All right.

Good morning.

I'd like to call the health committee meeting to order for January 12th.

Clerk, take the roll.

Supervisor Town.

Present.

Supervisor Miley.

Present.

Okay.

Does the clerk need to provide any instructions?

For in-person participation, the meeting site is open to the public.

If you'd like to speak on an item, you can fill out a speaker's card in the front of the room and hand it to the clerk for remote participation.

Follow the teleconferencing guidelines posted at www.hcav.org.

And if you'd like to speak on an item remotely, use the raise your hand function.

Okay, thank you.

All right.

So we have two informational items this morning.

The first one is the homeless state of emergency update.

Thank you, Supervisor Jonathan's gonna do uh both of the presentations.

So I'll turn it over to him.

Good morning.

Jonathan Russell, director for Alameda County Health Housing and Homelessness Services.

Um this is an update on the state of emergency at your request.

Um starting with just a brief summary, as I know you're aware, the Board of Supervisors declared a countywide state of emergency on homelessness on the 19th of September 2023.

And the then Office of Homeless Care and Coordination now Housing and Homelessness Services was tasked with uh facilitating and leading the development of a response plan in partnership with other county agencies, and we're providing an update today at the health committee's request.

Um obviously it was late 2023 when the emergency was declared.

So jumping forward here to the context in 2026.

Um just wanted to at a high level summarize kind of some of the assets and then of course some of the challenges we face in the ongoing uh emergency that is uh high levels of homelessness in our community.

Um, first, just summarizing in our last year reported to you, we're aggregating the figures for fiscal year 25, uh 2425 right now, but over 435 million dollars were uh dedicated to homelessness in Alameda County.

Apologies, there's a data miss there.

We'll fill that in, but um that's roughly 50 percent split between county investments and was that figure again.

What was that figure again?

435 million dollars in total funds awarded uh or committed.

So that includes federal, state, and local funding.

Uh 219 million of that is uh county funding, funding that has flowed through or been committed by the county, uh, and then the balance uh by the collection of our city partners.

So essentially 50-50 percent split in that year.

As you also know, we'll touch more on this in our next update on the point in time count.

We saw for the first time in the year following the declaration of emergency.

We saw the first time reduction in the point in time count numbers uh in 10 years.

We saw a 3% reduction overall and a higher reduction, an 11% reduction specifically in unsheltered homelessness, which of course we see as positive considering the particular focus on uh folks that are unhoused and unsheltered in the declaration of emergency itself.

Obviously, our guiding light, our North Star has been the Home Together 2026 community plan.

We are uh knee deep in the update to that plan right now and plan to bring uh draft before your committee and then eventually the board in the summertime, so that we might be able hopefully in the early part of the next fiscal year be launching into the updated home together 2030 plan again with the same goals to reduce homelessness, better coordinate with our partners, and address racial inequities in who's experiencing homelessness in our communities.

Of course, we also have the historic estimated 1.4 billion dollar investment through the Home Together Fund.

Decisions made in July 2025.

I'll present some updates today around some initiatives that have already launched, and of course, as we update the Home Together 2030 plan, that will really be our guiding light for driving those investments and all investments across the community to leverage those to continue our progress.

Challenges, of course, uh there are plenty of headwinds consistently, at least as of 2024, and our most recent report, those entering homelessness uh still outpace those exiting.

So much as we house uh nearly uh 4,000 people a year out of our homelessness response system into permanent housing with resources.

More than 4,000 on average fall into homelessness.

So one of the real goals of our updated plan is really to launch countywide homelessness prevention more intensively.

So to really combat that inflow, exceeding to try to get toward our outflow so that we can exceed inflow and begin to make progress.

Definitely resource constraints.

The Home Together 2026 plan calls for more than 24,000 additional housing resources with a high level of operating costs.

We are updating these estimates, of course, but given stagnation in state level and federal level housing resources, we of course need a lot more housing than we have for individuals, particularly deeply affordable housing.

So the persistent housing gaps are enduring.

We also, as a system struggle with the over-reliance on one-time sources.

So unlike many, many, essentially all of our other social safety net services in our communities where there are ongoing sources of one kind or another, homelessness funding is the vast majority of it, particularly state level funding is one-time investments without with the inability to plan on those investments for future years.

So we have to constantly balance between reserving funding to keep programs in operation and also standing up projects that could quickly be closed down, which as you can imagine doesn't work very well for scaling housing investments.

And then, of course, the federal threats to funding, both in terms of our the primary uh federal funding we receive through the Department of Housing and Urban Development for homelessness, roughly two-thirds of our federal funding each year is currently at risk with the federal government seeking to change the priorities for that funding and putting up to 60 million dollars at risk for Alameda County.

And then, of course, as I know you were discussing in other contexts also later today, that the threats from HR1 are pervasive as well.

So quickly summarizing in the development of the response plan.

So much of what I'll be outlining today follows the updates we provided to you previously and the broad outlines and focus areas developed in the response plan that really has two areas of recommendations.

What were called efficiency recommendations and then resource recommendations.

Examples of the efficiency recommendations were ways to improve or expedite hiring and recruitment, procurement, collaboration with our city partners, and then aspects of different land use and housing development, ways to improve efficiency there, and then examples of resource recommendations, such as, of course, investing in additional resources and services according to the home together needs, dedicating resources for emergency response and unsheltered homelessness in particular.

So I will run through some high-level updates in those different areas.

Particularly starting with land use.

She's not here, but the director of HCD, Michelle Sterrett may be on the call as well.

Her hand is raised.

Yeah.

So I would invite her to provide this update if she'd like, as they had been leading this group and have a good update.

Good morning.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Thank you.

We've been meeting with the cities in Alameda County since early 2025.

And one of the key things that we've identified in the last uh year is really the need for identifying sites that can be used not just for affordable housing development, not just for permanent supported housing, but for interim uses as well.

And uh one of the key problems that arose very quickly in our early discussions was a lack of understanding at the city housing staff level uh for how to evaluate a site.

And so a big chunk of our work last year was geared towards creating a toolkit for cities to use to actually evaluate a possible site for the potential uses that we've been discussing under this emergency.

So, of course, there's a permanent building that you would build on a site, but there's also other things like safe parking, safe camping, um, and other types of uses uh like a navigation center or a services site that could be an option.

Um so we established that toolkit.

We we've done a lot of training and teaching around that toolkit.

We've met with every city in the county to make sure they understand how to use it, but also to ask them the questions.

Do you have sites that you would like to use to do any of these things?

Now we're talking directly to city level housing staff, not at a political level.

Um, we're hearing at a political level, there's a lot of interest, but we're hearing at the staff level uh that there aren't necessarily sites that have been identified for interim uses.

So I actually would like to come back and um share the toolkit and share the site criteria so that we have a much broader understanding and it's out in the public about what we're working with.

I think when we think about interim uses, there's a lot of possibility out there, but there aren't a lot of funding sources out there.

So for instance, when you look at building a building, there are federal and state sources that will help you acquire it, rehabilitate it, build it, build it from the ground up.

Um, but when you're talking about a navigation center or an interim use, that is almost 100% on local government to fund.

So trying to match both an interim use site as well as funding sources is really critical.

Thank you.

Before you go on, I don't know if uh Supervisor Jam wants to ask questions as we go along.

Sure, but I I know uh I would probably want to ask some questions.

Um on this component is the and Michelle might have to answer this.

I'm just perplexed because there's a lot of vacant property.

I'll just talk about the city of Oakland.

A lot of vacant property in the city of Oakland, a lot of underutilized sites in the city of Oakland, a lot of formerly closed school sites in the city of Oakland, a lot of um uh this the former um their sites um in East Oakland that are vacant, their tax defaulted properties.

Um I just I'm just trying to try to get a handle on what is the issue with uh not having sites, or if it if the issue is not sites but funding, because I know you mentioned funding.

Can you just I'm perplexed because I mean I see it all the time, and I've got people calling me uh with plans for things they'd like to do on underutilized church properties as well.

So I'm just very, very perplexed.

Um I mean I can speak a little bit to the to the dynamic between the two.

I definitely think there are properties, you know, private properties, underused properties.

I don't think that that is the primary issue, my understanding in the Oakland context in particular.

I do think whenever it comes to siting an actual property uh with any of our city support, there was also, of course, always the community engagement element and potential potential pushback there.

I think that that's pervasive in all of our communities and in recent procurements, you know, we've had those those things come up when we had uh recently put out our first RFP for Measure W to expand interim housing.

There's always that political dynamic of settling on a property that may be technically available.

Uh I think that the primary issue from my perspective is much more about funding.

So there are significant structural gaps, as you know, in Oakland's current budget for their shelters for their existing shelters.

So the ability to both sustain and looking at expanding uh stabilizing the existing inventory versus bringing on additional new things has always been attention.

That's not to say that land use doesn't become an issue in other areas, but given the significant limitations for ongoing dedicated permanent sources to fund shelters, that has always been the dynamic, and that is what Oakland is is facing now, as they reported late last year, late last calendar year, shortfalls in some of the funding that is ending for them from state funding.

So I think it's always a dynamic between the two.

I think having this tool is very helpful for when and where there are opportunities and interests at the city level, but but all of our cities, my understanding, are facing tight budgets on their own.

And so this is where the county can lean in with the funding we have, again, balancing the concurrent investments to expand where possible.

And as we go into the uh updates on the later slide, we'll talk about a lot of the interim housing programs that are currently expanding right now.

What about the tax defaulted properties?

I mean, I'm familiar with the uh the great work that our um uh Hank Leapy does on our on our the county to work with partners to try to lift up these properties, available tax defaulted properties to nonprofit developers and otherwise.

I think those always require in that case an individual um partner, you get a nonprofit or developer to acquire uh and renovate.

So we're consistently aware of those coming up.

I think they they present a variety of complexities that that require more so an individual partner to commit to that project with a city or county support.

So I know that those are certainly um in the mix at different times.

I've I've had a variety come across my desk in terms of potential options, but it really requires the willingness of a relevant developer, for example, to want to do the project.

Yeah, because in some cases we're not talking about new development, because I know new development takes longer.

We're talking about converting, you know, shuttered commercial properties of which there are many in Oakland, uh, tax default properties of which there are many of Oakland.

Yeah, then there's vacant lots that might be new development.

But we can also look in modular homes or tiny homes or things of that nature.

Um school sites, um, I mean, underlying school sites that this you know, the school as um the Oakland Unified School District has set aside that they're no longer utilizing.

I'm just I mean, you've got to understand, I got people that are constantly talking to me.

Why, why, why?

When they see all this, I see all this, and I don't have a good answer for them, other than maybe it's a funding issue.

But if it's more than a funding issue, I really need to understand this because quite frankly, I am very perplexed.

Well, director Sterrett, I think uh has her hand up as well.

Um, thank you.

I think thank you for asking the question because it is complicated, and I think that it's something that we've been working on for a while.

We do have a surplus property program, and we have money set aside for it.

Um, we issued an RFP working directly with uh with Hank Levy around you know what possible uh sites could be utilized, and quite frankly, what we identified is that it's a very complex process of transitioning land from an existing owner who is in default to a new owner, and a lot of risk involved for that new owner.

Um, one of the things that we're trying to do to mitigate that risk is to provide the funding so that if you know potentially there's a clawback and that property has to go back, that the developer who's interested is not gonna lose their own resources.

However, that said, um, you know, we still didn't get a lot of bites at that apple and a lot of interest.

