In progress.

Good morning, everyone.

I'd like to call to order our meeting for the regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors for Alameda County on Tuesday, April 201st.

Would you all please rise and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance?

Pledge link is to the flag.

United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation regards indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

Will the clerk please call the role to establish our quorum?

Supervisor Marquez.

Present.

Supervisor Tam.

Present.

Supervisor Miley.

Supervisor Fortunato Bass excused.

President Haubert.

Present.

We have a quorum.

I'd like to just note that Supervisor Fortunato Bass is at a very important meeting in her district and can't be with us this morning, but will be joining us later today.

And so she let us know that earlier today, she will be with us for the meeting.

Next item is supervisors' remarks.

A recognized supervisor Tam.

Thank you, President Halbert.

I wanted to take the opportunity to highlight uh Alameda County celebration of Earth Date and the many activities that happened over the weekend, including uh the Alameda Spring Shindig, the Unity Council, Oakland Chinatown, and San Lorenzo Cleanup along with the San Leandro Wastewater Treatment Plan Cleanup activities and this commitment that we have in the community toward beautification of and climate action is very significant in our county and very proud of the activities that have been so much a part of our tradition in the county.

Thank you, Supervisor TAM.

Supervisor uh Marquez.

Thank you, President Howard.

Just wanted to congratulate the City of Newark.

They hosted their state of the city address this past Saturday, and it was a community event.

My team was out there tabling, so just wanted to thank them for the great work they're doing on behalf of the residents in Newark.

And also wanted to congratulate Covenant House.

They opened the one and only transitional age youth shelter in uh mid and southern Alameda County this past Saturday in Hayward.

Right now they are authorized to receive 15 young people, but the goal is to have the capacity up to 30, which we know this is desperately needed for our community to prevent our young people from being unsheltered.

So just wanted to congratulate Covenant House.

I actually voted on that project back in 2020 when I was on the Hayward City Council.

So excited that they're open, but also a lot of lessons learned.

It should not take this long to open a shelter in our community.

Thank you.

Thank you for mentioning that indeed an important item.

And um isn't it great that you can see the continuation of the work and how long things take, but from city council to now being able to uh open the doors.

Great job.

Supervisor Miley, anything to report out on?

I'd like to also recognize Earth Day and I know in my district vision recycling, a local producer of compost, which is sorely needed and in fact required to be used locally, uh, is having uh an open house day and uh demonstrating the ways that they use local green waste to make compost, which then can be used locally.

Uh I've invited our uh through our public works director, our public works staff, as well as staff from local neighboring cities.

So thank you, Division Recycling, for doing that for our community.

Concluding Board of Supervisors' remarks, we now have public comment on closed session items, after which we will recess into closed session.

I have had requests for those people, some have time constraints and would like to make comment on the main motion, the main mass motion, the agenda.

So I'm going to allow that.

So I'd like the clerk to please um let everybody have two minutes.

Items for public comment.

Thank you.

I will give instructions.

Detailed instructions are provided in the teleconferencing guidelines.

A link to the document is included in today's agenda to view an automated translated transcript or listen to an automated translated audio of the meeting from English into multiple other languages.

Please utilize the worldly link in today's agenda or the QR codes posted throughout the room and select your preferred language from the drop-down menu.

We do have interpreters for Spanish speakers available in chambers.

Please proceed to the back of the room to retrieve a listening device.

If you are joining the meeting using a computer, use the button at the bottom of your screen to raise your hand to request to speak.

When called to speak, please unmute your microphone and state your name.

If you are calling in, dial star nine to raise your hand to speak.

When you're called to speak, the host will enable you.

If you decide not to speak, notify the clerk when your call is unmuted, or you may simply hang up and dial back into the meeting.

As a reminder, you may always just observe the meeting without participating by clicking on the view now link on the county's webpage at acgov.org.

When called, you will have two minutes to speak.

Please limit your remarks to the time allocated.

Public comment will generally alternate between in-person and online speakers as determined by the president of the board and subject to overall time limits.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And thank you for having interpretation available.

Two minutes.

I think you certainly said that obviously certain.

That's a better way to say it.

More efficient.

Yeah.

I wasn't sure that what you said, and I believe the um county administrator has two items that are being continued or pulled that would be excluded from comment.

There are two items that are being pulled and will be bought brought back at a future date.

The first one is item 12, which is being uh pulled and will be brought back when the related documents and agreements are completed, and item 47 is also being pulled and will be brought back at a future date.

Okay, that's very good.

Thank you.

So to clarify, those items are off the agenda.

Okay.

12 and 47.

Thank you.

Anyone in the room goes first.

Anybody online goes after that.

In person is similar Ramey speaking on closed session.

Item three, item four, item five, item six, item eight, item nine, and item eleven.

Thank you.

Good morning, Algae County.

We're in trouble.

Bit troll.

We need seven million houses built.

Bad.

58,000 minimal health patients right around Chicago.

You have 5,000 around here.

They own the streets home.

This is in social injustice.

We got senior citizens working on your life.

They are homeless.

Run for war.

They always you got pink your people.

Another country for taking care of your own.

Something wrong with his pitch.

And then hiring.

They should have kept hiring open and put people work.

They got people from outside the country.

Outside the neighborhood working and doing things, people in the neighborhood should be doing.

We don't have people should have to pay for this.

I have fine right now.

Do the minimal health hospital.

We work in Chicago is the national headquarters, trust me.

They got the housing population.

And you got no help question.

They know how to hand first here.

I don't even agree.

You don't know nobody.

We all go to hear the big mixed income.

You're not going to get a form of cost daying on the pay for it.

It's low income.

You can't change it.

Somebody in trouble.

People can job night in the session.

This is wrong.

So I'm waiting on streaming ahead.

I don't mean counting on.

I can't run it.

I'm doing my people off the street.

And waiting on your guys.

Thank you.

The next in-person speakers are Madeline Stacy, item 36.

Noel Gallo, item 55, Edward Escobar, item 55 and Juan, item 55.

Am I am I good?

Okay.

Set matters at one o'clock and three o'clock will be heard at those times.

Madeline Stacy, long time Alamina County resident.

Um, speaking about Pear Green and extending the contract.

Paragreen is a platform software that's effectively a palantar spin-off.

It brings military grade surveillance, and by that I mean dangerous AI predictive policing, based upon tracking normal people going about their everyday lives.

Um surveillance tactics and software into local municipalities driven by an inner circle of billionaire investors and former Palantir executives.

Parent is led by CEO Nick Noon, who was the former head of U.S.

special ops at Palantir.

This extension would increase the contract amount by 723,000 dollars for a contract cost of over four point, or excuse me, 1.4 million.

That's big money to another big tech company, money that can be spent in ways that actually help our community, like health care, food assistance, affordable housing, fixing roads, and so on.

On February 10th, the uh sheriff's office presented on the RTIC, the real-time information center, um, which is the central hub, um, touting the substantial investment in technology, software, and hardware, specifically naming the Flock integrated cloud hardware and software platform.

So, yes, Peregreen can be integrated into the RTIC, but it's a duplicative of the software and the technology that we already have that took three years to build.

And we already spent money on.

So it's it's not necessary.

The platform will also consolidate residents' personal information ranging from ALPRs to geospatial mapping, likely using facial recognition and to a mass surveillance database, like any database that is vulnerable to security risks and constitutional privacy violations.

This is technology we don't need with a database we cannot trust, and one which we cannot afford in more ways than one.

Don't extend the contract.

Thank you.

Roland Ellinson, you have two minutes.

Go ahead, please.

Uh, there we go.

Thank you.

Hi, this is Roland Ellingson.

I'm with Tri Valley Seek and Save.

I'm just calling in just to uh uh voice um uh opposition to hopefully there's the right time to SB 1193.

I think it really ties the hands of our elected leaders that have uh my full confidence and the confidence of many I know in order to make decisions, uh funding.

Um I think it's uh uh it's uh it's a move that is uh uh uh unfair.

It uh it um it does applies only to Alameda County.

I think everyone's aware of that, and so I'm in direct direct opposition to it.

Thank you.

Brandy.

Kathleen Robinson, go ahead, please.

You have two minutes.

This is closed session and agenda items.

Yes, Kathleen Robinson.

I'm a supporter of School of Imagination, and I'd like to voice my opposition of SB 1193.

Um the restrictions of fund giving will affect many small nonprofits in our area.

Often they're in dire need, and when the supervisor has the ability to see that need and help them, it could help them be the difference between survival and folding.

So I would like to voice my opposition and um be noted that I'm speaking specifically of the help we've received at School of Imagination, which was invaluable.

Thank you.

Brandy Lombardi, you have two minutes, please state the item that you're speaking on.

This is closed session and agenda items.

My name is Brandy, and I am speaking about um item 59.

I'm here to speak about SB 1193 and to raise concerns about both its intent and its impact.

At its core, this legislation appears less about good governance and more about political retribution, but this goes beyond politics.

The real risk here is to the community.

SB 1193 puts critical nonprofit funding in jeopardy, funding that supports women's shelters, addresses food insecurity, provides homeless services, and expands access to mental health care.

These are not abstract issues, they're essential services that most of our vulnerable residents depend on every single day.

We should also be clear, this bill is unnecessary.

Alameda County already has established processes in place, processes that require an even higher level of oversight and approval than what this bill proposes.

In that sense, SV 1193 is not just harmful, it's redundant.

It reflects a lack of understanding of how our local systems already function effectively.

Legislation should be used to solve problems, not to create new ones or to settle political differences.

I urge this board and the public to look closely at what is at stake here and to stand in support of maintaining fair, effective processes that protect, not politicize essential services.

Thank you.

Alan, you have two minutes, please state the item that you're speaking on.

Alan Cyril, please unmute.

You have two minutes, please state your item number.

Yes, I'm sorry.

Uh my name is Alan Cerro.

I'm speaking uh in opposition to SB 1193.

I am a Alameda, long time Alameda County uh resident, and I work very closely with a handful of um nonprofit organizations in Alameda County that have uh worked very effectively with our local supervisor uh in terms of use of the discretionary funds that are at risk.

So I'm speaking in opposition to that uh very uh seems like it's uh retaliatory and uh necessary, and I'm speaking out against it and urging you to vote uh no, and uh so that we can continue to do the important and effective work we're doing in our district.

Thank you for your time.

Susan, you have two minutes, please state the item that you're speaking on.

Good morning.

I am speaking on item number 59, Senate Bill 1193.

I want to thank Supervisor Miley and Halbert for identifying this and putting it on the agenda.

This could have a significant impact for so many nonprofits in our region, nonprofits that frankly are already struggling to find funding in light of so many federal budget cuts.

I am concerned that there's something else behind this agenda, and I would encourage the supervisors and the general public to take a look.

Just last Friday, this bill was amended.

It was amended to now suggest that all discretionary funding to nonprofit organizations must come with a contract and performance objectives for large contracts.

We certainly understand that, and we want that to be in place, and those measures are already in place.

But for a small community event or a program or a project, that discretionary ability of our supervisors to help the young small nonprofits get to the next level is imperative.

I question why a state senator is so focused on one county.

Why is this necessary now?

And why, if it's so important, aren't other counties um included in this?

We need our nonprofits to have a state senator that's focused on helping, not hurting, and at a time when discretionary dollars are so important.

I would encourage all supervisors to take a hard look at this and ask why just Alameda County.

Thank you for your consideration.

Jerry, you have two minutes, please state the item that you're speaking on.

Uh item number 59, so the bill 1193.

My name is Jerry B.

Miller, and I'm a longtime resident of Sinnol.

But more importantly, I'm a longtime supporter of our nonprofit community.

I'm I'm sorry, but I don't understand why a state senator was sponsored bill that doesn't apply to every part of the state.

What problem does California have that's unique to Alameda County?

Why does the senator want to make it more difficult for Alameda County to support our local nonprofits?

What's the senator thinking?

In my opinion, this bill is stupid, unnecessary, and unwardened.

The last thing we need is legislation that makes life more difficult for our nonprofits in our community.

Thanks a lot.

Thank you for uh calling on me.

It's item 59.

My name is Andrew A.

Turnbull, and I serve on several boards of directors, including um the uh Sinnol Business Guild uh nonprofit, the Bay Area Barnes and Trails nonprofit, and I'm the executive director of the International Horsemanship Foundation.

We moved our um headquarters from North Carolina to Alameda County because Alameda County and California, I know will support my nonprofit uh that I that I lead on behalf of people all over the world.

This 1193 absolutely surprises me.

And I'll tell you what, Brandy Lombardi, Ellen Cherrow, Susan Houghton, and Jerry B.

Miller each said exactly what I'm feeling.

I'm absolutely against this.

And uh David Haubert and um and Nate Miley, thank you so much for bringing this to our attention.

I am absolutely an opposition and have no idea why anyone would want to sponsor SB 1193.

Thank you for your respect and attention, and may the horse be with you.

Caller, you have two minutes.

Please unmute your phone and state the item that you're speaking on.

Yeah, hi, this is John Elfin.

Um, I am calling an opposite about uh item number 53.

Um, and I want to add my opposition to SB 1193 and urge you to make an official statement against it on behalf of the county.

We don't need a state senator focusing on local politics.

We need state senators to do their job in Sacramento and address issues that benefit the entire state and all residents.

It seems to me that there are more that there's more than meets the eye here.

I think it's worth it to have the senator concretely address why this is needed.

Can she?

If not, she needs to withdraw it.

Orange County is an Alameda County, and I'm thankful that we have supervisors who care so strongly about supporting the nonprofits in our region in our region.

Please oppose this.

Thank you.

Good morning.

Thank you.

My name is Jean Moses.

I live in District 3.

And um, I want to say that there's certainly clear opposition to SB 1193, which sounds justified, but I'm here to speak on item 36.

Um, I find the peregrine systems to be very concerning.

That is a technology that will allow integration of data, which sounds good on the surface, but I would like to see clear guidelines in terms of how this technology will be used and limits in terms of its use for facial recognition and um interference with personal liberties before we go forward with that contract.

So I am speaking in opposition to item number 36.

Thank you.

Steve McCoy Thompson, you have two minutes, please state the item you're speaking on.

Uh thank you.

I'm speaking on item 59 in opposition to uh the proposed SB 1193.

Uh my name is Steve McCoy Thompson.

I have been involved in support of numerous nonprofit organizations throughout Alameda County, including Three Valleys Community Foundation, um PPIE, which is Education Foundation for our schools in Pleasanton, and currently is executive director of Keystone Housing Foundation, which is building tiny homes for veterans.

And I want to thank uh Messrs Albert and Miley for bringing this to the fore.

And just having been involved with nonprofits, they are struggling, as you know, to get the funds and the support out to people throughout the community and to add a bottleneck and an unnecessary bottleneck like SB 1193 to the process.

We'll just simply delay uh funding further and harm our uh constituents and recipients.

Um several supervisors have already noted delays in getting an important project started.

This would add another unnecessary delay that is targeted at Alameda County.

And so I strongly urge you to uh uh express your opposition to 1193.

Thank you very much.

Janessa, you have two minutes, please state the item that you're speaking on.

Good morning.

I am speaking on um item 59.

Uh I'm speaking on the item 59.

I am the CEO of a local nonprofit and a forever resident of Alameda County.

I'm opposing SB 1193.

I'm appalled that a state senator Aisha Wahhab is abusing her power to vindictively attack an Alameda County supervisor.

She should be ashamed of herself.

This is an absolute abuse of power, a disgrace, and a personal attack on our county.

Thank you.

Christine, you have two minutes, please state the item that you're speaking on.

Hello, thank you for having me.

I am speaking on item number 59.

I'm asking you to please vote no on SB 1193.

Alamina County funding has been instrumental in helping the nonprofit that I run and many others.

It has helped survivors of domestic violence, those who are unhoused, and those who are impacted by poverty.

Without NIMBLE funding, we'd be in dire straits, added to many other nonprofits.

This legislation unfairly targets Alamina County.

It's political and it causes problems.

It doesn't create any solutions.

We already have great transparency in Alamina County.

Please vote no on 1193.

Thank you.

Steve Tesler, you have two minutes, please state the item that you're speaking on.

Thank you.

I'm calling about item number 59, SB 1193, and I want to thank the Board of Supervisors for its past funding of so many important and instrumental nonprofit organizations and causes uh related to social and uh related needs in Alameda County.

Uh I just learned about this bill, and frankly, I'm appalled by it.

I don't understand what would compel a state senator to focus on county procedures.

Uh doesn't she have to have enough to do in Sacramento to focus on uh targeting Alameda County?

And because there are a whole lot of issues far more important than this, it sounds like there's some political motivation behind this, and frankly, that's just incredibly sad.

At a time when we have such a diverse county, we need our state, county and local leaders to stand united.

Funding nonprofits who are doing so much work to help so many in our county is critical.

This bill is not needed.

Please oppose.

Thank you.

Kelly, you have two minutes, please state the item you're speaking on.

Yeah, I'm speaking on uh SB 1159.

Um it is uh it's a great honor to have so many people from the uh unincorporated area nonprofits here today listening intently, along with four members of our board of supervisors listening to this very important item about uh nonprofit grants, discretionary nonprofit grants that are uh uh being handed out by each supervisor's office.

I think that uh the non the uh unincorporated area uh doesn't understand um its um, you know, what what what should it be expecting from uh the county in terms of nonprofit grants?

Now, the unincorporated area represents uh 36% of uh the population of uh one of the uh supervisorial districts at that at most, at most 36% uh of the residents of one of the districts.

And therefore, you would expect that uh the unincorporated area could be getting you know roughly a third of the uh nonprofit grants being handed out by that uh super by that supervisor.

Uh unfortunately, in the last several years, uh the unincorporated area has received nowhere near one-third of the of the grants.

Um it's probably uh, you know, in some sometimes it's been like 12%, sometimes it's been 20%.

Nowhere near one third of the unincorporated grants.

How could that be?

Well, for one thing, nobody watches this stuff.

Nobody's watching the unincorporated the uh nonprofit grants.

So I'd urge all of you in the uh you know nonprofit community to um open your eyes, look around, uh uh do some accounting, count how much money you're getting uh in the non in the unincorporated area, and ask why aren't we getting our share?

Thank you.

No more speakers.

Thank you very much.

We're now at the point of our agenda where we will recess into closed session.

We're now recessed recording in progress.

Good afternoon, everyone.

I'd like to call us back to order from closed session.

Does county council have anything to report out in closed session?

Could we take roll call first?

Ah, let's re-establish quorum.

Would the clerk please call the roll?

Supervisor Marquez, excuse Supervisor Tam.

Present.

Supervisor Miley.

Supervisor Fortunato Bass.

Present.

President Howbert.

Present.

We have a quorum.

Thank you very much.

County Council, anything to report out?

We do have two items to report out regarding settlements that were approved by your board in recent meetings.

In the first matter, Ariana Castro and Uriel, Giovanni, Pina Lopez versus Justin Lee Stubblefield et al.

Superior Court of California, County of Alameda case number 24 CV 085630 in close session on March the 17th of 2026.

Your board authorized uh by unanimous vote a settlement of 110,000 with Supervisors Hobbert, Tam, Miley, Marquez, and Fortunatobas voting yes.

In a second matter, NRA claim of Kishana Hampton tort claim number 24-362 on March 24th, 2026 in close session.

Your board by a vote of three yes, excuse me, four yeses.

Supervisors Tam, Miley, Marquez, and Fortunato Boss voting yes with Supervisor Hobbert absent or excused, approved a settlement of $58,000.

Um there was a prior payment of $14,937 to reimburse uh farmers' insurance for the claimants insurance carrier for property damages.

Uh those two matters are final.

We have not concluded closed session for today, but we do not anticipate any further announcements regarding settlements.

Thank you very much.

With that said, when we're going to move to our one o'clock clock set matters, we have a list of about six proclamations and commendations.

I will start with the first one.

