Good afternoon and happy new year.

Welcome to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors Personnel Administration and Legislation Committee meeting for Monday, January the 5th, 2026.

Aborrow call, please.

Supervisor Fortnite.

Present.

Present.

We have a quorum.

Thank you.

You need to go through instructions on participation with MS teams.

Sure.

And for all participants, please state your name for the record prior to your comment.

If you wish to speak on a matter not on the agenda, please wait until Supervisor Lena Tam calls for public input on non-agendized items.

Only matters within the committee's jurisdiction may be addressed.

To notify the clerk that you wish to speak, please listen closely to the following for in-person participants.

Please fill out a speaker card at the front of the room and hand it to the clerk.

The clerk will call your name to allow you to speak at the podium.

For online participants, please use the raise hand function at the bottom of the screen during the item of which you would like to speak.

The clerk will call your name and allow you to unmute when it is your turn.

For dialed in participants, please dial star five.

That's star five to raise and or lower your hand.

The clerk will allow you to unmute when it is your turn.

If you no longer wish to speak, lower your hand on Microsoft Teams or simply notify the clerk that you no longer wish to speak when it is your turn.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

We will start with the federal legislation update from CJ Lake.

Uh thank you, Supervisor.

And I think uh Emily is waiting to get her uh presentation like certification or designation so that she can unmute and be on camera.

Sorry about that, Emily.

Go ahead.

There we go.

Emily, do you want me to kick it off or do you want to take the lead?

Okay, sounds good.

Uh so welcome back.

Uh and welcome to 2026.

Uh Congress is back in session this week after a lengthy uh holiday recess.

Um the Senate came back today and the house will gavel in tomorrow uh as the second session in the 119th Congress starts.

Um as we typically start off with, there are a number of deadlines uh that are approaching early in the year that Congress will have to meet, the first of which is of course the FY26 uh appropriations process and the expiration of the continuing resolution uh which expires on January 30th, um, leaving Congress only three and a half weeks to address the remaining FY26 appropriations bills or pass uh an additional continuing resolution.

Um just as a reminder in late 2025 when the government reopened, Congress enacted a funding minibus uh that provided uh federal funding through the end of the fiscal year for the ag milcon VA and ledge branch appropriations bills, uh but the remaining nine appropriations bills remained under continuing resolution.

Uh and then just this morning, uh three additional appropriations bills uh were released on a bicameral bipartisan basis.

This is for the interior environment, the commerce, justice, and science, and the energy and water bills.

Um, they have been released today, and the house will likely vote on the measure Thursday, uh and then the Senate will pick it up shortly thereafter, uh, most likely next week, but it's not uh yet sure.

Of course, that remains uh six additional uh appropriations bills uh that need to get passed, which include the labor age and defense and tea bills.

Um, the defense bill uh was previously close to getting an agreement, um, but of course, the operations in Venezuela uh last weekend are going to most likely complicate uh passage of that bill quickly, and that bill is often tied with the labor age bill.

Um, and it basically accounts for about 85% of the total federal budget.

Um, outside of that, uh, once the appropriations process takes place uh for FY26, Congress will then start to address the FY27 appropriations process.

Okay, we were already going through that, where members and senators from on both sides are going to start opening up their portals for programmatic and congressionally directed spending requests.

Emily, I'll pause there in case there's anything that I miss on the apprope side before we move on to our next two topics.

Sure.

That was released this morning, and it seems like this minibus will pass with bipartisan support.

I don't want to jinx it, but it seems like it'll, as you said, pass the House later this week and then move over to the Senate.

Congressman Swalwell included a million dollars for uh the county's Livermore Sewer Extension Project.

Uh that was uh included in the House bill and then the full amount was included in kind of the final package.

And so um I know uh their office has reached out to public works, but just wanted to flag that for you all as well.

And John, I don't know if you want me to keep going, but um I certainly can.

Um yeah, keep going.

That's fine.

Okay.

Um, you know, again, one of the things, and of course, this is what tripped up a probes to begin with, was the expiration of the enhanced premium tax credits, um, which went into effect on December, or I guess January 1 is when they officially expired.

Um, if you recall, um, right before the House adjourned at the end of the year, um, the House did uh pass a discharge petition seeking a straight extension.