So we're going out again, probably in the spring, uh, with another RFP to see if we can't generate more interest.

Um, the other thing that's really critical about what you said, Supervisor Miley is public interest.

And I want to highlight a significant difference between the city of Oakland and for instance the city of Sacramento.

So in the city of Sacramento, um, they have pulled all of the potential sites out of the city council approval process and delegated it down to the city manager.

The city council adopted site criteria.

Basically, this is what we would consider is important in a site that we would convert to a homeless use for tiny homes, et cetera.

And this is what you're all as city council going to approve.

But as we put together a crack team of individuals from different departments who are evaluating these sites, they're not going to go through the city council for the approval process.

We are going to put forward the best possible sites, and the city council's not going to get involved in saying, yes, this site works or no, this site doesn't.

In contrast, the city of Oakland, any site that you want to actually investigate for some possible homeless use, you have to have that city council person's buy-in before it can move forward.

And if that city council person is not interested in a homeless site in their jurisdiction, the project is next.

And then I also just want to finally point out that you know local funding is really important for all of these projects.

And Oakland's done a great job with Measure U, they were able to set aside 30% of their measure U money for homelessness.

30% is you know what we did in measure A1.

So they matched our accomplishments with measure A1, but they certainly didn't exceed it.

So it would be great to see them, you know, maybe with future funding increasing the amount of money that they put aside to homelessness.

And one last question.

I'm only using Oakland because uh Oakland is the biggest jurisdiction in the county, it's got the most homeless.

I live in Oakland, so I mean, it's all those factors.

Um do we have an inventory of all sites, tax defaulted sites, unutilized commercial sites, um uh faith-based sites, uh vacant property sites, um, but do we have a comprehensive inventory?

Let's just say in the city of Oakland, of all the possible sites.

I think we have one that is specific to publicly owned land, so city of Oakland land, county of Alameda owned land.

I have not cross-referenced it with potential city uh school district land, um, and then privately owned land is also something that is not on there.

Um, so as far as whether or not there's faith-based organizations interested in developing their sites, we would have to do a much broader inventory of those types of sites.

Um the state of California recently requested and required that all local government feed up to their uh comprehensive database, all not just surplus property, but um sites that are considered to be excess and may eventually become surplus because surplus is a very technical uh defined term.

Excess is we're not using it now, and it may in the future become surplused.

Um, and so there is now a statewide database of all city and county owned and and state-owned land that is excess and all state-owned land that is surplus.

Um, happy to add that to our website.

It's one of the website updates that we've been considering.

However, we haven't done that work yet.

I would have to talk with my staff about how to cross-reference um privately owned property, and I'll talk to Hank about how to evaluate their website.

Um, I'm sorry, their their database for surplus property um for tax defaulted property to see if we could cross-reference that as well.

Yeah, because I'm not asking staff to do any more work than uh you're capable of doing, but it just seems to me that let's just take Oakland as an example.

If we had a comprehensive database of all sites, private, public, um, faith-based, Oakland Unified School District, um, commercial, vacant, tax-ifulted, I might be leaving something out.

If we had a comprehensive database of all of that, and if you were to put a um put them in categories of what's you know what's possible, what's not possible, what's a maybe, um I think I don't know.

I don't know if that would be helpful, so we could see if we just had those three categories possible, maybe not possible, we can look at the possible and then what's the impediment to this making the possible a reality.

I don't know.

I'm just I'm just spitballing because I'm very perplexed about this because I've been frustrated about this now for more than a decade, and we continue to throw money, but we're not resolving the problem.

I mean, we're reducing it, but we're not getting it to a point where I think it's um um at a place where it's not a crisis or an emergency, and people can comfortably you know go about their daily lives and say, you know, just like we have to deal with I'd love for crime to be down, I'd love for there not to be hunger, I'd love for there not to be illness, I'd love for everybody to be educated, I'd love for everybody to be you know housed, but some of these things are crises, others we just it's a fact of life.

We live with them constantly day in and day out.

So I'd like to get homelessness to a place where it's not a crisis anymore.

I'm I'm done.

Uh but I don't know if Supervisor Tam wants to weigh in on this before you continue.

Jonathan.

No, yes.

Um, thank you, Chairmile.

I just have a quick follow-up.

Um, I know that when we were looking at the um work with the East 12th Street encampment and the clearing Caltrans did approach uh so we had uh joint meetings with the city of Oakland, and they also uh recognize the need for sites and committed to providing like interim sites as well.

Um I understand the complexities with tax defaulted properties.

Yeah, I mean, we even have faith-based organizations coming to us asking if we can help fund car parks and housing on their on their unused properties, uh, but like you said, it's it's usually a million dollars a unit when you uh talk about building it, like Dr.

Anderson has come before us a number of times.

So I I think um getting that inventory is important, but more importantly, is maybe working with um our staff and looking strategically and how we can work with some of the electeds in Oakland in very site-specific opportunities, um, because as we saw with 430 Broadway, it's gonna take a braiding of funding from a number of sources, whether it's city, county, and federal government support.

So uh having that would be helpful.

Yeah, absolutely.

And we we do plan to, as we go through the process of transitioning the bed night rate shelter funding that the county provides, um, transitioning from the social services agency to H and H over the next 12 months, uh, where we're significantly increasing the investments in those and other interim housing projects.

We do plan to do a procurement that will also have an openness to additional new sites by mid-year.

So there will be opportunity for a broader call for potential competitive sites.

And again, I think we're certainly not trying to uh mystify the process to say, oh, there's a lot of different criteria based on public or private land and the development costs versus ready to use.

Um, but in the context of Oakland, we certainly are continuing those conversations, and as we go through first, making sure we're stabilizing that existing inventory and the potential hundreds of beds that are coming offline, looking at new sites and just what is the most cost-effective way to utilize and expand, that is certainly our priority, and so appreciate the feedback on that.

I just want to echo um that we are uh, in fact, this past week on Friday, we had uh a joint meeting with uh the mayor of Oakland and in her entire staff on housing and homelessness, and both um Anika and Jonathan were there, and we we talked a number about a number of issues with respect to the criteria and the RP and what opportunities and they also express a commitment to working with us, and I know uh uh H is putting together regional meetings that will be coming up in each of our respective uh regions and hopefully that will also um provide some more opportunities with cities um that are adjacent to Oakland that could help as well.

Absolutely.

Um and we'll talk a little bit more.

There's specific city-county coordination on a later slide too.

So we'll give updates on our work uh in those regards as well.

For some reason, the slide clicker is not working here.

Contracting for services, okay.

So one of the other key areas of the response plan was uh directing the heads of agency heads, county administrator, general services auditor, and um healthcare services agency to work in close partnership to expedite contract procurement development, renewing existing uh approving and new vendor pool contracts.

So as you know, we launched a vendor pool um several years ago.

We have new vendor pools that are updates to those created and launching, so we're continuing to expand and leverage that process.

We are also uh expanding our procurement staff, so H uh really needs to have dedicated staff to where we can do our own in-house procurements effectively and expeditiously.

So that is a process that's underway in some of the staffing expansions we have.

Again, just the nature of procurement, whether through the vendor pool or through traditional RFP processes, does remain a lengthy, lengthy, time-intensive administrative process, in the way that even through our vendor pool, each individual contract, of course, uh rightfully comes to the board, needs to be on a cadence and calendar.

So this will be a big part of our next year as we continue to have uh more of the home together fund coming online.

It will take a significant amount of work to bolster uh our procurements and to do them in a way that are not just quick but maximally accessible to the partners we want to work with, and the diversity of the kinds of services and programs we need to bring online.

So we're continuing to work on that, and I think the more we build our own shop, so to speak, internally, the more quickly we'll be able to um uh comprehensively run our own procurements.

Hiring, another key area where there was a desire, a variety of hiring uh recommendations or elements to the response plan, highlighting a few here, uh the need to expedite the approval of provisional appointments for vacancies that don't have hiring lists to be able to expedite uh also the reclassification requests to facilitate organizational growth.

These are two areas that I'll touch on here that we've been focusing on heavily since we've begun the Measure W Home Together Fund position expansions within H and then also a goal which is underway to create H H-specific classifications where needed.

We do have some limitations uh given uh our current county classifications and uh you know sometimes there's a square peg round uh whole kind of situation.

So the more we move forward and create HH-specific classifications where we're able to do those comps for those new classifications in alignment with uh our parallel markets competitive markets to really make sure we are competitive in the hiring uh context.

So this is a this is a big one, of course, as well.

Um as you know, uh prior to the Home Together Fund, we had had some growth in our total FTE, but it was incremental over the calendar years 24 and 25.

That was as new uh sources came online.

Um certain new positions were able to be added, but it's really right now that we are beginning that more intensive expansion where now there's uh 20 plus new positions that are currently reclassed or pending approval.

So speaking to that expeditious process to take existing positions and reclass them and do that quickly.

We have 20 plus underway with additional positions, some of which will be um newly created positions uh coming to the board in a board letter.

Uh, and also again maximizing anywhere we can do those provisional appointments to jump straight to recruitment where there's not lists.

We're we're leveraging that as well.

Before you go on, both on contracting for services and hiring.

Um in both slides, you said the emergency, the state of emergency uh hasn't um had an impact on uh shortening the procurement um uh process for contracting for services nor has it had um an impact on shortening the process for the time to hire folks so it's a state of emergency I know you haven't gotten through your presentation on anything to help us out because to me I know when Colleen was here I thought the state of emergency because you know that's something I pushed the board um offered to the board and the board approved and the agency director supported it we thought at the time that the state of emergency would help us move this agenda um you know the agenda of addressing homelessness so now I'm seeing that at least in two areas it hasn't done nothing.

Yeah I mean welcome the agency director to feedback as well.

I I wouldn't say it's done nothing.

I think the urgency is certainly there.

I think the the the nature of the declaration does not change the the myriad layers of administrative and and county policies around things like procurement in and of itself so if anything I think the urgency to address and work within existing policy and find flexibilities where possible has certainly been our intention um but that does not um in and of itself create um new policies different policies ways to move more quickly than our than our standard county cadence and policies work and well I'd push back on that Jonathan because once again I'm only a policy maker I've only been around for a while but it seems to me when we've had state of emergencies we've been able to expedite things we've been able to you know uh bypass the rules bypass the regulations bypass the processes make things move faster so I mean county council's not here versus county council here I don't understand why we haven't been able to expedite some of this stuff under a state of emergency and maybe that's not a question for you maybe it's a question for county council and the agency interim agency director I don't know it's once again I'm perplexed uh I'm ready to I'm ready to just throw my hands a holler because I don't understand why the state of emergency hasn't helped us more than what I'm receiving today.

I will say for H and H that we have we have we have we can to seek to um to access those flexibilities and I think that that um prefer to hear from the agency director in terms of potential opportunities.

Yeah I I think supervisor it's a little bit tricky in that um as Jonathan said you know are the county's procurement rules are still the county's procurement rules and so uh we're also in this like difficult situation where um I it in terms of uh providing the services so in in terms of contracting for example I think one of the greatest flexibilities that we already had in place uh before the emergency was declared was the vendor pool um and the board's continued support for that has been really helpful um we've been looking at ways that we can be you know maybe even a little bit more efficient with the vendor pool so there's there will be a new RFP coming out for that um this year um but procurements just take a long time and we are also not in the position to be able to come to you with like a sole source for everything right so we want to be judicious about those spaces where we are coming to the board to say hey we need you to please waive your procurement process for this particular thing.