This is from our CAO's office, proclaiming April 2026 as National County Government Month.

I understand it's also supported by the California State Association of Counties and the National Association of Counties, CSAC and NACO.

April 26th is recognized as National County Government Month, highlighting the vital role that counties play in serving over 330 million Americans and providing essential services that support healthy, safe, and vibrant communities.

Counties deliver a wide range of programs and act as key partners in implementing local, state, and federal initiatives that impact nearly every aspect of residents' lives.

Alameda County remains committed to protecting the health, well-being, and safety of its community through efficient, cost-effective services while advancing policies and programs that support vulnerable populations.

With a focus on equity, innovation, equity, and innovation, the county continues, our county continues to address challenges such as homelessness, housing affordability, health care access, and workforce opportunities, working to build a resilient and inclusive communities for all.

We do this with the help of a wide range of nonprofit organizations that we support and that support us.

We couldn't do it without them.

With that said, um, I'll just say great job, team, and move to the next one.

That's all we get.

Great job, team.

Give ourselves a round of applause.

Okay, I like that, sure.

Next we have item 51 proclaiming May 2026 as foster care month.

And uh we will uh thank and recognize Jeff Samp with our county almost 20 years, and I would like to say, Jeff, a few words that um then you can have a few words as well.

Thank you for being here.

We recognize 20 May 2026 as foster care month in Alameda County.

We have approximately 700 children and youth and 200 young adults in foster care that need safe, stable homes and lasting connections with caring adults.

Strong families provide essential belonging and support, and the county has made progress in reducing placements while strengthening permanent family connections.

The contributions of relatives, foster parents, and adoptive families are vital alongside our community organizations, nonprofit organizations, and professionals who support youth, maintain sibling bonds, and prepare them for adulthood.

Alameda County remains committed to working with state and federal partners and an extensive network of local nonprofit organizations that we rely on, and we encourage residents to volunteer and support foster youth and caregivers throughout the year.

I will also like to add personally that I understand not everybody can be a resource parent to a foster parent.

It takes a very special person to be able to do that, but everybody can support a foster parent, a resource parent.

If you are willing to put yourself out there and either consider becoming a resource parent, a foster parent, or to support one, please contact our social service agency.

Jeff, um, thank you for being here.

And um, you can say a few words, we'll have public comment, and then we'll come down and give you this proclamation and take a photo with you.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you for being here, Jeff.

Good morning, President Halbert and members of the board.

Thank you for this proclamation recognizing Foster Parent Month.

I'm honored to accept it on behalf of our foster parents and relative caregivers, whose daily commitment provides children with safety, stability, and a sense of belonging during some of the most uncertain moments in their lives.

Well, I stand here in an agency role.

This recognition truly belongs to the caregivers who opened their homes and to the children whose uh and youth whose resilience continues to guide and inspire our shared work.

Our role as an agency is to partner with resource parents, birth families, and community providers to ensure children are supported, families are strengthened, and reunification remains the goal whenever possible.

This proclamation affirms the importance of that shared effort and the values that sustain it.

Compassion, consistency, and accountability.

We accept it with gratitude and with a continued commitment to recruit, prepare and support resource families so that every child in our community has the opportunity to heal, grow, and thrive.

Thank you for your recognition and for your ongoing support of the children and families we serve.

Jeff, thank you, and thank you for being here.

We're gonna do photos maybe at the end.

Can you hang out for a few extra minutes?

But if we do have anybody on this item that wishes to speak on this item, foster care month.

We have no speakers.

Thank you.

We're gonna go to the next one, which is National Donate a Life Month.

Is Donor Network West with us?

They're not in the room with us, I guess, but we'll recognize them because we will say that April 2026 is recognized as National Donate Life Month in Alameda County, highlighting the critical need for organ and tissue donors.

About 744 county residents are currently on the transplant waiting list, while 17 people nationwide die each day due to organ shortages.

Donation is a powerful act of compassion that can save up to eight lives and heal dozens more with especially urgent need in the Asian, Hispanic, and African American communities.

Donor Network West and Healthcare Partners work to connect donors with the recipients, and over 19 million Californians have already registered.

Residents are encouraged to say yes to donation when renewing their driver's licenses and IDs, or by registering online.

Again, I'd like to thank National Donate Life Month and all of our nonprofit organizations that work with us to provide these services.

The next two items we're going to be recognizing and participating with our Alameda County District Attorney and her team.

The first is National Crime Victim's Rights Week.

Each year, over 26 million people are affected by crime, often facing systems that do not fully meet their needs.

In Alameda County, the district attorney's office, headed up by Miss Ursula Jones Dixon, supports victims through programs like the Victims Witness Assistance Division, the Family Justice Center, and Trauma Recovery Center, offering inclusive trauma-informed services.

In 2025, more than 13,000 survivors were served, and over $2 million in compensation was provided during National Crime Victims Rights Week, which is April 19th through 25th.

The county reaffirms its commitment to supporting victims, advancing equity, and recognizing the strength of survivors.

Receiving this accommodation and proclamation will be our none other than our Alameda County District Attorney.

Thank you for being here, Miss Urs Ursula Jones Dixon.

Madam DA.

Thank you, thank you.

All right.

So first and foremost to the entire board, thank you for having us today and recognizing victims of crime during this week.

Also, I am here with multiple members of our district attorney's office, victim witness advocate program.

I'm gonna have them join me now because we're gonna have two proclamations, so we might as well run into those if you guys will come up.

Jennifer Mello, Kelly Sage, Erica Chavez, Juan Matias, Leonard Dixon, Alexis Tapor, and Yogida Shankar.

So I asked them to come up here because you need to know who does the real work with victims of crime.

I would take them on the road with me everywhere I go if I could, because the work they do is amazing.

Um the meaning of National Crime Victims' Rights Week.

It's a time to recognize the strength, resilience, and dignity of survivors.

This year's theme is listen, act, and advocate.

Protect victims, serve communities.

This theme reaffirms a fundamental truth that victims and witnesses of crime deserve to be heard, supported, and treated with dignity, compassion, and respect.

For those of us entrusted with this work, that's not optional.

It's a constitutional mandate and a core part of our responsibility to pursue justice in a way that does not overlook the needs of those who have been harmed.

We've made it a priority to stand with survivors and to center survivors in everything that we do.

That means recognizing that justice is not only about what happens in a courtroom, it's also about whether survivors feel seen, heard, respected, and supported throughout the entire process.

It means listening carefully to what survivors and families tell us they need.

It means treating them not as an afterthought, but as central to the work of justice itself.

That commitment also means showing up, building trust, and one of the things that I've made up as a priority in this office is meeting directly with families and hearing from those who've been most impacted by violence and harm.

It also means listening to the broader community.

That's why we've convened and attended a number of listening sessions with survivors, advocates, community members, and partners across Alameda County.

Those conversations matter.

They help us understand where systems are falling short and what survivors are experiencing and what we must do better on their behalf.

When a person experiences crime, the impact does not end when the incident is over.

The aftermath can bring trauma, fear, grief, and stability, and the overwhelming burden of trying to navigate complex systems during one of the most difficult times of an individual's life.

That's why victims' rights matter so deeply.

In California, those rights are constitutionally guaranteed under Marcy's law.

And Marcy's Law makes it clear that victims are entitled to be treated with fairness, dignity, and respect, and to have meaningful voice in the justice process.

At this time of reduced grant funding and increased demand for services, we cannot afford to retreat from our commitment to victims.

We need continued investment in the programs, partnerships, and supports that help survivors heal, including victim advocacy, trauma recovery, mental health care, and family support systems.

Because standing with survivors means ensuring that the help they need is actually there when they actually need it.

I also want to invite my colleagues, our county partner service providers, survivors, and members of the public to join us for Survivor Resource Fair at the Family Justice Center this Thursday, April 23rd from 12 p.m.

to 4 p.m.

That event is an opportunity to connect survivors and families with resources, services, and support.

It also reflects our commitment to making sure that people know that they're not alone and help is available.

So thank you for recognizing the work of these amazing human beings next to me and recognizing survivors of crime.

Thank you for recognizing the importance of National Crime Victims Rights Week and affirming that victims' rights are central to justice.

We'd love to accept this proclamation on behalf of all victims of crime.

Thank you for all you do.

We'll be taking a photo in a minute, but I'll ask if there's any public comment on this item.

No speakers.

With that, we'll go to the next item, and you're up again.

This is from Supervisor Tam proclaiming April 24th as Children's Memorial Day and Children's Memorial Flag Day.

I'll turn the meeting over to Supervisor Tan.

Thank you, President Halbert.

And so this Friday, April 24th, marks the 30th year since the Alameda County Board of Supervisors adopted children's memorial flag project and establish an annual observance on the fourth Friday in April, founded by the late county supervisor, Gail Sheel.

This is a symbol of remembrance for young lives taken by violence.

Let us recognize that when a child dies from violence, the harm ripples outward.

Parents, siblings, schools, neighborhoods are all affected.

Public recognition validates that grief shows that these losses aren't invisible or forgotten.

So today, the memorial sites and plaques are maintained at multiple locations throughout the county, including here at the County Administration Building, the Children's Memorial Groves located above Fairmont and the Fairmont Ridge, with additional county locations in Hayward and Castle Valley.

So thank you to our county agencies and community partners who play a vital role in supporting children and families through collaboration among Alameda County agencies, including social services, the district attorney's office, the information technology department.

The county continues to advance a coordinated trauma-informed approach to protect children and support family well-being.

As we proclaim Friday, April 24th as Children's Memorial Day and the Children's Memorial Flag Day, we urge community members, nonprofit organizations, schools, faith-based communities, and partners to join in the remembrance of children and youth lost to violence in solidarity with impacted families and in renewed commitment to prevention, healing, and hope.

And as you mentioned, the DA's office will be accepting this proclamation as well.

Thank you again to the entire board.

The most devastating loss that one can imagine, the loss of a child.

Today we remember the children whose lives were taken by violence.

We honor their memory.

We stand with the families and loved ones who carry that grief, and we recognize that the loss of a child leaves a wound that reaches far beyond one family.

It affects entire communities.

This day demands more than remembrance.

It demands that we honor these children through action by supporting families, investing in prevention, and doing everything in our power to keep other children safe.

As previously stated, this observance has deep roots here in Alameda County.

The Children's Memorial Day grew out of Alameda County Children's Memorial Flag Project and also started by Supervisor Gail Steele.

In 1997, Supervisor Still held the first recognition event and flag raising ceremony, which included the distribution of 50 memorial flags to schools across the county.

That same year in 1997, April 1997, the California Assembly formally recognized the fourth Friday in April as a statewide annual observance.

Since then, the children's memorial flag has been flown across California in memory of young lives lost to violence in the prior year.

Here in Alameda County, that remembrance has continued through memorial sites in Oakland, Hayward, and Castro Valley, including the County Administration Building and Children's Memorial Grove above Fairmont Ridge.

These memorials ensure that the children we honor are not forgotten and that they remind us of our ongoing responsibility to protect the children who are still with us.

The DA's office has long been part of this countywide effort.

And over the years, our office has helped convene and support this observance alongside county departments, community partners, and impacted families.

I'm proud that we're helping to bring renewed attention and commitment to this event.

This observance is more than an act of remembrance.

It's a public declaration that the lives of children matter.

They always do.

They always will.

Their loss demands accountability and their memory calls us to action.

I'm going to stop reading because this always makes me a motion.

So I just want to thank you guys for this support for families who have lost children to violence.

I also would love to invite you to our on April 24th at 10 a.m.

We raise the children's memorial flag in front of RCD.

Please join us.

Thank you.

Thank you for being here and receiving this award.

We thank you for all that you do in this space.

Do we have any public speakers on this item?

No speakers.

Thank you.

We'll move to the next item.

We will come down and take a photo hangout for just a few more minutes.

The last item is Supervisor Tam and Supervisor Fortunato Bass combining to proclaim April 20 to 26th as sexually exploited minor awareness week.

Thank you.

President Halbert.

So Sexually Exploited Minors' Awareness Week is dedicated to increasing public understanding of the risks, the signs, and consequences of child exploitation.

By educating individuals, families, and communities, this initiative aims to prevent abuse, support survivors, and promote stronger systems of protection for minors.

According to the International Labor Organization, it is estimated that there are 40.3 million victims of human trafficking globally.

81% are trapped in forced labor, 25% are children, 75% are women and girls.

In 2024, the California Hotline received 3,378 signals from victims or survivors as reported by the National Human Trafficking Hotline.

In Alamee County, we are proud of the work of our community-based organizations that demonstrates its commitment to sexually exploited children since the SEM or sexually exploited minors network was established in 2004.

The STEM network aim to address the issues of child sexual exploitation through interagency children's policy council with the support of the county's courts, probation, district attorney, health and social services agency, and the city of Oakland, its police department, and community providers, resulting in many new initiatives having been developed.

We honor and respect the work of nonprofit organizations, advocacy groups, and system partners, including the Shave Movement Family Violence Law Center, the Children's Hospital Oakland, One Love Health Center, Tribe, and Ebasee, who continues to play a critical role in supporting survivors.

As we proclaim sexually exploited minors' awareness week, April 20th through the 26th, is a time to bring this issue into the light of public understanding.

It is a moment to recognize the resilience of survivors, the work of advocates and service providers, and to recommit ourselves to prevention, protection, and justice.

And Supervisor Fortunato Bass.

Thank you, Supervisor Tam.

It's an honor to co-sponsor this annual proclamation with you.

And I want to especially appreciate the community organizations that were mentioned as well as those that are survivor-led.

This issue is about injustice, and it's important for us to reaffirm our commitment to combating human trafficking and child sexual exploitation with the urgency and compassion that the issue deserves.

I'm proud that we've been able to use Measure W funding to help support a project that is in uh downtown that is helping to support survivors of domestic violence as well as swimming trafficking, and it is that access to housing security, to food security, to job training that will help combat this issue along with the collaboration with community groups with law enforcement and with our broader community.

So I hope that we can continue to protect our most vulnerable to strive towards justice and to end the exploitation of young people in our community and beyond.

Thank you again to everyone who does this important work.

Thank you.

So we have um from Shade Staff, Saray Smith Mariaco, Maria Ghost, excuse me, speaking along with Jocelyn Gomez from the Immigration Institute of the Bay Area, and Layla Bachrock from the Children's Hospital, Oakland, Mary Ann Abbott from the Family Violence Law Center, and Sarah Sharene Christ Christ from City of Oakland Department of Violence Prevention.

Thank you.

Wonderful.

Thank you guys.

Good afternoon.

Um I just want to say thank you to the Board of Supervisors for always supporting our efforts here in Alameda County, the city of Oakland, um, supporting our awareness week for the past 20 years.

Um we've done a lot of great work together, so thank you.

Um I just want to express a few things.

I think it's important for us to always acknowledge that sexual exploitation and sex trafficking is not just sexual abuse, not just rape.

It is serial rape.

And it's a racialized hate crime against black and brown bodies.

We're constantly talking about we need to address the root cause.

So I'm gonna ask the county and the city of Oakland to start addressing and perviding, preventing the exploitation of boys and young men by identifying the methods used to target them to sell bodies to become pimps.

We need to understand what grooming looks like for this, and what actions are necessary to shift the focus to boys and young men to disrupt the demand for trafficking without relying solely on criminalization.

We need to focus on prevention, not just intervention.

That is the root cause we need to start addressing.

Why do we have boys being groomed to sell women and girls on the streets of Oakland here in this in the county of Alameda?

We have to start focusing on the boys.

That is how we handle this issue of trafficking and exploitation in our streets.

So I'm also going to ask you guys to support our project, stop the pimp, stop the prostituting of innocent minors, the making of a pimp.

This is a survivor-led initiative through our organization.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

My name is Angela, and I am a part of Shade.

So I just have a little things to say.

I want to start with a question that I sit with every day.

If we all know this is happening, why does it still happen?

Right?

Every year we say this is the year we're going to address it.

And every year I continue to meet young people who are being exploited, who are being hurt, and who are slipping through the cracks.

And I need to be clear, these are kids, these are our kids, these are kids we are talking about today.

They are not statistics, they are not cases, they are not data points for nonprofit findings.

They are children.

They are children who have experienced exploitation violence, sex trafficking, and coercion.

Many of them have been failed by the very systems that's supposed to protect them.

And what I see over and over again are gaps, support that ends too soon, expectations that don't make their trauma, systems that label them instead of understanding them.

So I ask again, if we know why is this still happening?

Because awareness is not enough.

It's not enough.

We need real substantial investment in long-term housing, trauma-informed care, services that meet them where they are, not without judgment and without conditions because every year we say this will stop, and yet again, here we are.

These are kids, again, these are our children.

They deserve more than promises.

They deserve action.

So what we do after today will show whether they are truly seen as children or just another topic we continue to discuss.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

Um my name is Maribel, and I'm an advocate with Shade Movement.

I want to begin by recognizing families who are doing everything they can while earning minimum wage.

For many parents, life isn't just busy, it's a constant balancing act.

Long hours, tight budgets, and the stress of making ends meet, leave little room for anything extra.

There's often no money for child care after school programs or safe activities.

So children are left to occupy themselves.

A phone, a game, or simply time alone, because the solution that's the solution.

It's not neglect, it's survival.

But these moments can create vulnerability.

When children are left to navigate spaces, especially online on their own, they can become easy targets.

Predators don't appear dangerous.

They build trust slowly, starting with simple conversations, turning attention into manipulation.

Child exploitation often doesn't begin with something obvious.

It begins quietly with connection and then becomes control.

That's why awareness matters.

We don't need perfect parents, but we do need present where possible.

Asking questions, staying involved, and creating a space where children feel safe to speak up can make all the difference.

It belongs to all of us, educators, advocates, and communities where the support when we support families, we reduce isolation, and that helps protect children.

Because in a world where predators look for vulnerability, the strongest protection we can offer is connection.

Thank you.

I'd like to thank you for being here.

Oh, one more speaker.

Come on up.

Okay.

Good afternoon.

My name is Samson Mile.

I'm the CEO of OneLove Center for Health, and I stand for Health Equity for myself and others.

And um, I thank you today for an opportunity to be here.

I want to recognize Saray and the team behind State, Freed Collective, and Missy.

The work that they are doing is critical and is making a real difference in people's lives.

I also want to honor the work of Nika St.

Clair, who was the director of Dreamcatchers at the time of her passing.

At One Love Center for Health, we see every day how health is shaped by what people are going through.

When someone is dealing with trauma, their health is directly affected.

This is why community-based work matters so much.

They are building trusts, creating access, and supporting people when they need it most.

We do that because it's efficient.

But uh before that, ask any public comment.

No speakers.

Then seeing none, we'll close public comment and come down and take a couple photos.

The first we'll do is national no foster care month.

I'm coming.

Okay, round of applause for Jeff.

Thanks, Jeff.

Oh, she brought her own camera.

Is that a live lens camera?

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you for the window.

Sexually explicitly minor way.

She come on up.

Thank you so much, guys.

Does the DA want to get in this photo too?

I know you care about I know you care.

Don't make me cry again.

That's what we're doing.

Okay.

Just try it on out.

You can go hang us uh on while in your office or whatever you want to do with it.

Thank you so much.

We're gonna take a five minute recess.

Recording in progress.

I'd like to call our meeting back to order.

Ask the clerk to please call roll to establish quorum.

Supervisor Marcus.

Supervisor Tam.

Present.

Supervisor Miley.

Supervisor Fortnado Bass.

Present.

President Howard.

Present.

We have a quorum.

Thank you very much.

We're now we're ready to take up our mass motion.

Actually, the next item would be minutes approval, I think, or approval of minutes from approval of minutes from Tuesday, April 7th.

Mr.

President, I will move approval of the minutes from April 7th.

Second.

It's been moved by Supervisor Tam, seconded by Supervisor Miley.

Roll call vote, please.