There were a number of Democrats, I think every Democrat signed it, and then a few moderate Republicans went over.

So it has enough votes or enough signatures on it so that we are expecting the House to take up um, I think I believe it's a three-year extension of the credits, uh, which would be retroactive.

They haven't said that it will happen.

Um there's no confirmation it will happen later this week, but it could.

Um we do expect it to pass, and I know we talked about this probably at our last PAL meeting in December.

Um it will pass with, you know, Democratic votes and then a handful of moderate Republicans who will push it over the edge.

Um, but we do not anticipate the Senate to take up that bill.

The Senate um took up the similar three-year extension in December and it failed.

But I think what you know, we had said when we saw this happen at the end of December is that, you know, it it now kind of leads to potential legislative pathways um to see what could happen um kind of on broader health care policy discussions.

So there are a few things that we think uh the Senate will be focused on.

Um Senate Finance Committee um is uh focused on um again some sort of potential extension um for the enhanced premium tax credits.

Not sure how that will look.

Um one thing I also wanted to bring up was the 340B pilot program that um drug pilot program that HERSA was supposed to institute was supposed to take effect on January one and FQHCs and CHCs in particular were opposed to it and very concerned that um with a rebate program, they wouldn't be able to come up with the money for these drugs on the front end.

Um, and so um I know I had talked to health care services about this a good bit, and just wanted to flag that um a federal judge ruled that officials didn't sufficiently consider the impact on safety net hospitals.

And so that program has been paused.

It was supposed to go into effect on January 1.

Um, it has been paused.

So again, I was having conversations with healthcare services on that.

Um that's really it for our report for this week.

Um again, they're just back, as John said.

Um, Senate is back today, House comes back tomorrow.

Uh, but happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Thank you, John and Emily.

Uh, questions?

Supervisor Fortunato passed.

Thank you for that report.

Um, definitely appreciate everything that was shared.

I do have a question about um one thing that um I didn't hear an update on, which is uh the freezing of child care money to states because of alleged abuse um in Minnesota.

So I know that uh the first five commission, which has a relationship with our county is monitoring this very closely.

I was just curious if you have anything to share.

Um they did share with us that um our, you know, California Department of Social Services believes that we're fine till March.

Um, but is there any information that you might have on this?

Uh I uh I do not, John.

I don't know if you have anything new, but but I do not, and I can certainly connect with first five and and um get a little bit more info, but I don't at this point.

Uh I mean I've been following it not super closely since it has predominantly to do with the state of Minnesota and the and the ongoing sort of scandal that that state has been going through for the past better part of a year uh at this point, you know, obviously it raised a fever pitch over the holiday break, um, with HHS taking action and pausing uh federal funding um to child care centers.

This has also been part of a pretty substantial right wing environment, uh, or the product of a right-wing environment rather.

Um, so I'm not sure how broad um the policy will extend beyond the state of Minnesota, um, or if this will be more of an acute issue with a particular political bent, of course.

Okay, if you could just keep this on your radar, I know that first five's policy team is monitoring it very closely, um, just something to keep on your radar as well, and in case it does have impact on California, which could then potentially have impact on us here in Alameda County and elsewhere.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um, appreciate the update as well on the ACA subsidies, um, which ends January 1st, even if they took action to extend it for three years in the meantime, uh the premiums uh would be affected for a good number of residents in the um state.

So how long do you think that might involve?

I mean, I'm I we we don't know.

I mean, quite frankly.

Um it and I don't think there would be a three year extension.

I just I don't um, but I'm not sure how long this will last and whether there's going to be momentum to get something done.

Um again, it would be retroactive, um, but I I don't think we can say how long it will go.

We just I don't know.

But I think they'd probably like to get something done this first quarter, but I just don't know.

Okay, that's fair.

I know that there's been some talk about some bipartisan support um between our uh local um legislators like uh Sam Licardo and uh Mr.

Um, I think Representative Riley had talked about looking at some alternatives, but it's just that for the here and now there's going to be um impacts that I think a lot of families are going to have to sort through until this uncertainty gets resolved.

Yeah, I think what we'd, you know the with the Licardo legislation and the Licarta's approach, it's going to be difficult to get a majority of Republicans to get on board with an extension of the Affordable Care Act, enhanced premium tax credits in either chamber.

