Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Meeting - June 3, 2025
I'd like to call to order this meeting of the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
for Tuesday June 3rd, 2025.
Madam Clerk will you please call the roll and establish a quorum.
Yes, good morning.
Supervisors Kennedy.
Here.
Rodriguez.
Here.
Hume.
Here.
Serna.
Here.
And you have a quorum and let's let the record reflect that Supervisor Desmond will not
be present with us today.
This meeting of the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors is live and recorded and closed
captioning.
It is cable cast on Metro Cable Channel 14, the local government affairs channel on the
Comcast and Direct TV U-verse cable systems.
It is also live streamed at Metro14live.satcounty.gov and today's meeting will be repeated Friday,
June 6th at 6 p.m. on Channel 14 and viewed at youtube.com forward slash Metro Cable 14.
The Board of Supervisors fosters public engagement during the meeting and encourages public participation,
civility, and use of courteous language.
The Board does not condone the use of profanity, vulgar language, gestures, or other inappropriate
behavior including personal attacks or threats directed towards any meeting participant.
Seating is limited and available on a first-come, first-served basis.
Each speaker will be given two minutes to make a public comment and are limited to making
one comment per agenda or off-agenda item.
Please be mindful of the public comment procedures to avoid being interrupted while making your
comment.
Comments made by the public during the Board of Supervisors meetings may include information
that could be inaccurate or misleading, particularly concerning topics related to public health,
voter registrations, and elections.
The County of Sacramento does not endorse or validate the accuracy of public statements
made during these open public forums.
The recordings are shared to provide transparency and access to proceedings of meetings.
If you need to make a comment in person, please fill out a speaker request form and hand it
to clerk staff.
The chairperson will open public comments for each agenda or off-agenda item and direct the
clerk to call the name of each speaker.
When the clerk calls your name, please come to the podium and make your comment.
If a speaker is unavailable to make a comment prior to the closing of public comments, the
speaker waives their request to speak and the clerk will file the speaker request form in
the record.
The clerk will manage the timer and allow each speaker two minutes to make a comment.
Off-agenda public comments will take place for a maximum of 30 minutes, and the remainder
of the agenda comments will take place at the conclusion of the time matters in the afternoon.
You may send written comments by email to boardclerk at saccounty.gov, and your comment
will be routed to the board and filed in the record.
If you need an accommodation pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act or for medical
or other reasons, please see clerk staff for assistance or contact the clerk's office at
916-874-5451 or by email at boardclerk at saccounty.gov.
Thank you in advance for your courtesy and understanding of the meeting procedures.
Thank you, Madam Clerk.
Supervisor Hume, will you do us the honor of leading us in the pledge, please?
Sure.
Please address the flag.
Pledge.
Pledge.
Please address the flag of the United States of America.
Pledge.
By the allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.
And to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty
and justice for all.
Again, I'd like to welcome everyone that has joined us here in chambers and who might
be watching out there to today's proceedings.
I'VE BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT.
WE HAVE ANOTHER BUSY
AGENDA.
I SEE THAT WE HAVE A NUMBER OF
YOUNG PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE
IT'LL BE GREAT TO SEE YOUNG
PEOPLE HERE.
WE'LL HEAR ABOUT THEM AND
PERHAPS FROM THEM LATER.
AGAIN AS A FRIENDLY REMINDER
YOU CERTAINLY ARE WELCOME TO
ADDRESS THE BOARD ON ANY ITEM
ON OUR PRINTED AGENDA OR ANY
ITEM THAT'S NOT ON OUR AGENDA
AND WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THE
COMPANY.
WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THE
COMPANY.
WE'LL BE TALKING ABOUT THE
COMPANY.
WE'LL HAVE NO MORE THAN TWO
MINUTES THAT WAY EVERYONE WHO
WISHES TO ADDRESS THE BOARD HAS
THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO.
IF YOU COULD PLEASE COMPLETE
THAT SPEAKER SLIP AND GET IT TO
OUR CLEAR THAT WAY WE HAVE YOUR
NAME CORRECTLY SPELLED FOR THE
RECORD AND LOOK FORWARD TO
HEARING FROM YOU IF YOU DECIDE
TO PETITION YOUR COUNTY BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS TODAY.
WITH THAT, MADMEN CLERK, OUR
FIRST ITEM.
WE'RE WORKING ON GETTING THIS
LIST UP ON THE VIDEO SCREEN.
VERY GOOD.
MORNING, MIKE.
MORNING, CHAIR CERNA,
SUPERVISORS.
MY NAME IS MIKE JASKE, MEMBER OF
ST. MARK'S UNITED METHODIST
CHURCH AND AN ACTIVE LEADER IN
SACDAC.
FIRST, SOME QUOTATIONS FROM
PRESIDENT LYNDON B. JOHNSON ON
MAY 24, 1964 TO THE GRADUATING
CLASS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
MICHIGAN.
SECONDLY, A FEW CONCLUDING
REMARKS OF MY OWN.
SO, PRESIDENT JOHNSON SPEAKING TO
GRADUATES.
YOUR IMAGINATION, YOUR INITIATIVE,
AND YOUR INDIGNATION WILL
DETERMINE WHETHER WE BUILD A
SOCIETY WHERE PROGRESS IS A
SERVANT OF OUR NEEDS OR A
SOCIETY WHERE OLD AND NEW
VISIONS ARE BURIED UNDER
UNBRIIDLED GROWTH.
FOR IN YOUR TIME WE HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE NOT ONLY
TOWARD THE RICH SOCIETY AND THE
POWERFUL SOCIETY, BUT UPWARD TO
THE GREAT SOCIETY.
THE GREAT SOCIETY REST ON
ABUNDANCE AND LIBERTY FOR ALL.
IT DEMANDS AN END TO POVERTY
AND RACIAL JUSTICE.
BUT THAT'S JUST THE BEGINNING.
IT'S A PLACE WHERE MEN ARE
MORE CONCERNED WITH THE QUALITY
OF THEIR GOALS THAN THE
QUANTITY OF THEIR GOODS.
MOST OF ALL, THE GREAT
SOCIETY IS NOT A SAFE HARBOR,
A RESTING PLACE, A FINAL
OBJECTIVE, A FINAL
WORK.
IT'S A CHALLENGE CONSTANTLY
RENEWED, BECKONING US TOWARD
A DESTINY WHERE THE MEANING OF
OUR LIVES MATCHES THE MARVELOUS
PRODUCTS OF OUR LABOR.
WHILE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
HAS MANY PROGRAMS DIRECTED AT
THOSE ISSUES, I DO NOT PRETEND
THAT WE HAVE THE FULL ANSWER TO
THOSE PROBLEMS.
THE SOLUTION TO THESE PROBLEMS
DOES NOT REST ON A MASSIVE
PROGRAM IN THE FEDERAL
IN WASHINGTON, NOR CAN IT RELY
SOLELY ON THE STRAINED
RESOURCES OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT.
THEY REQUIRE US TO CREATE NEW
CONCEPTS OF COOPERATION, A
CREATIVE FEDERALISM BETWEEN
THE NATION'S CAPITAL AND THE
LEADERS OF LOCAL COMMUNITIES.
SO HOW DO THESE COMMENTS
APPLY TO YOU?
WE'RE IN A TIME OF GREAT
NATIONAL TURMOIL.
PROMINENT LEADERS ALLEGED
AMERICAN PEOPLE SUPPORT
EFFORTS TO RETURN TO SOCIAL
DARWINISM, SURVIVAL OF THE
FIEST, AND THIS WILL MAKE
MERRICA GREAT ONCE AGAIN.
DON'T BELIEVE IT.
DON'T SUCCUM TO IT.
EVEN IF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT HAS TEMPORARILY
BEEN CAPTURED BY
DECEITFUL OLIGARCHS, YOU
SHOULD ACT ON THE PROMISE
THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS PART
OF THE SOLUTION.
USE THE VISION THAT
PRESIDENT JOHNSON
ARTICULATED IN YOUR OWN
DECISION-MAKING.
BE INSPIRED TO HELP THE
LEAST AMONG US IN ALL THE
DECISIONS YOU MAKE.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, MIKE.
APPRECIATE THOSE COMMENTS.
TED SAMARA.
GOOD MORNING, TED.
GOOD MORNING, SUPERVISORS.
TED SAMARA, EXECUTIVE
DIRECTOR OF UNITED PUBLIC
EMPLOYEES.
WE REPRESENT ROUGHLY AROUND
3500 OF YOUR COUNTY
EMPLOYEES.
SO TODAY IS ONE OF THOSE
DAYS OF RECKONING.
MY OIGHT BARGAINING UNIT,
UP OIGHT BARGAINING UNIT IS
AT IMPASS.
WE HAVE A STATE MEDIATOR
RIGHT NOW HERE IN
SACRAMENTO TRYING TO GO BACK
AND FORTH BETWEEN THE COUNTY
AND MY BARGAINING UNIT TO
REACH AN AGREEMENT.
WE HAVE THREE MORE MEETINGS
FOR THE OFFICE TECHNICAL
BARGAINING UNIT.
OF COURSE WE'LL BE AT IMPASS
AS WELL AS THERE.
I'M HERE TO PLEAD TO YOU
ALL TO REMEMBER THAT
WHAT THE MEMBERS OF UPE
SACRIFICED FOR THE LAST
FIVE TO SIX YEARS WITHOUT
MAKING A LIVABLE WAGE.
THEY'RE BEHIND THE COST OF
LIVING.
I KNOW YOU HAVE THE COUNTY
OVER HERE SAYING,
WELL, WE GOT OTHER UNITS
THAT AGREE TO A 2.8%.
BUT THOSE OTHER UNITS MAKE
$90,000 OR ABOVE.
HOW MUCH DO THE ATTORNEYS
MAKE?
MY MEMBERS RANGE FROM 45 TO
80,000.
THINK ABOUT THAT.
IF YOU BELIEVE EGGS HAVE GONE
DOWN, WELL, TELL ME THE STORE
YOU'RE SHOPPING AT SO I CAN
SEND MY MEMBERS THERE.
WHERE ARE THEY BUYING THE
CHEAP GAS?
