Amy or Emily, can you sing if he can hear us?

We can hear you now.

We can hear you now.

Thank you.

Start over.

Good afternoon, and welcome to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors Personnel Administration and Legislation Committee meeting for Monday, February the second, 2026.

May I have a roll call, please.

Thank you.

Um can you go over instructions for online participation and in-person participation?

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

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

Only matters within the committee's jurisdiction may be addressed to notify the clerk you wish to speak.

Please listen closely to the following or in-person participants.

Please fill out a speaker card and hand it to the clerk.

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

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

Thank you very much.

Let's start with the federal legislation update.

Go ahead, I'm sorry.

We are in a partial government shutdown, and I think it's about 80% of the federal government.

I know on our PAL call last Monday, we kind of we we thought that this could be a possibility.

Um I will say last week, Senate Democrats and the White House did reach a deal.

Um and basically when we were talking with you last Monday, we were talking about the overall FY26 minibus that included Homeland Security appropriations.

And of course, um Democrats wanted to pull out Homeland Security because of the events in Minneapolis.

And so they were successful in doing that.

And so ultimately, last Friday night, the Senate pretty overwhelmingly passed kind of the amended version of what the House had passed the week before, with all of the other appropriations bills to include labor HHS education, transportation HUD, defense, um, a lot of the really big ones.

Uh, they kept those together and basically pulled out the homeland bill and instead passed a continuing resolution for homeland in order to give them more time to negotiate um the homeland bill.

So that package went over to the House on Friday.

Uh the House Rules Committee meets today.

Uh they started meeting at four o'clock.

Um, and they will uh the plan is for to pass a rule out um for the bill.

And so the House in a perfect world would take up the amended package tomorrow.

Um, I think, best case, if they are able to get all the votes they need, um, they could pass that amended version and the partial shutdown would be lifted um, you know, as soon as tomorrow evening.

Uh, there is concern because the speaker at this point has a one vote uh margin to play with, and um, so he needs all of his folks in line.

And Democrats have said they will not help on the rule vote tomorrow.

So that is currently um the state of play.

Again, because the shutdown started Friday night, there are very minimal effects at this point.

And so if the government is to be up and running tomorrow, no one will really feel it.

Um, again, if it goes longer, then again, we will start to feel impacts.

And I know we talked about that a good bit last week, but that's kind of the current state of play.

John, I'm not sure if you want to throw in anything else to what the House may or may not do.

Yeah, the only other thing that I would mention is that um with the approval or pending approval of the Homeland CR, that uh extends funding for the Department of Department of Homeland Security for two weeks through February 11th.

That puts us right before the President's Day recess where they'll have a three-day weekend.

Um, and I believe they'll be out of session that week as well.

Um, so this puts a little bit of pressure for the White House and Senate Republicans to come up, or Senate Democrats rather, to come up with some sort of compromise proposal that they could include in the homeland bill to lower some of the temperature on immigration enforcement.

Um the difficulty is the proposals that Democrats want to see Republicans and the White House would want to do not through statutory language, which would be included in a probes bill, but through executive action, which has no um, you know, they would have to use existing authorities that has already been provided through law um through executive action.

Um Senator Graham from uh South Carolina has indicated his in exchange for his vote, he is pushing for a prohibition of federal funding on sanctuary cities and states that support sanctuary cities.

So I think California being front of mind.

Um that of course would never fly um in the Senate, which would require 60 votes on that sort of approval.

Um, but the horse trading on potential language to be included in the homeland approbes bill uh is very very much a live issue.

Um, this is all to say that despite the fact that Homeland Security will likely be in a continuing resolution, it does nothing for the 170 million dollars um provided to immigration enforcement through the one big beautiful bill act last year.

Of course, this was split mainly between IC and CBP, um, which is not part of the uh annual appropriations process.

So that's the current state of play with the approbes package.

Again, you know, the fact that uh Senate Dems were able to reach a deal with the White House last week shows kind of that they did have the upper hand and were able to pull out the Homeland Security Bill for further negotiation.

We just need to see how this plays out in the House tonight and then tomorrow.