Supervisor Marcus.

Aye.

Supervisor Tam.

Aye.

Supervisor Miley.

Aye.

Supervisor Fortunato Pass.

Aye.

President Halbert.

Aye.

The next item is the consent calendar.

Is there a motion to approve the consent calendar?

I'd like to move consent, but I'd like to speak to item fifty-nine.

Very good.

We'll speak to it and take up the motion together.

Sure.

Okay.

Is that a motion?

Is there a second?

Oh second.

Motion's been made to approve the consent calendar second by Supervisor Miley.

Seconded by Supervisor Tam with a request to comment on item fifty-nine.

Supervisor Miley.

Sure, I have a few comments.

Supervisor Miley, could you hold, please?

It seems as though somebody may be having a medical emergency.

We're going to take a five-minute recess, everyone.

Apologies.

We're going to reconvene to open session.

I'll ask the clerk to call the role to establish quorum.

Supervisor Marquez.

Present.

Supervisor Tam.

Present.

Supervisor Miley.

Supervisor Fortunato Bass.

President Haubert.

Present.

We have a quorum.

Thank you.

We had a brief interruption.

Member of the public.

I understand had a seizure but is doing well.

We're going to proceed with our meeting.

She's elected to stay.

Thank you and welcome for being here.

I'd like to thank our emergency responders and our sheriff's department for being on the ball and Supervisor Marquez for the eagle eye that spotted the person in the community, the medical emergency.

Thank you so much.

And Supervisor Fortunato Bass, your staff for helping with water and uh compassion and Supervisor Miley staff.

Thank you.

With that said, we uh have had a motion made by Supervisor TAM seconded by Supervisor Miley to approve our consent calendar with discussion on item 59.

Supervisor Miley.

Uh yeah, thank you, President Howard.

So a couple of questions before I make my comments.

So item 59 deals with Senate Bill 1193.

And I just wanted to check with County Council.

Um, from your understanding of this legislation, would it have uh uh an impact or potential effect on uh on item 14 on today's agenda so supervisor item 14 is a um grant of money from uh the enhancing vision 2036 fund of District 4 to the Oakland Fund for Public Innovation.

It's my understanding that uh the Oakland Fund is a 501c3 uh nonprofit entity based on the uh recent amendment of SBE 1193 that occurred on April 16th, the definition of discretionary funds is is very broad.

It's broader than initially uh as the bill was initially introduced, such that it applies to funds that the board or a member of the board appropriates to community organizations, nonprofit organizations, and private entities.

So uh absent uh uh a um an appropriation of funds to a essentially a governmental entity, almost all of these types of of transactions would be covered by uh SB 1193 if it is adopted.

So, in short, yes, okay, would be covered.

Yeah, I wanted to get county counsel to at least give us um her opinion on Levin uh SB 1193, because this is a real good example here on item 14.

If the board approves it, you know, I'm my staff has been working on this for maybe six months, six months.

The request came to me maybe I don't know, eight months ago to help provide resources so that it could be looked into and explored whether or not a historical black college university campus could be located in Oakland under this SB 1193, it would apply to this.

Umerous because like I said, we've been working on this for a good six months, probably eight months.

Um, and to have SB 1193 apply to this would be very disturbing.

And this is just one example.

I also wanted to point out another example, a real life example for today's agenda.

And once again, I support I'm supporting item 14 when we get to it, and I'll be supporting item 17 when we get to it.

But item 17, you know, the request from a supervisor that we provide funding for the Hayward Area Forum, which deals with uh accessible visual and performing arts exhibits, the best men conference, which supports the 26 2026 Juneteenth event, friends of Chabot College, which supports academic scholarships for low-income students, abode which supports and benefits low-income families, pace event, which supports seniors, assist uh seniors with medical needs, VESCO, which deals with homeless families, African American Advisory of New Haven, which deals with Black History Month, uh graduation and celebration, the League of Volunteers, which deals with low income families, the Committee for Restoration of Mission San Jose, which deals with the exterior rent of um restoration of Mission San Jose to support that ability to.

2026 Juneteent event, Friends of Chabot College, which supports academic scholarships for low-income students, abode, which supports and benefits low-income families, PACE event, which supports seniors, assist uh seniors with medical needs, VESCO, which deals with homeless families, African American Advisory of New Haven, which deals with Black History Month graduation and celebration, the League of Volunteers, which deals with low-income families, the Committee for Restoration of Mission San Jose, which deals with the exterior restoration of Mission San Jose to support that ability to uh uh now Bay area which deals with serving individuals with disabilities, their families and support networks.

So I I pull these two out, 14 and 17, because these are real examples today.

1180 1193 would affect these as examples.

I'm gonna ask the county administrator from the grand jury's uh recommendations a number of years ago, the board took actions to address and try to tighten up how we would approach our discretionary funds.

Can you just um kind of um speak to uh the actions that the board took?

Uh yes, Supervisor Miley, members of the board.

Um your board augmented your process with regard to allocation of discretionary funds.

Um the auditor uh created and established a form that accompany accompanies each of the board letters with your board's allocation of discretionary funds.

Um it's consistent with the auditor's manual of accounting policies uh and procedures, and as you know, um each of the uh board letters that your board submits are placed on the public agenda on the regular uh calendar and require a four-fifth vote in order to allocate the funding.

And there is an ongoing reporting requirement for recipients of the funds as well.

Okay, thank you.

So I'm very very disturbed about the senator seeking legislation to um control how the Alameda County Board of Supervisors uses discretionary funds.

We have four hundred we have over 400 contracts.

The county has with CBOs, and we contract with more than 300 CBOs.

Many of the discretionary contracts or discretionary resources that we use go to some of these CBOs, but a lot of it goes to other entities, CBOs, school districts, other um entities that are not CBOs but are small, that don't have the ability to apply for uh major contracts, and it supports them, and the list on item 17 is a good example, and then item um 14 is another example.

I feel it's unfair that the similar let's keep calling this up, the senator is targeting Alameda County.

There I've asked my staff, and I know I've talked to other supervisors, if and if anybody could give me a rational basis for this legislation, and nobody could.

We've talked to our lobbyists as well to see if we can get a rational basis for this legislation.

We haven't gotten that.

Once again, emphasis on think that there's enough issues for the senator to take on in Sacramento that the senator wouldn't have to be meddling in Alameda County's business.

If the senator thinks this is good public policy, good legislation, serves the public interest, then don't just legislate for Alameda County, legislate for all 58 counties, impose it on all 58 counties.

I'll emphasize that again.

Impose it on all 58 counties, and I hope the legislative delegation for Alameda County, the senators, and the assembly people in Sacramento hear my voice, because there is no rational basis for this legislation to be imposed on Alameda County.

Because once again, this I don't think the state has the authority to come in and impose its will on one county at its own individual discretion without a court order, without justification.

If they're doing it with all 58 counties, that's something different.

So I wholeheartedly oppose this legislation, and it angers me.

Enough said.

Thank you, Supervisor Miley.

I'll go to Supervisor Marquez.

Thank you, board president.

I also would like to state my strong opposition to uh State Bill 1193.

Um, as Supervisor Miley pointed out, item number 17 is my board letter.

There are several items on here.

You could see the variety and the type of grants that are administered to our community.

Our nonprofit providers are struggling.

We're dealing with hits from HR1, Proposition One, and our district grants are designed to meet some of the unmet needs in the community.

If you look at my board letter, the uh least amount is $500, and the most, the highest amount is $1,000.

So this is clearly dollars that our community, our most vulnerable residents rely on, and this is not providing um staffing.

This is just support to elevate the work that's being done on behalf of constituents in our district.

So I also find it very disturbing and a poor use of time and energy to um write this bill.

So I concur with the comments made and will not be uh supporting this legislation.

So also want to register my strong opposition.

Thank you.

Thank you, Supervisor Marques.

Supervisor Fortunato Bass.

Thank you.

Um I want to start by saying I do support transparency in our government and with discretionary spending.

Um I've only had access to discretionary funds in my office since uh the beginning of this fiscal year as we uh approved our budget and more funds became available, both um in terms of EV 2036 as well as prior year savings from uh my first few months in office.

And I know that these grants are very meaningful to the community.

You know, without um a lot of um uh without an RFP, for example, in the short time I've been here, I've received a hundred over a hundred requests for over four million dollars.

And my office um is committed to having more transparency.

In fact, um I am going to be working with my team to ensure that we are uh transparent in terms of um who we're making grants to and what the process is, what the timing is that will take time because it's also a lot of work.

Um so I just want to start by saying I do support the effort around transparency.

Um that said, um I think it's important to recognize the processes and systems we do have.

We certainly have those systems for EV 2036 grants as well as for uh the very limited amount of measure A uh grants that we make.

Um prior year savings, as you heard regarding the item that's on today's agenda, are very, very small.

I mean, some of these grants are for organizations where it would be incredibly onerous for them to have to wait a long time, to have to go through reporting process.

So I think uh in terms of this legislation, certainly discretionary would have to be defined.

Uh there should be uh, if it does move forward, a carve-out for small grants so that there isn't any owner uh any difficulty on smaller nonprofits, and um, I do think that it would only be fair that this would apply to the entire state and all 58 counties.

So um I do not support the uh legislation in its current form, and um there would have to be amendments in order for me to support it, including having it apply to all 58 counties as well as further defining discretionary grants and ensuring that our small, small nonprofit organizations who rely on the smaller grants are not adversely impacted.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Um I think we all support transparency, and so well said, uh, Supervisor Fortunato Bass, I would like to echo comments of my colleagues and add uh to them.

We rely on our county network of nonprofit organizations, and I'll say that we as a county agency can't do all that we need to do by ourselves.

That's why we rely on trusted partners.

I don't think any county can do all that we need to do by ourselves.

We have unfunded mandate upon unfunded mandate from Sacramento, and I think that this bill, as was pointed out, simply misses the point, doesn't understand how local government works, how county government works, and this all could have been avoided, I think, with some communication from the Senator's office on how to accomplish the goal of transparency, for example, but that didn't happen.

I also want to echo the comment this bill simply pours salt in the wounds that are created by Trump's HR 1.

We know that budgets are tight and being cut and slashed, and this bill simply pours salt in those wounds.

I also am concerned because the needs of our community come at us daily.

Three months before a November election, three months before a June primary, as if nonprofit organizations don't need help during those times.

They certainly shouldn't be held to a supervisor who's on the ballot.

In this case, only one in our county, that Supervisor Marquez is the only supervisor on the ballot this year, and to hold her constituents hostage during an election time frame is repugnant.

I think that while transparency is a virtue that we all seek, and I'm just going to say Supervisor Miley mentioned a lot of great nonprofits.

Uh I'll just mention a few that I've supported with discretionary funding.

Tri-Valley Haven, a shelter for battered women and teenagers, hears breast cancer, tri-city volunteers, school of imagination, and many, many, many others.

I believe this is mean-spirited and vindictive.

It's a weaponization of our legislative power, and I oppose SB 1193.

I thank my colleague, Supervisor Miley, for bringing this forth.

And with that said, I'll close our comments and ask for a roll call vote of our consent item.

Supervisor Marquez, aye.

Supervisor Tam.

Aye.

Supervisor Miley.

Aye.

President Haubert.

I vote yes.

We're now ready for the mass motion.

Thank you, President Halbert.

I will move items two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, thirteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, nineteen, twenty, twenty one, twenty-three, twenty-four, twenty five.

Twenty seven, twenty eight, twenty-nine, thirty, thirty-one, thirty-two, thirty-three, thirty-four, thirty-five, thirty-six.

Questions on the 37, 38, 39, 40.

Question on 39.

41, 42, 44, 45, 46, 48, and 49.

Just to confirm, did I hear item 40 and 41 both in the mass motion?

Yes, they are in the mass motion.

Um, I will defer to the county administrator to point out the ones that were pulled.

Um items that were um earlier announced as being pulled off of today's agenda.

Items 12 and 47 are being pulled and will be brought back at a future date.

Item 14 is not included in the motion, and the other items that were not included are all ordinances.

Thank you very much.

And I a motion has been made by Supervisor Tam.

Was there a second?

Second.

Second by Supervisor Miley, roll call vote, please.

Supervisor.

Oh, wait, I'm sorry, we have questions, and that's first item up for questions is Supervisor Nate Miley with questions on item 25.

Uh, yes.

If um I think this is from G uh General Services.

So you know, typically contracts that are out of county, you know, I I give I flag them anyway.

But I wanted to mention that uh these two contracts to Ashbrite and to DRC specific are for uh disaster repairness, and these are necessary contracts.

That's correct.

This is Kimberly Gasway, GSA director.

Um these contracts were competitively bid, and these two companies um they historically provide emergency disaster response to put uh proclaimed disaster, so it's as needed.

Yes, and uh so I'm not questioning the contracts, because I do think it's important that we have these contracts because you know we we don't know when a disaster is gonna occur.

Um it's not a question of if it's a question of when.

And it could be any type of disaster, uh, man-made or natural.

Um it could be even a uh kind of a terrorist attack, it could be uh a school shooting, it could be um a tsunami, uh could be an earthquake, could be a fire storm.

Um so and as pointed out in the board letter, FEMA encourages jurisdictions throughout the United States to have contingency contracts in place to ensure rapid and effective response to catastrophe, excuse me, to catastric disasters.

So these contractors come in when there's a mass disaster to set up mass um operational sites, shelters, right?

So it's not our regular disasters we're able to respond to.

Yeah, and it says both firms have international experience in rapidly deploying critical response and recovery assets to manage debris management, mass care, sheltering, and general support services following the catastrophic disaster.

So I just wanted to, you know, I never miss an opportunity to punctuate the need for disaster repairedness, and even though these contracts are out of state, they're vitally needed, and as you said, they don't come into play until we need them, but it's we need to have them under contract because we don't know when it's just a matter of I mean we don't know if it's just a matter of when.

Okay.

Thank you.

GSA for being on be on top of things.

Thank you.

Questions asked and answered.

Very well.

The next item is item 36.

Questions from Supervisor Marquez, questions, comments.

Yes, thank you.

Uh President Howard.

I just wanted to get clarification on item um number 36.

I'm not sure if the sheriff would be responding to this or someone from her team, but I wanted to get clarity on how Peregrine works and interacts with data from the license plate readers.

I don't think okay, there we go.

Um it does not integrate with our ALPR system right now.

Um, I know that there's been discussion, there's no agreement, so there's nothing that works um in that fashion.

What Peregrine does is it takes data that we already have and it puts us puts it into an arena where it's kind of like a dashboard for us to reference, easily reference.

So it takes our own data, does some analytics and allows us to look at you know our information and maybe maybe take a look at it as far as how we deploy resources in it in a more efficient way.

So it's not nothing that integrates with a ALPR right now.

Okay.

I've also heard comments from some members of the public that this is part of um kind of facial recognition system.

It is that accurate or in your experience.

No, so it does not have facial recognition.

Um they're not a facial recognition company.

I know that there's another company out there that has a similar name that does facial recognition, but we do not partner with that entity.

This is a totally different entity.

This is strictly data analytics.

Thank you for the clarification.

Supervisor Tam, same comment or same uh item questions.

Um thank you, President Halbert.

And I think uh the sheriff answered the question.

Uh one of the comments I think may have confused Peregrine Technologies with Peregrine Securities, which um is a completely different company, and the contract that the sheriff has is with Peregrine Technologies.

Correct.

Very good.

Thank you.

Uh the next item is Supervisor Miley question or comment on item 39.

That's Nikki, I'm sorry.

Yes.

Yes, so item uh 39.

That is the contract with Aramark for food at Santa Rita jail.

Um, I am just curious whether uh the sheriff you or your team or maybe social services know whether there is um a collaboration between Eramark and Stop Waste, for example, regarding food recovery.

You know, there's a huge food crisis in our community, and if there's any way that that very large contract could be uh done in collaboration to ensure no food goes to waste, that would be a huge benefit to our community.

You know, I do remember that we did have a component of some sort of food recovery with Airmark, and I don't remember remember who the entity was that was doing the recovery.

I don't know if it's still in play, but it's definitely something that I can look into.

Thank you.

Question uh Yes, that would be terrific if you could look into that uh to make sure no food goes to waste.

There's a lot of people in need and a lot of organizations who are sort of recapturing any food before it goes bad to deliver to people in need.

Thank you, Supervisor Marquez.

Thank you, President Habert.

Thank you, Supervisor Prateno Bass for flagging that.

Since we're on the topic of Airmark, Sheriff, if you would please share with the public um some of the good updates we got from our presentation at public protection back in November with respect to the training that's being done with um individuals in our care at Santa Rita jail.

Yeah, so part of our partnership with Airmark is that they provide um vocational training to individuals who are going into either the culinary work or food service work when they get released.

They offer certification programs, which includes it's called into work.

Um they certify them in food service, uh, food safety, but also they have um they've escalated it to where you can get a uh supervisors type of certificate and be able to operate maybe if in you engage in some sort of uh restaurant on your own, entrepreneur, um, where it gives you some management skills as well.

So it's a great program.

Uh we have a number of people who graduate from it.

Uh we generally have um I'm gonna say about six classes a year, uh, and we generally have between six and twelve people who take advantage and graduate from the program.

Uh thank you.

I think it that dovetails with the other unrelated, but you do a lot of work with the building trades to help people get jobs.

This is a perfect uh example of uh another job to go get in the food service business.

So um we've uh asked and answered all of our questions.

We do have a motion on the table.

I was reminded that earlier today we had extensive public comment on the agenda items, but I also said that I would make room for people who would like to speak on the agenda item.

So now I would like to just ask if anybody in the room or online would like to make uh uh comments on any item on the agenda, not the one o'clock or three o'clock set matters, but the mass motion items that are before us right now, because I did make that announcement earlier.

So if you're here for three o'clock, raise lower your hand if you're online.

But if you are online and wish to make a comment on the mass motion, raise your hand.

Do we have any speakers?

We have speakers.

The first five in-person speakers are Manny speaking on item 36, Greg on item 36, Marcus on item 36, Valerie on item 36, and Sandra on item 44.

All right.

Thank you very much.

My name is Manny.

So Peregrine Technologies, a based NSF, I do not have them confused, is a company which combines all of your policing data into one searchable platform, millions of data points aggregated into one platform which prides itself for being a leader in predictive policing.

It markets itself as a superpowered Google for police.

Predictive policing is simply a method of automating the already existing disparities faced by constantly over-policed communities.

The only way to lower crime is to fund community programs that treat the root causes of crime, not by continuing to increase an already inflated police budget.

In Santa Cruz, predictive policing and and companies that provide predictive policing were banned in 2020 because they, along with other cities, saw the danger which this technology would have on impacted communities of color.

Peregrine is currently working with the National Fusion Center Association in an attempt to be implemented nationwide in fusion centers.

Through these fusion centers, federal immigration authorities would have access to our local data in violation of state and local law.

Peregrine is also used by other counties such as Lee County to modernize immigration enforcement.

Peregrine CEO is a former Palantir executive, and under him, Palantir entered several contracts with federal immigration enforcement entities.

Peregrine is also capable of running facial recognition on its platform, despite what the sheriff might be telling you.

Flock footage can be migrated into peregrine as a way to skirt around the data retention policies as well as to skirt around contract language stating that flock will not run facial recognition.

And we have seen this happen in other states.

Knowing how dangerous this system is, I urge you to vote against the implementation of Peregrine.

Thank you.

Sir come on up.

Good afternoon, uh supervisors.

My name is Greg.

I'm the uh chief steward of Ace Oakland.

I'm a disorder of uh district four.

And flock impairment does not make us safer in these mistakes.

More dangerous in March of two uh 2026, a sixty-two-year-old woman in Oakland was pulled over at gunpoint because a flock camera misidentified her license plates.

That's not safety, that's isolation.

The woman also the ad on that had problems with other city districts because her place was stolen and flock picked it up.