You know, you may be able to pick off a couple of moderate Republicans, such as Mr.

Riley, who see this as a threat to their own reelection in a more purple state or more purple state or more purple district.

But the vast majority of Republicans in Congress don't serve those kinds of areas.

They serve much more Republican districts.

So the approach that Democrats are taking or would like to take rather, which is some form of an extension of the tax credit with the retroactive provision.

It's going to be very difficult to try to find a majority of Republicans to go on board with that approach.

Okay.

Trying to be optimistic here.

Appreciate the updates, and I look forward to hearing more about that as well as well as the impacts potentially on early childhood education and daycare, especially.

I have no other questions.

Are there any comments or public input on our federal legislative update?

There are no public comments.

Okay, let's go to the state legislative update from Full Moon Strategies.

Happy New Year, everyone.

Amy cost up with full moon strategies with your legislative update at the state level.

Much like our federal counterparts, the legislature reconvenes today.

The assembly already went into their floor session, and the Senate is scheduled to begin at two o'clock.

The new president pro tem, Senator Monique Lamone, announced major leadership and committee changes for the upcoming session.

We emailed that out late last month, but obviously it's going to reshape some of the more uh powerful uh chair uh positions within the Senate.

Um, and this is a practice for each new pro tem.

Um she has named Senator Angelique Ashby of Sacramento as the majority leader.

Uh Senator John Laird of Santa Cruz uh has been appointed as the budget chair.

That's a position he held previously when he was in the assembly.

Uh, a longtime ally, uh Senator Cervantes has been named as the chair of the appropriations committee.

Um, Senator Argyen of Alameda County maintains his two chairmanships.

Um, uh however he's leading housing in addition to public safety committees.

Uh, most of the new committee roles will actually begin in February in alignment with the two-year bill cycle, with the exception of the leadership changes, the budget chairmanship, uh, natural resources and water committees took effect immediately upon announcement.

For our delegation members, Senator Wahab has been named chair of the business profession and economic development committee.

Um, I already named Senator Argyen's committees.

Again, it's housing and public safety.

Uh Senator McNirney uh maintains his chairmanship of the revenue and taxation committee, as well as uh Senator Grayson maintaining his chairmanship of the banking and financial institutions committee.

Um, as we've discussed many times, and as you heard in the latest federal update, health care policy continues to be poised to be dominating the agenda in 2026 for California as hospitals, insurers, medical and state leaders brace for the sweeping changes um that are coming under HR 1 signed in the law last July.

Uh, as we've talked about, the law dramatically alters how health care is financed with big changes in California, forcing some um pretty significant funding shortfalls in programs.

Um we've provided and we provide again in our PAL notes today some of the active ballot initiatives um that are circulating to help address some of these issues, and so clearly labor unions, health care providers, policymakers, and industry groups are gearing up for several battles uh over revenue, uh, with several labor unions pushing both to extend um current revenues set to expire under previously approved proposition 30/55, and for new revenue measures to help offset the roughly $30 billion in projected health care losses from HR 1, as well as recent state budget cuts in programs such as Medical Dental Vision Services and coverage for undocumented immigrants.

At the center of this debate is the governor.

He has not weighed in on many of the revenue measures in circulation, but he did express concern about the proposed billionaire tax.

At the same time, hospitals are seeking relief from costly mandates like minimum wage hikes and seismic retrofit requirements, warning that the combined impacts of HR1 and some of those state rules are really squeezing their finances.

Revenue measures in the legislature require two-thirds vote, moving much of this discussion into the ballot versus within the legislature.

We're anticipating the governor will release his budget on Friday.

So we will be, of course, monitoring that, and we will see if he says anything further about revenues in light of some of these decisions.

The state, as we've talked about, faces some significant structural upheaval in how Medi-Cal is funded, as new federal uniformity rules force California to overhaul its provider tax system.

We have a couple of articles that we'll include in the PAL report that kind of lays out a little bit of the landscape that people will be facing with some of these fiscal concerns.

A federal judge did rule on December 29th that the Trump administration can resume sharing Medicaid data about undocumented immigrants with ICE starting January 6th.

The ruling is obviously a significant win for the federal administration's mass deporting efforts, allowing ICE to use location data and deportation cases.