When we get to civil service rules it gets to be a little bit more complicated because for example um we you know uh H and H infrastructure in 2019 I think we started with maybe seven employees and like a budget of five million dollars um and now we're well beyond that um but they are a part of the office of the agency director within our agency, right?

And so when we ask for positions, it gets looked at in the context of what's happening in that part of our agency um and uh while there is support from HRS to help us get things moving as quickly as possible, or to create the specific classifications um the emergency itself doesn't, and I don't think can't waive civil service requirements and the different rules that we have to abide by in terms of the classifications.

So it just sort of adds time to the thing, and it's not um we've had really good support from all of our partners in in GSA from our special projects office from uh the HR teams to try and do this, but we sort of keep running into there's a lot of bureaucracy and and rules that are there for good reason.

Um, and and so we just sort of try and figure out how to navigate them.

Um so we think you're how many how large the uh the office now, H and H, how many staff do you have?

How many staff?

We have about 90 staff, not including the positions we're seeking to add.

Okay.

Um now if H A were H, uh, think of the sugar H H sugar, something, but if H H were to a department like behavioral health and public health, would that help them to be able to expedite their hiring?

Um I don't know if it would necessarily be able to help expedite the hiring because we still have to go through the hiring process.

Um, but there are other like Jonathan touched on contracting, for example, right?

The speed with which we can do procurements because that would be speeded up.

Yeah, public health has a um uh uh procurement infrastructure, behavior health has a procurement infrastructure.

H relies on the Office of the Agency Director's procurement structure, and they're just sort of outstripping it because they're managing such uh large amounts of credit.

Wrong so much.

Because I do think it's important, and uh maybe Supervisor Tam will support me on this, that we uh have the agency come back with a plan to uh transition H into a department, a development plan to transition H into a department as opposed to being part of the Office of the Agency Director.

You know, we need to within our agency.

Yes, yes, within your agency, make that a department because there are efficiencies.

You've just pointed out a couple of them, but there are other efficiencies possibly that could be achieved if it were its own department as opposed to being part of the office.

Um would you would you be comfortable with that supervisor?

Tam.

I I need to better understand what that means.

Um, so the two questions I had is one, what has the emergency declaration enable um H as it currently stands to streamline some of the bureaucracy and red tape, and second, um, how does that differ if you were a department like public health or mental um behavioral health?

Um I'll take that in reverse order and and Jonathan can speak to uh how the emergency has been beneficial.

Um I think that we would need to do, we would need to take a look at our agency structure and see what that means because uh, you know, we're structured as four departments right now.

Um there are certain benefits to uh, for example, in the um HRS scheme of things when they look at uh certain higher level positions, those are available to a department, but not necessarily to a division within a department, which is kind of how H is treated right now, right?

And so um uh we can look further into that and and kind of, you know, because I think there would be impacts on our agency as a whole and on office of the agency director for sure.

Um, so we are happy to do some deeper dives and come back to you with a proposal.

Yeah.

In terms of what has been helpful.

Sorry, go ahead.

Sorry, go ahead.

In terms of what has been helpful, I think certainly highlighting the need that we've got to that this is an emergency.

Um the reality is is we haven't had any infusion until now of additional resources.

We'll talk about the deck uh the the direction for emergency funding should it come to direct it toward homelessness.

We hadn't had a windfall of funding in which to hire new positions.

As I said, it had been, you know, so the directive to move quickly, I think it has certainly been helpful in working with our other county partners for which we have funding, we have provisional positions.

Those were very much fast-tracked for us to get out there and start recruitment.

But it really, I think the rubber hits the road now in terms of it's helping on hiring is now we've got a bunch of positions to put out there.

We have for a long time been in a very different position than all the other departments we work alongside where we have not had, we have not had a high vacancy rate that takes a long time to fill.

We haven't had vacancies, right?

We haven't had the positions to be vacant, we've just been kind of strapped at the at capacity and needing more positions.

So I think now is good timing to to ask these questions.

I will say from an administrative perspective, and I think rightfully given the emergency, but we're seeing some of the chickens come home to roost of just how administratively onerous this is, where we have put the vast majority of dollars we've had thus far directly into programs and services.

So we have a very thin administrative administrative bench.

Um and so the opportunity, I think, um uh through that transition to really right-size some of those back office functions that really are where those efficiencies happen.

If we had staff that were full-time working through these processes, an HR officer, for example, we at least would be able to move through those bureaucratic years at a full pitch with dedicated staff working them, as opposed to now where we're sharing that that infrastructure in some ways.

So it has been beneficial.

The moment where we've had funding to actually do more than what we were currently doing is now, and I think that's where we will see the opportunity and hopefully flag more of those ways that we can push through and expedite things.

You raise a good point because obviously when we had the emergency with the pandemic, there was a lot an influx of ARPA funding, but we do have 1.4 billion in measure W funding now going forward.

So it sounds like you are able to at least create the staffing structure with this emergency declaration, fast track some of the uh filling out the positions, um, but you are not also seeing emergency funding from other sources coming into play.

Is that correct, right?

This this is this would be that resource, right?

Our local, our local resources.

Happy to share a little bit more about the federal landscape and the state landscape.

Obviously, the the January draft of the of the governor's budget has just come out, and you know, there is some realities there.

I think we're facing in terms of of what will be and won't be available at the state level.

But yeah, it would be leveraging that local resource and um again building the administrative bench to be able to use that quickly effectively and drive better performance in our system.

That is what we what we need to develop, and I do think uh a departmental infrastructure would allow us to fully build a dedicated team, not a shared, not a shared agency team, because uh as um interim director Chaudry mentioned, we we have certainly outstripped what that available administrative support we have is able to offer understandably because we just do so much now.

200 plus contracts a year, 40 to 50 funding sources.

Um it's as complicated as any other uh complex department in our county.

Well, I think I'm I'm convinced that it needs to be transitioned into a department.

So we'll eagerly uh wait a proposal and a plan for um that development.

Uh and then furthermore, like I said, I was never the intention that the state of emergency was symbolic.

So I, you know, I really having a department helps us advance our ability to make the state of emergency truly move the agenda of addressing homelessness, then I think we need to really do that.

Uh there was another directive really to focus on seeking any and uh available federal or state waivers.

That is to create more flexibilities, to create regulatory relief on items.

Uh obviously the the landscape has changed significantly uh at the federal level in particular as related to funding for homelessness.

So uh there is we've really shifted away from layers of bureaucracy that might be difficult to use federal funding to that federal funding itself being at risk.

So those continue to be challenges, as we've shared briefly with you several months ago, I believe.

The ongoing dialogue on our current federal year funding remains unclear.

There is federal litigation and a temporary injunction against the Department of Hazard and Urban Development for seeking to make changes that would have cost drastic changes to our local funding, but those are ongoing.

So the viability of waivers at this time are probably not a priority given those emergent issues, but we definitely, of course, need that continued advocacy around Medi-Cal, Medicaid, the impacts, HR1 impacts, of course, on every aspect of vulnerable populations in our communities, including those that are at risk of or experiencing homelessness will be huge.

And then, in addition to the HUD funding dedicated toward homelessness, that continues to be a real need and appreciate through the POW committee and others the support for advocacy letters around state and federal needs, and that will continue to be something we'll provide updates to you on as those things emerge.

We will very likely be in a space where there will be at best significant delays in receiving the federal funding for this year, the 60 some million dollars go to our community.

So we may need to do some sort of emergency relief to bridge those programs.

For context, that federal funding for this year, many of those grants started in January.

So that funding is supposed to be in the mix and it's still in court, let alone in process.

So it'll be some time before that is all shaken out.

But we're continuing to monitor it and committed to not letting those programs lapse in the meantime while those court cases proceed.

Unsheltered response.

Obviously, this is a priority area, directing county agencies to lead multi-jurisdictional efforts to provide services to persons experiencing unsheltered homelessness, developing rapid response and rescue teams to coordinate with jurisdictions.

We have worked closely with our partners, particularly the city of Oakland in this case, to work with and leverage state encampment resolution funding.

This was one time grant awards put out by the state over the past several years, specifically dedicated toward addressing encampments and transitioning individuals from those encampments into housing.

We were closely in partnership with the city of Oakland on three primary focused encampment areas to open Mandela homes, which is a converted currently interim and will eventually be permanent housing for the extended State Hotel on Mandela Parkway.

We're doing the shelter the shelter portfolio transition, which will allow us to significantly optimize our system to increase the flow to increase our investment in shelter.

As I've said many times before, we have thousands of shelter beds in our community.

Those shelters often have limited resources to help people move into housing to create more room for more people to exit homelessness.

So really increasing our investments will be a cost-effective way to create more shelter beds by creating more vacancies in our current shelter system.

Already we've opened 300 new beds that are in process between now and the next several months to create expanded interim housing sites.

This is, to your point, Supervisor Miley, leveraging existing inventory.

Each of these three sites totaling these 300 beds are existing hotels or buildings that are being converted at low-cost leases for this purpose to potentially be acquired in the future.

So that's not taking the time to do costly building and development at a site.

It's using existing real estate to create units.

Importantly, these beds are going to be dedicated to individuals with high and complex needs.

More and more, both in our unsheltered setting and our existing shelters.

We see people who have understandably, because of the toll, as the emergency declaration talks about, the toll that living outside takes.

As the director Margot Cushell of the UCSF Binioff Homeless and Housing Initiative has shown in her studies.

People aged sometimes 20 to 25 years more just by living outside.

So as they say, 50 is the new 75.

So we might be serving 50 year old individuals that have the behavioral, certainly the physical health care needs of individuals in their 70s or 80s.

So we see that a lot of our current shelters cannot handle those supports.

So we created these beds not only to be able to serve folks in unsheltered settings that have those complex needs that wouldn't be able to receive the support they need in existing shelters, but also to help people transition out of those current shelters that can't support them so that they can better serve individuals that might not have those complex needs.

So those 300 beds are underway just this past month.

We reappropriated unused state dollars.

So we had a contract that was spending money too slowly, wasn't going to be able to meet a deadline for our state half funding.

We pulled that money back and put it to create in a matter of two months an additional winter shelter for youth in Oakland.

So that opened on December 31st.

25 new beds at the Lake Merit Lodge of expanded transition age youth winter shelter.

So again, opening as much as we can as quickly as we can, including winter relief beds, specifically for transition age youth.

What does HTF stand for?

The Home Together Fund.

So that is the acronym.

We love our acronyms.

Shorthand for the homelessness designated measure W.

And again, this is the first of more.

There will be significant focus over the next year as we transition the bed night rate and expand our investment in county shelters.

So I think that that'll be a really focused area where we will see impact as we continue to grow those investments.

And then of course the need, you know, the uh sorry, I went to the very end.

Um, going back to unsheltered response here.

Obviously, we we live in a complex landscape with local policies on encampments, right?

Which is the most direct way that from a policy perspective, local jurisdictions set up and structure their response to homelessness.

So we're continuing to navigate kind of what is H's role in partnership with jurisdictions, giving the variance and changing landscape around local policies.

Different jurisdictions may have different policies, one may have a policy, one may not.

So, what is HH's role as the as a partner in those different situations, knowing that each different jurisdiction may have a very different uh patterned response?

So, how can we continue to be um good partners?

Uh hold up our commitment to dollars well spent on what we know uh has the best evidence and the best impact.