So she was getting phone calls from other uh police departments on this on this same issues.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Greg Slaughter on 36, Marcus on 36, Valerie on 36, and Sandra on 44.

If all the speakers could come up and line up one next to another, we're gonna go speaker after speaker after speaker.

Or else if they're not here, we'll just move on to the next speaker.

If your name's called and you're not here, I'm sure come back up because I was just speaking just to be slaughtered.

I I think was the time elapsed or not.

How much time did he have left?

Okay, another minute.

Okay, one more minute.

All right, sorry, we have a top clock.

Okay, all right.

Um there's a uh um let's see.

Let's see which one we this contract is flocked worldwide right to war white rights to our data, including sending overseas to train AI systems that raises serious privacy and legal concerns for every residence in this county.

My answer to this is please vote no on flock.

Yes, sir.

Thank you.

Next speaker on item 44.

Maria on item 44 Salazar on 44.

Andrea on item 44.

Come on up.

Next speaker, please.

Thank you.

We need to put our translation app.

So I believe or we have we have an interpreters.

Can an interpreter come up, please?

It is not.

55 is not that matter.

Okay.

Can we ask the interpreter which item is she speaking on?

44.

That's a public works item.

And a public works.

It's helpful if we hear either we have the text on the screen to read, or that the interpreter would tell us a little bit at a time.

Interpreter would like to read off of her notes after she has read it out in Spanish.

When she's finished, then are you the interpreter?

Yes.

Then you will do the entire thing.

Yes.

Okay.

Not back and forth.

Supervisor, if we're if she's not speaking on if she's speaking on the flock item, that's the three o'clock.

So I don't know what she's saying, so I don't know if she's speaking on can she say flock?

Yes.

Okay, flock is an item 44.

Yes.

So you want to be on 55.

Okay.

Okay.

Okay.

Yeah.

Thank you.

And for anybody that wants to speak on Flock, maybe you can ask your interpret that.

Maybe we could interpret that the interpreter could make an announcement, or maybe the handlers that are handling these speakers can speak to them in their language so that they can understand.

But present how we're gonna go to the next speaker.

President Howard, it was just explained.

So they people wrote 44 because of the item was continued at 44.

So they're confused.

They don't realize that it's actually 55.

Is that general?

They're writing item 44 because of what?

Because it said it was continued from the previous meeting at 44.

The previous set matter at three.

So can the interpreter.

If the interpreter can come back and then you can see that.

Ma'am, if you could explain that it's really item 55.

That is a set matter at three o'clock, it'll probably be heard after three o'clock.

But but it was just a confusion with the agenda.

We understand the confusion.

That's nobody's fault, but to let them know.

And I don't speak Spanish, so do you want me to announce that?

Announce that in Spanish, yes.

Yes.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

I so wish I took Spanish in high school.

But I did not.

I still can.

Thank you.

I should do that.

With that said, if we could ask the next speakers to line up that we've called, and maybe you can confirm if they're in the right spot.

Call the next speakers.

Ramesh for item 36.

And Rafael for 36 messages to that effect.

Yes.

Thank you.

My name is Valerie Bachelor, and I'm the director of Ace Oakland.

I'm here to urge the county to reject the $700,000 extension to Peregrine Technologies, as it is a platform that integrates not only license plate reader data, but it also is um taking pictures of our faces.

Peregrine is effectively a Palantir spin-off.

Palantir is a terrible company that unfortunately is in cooperation with ICE enforcement, and their tactics have we have seen them cost people not only their livelihoods but their lives.

And of course, our black and brown communities are going to be seeing the most over policing.

We've seen that happen in places like Durham, and we do not want those types of technologies to be used in our communities.

So again, we urge you to spend this money wisely, like you have been on supporting immigrant communities, on supporting our young people, on supporting folks in our communities and not on palantir type technologies that are extracting from our communities versus fully supporting our communities.

There's also a lack of transparency when it comes to uh these types of technologies, and we urge you to think about what this is going to mean if there is an invasion, such as what's happening in Minnesota and when we have to, we will have to at some point provide this technology and provide this data to the federal government.

I urge you to vote no on contracts like this.

Thank you.

Thank you, next speaker.

Hello, my name is Dr.

Rome Strindron.

I hold a PhD in computer science from MIT.

I'm a 10-year, 11-year resident of Oakland, and I teach at UC Berkeley, where I've been teaching for about uh seven years now.

Um, one of the things I teach my students is on the uses and value of data and when it is and isn't appropriate to collect it.

I also work in uh applying machine learning AI analytics to an industry in the real world where I have built dashboards like this for much more benign applications, but what we consistently see is a pattern of any time you aggregate data in a central place, there's always a desire for more data.

There is always a desire to use that data for purposes beyond what it was originally designated for.

The idea of building a platform where law enforcement, both local and federal, can surveil our every move and everything we do in our communities is antithetical to what Oakland and uh Alameda County residents want.

This is not something we should be doing.

We should not be building surveillance platforms that aggregate this kind of data.

Uh, if I were in charge of uh a project with my students evaluating something like this, I would tell them do not build this.

This will be used for nefarious ends.

We've seen other Palantir technologies be used by the administration in awful ways, and this kind of data does not have any benign uses.

We absolutely should not be spending enormous sums of money on increasing surveillance in an era where we see an authoritarian regime trying to use that data against our communities.

Please, I urge you not to vote for this contract.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

My name is Rifeloy.

I'm here to uplift what a number of my community members have already said about the data vulnerabilities that come with peregrine, um, the legal contradictions and the threats of public safety.

I want to say no to peregrine.

The board of supervisors, you all earlier you spoke to the threat of 1193 SB 1193, the importance of uplifting our vulnerable community members and investing in them.

Um, and I don't see why, with that logic, you are not vehemently also saying no to this technology, which will only make us more vulnerable.

We saw with the threats of federal escalation and the kidnappings that happened in our community, that the county was not prepared to protect community members in the proactive ways that we called for protection.

We these we did see investment and support.

And so if we're not yet in a place where we understand how to protect our most vulnerable community members in a county where people are still struggling to meet their basic needs, then we ask that the least that this board can do is not add to the harms that we have to struggle against every day, not add to the vulnerability against the federal government that you are not yet equipped to support us and protect us against.

So please listen to the legal contradictions, the data vulnerabilities and the threats to public safety.

There are many data-driven public safety initiatives born from our county, from our cities here, that the nation uplifts and champions.

And so I call for us to champion those data-driven public safety mechanisms that don't call for additional surveillance technologies like peregrine and other contracts.

Thank you.

Olivia, you have two minutes.

Please state the item you're speaking on.

This is for all items on the agenda except the three o'clock set matter item 55.

Hi, everyone.

Um, my name is Olivia, and I'm speaking on item number 36.

Um, I'm an Alameda County resident, and I'm representing Bay Area Jews for Justice.

I've also led youth programs in this county my whole adult life.

And I'm here to urge the council to vote against extending the contract with peregrine technologies.

Peregrine is an AI mass surveillance company that involves predictive policing, which means using algorithms to determine where crime will take place and who will commit crimes before these crimes even happen.

Predictive policing leads to racial profiling, and I'm particularly fearful for the black and brown youth that I work with and their families who will fall victim to these systems.

I'm also concerned for the immigrants in my own family, even those who have been citizens in this country for decades, but because of how they look, could be targeted by the Peregrine system as we are seeing them being targeted by our federal administration.

We should not be relying on algorithms to lead public safety in this county.

Artificial intelligence cannot be the tool we use to keep us safe.

Mass surveillance does not reduce crime.

What does reduce crime is better services for mental health, funding for youth programs in low-income communities, better street lighting, and general provide and generally providing people with the services they need to live healthy, thriving lives.

I recommend the funding from this contract to be redistributed to services that actually keep us safe.

Please vote no on extending this contract.

Thank you.

And how many speaker slips on this item do we have for this item for items on the agenda?

There are four raised hands online.

And three in person.

We're gonna close the uh speaker slip solicitation, and those speakers will be able to speak.

Thank you.

Elise, you have two minutes.

Please state the item that you're speaking on.

Item 36, the Peregrine uh contract.

Go ahead, um, yes.

Uh the Palantir CEO has bragged.

Uh my name is Elise, I'm an Alameda County resident.

Uh Palantir CEO has bragged about using the data they collect on a mercenary basis to harm and even kill desired targets based on whoever pays them the most.

You say you want to use this to make our communities safer to lower crime, but their algorithms are arbitrary and biased, and you do not have control over this technology.

They only do your bidding as long as you can increase their contract.

They will turn on you as soon as someone offers more.

This does not protect our communities.

This is putting many people at risk.

You do not have the control that you think you do over this tech, and I want you to vote no on expanding Peregrine.

In fact, I'd prefer to be canceled the contract.

Thank you.

Mary, you have two minutes.

Please state the item you're speaking on.

Go ahead.

Hi, my name is Mari, and I'm speaking on item 36.

I'm an Alameda County resident and have been for all of my adult life.

I have seen the many changes over the course of the last 15 years in this county, and the addition of surveillance has been one of the most disappointing that I have seen.

Alameda County has always been a beacon of hope and freedom of speech, of assembly, and these contracts with companies like Peregrine Technologies, threaten that.

I believe in everything that the previous speakers have said.

I want to second all of it.

We should absolutely not be entertaining these companies in our county.

Please vote now.

Lindsay, you have two minutes.

Please state the item that you're speaking on.

Please unmute your phone.

Can you hear me?

Yes, go ahead, please.

Thank you.

Hello, good afternoon.

My name is uh this is about item number 55, the flock camera systems.

We are not taking that yet.

This is for all other items on the agenda.

Ah, then this would be about 36, I believe.

The um peregrine.

Go ahead, please.

Are you taking the call?

Yes, go ahead, please.

I just I would just like to urge the county not to renew any contracts with Peregrine.

I agree with all the other speakers.

This could be used detrimentally in our county against our residents, and I do not support it.

Thank you very much.

Keen, this is for all items on the agenda other than item 55.

You have two minutes.

Go ahead, please.

Greetings, Alameda County Board of Supervisor.

I am uh calling in to urge you to reject uh the 700,000 dollar extension of Peregrine Tech uh as the county's uh integration platform.

Um besides just consolidating uh our res like our residential uh and our residents' personal info uh ranging from automated license plate readers to geospatial mapping.

Um all of this brings into a mass surveillance database that is almost like that is certainly vulnerable to uh numerous risks as well as just violating uh our basic constitutional protections under the fourth amendment.

Um in other cities like Mountain View, uh peregrine systems uh like this have been used to manipulate like are manipulated to share with unauthor unauthorized agencies like ICE um use it in a side door manner uh that makes it most vulnerable to hackers as well as accessible to uh immigration uh and customs and uh and customs and border patrol.

Um without clear accountability or transparency mechanism, does the data integration platform exposes our most sensitive info to the same uh security vulnerabilities that ALPRs face, which you're going to be discussing uh here with Flock later.

Uh, but on a greater scale with info beyond ALPRs.

It is what actually brings a lot of this together.

Um already told you Peregrine is effectively a palantier spinoff that brings military grade surveillance tactics and software into local uh police departments and municipalities, driven by an inner circle of billionaire investors and former Paluntier executives, uh including uh Palantir co-founder Peter Teel, um, who is uh also a venture capitalist that is currently funding the war, like you know, backing uh the Pentagon and its war with Run.

Um and it's backed by other uh Silicon Valley uh San Francisco billionaires like uh Gary Tan from Y Combinator, as well as venture capitalist Ilya Sukar, uh founder of Rubidalize East Bay, who settled who funds a lot of the AstroTurf activists, um, like East Bay Alliance of Public Safety.

So uh with that, I'm gonna urge you to vote no on uh any extension of up before the next speaker comes.

I'd like to just make an announcement that Supervisor Fortunato Bass would like to continue this item.

And um, as we do that, and we have a protocol that allows for that.

I'll ask our county administrator if you could remind me.

We can continue an item for up to two meetings.

Does that include regular meetings not work study sessions?

Okay, so if it's continued for two meetings, it would be for um the 28th of April is a work study session.

Well, it's actually a regular meeting and a work session, and your next regular meeting would be on May 12th.

Okay, so it would be continued to May 12th if that were the two items.

Then I asked the sheriff, um, are are there time implications of this item?

I know it pertains to a contract.

Uh notwithstanding that's the supervisor's prerogative.

So I think that she's in a conference, but uh the if this item is then pulled off the agenda, no other speakers need to speak.

It's not an item on the agenda anymore.

It will be continued to May 12th.

Sheriff, any comments.

Yeah, I I um I think that there's some misperception that there is, and and mind you, that's kind of our fault for the board letter saying that there's going to be this connection with our ALPR, but there is no connection at this point in time.

And this is a contract exception for Peregrine that we've used for a number of years.

So I would prefer that we not pull it.

But my question is what what am I bringing to the table before we hit May?

Like what information do you need from my office?

Um, I'll just state that I am hearing these public comments for the first time today.

I understand from my staff there was also a packet of information that just arrived today.

So I have not had time to listen to all of these stakeholder comments and to ask questions of your office.

Uh you got the questions that I shared, which were largely about the flock item.

Um the concerns about this.

I'm hearing for the first time today, so I don't feel equipped to vote on it today.

So is there any time sensitivity as there are with the other item?

No, very good.

It'll just continue to be continue till May 12th yeah.

With that continuous services, pardon.

We'll still continue on with services.

The contract will just be expired.

Very good.

Our item 36 is continued to May 12th.

39.

I'm sorry, 36.

36.

Item 36 is continued to May 12th, your regular calendar.

Are there any um members of the public wishing to comment on items other than that that is still on the today's agenda?

Seeing none speakers.

Seeing none, we're going to proceed with the mass motion vote.

And then we have some ordinances, is that correct?

And item 14.

So motions been made and seconded.

Roll call vote, please.

Supervisor Marquez.

Aye.

Supervisor Tam.

Aye.

Supervisor Miley.

Supervisor Fortunato Bass.

Aye.

President Hauber.

I vote yes.

With that, um County Administrator, do we have item 14 before us?

Or or ordinances.

Item 14.

Is the Supervisor Milley here to make a motion on item 14?

Yes, I'd like to move item 14, but I'd like to speak to it.

So I move it and then the floor.

Is there a second?

Second.

Okay.

Okay.

So the reason I pulled it, it's not because I'm opposed to this, because obviously I'm I'm the one that's submitting it.

But I just wanted to highlight this item.

Um this is to provide funding to look at establishing a historically black college university campus in Oakland.

And as I pointed out, if Senate Bill 1193 were to pass, County Council's already opined that it would affect items such as this.

And you know, the board letter points out the Oakland Fund for Public Innovation.

Its mission is to improve prosperity, safety, and quality of life for Oakland residents by establishing innovative public private partnerships in the city's most vulnerable communities by working with working directly with community leaders and partnering with local government.

The Oakland Fund for Public Innovation is able to test quick cycles of innovation and try creative ideas to identify and pioneer new strategies to create positive change.

And the fund has done a lot over the years.

Now this particular request today to the Oakland Fund for Public Innovation is for 200,000 of the resources that I'm putting forward to the fund under standard service agreement, so that the money could be allowed to convene three steering committee meetings, conduct 50 stakeholder interviews with key leaders, develop three academic STEM program design, and produce a final feasibility study.

This would create an actionable implementation roadmap to establish a historical historically black college university satellite campus in Oakland that would benefit prospective HBCU partners, Bay Area industry leaders, and innovative sectors, Oakland municipal and community stakeholders and children and youth uh seeking access to STEM higher education pathways.

I was approached about this as I mentioned earlier when I was talking about 1193, City Bill 1193.

At least it was back in the fall of 2025.

And this is just getting to us now because it's taken that long to have all the necessary processes.

And the funds that uh hopefully the board will approve the at my request of resources that I have in my office would be used for the study.

Uh this is just part of the funds that they need for the study, the 200,000.

I know they're raising additional monies or have raised additional monies.

My hope was that the campus would be located on the site of the former Holy Names campus that is in the um the Oakland Hills uh near Montclair.

But I think that's now going to be developed into uh housing.

So there's still a good possibility that it would be located in downtown Oakland, uh the campus.

So this would be a major, major coup for the city of Oakland and all of us residents in Oakland.

Um residents of Oakland.

Yes, all of us residents in Oakland.

So and then it would benefit the county as well to have a historically backed college university in Oakland in Alameda County.

So I wanted to speak to this because I feel very proud about this item.

Even though I didn't graduate from historical back college and university, I graduated from the Franklin Marshall in Pennsylvania and then University of Meryland Law School in Maryland.

Um but I still support historically backed colleges and universities.

So I know a number of folks who've gone there and graduated and been very successful.

So that's my remarks on this item.

Mr.

Chair, Mr.

President.

Supervisor Miley, thank you for that uh wonderful explanation of your item 14.

Again, uh noting that um you've done your homework.

We have processes in place to monitor the expenditure.

We have transparency as we always do.

I'm supportive.

Motion's been made and seconded.

Roll call vote, please.

Supervisor Marquez.

Aye.

Supervisor Tam.

Aye.

Supervisor Miley.

Aye.

Supervisor Fortunato Bass.

Aye.

President Haubert.

I vote yes.

County Administrator, we have some ordinances.

Item 22 is the recommendation from the General Services Agency that your board uh make amendments to the administrative code related to veterans memorial building commissions.

And the action is to consolidate the Albany, Hayward, San Leander, and Washington Township Veterans Building Commissions into a single veterans memorial buildings commission and authorized payment of a $400 monthly stipend fully offset by existing funding.

It's a first reading of an ordinance.

Adopt an ordinance repealing and reenacting administrative code chapter 2.94 to consolidate the commissions for the Albany Hayward San Leandro and Washington Township Veterans Memorial Buildings into one veterans memorial buildings commission.

Mr.

President, I will move to wave the full first reading and introduce the ordinance repealing and reenacting administrative code chapter 2.94 and also authorize GSA to pay the 400 monthly stipend for the Veterans Memorial Buildings Commissioner and authorize the auditor controller to make the related budget adjustments.

I'll second just want to make a brief comment.

Indeed, very supportive.

Thank you.

Motion's been made and seconded.

Roll call vote, please.

Supervisor Marquez.

Aye.

Supervisor Tam.

Aye.

Supervisor Miley.

Aye.

Supervisor Fortunato Bass.

Aye.

President Hauber.

I vote yes.

Item 26 is the second reading of salary ordinance amendments.

An ordinance amending certain provisions of the 2025 through 2026 County of Alameda salary ordinance.

Mr.

President, I will move to waive the full second reading and adopt the salary ordinance amendments as described in item 26A, little rollment I, Roman 2, and Rollman 3.

Motion's been made by Supervisor TAM, seconded by Supervisor Miley.

Roll call vote, please.

Supervisor Marquez.

Aye.

Supervisor TAM.

Aye.

Supervisor Miley.

Supervisor Fortunato Bass.

Aye.

President Howbert.

I vote yes.

Thank you.

Your final regular item is item 43 from the public works agency.

It's the second reading of a county ordinance code amendment related to floodplain management.

An ordinance amending section 15.40.150 tasks of chapter 15.40, floodplain management of title 15 buildings and construction of the Alameda County Ordinance Code.

Mr.

President, I will move to waive the full second reading and adopt the ordinance amending section 15.40.150 related to the flood management of building and construction.

Second.

Second by Supervisor Miley.

Roll call vote, please.

Supervisor Marquez.

Aye.

Supervisor Tam.

Aye.

Supervisor Miley.

Aye.

Supervisor Fortunato Bass.

Aye.

President Halbert.

Yes.

That concludes your regular calendar, other than your set matter at 3 p.m.

We have a 3 p.m.

set matter now, but we also do have a closed session item that we will recess into.

We will uh recess in the closed session and come back and take up the three o'clock set matter at that time.

Obviously, we are running late.

Bear with us.