And then the only other thing, and I know we've been talking about it since December and prior to that because of the first shutdown, but um, you know, there really hasn't been much in terms of uh Senate negotiations to revive the advanced of the enhanced affordable care act premium tax credits.

Uh, you know, Republican negotiators have said that uh they are approaching a decision point, um, and that they're preparing what could be described as a best and final offer following weeks of bipartisan discussions, but I don't think we're as far along as we had hoped uh that they would have been.

And I know when you first asked us how long we thought this would go, we were hoping that they could wrap it up in January.

So I just wanted to make that um that note.

Uh, but really the big focus this week will be of course on um the government funding talks.

So um that's what we have for you.

Happy to answer any questions.

Thank you very much for the update and the trials and tribulations of trying to get this appropriations bill through.

Um, supervisor for China Bass, questions, comments?

Um, thanks for the update.

I actually don't think I have any questions or comments.

I think we're uh in CMO and it's positive development, and we'll just have to hope for the best.

Same here.

So thank you very much both and try to stay warm.

Um, let's move to the legislative request at the federal level.

So we have a request to support Senate Bill 3145 on the CARE Act of 2025.

This uh bill would enable the um testing of Medicare reimbursement uh for uh patients that get treated uh on site, uh not just through transport and at a medical facility.

So I am in agreement with the support position.

Do we have concurrence?

Yes, absolutely.

You want to make a motion?

Um I will make a motion uh that we adopt a support position on Senate Bill 3145, the Care Act of 2025.

I will second.

Supervisor for Canada Bass.

Aye.

Supervisor Cam.

Aye.

Okay.

The next item is a proposed rulemaking docket that basically uh would prohibit sex rejecting or um gender-affirming procedures for children at hospitals, and we are seeing a recommendation of a pose from Alameda County Health and similarly on another rulemaking pertaining to federal Medicaid and children's health insurance, uh, to basically reject procedures related to gender affirming for children.

Uh Alamaya County Health is also recommending an opposed position.

And I am supportive of both those recommendations.

I am also supportive.

So I'll make a motion uh that we adopt an opposed position on both items, and um this is also to send our letter, our comment letter as well by the deadline.

I'll second that motion.

Supervisor Fortunately Bass.

Aye.

Supervisor Town.

Aye.

Motion's passed.

Thank you.

Uh, let's move to the state legislative update from Full Moon Strategies.

Good afternoon, Supervisors.

Amy Costa with Full Moon Strategies with your state legislative update.

Uh, as of last Friday, the legislature had finished sorting through the remaining two-year bills that they had in their possession, meeting the deadline for them to reach the floors of each of the respective houses.

This significantly reduced the number of bills actually being carried forward from last year.

Meanwhile, new bills are still being introduced in advance of the bill introduction deadline for the second year, and we'll continue sharing our weekly bill report with departments to keep everyone informed on those new bills as they become introduced.

A couple of budget updates.

Over the weekend, SB-AB 106, a proposed budget bill junior for the current year was put into print.

This early action proposal by the legislatures in response to HR1 cuts and would provide a 90 million dollars in a one-time general fund appropriation for reproductive health providers such as Planned Parenthood.

It was followed by a lot of statements from the women's caucus chair as well as legislative leaders, talking about the importance of this funding.

Also in budget news, a couple of hours ago, the Department of Finance began proposing or posting the governor's proposed 2026 budget trailer bills on their website.

I often describe trailer bills as kind of the operating manual for how the appropriations go out.

So it's all the statutory changes that accompany the budget that the administration is putting forward.

In our notes, we provide a full list, and we highlight a few that we think will be of particular interest to the county on topics such as HR1, in-home supportive services, CalFresh, as well as Bay Area Transit Assistance.

Some of the topics that we've talked about previously within PAL.

Obviously, folks continue to watch what's happening in Minnesota, and more than half of California's Democratic lawmakers are calling on Congress to shut down the federal government and block funding for immigration enforcement following the fatal shooting of Minnesota nurse Alex Preday by federal agents.

Members of our delegation joined the push with assembly member Liz Ortega warning Senate leaders to stand for something and not give in.

Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas intensified this messaging, calling on Senate leadership to step aside if they could not hold the line.

Together, lawmakers announced plans to introduce new legislation to increase accountability for federal agents and condemned what they described as the growing militarization of American cities.

Assembly member and budget chair Jesse Gabriel announced plans to introduce a bill requiring the state attorney general to independently investigate any shooting by federal immigration agents, mirroring existing requirements for local and state law enforcement.

Assemblymember Gabriel is also co-authoring legislation with assembly member Carrillo to bar federal agents from using state resources to support their operations.

Lawmakers argue these measures are about accountability and equal standards for all law enforcement, regardless of political party.

Assembly budget subcommittee number seven, and we'll include the full hearing notes in our appellal notes.

Had an accountability and oversight hearing on the impact of federal funding withholding for child care services.

On January 28th, the hearing reviewed the impacts of the federal government's decision to freeze critical child care funding for California's child care services.

The legislative analyst office reported that it's worth about 5.5 billion in child care program funding and 2 billion in support services, specifically targeting the child care development fund, TANA for the temporary assistance for needy families and the social services block grant.

Jennifer Troia, the director of the California Department of Social Services, explained that while a temporary restraining order keeps these funds flowing, a permanent freeze would impact up to 3.2 million Californians.

The committee also heard local and personal testimonies provided by Los Angeles County Supervisor Holly Mitchell and Amasha Griffith with the Childcare Providers United, illustrating some of the immediate impacts of withholding this funding in communities.

The Assembly members on the committee panel focused their inquiries on the validity of the federal government's concerns for fraud and the potential for the long-term damage.

Assemblymember Bonta and others questioned the level of oversight already in place, to which Jennifer Troya, the director revealed that California's fraud rate is around one to two percent, or roughly seven million dollars out of the 7 billion dollars in funding.

The assembly health committee also had a hearing on January twenty-seventh on the devastating impacts of federal disinvestment on California's healthcare system.

Again, we'll have full notes, but at a very high level.

Panelist estimated that about 1.4 million Californians could lose coverage due to the six-month eligibility redeterminations, coverage limits for immigrants, and the expiration of the premium subsidies in the health care exchange.

State officials warned that by the time HR one is fully implemented, that number will grow up to two million people that could be disenrolled, leading to an estimated loss of 200,000 jobs in the health care sector.

The presentation by uh the Department of Healthcare Services Director and the LAOs uh detailed the technical and administrative challenges of implementing some of these policy changes.

Um the director of healthcare services director Michelle Boss emphasized a strategy of trying to automate to minimize some of the paperwork and protect coverage.

Um however, the legislative analyst office noted that the state's structural deficit makes it very hard to backfill these federal losses, forcing a difficult reassessment of the Medical program size and scope.

Lastly, Michelle Gibbons of the County Health Executives Association explained that the safety net of last resort, county indigent care, has been systemically underfunded since 2013 and cannot be rapidly rebuilt to handle the influx of uninsured Californians that these um changes will cause.

The hearing concluded with a call for fierce collaboration among the stakeholders, the legislature, and the administration to find solutions to keep Californians insured.

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

Serena is telling us she can't hear.

We can hear you now.

We lost you for a minute, but now we can hear you.

Great.

Supervisor Fortunatabas was in the middle of asking a question about the hearings.

Yes, I uh thank you so much, Amy, for the update.

I was just wondering if there are any additional hearings coming up and sort of what the timeline looks like over the next month or so.

Absolutely.

So we're getting into our budget season supervisor.

So we have a Senate budget hearing scheduled uh for the fourth, and um all of the subcommittees are beginning to publish their their hearings.

Um typically um each of the subcommittees, they hear a lot of items in March and April as a lead up to the May revise.

Um and what we'll do is we'll highlight those in um our PAL reports, and of course we will monitor the hearings and report out all the relevant information.

Okay.

And then uh not related to your update, I was just wondering if there's any additional updates since last week regarding the legislation uh that we discuss the county um helping to move forward around our EMS system as well as our Alameda Health System.

