delivered delivered at least 8100 boxes of naloxone that includes information
[4:12:24] along with the naloxone so that people know where to get treatment and that sort
[4:12:28] of thing. We have the little red bags I'm going to bring up here that we distribute.
[4:12:33] We are tracking weekly or overdose data. We have a monthly, weekly report. We know
[4:12:41] when we have spikes in overdoses, where they are, and then we go and address those.
[4:12:47] One thing that I'm really excited about is that we now have over 100 business locations
[4:12:53] throughout Chesa County, including many. uh, gas stations, etc. that um carry uh
[4:13:00] naloxone and educational material and will provide it for free to people in the community
[4:13:06] to come in and these are in even the most isolated areas. We've uh provided training
[4:13:13] in naloxone to 22, soon to be 24, all 24 school districts. Talking a little bit about
[4:13:21] the continuum of care for those with opioid use disorder, uh, we developed a survey
[4:13:27] and we had 29 respondents. We gave the survey to those who are providing opioid treatment
[4:13:34] services and recovery support. Anyone who's working with individuals who have opioid
[4:13:41] use disorder. And you can see we've asked several questions, but uh this one question
[4:13:48] was uh what are the missing or under available services and uh unsurprisingly, medical
[4:13:54] detox uh came to the top. We also have um need for housing co-occurring treatment,
[4:14:02] residential treatment, and so on. One of the things we've done is put together a
[4:14:09] continuum, a diagram here so that we can see, you know, how we are working together,
[4:14:15] what, where the routes of entry are, um. Where some of the gaps in services are,
[4:14:22] we have known that we have needed more residential and intensive outpatient treatment,
[4:14:28] and I'm happy to have learned recently that both Good News Rescue Mission and Visions
[4:14:34] on the Cross have received funding from the state which will increase those services.
[4:14:39] We're very, very anxious to see and support more services in the jail, um, and we
[4:14:47] think that's a really important place for services to be provided and we're very
[4:14:55] ready, willing and able to connect uh through the community connections so service
[4:15:01] providers in the community are very interested in connecting with the jail so we
[4:15:05] have smooth transitions. And uh we're very interested in seeing a medical detox crisis
[4:15:12] stabilization that has yet to be funded, although I think the tribe is preparing
[4:15:17] to do some of those services. Um, we've identified keys to successful treatment of
[4:15:25] opioid use disorder, and I think these are really important to kind of keep in mind
[4:15:29] as we all are working together between the prevention all the way through the treatment
[4:15:34] and recovery, um, preventing overdose deaths, building relationships, increasing
[4:15:40] opportunities for effective engagement. Removing any barriers, this is really one
[4:15:45] of the areas that we're looking at. We want to reduce wait time for service access,
[4:15:50] reducing withdrawal symptoms through the medical detox services, treating mental
[4:15:56] health that's co-occurring with substance use disorder, and providing ongoing supportive
[4:16:01] services for the needed level of care. Um, we're working to gather some data that
[4:16:08] can really help us to identify the areas, the gap areas and those areas that we can
[4:16:15] improve in. Um, here's some examples of some of the data that we're looking at. We
[4:16:21] have received some data from partnership that is helping us to sort of see the picture
[4:16:26] here, so you can see that in Bullet two, only half of those who were diagnosed with
[4:16:33] opioid use disorder in 2024 received the medications required to effectively treat
[4:16:39] that disorder. So those are areas that we'd like to get the numbers to improve. Um,
[4:16:47] we see some, some pretty good changes in housing instability, um, improvements in
[4:16:52] housing instability when there's treatment, and, um, we see that in general the the
[4:17:00] the 10 day guidance for access to residential outpatient treatment was met 95% of
[4:17:07] the time, but we think that that should be narrowed to a smaller amount of time.
[4:17:13] And and so on, so. Next, we're looking at continuing to work and develop
[4:17:21] and strengthen the treatment recovery continuum of care. We want to improve access
[4:17:27] to naloxone and information for the highest risk populations, and we want to provide
[4:17:34] data driven information to assist in decision making for whoever is making those
[4:17:38] decisions, whether it's providers or policy makers, and we. Want
[4:17:46] to establish progress goals and here's some examples from some areas that we're looking
[4:17:50] at, uh, promote service development where needed and increase community information
[4:17:56] and points of connection.
[4:18:01] That's it.