I HAVE, JUST A COUPLE
MEANINGS AGO, THIS BOARD
AUTHORIZED THE COUNTY EXECTS
TO DISH OUT 25,000 RELOCATION
FEES FOR TOP SENIOR
POSITIONS THEY CAN'T FILL.
MY MEMBERS CAN'T EVEN
AFFORD TO BUY A HOUSE.
I HAVE FOLKS IN THE OFFICE
TECHNICAL BARTENING UNIT THAT
ARE ON WELFARE.
THESE ARE YOUR EMPLOYEES.
THEY GOT TO GO AND APPLY FOR
AID SO THAT THEY CAN CONTINUE
TO PUT FOOD ON THE TABLE FOR
THEIR MEMBERS.
THEY SHOULD BE A SHAME OF
THAT.
IT'S NOT LOST ON US.
THAT YOU GOT YOURS AND THEY
GOT THEIRS.
WHAT ANNE DID WHEN SHE
PACKAGED THAT DEAL TO GIVE
HERSELF A 16% RAISE AND ALL
THOSE DEPUTY COUNTY EXEC AND
DIRECTORS RAISES WHEN YOU GOT
YOURS SO THEY CAN GET UP TO
THE MEDIUM.
BUT OUR FOLKS CAN'T.
THEY'RE THE ONES THAT KEEP
THE WELFARE DEPARTMENTS
RUNNING.
THE SOCIAL STATES.
THEY'RE THE ONES THAT KEEP
THE WELFARE DEPARTMENTS
RUNNING.
THE SOCIAL STATES.
THEY'RE THE ONES THAT KEEP
THE WELFARE DEPARTMENTS
RUNNING.
THE SOCIAL SERVICES
DEPARTMENTS RUNNING.
THESE ARE SOCIAL WORKERS,
HISS, CLERICO, SHERIFF
RECORD SPECIALS.
THOSE ARE THE DIRECTORS
HERE.
IF THEY BELIEVE THEY CAN'T
MAKE, THEY CAN WORK
WITHOUT MY MEMBERS IN THEIR
DEPARTMENTS, WE'LL SUE SEE.
BECAUSE IF YOU CONTINUE
WITH THE 2.8 ON THE TABLE,
WE WILL STRIKE YOU.
MY MEMBERS SPOKE LOUDLY
WHEN THEY AUTHORIZED THIS,
A UPE TO STRIKE.
WE DON'T WANT TO STRIKE.
THEY WANT A LIVABLE WAGE.
JUST AS YOU GOT ONE.
JUST AS THEY GOT ONE.
JUST AS THOSE DIRECTORS
RECEIVED ONE.
SO PLEASE, YOU HAVE A BIG,
TOUGH DECISIONS TO MAKE
HERE IN THE NEXT COUPLE
DAYS AND WHEN IT COMES TO
YOUR AGENDA, TO YOUR
BUDGET, DON'T FORGET ABOUT
THE WORKING CLASS.
PLEASE.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU, TED.
THAT CONCLUDES YOUR
PUBLIC COMMENTS.
ALL RIGHT.
OK.
SO, MADAM CLERK, ADVISE
ME ON WHAT WE CAN DO NEXT IN
TERMS OF USING OUR TIME BEST.
YES.
WE CAN TAKE CONSENT MATTERS,
ITEMS 4 THROUGH 19.
OK.
AND I DO NOT HAVE ANY CLERK
NOTES.
I'LL TURN THAT OVER TO YOU,
MR. CHAIR.
OKAY.
THANK YOU.
ANY MEMBER OF THE BOARD WISH
TO PULL AN ITEM FOR COMMENT
OR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION?
SUPERVISOR HUGH.
THANK YOU, CHAIR.
I DON'T WISH TO PULL THE
ITEM, BUT I DO HAVE QUESTIONS
ON ITEM NUMBER 12.
OKAY.
I'LL READ.
I DON'T SEE DIRECTOR SATOW IN
THE AUDIENCE, BUT MAYBE SOMEBODY
CAN ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT
THIS PROGRAM.
OKAY.
SO, ITEM NUMBER 12 IS TO APPROVE
THE RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE
DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF
WATER RESOURCES TO ACCEPT
SACRAMENTO AREA FLOOD
CONTROL AGENCY BEACH STONE LAKE
AREA FLOOD MITIGATION FACTOR
AND THE DEPARTMENT OF THE
SACRAMENTO AREA FLOOD
CONTROL AGENCY BEACH STONE LAKE
AREA FLOOD MITIGATION FUNDS.
THANK YOU.
SO, MY QUESTION IS, IF THIS IS,
FROM WHAT I READ IN THE BOARD
LETTER, IT'S APPARENTLY SAFKA
SAYING HERE'S THE REMAINDER OF
THE FUNDS FOR THIS PROGRAM.
YOU TAKE IT.
YOU ADMINISTER IT.
RATHER THAN REIMBURSING US ON
AN ANNUAL BASIS.
BUT MY, I GUESS THE, THE
FOUNDATION OF THE FUNDATION
IS, THE FUNDATION OF THE
FUNDATION OF THE FUNDATION
IS, THE FUNDATION OF THE
FUNDATION OF THE FUNDATION
IS, THE FUNDATION OF THE
FUNDATION OF THE FUNDATION
IS, IF IT WAS ORIGINALLY $2
MILLION AND WE'RE NOW DOWN TO
$7.57 AND SOME CHANGE BEING
TRANSFERRED OVER, SO CALL IT
1.3 MILLION THAT'S BEEN
EXPENDED IN THE LAST 20 YEARS.
SO, I'M ASKING WHAT IS THE
ANNUAL OUTLAY OR HOW MANY
HOUSES DOES THIS AFFECT OR
HOW LONG WILL THIS BEEN
EXPENDED IN THE LAST 20
YEARS.
SO, I'M ASKING WHAT IS THE
ANNUAL OUTLAY OR HOW MANY
HOUSES DOES THIS AFFECT OR
HOW LONG WILL THIS BEEN
REMAINDER LAST?
WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THE
OVERALL PROGRAM IRRESPECTIVE
OF THE FACT OF THE TRANSFERING
OF FUNDS ALL IN A LUMPSUM
RATHER THAN ANNUALLY?
GOOD MORNING BOARD MEMBERS,
AMITAR SANDY, CHIEF OF
DRAIN AGE DIVISION, WATER
RESOURCES.
SO, THIS PROGRAM, OUR PLAN IS
THERE'S THE $797,000 THAT'S
BEING TRANSFERRED RIGHT NOW.
WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THIS
PROGRAM, THERE'S I THINK
MAYBE LESS THAN 10 POLICIES OR
MAYBE A LITTLE MORE THAT
ARE BEING FUNDED THROUGH
SAFECA.
THE PLAN IS WE'RE GOING TO
FUND THOSE INSURANCE PREMIUMS
FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS AT
LEAST.
AFTER TWO YEARS WE'RE GOING TO
REASSESS AND SEE KIND OF IF
THERE'S OTHER OPTIONS AVAILABLE
AS FAR AS OTHER IMPROVEMENTS
THAT CAN BE MADE.
WE CAN POSSIBLY USE THOSE
FUNDS ON OTHER IMPROVEMENTS
IN THAT AREA TO MAYBE
ALLEVIATE.
BUT FOR RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING
TO REASSESS AFTER TWO YEARS.
AND SO IN THE MCCORMICK
WILLIAMSON TRACK PROJECT AND
IN OUR RESULTING MORRISON
CREEG FLOAD STUDY, DID ANY OF
THESE HOUSES AFFECTED WHERE
THEY HAVE TO HAVE FLOOD
INSURANCE PREMIUMS AND FLOOD
INSURANCE.
DID ANY OF THEM GET TAKEN OUT
OF THAT DESIGNATION?
SO NO HOMES GOT TAKEN OUT.
THERE'S THE WATER SURFACE
ELEVATIONS BASED ON THE
HOMES THAT CAN BE MADE.
WE CAN POSSIBLY USE THOSE
FUNDS ON OTHER IMPROVEMENTS
IN THAT AREA TO MAYBE
ALLEVIATE.
BUT FOR RIGHT NOW WE'RE GOING TO
THE STUDIES AND MCCORMICK
WILLIAMSON THERE WAS SOME
REDUCTION IN WATER SURFACE
ELEVATIONS.
BUT AS FAR AS THE HOMES IN THE
FLOOD PLANE THOSE ARE IN THE
FEMA FLOOD PLANE SO THOSE WILL
ONLY COME OUT WHEN FEMA DECIDES
TO REMODEL THE AREA.
SO WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH
FEMA AND THEY HAVE NO IMMEDIATE
PLANS OF RE-MAPPING THAT WHOLE
FLOOD PLANE.
AND SO IN THOSE WATER
ELEVATIONS IT'S REDUCED BY A
QUARTER FOOT UP TO FOUR
TENDS OF A FOOT IN SOME
CASES ALMOST FOUR TENDS.
THAT DOESN'T AFFECT HOW MUCH
FLOOD INSURANCE YOU HAVE TO
HAVE, CORRECT?
IT'S AN ALL OR NOTHING PLAY I
WOULD IMAGINE.
SO FEMA HAS THEY ACTUALLY HAVE
A RISK RATING 2.0 WHICH
THEY'VE CHANGED THE PREMIUMS
NOW IT'S BASED ON YOUR RISK.
SO BASED ON THE WHERE YOUR
ELEVATION IS OF YOUR HOME
COMPARED TO THE WATER SURFACE
ELEVATION OF THE FLOOD PLANE
THAT'S HOW THEY ADMINISTER
THOSE PREMIUMS ON THE FLOOD
INSURANCE.
SO POTENTIALLY CHANGING THESE
ELEVATIONS DID CHANGE THE
AMOUNT OF THE PREMIUM.
SO THE PREMIUMS DID COME DOWN
ACTUALLY IN THAT AREA.
OKAY.
GOOD TO KNOW.
THANK YOU.
AND THEN FINAL QUESTION.
DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA YOU SAID
WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS FOR TWO
YEARS AND THEN RE-EVALUATE?
EXACTLY.
AND THESE FUNDS OBVIOUSLY
SINCE THEY'VE LASTED THIS LONG
THEY WILL LAST THOSE
PERMITTING TWO YEARS.
ABSOLUTELY.