We are now in recess.

We can start when you're ready.

Recording in progress.

Okay, we're going to reconvene to open session.

I'll ask the clerk to call the roll to establish our quorum.

Supervisor Marquez.

Present.

Supervisor Tam.

Present.

Supervisor Miley.

Supervisor Fortunato Bass.

Present.

President Haubert.

Present.

County Council, is there anything to report out from close session?

No, Mr.

President.

There is no reportable action.

There was no reportable action taken in closed session.

Thank you very much.

With that, we are at our three o'clock set matter, noting that it is late.

This is item 55.

A public protection item from the sheriff to approve a second amendment contract procurement.

This item was continued from February 10th.

We'll proceed with the report from the Sheriff's Department.

Thank you.

After the Sheriff's Department presentation and questions from my colleagues and I, we will then have public comment.

Can I get the mic?

Oh, there we go.

Thank you.

All right, good afternoon, everybody.

Um, this item that's before the board is really about my fulfilling my responsibility under the law to investigate and solve crimes and to ensure that services are supported and paid for.

Specifically, this is a request for retroactive payment and approval for services rendered over the past 10 months.

Uh for context, the Alameda County Sheriff's Office has utilized LPR systems and technology in some form for nearly 20 years.

In 2023, your board approved our agreement with Flock Safety, followed by an extension in 2024.

As that contract approached expiration, we worked to bring forward the next extension while also addressing data sharing concerns to ensure that we're working with a trusted partner.

That process brings us to this item that's before you today.

The purpose of LPR technology is critical in investigative tool.

Thank you.

That allows our deputies to identify vehicles connected to serious crimes, develops leads, and locate suspects in ways that would otherwise not be possible.

This directly impacts our ability to solve grimes crimes and most importantly to provide answers and accountability for our victims.

It is not about any particular vendor.

I do not support any particular or specific vendor.

I support the technology.

And I would be remiss not to mention that we have had mistakes that were made that were brought to our attention, and we called on FLOC to make some corrections, and they've done so.

For the unincorporated communities that we serve, when the sheriff's office is the primary law enforcement provider, this technology helps ensure equitable access to modern policing tools.

This is about delivering the same level of service, responsiveness, and investigative capability that residents across Alameda County expect.

Sergeant Cully.

Thank you, Sheriff.

Good afternoon, board.

I appreciate the opportunity to present here.

Uh, this information is extremely important and vital to the public safety for the unincorporated area of Alameda County.

Uh I have been with the sheriff's office for about 20 years.

I have spent uh the last three years of my life building a technology-based uh information center to increase public safety and really bring the sheriff's office up to the standard uh that the rest of California is already at.

So um I have a slideshow.

If we could go next slide, please.

Uh what is the real-time information center?

Um historically, the sheriff's office has been very siloed in the way that we do things.

We have not shared information with uh very well, at least officially with outside agencies, uh including our fire and and other public uh safety partners.

And so the mission is really to utilize technology to increase that sharing and efficiency within the uh the agency and increase public safety.

Next slide.

Public safety has to be a priority, and I can tell uh from prior board meetings that uh it absolutely is, but it is certainly the sheriff's office uh priority.

Uh we are looking to bring technology and continue to use technology that we've been using for a long period of time responsibly uh to increase public safety.

We agree with Alameda County's board's mission that the Alameda County should be a crime-free county, uh, and we are doing everything that we can to support that mission.

Uh, additionally, Alameda County Sheriff's Office is committed to transparency, accountability, and most importantly, community collaboration.

Next slide.

At the beginning, three years ago, we started with an idea.

Uh, we did some traveling and looked around at what other agencies in California were doing, and uh began to model our real-time information center after that.

Uh, it wasn't very fancy.

Next slide.

Uh, but we three years later have grown our real-time information center into uh a viable hub that helps solve crime, helps investigations, and sometimes helps bring uh missing persons or uh public safety issues, bring home people bring people home safe.

Next slide.

The current staffing for the Arctic, as we call it, is myself, one supervisor, a sheriff's technician, a crime technician, and as of this week, we will have a deputy assigned to this uh unit.

We're in the process of working with human resources uh to hopefully acquire a senior crime analyst position uh to help us as well.

Next slide.

There are four four main components to a real-time information center, also commonly known throughout California as a real-time crime center.

Um, the first one is staffed.

It doesn't matter how much technology uh the sheriff department acquires or the board approves.

If there is not adequate staff that is trained to vet that information and appropriately disseminate it, the technology becomes invaluable or unusable, I should say.

Uh the second component is the one that we're gonna talk mostly about today.

It is the automated license plate readers.

Uh additionally, we have Pant Zoom community cameras, and we've implemented a drone first responder program.

So those are the big components of the Arctic.

Next slide.

As mentioned by the sheriff, it's taking us about three years to build this and acquire uh the technology to create an efficient real-time information center that includes uh hardware and software platforms and staffing.

Uh and a key component of this is the automated license plate readers.

Next slide.

I want to point out that uh Governor Gavin Newsom uh saw the value in automated license weight readers and flock safety and implemented 300 of those throughout the Bay Area to uh curb freeway violence, and it has been extremely successful.

Additionally, every single agency, law enforcement agency within the county of Alameda has ALPR technology and vendor uh flock safety.

That includes Berkeley, Oakland, and Greater Bay Area uh agencies such as San Francisco.

Next slide.

This technology has been misrepresented as surveillance.

This is not surveillance technology, it is very simple.

No comments, please.

It's disruptive.

If anybody's comments, we can't hear.

So I would ask everybody to refrain from making comments during the presentation.

Officers in the back will ask people to leave if that happens, and we may have to take a break and recess and stop the meeting if that happens.

So please proceed.

Thank you.

Uh, this technology, the automated license plate readers, are in public places, and they are taking still images of things that are in public view, where legally there is no right to uh expectation of privacy.

Anybody could take a photo with their cell phone and capture the same image.

Additionally, all this technology is doing is doing what a police officer has done for decades.

It's just doing it more efficiently.

It gives us a better image with a license plate and a direction of travel.

In this particular image on the left, this is what an ALPR hit looks like.

It now helps us find that needle in the haystack.

When we're looking for that missing person in a black Lexus, there are thousands of black Lexuses driving around in Alameda County at one time.

But now, with this technology, it allows us to narrow that search down to a specific location.

Next slide.

Additionally, deputies have been issued county cell phones uh for work-related matters, and they're able to utilize uh an app to receive these notifications.

So, in the event they're in their uh unmarked or investigative vehicles and they don't have a computer, they still have access to this technology.

Next slide.

Specifically, this vendor uh and the technology that we're using has been supported by the Oakland chapter of the NAACP, as well as the National Center for Exploited and Missing Children who have supported the use in this technology, helping curb human trafficking and helping with amber alert and kidnapping rescues.

Next slide.

I want to point out that thousands of privately owned cameras have existed for the at least the last 10 years, if not longer, within the county of Alameda.

And frequently deputies respond to calls for service and will obtain this security footage from privately owned residences or businesses.

Unfortunately, that video footage is not high quality and does not provide us with license plates.

So we use that information and then we parent with automated license plate reader technology information that is in that general area to help us locate that exact vehicle.

Next slide.

In 2025, this victim went to the ATM to withdraw some money in Hayward.

As he returned to his residence in San Lorenzo, he was followed unbeknownst to him by the suspects that were driving this white Toyota Camry.

As he walked up to his front door in broad daylight, these two suspects who were armed with firearms ran up behind him, robbed him, and shot him.

Thankfully, he survived his injuries.

The image you see on the left with the red circle is what we obtained from private residence security footage.

We can tell it's a white Toyota Camry, but how many white Toyota cameras are there in San Lorenzo?

A lot.

We utilized the flock technology in this immediate area to narrow it down and find there was only one car that fit this description, and we were able to get the license plate.

And through that investigation, we were able to locate this car in the city of Oakland and apprehend the suspects.

Unlikely that we we solved this case without this technology.

Next slide.

In December of 2022, unfortunately, we had a fatal shooting in the city of Castro Valley.

This occurred in the evening hours, and we were able to again obtain privately owned residential uh camera uh camera footage, but it did not provide a license plate.

We were able to utilize the license plate readers one block away to narrow it down, and there were no other vehicles in the area at the time.

This does not mean this vehicle was the suspect vehicle, but this gave us a lead then to use other technology and other investigative purposes to further this investigation.

And lo and behold, this ended up being the suspect vehicle, and we ended up arresting these individuals for the shooting.

Yet again, unlikely would have solved this crime without this technology.

Next slide.

This case was turned over to the special victims unit, and the individual was booked into Santa Rita jail.

However, he was able to make bail and was released from custody.

Deputies uh in investigations quickly wrote a search warrant for the phone and were able to identify several of the actual images as victims from our jurisdiction, one of which was the individual's own son.

The real-time information center immediately took this information and flagged this individual's vehicle because he did not return home.

He knew we had his phone.

A warrant was uh authored and issued by a judge, and within an hour and 26 minutes, we received an automated license plate reader hit for this individual.

We were able to find him hiding at a local hotel and in turn prevent him from victimizing any other children.

Next slide.

Once again, this is a public safety tool.

This is not just a law enforcement tool.

This helps us find missing persons.

We had an individual who had dementia who walked away from her home with car keys, got into a vehicle, and drove away.

Her husband called, we were able to flag that vehicle, and about 30 minutes later received a notification that she was driving on A Street in Hayward.

She did not hit on another camera close by, so that gave us that needle in the haystack, and we found her within 10 minutes parked in the Costco parking lot, and we're able to safely return her home.

Next slide.

This does have effects on crime, certainly.

In California, unfortunately, 25% of all auto theft occurs in the Greater Bay Area.

However, even more unfortunately, 42% of that auto theft occurs right here in Alameda County.

The sheriff had said in 2023 that we implemented Fox Safety Technology.

You can tell by the graph, we had over a thousand stolen vehicle reports just in the unincorporated area in 2023.

Since implementing this technology, we have cut that number in half.

Next slide.

An instance this weekend, we received an automated license plate reader hit for a vehicle with stolen license plates.

We were able to intercept that vehicle, use spike strips, and then ultimately get people into custody after a short pursuit.

Inside that car, burglary tools, shaved keys, stolen copper wire.

I have no doubt from my training experience that these individuals were coming into Castro Valley to commit crime.

It didn't happen, and that's only because the license plate readers gave us that notification.

Next slide.

Any of these violations, deputies or any employees of the sheriff's office that have access to the system would be subject to not only disciplinary action, but potential criminal action and civil liability.

So one more time on a review because this is a uh important part of this discussion.

The sheriff's office has turned off the national lookup tool at the request.

Uh, we're the ones that brought this tool up to Flock, and they immediately turned it off.

Uh, we do not allow any agencies out of state to even see our Flock data.

We do not share with them.

We don't share with the federal government, and we certainly do not share our ALPR data with ICE or the border protection.

Next slide.

This image shows a search.

This are the this is the safeguards that are in place.

Deputies must select from a predetermined list of approved uses for this system.

They also are required to input a case number or an event number related to a CAD call, a computer-aided dispatch call.

And then lastly, they have to write an actual code and a reason that they're accessing this system.

Uh previous to us making changes in this system, deputies were not required to do these things.

And since we've we've had issues back in 2024, we have made several changes to the system with Flox assistance to safeguard and make sure that the system is used appropriately.

Next slide.

Talk about transparency.

The Sheriff's Office greatly values our partnership with the community and the residents that we serve.

We have put out a transparency policy, uh, or I'm sorry, a transparency portal.

You can scan this QR code and it will take you directly to it.

It not only lists our information related to flock automated license plate readers.

Our policy is posted on there for public consumption.

And it also lists flights and shows flight data, which I'll show you in a little bit for our drone first responder program.

This is available publicly on the sheriff's office website right now.

Next slide.

The policy for the sheriff's office related to automated license plate readers is General Order 5.42.

It was developed many, many years ago with the assistance of county council and is fully compliant with the California state law.

Next slide.

Sheriff Sanchez previously has met with the CEO of our current ALPR vendor.

We have voiced some concerns and uh those concerns were addressed, and they have made significant changes to the platform.

Additionally, our network security team is met directly with the vendor to make sure that there are no security issues related to the software or the hardware.

The Sheriff's Office conducts audits every 30 days, not only of internal searches, but external searches being conducted by other agencies that we share with to make sure that they are in line with our policy, state law, and best practices.

Next slide.

All deputies before they have uh access to this system are required to complete online certification training and present a copy of that certification to the training sergeant.

The biggest part of this is we are up here asking for this public safety tool to be continued because we value the partnership that we have with our community and the residents.

Our job is to keep them safe.

Uh, I can tell you that uh in a city that I live, this same debate occurred recently.

And as a resident, not as a police officer, I went and spoke at the city council meeting and voice my concerns.

I I bring this to you, telling you that I would not bring this forth if I didn't want it in my own community protecting my own family, and I do.

Next slide.

We have done tremendous amounts since uh the agenda item was pulled for uh discussion.

Uh a tremendous amount of community outreach.

Uh almost every community organization and meeting that we could reach out to, we went and provided presentations to because we value that partnership, trying to provide information as to what we're doing, how we're doing it, and get the community's input.

Next slide.

All of this data feeds into a platform called Flock OS.

It allows us to see automated license plate reader data, our uh community cameras, and our drone footage all on one screen.

Next slide.

The Sheriff's Office, with the help of uh grant funding, has recently uh acquired uh several of these community cameras that we have positioned in high traffic areas and high crime areas, and they have been very successful.

Um, as we they're they're obviously pointed at the street, these are no different than traffic cameras, and the sheriff's office is not using these cameras uh unless we're getting a call for service in that area, and then we will move the camera and position it to where the call is is occurring.

Next slide.

This works in conjunction with a software platform that the board approved called prepared 911, which allows me to hear the 911 calls in real time in the Arctic.

At that moment in time, I'm able to use our situational cameras, our automated license plate uh reader technology and launch drones to areas.

This allows us to get information long before deputies are even dispatched to the call, much less arrive.

The more information the deputies have before they arrive, the better decisions they can make.

There is statistical data that shows there is less uses of force when we have more information before we arrive on scene.

It allows for better planning.

Next slide.

This brings us to the drone first responder program, which integrates with the automated license plate reader data.

So if we were to receive uh an alert for a missing person, it shows up on the drone first responder screen.

I can then proactively launch the drone to where the alert is and try and locate the car quickly and then direct deputies to that.

Uh we're in the air in about 10 seconds or less.

The drone flies about 51 miles an hour, and I want to make it clear that all of this technology I'm talking about is not top secret.

And I want to make it clear that all of this technology I'm talking about is not top secret.

This is all available uh on on the public.

You can Google it.

It's it's very transparent.

We're able to use the camera on scene, and I'm gonna show you what it looks like was the the drone is flying to the scene.

Next uh slide, please.

Uh these are two videos.

We currently have two locations for drone purse responder, or I'm sorry, one location, two drones on top of the Eden Township substation.

Uh we're able to provide service currently to San Leandro and the Ashland Cherryland area uh and San Lorenzo from here.

Uh we're hoping to expand.

Um we're working on that.

It's already part of the contract that was approved, and we will be providing drone service to Capstroe Valley, uh, Hayward Fairview, as well as uh a second location in Cherry Land to increase our response times.

Uh if you hit play, it should play the video.

No.

It's a PDF.

Does that mean my vehicle doesn't okay?

I brought it, so maybe we can take a break afterwards and play that.

Uh anyways, these boxes contain drones that uh launch uh from my office at my computer desk, and I'm able to fly to the call for service.

Next slide.

As I mentioned, all of these uh technologies integrate, or we have acquired them uh through the the three-year acquisition.

Uh and we're using all of these technologies together um to to increase public safety.

Next slide.

This is the view from the drone as it responds.

We're uh not looking down at anybody's backyard.

We're positioned at the horizon.

And as we arrive in the area of the call for service, then we're positioning the the camera and zooming in to try to find uh what we need to find related to that specific call for service.

On the right, that's what it looks like when we receive an automated license plate reader hit that's integrated into this drone program.

And it uh gives us a direction for for us to look.

Um these two tools work hand in hand together.

If you remove any one of these tools, you cripple the ability of the Arctic to function uh efficiently.

Next slide.

The drone has been very successful so far.

The statistics are from January 1.

We've used it in 40, 142 responses, and out of uh 142 responses, we've located 81 subjects that were either suspects in crimes or missing persons.

Uh the drone is on scene more than 50% of the time.

And most importantly, utilizing these tools, we've been able to uh save patrol officers from even having to respond, or I should say arrive on scene, uh, because we've been able to clear the call with the drone.

Uh that happened in 17 different calls, saving time and resources.

Next slide.

Our transparency portal we discussed already, extremely uh important to the sheriff's office.

This is the drone portion of that.

You can see the flight path of the drone.

You can see the call for service they were responding to.

You can see the location, uh, part of the address is uh removed for confidentiality and the date and the time.

We have nothing to hide here.

Next slide.

A big part of Flox uh contract that was previously approved is our ability to partner with our local businesses who have unfortunately been the target of uh high increase of crime and break-ins lately.

Uh this partnership allows businesses to voluntarily opt in to a camera sharing program where they take their existing security cameras, they get to pick what feeds, and those feeds then are broadcast live into the Arctic.

We're not looking at this uh these these camera feeds unless we have a call for service there.

But if we get an alarm in a business, we're able to pull up those camera feeds and see is this legitimate?

And if it is, what do the suspects look like?

What are they driving?

And we're able to provide adequate resources, a better response, and more information related to suspects, and it increases apprehension.

So we're partnering with our local businesses right now.

We're very excited.

We just rolled that out.

Next slide.

This is uh we're gonna have to plug this in and play this from uh thumb drive extremely important, so we'll pass that.

Uh Sheriff Sanchez, you have some uh words you want to speak while I get this video hooked up.

Yes, I do.

Um so this video has been put together.

A lot of work uh went into it, so uh if we can get that up, that'd be great.

Uh, if you're thinking about what uh we're doing as far as next steps uh as part of today's action, I think the county needs to fulfill their obligation and pay the bill through June of uh this year.

Uh it also will ensure that we have continuity of operations and avoids disruption to how we provide public safety uh by utilizing this tool.

But also we continue and will continue to do outreach with our community on the technology that we're onboarding.

Uh we've been doing that.

Uh we've been doing more extensive outreach uh since February.

But you know, our our community has been very supportive of us, and I think that it's important for me to point out that our unincorporated areas sometimes feel ignored.

And this does not help.

Um, we are trying to provide the best public safety service to them, utilizing the best technology out that we can find out there.

Uh, I I definitely want to make sure that our unincorporated areas know that they can lean on us and be um know that we are employing what we can to provide better service to them.

Um, you know, I think that uh there's there's discussion about whether we go out to RFP or not, and I am committed to going out to RFP for this service.

I've said it before, I support the technology, but I think that it is important that we on board our the best partner to provide this service to us.

So we will be in development of an RFP to move forward with.

We're gonna take a five minute recess.

All right, we're gonna reconvene here.

Ask everybody to take a seat and then um I understand that the video is ready to go.

And so after the video, do we have more presentation?

Or is that the end of the presentation?

Okay, the video will wrap up the presentation.

Can we take role President Howard?

Yeah, I know.

Supervisor Miley's on his way.

We might just wait a minute for him.

After the video, that will be the conclusion of the presentation.

We'll have deliberate questions, comments from our board, and then we'll go into public comment.

When we get to that point, I'm gonna ask the clerk how many speakers we have.

Last count was uh over 75.

And that isn't counting the people online.

Be ready to raise your hand if you have a speaker slip, have not filled out speaker slip, please do so now.

We'll make announcements about speakers when we get to that point in time.

Why don't we ask the clerk to take role and yeah?

Okay.

Let me go check on Supervisor Miley.

Supervisor Tam.

Present.