[4:18:04] To Plumber. Thank you Jill for being here and presenting on this. Um, the reason
[4:18:08] I had asked you to share this is because, you know, a lot of times we're talking
[4:18:13] about the challenges that our community faces and uh we don't always celebrate the
[4:18:18] progress that we're making and so it's exciting to hear that overdose deaths has
[4:18:21] gone down significantly, uh, uh, from 2023 to 2024 and then it seems to be, uh, you
[4:18:28] know, staying there and it's, it's helpful to also learn from. The uh strategies
[4:18:33] that you, you found to be effective there and see how we can both increase those
[4:18:38] but also uh replicate them in other areas as well. So, thank you. Welcome. Thank
[4:18:45] you, Joe. I appreciate it. Joe. Joe, Joe Campbell
[4:18:50] uh sent us a uh email in between, so I remember reading that. So Joe's watching,
[4:18:54] Joe, I read it and thank you. Thank you very much. Yes, thank you, Joe. All right,
[4:18:59] moving on.
[4:19:02] Is this gonna be OK. So we have a scheduled hearing. How many uh public commenters
[4:19:07] do you have on this one? So for the hearing for our time we have no public uh commenters
[4:19:14] hearing OK.
[4:19:16] It's all correspondence on file with the clerk of the board. the hearing first, then
[4:19:20] I guess to tell you, that's right.
[4:19:25] I'll take them, sure.
[4:19:50] The area to which we all think.
[4:19:54] Welcome, sir. Um, good afternoon, Chair Cry, members of the board. Brandon Magby,
[4:19:58] I'm the County Real Property and right agent. Um, That's it. Thank you for coming.
[4:20:04] That was close. That was quick. Thank you. That's OK. So, uh, before you have
[4:20:12] this afternoon is a proposed abandonment for a portion of Tamarack Avenue in, in
[4:20:17] the Bernie area. Um, in front of you is an aerial aerial map of the southern portion
[4:20:25] of Tamarack Avenue as it intersects Highway 299 East. Um, we just go to the next
[4:20:32] one. So, If you see the red um hatched area, that is the previous
[4:20:40] alignment of Tamarack Avenue prior to 2006. 2006, Caltrans are part of a
[4:20:47] uh safety project. Acquired the necessary right away to realign Tamarack Avenue as
[4:20:53] it intersects 299 at a 90 degree angle. With doing that, that provided better sight
[4:20:59] distance for the traffic from Tamarack onto Highway 299 going both east and west
[4:21:05] directions. As you can see previously it had a very obscure angle, especially for
[4:21:09] the westbound traffic from Tamarack on the 299. Um, the tribe has recently, in the
[4:21:16] last few years have purchased the property um there south of Tamarack Avenue and
[4:21:23] the property there, that corner property on the north side of Tamarack Avenue. Um,
[4:21:27] the tribe are the ones that asked for the abandonment, the, the.
[4:21:34] The area is no longer used. There is, um, I have heard from utility companies that
[4:21:42] PG&E does have facilities in that area. And I believe there is a waterline too. The
[4:21:48] abandonment resolution does hold a reservation for those any existing utilities that
[4:21:54] are in that easement area. Those utility companies will retain the right to maintain
[4:22:00] and keep those utilities in place, so that. I know the reason why the
[4:22:07] tribe has asked for this to be abandoned is they're in the process of trying to move
[4:22:13] the property into their trust, and this is an encumbrance on the property that is
[4:22:17] currently prohibiting that moving the property into their trust. Um, that is my
[4:22:24] presentation for today. I will note that the chairman for the tribe, um, is in the
[4:22:30] is in the audience if you have any questions, um, as well, but if you have any questions
[4:22:34] for me, I'm available. This is that little section that, um, it kind of comes around
[4:22:40] the gas station, right and goes back to. And I'm that's how the road currently goes,
[4:22:43] and this is the old one that used to go, yes sir, so you can see on this slide you
[4:22:47] can see where the gas station is further up, uh, there at the intersection of park
[4:22:52] in Tamarack, and then the casinos on the other side. Yes sir, that's correct. So
[4:22:56] this is down by by Tamaracks uh by 299. And here's a, here's a photo photo of showing
[4:23:03] where it currently is lined and the previous alignment that the payment's been removed
[4:23:10] and it's been returned to be a good place for a casino sign, I would guess. They
[4:23:14] already have their casino sign there. So there is already a sign there, so, um, but
[4:23:21] yes, sir. Super long. Oh, I wasn't, I wasn't, uh, in line. I just, I just saw you
[4:23:28] had your head. OK. No, the only thing is, and I've spoken with you at length about
[4:23:33] this, so I had, you answered all my questions, and one of the things that maybe you
[4:23:37] could just bring out would be that there is no monetary worth to this property as
[4:23:43] as you described it to me, so it's not an abandonment of something that we could
[4:23:46] negotiate anything. Yes, sir. I mean for the use for the county was for uh public
[4:23:52] road and public utilities. The public road is no longer there, so there is no need
[4:23:57] for the county to retain the right in the future to build a road. There is we have
[4:24:02] no plans and the current alignment is the best alignment for the public for the safety.