The decision comes after a legal challenge from California and 21 other states which sued to prevent the use of Medicaid data in immigration enforcement.

The judges' order permits the sharing of basic personal information such as citizenship, immigration status, address, phone number, date of birth, and Medicaid ID, while barring the release of more sensitive health-related records and documents.

California officials argue that the policy undermines trust in the state's Medicaid program, potentially discouraging undocumented immigrants from seeking vital health care services.

This ruling marks a major shift in how personal information could be used for immigration enforcement, raising concerns about privacy and the potential chilling effects on health care access for vulnerable communities.

As we've noted, California has filed 52 lawsuit lawsuits during the first portion of Trump's second term under Attorney General Rob Bonta.

And we've won or settled about 80% of them and claiming about 168 billion dollars in benefits for the state.

Judges have blocked the Trump administration actions, such as freezing federal funds, cutting food assistance, forcing states into immigration enforcement, revoking AmeriCorps funding and deploying National Guard troops in some of our local cities, though California has suffered some losses as well, including limits on nationwide injunctions, environmental regulations, firearm laws, and protections for transgender use.

So more to come on that, you know, but even, you know, the discussion on child care funding.

I imagine that we will continue to see more lawsuits filed, and we will keep you appraised as always.

Also, coming up, we have the state of the state, which the governor will be presenting later this week, followed by the announcement of his budget.

With that, I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, Amy.

Supervisor Fortune of asked questions or comments.

Thank you so much for the report, Amy.

Well, I guess we're just going to anticipate hearing about the governor's budget and the state of the state.

Any initial intel in terms of how the state might be addressing our challenges around health care as it relates to what might be in the budget?

Not quite yet, Supervisor.

I would say there's a bit of a timing issue with, of course, we've talked a lot about the major uh fiscal implications of HR1, many of which won't take effect in this budget year, but they'll take effect in budget year plus one for the state.

So I think there's a question of whether or not, you know, for lack of a better term, they try to kind of muddle through this year's budget while these conversations about revenue measures take more form.

You know, many of the initiatives that we have shared and that are in our notes are still in circulation.

So it remains to be seen which of those might actually ultimately make it to voters for consideration.

Thank you.

And you mentioned the billionaires tax, which is one of the initiatives that's being circulated.

Did I hear you correctly that the governor expressed some concerns about that?

And if so, what were his concerns?

Yeah, so there's been a couple of reports of his concerns.

One of his first comments actually drew um quite a strong rebuke from some of the labor unions.

He made a comment about whether or not there was really kind of uh uniformity amongst the labor unions on the billionaire tax.

Um and he drew a strong rebuke from Lorena Gonzalez on that point, saying that labor unions absolutely are working kind of in lockstep on these issues.

Um, and then more recently he had um a more nuanced quote uh in the New York Times about how such a move could put California at a competitive disadvantage with the other 49 states.

But he has definitely expressed opposition and concern to that particular revenue measure.

Despite the fact that it's a one-time tax on wealth versus an ongoing.

Yes.

Um, and as we've mentioned before, there are other um ideas out there, including, and this was brought up in the budget last year by the Senate, a question of whether or not you restructure the corporate tax for corporations that have employees utilizing our safety net services.

Um, colloquially, we kind of refer to it as the Walmart tax.

Um, but the idea would be that there would be some sort of a tax levied, um, if a lot of your employees are on our safety net programs.

Um, and so you know, I think the dust hasn't quite settled yet on what these revenue measures might be.

There's quite a few that are still, as I said, you know, either in circulation or even still in the exploratory stage.

Um, and I wouldn't know those are new revenues.

There is still the very core issue of extending existing revenues that were originally passed under Jerry Brown and Prop 30 and then extended in 55, um, which will also need to be addressed.

Thank you for all of that.

And thanks also for sharing um the ruling on medical data sharing.

That's very concerning that shift.

Um it may be too early to tell how our health care providers are reacting to that as well as how just ordinary people who need health care are reacting, but we'll keep tabs on it.

Thank you.

Um, thank you for that update as well.

I I'd like to follow up on the um discussion about the revenue measures.

So I think the last PAL meeting, uh Amy, you had mentioned that uh the lack of uniformity in the labor unions that the governor expressed his concern with the billionaire tax.