Uh, we continue to work closely with our city partners, which I'll share a bit more about on this slide as well.

Uh, as Director Sterrett mentioned, the land use working uh group is underway.

We have a great site assessment tool that kind of speaks to how can we use properties when there is funding.

Uh I also mentioned uh the directive specifically to encourage cities to work with the county to identify vacant properties and convert them to new interim and permanent housing.

As we said, 300 new interim housings using existing properties coming online.

The initial capital allocation that is going out for permanent housing expansion, we estimate that that may um together those total investments may just in those initial uh RFPs, those two could total between uh 550 to 600, giving leverage sources from other areas of new units of interim and permanent housing.

So, as that those dollars begin to roll, we're seeing opportunity to bring on hundreds more interim and permanent housing sites, and and we want to keep that momentum going.

Again, a lot of those are using existing inventory.

And then, of course, the permanent housing are new construction.

There will be future rounds where we will be um using additional local capital to to do acquisitions for permanent housing, using existing real estate, converting existing property.

So everything you were talking about, Supervisor Miley, we think there's a lot of big and small opportunities on the horizon where existing sites can be used to expand as well.

Um, and there was also uh a focus on cities and counties evaluating programs that operate only during winter to potentially expand expand to year-round housing.

So this is something we're working with our partners.

I've been talking about that forever.

Yeah, yeah.

So working with the cities to say, does this look like a site or a funding stream that we could essentially make it annual, make it permanent?

Um, or do we just need to find that might not be the right site or the right funding source, but we know these beds are working.

So let's find an alternate source to make these uh permanent additional beds again.

Again, this is where your support, a local elected support is critical.

Um, advocacy for and support for uh committing to sites, wanting to have beds in your community, you know, those are the real solutions.

We can't solve this problem unless we want to have places for our residents to go in our neighborhoods and our cities.

So that will continue to be a conversation that I would imagine will only grow as more funding is out there.

Uh we control uh just a portion of the land in the county as we know in terms of uh the unincorporated area.

So it really requires city partners to say yes.

Uh, and so the more we can incentivize saying yes with the funding we have, the better.

And it is my understanding, at least from a staff level that we have strong support from our city partners to to do everything we can.

Again, many of them are facing cliffs right now on some of their existing shelter projects.

So, how can we work with them to sustain those projects is also a top priority in addition to expanding.

There was uh, of course, a note to identify available funds to fully implement the home together plan.

Uh currently resources, again, this is the language from the original response plan at the top here, fall far short of uh what is needed to identify or adopt the strategy, directing us to quickly dedicate resources that become available.

Obviously, the prime resource in the local sense have now become available.

The board has dedicated what it has in July of this year.

Um we are focused below this is an estimate here.

This donut chart below is an estimated about 153 million dollars on average over the course of the next eight years, could be available annually for homelessness using the current estimates and projected revenue.

These are the rough proportions based on our modeling that we plan to invest that.

So you can see almost a third of that going directly to new and expanded and existing shelter.

37% toward permanent housing of a variety of kinds, short-term rental assistance, long-term rental assistance, new construction, helping people move into housing with one-time assistance, uh, and then also prevention.

This red this red uh 15% toward annual prevention investments would be a first time investment.

Uh and then you can see again on the yellow here, that is not a funding source, that's a potential implication.

So I put the uh that yellow chart on there to show if we do lose federal funding between 33 and 60 million dollars could really impact the home together fund, as there would not be another backfill source short of local revenue to cover those existing programs.

So depending on what happens year over year with those federal funds, we'll have an impact on our local planning.

And then lastly, specific call out to implement and prevent inflow.

Um, we'll be excited to bring back in probably early February our year four report on the Home Together Fund where we will show, as we have consistently showed, the comparison of inflow to outflow.

But at this point, uh we are laser focused on the near-term uh next steps as we staff up to launch a countywide prevention framework.

So identifying leads for the homelessness prevention services network.

We have the funding source through Home Together to launch that.

We've done a comprehensive study on what it's gonna take in terms of the potential impacts of certain amounts of investments per year.

10 million dollars a year would prevent all of those returns to homelessness.

So we're really set up in a way to focus on these and launching this in the next few years, so hoping that we will have 20 plus million per year to put toward countywide prevention and really reduce the amount of people that are falling into homelessness in our county.

Even a reduction in part would really help us continue momentum because right now, short of some individual programs and individual cities, there is no countywide system presenting the between four and six thousand people that fall into homelessness each year that we know about.

I put a slide up here just to show, of course, what are the metrics we use?

What are the ways we can really benchmark and check our progress?

Obviously, the point-and-time count trends as our next item will show.

We've been using the 2024 point in time count in comparison to previous years.

We will have a new count in a matter of weeks.

Uh, and then we will have the data on that in spring and beyond.

So that'll be an important measure for uh the uh biannual trends in unsheltered and overall homelessness.

Also wanting to compare against our 2029 baseline report.

So, what was the what was the state of our system at the beginning of the home together plan?

We'll be doing another one of those baseline comparisons as we launch the Home Together 2030 plan.

As I just mentioned, always comparing how many people are becoming homeless compared to how many are exiting.

Um, and then you can also look in specifically at unsheltered numbers, uh, and looking at a lot of different progress areas.

So, this is one of those areas where with increased investment, we think there is going to be a much more active opportunity for us to develop public-facing um dashboards and summaries of our progress uh to really show what's working in our system and what's not.

So these continue to be uh resources we're using and resources we'll be expanding.

And then, of course, the limitations which we've talked about from the beginning, um, in and of itself, it doesn't trigger access to state or federal resources, relies on our existing systems, um, and it applies uh, of course, to the county jurisdiction only in terms of uh the impacts for things like land use.

Though our city partners, as we're, you know, have many of them have have also declared uh related declarations or concurrent with ours.

So um, but now again with the home together fund, I think we have a first-time opportunity to implement more of these resources more quickly, and that is uh our North Star.

All right, thanks for the presentation.

I know we've been asking questions and making comments throughout the presentation.

So what I'll do is uh I'll have public speakers, and then Supervisor Jam and I will deliberate on this.

I'm sure because I'm sure we might have more questions and comments.

So do we have any speakers?

Gloria Crow.

Thank you so much, Supervisor Tam, Supervisor Miley, uh also Anika and Jonathan.

I just wanted to address this particular topic.

I am a resident of the city of Oakland.

I am a taxpayer homeowner.

I am a resident of East Oakland specifically, and I drive the streets of East Oakland each and every day, specifically between 73rd and the San Leandro border.

I wanted to just listen to the report.

I'm a former uh commissioner on the Alameda County Public Health Commission and current commissioner on the Alameda County Health Care for the Homeless Commission.

This is an issue that's very near and dear to my heart, but I hear a lot of administrative barriers, but I don't really hear a lot of the will to make differences as soon as possible, particularly since we have declared a state of emergency in this issue.

I echo what Supervisor Miley said earlier in the presentation.

I am perplexed.

I um see that we have a significant investment into this area to address homelessness in Alameda County.

Yet when I see on the street the individuals that are homeless living in encampments, living on the street in the underpasses, in the driveways, in the parking lots throughout specifically East Oakland.

I am not witnessing the significant improvements in which the Measure W funds have allowed us.

I would just make a few commentary.

I think we need extremely better coordination between the city of Oakland and the County of Alameda.

I think we need to really establish more bids that address substance abuse and mental health.

Hold up.

Okay, give her another minute, please.

And if I have to give a thank you speakers in additional minute, I will.

Okay.

I think I'm the only speaker on this.

I think we talk a lot about preventing homelessness, but the existing persons that I come encounter with as my outreach on the street on a day-to-day basis are experiencing substance abuse and mental health issues.

These are issues that have to be addressed currently to help prevent future homelessness.

I don't know if we're proposing enough beds to really address both this combination, this deadly combination of substance abuse as well as mental health.

Those beds that we're proposing to put in these sites really need to address these two combinations of substance abuse and mental health.

And then we need to really rethink how we better work with our faith communities who are willing to maybe give up some land to be able to hopefully house some individuals.

And I think the prevention of homelessness versus the current state of the individuals that are homeless on the street, they probably couldn't afford nor be in the right mind to get into a place of residence until this deadly combination of substance abuse and mental health are cleared up.

I don't believe that the current crisis of homelessness can be really adequately addressed until we effectively address this deadly combination of uh not deadly, but definitely uh ongoing combination of mental health and uh substance abuse.

What can the taxpayers see as this significant progress of measure W funds continue to move forward?

I think we need to really um get something where taxpayers could see how their dollars are working for them.

Thank you.

Thanks.

I was real generous at the time.

So uh give the next speaker three minutes, then we'll see if the next speakers need more than three minutes.

Okay, go ahead.

Caller, you're on the line, you have three minutes.

We're on item one.

Madam Clerk, can you hear me?

Yes.

Great.

Thank you.

This is uh Derek Barnes from Us Bay Rental Housing Association.

Um, thank you, supervisors, and happy new year.

Um, Jonathan and Michelle, thank you for the report.

I was just listening in on this, and uh I appreciate the um the work and the thought that goes that's gone into this.

Um I'm with you, Supervisor Miley.

I'm sitting and I'm I'm opt- I'm optimistic.

Let me just say that, but I'm also perplexed and a little frustrated and sometimes angry when I'm uh in these conversations because oftentimes uh I think there's opportunities um out there that um we're not always sort of dialed into or tapped into.

And I appreciate the focus on um prevention.

I think that's a critical part.

You all have heard me say this before with ERAP and shallow subsidies.

I think you know, stopping the inflow um is critical uh to uh to um our unhoused population is is is what we need, and we know that we see that in the data in terms of eviction filings, and you know, know that a lot of that is like 90% of it is for non-payment of rent.

So there are things that we can do with the use of funds to stop that inflow.

But I want to direct us again just on the the I guess the area that I'm calling smart production, and you know, I I've been um visiting sites um from our members um who have told us that they have vacancies just to get an idea of what that means.

And these are this is private, these are private owners, and um I visited a um a site uh last Friday, 20 unit building.

About five of those units um were not occupied, vacant, and they needed substantial um rehab work, you know, to the tune of 20 to 50,000.

And this particular owner doesn't have the means to really do that.

So I think again, focusing in on um this low-hanging fruit around vacancy and unoccupied units that really need um some substantial work to kind of get them habitable is really critical.

And I think matching that up with our higher higher functioning folks who may be on the streets.

I think that may be to the tune of 20, 25%.

I think if we were matching those folks, those high functioning folks with needs to um these owners with um vacancies that we can pull back into the housing stock, you know, 10, 20, 10 to 50,000.

And that, you know, that probably would take, you know, two to three months to bring, you know, units like this back onto the market.

I think this would make a real difference in the community.

Um, and I know there are complications there in terms of you know the sort of the process and the bureaucracy and how we do that with these private owners, but I would like to have conversation about how this could work and really let's move forward with all of these ideas that are feasible so that um we can act like you know there's an emergency here.

Thank you very much.

I have no additional speakers on item one.

All right, we want to thank uh the speakers.

Uh you've said a lot.

I have additional comments and and or questions.

But before I start, I'll turn to my colleague, Supervisor Jam, see if she has additional comments, uh, and/or questions.

Thank you, Chair Miley.

And I want to underscore we really appreciate a lot of the work.

There's I know Measure W it's only within the last year, right?

It hasn't been even a full year in which we um basically allocated the funding, and so we are uh making really good progress with your the work that you're doing.