OKAY.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU CHAIR.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS?
I'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE THE
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS
NUMBER 4 THROUGH 19 FOR
APPROVAL.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE THE
CONSENT.
I'LL GO AHEAD AND MOVE THE
CONSENT.
OKAY.
IS THERE A SECOND?
SECOND.
OKAY.
MADAM CLERK, DO WE HAVE
ANYONE SIGN UP TO SPEAK ON
CONSENT?
WE DO NOT HAVE ANYONE SIGN
UP FOR CONSENT MATTERS.
OKAY.
BEFORE WE VOTE I WANT TO MAKE
NOTE OF THE FACT THAT DURING
MY TENURE THIS IS THE SHORTEST
CONSENT AGENDA I'VE EVER SEEN.
SO WHATEVER MAGIC YOU'RE
SPRINKLING ON THIS BETWEEN THE
CLEARKS OFFICE AND THE CEO'S
OFFICE CONTINUE PLEASE.
WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
PLEASE VOTE.
UNANIMOUS VOTE WITH THOSE
MEMBERS PRESENT.
ALL RIGHT.
VERY GOOD.
SHOULD WE TAKE UP NOMINATIONS?
YEAH.
WE CAN GO TO NOMINATIONS.
I ALSO WANT TO DO YOUR OWN
RANKS BUT I NEED ONE SECOND TO
GET TO THAT.
SORRY ABOUT THAT.
I'M HAVING SOME TECHNICAL ISSUES.
OKAY.
SO FOR YOUR OWN RANKS.
SO FOR YOUR OWN RANKS ITEM 26
THIS IS TO CONSIDER OWN RANKS TO
THE AREA FOR AGENCY ON AGING.
AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE
REAPPOINTING OR REQUESTING AN
APPOINTMENT FOR THE ALTERNATE
POSITION.
OKAY.
AND CURRENTLY CECILLE NUNLEY IS
YOUR ALTERNATE SUPERVISOR
CERNA.
CORRECT.
WOULD YOU LIKE TO REAPPOINT
HER?
I WANT TO CONTINUE THIS.
I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY OTHER
CANDIDATE.
SO I WOULD JUST ASSUME REAPPOINT
HER.
REAPPOINT.
OKAY.
GOT IT.
THANK YOU FOR THAT.
WE'LL UPDATE THE OWN RANKS
APPOINTMENT LIST AND GET THAT OUT
TO EVERYONE.
AND NOW WE CAN MOVE ON TO ITEM 28.
THIS IS YOUR NOMINATIONS.
OKAY.
YOU'RE CONTINUING TO JUNE 10th THE
CARMICLE RECREATION AND PARK
DISTRICT, CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION,
DISABILITY ADVISORY COMMISSION,
SHERIFF COMMUNITY REVIEW COMMISSION,
SOUTH SACRAMENTO AREA COMMUNITY
PLANNING ADVISORY COUNCIL, AND THE
VINEYARD AREA COMMUNITY PLANNING
ADVISORY COUNCIL.
YOU'RE CONTINUING TO JULY 8th THE
AMERICAN RIVER PARKWAY ADVISORY
COMMITTEE, CEMETERY ADVISORY
COMMISSION, DELTA CITIZENS
MUNICIPAL ADVISORY COUNCIL, LOCAL
CHILD CARE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
COUNCIL, PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
OF THE COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO METRO
AIRPARK ENHANCED INFRASTRUCTURE
FINANCING DISTRICT.
AND THEN YOU'RE CONTINUING TO JULY
22nd THE CHILDREN'S COALITION, ELK
GROVE COSUMNA CEMETERY DISTRICT,
IN HOME SUPPORT OF SERVICES
ADVISORY COMMITTEE, SACRAMENTO
COUNTY BEHAVIORAL HEALTH YOUTH
ADVISORY COMMITTEE, SACRAMENTO
COUNTY BEHAVIORAL HEALTH YOUTH
ADVISORY BOARD AND THE SACRAMENTO
COUNTY TREASURY OVERSIGHT
COMMITTEE.
YOUR FIRST ITEM TODAY IS THE
ANTELOPE COMMUNITY PLANNING
ADVISORY COUNCIL.
I WILL NOMINATE MATTHEW
KEARNEY AND EMILY MCSHANE.
OKAY.
AND THEN CONTINUE THE REST UNTIL
JUNE 10TH.
THANK YOU.
CARMICHAEL COMMUNITY PLANNING
ADVISORY COUNCIL.
I HAVE A NOTE FROM THE DISTRICT
OFFICE TO CONTINUE TO JUNE 10TH.
OKAY.
AND CORDOVA COMMUNITY PLANNING
ADVISORY COUNCIL.
SUPERVISOR HUGH.
CONTINUE TO JUNE 10TH PLEASE.
OKAY.
THANK YOU.
MATERNAL CHILD AND ADOLESCENT
HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD.
CHAIR SERNA.
MY NOTES DON'T HAVE ANYTHING
FOR DISTRICT ONE.
OKAY.
I HAVE A NOTE FROM THE CHIEFS TO
CONTINUE TO JULY 8TH.
WOULD THAT BE?
THAT'S FINE.
OKAY.
THANK YOU.
MISSION OAKS RECREATION AND PARK
DISTRICT.
I HAVE A NOTE FOR DISTRICT 3 TO
CONTINUE TO JUNE 10TH.
ORANGEVILLE COMMUNITY PLANNING
ADVISORY COUNCIL.
SUPERVISOR RODRIGUEZ.
PLEASE CONTINUE TO JULY 8TH.
PUBLIC HEALTH ADVISORY BOARD.
CHIEFS ARE RECOMMENDING CONTINUING
THE ITEM TO JULY 8TH.
THANK YOU.
RIOLINDA ELVERTA COMMUNITY PLANNING
ADVISORY COUNCIL.
I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE COURTNEY
SPEARS AND CONTINUE THE REMAINDER
UNTIL JUNE 10TH.
THANK YOU.
SUNRISE RECREATION AND PARK
DISTRICT.
CONTINUE THE ITEM TO JULY 10TH.
THANK YOU.
THAT CONCLUDES YOUR NOMINATIONS.
AND SO WE WILL NEED TO TAKE A SHORT
RECESS.
I'M GOING TO JUST COME THROUGH
HERE ONE MORE TIME.
UNTIL 1015, CORRECT?
YEAH.
SO, WE WILL NEED TO TAKE A SHORT
RECESS.
I'M GOING TO JUST COMB THROUGH
HERE ONE MORE TIME.
UNTIL 1015, CORRECT?
LET'S START AT 10.
YEAH.
SO, WE COULD START AT 10 AND TAKE ONE
OF THE FIRST HEARING MATTERS AND
I'LL LEAVE THAT TO THE CHAIR IF
YOU WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT AND GO
BACK TO PRESENTATIONS.
YEAH.
LET'S DO THAT.
OKAY.
WE WILL STAND IN RECESS FOR 10
MINUTES UNTIL 10 O'CLOCK.
ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU.
THANK YOU.
I'd like to call back to order this meeting of the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
Tuesday, June 3rd, 2025.
Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll and reestablish a quorum?
Yes.
Supervisors Kennedy?
Here.
Rodriguez?
Here.
Hume?
Here.
Cerner?
Here.
And you have a quorum.
Very good.
Next item, please.
Okay, Mr. Chair, we're going to go to your first timed item, which is item 20.
This is the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act hearing, request for approval of tax-exempt
bonds by the California Enterprise Development Authority for the benefit of Verge Center
for the Arts and the amount not to exceed $1.5 million.
Okay.
Good morning, Chair Cerner and supervisors.
I'm Colin Bettis, your county debt officer.
Today's Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act hearing is a request from Verge Center
for the Arts and California Enterprise Development Authority, of which the county of Sacramento
is a member.
The hearing is to request approval of a tax-exempt bond issuance in the amount not to exceed $1.5
million.
Verge Center for the Arts is a non-profit organization that provides contemporary art and art resources
to the Sacramento region.
Before Verge can issue these bonds, federal law requires that the public hearing be held
and approved and approval obtained from the jurisdiction in which the project is located.
Proceeds of this debt issuance will be used to finance or refinance debt associated with
the building at 625 S Street, Sacramento, California.
These taxes and bonds are payable solely by Verge Center for the Arts and are not a direct
obligation of either the California Enterprise Development Authority or the county of Sacramento.
The county staff is recommending the board conduct the public hearing and at the close
of the hearing adopt the resolution that approves the issuance bonds by the California
Enterprise Development Authority on behalf of Verge Center for the Arts.
We also have from Verge Center for the Arts, Liv Moe, the executive director.
Great.
Thank you, Colin.
Any questions for staff?
Seeing none.
Okay.
Madam Clerk, do we have any public speakers?
We do not.
All right.
Very good.
Okay.
In that event, I will move the item and look for a second.
Second.
It's been moved and second.
Please vote.
Okay.
Unanimous vote with those members present.
Okay.
Very good.
In my understanding, Madam Clerk, is we're going to take another short break?
Yes.
Okay.
And then we will reconvene at 1015.
I'd like to call back to order this meeting of the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors
for Tuesday, June 3rd, 2025.
Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll and reestablish?
Yes.
Supervisors Kennedy.
Here.
Rodriguez.
Here.
Hume.
Here.
Cerna.
Here.
And you have a quorum.
Okay.
Next item.
All right.
Mr. Chair, we're going back to presentations.
Item 2 is the presentation recognizing family health and fitness day and free entry for select
family health and fitness day activities on June 14, 2025.
Good morning.
Liz Bellis, Director of Regional Parks.
I have a PowerPoint.
Yay.
Thank you.
Look, I included our very fancy.
I'm not even going to try and say the word 175 years.
Okay.
So I'm super excited to be here.
As you know, I love parks.
I love sharing with you all the wonderful things that we can do in our regional park system.
And we have a whole slate of activities set up for you for June 14th, which is family health
and fitness day.
It's a nationwide celebration.
We recognize the essential roles that parks and recreation play in keeping individuals,
families, and communities healthy and active.
We do have a cool new logo for family health and fitness day.
We were going to try and do merch on demand this year, but Amazon denied us and
said, no, you can't have a storefront.
So we're going to plan B.
We're going to figure it out.