Supervisor Miley.

Present.

Supervisor Fortunato Bass.

Present.

President Haubert.

Present.

We have a quorum.

So to know that they've been caught is a relief, and I'm really glad that it's not gonna happen to anyone else.

We utilize the license plate reader cameras along with several other pieces of technology to help identify a suspect vehicle.

And without the license plate reader technology, we would not have been able to identify that car.

The more information that we can have that we can put into the hands of our deputies allows them to make better decisions, have better judgment, and de-escalate situations better than they normally would.

I'm very grateful for the technology.

I mean, the rest of the world is advancing, so our police force should be able to advance too.

Technology has always been a part of what we do.

Radios, computers have been instrumental, but really the license plate reader technology has been in my 20 years at the sheriff's office the biggest piece of technology that has made a difference in how we protect the community.

As the lead law enforcement officer in this county, I have a responsibility to equip my staff with the tools necessary to conduct the most thorough and complete investigations.

My commitment to you is to safeguard your privacy, protect the rights of the most vulnerable among us, and ensure Alameda County continues to work toward being a crime-free county.

It's probably one of the worst things that I've had to go through.

They've been great.

So I'm really appreciative.

I think that concludes the presentation, but Sheriff, uh, some concluding words.

Yes.

Well, first off, thanks to the board for the flexibility on allowing us to pay this video.

Um, I think that to cut kind of close us off.

I understand the responsibility that I have to make sure that our data is safeguarded, and we're working towards making sure that we implement and put solid policy but also solid language in our contracts to ensure that our vendors are going to be trusted partners and that we hold them accountable just as well as we hold ourselves accountable.

So I just want to make sure that I speak to that.

Um, but this is definitely something that um, you know, we we have an obligation to pay our bills, and I'm hopeful that um we can do so.

So does that conclude the presentation?

Yes.

Okay, well, I'm gonna go to our um public safety commission, committee uh chairperson Lisa Marquez questions.

Now we'll deliberate and have questions before we go to public comment.

We will go to public comment after our brief questions are asked and answered.

Okay.

Uh thank you, Board President Howbert.

Uh, thank you, Sheriff and Team, for this presentation.

Um, for those of you that weren't following back on February 10th, um, I did request to continue the item as a set matter for me personally.

It was really important that the public have an opportunity to learn more about this contract.

I know um this is retroactive, and I do appreciate the community engagement that has occurred throughout unincorporated part of the county since February.

Um, but again, I'll continue to uplift.

We we do have to do a better job in strengthening transparency and good governance here and making sure that questions, concerns, pertinent information is shared out with the public.

So I do appreciate the presentation and the updated information.

I do have a few follow-up questions.

Um, can you please verify?

I believe I understood that the general order 5.42 has been updated.

If you could please highlight what those changes were and um whether or not there was any type of guidance given from Secure Justice or any other uh individuals that have been closely monitoring um this contract.

Well, I to specific language, um, I'm gonna call Sergeant Cully up to point out all the highlights because I've read this thing several times over, but he was the one that added the the specific language that updated this policy.

Uh with respect to what that was what was the second part to it.

Um just wanting to know uh what if there was guidance sought from specific organizations.

I just my office has been outreached by a Secure Justice.

I know they've spoken public comment on this item in the past, so just wanting to hear whether or not there's been communication with that group and just where you all landed in terms of hearing their concerns.

So he sent us uh a letter, a secure justice census letter with their concerns, and we did take all of those concerns and we utilize some of that information to develop our policy, make sure that we're covering all of our bases, right?

So, I mean, we do use information.

I don't know if we specifically spoke with uh Secure Justice Brian, but we did take the information and took it into consideration for our policy.

Hi, Sergeant Coley.

If you could just call out uh with respect to the general order, what updates specifically have been made.

Yes, ma'am.

Uh specifically, we updated uh portions of the policy to include language that discussed uh our state law responsibility not to share our data with federal agencies.

Uh we also included language that talks about increasing uh audits and specifically auditing uh outside agencies access to our data.

Uh there was some minor language uh uh manipulations or or tweaks, I should say, to the policy, and and those were made with the input from uh organizations such as Secure Justice.

Uh, we did not agree with every single recommendation that they made, but uh we made significant changes to this policy based on some of the input and feedback we received from them.

So we're certainly uh listening to everybody in the room and making changes to our policy to make sure that it's the most comprehensive and uh and complete policy that we can have.

And the link, the QR code you shared in your presentation, I did click on that.

So that includes all these supporting documents, including the general order for anyone in the public that wants to review it.

That is correct.

Okay.

And then you mentioned um meeting with different community groups.

I heard you say San Lorenzo Village, Castor Valley, Cherry Land.

I heard you say people were generally in support, but did you get any objections, concerns?

I'm wondering what type of feedback you received and what you did with that information for people that are not necessarily in support of this.

Yeah, thank you for that question, because that's actually a fantastic question.

As I visited all of these different organizations, uh like my Eden Voice, and as you mentioned, you know, uh Castro Valley, uh Mac and San Lorenzo Village, uh, all of these locations, there was a a lot of questions and concerns that were raised uh at the beginning of my presentation, and by the end of that presentation, uh some of these meetings lasted several hours where we stayed to answer uh residents' questions.

Uh and I can testify in front of all of you that there was not a single person that at least voiced opposition that resides or has a business or operates in the unincorporated Alameda County area that did not want this technology, not a single person.

There was opposition at the beginning of the meeting, and by the end, they understood what the technology was, how we use it.

And uh we we you know partner with the community.

We bridge that gap by providing them.

I think there was a lot of misinformation and a lack of information.

And so those community meetings were very important to us to to provide that info to the to the residents.

Thank you.

And either one of you, can you speak to um the item before us today is for uh a retroactive contract up until June 30th?

What are next steps in terms of I did hear the sheriff say um you're interested in RFP, but I think it's also important to share with the community our uh contract and procurement process to go out to an RFP.

So I don't know if you have connected with GSA if you have any additional information in terms of what that timeline might look like and what are next steps in this process.

Yeah, well, procurement does take months, so it will take a few months before we're able to get something out.

Um, but we will be putting out an RFP for services.

Um it all depends on how many people put in.

I mean, it's definitely a timely process.

And then in the meantime, we'll continue with services.

We'll have to come back to get approval to pay for those services until we can go through the RFP process.

Can you speak to what the bridge, the interim approach is going to be because the RFP is going to take some time?

So what do we do July 1st?

July 1st, just like we've been continuing with services so far, we'll just have to go retroactive for payment.

So you're planning to continue this beyond July 1st, even though what's in the board letters said that it's only valid up through June 30th of this year.

That that'll allow us to pay.

To pay, correct?

Yes.

And then beyond that, we're just gonna be operating on a contract, just as we are right now, yes.

Okay.

Any other questions?

No.

Who else is on public protection?

Supervisor Miley.

The other member of Public Protection Committee.

Thank you, President Howard.

Yes, I'm the public protection committee.

Well, first of all, I want to thank the Sheriff's Department for an excellent presentation.

Excellent.

Um I know we've got folks that have been waiting a few hours to speak on this item, and I know people on both sides of the issue.

So I just want to be clear to folks.

Um, because I think people know where I'm coming from.

I I respect um the opinions of those who oppose this, but uh, you know, I've been a firm supporter of uh cameras and technology for many, many, many years.

I represent the unincorporated area.

I live in Oakland, but I represent the unincorporated area in the healthy portion of Oakland.

This is all about the unincorporated area.

I firmly supported, I believe this these are best practices.

I I I've I'm totally in alignment with it.

I appreciate the sheriff's office looking into everything you can do to ensure um safety, uh transparency, um, to deal with any um inappropriate uh potential uses of this, etc.

etc.

etc.

Uh, I do know that since we have a dearth of law enforcement officers, it's important to have adequate technology to ensure public safety.

So for me, uh and the fact that we need to pay the contract, I think it's important that we pay the contract as well.

I do understand the sheriff will look in the future at potentially RFPing this and and seeing what else we can do, but continuing to provide all the necessary safeguards uh that are um that we can imagine that ensure public confidence.

Once again, um I've been to countries where there's cameras.

Uh I've never felt threatened.

I've been in the unincorporated area.

I've been in other places, even in Oakland with their cameras.

So for me, as long as it's being done appropriately and within the public domain, I think we are right on target.

But once again, I appreciate the you know folks raising the issues because that's important, but I want to be clear where I'm coming from, and it shouldn't be no surprise.

I'm going to support this.

So before public comment.

Please don't disrupt the meeting.

If you do, we're going to call it off and take a recess.

That's for everybody.

So Supervisor Sheriff has a question.

I'm gonna go to Fortunatter Bass, if that's okay.

I told her she would go next.

Is that okay?

That's fine.

Supervisor Fort's not a bass.

I'm sorry, I had already told.

Thank you.

Um, firstly, I want to say that I of course public safety is a huge priority for us.

It has been, it will continue to be.

Um, I appreciate how uh so many of our law enforcement partners are doing a lot with uh without adequate staffing.

Um, and I appreciate how we're looking at this holistically, looking at violence prevention, intervention, looking at how we help meet people's basic needs like housing jobs, etc., so that people have what they need in order to survive.

Um, I served on the Oakland City Council prior to joining the board.

I believe it was in 2024 when I presided over the council as council president uh to approve the uh flock cameras in Oakland, and that was a time when we had uh very high crime, and it was also a time when we weren't under Trump in this current administration.

And I want to be very clear that while I support responsible use of technology, we are operating in a very, very different time under this administration, and with uh with uh investors in Flock who are who are very much interested in building out and using technology for purposes that may not actually be for public safety.

So I have uh significant concerns about Flock as a company at the same time that I do want to support our public safety and want to make sure that um you know all of our strategies have the tools and the resources that they need.

Um I have just a few uh questions I wanted to put on the record before we go to public comment.

Um and I do want to say, Sheriff, I appreciate you raising concerns with Flock when we found out what they were doing with our information without our consent.

Um I appreciate you sharing that uh you share our concerns and we'll strengthen the contract.

And there are some specific things I would like to see in any contract, regardless of who the vendor is.

Um that includes being very and I I did share this with the sheriff and her team, uh, making sure our contract says that Flock has or whichever vendor has no discretion to share our county data.

Um I believe that could be strengthened by also requiring the county's written or uh authorization for any federal access.

I think it could also be strengthened if we include language that says the vendor is required to inform the county of any request for information, um, so that we're fully aware, in addition to our own auditing of who's trying to access our data.

Uh secondly, I think the contract should clearly state that Alameda County can fully audit uh that Alameda County uh can fully audit uh access to our data.

I'm glad to hear that's happening every 30 days.

Um I do have questions about how more of that information could become public.

I just took a quick look at the transparency portal, it's some basic data.

I don't know if it can go a level deeper and give us more information so that it's uh more clear to the public how this is being used.

Um, thirdly, um Alameda County should retain meaningful control.

Um, I do want to make sure that language is really strong so that we're not inadvertently um you know having a situation where uh the data is being accessed by folks who will use it uh for purposes other than public safety.

And then finally, um I would like to explore Alameda County uh having legally enforceable penalties.

I believe other jurisdictions have done that.

I think we should too.

I think we have to do everything that we can given the current political environment, given how quickly technology is changing to ensure that if and when we use technology, that we have as many safeguards as possible.

So wanted to put that out there.

If there's a response from the sheriff for her office, I welcome that.

But I do want to make sure that uh for any contracts regarding technology that we really try to protect ourselves given uh what has happened with this particular company.

So I I can't say that I disagree with uh those points, and I think that it shouldn't be focused on just law enforcement contracts, that should be a countywide effort.

So for contracts to be to be built in with Sparz language for any vendor that does um you know break our trust, really, uh holding them accountable to certain things with penalties or whatever that might look like, right?

But it should be a countywide effort.

It I don't think that just making sure that law enforcement, because there's there's critical information that's captured by a number of entities in the county, health services.

I mean, I mean, you name it, there's information that could be requested by the federal authorities.

So making sure that there's contracts language in there that protects everybody, I think is would would be a great thing, but not just solely focused on one entity.

I think that should be across the board.

Supervisor Tan.

Um thank you, President Howard, and I also appreciate the presentation.

I think um the camera technology is illustrative of how technology can be used for good, whether it's the senior alerts, the amber alerts, trying to prevent human trafficking, and we can also see sometimes how technology can be misused.

So I appreciate the questions that Supervisor Fortunato Bass asked in terms of the areas that you see within our contract, probably prospective contract now, uh, that would have to be modified to provide any additional safeguards that you see.

And some of the um coalition groups did raise the um section in the our existing contract.

They said it's 4.1, but I think it's really section 4.2 of our contract that talks about uh the uh role and the um agencies responsibility for the data, the retention of the data.

Do you see whether or not that section and other parts of the contract would be needed to be changed to be more aligned with uh SB 34 in terms of restricting access?

I mean, I think that language can be strengthened for sure in that section.

Um and we can we can work with county council as far as what what language we can add in there uh to make sure that it is very clear on whose data is whose and it's our data.

We own it and it's not the data of any particular vendor.

So I mean that there's definitely work that we can do on that.

Um so I'm gonna ask kind of like uh a question because of my ignorance about uh this contract.

It's 10th month retroactive to activity going through the end of June 30th.

So does that mean the last 11 months flock hasn't been paid by the county?

We haven't had a contract for since that time.

So that we've uh but we're still allowed to use the technology even though we haven't paid for it.

Yes, in good faith, we have continued on with services.

This is not unusual.

This is not just for um this particular contract.

This is something that happens on a common occasion throughout the county, it's not just the sheriff's office for contracts.

We're it it is typical for us to go beyond contract with services.

Okay.

That's helpful.

Thank you.

Um and I also want to express my appreciation as well for your proactiveness in uh being very diligent in the audit of how the data is being used and who's accessing the data.

I think um I'm sure you're gonna make sure that continues.

The the last question I had that got brought up, um, I think uh the sergeant talked about uh Governor Newsom putting in 300 cameras within the Bay Area, and there's a certain amount of interoperability within the Bay Area counties.

Uh and and how do we, or how does Flock protect itself from hacking?

Because like Oakland's had their system hacked where private information was stolen.

And that's that's IT stuff, but they do have firewalls, they do have you know encryption, and we're making sure that they are able to do audits, and they have been doing audits, and I can't remember what that audit name is.

It's a SOC to or something like that, which shows that they're they're putting in all the protections that they need to for cybersecurity wise.

So I'm confident that they'll continue to do that.

Um and that's what we ask for all of our partners as well.

So in terms of the vulnerabilities, well uh like our IT department can control and put firewalls on uh access to data that's in our control, but are there like backdoors they can get through other cities that may not have that same level of security that comes into our system?

I don't believe so.

I think our ITD department would be the the best people to to answer that question because they are the ones that so we have operating systems, whether it's Flock, whether it's Axon, and they're on our network.

So county ITD is the one that manages our network.

They're the ones that make sure that you know we have safeguards in place to make sure that we're not hacked into.

Thank you.

I just want to point out that we have an awesome ITD department that have won awards for their cybersecurity programs.

Yes, um, thank you everyone for the questions.

Before we hear public comment, I also have some questions, and I think I heard it said that we have an SB34 that doesn't allow us to share data outside of our state.

Correct.

And I think that's um very important, and that's that that law already exists.

So I'm concerned when I hear uh if that is breached, and I think comments around the toughness of our contract language is super important, and so I think in the next generation of a contract, if it gets to that point that we confer with county council and other industry experts that we would have the toughest language.

I like the idea, Supervisor Fort Center Bass of including penalties if we can for um breach of uh of that.

Um questions around the tracking capabilities, and I've heard concern that somebody would say you can track where I drive from the moment I leave my house to wherever I go in the community to the time I come back to my home.

Um and even if I leave the county and it's uh go into the city and we have a uh cooperation with San Francisco that they'll be able to track me there and all the way till the time I get home.

But what I also heard is we have a certain number of around the county, and if you leave the view of one camera, you might not be in the view of the next camera.

We may find you down the road somewhere, but we're not tracking your exact move throughout the county.

Uh is that maybe explain the tracking to me.

We have a rather large uh county, and and we have a number of cameras out there, but they're situated where um like mostly around our public uh, you know, our main thoroughfares, uh, but we don't have them on every corner.

I mean, they are definitely spaced out, so it's gonna take some time for I mean, and and that's if a if a camera picks your license plate up, but we're not actively watching these cameras.

These cameras are only utilized when we have a crime and we have an associated vehicle description license plate that we are looking for, and then once that that plate or that vehicle is identified, then we wait to see if it pops up again on the system to see where the last location was.

But it's not this, there's not this little GPS tracker that goes and follows this license plate or vehicle anywhere.

I've also heard I've also heard concerns from people that um uh accuse this capability or um say that law enforcement is even capable of tracking people from another state that come into Alameda County to receive reproductive services.

That concerns me if that's even possible.

Is that happening?

Is it even possible?

I can speak for our agency where I have no idea how they would know someone is getting any type of service like that, and we wouldn't we don't that is not something that the sheriff's office investigates.

Um we are very supportive for care in this county, and that is not um I'll just say that I have no idea how that would happen.

But we don't we don't track that, we don't um we don't pursue anything in that realm at all.

I heard it said that the Oakland NAACP was supportive.

I thought I heard that.

Uh I'm seeing a head nod.

What about South County?

I'm represented by South County in double ACP.

Do we know if South County and ACP is taking a position or is even supportive?

Do we know?

And can you say when they expressed their support?

Just so I know.

So South County has uh implemented flock safety cameras.

Uh however, there has been uh much less debate in South County related to this topic.

Uh and I do not believe that the NAACP in that region has had to voice any concerns.

Uh the concerns from the Oakland chapter were voiced during the City of Oakland uh debate on whether or not to expand and continue flock safety uh automated license plate readers.

And then in that regard and discussion, Oakland City approved the use or not.

They did.

They approved the use and they also expanded the number of cameras that they had from the previous contract.

And I I uh Supervisor Marquez, you might know, Supervisor Tam, you might know with regard to Oakland and ACP, South County, NAACP.

Our unincorporated area that lies in between.

Do we know would they typically um uh resonate more with Oakland and double ACP or South County?

I want to say South County.

Yeah, I'm gonna hear the head nod.

So the people that this affects, unincorporated Alameda County, would typically um resonate with South County and ACP.

Okay, well I'll do some more homework on that one then.

Um those are the questions that I have again.

I I'm most interested to hear public comment.

I'm going to ask the clerk to give me a count of in the room, and then if you are online, now would be the time to raise your hand.

We're going to take a count and uh close the um the roles for public comment.

How many do we have?

We're gonna use that to decide the amount of time that we allocate for each speaker.

We have um we have 30 online, the numbers increasing.

And we have um around 80 in person.

Okay.

So we're gonna cut off um when the number stops going up online and cut off in person.

And I'm going to ask that we have uh one minute of public comment for each speaker.

I'm going to limit public comment seeing that we're two and a half hours after the time we were supposed to start this meeting to an hour.

It's five, call it five thirty-five, five forty, and um we're gonna limit it to an hour.

Um I I say a minute, and you know, it's really up to a minute if you feel that you're done before that, that would allow more time for the next speaker to come speak.

We want to get as many people to speak as possible.

And so if you're done speaking, you can say ditto or let the next person speak.

And with regard to um interruptions between speakers, uh, I'm just gonna ask you to remain as silent as possible because that will allow more people to speak.

If you disrupt or distract, it's going to allow less people, fewer people to speak.

So that's my thoughts on that.

If we get disruptive, we'll have to provide warnings and then maybe even take a break and clear the room.

With that, we're also going to ask the clerk to please call five speakers in the room and then go to five online.

When they call your name, line up after the microphone, and when the speaker before you is done, come right on up and speak.

The more we get in, the better for everyone.

So first five on uh in the person, then five online.

Supervisor Marquez comments.