Was that over the formula and and how the California teachers union was uh looking at that tax and how the allocations would happen and could something be resolved to address those concerns?

Absolutely.

I mean, I think I'm gonna be really nerdy and just say in the state budget, whenever the state takes in revenues, one of the first questions that has to be addressed is whether or not it would be subject to proposition 98, which funds K through 14.

Um, as currently drafted, uh, the billionaire tax would not provide for proposition 98.

However, um, you know, based on uh the union leaders' comments after the governor's quote, you know, it does definitely appear like the labor unions are having those conversations, and you know, we have no, I would no way of knowing you know what those conversations are, but it's absolutely something that could be resolved in the text.

Thank you.

That's helpful.

Um, even though the governor expressed concerns with this particular revenue generating, did he seem overall supportive of extending the existing revenue measures and are there prospective ones that he was leaning toward or more supportive of?

I'm unaware of any other public comments, supervisor that he's had on revenues.

Um, we will see if there's anything maybe in the budget when it's released.

Um, you know, to see, you know, I think you know, part of it is that um, you know, a lot of the newspapers have opined about his political aspirations and whether or not that's impacting kind of this conversation, um, as well as, you know, we've talked before, and I think it will continue to be the case that affordability remains a dominant theme in the legislature, um, which I think has some folks feeling um a little bit um skittish about a revenue uh generating.

Um, and so you know, more to come, but it certainly dominated conversations in energy and insurance um last year, and so I anticipate affordability will still be, you know, a big theme amongst policymakers this year as well.

Thank you.

Appreciate that clarification.

Um, I have no other questions.

Are there any public comments on our state legislative update?

There are no speakers.

Okay, thank you.

On the next item, um, it's an action item.

Uh Supervisor Miley is chair of the health committee and I are putting forth a legislative measure that seeks amendments to the health and safety code uh that addresses some of the issues that have been raised uh through an ad hoc committee on the governance of the Alameda Health Systems.

And I understand that uh Alameda Health Systems has an interest in being a part of this uh measure and um would welcome their comments at this time if they want like to bring forth.

Thank you.

Thank you, Supervisor Tam, um, and for allowing me to comment.

Jeanette Dong, Chief Public Affairs Officer for AHS.

Um, we'd like to not only do we have an interest, I'd like to thank the board for always working in partnership with AHS.

It's been a number of years, and it was a combination of the board uh when Supervisor Chan was here and the board of trustees of AHS.

So I want to always thank you for your partnership and keeping um each other abreast of current issues.

So I really want to appreciate that.

And in furthering that partnership, we'd like to co-sponsor this legislation with you to finally finish the recommendations of the ad hoc committee and both the board of soups and uh board of trustees.

So that is our request is to co-sponsor with you and work together to bring this to finality.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

We welcome that partnership and um we will advance this to the full board after I have a motion for approval or any questions from my colleague.

Just a couple clarifications before the motion.

Um, thank you, Chair Tam, to you and Supervisor Miley, um, as well as to AHS for their interests in co-sponsoring this.

Um, I just want to clarify that the legislative fix that we're proposing will allow the board to implement either options A or option B that were presented to the board as I understand it, the ad hoc committee on AHS governance identified two possible reforms, and this was in the slide deck that was shared previously.

Option A is the hybrid form of governance with the Board of Supervisors in charge of the AHS budget and the hiring and firing of the AHS CEO, while the trustees would be in charge of all operations of the hospital system, and then option B would allow the Board of Supervisors to appoint one of our own to the Board of Trustees.

A or B.

Um that is our understanding.

Either more directly on the governing board along with their decisions that they make, including personnel decisions at the um executive team level.

Okay, I I, you know, obviously I've um I've only been here for a year, but I have looked at the history, and in fact, you know, I remember some of the rallies that were outside this building where I joined supervisors Valle and Supervisor Chan around these issues.

Um I do want to make sure that there is consistency with the work that the ad hoc committee did and that it's clear as we potentially bring this forward with um state lawmakers that we want those two options on the table.

Um, in addition to that, um, as this goes to the board, making sure that the slide deck that was presented at the health committee and any other background materials are also part of the legistar packet.

Um, so thank you for Chair Tam for that clarification.