It's going to happen.
Maybe not this year, but it's going to happen.
Someday you can rock your own very special family health and fitness day shirt.
First things first, who needs a little goat therapy?
I think I might partake.
So if you go to Gibson Ranch, you can hang out with some of our goats.
These are some of the crew that we use at our grazing and wildfire fuel reduction program.
And if not, you can join us for a Zumba class.
That's in partnership with our Sacramento County Public Health.
Or if you prefer, in partnership with CrossFit Natomas, you can do a CrossFit class.
Or if something a little more low-key is your style, how about a partnership with Green Acres for a gardening workshop?
That's going to be at our newly established community garden at Gibson Ranch.
We're still up and running on that.
And we're hoping to open that up by fall of this year.
We have a lot of free family fun in partnership with Corse Go at Cherry Island Golf Course.
There'll be all kinds of fun things for kids to do.
So bring the family.
Or a competitive game of dodgeball at our Cherry Island Sports Complex.
This is in partnership with Rio Linda Elberto Recreation and Park District.
The Dry Creek Ranch House.
If you like a good car show, check them out.
This is all day from noon to 8, Night of the Revving Dead.
A lot of cool cars will be out there, a lot of fun activities.
And this is at the Dry Creek Ranch House.
That is leased by the Historical Society.
Sacramento Valley Conservancy.
If you'd like to do a volunteer work project on the American River Parkway,
they have something going on in Camp Pollock.
American River Raft Rentals is offering a break on their next raft rental
if you join us on Family Health and Fitness Day.
For the little ones at Efeon Nature Center, we have the Nature of Reading Program.
Parents, you don't get to strap the kids off,
but you can hang out and read a book with them in Efeon.
It's a beautiful place.
There is limited parking, as you well know, at Ansel Hoffman for the next month or so.
Safe cycling and hiking.
Our American River Parkway Bike Patrol is going to be offering talks on the hour
to talk about safe cycling and hiking for families.
And they also will have some free bike helmet distribution.
And this was a new thing for this year, and I'm really excited about this.
This is a trail accessibility equipment demonstration at Discovery Park at the Alder picnic site area.
We will have a myriad of different types of equipment that people could try out.
In case you might need something a little bit different to still be able to enjoy our trails,
even into our later years.
Soilborne Farms has yoga and also the farm stands.
You can get some nice, fresh Prudus, organic.
And Splash is offering a BioBlitz at Mather Regional Park around the lake.
You can learn all about native plants, birds, local wildlife, and participate in that with iNaturalist.
If you would like a fun run, we've got a fun run for you.
Come out to the Consumatory Preserve.
We've got a 5K.
So I'm hoping that you will find something on this list that will make it a great day for you to join us in our regional park system.
Thank you so much.
Thank you, Liz.
Any questions or comments from board members?
Okay.
Appreciate it.
Madam Clerk, do we have anyone sign up to speak on this?
We do not have any speakers signed up for this item.
Okay.
Next item, please.
Okay.
Our next item is the presentation of resolutions honoring the award winners of Sacramento County History Day 2025.
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I'm going to go ahead and tee up first.
Okay.
Okay.
Very good.
Colleagues and members of the public, it's my distinct honor and privilege to say a few words today,
as we always do, to honor the award winners of the Sacramento County History Day event.
And as I mentioned at the commencement of today's board meeting,
we're fortunate to have some very knowledgeable young people here with us,
joining us in the meeting today to not just be recognized,
but hopefully say a few words.
So get prepared.
I'm going to expect you to do a little public speaking.
I know it can be uncomfortable sometimes,
but we're always very eager to hear from our youngest constituents
about all the endeavors that they're part of,
whether it be academic or otherwise.
And this is an annual tradition.
I say that for the benefit of our newest member of the board,
supervisor Rodriguez, that we get to hear from Dr. Bob, but also his students.
And it's rightful that we do this.
It's important.
I can't help but think of supervisor Antoli and his delight that he took in these presentations every year.
And I have likewise kind of adopted the same anticipation.
So, again, I won't read all the whereases,
but, again, we're going to hear the most important part of today's presentation,
which is from the young people.
But before we do that, we'll hear from Dr. Bob.
I'm Dr. Bob LaPerriere, the chair of the special awards committee of the Sacramento County History Day Committee.
And I'd like to take this time to thank the board for their continuous support
and help in awarding the students every year
and bringing the fact that Sacramento History Day is existing and is an annual event.
Sacramento County History Day is held yearly in early March,
and it's related to California State History Day and National History Day.
Winners at the county level progress to state and state winners,
go to national.
For ease of descriptions, it's the history counterpart of science fairs
and is organized by the Sacramento County Office of Education
and the Center for Sacramento History through the History Day Committee.
History Day is open to grades 4 through 12,
with, in California, grades 4 and 5 competing in a poster or two-dimensional category.
6th through 12th grades complete in junior and senior divisions in one of six categories,
performances, exhibits, websites, documentaries, podcasts, or papers.
Each year, a theme is determined that guides the topics that the students choose.
The theme the students had to follow for this year was rights and responsibilities in history.
The education these students get is an adjunct to the regular school,
learning techniques such as proper research through primary and secondary documents.
In addition to the judging for progression to state and national,
Sacramento County has a special awards program with a variety of organizations,
giving awards to stimulate and interest the students in aspects of history
they may not generally think of or be aware of.
It is always a real joy to see the enthusiasm these students have
and the amazing quality of their projects.
I encourage everyone to get involved with this wonderful program.
Information can be found on their website if you just Google Sacramento County History Day.
This year, there were 307 students involved with a total of 162 projects.
The Board of Supervisors awards are in the special awards category,
and this year, three projects will be presented,
a resolution from our County Board of Supervisors.
And those three projects are one of Nathaniel Colley,
which was a poster done by Vida Arvind and Daya Grandler.
The other one is an exhibit,
and it was entitled From Disaster to Desegregation,
the Port Chicago Mutiny.
Winston Churchill Middle School is involved with this,
and the winner was Maui Singhai.
And William Landers did a project on the United Nations,
a documentary from Our Lady of Assumption School.
And they are here today except for Daya, who worked with Vida.
Daya is out of town, but will receive her award later.
Thank you very much for your attention,
and I'd like to call all the students up here.
Thank you very much for your attention.
Thank you.
Dr. Bob, are they going,
are they going to maybe tell us their name
and what their, a little bit about their project?
I'll do that.
I'll introduce them,
and then they can do that before I give the award.
First of all, we have William Landers, who did a documentary on the United Nations.
Hello, my name is William Landers, and I did, as he said, a documentary on the United Nations.
I am in seventh grade at Our Lady of the Assumption School.
And...
Tell us about your research.
Oh.
So when I was researching, I looked really into the history of them, and specifically the International Court of Justice, which is in Everlands, and the court cases that were held there.
Okay, very great. Very good.
And did you do a lot of that research using the internet or libraries?
I used the internet and the websites that the United Nations hold up.
Okay, very good.
And did you learn about the, kind of the current importance of the United Nations?
Yeah, I did.
It's trying to keep, like, the world together and not having, like, more, like, wars and stuff like that.
Couldn't have said it better myself. Thank you.
All right.
Thank you so much.
Very good. Congratulations.
Congratulations.
Congratulations.
Next we have Molly Singhai, who did a project entitled From Disaster to Desegregation, the Port Chicago Mutiny, which was an exhibit.
Congratulations, Molly.
So, hi.
My name is Molly Singhai.
I am in seventh grade.
I go to Winston Churchill Middle School.
My project was about the Port Chicago, California.
Is that in Contra Costa County?
Yes, it is.
Okay.
All right.
And tell us a little bit about what it was.
What happened?
What was the event?
Well, during World War II, Port Chicago was, its main purpose was to export munitions.
Mm-hmm.
Black sailors were the only ones who did that.
They were, they had, it was a very dangerous job and they weren't given proper training.
Okay.
Later in, on July 14th, 1944, there was an explosion.
351 people died.
Mm-hmm.
Later, well, two days later, they asked all of the black sailors, the only ones who had to do this work, to come back to work.
And 50 of them refused.
They were charged with mutiny and were exonerated 80 years later.
So in 2024, it was the primary cause to the desegregation of the armed forces.
Terrific.
That's, you know, that's an event that I don't think many of us know much about.
So you just educated a bunch of us.
So thank you for that.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
And now we have Vita Arvind, who worked on a project with Daya Gander, who cannot be here today.
So Vita will make sure that her co-worker in this project does receive her award also.
All right.
Very good.
Hi.
Hi.
Hi.
Hi.
My name is Vita, and I'm in fourth grade at Theater Judah Elementary, and my topic is Nathaniel Coley.
All right.
And tell us a little bit about who that is.
So Nathaniel Coley was a black attorney.
And he fought for, like, black's rights and, like, different things like education, housing, and the U.S. Armed Forces.
Okay.
Very important things.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Very good.
Well, congratulations.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
This is an example of the posters and the one that Vita did and Nathaniel Coley.
And he's really in the news historically now because the Sacramento Historical Society is working on a statue in honor and memory of Nathaniel.
Very good.
That's awesome.
Terrific.
Thank you.
I thank you all for your time and, again, for your annual contribution to History Day.
hopefully I'll see you next year again. Thank you Dr. Bob for all you do and for
you know leading this and guiding the students as you do every year it's
remarkable that these young minds are doing what they're doing relative to
certainly history but as we heard from each of the three students some very
relevant history even as it relates to kind of our contemporary challenges
and whether it be policymaking or just you know current events in general but
it's always very impressive so thank you. Definitely would thank you all again. Bob
I have a quick question so are these displayed anywhere? Unfortunately not
that's a project I would love to get going to get some of the documentaries and
websites and other projects on some kind of a site so people can access them. I do
put an occasional one on our medical museum website but let me try to work on
that over the next year and see what kind of support I can get. Why don't we that's a
great idea I mean I like the idea of somehow you know having a place whether
it's digitally or physically a place for their presentation materials looking to
our CEO perhaps we can put Dr. Bob in touch with Kim Nava and her staff and I'm
thinking maybe there's a place for it to reside on Sacramento County's website.