So appreciate that.

Uh I have basically three questions.

Um the one area that I'm really concerned about is what you talked about.

It's the threat to existing funding, existing shelter bed, existing housing, uh, versus trying to get new housing.

But you know, obviously, kudos on the 300 beds with that expansion.

So, do you have a sense of the rate in which we could potentially lose housing versus adding?

It's a great question.

Um, it's it's an emerging landscape, obviously.

Um, speaking to what we know about rough estimates, um, you know, Oakland has messaged that you know that they're set to close, I believe around 500 beds in the next six months of existing um uh projects, existing shelter beds in the city of Oakland.

Uh I know other cities have other pending financial cliffs, right, that fall off of local general um fund, for example, because of structural deficits.

It really is the symptom of the way many projects are stood up.

State will release some funds, those will flow down to a community, it gets braided with three or four local and other sources.

And as soon as some of those sources taper off or the, you know, the the landscape changes from one year to the next for that city, then you've got a gap.

Um, I think we're seeing that at scale now.

So um proportionally, I mean, we know that well, more than 300 beds are at risk right now.

Uh so it's not a one-to-one.

I think there's kind of a maybe a one and a half to two to one at risk of closing versus what we might open up.

So that's why I'm trying to be real um sober about our assessment to say a lot of the work, especially, and this is not including the federal cuts, uh, fortunately or unfortunately, the vast majority of our federal funding, 90% of our federal funding goes toward existing permanent housing units for individuals experiencing homelessness.

So if that federal funding gets cuts, that creates a different gap in our system.

That's not our primarily locally funded shelter system that is at risk of closing, which is a very bad thing, of course, to close shelter beds.

But administratively, it's much easier to close a time limited project where the people are there for time limited anyway.

Then people that are currently um have complex disabled needs and they're in permanent housing and they have nowhere to go when that housing closes too.

So we're facing two threats.

Federal threats to our permanent housing infrastructure, roughly 2,000 people a year receive federal subsidies, formerly homeless individuals to stay housed, and then these hundreds of shelter beds over here.

So between those two threats, I think we're having to balance in urgency uh with the reality, unknowns on the federal side.

Um I think none of this requires that we hold back whole cloth from setting a path with Measure W home together fund and implementing it.

I think we just need to concurrently plan to make sure these it's really these three investment categories sustain, which would be don't close, keep it open, keep the momentum, enhance, which is a growing category of priority from my perspective.

How can we use these dollars to stretch and expand the impacts at existing sites?

Because a lot of sites, again, I've said this before, have people inside.

That's great.

They have shelter, they have minimal resources to keep people taken care of, to keep them safe, to keep them inside.

But if we can do an infusion of some additional money, think of you know, some more vitamins and resources into that system to help people actually leave the shelter into housing, that creates more room for that shelter to perform even better, and then of course, expand.

So I think we need to candidly take those in the in that priority, sustain is top priority, enhance where we can as a secondary priority, and then of course, where possible, expand, which is create new things.

So using those kind of three categories.

So I don't have an exact ratio, but um it continues to be the way we need to analyze and make decisions.

Yeah, and uh supervisor, I'll just add, um, you know, just looking at the numbers themselves.

So the 2023-24 number that Jonathan shared about 435 million dollars that was spent across the county, about half of that is county investments, the other half is cities.

Um, and then you saw another slide that had 150 some million dollars in Measure W infusion that could happen.

So essentially, you know, what Jonathan's talking about is figuring out how we can keep that additional Measure W resource as being additive, but we're seeing for a lot of different factors that you know it's gonna need to go into that uh sustaining some of that 435 million, right?

So instead of like 700 million altogether, we're looking at a sh a smaller pot.

Um, and I think in terms of you know what we heard from some of the speakers as well, it really is a strategy of all the things.

So, you know, all the different types of housing, all the different uh administrative things that we can uh find deficiencies in, and it's really just a matter of balancing um the timing of when things are available and getting things out the door.

Measure W has been available only for five months, and I I think in that time uh we've gotten right now uh a little over 105 million dollars committed and out the door.

Um, and so you know, we're working on uh dashboards as the board has requested previously for us to be able to track where that funding is going, and so looking forward to being able to share that with the community as well.

Okay, thank you for that.

Um so, in addressing one of the comments that we heard from the speakers.

Uh I I know that we are looking at using um some of the Prop One B chip funding uh to deal with treatment beds, and so how's that factored into like the total number of beds because obviously there's a population that has mental health issues and substance use that need to go into a different type of uh shelter.

Yeah, thank you for that.

So with BCIP, I believe we're on track to bring on more than it's several hundred beds that will come online in the across the county over the next couple of years.

That was capital investment that came down from the state, and uh we've used that specifically to expand residential treatment beds.

So for people who might need locked settings uh for treatment for behavioral health treatment, or people who might need, you know, lower levels of settings.

Um, and that's one of the the key parts of work that we do on the back end as an agency for HH to work closely with behavioral health.

So, for example, there's um, you know, again, a whole spectrum of services.

So you've got people who might have really high medical needs and some behavioral health needs, and so maybe the first thing we need to do is have them in one of those shelters that Jonathan was talking about with for the medical needs.

Um, and behavioral health is a little bit secondary.

Then there are people whose behavioral health needs are so severe that they're treated perhaps first in our behavioral health system, and we coordinate on the back end to make sure that they have housing because that's a critical component of their work.

So all that to say, you know, again, with all these infusions with the B chip funding, with some additional prop fund, Prop One funding as well as Measure W funding, we should start to see more spaces for folks to be.

And do you see that coming online?

Um like within the next, well, actually there's only five to six years, right, left with measure W.

Well, the behavioral health bridge housing beds that were funded concurrently with Care Court, that's 200 additional, not included in my slides.

200 additional interim bridge housing, interim housing shelter dedicated for individual with behavioral health needs, those are already online.

Those have opened up over the past year.

So again, 200 dedicated beds, focused for individuals with complex behavioral health needs with a priority for individuals in care court.

I believe on the most recent numbers, 55 of the individuals that are receiving care court services through the full service partnership team, behavioral health, of course, is leading 55 or so of those individuals are currently receiving that behavioral health bridge housing as well.

So that's a good example of pairing the housing services with the clinical services to support the individual and those in those sites.

Again, that's also time limited funding the state gave us that needs to be spent, I believe, by some time in 2027.

So there's a question of sustainability for those beds, but again, we're taking every available dollar from the state.

We put in two applications, the county did in partnership with behavioral health to get that behavioral health bridge housing money, and we have implemented it, you know, uh as intensively as possible.

So that is an that is a version.

I mean, there's a whole spectrum of need, right?

There's residential treatment, that's clinical licensed facilities that obviously is um uh managed and funded and overseen through the behavioral health department.

We know we have a dearth of that in terms of the amount of need, but there's also things that we can do on the shelter side to continue to going back to my three categories, enhance our shelters to add more substance use services for individuals, peer support, substance use navigators.

One of our goals is continue through our shelter health system.

So our health care for the homeless team provides what we call shelter health services where we come alongside our existing shelters to make sure they're trained, the NARCAN, the support, the more we can provide that peer support, um, the more we can help our shelters not be what residential treatment needs to be, those are two different things, but support people to either access that or at least have those needs met while they're also in shelter as well.

I I appreciate that.

I mean, we are aware about this because we get briefings from you, but in terms of what a community member sees, if they see an encampment close by, you know, under freeway underpass and they see somebody that has a substance use issue.

How does that person end up getting to one of these treatment beds or getting off the street to get the kind of care they need?

Jonathan can elaborate, but essentially we have uh a network of outreach teams.

Um, so there are some outreach teams from behavioral health that are specifically for substance use treatment and um there's also ones that are connected to their crisis system.

So it could be that someone gets a crisis call and then they get connected on the back end to additional resources.

We have a really robust street health uh network, uh street health team network that's through H that's countywide.

Um, and so a lot of it's about you know building relationships with people, which again is something that takes a long time, and um at the end of the day, we're not able to, um, you know, treatment is voluntary.

So with care court and with AOT and with we have certain other tools available, uh we do community conservatorships.

Our county deploys really like the whole gamut that's available to us, um, but there are most pathways are voluntary.

And between the there's there's really two access points.

So for getting into residential treatment, that's through the behavior health access system where their teams would connect and prioritize and um help someone gain that residential treatment.

And then, of course, on the homelessness side, we liaise very closely to refer people that might have interest and need to get assessed by the behavioral health system to potentially access that treatment.

And then on the homeless services side for the shelter, anything they might need on that end, that is where we would take the lead and assess.

Crucially, though, our teams, and this gets a little bit to the unsheltered response.

We have continued to add more behavioral health resources into our street health teams.

So we can provide services and connections to medically assisted treatment, for example, or other uh harm reduction resources to help people address their substance use disorder in the context of their existing encampment.

I'll share one other bright start that just because we're really excited and proud about it, our team had received uh a grant, a competitive grant from the federal government from HERSA, which funds our street health team to actually create um a mobile pharmacy, the first that we're aware of in the nation that is using pilot funds to actually create a team that can bring those pharmacy services to the street to those encampments.

That was a vision that we had to say, you know, if it's a barrier to get there, I mean, so okay, great, you've got a prescription, you can get this.

Make sure you head over to your local pharmacy with all of your free time while you're trying to make sure you don't lose your stuff and get that.

That you know, that's a real barrier.

So we can actually connect people in that context to their initial treatment through our pharmacy team.

So we're trying to do those things and working closely with behavioral health, but so much of this is really about expanding and bringing the services to people where they are.

Um, and ultimately it's about we need more services because we've got you know one service for every 100 or so people.

Sorry, John, I just wanted to tie uh Supervisor Miley to your question earlier about the emergency and how it's been helpful.

Um, actually, that psychiatrist position for healthcare for the homeless team, that was something that we were able to push through because of the emergency.

Um, previously that had been a position that was uh coordinated with uh um behavioral health.

Uh so one, it's having their own psychiatrist and having it be at a level uh that they can supervise other other staff members.

So that is a very concrete example.

Good to hear.

Thank you.

Um, so last question I had is I think four or five months ago we had awarded uh the 150 million dollar pool uh to a boat, and um I was trying to uh get some clarity over the issues that one of the speakers brought up about you know the shallow subsidies as being part of the prevention program uh with rental assistance, for example, prevent people from going into homelessness and and how how's that administered?

Do they also have an inventory of like vacancies and potential um uh I guess shelters or rentals within a private uh complexes, or do they simply uh do the one-stop shop in terms of trying to provide different or identified funding sources for this individual uh to place them into a unit.

It's really twofold.

Um, as the um speaker from Ebro was saying, um, we do a lot in our community um to house people on the private market.

So part of what we launched, I know we've talked about with with your board uh multiple times over the past few months is the development and expansion of what we call the flexible housing subsidy pool.

That is dedicated rental assistance to house people now in existing units using vacant units and X or Y, Z apartment complex uh uh across the county.

So we are thankful that we have a long history in Alameda County of about 6040, 60% of our permanent supportive housing has historically been not new constructed buildings with units, but using a subsidy on the market in the existing inventory on the private market.

So we've got a long history of having lots of relationships.

So our flexible housing subsidy pool provider, a boat in this case, has relationships, as do other providers that provide rental assistance with hundreds, more than a thousand landlords engage at any different time with our homelessness system to help house people.

So their units, our subsidy on the market.

So that is a lot of so we have those relationships.