Yes, for the Alameda Health System legislation, we got back the RN or the request number from legislative council.

Um we've shared that with county council and the CAO's office to review that draft.

Um we plan to meet with them later this week to go over that, uh, as well as the author's office.

And so yes, that bill is moving right along, and we got our first draft.

Um we've had a series of meetings with some of the committee consultants that we anticipate the bill being referred to to get their early feedback.

Um, this is the type of bill that at the very least will likely be referred to two committees.

We've heard it could be referred to three, um, depending on um a couple of the provisions and the language.

Um so more to come on that.

Um and we'll talk with the author's office too about um, you know, if they want us to amend um the the RN that we got further before the bill is crossed.

Um, because we do have some time before um the bill deadline on the 20th.

Okay, thank you.

Can you still hear us?

Okay.

We can still hear you.

Thank you.

Uh I'll make this quick in case we lose you again.

Um so uh uh I've had a series of retreats this past week with the uh Alameda Alliance were held at the board of governors as well as the air district, and we're all still trying to figure out um how much the backfill at the county level because measure A goes to the hospitals uh and measure C goes to child care and measure W goes to homelessness and essential services, but we need to uh get a better handle on how much the state's gonna backfill with HR one and then figure out how that works with the county's budgeting process.

Do you have a sense of whether or not we will have some certainty uh within a couple weeks of the May revise coming out?

Yeah, I think that's a great question.

I think we'll have a a better sense post-May revise on where the state's revenues are and what, if any um help they will provide in backfilling the cost for HR1.

As you know, right now on the governor's budget, there's really no backfill.

Um, and then traditionally they are done, um, they have to be done by the beginning of the fiscal year by July 1.

Um, I think um, as we've said before, it's very likely May revise is gonna look quite different than what we saw the governor release a couple of weeks ago.

Um, so I I certainly think you will, I don't think everything will be certain, supervisor, but I think you'll have a better sense about the state's overall um fiscal health and whether or not the revenues continue to increase and whether or not there's any proposals um to help backfill some of the increased cost to counties on HR one post-May revise.

Thank you.

And then the uh revenue measures are being tossed around, that would not necessarily be available for this round, right?

Because we, you know, we're even hearing about people trying to gather signatures for the billionaires tax and these kind of uh measures.

Yeah, so it's it's a great point, supervisor.

It wouldn't help us in this budget year, because it would require voter approval before whatever the revenue measure was could be collected.

Um, and so um there are I think somebody told me 14 different measures in circulation right now, not all of them revenue related, but quite a few.

Um, and so some of it will depend ultimately which of those qualify, and then of course, you know what voters decide.

But as far as timing will help us in budget year plus one, not this budget year.

Should any other us?

Thank you.

Does that also include assembly member bontas, the surcharges and employers that don't provide health care?

Is that bill uh timing-wise, will that be heard anytime soon to be helpful?

Uh I'd have to look at the language.

I mean, traditionally those types of bills, unless there's an urgency measure would take effect in January of the following year.

So the timing would be similar.

It would help, but not necessarily probably within budget year, it would be more like budget year plus one.

Okay.

Thank you so much for that clarification.

I have no other questions.

Are there any public comments on either the federal legislation or the state legislation?

There are no public comments on the items.

Um are there any public comments on items that are not on today's agenda?

There does not seem to be any public comments on non-agendized items.

Okay, at the risk of testing out our MS team systems, will those online uh please identify yourself so we can appreciate your participation.

Anna, sorry, I allowed your camera, but not your mic.

Hi, uh good afternoon, everyone.

This is Hannah Hamilton with Alameda County Social Services Agency.

Thank you, Jessica.

Good afternoon, Jessica Blake Moore, Alameda County Health.

Serena.

Serena Chen.

Yeah, I'm sorry, I can never find the mic.

Uh Serena Chen with Supervisor Temp's office.

On a Apotica.

Anna Apataka, first five Alameda County.

Aaron.

Erin Tateman, Alameda County H C D.

That's everyone that's volunteering too.

Okay.

Thank you very much for your participation.

This meeting is adjourned.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Do you know why the sound went out?