Absolutely phenomenal. Absolutely I'll work with Dr. Bob and see what we can do and
if nothing else we'll get some media out there and see what we can do for
hyping that up. And then we have a bit of we have a gallery out there too.
Yeah I was going to say we have a beautiful atrium out there. I appreciate that very much. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you. All right.
Okay next item please. Okay we are moving on to item 21. This is the annual reports of the housing trust fund affordable housing ordinance home investment partnerships program permanent local housing allocation state local housing trust fund and the city county affordable housing plan.
There we go.
There we go.
Good morning Christine Weikert with Sacramento housing and redevelopment agency.
This is the housing workshop workshop to review affordable housing programs and funding for the 2024 calendar year.
This also serves as SHRA's annual report on two county ordinances the housing trust fund and the affordable housing ordinance.
Lastly it serves as the annual update to the affordable housing plan adopted as a result of the city county partnership agreement.
So Sacramento County has two development impact fee programs one for residential and the other one for non-residential development.
The revenues generated depend on the fee level per square foot of new construction and the amount of building that occurs in any given year.
The county housing trust fund ordinance authorizes the collection of impact fees on non-residential construction to fund low-income housing.
The housing trust fund ordinance was adopted in 1990 and fees were increased a few years ago.
To date there's been $33.1 million collected plus another $25.2 million in repayments from loans made from these funds.
In 2024 $1.6 million was collected.
The project currently under construction utilizing these fees are listed below.
Each of these were brought forward to the board of supervisors individually for approval.
The county affordable housing ordinance is a fee on new residential development.
$28.7 million has been collected since 2015 when the ordinance was revised to be fee-based.
Plus $2.9 million in repayments from loans made with these funds.
In 2024 $5.1 million was collected.
Again the projects utilizing the funds are listed on the slide.
SHRA utilizes funds from two state affordable housing financing programs.
The Permanent Local Housing Allocation Program or PLHA and the Local Housing Trust funds.
PLHA funds are generated through a recording fee on real estate transactions.
25% of the funds must be reserved for single-family down payment assistance and the remaining for multifamily affordable housing.
In 2024 we received a portion of the 2023 and 2024 allocations for a total of $6.6 million.
The local housing trust funds are competitive state funds that can match local housing trust funds dollar for dollar.
The funds are awarded on a competitive basis for the creation, rehabilitation, or preservation of affordable housing.
SHRA was awarded $2.9 million in 2024 and has been awarded $13.3 million since 2020.
SHRA administers one federal housing entitlement grant from HUD.
The home funds are used for multifamily production or preservation and these funds have hard deadlines for expenditures so we make sure we pick projects that are ready to go.
I should note that the President's current budget proposes to eliminate this program.
In 2024 county home funds generated $2.9 million in entitlement along with $1.4 million in loan repayments.
So in total the funds I just reviewed in 2024 we received local, state, and federal sources totaling $19.2 million.
And just as a quick reminder, these funds must be advertised when available twice a year, typically in January and July.
The amounts available are published 30 days prior to funding rounds allowing developers to time to submit a pre-application.
And developers are notified 30 days after that if they are being asked to submit a full application for funding.
And then applications are analyzed by various departments at SHRA including Development Finance Department which provides underwriting and operating and budget analysis.
Our Real Estate Construction Services Department which reviews construction budgets and the scope of work.
Of course we have an environmental review department and regulatory compliance which reviews the projects and units afterwards but at the beginning reviews property management plans, leases, resident service plans, things like that.
And then finally the current funding priorities approved by the Board of Supervisors are in the SHRA multifamily lending policies.
First is preservation of existing affordable housing at risk of loss of affordability.
Second is new construction or conversion of non-residential buildings.
First is preservation of non-residential buildings for permanent supportive housing and homeless first, then veterans, workforce, and others.
Followed by rehabilitation of existing affordable housing and then rehabilitation of market rate housing into affordable housing.
So the city and county entered into a partnership agreement in 2022 to improve coordination on homeless efforts.
The agreement required the preparation of affordable housing plan to analyze the issues and set goals.
The affordable housing plan was developed with community input and approved by both the Board of Supervisors and City Council in October 2023.
So permanent supportive housing and rehousing are the two sections that make up this plan.
For permanent supportive housing, the measurable targets is to create 30 permanent supportive housing units and 100 affordable housing units per year.
In 2024, 303 units of permanent supportive housing and 1,102 units of affordable housing were created.
Other accomplishments included amending county zoning codes and plan check process, establishing a tracking process, and then there were quite a few other efforts listed on the slide.
For rehousing, the goal is 220 rehousing opportunities annually.
To that end, service standards and performance matrix were established.
A landscape analysis of rehousing capacity was developed and efforts were made to receive additional funding.
So that concludes my presentation and staff is available to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you, Christine.
Any questions for staff?
Supervisor Rodriguez.
Can you elaborate a little more on the city and county partnership?
I can.
I am.
SHRA primarily focuses on the permanent supportive housing creation part of the affordable housing plan.
For the overview of more of the partnership agreement, I'd probably defer to Siobhan.
Thank you.
Siobhan Katari, Deputy County Executive.
So in 2022, the city and county, as a result of Measure 8, entered into the city-county partnership agreement.
And essentially what it is, it's an agreement that we will work together to reduce, to address homelessness, as well as, and that includes creating an affordable housing plan, which Christine just talked about.
That was one of the components of the city-county partnership agreement.
So this is a similar partnership that encompasses some of the, is it the homeless services?
That's correct.
Okay.
So that.
Yes.
And so in this partnership, do you identify how many potential housing units are scheduled over the next several years?
Not in totality.
Totality.
So really what it did is it, it, the county agreed to develop a certain number of units over the next several years.
And we've actually achieved and reached our objectives in the partnership agreement.
So this is Emily Halkin presented on the city-county partnership agreement report not too long ago.
I remember.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And so we did achieve what we set out to achieve in that agreement.
That being said, it's just a slice of what we're doing, just one piece of that.
We engage in a lot of efforts above and beyond that city-county partnership agreement.
And so the county met their obligation.
What about the city?
Yes.
Both parties met their obligations of the partnership agreement.
And it's a five-year agreement.
And so we met the obligations several years ahead of schedule.
Okay.
I do have more questions, but I guess I'll ask those at another time.
Okay.
Thank you.
Any other questions or comments for staff?
Seeing none.
Madam Clerk, do we have anyone sign up to speak on this matter?
We do not.
Okay.
And is this just a presentation?
Or no, we need to take action, correct?
No action is necessary.
Thank you.
I'm sorry?
No action is necessary.
No action is necessary.
All right.
Thank you.
All right.
Next item, please.
Next item.
For item 22, you're acting as the Board of Supervisors and the Housing Authority of the County of Sacramento.
This is the 2026 one-year action plan, federal program allocation process, workshop number two.
Hello.
My name is Stephanie Green.
I'm the federal programs manager for SHRA.
And today's presentation will be the second workshop for the 2026 annual action plan for
the allocation of community development block grant or CDBG funding.
The action plan process started in the beginning of the year with workshop number one.
And following that, SHRA met with county staff to identify potential projects and review them for readiness and eligibility.
We also received and reviewed any project suggestions from board members.
The purpose of today's workshop will be to present the draft list of potential infrastructure projects for CDBG for the 2026 action plan and receive input on those and any new ideas for projects.
I would like to note that these budget estimates are preliminary and are based on previous allocations of CDBG funding and are subject to change based on the final federal budget decisions.
At this time, the president's proposed budget for the upcoming fiscal year includes the elimination of the CDBG program and signals a potential decrease or loss of funding for these projects.
So based on previous year's allocations, we anticipate receiving a little over 6 million total in CDBG funding for 2026.
And this slide shows an estimate of how those funds will be allocated among the various programs.
Generally, we reserve close to the maximum of 15% of the entitlement for public services and 20% for grant planning and admin.
And from there, we work backwards to identify available funds for public facilities and housing.
This year, we anticipate allocating approximately 2.18 million to the infrastructure and public facility improvements,
1.3 million to the housing programs, and 400,000 to the agreement cities.
Capital reserve is a set aside for potential project budget adjustments that are needed.
This slide shows the draft list of recommended infrastructure projects.
And as a reminder, when we're looking at which projects to fund or prioritize,
we consider not only eligibility and community impact,
but also the likelihood of the project being able to complete and spend down funds in the next 12 to 18 months,
as well as whether or not we have spent money on the project previously,
and we need to add additional funding to finish up the project and close it out with HUD.
So based on this, the projects that we are recommending for 2026 include the Fruit Ridge sidewalk project.
This is for the construction of sidewalks in District 1.
The Floor and Road Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements Project.
This is for construction of bike lanes, traffic signals, lighting, and ADA improvements along Floor and Road between Franklin and Power Inn.
And this is in District 2.
The Wide Away Sidewalk Infill Project.
So this is funding for the construction of new sidewalks, ADA improvements, and street lighting along Wide Away between Alta Arden Expressway and Markston Road in District 3.
And then the Arden Way Complete Streets Project for the design and construction of underground sections of the project on Arden Way from Fulton to Morse Avenue.
And that's in District 3.
And then we also have a line item there for environmental review of these projects.
Supervisor Rodriguez.
How do you identify?
Go back to one page.
How do you identify the priority of these projects versus all the projects throughout the county?
Well, we'll look at first if the county has priority projects that they would like us to consider.
But also, again, if the project had received previous funding, the ability of the project to spend down funds within a year, community impact.
There's several things that we look at to identify the priority of projects.
And do you have a list of all the projects that you were given for assessment and review?
Yes.
So the next slide will be talking about the other projects that were looked at.
So this slide includes the other projects proposed for CDBG funding, which were evaluated but not recommended to proceed in 2026.
However, we can still consider them for funding in future action plan years.
Several of these were proposed by the Southgate Park District, which include the Norm Waters Park ADA and Shade Structure Project, the Fountain Park Plaza Basketball Court, Kennedy Park Improvements, Sunrise, Florin Park, and Fletcher Farm Community Center Land Acquisition, Florin Creek Park Street and Park Improvements.
And other projects proposed by the county were additional funding for the Gibson Ranch ADA improvements and the Rosemont ADA curve improvements.
And then we'll also talk about the, just to give an idea of the types of projects and funding amounts from past action plan years in each district.