When we talk about prevention, that is related to the individual.

So that individual presents to us.

They would, for example, show up in an emergency, call the number, be assessed for their risk, because there are some very clear risk identifications of who's most at risk of homelessness.

And then they would be prioritized based on their household characteristics and need.

That emergency assistance, the vast majority of the time it comes in the form of rental assistance.

More and more we can see it can be rehousing assistance.

So it might not be the most sustainable thing to pay a bunch of back rent they owe in their current unit that's unsustainable.

It might be helping them move to a new unit.

So the rental assistance is more flexible than just back rent or prospective rent.

It's really what does this household need to stay housed?

And it could be here, it could be elsewhere.

So in many ways, most of this, when we talk about rental assistance, when we talk about the flex pool, 70-80% of that is literally an economic resource directly into our local uh housing property owners and community, right?

So the more we spend rental assistance in the homelessness response system, that is money going directly to local housing providers, right?

To sustain that individual and of course also sustain them as receiving the rent.

So that is what a lot of both the flex pool and the prevention system will go toward, specifically to the shallow subsidies, and this is a little different than was spoken to in the comments.

That was about providing one-time capital improvement funding to bring units online.

Um I think that's something we definitely could dialogue about.

You know, if the county was going to spend significant money to rehab a private market unit, uh, I would want that unit to essentially become a part of our portfolio in an enduring way, right?

So we would be able to house people there ongoingly.

That would be a that's different than kind of saying, great, hopefully we can work with you someday, you know, in that unit works.

So that is not something we've explored in the past, but I am happy to say there are thousands of units right now in Alameda County that are that you or I could rent, and they happen to be rented by someone that we've supported to rent it that's experiencing homelessness, and we're paying the rent through those local, federal, and state sources.

So that's a big part of our work that we want to continue, and it gets to that whole everything everywhere all at once.

Yes, we don't we need new construction, but that's not all it takes.

We've got a lot of open units.

And yes, we've got a bunch of underutilized hotels.

Let's convert those as well.

All those things at once is the best way that we can pursue all the options.

Um, and confident that our home together plan actually is pointing to each of those options in a unique way.

Um, ultimately, and that will stabilize uh the economics of those housing providers and the individuals that need a unit, right?

So that matchmaking is it's a it's a net benefit to the community.

But I do think that's something we under-emphasize when we talk about homelessness spending, that the vast majority of the money we spend is going, especially the proportion that is rental assistance, is going directly back into our economy and our local housing providers because we're housing people in our own neighborhoods.

Thank you.

That's very helpful.

Um, clearly, when um Michelle Sterrett talked about the inventory and potential sites and I guess there's an element of NIMBYism where people may not be as forthcoming and offering some of those sites that we uh we think naturally would make a lot of sense, whether it's you know, school closures which could end up with conversions.

Um, do we have any sort of funding support for those kind of conversions or transitions?

Yes.

Um, one of the things that we're planning to launch is the next phase of the next capital RFP, so money for potential conversion and development of housing.

Uh, will be inclusive of what we would call rapid conversion projects.

Existing property that with X or Y investment could be converted to this or that homeless use.

That is definitely something, again, that is what our interim housing was.

This is this is um existing, in these cases, they were three hotels, existing hotels that are being brought online with at a low cost lease where we're paying for the operations and we're paying to lease the site, ultimately potentially acquire convert those.

But that'll be a next phase of this where we can take big and small options again.

It's about how much is the the bang for the buck, as they say, in terms of what is it gonna cost to bring this online?

But on average, that is quite a bit less than constructing uh a new unit, and to be honest, it's quite a bit less than developing even a new vacant property from scratch.

Now, safe parking, these kinds of things are more low cost, right?

Because that's just you just need the land and a little bit, you're not building and plumbing and all that.

But we're gonna be exploring all of those options, which is why that inventory and that land use continues to be important.

Thank you.

Great questions and good responses.

So let me just start with the last one.

So, how soon before um we get to a point where we're doing all of that?

Everything you just talked about.

Yeah, well, we're doing all it right.

No, uh, it's gonna be a phase process.

We're we're in the midst of the first procurement for the capital where those projects are being reviewed.

Uh obviously, the Department of Housing and Community Development is leading that in partnership with H for the new construction permanent housing uh funding going out.

Uh, as I mentioned, those uh 298 technically, but call it 300 additional interim housing units are coming online now and in the next few months.

Um, and then the next phase of the um the shelter expansion.

So when we do a bid for expanding the shelter bed night rate, including potential new projects, that will happen about mid year.

So the RFP will launch by June or July to increase the rate but also broaden it to potentially include new projects.

Uh and I'm not sure exactly when that next um round of uh capital for kind of the call the everything else, the non-new construction versions of new projects.

We'll have to wait and see.

Um it is happening, but I want to make sure we know at least for the next year to two what's happening with the federal government in terms of how much that big yellow circle I talked is going to impact the available resources we have.

Because to be candid, it is that one-time capital that's being impacted by cuts.

That's kind of our flexible resource, knowing that the ongoing operations need to be static over the next few years.

So hopefully, in the next six months, we have a sense of the landscape in the federal government, and then we can land on what is the dollar amount and when is it being made available for that next round of capital?

So I would say six to nine months.

Okay, so um, I'm gonna be kind of making comments and questions simultaneously.

So it sounds good, and I do think you've heard me say we have to have a sense of a moral imperative and a sense of urgency.

I get the sense that you have that moral imperative and that sense of urgency, um, because I'd like to, and uh uh the agency director pointed out too, and I think Supervisor Tam, uh, measure W, we have a short window with measure W.

So sense of urgency moral imperative, I think you've got that.

You've I think I think you know you've got our backing, you've we've got to make it happen.

So I'm hoping when this report comes to us in January of 2027, we will, you know, we will be advancing on all those fronts.

Um because I think you're caring a lot.

But in order for you to advance on all those fronts and to use the state of emergency as a tool to help facilitate anything on any of those fronts, we need to get H as a department.

So I'm gonna turn to the agency director and find out how soon before you can bring to us a proposal and a plan, because for it's not Jonathan's the head of the H, and he's got a team of a hundred staff now, probably have more, got an investment of a billion dollars or more, he's got a lot of complications, he's got at least one supervisor who's perplexed.

You heard two audience members that are perplexed, you know.

So, how soon can we give him the the organizational structure infrastructure to advance this so uh he can carry forth this moral imperative with a sense of urgency and get us results?

I don't want to tie it just to it being a department supervisor.

Um we will uh work on that as as quickly as possible.

I'd like to engage with the county administrators' office and sort of get their thoughts on, you know, what makes sense structurally um and uh in the next few months we can bring you back a proposal.

So you should better bring something back, maybe late spring.

Let me take it back to the spring sometime in the spring.

Yeah.

At least some sort of an update I can I can give you.

Yeah, because I think you've got uh this committee saying we want to see this, because I think for Jonathan to carry this out, what we're saying here, he needs to have the backbone of a of uh of a department um within your agency to carry forth because a lot of us are perplexed, got a lot of money, we want to see results.

If if the public doesn't see results, they're not gonna reauthorize measure W.

Um, you can't, and and people are gonna criticize us for having all this money, and what did we do with it?

Uh we've just built a homeless industrial complex.

Um, we've got to get results.

And if Jonathan needs a department in order to get results, then we gotta give him a department so he can get results.

We gotta remove impediments.

Um, and then we've got to work on all those fronts.

We've got to work with the housing rental housing providers, you know, the the you know, that piece.

We've got to work with the faith phase community, that piece.

We've got to make work with the you know, the the underutilized commercial properties, that piece.

We got to work with the tax default properties, that piece.

We've got to work with um obviously vacant land, that piece, and maybe bring in modulars, tiny homes, whatever we can put on those vacant lands to make them uh viable.

We gotta work with, and if we want to pilot all this in a comprehensive fashion in the city of Oakland, then we need to try to do that.

And if um, and if and you know you can always pilot stuff in the unincorporated area, you're looking at the two supervisors who, you know, you know, what we basically want to have in the happening in the corporate area will happen, because we um, at least in the urban incorporate area, we have the uh the jurisdictional authority there.

So uh if you want to pilot this, all this comprehensive effort in the unincorporated area, great.

It's not the best because Oakland is the bohemoth with all the problems.

Um, so I'm just uh you know, I I need to see results.

I need to see results.

Um that's what I need, and I know you feel a sense of urgency and a moral imperative, and I want to back you.

So let's do this.

Um and then with the with the department, the we need to look at H as a department having responsibility for the unincorporated area in terms of of uh homelessness and encampment policies and things like that.

H similarly what you do with other jurisdictions you need to do in the non incorporate area and even beyond, because we are the jurisdiction for services in the unincorporated area.

So we need to look at addressing homelessness through uh this new department in the unincorporated area.

And the efforts to consolidate services, we've been on that track.

We need to finalize that.

So if social services transitioning shelters over to H, we need to get all this done so that we can put our best foot forward um as strongly as possible to give results so that the citizens see Measure W really gave us what we needed.

And and once again, we can't minimize the fact.

Thank God for Measure W.

If we didn't have Measure W, we would, I mean, with everything else we're dealing with, HR one with Prop One, with with you know, you know, a madman in the White House, etc.

Uh, if we didn't have Measure W, we would be up that creek without a paddle, but we do have Measure W.

So we at least have a paddle, you know we have possibilities so please please let's move this forward and you got our backing you have anything else to say Supervisor Dan.

I appreciate your passion about trying to get results.

Clearly I I know the county moved um housing into health because it's a social department of health and that was only within the last year now we're forming a department within the health department so I I just want to make sure that as much as we want the structure we think the structure will get us the results that you're looking for and I just need to understand that better.

Yes and let me just go back in time a little bit supervisor Tam because I know you weren't here with Superfactor Tam and and Carson when when this whole homeless crisis started we didn't have I mean healthcare wasn't even you know we didn't have a Jonathan or um his predecessor carrier we didn't have Jonathan or Carrie we were struggling with what to do you know the whole effort around homelessness was dispersed in a lot of different county agencies departments et cetera we didn't have a plan etc so we've developed and come a long way over the last decade you know we have covered come a long way but we haven't you know we just haven't resolved the emergency the crisis and I think this might be the the tool that helps us because we were saying we need to have a a homeless czar we really did someone who's responsible for that and when Colleen in healthcare said she'll take on homelessness and hire Carrie you know I saw Carrie as that czar but at that point it was just carrying maybe an assistant or two but at least it was a step forward and they developed a plan a five year plan I think this is our is this our second or third iteration of a five year plan.

Well we're yeah we're just we're not even through the five year plan.

So we're only half a decade into that infrastructure bill so I thought we had one five year plan and then we started a another five year plan.

Well the the home together was the first truly county led countywide plan there was a there was a continuum of care uh system a plan uh previous to that that the community and the county was involved in but in terms of a consolidated unified my understanding is that was really the first of that scale so yeah because I thought we had a plan like from 2016 to 2020 and then maybe it was 2020 2020 well whatever but I do think we had we've had two I think we've had a couple of plans there was this is the most uh this is the new iteration of uh home together uh for the next five years and now we're in year two of that plan we are in we are just we are in year five of the current plan and that's why we want to have home together 2030 done by the beginning of this fiscal year to kick off into the new one so we'll be okay so we're in the current plan we are we are sunsetting the current plan as we launch the new one with no gap yeah see this all this stuff runs together it does it has so much but just to kind of paint that picture so I'm not saying having the departments the panacea but I do see over my course of time being here and seeing this housing crisis how we've taken incremental steps to try to get to a place where we can achieve where we can effectively achieve results and I and I think we're you know we're getting there and I think this is another you know another step in that direction that'll help us um yeah and once again uh you know I'm not gonna you know it was one of my big um comments I never thought we could end homelessness I mean that's the goal in homelessness that's kind of the North Star to end homelessness like the North Stars to have you know, you know, everybody to to have um a safe um quality of life in their communities and things.