And finally, I'll just say uh with HR1, our public hospital system we all know is facing unprecedented attack, and the board is ultimately responsible as we've discussed in our board meetings under the welfare and institutions code 1700 to provide health care for those who need it.

So ultimately, we're responsible for these services.

Uh, we need to have a stronger voice in ensuring the system's success, a voice and a partnership.

And I am pleased that we are able to move this forward.

Um, if I could just ask one more piece of clarifying information, and I'll be happy to make the motion.

Um, section number five of this proposal, it states quote allow the hospital authority to operate through one or more corporation joint ventures or partnerships and maintain the private character of any private hospitals, clinics, or other health care facilities over which the hospital authority gains ownership or control.

Um, is there someone here who could clarify what this means and sort of what options we're looking at?

Thank you, uh supervisor, for that question.

That amendment to the Health and Safety Code addresses our relationship primarily with St.

Rose.

We acquired St.

Rose and affiliated, and I use that term affiliated.

We kept them as a private uh hospital because of the financial advantages for fiscal federal fiscal leveraging and the IGT.

It was more beneficial financially at this time.

Um, to keep it in that way doesn't mean it can change, but for now, this is the this is the manner in which we acquired them.

Okay, I appreciate that clarification.

And if there is a way as this moves forward as legislation, or maybe I'll just state for the record, um, I think it's incredibly valuable to have a public hospital system to serve those who need it.

And I would hate this to be interpreted inadvertently as allowing for the privatization of parts of our system.

So that potentially could be something that we could make sure is is more crystal clear.

Understood.

The other aspect of it, because this took a while before it got to this point.

The Alameda Healthcare District, which governs Alameda Hospital, has a joint powers authority with the Alameda Health Systems Board of Trustees, but not the county.

So that relationship and the obligations with that joint powers authority and agreement included a seat at the board of trustees level that also has to be reflected in the amendments to the Health and Safety Code.

So that's one of the other aspects of it, even though they're not technically private.

Thank you for that clarification as well, which I think is also helpful for members of the public who might be listening.

So with that again, I am happy to make a motion to forward this to the full board.

If there's anything that myself or my office can do to support, we also would be very happy to participate.

I will second that motion.

Um, Supervisor Tem, would you like to take public comment on this item first?

Pardon?

Would you like to take public comment on this item first?

You're right.

Thank you for that reminder.

May have public comment on our proposed amendments to the health and safety code and to seek uh sponsorship of legislation for moving forward to these with these amendments.

John Lizzie Pulland.

Hi, can you hear me?

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay.

Um good morning and good afternoon and uh best to you in the new year.

Um, the proposal that is in the packet for today's meeting doesn't really say very much uh about what this might look like.

Uh we understand that this needs to go to the full board, that the state legislature would need to act.

Um, but in the context of more than 300 staff people at AHS uh announcements of their layoffs, it does raise a number of questions about what the intent is for this particular reform if it were to be enacted.

Um would the county involve itself in the uh finances and use the county's finances in order to ensure what Supervisor Fortunatabas described as the county's obligation.

Um what will happen in the meantime?

You know, this is uh we know that the uh big ugly bill won't go into effect until for another year, but it appears that AHS is acting uh uh proactively to lay people off, and that will have enormous impacts not only on all the staff people and more than 300 people uh without employment, but uh especially on the care uh within the county.

Um, you know, whether we're talking about Highland Hospital, uh whether we're talking about John George, um, and enormous impacts on commitments that the county has made this year.

So I guess I'm I'm hopeful that in addition to what Supervisor Bass asked for to be in the in the full packet, um, the AHS presentation to the health committee, that this committee and an AHS um the public affairs person could could share more uh through the chair about what the intent is here, what it will permit the county to do that will address some of these problems both in the short term and longer.

Thanks so much.

Casey.

Hi everyone, can you hear me?

Yes, okay, great.

Um I apologize.

I actually submitted my public comment electronically and I did not copy it.

Is it possible for uh the moderator to read the comment on my behalf?

We do not read uh written public comments into the record during the meeting, but I also do not have a copy of your public comment, um, but it will be distributed to the supervisors in the committee.

Okay, I will speak extemporaneously.

Um I apologize the uh instructions read differently, or at least my understanding of this was that.