These next few slides will show that.
These columns identify the project that was funded the year the project were funded, as well as the total amount per project, and then you'll see the amount total for that district.
And again, this is for the last five years.
I won't read through each individual project, but as you can see, this represents quite a breadth of investments in infrastructure projects that we typically fund.
And you can see, you'll see that some districts have more projects than others, and this is because the projects must be located in an eligible area, low-mod area, and some districts have larger areas than others.
So this first slide shows districts one and two.
District one was mainly parks projects and two ADA or sidewalk improvements.
District two had mostly complete streets and pedestrian improvements with a couple of parks projects.
For district three and four, district three had a few complete streets, a couple pedestrian improvements and parks projects.
And district four had complete streets, ADA improvements and street lighting.
And you can also see here some projects span multiple districts.
So for example, the Elkhorn Boulevard complete streets project is in both district three and four.
So we've divided the total funding between the two for the purpose of this table.
I'm going to interject here just for the benefit of those that may not be as familiar with the county's process for allocation of CDBG, whether it be project or program.
One of the things that people might assume just based on the amount of investment in years past by district is they might see these kind of glaringly wide differences in amounts.
And that has so much to do with the fact that supervisorial districts are very different.
Some are primarily municipal areas such as district one and parts of district two with the city of Sacramento.
But other districts such as district four with Citrus Heights and Folsom.
Our CDBG allocation cannot be used in those municipal parts of the county.
The cities themselves compete and then allocate their own CDBG federal allocations.
So if you just were to kind of gravitate to the bottom lines on these charts, you might misunderstand that they're, especially in those districts with a large mix of municipal and unincorporated areas,
you'd really have to look at the spreadsheets for both the cities or parts of cities and the unincorporated county in those in those supervisorial districts to understand the total investment.
Hope that's clear as mud.
Thank you.
And then finally in district five projects included a mix of lighting, community centers, restrooms, pedestrian improvements, and parks.
I do want to note on this slide that there have been some changes to the Isleton projects listed there at the bottom.
With the streetlight project had been adjusted to actually become the main street improvements project with no adjustment in funding there.
And the Delta traffic project was canceled with the Wilson Park project, which is approved in 2025, took its place.
However, recently at the request of Isleton, after some discussions, all of the approved, previously approved Isleton projects have been canceled to be potentially revisited at a future date.
And this will free up all of those funds currently allocated to Isleton projects to be reprogrammed.
And we are reviewing the possibility of reprogramming those funds for the Rosemont ADA curb improvements project also in district five.
I have a question here.
And then I know Supervisor Hume is in the queue here.
But you started the presentation with the overarching concern that we all have that the administration is canceling community development block grant funding,
which is a phrase I never thought I'd utter.
But nonetheless, that is the intent, at least the way we understand it currently.
Do we have projects that assumed that we would have multiple years forthcoming of CDBG support?
And so they were budgeted and phased appropriately, thinking that CDBG would at least be there in some manner,
maybe not everything we want or need, but that it would be a sustained program that we could rely on.
So are there those projects that have these now massive funding holes because of the administration's disposition?
So I want to start by saying that any previously approved funding that we've allocated to projects will continue.
They will get that funding.
But there are not any projects I'm aware of that are relying on future CDBG funding in order to continue those projects.
Again, we try to make it clear that we never know how much funding we'll receive in each given year.
And so hopefully they aren't relying on that to finish the project.
Okay. Thank you.
Supervisor Hume.
Thank you, Chair.
Let me first start by picking up kind of on the line of questions that the Chair was just asking about.
Given that those ILTEN projects were from prior, prior years, is there a risk of those dollars being clawed back if the entire program were to go away?
No. So we have each time we're allocated funds in any given action plan year, we have five years to spend down those funds.
So we try to make sure we keep funding moving, but they're not going to take back previously allocated funds unless we don't spend them within that allotted time frame.
So we can just reallocate them, get them spent.
That being said, we do like to see funds spent down within a year to 18 months of being allocated because we do have a timeliness obligation to HUD where we're not supposed to have more than a certain amount of our entitlement on hand at any given time.
And so we do want to get them spent, but there is no risk really of them being taken back from HUD unless we don't meet that timeliness obligation.
Okay. So you answered my second question, which is going to be what is the ticking clock on these funds?
And so it sounds like we're coming up on the streetlight allocation, but the other two, we have a little longer time.
So I would just ask that, and I've had a briefing from Lachelle and Christine on this, that maybe we pause and see if we can't find a reallocation in the Delta, given that that was the original destination for these monies.
I understand that the curb ramps in Rosemont is an important project as well, but there's many needs in the Delta, some of which are maybe not even identified or contemplated, that I could lean in and find some new home for this money down there.
Okay.
Given that really in District 5, I only have a couple of communities that qualify for the allocation of CDBG.
I just wanted to also add, to the best of our knowledge, we don't think that any of the previously funded projects would be in jeopardy.
However, I mean, they could decide to start to claw back money that isn't spent.
So I just didn't want to leave the impression.
Thank you for rosy picture.
But maybe I'm a little bit more pessimistic in terms of some of the things that we have seen in terms of clawing back funds.
So just to make sure that everyone understands that that is a possibility.
Could I add one more thing about CDBG while Lachelle is up?
So just a reminder in the beginning of the presentation, they talked about not only these projects, but also we have public services dollars in CDBG.
So that's our Mather single shelter as well as our Meals on Wheels program.
So CDBG funding at risk at the federal level could also impact services.
I don't know if you want to.
Yes, it would have a huge impact on services because for the Meals on Wheels program, you see the portion that the county is putting in.
But also the city of Sacramento puts in dollars as well, as well as some of the surrounding cities use those funds to fund Meals on Wheels.
And there are other the other public services like in here is the shelter, same on the city side.
So it would be a drastic, drastic reduction in services throughout the county.
Thank you.
So this is the final slide.
This shows an overview of the action plan process moving forward.
So over the next few months, we'll continue to meet with county staff as needed to refine the draft list of projects, finalize our budget by August.
And then in October, we will return to you with a final list of projects for approval before we submit our action plan to HUD.
So that concludes my presentation.
I'm happy to take any questions or feedback about the project.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Well, I think you probably tell from our line of questioning, there's an immense amount of concern.
That shared with staff, obviously.
Yeah, it's beyond unfortunate that we're actually facing this.
And I know we're not alone.
I mean, local government across the country depends greatly on federal assistance in the form of community development block grant funding,
as was just mentioned, for both programs and capital improvements.
How are we going to perhaps keep this decision-making body apprised with a greater frequency in terms of the daily, perhaps even hourly change that we've seen in terms of the swings and, you know, the disposition of the administration?
I know it's very difficult to govern and very difficult to administer policy and resource allocation in this environment.
But I think we all have a, you know, heightened level of interest in being nimble at this point.
Absolutely.
And I think that is the huge concern that we as housing authorities have across the United States.
We are getting information on a pretty regular basis.
The difficulty is that information really comes from D.C.
Our regional offices, in terms of HUD, have been decimated.
The staff has been drastically reduced.
They're trying to get to 50 percent or less.
And they are just losing staff so frequently that we can't rely on our field office for information.
We do have to really interact at the federal level and with the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
One good thing is that I do participate on the Council of Large Public Housing Authorities.
And as their vice president, we are often invited into the room to talk about, you know, proposed changes to really advocate on behalf of ourselves and nationwide why these things are so critical and important.
So what I am doing in my meetings with you is giving you updates in terms of where we are at the federal budget, what are the types of changes that we're seeing, and what is the level of advocacy that we really need to push forward on.
Thank you.
Thank you.
But it's changing quickly, very, very quickly.
That's my comments.
Mm-hmm.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Any other questions or comments for staff?
I believe this is presentation only as well?
Yes.
Okay.
Do we have anyone sign up to speak on that?
We do not for this item.
All right.
Again, I want to thank our staff for both workshop presentations.
I wish it was better news, but we'll all stay very in tune to what continues to progress in D.C.
and as that affects our ability to do what we're charged to do.
So thank you.
Next time, please.
All right.
Item 23.
This is AB-481, Military Equipment Annual Report and Presentation.
Supervisor Serna, before the Department of Regional Parks comes up and presents that,
Deputy County Executive Eric Jones has some opening comments to cover not only 23, but 24, 25, and 26.
Okay.
Thank you.
Good morning, Chair, Board.
I'm Eric Jones, Deputy County Executive, Public Safety and Justice Agency,
and I did want to just give a brief introduction of these group together items, which are 23 through 26.
All four items are annual reports by law enforcement agencies to the board as required by Assembly Bill 481.
Each agency must report their inventory, use, and any new equipment requested.
This is the fourth year since the implementation of AB-481,
and each department had a public meeting prior as required by law,
and each item separately requires Board of Supervisors approval.
So it will be in this order.
First will be Regional Parks Rangers.
We have Liz Bellis, Director of Regional Parks, as well as Park Rangers Chief Leonard Orman.
Then we'll be the District Attorney's Office.
We have Scott Maldonado, Assistant Chief Investigator for the District Attorney's Office.
Then probation.
Probation Chief Julie Wary will present.
And then the Sheriff's Office.
We have Under-Sheriff Mike Ziegler here,
and I believe presenting primarily will be Lieutenant James Petronovich.
So with that, we'll go to the Regional Parks item.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Jones.
Before we hear from Liz, just procedurally, I guess I'm looking to County Council.
Should we take each?
I know one's a recommendation, and then we have some other action items here associated with the suite of agenda matters.
But can we take action at once on all three?
That's acceptable.
Okay.
Very good.
Thank you.
Would you like me to read, if that's the intention, I'll read all those items in?
Yeah, let's do that.
Okay.
Thank you.
For item 24, Sacramento County District Attorney's Office Military Equipment Policy Annual Report.
This is a receive and file.
For item 25, you're going to introduce an ordinance related to approval of a military equipment policy
and authorization to purchase, acquire, and use military equipment in the future in accordance with policy,
waitful reading, and continue to June 10th for adoption.
And then for item 26, this is the Sacramento Sheriff's Office Annual Military Equipment Use Report for 2025,
authorization for continued use of military equipment and amend the inventory as changes occur,
and authorization to purchase and acquire military equipment in the future in accordance with military equipment policy.