I think that's the North Star.

We need to strive for it and get as close to it as possible, but the point is right now in terms of striving for the North Star, you know, if we're on a scale of one to ten intensive North Star, maybe we're just at five.

Four or five.

I want to get us to seven.

So this is not a crisis anymore.

Yeah.

So I've said a lot, but thank you.

Um, Anika, I think um, for this committee supervisor, uh, Tam has pointed out uh she needs to understand specifically how a department's going to help us advance what we need to do to achieve um uh an end to the state of emergency and to reduce uh the homeless crisis in this county.

So we will uh do a bit of a deeper dive on it.

It's something we've talked about a little bit over the last couple of years, um, because essentially H uh, for all intents and purposes, functions like a department, like in terms of the services they provide and the breadth and scope of uh um services they provide and the budget that they carry, um, and that's grown with Measure W.

So uh we'll take a look at, you know, organizationally, what does that mean?

Um, for our for uh H and H and for the agency and kind of taking a look at um uh what that can be, and I'll I'll make sure to uh keep you apprised both in our individual meetings and to bring back something at uh help committee.

Yeah.

And continue to use the state of emergency to the best of your ability uh to expedite things.

Um, uh work with county council, county administrator, etc.

to use the state of emergency to the best of your ability.

And if and if we do need to get to a place where we need to uh it's questionable, then if it's a if you need board action on it, bring it to the committee so we can give you our blessing.

We'll give you a call when we hit any snags.

All right, thank you.

So we're gonna take about a five-minute recess and then we'll take up our next item, item two, the point in time count.

All right.

The health committees reconvening.

Oh, sorry.

Recording in progress.

Okay.

The next item is information item, point in time count.

All right.

Again, Jonathan Russell, Director for Alameda County Health Housing and Homelessness Services here with a brief update on the point in time count, the 2026 point in time count.

As you know, this is an annual, we'd say biannual every two years, not twice a year.

Count that we do under the direction of the Department in Housing and Riven Development, a very important process that we complete in order to serve as a benchmark for obviously our overall proportion of the population experiencing homelessness.

The federal government uses this to consolidate an annual homelessness report to Congress and looking at the data nationwide.

And it's also a relatively important measure for our state funding.

So the state also uses this to make decisions around statewide allocations of resources according to the proportion of the point-time count.

And we also locally have historically used this as a measure for how we allocate resources based on need, as we were discussing in a meeting with Oakland last Friday, to really apportion resources accordingly.

It also provides, and I'll share a little bit toward the end, it's not on the slides, but we can talk through the primary way that we get direct feedback from individuals experiencing homelessness this month in our community through a pretty comprehensive voluntary survey we do to get a the best picture we can get of who's experiencing homelessness, particularly uncheltered homelessness in our community at times.

So an important effort and undertaking.

This is a brief timeline of where we're at for this year.

Um we are obviously today is the 12th.

Um we are doing the pre-count outreach beginning.

So that is going to large encampments in advance of the day itself to outreach to connect with people to make sure that people know that we're coming, to make sure we get the best count and the best amount of maximum contact with individuals on that day.

We have a big volunteer effort, which I'll provide updates up to the day up to the moment on how many volunteers we have signed up in a later slide.

But we're doing the first of series of trainings.

So for all of our volunteers that have signed up, again, this is on average about 1,200 to 1,300 individuals according to our 2013 point in time count or 20 uh 24 point in time count, 1300 people uh had signed up as volunteers.

So it's a big effort.

Uh, we're doing these uh four different options, I believe, uh, or three three trainings between uh options for people between morning and afternoon and evening options between the 14th of this Wednesday.

That's when I'll be doing my training at 8:30 a.m.

It's a virtual training.

Uh, we're working with an agency as the contractor called SIMTEC.

They have a comprehensive proprietary um technology platform we use, so people are able to access this and do the count on their phone.

Uh, so that all those trainings will happen between Wednesday the 14th and Tuesday the 20th for all of our uh volunteers.

Wednesday, we will start the surveys for individuals that are in shelters.

So again, the point-in time count counts both individuals currently in shelters and individuals experiencing unsheltered homelessness.

The majority of the effort is of course the unsheltered count because we have the data on who's in shelters through our homeless management information system.

So that's really running a report for that specific census of the shelter on that day.

The big lift that most of us as volunteers are doing is getting out at 5 a.m.

on our designated census track to do the actual count and engage individuals in unsheltered context.

So the surveys will start for the shelters on the 21st.

The big day of the count will be the 22nd of this month, when all of our volunteers will go out in Canvas.

We have a really cool system through Symtec where we actually have, I think they call it the command center, where we can see in real time every volunteer's location across all of our census tracks to see who's out and where.

If we need to move around individuals because we have a, you know, we have oh, we have we have not enough people for unincorporated, for example.

We can in real time say, hey, we don't we didn't have enough volunteers show, we can shift people if we have more volume elsewhere.

So we've really, since certainly when I started doing point-in-time counts, the the sophistication of our process has grown significantly, and and I believe it's a it's a relatively well-oiled machine now, as much as hurting that many volunteers doing anything can be.

So the count will be completed on the 22nd, and then we will do additional outreach as needed for uh a count or any post-uh count days to do outreach or connect with people or see uh connect with anyone we've missed.

This is uh data as of the 8th.

So this is last week.

As of this morning on my drive here, I got the updated numbers.

We're closer to 1,000.

So each day it's ticking up significantly.

So again, this is as I like to say, this is a real great heartening example of of the community showing up for the community, right?

These are our neighbors, our residents, um, and it's just heartening to see how many people as of last week, and then again, as of this morning, I think we're at about 950 to a thousand.

So no concern about the volume of volunteers, um, in terms of the pace that we're on, still a couple weeks out.

You can see the distribution by region.

Again, if we have any sense of uh shortcomings for different areas, we'll ask people to shift.

But this is this is based on where people have selected to sign up because they're they're given that opportunity.

We work really closely with each of our jurisdictional partners.

So each city has a lead.

That's a new thing we added in 2024, where there's a designated kind of uh chief point of contact for the point time count for that city that has really helped the cities to be great partners.

I think to increase their ownership of their local count.

They are the experts of their local jurisdiction, so each of those jurisdictional leads has been the lead for facilitating volunteer signups.

They will also be the leads on the day of the count.

Um, one other thing that is uh an improvement, we call this the known locations data.

Part of what we do, obviously, we are not a small community.

Uh, we have thousands of um people experiencing homelessness in an unsheltered way.

Uh last count, there was six thousand three hundred and forty-three people counted in 2024 unsheltered on the morning of the count.

So that is a lot of people.

Um, and hence the moral urgency we need to have for how many people, you know, none of those people should be outside uh if we lived in a just world, and so because of that, it's also a big administrative lift.

So one of the things we do is we do advanced tracking.

So we go out and work with each jurisdictional partner to identify those key areas where we already know encampments are in advance of the day.

So we have a whole map that details all the known locations across the county because we're not going blind in the morning.

We know where there are camp, you know, a significant um preponderance of encampments or individuals experiencing homelessness.

So we mark those areas on a map to make sure we're prioritizing those for the balance of the volume of volunteers we need to cover that.

So we've been doing that advanced mapping.

We'll be doing that up to the day of the count to where we have a really crystal clear picture of where we need to prioritize how many individuals, and so you can see this is our known locations marker.

This is 1,300 places, not individuals, but places where people, one or more people are identified in advance.

So we are long way to say, we're going through the steps and doing the process, shifting briefly to the communications plan.

Um, this is of course our strategy is to leverage uh H and AC Health, AC HealthComs team has been helping to lead this for us because this is a communications effort as much as anything to get the word out for the volunteerism.

So you can see here one of our social media posts with the QR code for people to sign up.

There's a website there, Alameda.point in time.info that takes you directly to the sign-up page where people can both sign up and then get communications around the trainings and the rest.

Obviously, our message is making a difference in your community to help people better understand the magnitude of homelessness, to understand what individuals' needs are, and to help uh make sure we have the funding we need to have.

So we don't do this just to get to funding, we do this because we want to know our neighbors and what their needs are.

Um, together with this, um, just briefly showing a timeline of our communications, kicking off in December with generating the toolkit.

So we have a toolkit that we distribute to people that want to help get the word out, sharing the social media posts, put it in the newsletter, we did a press release the first week of January.

It's a little bit of a dance of when do you really want to kick off your volunteer recruitment?

You don't want to be too close, but you don't want to be too far to where folks might sign up for something and forget they did.

So we start pretty intensely right at the beginning of January, and we think we're hitting the mark in terms of the pace of signups.

Oakland, for example, is our largest city with the highest proportion of folks experiencing homelessness.

You can see they have a ton of volunteers that set up.

They've been doing great recruitment, as have all of our cities.

So in addition to this, I didn't put it on the slide.

I know we are uh potentially a little bit pressed for time, but um, as I've shared many times, this is not not, I mean, certainly the data is important in terms of the numbers.

How many people, 9,000 and how many, has the number gone up or down?

But even more than that, the qualitative data, the individual survey questions we ask.

We ask six plus pages of survey questions, all those voluntary, whether people want to answer it.

There's the base questions, but then there's household demographics.

There's what do you struggle with?

What are your barriers?

Some of the all important questions that I think are so critical is how long have you lived in this community?

We find year over year, every point in time count, we find that 80 plus people, 80 plus percent of the respondents have lived here in many cases 10 plus years.

More than 90% have lived here five years or more.

So we get that really honest reflection of what are the actual household experiences from their mouth, right?

Not filtered through our assumptions or our biases, really people sharing directly with us.

What are their household barriers?

Do they have disabling conditions?

One of the prominent things we found out in 2024 is 60% of the individuals that are unsheltered.

60% of them have at least one disabling condition.

So right, consequential data, policy-informing, you know, data that we find out.

So it is a big lift.

We do offer the opportunity on that morning.

We every person that we interact with, we we request a survey from them.

They want to fill it out, great.

If they don't, we do that right there in real time over our phone through the application.

And then what that provides is a deeper look than we've ever had at unsheltered homelessness, which was the first time we did it in that many unsheltered surveys in 2024.

So we plan to do the same thing.

We'll certainly share the survey data with you as well.

Uh we put that together as an anonymized report to talk about things like percentages.

Some of the other key questions we ask are uh what caused your homelessness and what would have prevented it, right?

So we can get these honest uh we can see the trends, we can see the themes, and we can see what we need to do to be responsive.

So it's uh it's an important effort for the sake of doing the thing, but it's much, it's also an important effort um for knowing our neighborhoods and knowing what our neighbors need.

And um, yeah, any questions about about that where we're at?

Before we have questions, are there any speakers on this item?

Gloria.

No, no, no.

No, no speakers.

No speakers, okay.

Supervisor Jane.

Um, thank you.

Just a quick question.

Uh so uh how many programs that we put in place since the last pit count?