Well, we're gonna do one hour, but typically I would um see how many we have at the end of that hour, and if we go ahead, we might add for 15 minutes, but I'm not going to add more than two 15 minute breaks, depending on if we even need it, if we can get speakers through.

Okay, so we'll do a time check.

We're seeing what we're doing.

An account check.

Yeah.

Very good.

We want as many speakers as possible to be able to speak in a reasonable amount of time.

With the clerk, please call the first five in person.

And just to confirm, we don't have anybody across the street at the overflow room, right?

Everybody's here or they're online.

Thank you.

Can we call the first five speakers that have speaker slips?

The first five in person are uh Marcus Romero Garcia, Valerie Bachelor, Olivia Cuerva, Cathy Harris, and Isabel Ruiz.

Good afternoon, supervisors and community.

My name is Valerie Bachelor, and I'm the director of Ace Oakland and the taxpayer here in Oakland.

I'm asking you to reject the flock contract.

This data surveillance exposes the county to serious legal risks, and it puts our democracy at risk.

Right now, the flock contract says that Flock can access our data worldwide.

That means information about me and my neighbors, where we travel, where we worship, where we seek health care, where we vote could be compromised, and someone else from a different location can see it.

Once that door is open, you cannot close it.

That's why there are over 40 community organizations that have signed on to this letter, such as the California Nurses Association, SCIU 10 to 1, Padres Unidos of Cherry Land, and my Eden Voice, Faith in Action, Somos Familia, ACLU, and Centro Legal.

We stand united against this flock contract because it puts our communities at risks.

And as we talked about in this political moment of increasing attacks on our political institutions.

Next next speaker, please.

So again, we're gonna we're gonna not let as many speakers speak if we keep interrupting.

And if it happens again, I'm sorry, we're gonna call a recess and probably have to move on from public comment.

Hi everyone, my name is Olivia.

I'm a part of Bay Area Jews for Justice and also part of the coalition that Valerie was just talking about.

I'm also a technologist, um, have a background in uh human computer interaction.

And uh my concern is that recently a team of independent technologists published documentation of how easy it was for them to hack into the flock camera systems in under 30 seconds.

They were able to take complete control of the cameras, had the ability to upload malware, and the ability to manipulate and even delete footage with the click of a button.

There was no two-factor authentication or password protections.

They were able to tap they were able to able to tap into any flock camera throughout the United States, including a camera facing a children's playground in the Bay Area where anyone could track and watch children playing alone, even though VLOC's camera systems are meant to only record license plates, they found they still capture and track images of people constantly because of how easy it was to hack.

A group of Congress members put out a request to the Federal Trade Commission to do an open investigation of Flock as a threat to national security.

So why would the county continue to use this system?

Thank you.

Back to Valerie.

If you have a copy of what you referenced, the paper that you have that people signed.

If you would not now, but uh at some point get a copy to us.

Yeah, thank you.

Good afternoon.

My name is Marcus.

I live in District 5.

Uh Flox is presented as a public safety tool, but they create fear and mistrust in our neighborhoods.

This fear harms public safety and community cohesion.

These systems are prone to error and escalation.

Mysteries of license plates and false alerts invite dangerous police encounters.

Even with the technology works as intended, it enables mass surveillance, tracking movement patterns across our county.

That concentrated data becomes a single point of failure in proper if improperly accessed or shared.

We should also consider the chilling effect on civic life.

Immigrant families, journalists, and people exercising the right to protest are less likely to participate in public life when they know cameras and licensed pleaders readers are watching.

We cannot sacrifice civil liberties for a false promise of security.

This contract runs broad hands broad data rights to a private company and increases legal and ethical risk for the county.

Once that data pipeline exists, we lose control over who can access sensitive information about our neighbors.

Safety is built on trust, not surveillance.

Invest in people, not surveillance.

Michelle, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Hi, this is Michelle Clauser.

I'm sorry I'm not there in person for something so important like this, but I'm sick.

I want to thank Sheriff Sanchez and Sergeant Coley, this impressive technology and the fact that they came to our meetings.

Um we had so many people at these meetings, uh, more than one meeting.

They explained it in detail.

It was very impressive.

These cameras are a tool.

The data is controlled by the sheriff's office, and although there are ICE concerns, I think those concerns have been alleviated by their information.

I hear a lot of fear from the community, but you shouldn't make these decisions based on fear.

If we don't have these cameras, though, and unincorporated, we will become a magnet for crime because everybody around us will have them.

That's not fear, that's math, and that's science.

And that's a very real effect if we don't fund these cameras in our area.

So I would please ask you to please continue funding them.

The community is very much in support.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Elise, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Um, my name is Elise Unincorporated County resident.

Elizabeth has might remember me.

I worked for Heward Pellist Worber when she served on council.

I was disheartened last night at the MAC meeting to hear so many comments dismissing the concerns of myself and neighbors.

I'm associated with no group.

The sheriff's presentation contained a lot of false and misleading information.

Sarah Fshanto said Flock CEO personally assured them of Flock's integrity, but Flock has an $800,000 profit motive and incentive to lie, even with the best of intentions, they have been hacked before.

You're telling us to trust when that trust has not been earned.

A committee member joked about Flock data being a worry about Flock data being silly when our data is already compromised.

This problem exists because people in positions of power like yourselves have not protected us before, and you're about to do it again.

70 municipalities canceled, some cancel flock flock couldn't leave.

What does that tell you?

You don't have control over this uh tech.

It's overpowered.

They lie, they abuse our data.

Uh sheriffs at ALPR doesn't have the capability to record motion, but they do.

2025, Flock enabled all LEPRs with a software update.

Uh he says they don't surveil, but the AI does it for them.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Jason Martins, go ahead, please.

Hi there.

Yeah.

Uh I uh would like to address a few issues that I have been brought up.

One is about uh the contracts and the policies that everyone seems to rely on.

And the reality is that when this data gets uploaded to Flock servers, none of those contracts or policies matter.

That data can be accessed remotely via warless or warrant searches uh by federal agencies, and there is no policy or way that you can prevent or stop that, or even uh be aware that those uh searches have happened.

So for that reason, I strongly recommend that you do not do this, and you keep all of us safe by uh not collecting this data in the first place.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Andrew Turnbull, go ahead, please.

Thank you.

Um I feel compassion for those who are.

Am I started yet?

Oh, yeah, okay.

I feel compassion for those who are worried and I empathize.

Um, yet I trust and appreciate Sheriff Sanchez, and I thank and I'm thankful for uh having Sergeant Fenton Cully provide the thorough, detailed and clear presentation about these law enforcement tools.

In the East County, we depend on our sheriff sergeant, who has only three deputies to cover huge geography from the Western edge of Fremont all the way to Mountain House.

Take that in.

Only three deputies cover that ginormous unincorporated area.

Our council has applied the additional of these uh in tools.

Um we want to protect civil rights, of course, but I encourage the board to support our Alameda County Sheriff by funding these tools to protect the people of Alameda County.

Next speaker.

Linda Roman, go ahead, please.

Um, I just want to say that I um what Nikki said, I think is very oh, my name is Linda Roman.

I represent I'm here from the Wellstone Um Democratic Club, and I want to, and I'm in District Five.

I want to agree with Nikki that this is a different time.

What it what counts as crime has changed tremendously, and I feel like using Flock is completely antithetical to being a sanctuary city, county, and state.

It's virtually universal surveillance and precludes any right to privacy.

This will impact disproportionately on our um black, brown, and immigrant communities.

All information gleaned can even be chased shared with DHS ICE, etc.

No warrants are required for this massive and unaccountable invasion of our privacy and security.

Flock has to have to go.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Next five in speak in-person speakers, Noel Gallo, Edward, Edward S.

Escobar, Juan, Robert Batinich, and Colin Kavanaugh.

Next five speakers come on up, move move on up and next speaker and everybody line up behind the next speaker before you, and if they're not here, you can speak.

I submitted mine first at 12.

The clerk is alternating for and against for and against you'll see when it's I I put mine in at 9 30 this morning.

So pardon.

You submitted early in at 9 30 this morning.

So I'm Edward Escobar, founder of the Coalition for Community Engagement, urging all five supervisors to vote yes on the flock public safety camera program for unincorporated Alameda County.

Residents and businesses in Castro Valley, Ashland, Cherry Land, San Lorenzo, Fairview, Synol, and unincorporated Hayward Enclaves feel ignored.

At last night's Castro Valley Mac meeting, people were very upset watching decisions made in their name while their concerns about public safety go unheard.

Community members say certain nonprofits are pushing false narratives and exploiting human suffering, even using Latino and undocumented communities as props to undermine public safety.

They point out that flock camera captures only license plates, not faces, and that there have been zero deportations tied to flack flock data.

Residents also say the opposition is driven by ideology.

The same voices who oppose Proposition 36 supported defending police and tried unsuccessfully to remove flock cameras in Oakland and Richmond.

They reject fear-based hypotheticals with no facts behind them.

People also noted that Supervisor Nikki Bass previously supported Flock cameras as Oakland Council president.

Next speaker, and they question next speaker.

One minute.

And we'll try to keep to our time.

But we're not gonna.

Yeah.

The next time we're going to call a break and take people's time away from speaking until we're ready to come back.

And if we have to, we'll clear the room.

Let's keep it down.

Next speaker.

My name is Twan No, and I was with uh Councilmember Noel Gallo at a press conference earlier today, as well as a number of other occasions when he came out strongly to support Fox safety cameras because the community needs it.

And in fact, he gave many interviews to Felimundo and Univision on uh behalf of safety needs in the immigrant community.

Um additionally, I want to uh say that this issue of public safety using safety cameras was extensively debated with public input in Oakland for months in committee at council, multiple meetings at both forums, and the council voted seven to one to support Fox safety cameras, restore the cameras, and add additional cameras.

In Richmond, I also attended the meeting, and they restored the cameras to help cases like rescuing a person who is a child and a victim of human trafficking.

The NWCP in Oakland and in Richmond both support the Flock safety cameras.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Robert Batnich I've been a resident of Castro Valley for 50 years.

I was raised in San Leandro for 24, 25 years.

They've broken into my buildings recently.

They put flock cameras in San Leandro, and it seems to be that they haven't been breaking in.

It's it used to be every month or every two two months I'd be broken into.

And that's slowed down.

I also um endorse the use of the flock cameras in Castro Valley because we need that for public safety.

And the Jenny Lynn murder could have been solved with the flock cameras were in place, but they weren't in place at that time.

So please vote yes on in uh in renewing the contract with with flock with the flock cameras.

And we need help there in Castor Valley.

Also, there was only there was four officers now.

There were six.

Thank you.

That's that's your time.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Thank you.

Hi, my name is Cullen Cavanam.

I'm a board member of uh Castlewood HOA.

I wanted to share a different perspective.

Yes, you have a C a different perspective on LPR cameras.

We've had them for five years.

We were having one to two break-ins per month in Castlewood.

It was out of control.

We discussed it and argued for three months, and we got two cameras in place.

For the record, today we are at one or two break-ins a year.

We've worked extensively with the sheriff.

For a long time, we did not share our data with the sheriff.

We now do, because now we trust them, we understand what they are doing.

Before it was me who's doing all the searching.

So, you know, we've been able to address car break-ins, male theft, elder abuse.

Actually, cut the people abusing some elders in our neighborhood.

So the cameras have been very, very positive experience.

We've also really engaged with everybody's home cameras, anti-LPR cameras.

It's a very good tool.

Let's use it everywhere.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Is it online?

Thank you.

Randy, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Randy Waugh, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Karen, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Karen Carey, please unmute your phone.

You have one minute.

Wendy, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Please unmute your phone.

Wendy Alferson, you have one minute, please unmute your phone.

Ramiel, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Hi, can you guys hear me?

Yes, go ahead, please.

Hi, uh my name is Ramel.

Um, I'm calling uh as a president of a Hindu temple who was a victim of a hate crime uh a few years ago.

Um, you know, the Alameda County Sheriff Department has been instrumental to make sure that we're protected and we're safe.

Um, as a nonprofit and a religious organization, um, you know, one of the things that we're worried about after these hate crimes is something larger and a lot scarier is something like terrorism.

If something like that were were to occur and God forbid that it doesn't, um, how would the sheriff department be able to locate anyone after some a heinous crime is committed?

Um it's also vital that you know the community has access to, I mean, not to me, uh, the sheriff department has access to these flock cameras because once the crime is done, it's very hard to locate in our for in our instance when we were a victim of the hate crime.

The the probe chairs were never found.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Claudia, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Hi, I've lived in D2 in Oakland, Alameda County, D3 for eight years.

It's just east of the lake, supposedly a high crime area, depending on what data you're looking at, and it's also an extremely diverse immigrant and refugee community.

What makes me feel safe?

Cameras do not make me feel safer.

Surveillance does not make me feel safer.

Police cars flying through my neighborhood at top speed, chasing nothing, do not make me feel safer.

Having my data and the data of my neighbors caught up in a surveillance drag net does not make me feel safer.

When you have mass surveillance, what you effectively have is the construction of every single resident as a potential criminal.

In this era, especially, we cannot increase any tools that allow the increased criminalization of our neighbors.

A few weeks ago, I gave public comment on a resolution rejecting reopening FCI Dublin as an ICE detention center.

Pass tools and infrastructure that are used for supposedly public safety must be prevented from ever being used legally or illegally for uh the purposes of detain and criminalizing our communities.

Thank you, next speaker.

Terracita, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Hi, good afternoon.

My name is Teresita.

I'm from Ashley for and I live in uh for 22 years.

Uh when you have this full communities to me, the issue is personal, and that's why I'm reaching out and believe the cephale camaras can be helpful, branded stolen vehicles and cash criminal factors, and I know they can help to recover solen vehicles and help when Amber Alert.

I do not believe cephali camaras are the whole answer to crime.

I do believe they are one important tool, but they can help to recover some vehicles.

Uh gender length, investigate zero accidents and support safe neighborhood.

An urgent to you to support safely camarads because residents like me.

We want to safe neighborhood and practical public in save a solution.

Thank you so much.

Larry Goslin, you have one minute.

Go ahead.

Larry Gosslin, please unmute your phone.

You have one minute.

Hi, uh, thank you.

My name is Larry Goslin.

I'd like to thank the board for receiving my testimony.

I am a resident of rural unincorporated Alameda County, and as a resident, I've been a victim of crime in those rural areas.

I am here to ask you to support item 55, their approval of automatic licensed plate reader technology to improve safety more for my family and neighbors.

I'm requesting this action because rural East County faces a unique risk profile.

Homes and businesses are more remote with fewer nearby witnesses.

We have fewer law enforcement units nearby, so response time can be longer, and rural roads have three peer cross streets and faster speed limits.

The bad guys can get away.

At the same time, I believe public trust in this tech technology requires strong safeguards.

I support the mitigation proposed by the sheriff's department, and I support review that mitigation on a regular basis to prevent improper use.

With safeguards in place, this technology can help reduce crime in rural East County while respecting privacy and preventing misuse.

Thank you, next speaker.

Diane, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Yes.

Um I'm in district three, and I just we had the same argument when drones came, uh, were first presented, and now we use drones.

I have no expectation that the federal government um has kept our information safe.

So that kind of argument, I I would don't even entertain anymore.

Criminals use every technique, trick, uh technology, whatever they can find to try and take our things or hurt us.

And my view, if criminals get away with taking our data or information out of our houses or belongings out of our houses, and if we cannot catch them, we are way less safe having our information in the hands of criminals where the police cannot catch them than having cameras that can simply read a license plate and perhaps stop those people from taking our data and then using it in any means that they see fit.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next in-person speakers are Manny, Marina, Rafael, Francois, and Maya Para.

Welcome.

All right, hello, my name is Manny, and I've actually gotten five wins over Flock in the last uh few months.

And I hope you guys are the next, actually.

Let me tell you how they were able why they were able to switch.

So Flock actually, in their own patent in their own words, states that they're capable of their era neural networks are capable of categorizing people based on their heightened weight, race and gender, the clothes that they're wearing, bicycles, and animals.

Also, inside your own contract language was actually the same as Sacramento all the way down to Monterey, is a section four worldwide rights clause, which they use to send data over to the Philippines so that that way they can uh train the AI networks.

Also, 2021 DHS policy states that ice can dip in and out of these networks without you guys even knowing.

So they will not show up in your audit logs because DHS requires all vendors of ALPRs, not just Flock to not leave a trail of ICE in any audit logs.

So you're not gonna find them.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Marina Stanka, registered Nurse Highland Hospital.

Um, it's nice to know that drone first responders are replacing actual humans.

Um the reason why this technology, they're so confident in this technology is because it's been used to kill over 680,000 Palestinians.

You can read the Palestine Laboratory for that if you want more information.

Um I also want to take note that um supervisor Miley, the last about the when we were here about the detention facility, also made it clear when um that he did not hold responsible people that had interned Japanese people or people that had previously owned slaves.

So in the words of Kat Brooks um from the Anti Police Trailer Project, um, not all skin folk are kin folk.

Um I find it curious that we are able to support um higher militarization of our police department while we are simultaneously cutting funding for safety in at hospitals.

In the last two weeks, I have been called two three times, one for a woman that has been um scheduled for deportation after delivery, and I am now the social worker on my days off, and these technologies were used to surveil her.

Um anybody that is supporting those technologies, you can go flock yourself.

Hi, my name is Francois Long.

I'm a resident of district five and immigrants and a single parent.

So there's a there's a famous Luxin phrase custodial custodas.

Who watches the watchmen?

Last week, the press in Atlanta reported that Flock Employees had access surveillance cameras to view a kid's gym.

Go figure what law enforcement purpose that served.

But there is a backdoor.

So when Sir Sheriff Sanchez talks about strengthening language to secure data, I wonder how that's possible.

Why would you not control the data center?

And when Flock is a near company that sends the likely sends kiddo footage to countries with looser privacy laws where low-paid workers are parsing through that footage to create metadata in order to train the model.

I urge you to vote no.

Thank you.

Hello again.

I'm here to say strongly uh opposition to the flock contract to automatic license plate reader cameras and expanded networks being used to filter data into this real-time information crime center that takes away humanity from addressing public safety.

As community-based organizations and community advocates, we're often trying to think preventatively when it comes to our communities' well-being and safety.

We've laid out a number of reasons that this technology makes us more vulnerable to harm, not just locally but federally.

I can appreciate that the Alameda County Sheriff's Department believes themselves to be uh in the corner of community that are vulnerable to federal attacks.

But by allowing these technologies to take place vulnerable uh locally, you're making us vulnerable to out of state law enforcement.

ICE is not the only threat.

Police, right?

Um, law enforcement at the state, county, local, and federal level cooperating together and using shared data makes our communities who are criminalized that much more vulnerable, no on flock.

Thank you.

Next next speaker, please.

Do we have other speakers in person?

Okay.

Line up behind the speaker.

Let's go.

Yeah, hi.

Um, my name is Maya.

Um, I am a resident of Castro Valley.

So D4, yay, hi.

Um, so every single supervisor who um had a question was worried about date.

Wait, is there something wrong?

Wait, if your name was called, you can line up behind the speaker.

Wait, hold.

President Howard's the last one.

Are you the last of the five?

I'm the last of the five that you called, yes.

Oh, sorry.

We stopped your time, so you still have it.

Okay, thank you.

I appreciate it.

All right, I'm gonna go.

I'm gonna go.

Okay, cool.

Um, all the supervisors that had questions had questions about data security.

I am not an IT professional, but I know that if someone could hack into the back end of a of uh aggregate data place, you have a point of failure.

Someone talked about how they like hacked into it and gave the data over.

We we don't need that.

We don't need this in our community.

It doesn't make us safe.

The sheriff herself said that she doesn't care about the vendor, just the technology, the automatic uh license plate readers.

Debate that technology as you will, but I don't think we should have a contract with Flock anymore, also.