Madam Clerk, I think we need to read item 23 as well.
I did.
I'll read it again.
Oh, sorry.
AB 481 Military Equipment Annual Report and Presentation.
Good morning still.
Liz Bellis, Director of Regional Parks, and with me is our Chief Ranger, Chief Orman.
So this is our annual report.
We had our public meeting at the Recreation and Park Commission in May.
We do not have a lot of military equipment.
We have some less lethal shotgun and munitions.
We are not planning on purchasing any new equipment this next year.
We're not asking to add anything.
We also have an unmanned aircraft system, commonly known as a drone, which is used in several different ways of deployment, which is outlined in our report.
We have a lot of them, which is searching for water rescue victims.
We have dog bite victims.
We did support the City of Rancho Cordova Police Department in a search.
And then we did a lot of work on Mather Lake.
I think you might remember that we had some issues with some swan deaths, and so we did some unmanned drone coverage of Mather Lake.
That's really the extent of our report.
If there are any questions, I'm happy to answer them, or Chief is here as well.
So I assume the less than lethal is beanbag rounds, correct?
Correct.
Okay.
I don't have any questions.
Questions for Liz from my colleagues?
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay.
Next is the district attorney.
Mr. Chair, someone yelled in the background about public comments.
Did you want to?
I want to take public comment at the end of all three.
Okay.
Good morning.
I'm Scott Maldonado.
Sorry.
Sorry.
Go ahead.
Good morning.
I'm Scott Maldonado, assistant chief investigator with the Sacramento County District Attorney's Office.
And I'm here to report our annual military equipment report for 2025.
The report covers from May 16, 2024 to April 29, 2025.
Our use of the list of military equipment is six Remington 870 12-gauge less lethal impact munition launchers.
They were not deployed in the line of duty other than the training of law enforcement personnel.
On August 6, 2024, the district attorney's criminal investigators received training on the qualified and use of these less lethal munitions launchers.
Training included policy review, deployment considerations, alternative tactics, and post-deployment care.
The district attorney does not intend to acquire any military equipment in the next year.
The Sacramento County District Attorney's Office is committed to receiving and responding to community members' complaints regarding the use of military equipment.
Complaint forms are available at our public counters and online in all the district attorney buildings.
A review of the office records revealed no complaints were received or concerns regarding the military equipment were submitted from the past year.
We did an internal audit and determined there were no violations of Bureau Directive 605 military equipment or any other Bureau policy related to the acquisition, deployment, or the Bureau's military equipment.
In compliance with the public notice of AB 481, this report was published on the Sacramento County District Attorney's website for at least 30 days prior to presenting this report to the Board of Supervisors.
Within 30 days of submitting a publicly releasing this report, the Sacramento County District Attorney's Bureau of Investigations held a well-publicized, conveniently located community engagement meeting at which the general public could discuss and ask questions regarding the annual military equipment report.
one person came and we discussed the military equipment.
This report will be publicly available on the Sacramento County District Attorney's website for as long as the military equipment is in use.
Thank you.
Questions?
Thank you.
I do have a question.
You started by making mention of a launcher.
What's it launching?
It's a Remington 870 12-gauge Leslie's Little Shotgun.
Beanbag Brown as well?
Yes, Beanbag Wesley.
I hear launcher.
I think grenade launcher or a tear gas launcher, which can be lethal.
I just want to make that clarification.
Thank you.
Any questions for the district attorney's office?
All right.
Very good.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Next is our district attorney's office.
Oh, did we?
I'm so sorry.
Probation.
Yes.
Sorry about that, Julie.
Good morning, Chair Cerner.
Supervisors.
My name is Julie Weary.
I'm serving as the interim chief probation officer.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you today.
I'm here to respectfully request your approval pursuant to Assembly Bill 481 for adoption of a military equipment use policy regarding the potential future acquisition and use of an unmanned aerial systems, commonly referred to as drones, for the Sacramento County Probation Department.
In accordance with the law, we developed a military equipment policy, which outlines all of the military equipment listed in AB 481.
However, as we are only requesting the future purchase of drones, we developed the unmanned aerial system policy, outlining our purpose with drones, associated training requirements, and compliance in accordance with the law.
Specifically, the department is proposing the use of drones as an additional tool to enhance community engagement with unhoused individuals under probation supervision.
This technology would supplement our existing outreach infrastructure, which includes three mobile outreach vans, two four-wheel drive trucks, and one utility train vehicle.
Together, these tools allow our supervision teams to access remote areas, such as the American River Parkway, where traditional vehicles may be limited.
Drones would be used to help locate encampments not visible from public roads, increase operational efficiency and oversight of community contact efforts, provide real-time situational awareness to outreach teams in the community, offer aerial overview and mapping to assist with planning and documentation, and most importantly, support on-site community check-ins with clients to reduce warrants and provide supports and resources, such as clothing, snacks, water, and hygiene products.
This proposal aligns with several of the board's strategic priorities, including housing and homelessness, by improving how we locate and serve individuals experiencing homelessness, social services, by strengthening mobile and responsive service delivery, and equity and inclusion, by removing access barriers and serving harder-reach communities.
If approved, drone use will be guided by a publicly available policy currently posted on our webpage with annual reporting and oversight in compliance with AB-481.
Thank you for your consideration with our outreach-focused initiative.
Great. Thank you.
Quick question.
So the interest is limited to a drone?
Correct.
Okay.
Is this, how, how, how is the drone going to be acquired?
Is it a commercially available drone?
Well, we would be researching grants.
When we obtain-
No, no, but I mean, would you get the drone from, as military surplus, for instance, or would you actually get a grant and then go buy it, buy it commercially like any consumer?
I'm going to defer to Chief Deputy Derek Case-Barrick, because he's done some research on this drone, of acquiring it.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Good morning.
Yeah, they would be commercially available to a company that we're researching.
So, like, a DJI or that?
Exactly.
Okay.
So, this is the type of drone that I can go buy?
Yeah.
All right.
A lot more capabilities, as far as what we're asking, as far as operational effectiveness, as far as, like, being able to communicate through them, thermal imaging.
But, yeah, you can buy them privately, as well.
But they are DJI products.
Okay.
We are using- we're trying to leverage grant money to purchase other drones.
So, we're researching that currently.
Okay.
And then, did I hear you correctly that, besides the use in the American River Parkway and perhaps other difficult-to-otherwise-access areas, that they would be used for, for instance, for POs to check on probationers?
Well, specifically, sorry, specifically for the unhoused population.
Okay.
That is under our supervision.
Gotcha.
We're really trying to be proactive and do the outreach in the community to prevent the warrants, because, obviously, that there's transportation barriers to check in with us at our check-in sites.
So, we really want to, you know, enhance those outreach efforts.
This would assist in that.
And you mentioned that probation internally, I assume, would develop a policy for drone deployment and use?
We have one already.
You do?
Yes.
And what does that- I don't have the policy in front of me, but what does that generally say about making sure that it's not used overly invasively in terms of, you know, being respectful of people's privacy, you don't go, you know, flying it in probationers' backyards, that kind of thing?
Absolutely, in compliance with all federal and state laws.
Okay.
All right, very good.
Any other questions from board members?
Seeing none, thank you.
Thank you.
And now we have the sheriff.
Good morning, board.
Good morning.
Community members.
I'm Lieutenant James Petrinovich.
I'm the sheriff's tactical commander currently assigned to our Special Operations Division.
This morning I'll be giving you our AB 481 report, but first we have a short video.
This video is going to demonstrate some of the capabilities of some of our specialized equipment that we'll be discussing today.
First we'll be telling you.
Good morning.
I'll be back.
Good morning.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you for your attention to the video.
As we prepare the PowerPoint, I would just like to highlight that those tools are used
defensively in many situations to make sure that we don't put an officer in danger where
we could put a robot or a drone for our armored personnel carriers.
To begin with our report for the year, in 2024, there were no documented complaints specific
to military equipment as outlined in AB 481.
We did receive two civil claims requesting monetary compensation for property damage as a result
from 481 equipment.
As always, all complaints can be made online at sacsheriff.com or at any sheriff's office facility.
I'm curious, what were the two claims?
One of them was damage caused to a sprinkler system when the Bearcat, the armored vehicle.
It's a heavy vehicle.
Sorry?
It's a heavy vehicle.
It's a very heavy vehicle, yes, sir.
And the second one was during a SWAT incident when military equipment, the Rook, the Bearcat,
and some less lethal munitions were used to damage property.
Gotcha.
All right.
For unmanned aerial systems, commonly referred to as drones, we have a current inventory of 56.
They're similar in function.
These are spread throughout the county.
All eight of our patrol districts have access to drones on all three shifts, as well as some
of our investigative teams.
Again, as discussed earlier, these are commercially available drones.
We can buy them off the shelf at Costco.
And I would like to take the opportunity to reaffirm the sheriff's commitment to the privacy
of our community.
We have strict policies governing the use of these.
They are only used in reactive situations and, in those instances, limiting the scope to
the actual incident.
We have nine robots spread between our bomb squad and our SWAT team.
Five of these are placed strategically throughout the county, carried by individual officers assigned
to our bomb squad so that they can have rapid response to any calls for service that require
a bomb squad response.
And then the other four are specific use for EOD, sorry, our bomb squad, and two are assigned
to our SWAT team.
Thank you.
Supervisor Kennedy.
Thank you, Chair.
For both the drones and the robots, since you've gone on both, I just have a couple of
questions.
I'm not picking on the sheriff's department, but you guys are the biggest user, which makes
sense.
So we currently have 56 of the UAS of the drones, and the request is for 19 more for a total
of 75.
I support the use of drones when appropriate, and I always have, but that's a lot.
I mean, 75.
Yes, sir.
I understand that it can't seem like a lot, but again, we have nearly 1,000 square miles
of coverage in Sacramento County.
We like to have these drones spread out throughout the county across all three of our patrol shifts.
Also, we have many, many investigative teams that can use these individually.
Also, most of our pilots for drones, they're assigned to.
One is a smaller version that's allowed to go inside of areas or small compact areas, and
they come with a larger version as well.
So although, you know, 50 or 60 drones, that's really only 30 people having these things assigned
to them.
Additionally, we're trying to phase out older equipment.