Because the measure W funding really didn't kick in until this past year.

So do you have a sense of whether or not the latest pit count would measure some of the effectiveness?

I know there's not really a direct one-to-one, you know, causation and effect, but do you have a sense of whether the programming that we have put in place since the last pit count will help uh address some of the issues that were identified in the last pit count?

Yeah.

It's a great question.

Yes, we have, you know, the the kind of the best data counterpoint to the point in time count.

Without getting into the weeds, this is one of those kind of perennial problems in homelessness data.

The point in time count is really this one-time physical count that we do that happens every two years, right?

It doesn't necessarily overlap with what we collect the rest of the time, which is our system-wide data in HMIS who's being served.

So we use both of those two different data sets.

We always acknowledge that, right?

There is a, and there's also, I should acknowledge a very limited nature to the point-time count, right?

It is for the most part a visual count.

Um, it's it's prone to um be an undercount in many ways because we know a lot of homelessness, um, even when it is unsheltered, we don't always see it, right?

It's um it's a happenstance whether people might be seen, and we also know I should also say that there are certain populations, certain people experiencing homelessness who are less likely to be captured in some cases by a point in time count because the way they present is less visible.

Youth is one example.

Uh, families with minors in some cases, right?

Are not often as visibly homeless in a tent in an encampment, for example.

So we can have some under counts there.

Those are all my qualifications to say.

The number sounds high, and it's usually higher than the point-time count.

We estimate that that the point-time count is an undercount.

That's a pretty standard um perspective across the across the country in regards to this.

To your question around impacts between last count and this one.

Yes, we're going to be bringing a report to you probably early February that will be the last home together um annual update.

Well, it won't be the last update, but it'll be the last report we bring to you on our performance data.

How did we do in home together year four before we bring the new plan for you to adopt later this summer?

So that will be the best example in probably February.

We will come share with you what has happened over fiscal year 24-25.

So that would be June or July 2024 through June of this past year.

That will be the most recent 12-month data period since the last count.

So we'll show you the investment numbers, how much money compared to previous years was spent in the system, any programmatic or data trends.

So that'll be an important counterpoint that we'll be sharing, and that'll kind of be your update on okay.

Now I see what happened the 12 months that ended six months before the next point time count, and then we'll be able to compare once we have the point time count data.

So more to come in February when we provide that update.

But I will say we did see in our last count, um, and I'll be happy to bring this back to kind of refresh refresh you all.

Um, you know, our last count was consequential.

You know, the line had been going like this, and then we saw it do that for the first time in 10 years.

Even leveling off was consequential, if not a little bit down.

What we saw before that was in the year before that, we saw the first the highest increase of people exiting homelessness than we've ever seen in our system.

So we had the six months prior, the end of that year, fiscal year data, we saw we had our best performing year of the home together plan.

We got as close as possible to outflow, leaving homelessness, crossing inflow.

So because of that strong performance, lo and behold, six months later, point time count was leveled off for the first time.

So there is an overlap, I think.

Investment, investment, outcomes, impact on the point time count.

What we will see this year is what did the year after look like these next two years, and then what is the ultimate effect on things like the point time count?

So there will be a lot, a lot to to um reflect on in the coming months.

Good question and great response.

Yeah, I'm gonna keep my fingers crossed.

That sounds really, really good.

And with the point in time count, do you do you count people that are in trailers?

Correct.

So they get counted counted too.

Correct.

Everyone that is in every kind of shelter, everyone that is in vehicle homelessness, unsheltered, every everyone in every kind of setting, which we seek to capture.

Okay.

And all I can say is, well, 1300 uh locations throughout the county.

I've um I would suspect the vast majority are here in Oakland, but 1300, that's quite a number.

Then the fact that you've got over a thousand volunteers and you're looking to get is about 1300 volunteers.

That's where we were sign up-wise, uh, last year.

And so I imagine we're on track to end in the same place, and we had we had more than enough.

Okay to cover.

All I can say is um you guys are doing the Lord's work going out there doing the count, so you know, go forth and make it happen.

And um, I I know Supervisor Carson used to join in the count.

Um, I don't know if he did that as a member of the committee who's chair or just out of his own uh incombination with his office.

Um, we will not be joining you for the pointing down time count.

My staff and I, that's not something we do.

Now we'll go out and pick up trash and litter, but the point time count that we'll leave that to others to do.

But you're doing the Lord's, you're doing the Lord's work, so thank you.

We'll be out there in the unincorporated uh on your behalf.

Thank you.

All right.

So do we have any um speakers on non-agendized items today?

Gloria and uh David Gonzalez.

Thank you so much for the opportunity to come before you today.

Today, I am um additionally wearing my HIV hat.

I'm a long-term advocate in Alameda County around HIV and AIDS.

I've been before the Board of Supervisors many, many times, but today I'm coming to you in regards to ending the HIV epidemic funds.

These funds are administered by HERSA at the federal level.

They come into Alameda County for distribution in an emergency fashion to throughout the HIV AIDS community, particularly the service providers that are providing these needed services.

These funds have been requested by the uh public health department, particularly the Office of HIV care, and to be on the board agenda since September.

We were in the thoughts that these funds would have been approved by October of 2025, and here we are in January of 2026, and these funds have yet to be released to the community.

Here is the caveat to that.

Unless those funds get approved and distributed throughout the community by February 23rd, those funds go back to the federal government.

Thank you.

Yes, hi, thank you.

Uh my name is David Gonzalez.

I am the Asian, I am the HIV program manager at Asian Health Services here in downtown Oakland, one of the many community health centers in Alameda County that is on the front lines of the HIV epidemic.

I am, however, speaking as a son of Oakland as a concerned citizen, not as a representative of Asian Health Services.

Um, just building upon um what Gloria just spoke about and the urgency of these funds and the um lack of dispersal.

Um, I studied HIV stigma for my undergraduate honors thesis at UC Berkeley, and one of the things I studied was how many people, how many people have come to believe that HIV is no longer an epidemic that poses a threat to public health and to individual health.

That this, despite the city of Oakland recently recognizing HIV as an emergency.

This belief is partially drawn from the acceptance of two incredible innovations in HIV treatment and prevention, known respectively as PrEP and HIV and treatment as prevention or TASP.

Because we know that people living with HIV cannot transmit HIV once their virus is undetectable.

We can understand HIV treatment as a form of HIV prevention.

While HIV rates have declined overall, largely due to these innovations, those declines have only made significant dent among white individuals and HIV rates among black and Latina communities remain stubbornly high.

This is due to HIV stigma and racism.

I will share a recent client encounter as an example, which occurred only blocks from here over the past weekend.

One of my clients, uh a black woman in her mid-30s, contacted me because she thought she might be experiencing a miscarriage.

She was in deep distress.

She did not want to go to the ER, and luckily I was able to make an appointment at our urgent care clinic the following morning.

I met up with her at her appointment to help advocate for her at her request.

She could not stop crying.

The doctor unfortunately confirmed this was most likely a miscarriage.

She wanted this baby so much.

Last year, she had been outed in her social group as someone living with HIV and had received death threats from former partners.

She told me that she wanted to give up, that she had no reason to live.

She blamed her HIV, saying that if she had a strong immune system, this would not have happened.

I had to assure her that this was not related to her HIV, that her immune system was strong because she is undetectable.

This is not the first time I have had this conversation with her.

I've explained how she does not need to worry about her HIV many times before, but in her despair, she cannot overcome the stigma and blames herself.

I am proud to do this work.

It is life-saving work despite advances in HIV prevention and treatment.

It is this work and the work of my colleagues here, funded by the county and the federal government that does the day-in and day-out work that reduces HIV stigma.

We cultivate hope.

With the delay in funding, this work has continued unreimbursed, despite these being federal funds and not county funds.

This validates the state of emergency that the city of Oakland be certified.

Was the honoring of world aid state only two weeks ago by this board of supervisors just empty platitudes?

Any continued delay in this funding is nothing short of delaying life and inviting death to the most marginalized of Alameda County's residents.

Shame.

Caller, you're on the line.

We're on public comment.

You have two minutes.

Yamini.

Hi, can you hear me?

Yes.

Excellent.

Hi, my name is Yamini.

I am the deputy director at East Bay Getting to Zero.

We are a coalition, a network building organization and a capacity-building organization for agencies that serve our Alameda County residents living with HIV and impacted by HIV.

Like my colleagues and the wonderful speakers that just spoke before me, I would like to reiterate the situation that we have at hand here today, which is that 1.2 million dollars of federal ending the HIV epidemic.

Emergency funds have already been granted to the Office of HIV or to the Alameda County Public Health Department, which many of us and our community organizations, the work has been planned, the work plans have been created, the money has been earmarked for the work in service of those very vulnerable Alameda County residents, and yet with less than six weeks remaining in the fiscal year, we do not have the funds to do this work.

And on February 28th, we are all going to lose this money, and it will go back to the federal government if it is not used.

What I'd also like to say is moving forward, we really need to get more transparency in how the county's processes function, why we continually, year after year find ourselves as community-based organizations dedicated to the people of Alameda County, dedicated to the most vulnerable populations in this county, why we continually have to fight time and again for transparency and for timely disbursement of funds for the work that we are doing in the community to impact those that are very vulnerable.

Thank you very much.

You have two minutes.

Hi, um, my name is Holly Calhoun and I am with Project Open Hand.

Um, we provide medically tailored meals and groceries to people in Alameda County, um, and we serve the HIV community.

Um, and I would like to add my voice uh to others who have spoken on this topic.

There is a critical need for the county to release the federal funding for the ending the HIV epidemic that has already been awarded to these agencies to provide important care to people living in this community.

Um, the funds should have been released previously, they are federal funds, and if they are not released, they will be returned to the federal government.

Um, and there's a critical need for this funding to be spent to provide services for people in Alameda County.

Um, I'd also like to say that there does need to be further transparency on this in the future.

Um, Sammy, you're on the line.

We're on public comment.

You have two minutes.

Hello, thank you.

My name is Sammy Lubega.

I'm a family physician and HIV specialist practicing here in Alameda County.

I'm also the director at East Bay Getting to Zero, working alongside Yamini.

Um, as she mentioned, we're a network of community organizations serving people affected by HIV in the East Bay.

Um, I'm here to echo the concerns that have been raised by everyone before me about this funding.

Um, of note.

The funding from our understanding is being held up in administrative processes.

Um, and we have extreme concern about the urgency of this issue.

What I wanted to add at this time is that um there were a group of us representatives from across the HIV services spectrum and HIV advocacy spectrum who wrote a letter directed to the director of Alameda Health, Director Chowdhury, as well as the Board of Supervisors to ask for support in finding some accountability for these delays in a plan of action before the funds expire.

I'm here today to ask all of you for your support as the health committee, and that we're really hopeful for a response so that we can work together to assure these funds go out to the community.

Look forward to hearing from all of you.

Thank you.

There are no other speakers for public comment.

All right, I want to thank uh the speakers uh for public comment.

And I appreciate the fact that you brought this to our attention with the letters, but now today.

So I know the agency directors heard this.

I I'm hopeful that the public health uh department director, Kimmy Watkins Tart, heard this, and then Aaron Armstrong from my staff who has worked uh with the HIV community as well in the past.

And you know, I've been a very strong proponent, and Gloria, forever, that we get this resolved.

So I'm not I'm not asking for a response on the record, just you've heard it.

Let's get it done.

Okay, thank you.

We're adjourned.

Thank you