[4:24:08] Thank you. You're welcome. But, but you're preserving the utility. Yes, sir. That
[4:24:12] is correct. The utilities will will retain the right to use that area. If I remember
[4:24:17] right, that's just kind of an odd size 17-inch water line, lot of pressure. You don't
[4:24:22] want to hit it. The, the tribe is aware of it. I've spoken with their attorneys and
[4:24:27] made them aware that there are existing facilities, and they, they are OK with the
[4:24:32] reservation uh of the rights for the utility companies. We, we found it right in
[4:24:37] front of the casino. You remember that? Yeah.
[4:24:44] I gotta open the public, make a motion that we accept. Well, yeah, we have to open
[4:24:50] the public hearing, but, but we can, we can, we can take that motion. I'll second
[4:24:55] it, but let's now, we're gonna open the public hearing. Mr. Buttell, is there any
[4:24:59] correspondence on file with the clerk of the board? Yes, chair, any and all correspondence
[4:25:04] related to this, uh, scheduled hearing is on file with the clerk of the board and
[4:25:07] available for inspection upon request. Great. Do we have any public commenters for
[4:25:10] this item? We do not, chair. With that, we'll close the public hearing. We'll bring
[4:25:15] it back. We have a first and a second. Is there any other board discussion? All those
[4:25:20] in favor? I passes 50. Thank you, Brandon. You're up here for the next one too. OK,
[4:25:26] go ahead, R 11.
[4:25:47] Uh, chair crime, member of the board, Brandon Magby County Property and right of
[4:25:51] agent, um, before you today on this abandonment, this abandon, um, here's
[4:25:59] one of the sheets from uh track map out on Bear Mountain Road. If you Look at lots
[4:26:07] 9 and 10. I don't know if I can really zoom it in, but they have a shared, they have
[4:26:12] a shared driveway at the lot line of 9 and 10, um. So the rest of
[4:26:20] the access, the frontage along Bear Mountain Road per this track map, those access
[4:26:25] rights were relinquished and dedicated to the public, relinquishing, so they only
[4:26:29] had one area to access Bear Mountain Road. Um, so since then,
[4:26:37] The current owner, when he purchased the property, the previous owner had put in
[4:26:43] a secondary access that is technically an illegal encroachment, but the current owner
[4:26:50] is in the process of obtaining a building permit to make improvements on his property
[4:26:56] with building the shop there on this. Around the southeasterly corner of his property
[4:27:01] there, and it's the one in the middle. I, oh no I can't show you. So
[4:27:09] You probably asked
[4:27:12] Hm.
[4:27:16] OK. So this is the secondary access right here. You probably ask why can't he just
[4:27:22] use his existing access and discontinue his driveway on down. To do that would cross
[4:27:28] his leach field, so that's where his leach field is located on his property. So that's
[4:27:33] really not a feasible access to continue on to the access of his new proposed shop
[4:27:39] for his property. So the abandonment is to abandon the the relinquished access
[4:27:46] rights for the existing uh secondary driveway on the property. This would allow him
[4:27:53] to finalize his building permit um and and continue the improvements on his property
[4:27:59] which would increase the property values. um, so that is my presentation if you have
[4:28:06] any other questions. Supervisors, yeah, so they put that that property or the, the
[4:28:12] road to the west of the house is the one they're currently using, but it's a secondary
[4:28:17] access. They're using the, the shared driveway as their main access. The secondary
[4:28:23] access will provide access to the southern portion of the property to allow the improvements
[4:28:28] to be built. OK, and it's just the fact that they didn't have permission to put it
[4:28:31] in there. They didn't have any. Yes sir, that's right. This came up during the building
[4:28:35] permit process that they that they realized something that always does. It does.
[4:28:40] Yes, sir, and, and talk and speaking with the property owner, this was something
[4:28:43] that was in place prior to him buying the property, so he's just trying to correct
[4:28:48] everything so he can move forward with his building permit. Well, I like to see people
[4:28:52] move forward with their building projects, so, but it's not my district, so I won't
[4:28:55] make a motion. Troy.