Um I am a Alameda Health System employee, and I'm deeply concerned about what is going on.

My understanding of the current layoffs is they're happening uh preemptively.

Um all jobs have been budgeted through January 20, sorry, through June 2026, is that is the end of our fiscal year.

And so these um layoffs don't make much sense and feel very uh shaky.

I genuinely question how um AHS is going to be able to effectively take care of its patients, given the fact that the majority of the outpatient services are going to be cut in severe ways.

Either they're not going to be services provided anymore, or they're going to be so reduced that getting um appointments and wait times are just gonna make the actual care pretty much ineffective.

This is my understanding for speech therapy, for behavioral therapy, and for physical therapy, and that's just one aspect.

Um, a friend of mine uh and my like direct counterpart is facing potential layoff and departmentally it makes absolutely no sense because we're going to have to replace them in a significant way that either makes their layoff um inconsequential or totally upends our department.

Um managers were not uh actually checked in with about these um uh layoffs or whether or not it makes departmental sense.

And so if the uh board of supervisors is considering this, my encouragement is to encourage the trustees and the administration to delay these layoffs until well after June, because the Board of Supervisors potentially taking over could spare over 300 jobs.

That is my hope.

And if that is something that is of concern, which it sounds like it is.

Speaker, your time is up.

Thank you for your public comment.

There are no other speakers.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So the proposal before us are amendments to the health and safety code to address the governance at the Alamia Health Systems and what we propose is basically a framework.

We will be working with uh the sponsor of the bill at the state legislature to fine-tune the language uh and we will, I'm sure go through a number of hearings to address some of the concerns that have been um presented today as well.

Uh thank you, Chair Tab.

I believe that Scott Dickey from the County Council's office had his hand up after I raised that clarifying question regarding options A or B.

Uh, would you be able to call on him to see if he wishes to speak further?

Yes, Scott.

You are listed as a technical expert on this proposal.

No, I think that's that is correct.

Um, I did raise my hand to answer uh supervisor Fortunato Bass's questions.

Uh but I I believe that the those were resolved uh by by supervisor to him and by uh uh Ms.

Dong.

Um it is correct that your board selected option A as the option to proceed with, and that is uh the direction that the legislation has uh taken in terms of its amendments that would uh allow the board to decide whether or not it it wanted to be the governing body of the um of AHS or to uh appoint others to be part of that governing body and given the discretion.

Um and uh as far as the other question which was uh relating to the language about allowing the hospital authority to operate through one or more corporation joint ventures or partnerships that language is in there to allow the affiliation or the absorption of other um hospital facilities that are not currently part of AHS without uh losing the private character so that they can continue to take advantage of IGT and other uh federal benefits.

Thank you so much.

You're welcome.

Any other questions or comments?

One just technical point on the language, which is for us, you know, all language will be ultimately drafted by a legislative council.

Um, and so you know, as part of that process, obviously we'll work with the board and stakeholders, um, and then the bill must be in print for 30 days before it's acted upon.

So there'll be, you know, plenty of um of time for the public to review the draft, etc.

Um, and my experience has been ledge council does sometimes craft things, you know, a little differently based on you know precedent and case law.

Okay, thank you for reviewing that process with us.

Um so we had a motion on the table and a second, and I was about to do roll call vote.

Okay, supervisor for Donato Bass.

Hi.

Supervisor TAM.

Aye.

Motion passed.

Thank you.

So this goes to the full board at its next meeting.

Um, are there any public comment on items that are not on today's agenda that's within the purview of PAL?

There are no public comments.

Okay.

And uh would those online please identify yourself so we can appreciate your participation.

Valerie.

Good afternoon, Valerie Yarkin, Supervisor Miley's office.

Hannah.

Hi, good afternoon and happy new year.

This is Hannah Hamilton with Alameda County Social Services Agency.

Serena.

Good afternoon.

This is uh Serena Chen with Supervisor Tam's office.

Jessica M.

Happy New Year, everyone, Jessica Montis with Alameda County Community Food Bank.

Thank you.

Eileen.

Good afternoon, Mrs.

I mean with Alamina County Health.

Laura.

This is Laura Calvert with Spectrum Community Services.

That's all.

Thank you all for your participation, and we're off to a great start this year.

This meeting is adjourned.

Thank you.