So that's just what I learned to say about that.

I don't think it makes me feel safe in Castro Valley in D4.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll now go online to the next five speakers online.

Next online speaker.

Kristen, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Yes, thank you.

My name is Kirsten Scope.

I'm a resident in unincorporated Livermore and a constituent of Supervisor Halbert, who earlier asked if there was any endorsement or opposition in South County.

The response from the sheriff's department was that these systems have already been implemented in that area and that there was less discussion.

I recently completed a public records request with Livermore PD and City Council, so I can confirm that the reason for the lack of discussion is due to the fact that the city entered into the original contract without public debate.

There are no meeting minutes, no approved resolution, and no other records of discussion related to four of the five contracts that were signed in our community.

There is overwhelming objection to Flock, paragraph, and all mass surveillance systems, which is exactly what these are, despite what the sheriff's office might say.

And I take deep offense to the assumption that we are such rubs that we will accept emotionally charged anecdotal success stories in place of independently verified data substantiating a decrease in criminal in crime rates or any increase in closure rates.

Vendor and end user endorsements do not suffice.

No on Flock.

Thank you so much.

Next speaker, please.

Next online Laura, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Good evening.

My name is Flora Hill and I'm a vice president of public policy with the Bay Area Council.

We represent over 370 of the region's employers, including a coalition of 125 employers based in East Bay who are committed to building a safer and more vibrant region.

We strongly support this item and urge your approval today.

Technology like ALPR helps officers increase their response times, identify suspects faster, connect cases, and provide prosecutors with stronger evidence.

Importantly, ALPR technology has been proven to work and improve public safety in the region.

And the county needs continued access to this technology to protect residents, businesses, and visitors and to improve coordination with the jurisdictions in the surrounding and in and surrounding the county that are also already using this technology.

As we have seen in many jurisdictions in the East Bay and throughout the region, ALPR and related technology can absolutely be implemented with appropriate safeguards in a way that balances both the needs of the community and public safety.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Julia Feinberg, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Hi, my name is Julie Feinberg, and I'm an Alameda County resident.

I'm a member of hand in hand, the domestic employees network and Bay Area Jews for Justice.

On a professional level, I'm a clinical psychologist who works with patients that are scared of how this technology will put their safety at risk as members of the BIPOC and queer community and people seeking abortions.

It is well documented that multiple news outlets say that Flock database is easily hackable, so it's used by domestic abusers to stalk people they used to terrorize.

It's also well documented by news outlets that Flock is used disproportionately against people of color in predominantly black neighborhoods, and that ICE has backdoor access.

On a personal level, I'm a wheelchair user who employs caregivers.

Most of them are women of color and immigrants who might be profiled by ICE.

I'm terrified of what this might do for them and how it will not prevent us from protecting people who are vulnerable and deserve dignity, respect, and freedom.

Thank you.

Kiki, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Good evening.

My name is Kiki Trigus, and I'm with Indivisible Tri-Vally.

I live in Pleasanton and have lived here most of my life.

I urge you to vote no on item 55 and reject the extension of the Flock safety contract and to turn off and cover existing Flock cameras across Alameda County.

As we've learned from Mountain View, unauthorized agencies had access to Mountain View's license plate data for over a year without their knowledge.

It's widely known that Flock has violated agreements in other cities regarded data sharing, and I do not trust this vendor to honor the contracts that are drafted between them and the county or with their ability to handle our residents' daily data securely.

After the 2026 Super Bowl, where the security system ring announced their partnership with Flock in a Super Bowl ad, Ring actually ended up canceling their partnership with Flock because the public expressed their concern regarding Flock's ability to keep data secure.

So please follow Mountain View, Los Altos Hills, Cupertino, and vote no on Flock.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Candy De Haynes, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Candida Haynes, please unmute your phone.

You have one minute.

Sorry.

Semantic identity leakage, joint embedding space, latent space collapse.

These terms explain why my likeness came up in an industry white paper with ideas similar to mine without my consent.

These images came from the fact that my data exists on the internet and videos, photos, and a lot of my work in text format formats.

Worst case scenario is that the data from the shared meeting was also used in a private data context, much like Flock.

It's still possible that the person whose promotional materials contained a likeness that pulled several people who've known me for over 30 years and my ex.

It's possible that the person who produced that report doesn't even know that it's me or that our ideas are similar.

So although I understand the nuances that you've presented in favor of ICE, there's an iceberg that we're not dealing with, and we need to slow down.

This is not the time to expand.

It can cause confusion.

The next five in-person speakers, Irene Ralston, Javier Martinez, Daniel Silva, Linda Wade, and Greg Slaughter.

Hi, my name is Irene Ralston, and I'm here in Lena Tams group.

Hi Lena.

Um I'm in District 3, as is San Lorenzo resident and one of the um supporters of the Yes San Lorenzo neighborhood watch.

Uh it all started with the shots rang out in one of our neighborhoods, and as a result, for 5700 homes.

Uh, we are um coordinating our efforts for number one crime reduction and safety.

The sheriff's department has done a fabulous job in meeting with us, supporting us, walked with the deputy program and community events for safety, uh, whether it's for preparedness or for crime.

I'm personally offended when somebody's gonna take away my public rights if a crime is committed and I don't have flux, so please do the right thing and and save our community with crime reduction and flock.

Yes to flock.

Thank you, next speaker.

When I start the supervisor, my name is Javier Martinez, and I live in San Lorenzo and unincorporated Alameda County.

I'm here today to respectfully urge you to renew the flock license plate reader contract.

What concerns me is the decision seems to have shifted into a broader debate that doesn't reflect how these cameras are actually used.

Framing this as a choice between public safety and privacy is a false trade-off.

Let's not go backwards.

This is an abstract for me.

I live here.

It's about the safety of my neighborhood, my family, and my neighbors.

Public safety should not become a political talking point when real all-inclusive communities like mine are effective.

I'm asking you to lead with facts and keep public safety and privacy discussions clear and honest.

Please renew this contract.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

Hi, my name is Dan Silva.

I live in Castro Valley.

I'm asking you to support the contract as well.

Um I was carjacked in my driveway by six gentlemen, or not gentlemen, but six men, with four of which had guns pointed at me.

Um it was because of the cameras that they were able to locate my car being driven southward towards Fremont in Hayward.

Um, and had that not been there, they would not have recovered my car.

Also, I really feel that I know not in this room, but the majority of people in this county are tired of the crime.

And that witnessed by the fact that um our DA was recalled by a wide margin.

Um, I don't believe that the settlement in this room represents the true sentiment in the county.

Also, I want to say that um thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Good afternoon.

My name is Linda Wade, and I am a resident of District 4.

I live at the Oakland apartments, and I would like to ask Flock where the cameras for where for the the neighbor, the community that I live in.

However, uh only have one minute.

Okay.

Um, for the cost of that the the flock contract, there's so many other things that that money could could have been used in in other ways.

Uh however, we you have already supported the real public safety solutions like immigrant protection and community-based programs.

Voting for flock contradicts that that leadership.

This isn't just about technology, it's about priorities.

Do we find system that track or surveillance community or solutions that actually make people safer?

No, we don't.

Inclose it.

Including safety is built on trust, not on surveillance.

This system creates risk and not security.

We cannot trade our rights for tools that do that don't work.

Invest in people, not surveillance.

Thank you so much.

Next speaker, please.

Next speaker.

Thank you.

Okay, my name is Gregory Slaughter.

I am a resident of district seven.

Okay.

They save how good flock cameras are.

Okay.

Every week, there's a stolen car in my neighborhood where I'm at in District 7.

Okay.

One of my neighbors got chased behind his car being surveyed in my district.

Because uh on my block, 90%, I mean 80% of the people there are Latino.

They hunt them down in my neighborhood.

Okay.

And they say flock cameras do the thing towards sex trafficking.

Sorge.

Okay.

What okay?

Go to 20th.

It east 14th, down the Fifth Avenue at East 14th, and look at them babies out there, half fucking dress out there.

And you telling me they it worked.

I'm telling you, it don't work.

Okay, it don't.

And you can't tell me, give me, can you tell me?

Can you guarantee 100% that this stuff cannot get hacked?

You can't.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Rodney, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Please unmute your phone.

You have one minute, Rodney.

Yes, I live in a town of small.

It's a royal community.

And before we get the first P or on an incident that arrives, it takes about 30 minutes.

This camera system can help prevent and solve crime.

So I'm supporting the camera system.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Lindsay Wright, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Lindsay Wright, please unmute your phone.

You have one minute.

Can you hear me?

Yes, go ahead, please.

My name is Lindsay and a resident as a resident of Ashland in the unincorporated area of Alameda County.

I am speaking out against the use of the flock camera system here.

I do not think the benefits of it outweigh the potential risk to the most vulnerable members of our community.

I attended the same presentation from the sheriff's department as given earlier, and I felt the questions and concerns I had were not adequately addressed when I asked them.

Furthermore, I am worried about the cameras use being for more than just license plates.

I understand that the Alameda County Sheriff's Department is not partnered with ICE at this time, but if that changed or laws concerning homelessness are made more severe, these cameras could be used to track people for mass arrests.

I feel flock is largely a system that is reactive to crime, not preventative.

It can find a car that's been stolen, but maybe not before it's already been stripped of its parts.

It can find someone who starts a fight at a busy intersection, but it can't break that fight up.

We need solutions that are proactive and can't be turned on people in our communities most likely to be victimized.

Please do not support the Tammy.

You have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Please unmute your phone.

Hello, my name is Tammy Kresnar, and I'm an uh constituent of District 4.

Contracting with Flock risk the county being responsible for legal defense costs, much more expensive than the contract extension.

Cities, including Oakland, San Francisco, and San Jose are currently facing lawsuits aimed at curtailing usage of Flock systems, and those lawsuits do not come for free.

I understand that the sheriff's office noted the protections in the contract.

However, trusting Flock as a for-profit company with a vested interest in increasing as much surveillance in as many places as possible would be foolish.

The mass surveillance system collects data that the federal government will seize.

Federal immigration enforcement is using Flocks and surveillance data to track and target immigrants.

Just this month, the board voted unanimously to stop the Dublin prison from ever being used as an immigration detention center.

This action shows that you, the board, understand the need to protect the safety of our community and especially immigrant members in Alameda County to continue to stand by that promise.

Your only choice is to vote no to extend the contract.

Keith Barrows, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Yes, hi.

This is the first time since I've been alive that I'm able to actually come to Portugal, which is where I am right now, but I stayed up so just so I could speak at this.

This meeting is this issue is about safety first.

I I trust the sheriff, I trust Alameda County and to put in the proper safeguards to make sure that uh that we are that we are being looked out for, uh whether it's Flocker or whoever, but this system is about as I said, safety first.

Uh we don't want to become we don't want the unincorporated area to be uh to become uh uh magnet for crime because everybody knows there will be no cameras here or there will be no surveillance here.

I've lived in the unincorporated area for 69 years.

Castor Valley, Ashland and now San Lorenzo.

Um please uh vote yes to keep our communities safe.

We need it.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Savannah, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Savannah Chair, please unmute your phone.

You have one minute.

Hi, I'm here.

Yeah.

Um, I just want to point out that so much of the discussion today is like predicated on the assumption that we're living in some like regular time where law and order is being respected at some larger level.

That's just not the case.

Um I don't know if you all read the news aware what's happening, but um our swift descent into fascism requires some really unique thinking at this time, and that means protecting everyone in our community.

Many people today have come here and said they do not feel safe with this type of technology.

It is well proven you have enough information at your fingertips to know that uh a company like Flock is not one worth doing business with.

Um, your own employees have said that they'd like to go out and find someone else, or they're not too sure about it.

That should give you pause.

You have enough evidence there as well to say this is not a good relationship to be in.

Um flock and mass surveillance systems do not keep people safe, and they're particularly dangerous in this lawless time.

So we'd ask that you say no to Flock, put the put a pause on it, shut down the cameras for now.

You can make a decision in the future if things improve, but until then, please protect vulnerable people in my community.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker, please.

The next in-person speakers are Alberto Parra, Donna Griggs Murphy, Cory Miller, Christine Miller, and Erica Gordon.

Thank you.

If speakers needed interpretation, we can provide that.

Is that right?

Next speaker, please.

Okay.

Okay.

Yes.

Uh yeah, we hear us.

Soy aquí para compartir mis inquietudes sobre flock peregrine.

Uh, good evening.

My name is Alberto Parradiho.

Uh, I am a resident of district through district three, member of ACCE.

I am here to share my uh worries about flock and peregrine.

In temporal de presupuestos ajustados, deveriamos invertir in lo que realmente funciona estabilidad de vivienda, prevención de la violencia.

In these hard uh times, we should invest what really works.

Stability for housing, prevention against crime, and answers to these problems of mental health, and not on systems of vigilance with that do not have an impact that share uh how to prevent delinquency.

With a high cost of this contract, we can instead finance ambassadors of our communities, improve illumination in our uh uh communities or neighborhoods, uh increase the answers against crisis and invest in programs that prevent violence that can reduce delinquency up to 36% in Oakland.

Thank you so much.

Next speaker, please.

Hi, Cory Miller District 2.

Uh seems like we're we're going a little fast.

You know, pump the brakes on a little bit.

You know, we you know and okay, right?

You don't jump from chapter one and go to chapter 10, you know, and expect to understand chapter 10.

So you know, there's some other chapters we gotta explore beforehand, you know, to be more thorough uh going forward.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Do we have more in the room or are they all online next?

No, this too if your name was called to come speak in person.

If your name was called, then come on up and speak.

She called five names, and I think only two came to speak or three.

Donna Griggs Murphy, Christine Miller, Erica Gordon.

And if you don't come up to speak, we'll just assume you've left.

Let's go to the next online.

You have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Can you hear me?

Yes, go ahead, please.

Uh, my name is M.

I'm Filipino, born in the Tribe Valley, and now live in District Five.

Um, despite all precaution to create a well-audited contract with Flock Safety, I urge the board never to trust such a technology, something powered by AI and held by a company known for breaking contracts.

Um does not mean that we can if we have something that is powered by AI and held by a company known for breaking contracts, that means we cannot reliably reliably regulate how secure it is.

There are ways to create backdoors where none exists, and I have seen crisis scenario data models where similar technology was twisted into sharing exact locations, commute patterns, names and addresses of people driving in vehicles tracked by ALPRs.

Additionally, using FLOC means being complicit in supporting labor at unacceptable wage levels in the Philippines, and my ancestors take great offense to that and no, you can do better, please vote no on Flock.

Thank you.

Yeah, I'm gonna uh spend time calling out uh the board chair, uh David Hobart for uh really like creating an unfair process within the speaking uh like within the speaking engagement.

The cherry picking of names to name to make it seem like we're equally turned out when there's clearly an oppositional majority to flock and attempting to provide uh equal time and in equitable ways when there are clearly many times more people against the this vote than in support of it, is just weaponizing the public comment by making it seem like there are more pro-flock comments by ordering the comments as against and opposed.

Like there, and not to mention it doesn't even uh take in the fact some of these astroturf activists like Edward Escobar, uh, who are don't even live in Alameda County, but are coming from like San Francisco and other areas in the Bay Area to come out and support the like back wealthy uh uh Silicon Valley interest uh and Bay Area Tech billionaires.

So with that.

Next speaker.

Lala, you have one minute, go ahead, please.

Welcome.

Hello, um, over Trump's presidency, I have had over nine family members get forcibly displaced due to deportation.

I've had to be in the hospital with my younger cousin while I am a mother, um, because although his parents would love to take my spot, they were forcefully displaced back to our village.

I am asking you to prioritize our community safety over the convenience of the police.

We know that ICE can hack and has hacked these systems to surveil our folks.

So we are talking about a terrorist organization that is moving as such.

They know no laws and they have already proven this.

So while we are knowing that this administration is moving at a white supremacist level, I need y'all to match that level and stand with your community members.

Please vote with your heart and with your humanity.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Brenda Grisham, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

Hi, this is Brittany Grisham, and I'm calling to say yes to Flock as a business owner in district two.

We are just as important as anybody else.

We need the technology.

We don't have enough police to be proactive.

They can only be reactive.

So we need the flock cameras to help to um find the families that are walking the streets that have mental issues.

We need them to find the young ladies that are being trafficked to other cities.

And we need to just not make this political, is what I'm hearing.

Politics, politics, immigrants, immigrants.

There's been enough money put into that where we have to do something a little bit different and make sure that everybody in Alameda County is safe.

Everybody, not just one, but every single person deserves a right to be safe.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Wendy Alpson, you have one minute.

Go ahead, please.

My name is Wendy Alton.

I'm speaking uh at the Berkeley Friends meeting in opposition to the county, accepting the current uh contract and in opposition to its further extension, according to the sheriff's report.

The $600,000 that was mentioned in that report resulted in 60 arrests, 50 of which 53 had a recovery of vehicle of which only 23 or so were felony vehicles.

So most of the arrests were for misdemeanor, and it apparently costs more than a $10,000 per arrest.

And so it's is this really a wise expenditure of our funds?

And it's not safe for all of us to be surveilled and reported to the federal government.

The next five in-person speakers are Arlene Hip, Johnny Kosher, Brian Fogg, Ramesh, and Esme Iglesias.

Next five speakers come on up and um this will conclude the hour of public comment.

If you're here and your name's been called, come line up.

Hello, uh, my name is Johnny Cocher.

I'm a D5 resident of Almeida County and a member of Bay Area Jews for Justice, and I'm here today to urge uh the council to reject the proposal to use flock surveillance technology under the Cloud Act enacted in 2018.

Federal law enforcement can compel any U.S.

company to produce any data they possess, including data held on behalf of a local police department under FISA enacted in 1978 and significantly expanded in 2008.

Intelligence agencies can obtain the same data through secret court order, and the company is legally prohibited from disclosing that the order exists even to the city.

Um under national security letters authorized in 1986 and expanded under the Patriot Act.

The FBI can demand subscriber data in no with no court order uh involvement at all, and again with a mandatory gag order.

Uh, it's impossible for any local contracts to prevent this from happening because of the supremacy clause in the US Constitution.

So I urge you to vote now.

Thank you, next speaker.

Flock is going to be mercy the movie.

It's about a detective who is accused of murdering his wife.

He was completely innocent, caged in a court called mercy.

His fate sealed by AI, 90 minutes until execution.

The clock is ticking, and so Flock will be our mercy.

There was a Vegas man by the name of Jason Killinger, the AI, facial recognition at a Vegas Casino, wrongly identified Jason.

He was wrongfully arrested as well.

Eight people in the United States in 2025 alone was wrongfully arrested due to faulty AI facial recognition.

Us the people must speak out before we are living a real life mercy called Flock.

And you, the Board of Supervisors, have the power to stop Flock.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Please, please come up only if your name was called.

Good evening.

I'm a high school senior who has lived in Oakland my whole life, and I urge you to reject Flock's $854,000 contract extension.

This isn't a camera system.

It's a mass surveillance network that will track every single one of us, making a searchable database that tracks our movements.

You guys say you care about immigrant communities, but this system puts them directly in danger.

We've seen how local policies can't stop federal access through how in July, more than seven of these federal agencies illegally access Oakland's license place data.

The only way to protect our people is to not have this database in the first place.

And lastly, Flock doesn't even work.

Last month in Alameda County, sheriffs pulled over a 62-year-old mom at gunpoint because of a flock camera reading her plate.

Yes, her plates were changed, but that is exactly what shows us how Flock does not distinguish victims.

Studies have shown that almost all flock alerts already lead to absolutely nothing.

This means the result of a flock system would be hyper surveillance with no other youth, which we should know the dangers of.

So many other communities already figured that out and either banned or canceled their flock contracts.

And to be specific, it's over 50 of them.

This 800.

Thank you.

Next speaker.

Good evening.

Um I'm here to ask why we are allowing our data and personal information to be weaponized.