[4:29:01] All right, we're gonna go ahead and open the public hearing. Mr. Britell. Yes, chair,
[4:29:07] uh, any and all correspondence related to the scheduled hearing is on file with the
[4:29:10] clerk of the board and available for inspection upon request. And with that, uh,
[4:29:13] with your permission, we do have one public commenter, um, Mario Caligari. Great.
[4:29:22] Hello, gentlemen. Um, I'd like to thank Brandon for his guidance through this. It
[4:29:26] was crazy. Um, that I am the property owner. My name is Mario Caligari. It's the
[4:29:31] one to the east there, and it was in, I, I didn't, I'm not here with a mea copa.
[4:29:35] I didn't put it in. I always thought it was, um, a legal right away, and all the
[4:29:39] rest of it. Um, one thing that I'd like some clarification from Brandon is the adjacent
[4:29:43] property and, and I'm gonna tell you some of the uses for this right away is in addition
[4:29:47] to what I'm looking for, uh, the property to, um, the east of it, I also own that
[4:29:52] property. It has an easement, um, access easement. Are you? You said there were no
[4:29:58] further ones in this subdivision. I believe that's
[4:30:03] on this, OK, yeah, I just wanna talk. I just, I got property that doesn't have an
[4:30:06] easement now. I'm gonna be back before you. Um, some of the uses for this, and I
[4:30:10] think it's important for you to note, um, when there was a fire out there Bear Mountain,
[4:30:14] um, the, uh, Cal Fire, uh, put a strike team on the property adjacent to me that
[4:30:19] I own. The access through that access road as well. PG&E stacked a bunch of stuff
[4:30:26] out there to replace on my property on the right hand side as well, and they used
[4:30:30] it as well to access their stuff. But the real thing is, and I think another benefit
[4:30:35] for this is I have a large pool, 22,000 gallons access for fire protection for if
[4:30:41] they needed it. That would be where they would access my property to actually pull
[4:30:45] the water from that line from my pool if they wanted to do that, and I've granted
[4:30:50] them that when they were in the strike team. So just trying to be a good, good person
[4:30:56] in the community and trying to get this thing all rectified and all done. So I thank
[4:30:59] you for your time. Thank you. All right, with that, here, being our only public commenter
[4:31:05] we'll close the public hearing. I'll make a motion to approve abandon. We have a
[4:31:12] motion by Supervisor plumber to approve, seconded by Supervisor Kels from any other
[4:31:15] board discussion. Seeing none, all those in favor, uh, passes 50. Thank you. Troy
[4:31:22] never got in and out that fast. That's that's, that's fantastic.
[4:31:31] That's right.
[4:31:33] I, I stopped by his office was strictly to tell him thank you, and he almost closed
[4:31:37] the door and locked it all. That's right. Before you can get in there. Yeah. That's
[4:31:40] right.
[4:31:43] All right. We're gonna temporarily adjourn as the Shasta County Board of Supervisors.
[4:31:50] We are now going to reconvene as the Shasta County in-home Support Services Public
[4:31:54] Authority Board. This board does not receive any extra compensation for this, so
[4:31:59] we'll go ahead and call that meeting to order. Mr. Bell, do we have any public commenters
[4:32:05] for this item? No, chair, we do not. OK. We have, uh, one item and we have two items
[4:32:11] on consent, 1 and 2. I'll entertain a motion to approve. We have a motion Ellstrom,
[4:32:19] seconded by Supervisor Long. All those in favor I passes 50. You're going to adjourn
[4:32:27] the meeting as the in-home support services public authority, and we are now reconvening
[4:32:32] as the Shas County Board of Supervisors. We will now
[4:32:36] go to recess for that, and we will now convene as the Shasta County Water Agency,
[4:32:41] calling that meeting to order. We did not receive any additional compensation for
[4:32:45] this. Do we have any public commenters uh for the Shasta County Water Agency, Mr.
[4:32:50] Bull? No, chair, we do not. OK. So we have, I think it's 2 or 3 on this one.
[4:32:58] We have two items on consent. I'll make a motion that we approve. You have a second
[4:33:04] by Supervisor Kelstrom. All those in favor. I passes 50. We are going to adjourn
[4:33:10] as the Shasta County Water Agency, reconvening as the Shasta County Board of Supervisors.
[4:33:15] CEO Rickert, is there anything on the agenda that we have not, uh. Made it to
[4:33:25] or that I missed. But, why I'm asking you. I already asked the CEO. With that, this
[4:33:28] meeting is adjourned.