These things don't last forever.
So new technology, updated cameras, imaging, those types of things.
That makes sense.
So of the 19 additional, you have any idea how many are replacements or additional?
It's more of a future-proofing as things break or become decommissioned and expanding the
program a little bit as well.
So you have these.
They're actually physically located throughout the county so that they can be deployed.
They're not at a central location that they're driven out there.
So they could be deployed quickly from any given point in the county?
You got it, sir.
Okay.
All right.
And on the robots, there's currently nine, which these things, by the way, are pretty cool.
But you're just asking to replace one because of obsolescence, which also makes sense.
So there would be no net increase in the number of robots?
Yes, sir.
I mean, obviously, we would hang on to the one that we're replacing until it's completely
dead.
But eventually, that would reach its end of its life.
How often?
Because I was looking at of the 108 deployments in 24 in the report.
I didn't see any robot deployments.
Are they, how often are they used?
I'm not sure that we provided specific stats to robot deployments.
Those were the special or our SWAT team deployments were the 109.
But I can tell you that although I don't have the number, our robots are used routinely.
We're also a regional resource for other areas.
And they typically respond to bomb calls throughout the region.
Okay.
Thank you.
Supervisor Hume.
Thank you, Chair.
I was going to save this question until the end.
But since we're talking about drones, I'll go ahead and get in on it now.
My first question in the video showed a drone going in through a dog door.
I assume that drones are subject to the same warrant and search procedures that an individual
would be.
You can't just enter someone's place without probable cause?
Yes, sir.
And various other circumstances.
Sure.
But they are deployed as per law.
Okay.
And so then my second question goes back to kind of what Supervisor Kennedy was asking
relative to deployment countywide.
I know that Elk Grove PD, for example, just received licensing to, I don't even know what
it's called, but I think it's line of sight or essentially so that they can deploy a drone
and just go off of the camera.
They don't have to maintain.
And I think that that comes in handy for getting eyes on a scene in advance of officers arriving
so that they're better prepared for what they're coming out to and also to provide better
information on what kind of response is warranted.
Does Sac Sheriff have that capability or are you pursuing that capability?
Yes, sir.
In 2024, we did the second round of our pilot program.
The program is called Drone as a First Responder.
And we deployed it over our central station in South Sacramento near the intersection of Stockton
and Florin.
We had excellent results.
We deployed it across the summer and the fall.
We found that we were able to get drones out to a scene with an average response time of under
two minutes.
And many, many of those calls we were able to resolve without actual personnel going on scene.
You saw one specific call there with the machete-wielding man.
Obviously, those drones are first responders able to get to the scene, protect those officers
so that they know what they're walking into at the time.
In that instance, we were able to create time, distance, and cover so that the officers weren't
walking into that volatile situation.
You saw them take them into custody later on a vehicle stop.
Okay.
Thank you.
That's all my questions for now.
Sorry.
Also, Supervisor, we are working on getting the drone as a first responder as a permanent fixture
in our real-time crime center this year.
We're working on those FAA waivers like Elk Grove did.
Okay.
Great.
Thank you.
Not to get ahead of things, but I'm going to look to our county executive.
I know we're getting just kind of a report here today about the interest and
use of military equipment and the expected interest in acquiring further equipment,
if I'm hearing our presenters correctly.
But I just want to make sure I understand how it's paid for.
So we, the board, through our recommended and final budget processes, provide the sheriff's
department their budget allocation.
Once that allocation is made, the sheriff has, at his discretion, the ability to internally
use those funds the way he sees fit.
And I just want to make clear for the record that that would include the acquisition cost
of such things as drones and robots.
Supervisor, you're correct.
Not only the sheriff, the California constitution, I'll look to our county council to help me
with this if I stray too far.
But the California constitution allows the board of supervisors to set the total budget
for each of those, but not necessarily how the money is spent for operations.
So, yes, you're right.
We do control other things like the number of FTEs, the vehicles, but overall operations
is left to the elected officials.
So that would include the sheriff, the district attorney, and the assessor.
And so, however, I don't believe on past history, I believe the sheriff leverages grants
and other opportunities to buy this equipment.
So it's not necessarily general fund?
Correct.
Okay.
I think historically, at least with the undersheriff and I has shared with me, most if not all
has been purchased with grants.
Okay.
I see our undersheriff has approached the podium.
Chair, good morning.
Good morning.
Board members.
So there's other ways, too, that it's very little of it is paid out of the general fund.
And we suspect that with the status of the county budget and filling a lot of our full-time
equivalent positions that are vacant right now, we're not going to have that opportunity.
But before that, a couple other funding mechanisms we use is asset forfeiture, just as long
as it fits within the guidelines of the rules of asset forfeiture and also the Tucker fund.
Tucker funds specifically for motorized vehicles, like, say, the Bearcat went down.
We needed by a new Bearcat.
That would fit under that fund, which is outside of the general fund, which those funds have been
set aside by law for law enforcement to purchase that type of equipment.
Okay.
Let me just kind of cut to the chase because I'm trying to reconcile something.
And I want to make sure that I'm not thinking incorrectly about how, you know, how this all works.
And by this, I mean the fact that we're being asked tomorrow to deliberate and consider
the 25, 26 recommended budget, part of which will be the sheriff's allocation.
The sheriff is recommending cuts to some important programs, such as Hot and Pop.
I want to understand, is the sheriff's department simultaneously saying that there's an interest in acquiring during the same time period,
whether it's general fund or not, you know, un-teamed times more drones.
And again, I'm not being accusatory here.
I just want to understand the totality of what the interest of the sheriff's department is
and what we're being asked to do.
Yeah, I mean, I think it's important to note again that the funds that we use, whether they're grants
or the Tucker fund or asset forfeiture are the primary resources that we buy this equipment from.
Right.
So it's not affecting putting Hot Team or Pop Team on the streets or 911 response for services
or fill in our requirements under May's consent decree.
Right.
That's the priority.
But I thought, Mike, I thought I heard you previously say the sheriff's protocol in determining
how to fund the acquisition of drones and robots and perhaps other equipment,
first we'll go and look for non-general fund sources to do that, grants and whatnot.
But if there's a strong enough interest by the sheriff's department and the sheriff
that drones and robots are a high enough priority that we're going to dip into our general fund allocation,
which by the time you have it, it's out of our hands as the board because we've just made the allocation.
So hypothetically, the sheriff could use general fund monies to do that,
while at the same time when we were asked to make a decision and deliberate about something as important
as cutting Hot and Pop, the outcome of that hypothetically could be that we've cut those programs
but we've given you the ability to go fund what the sheriff's determined to be the priorities
being robots and drones.
Is that correct?
Yeah.
Okay.
That can happen, right?
So I think the failsafe on that is that any piece of equipment over a dollar amount that
we purchase like that, I'll use the bearcat again as an example, it's a high dollar piece
of equipment.
If we got into a situation where we had to replace that mid-budget year, right, something
happened to it, right, and we didn't have the money in the Tucker fund or asset forfeiture
to buy that, that still comes to this board.
You have to approve that purchase.
So you do have some authority and some power to question that purchase and intervene.
We'll be judicious about that if that happens, but there is still a failsafe on that.
Right.
That's a high dollar amount.
So if you're looking for, I don't know, I'm just picking a number, 20 more drones and
each drone is 500 bucks, that's not going to trigger it coming back to us.
I think it's...
Necessarily.
I can answer that question.
They don't have any contract authority in the sheriff's department.
I mean, they can run things through the purchasing agent, which I think is 20,000.
You're going to have to defer to...
I'd have to double check on that number, supervisor.
But we do have what I would call master contracts that purchasing has that departments can use
and you delegate that authority to the purchasing agent and we put those contracts out.
I'm not sure.
I don't recall seeing a host of DGI drones coming to the board.
So I don't know if they're purchasing it under that contract or purchasing it under the smaller amount that may allow for that.
Right.
But to the point, I think, of the undersheriff, most of the sheriff's purchases do have to go to the board
because the sheriff's office does not have a contracting authority individually.
But those are amount triggered, are they not?
They don't have any contract authority.
So the smallest interest in acquisition of equipment comes to us?
Unless it's through the purchasing agent.
Okay.
Right.
So now I need a full-on map about whose discretion is being applied.
Is it staff?
Is it non-sheriff staff?
Is it us?
Is it the sheriff?
Hopefully you can understand my consternation about this.
We could certainly get that information and report that back tomorrow in the process.
Very good.
But the point being, and I think this is kind of a distinction that is important.
Yeah, it is.
I mean, and to your original question, I think, about the authority that the sheriff's office has to make operational decisions,
but that the board has the budget authority, that they don't have any contract authority.
So that is the board's authority and control over the department.
Supervisor Kenney.
Thank you, counsel.
And even to be a little bit more specific, constitutionally where our hands are tied is specifically around investigatory powers and deployment of personnel, correct?
Yes, that's correct.
Yeah, thank you.
Those are all my questions.
Thank you.
Armored vehicles.
As you guys saw in the video, we are currently equipped with two Lenko Bearcats.
Those are armored transportation vehicles and one armored tractor that is called the Rook.
You saw some of the capabilities of those vehicles, and they have been in circulation with the sheriff's department for many, many years
and have provided countless opportunities to keep our officers out of harm's way and rescue citizens as needed.
Multi-purpose wheeled vehicles.
We have one five-ton truck outfitted with a dump bed located at the Rio Cosimus Correctional Center.
And two general Humvees, two Hummers used by our youth services outreach for community outreach.
These are vehicles that are not particularly operational in a law enforcement capability.
They have Xboxes and TV screens and stuff in them.
Mobile incident command vehicles.
We have our one new mobile command vehicle that was purchased last year.
We also have one mobile booking command vehicle.
It's a trailer kept out at the Rio Cosimus Correctional Center.
And our previous mobile incident command vehicle, the Nomad, is being repurposed as a drone vehicle for drone support to carry all the equipment.
Long-range acoustic device.
We currently have five LRADs.
Most of them are at the Folsom Dam used to communicate with boaters and vessels from atop the dam to make sure that they don't enter the incursionary zone.
And we have one speaker.
It's much smaller than the ones at the top of the dam.
One speaker assigned to our SWAT team to make announcements to the community and people inside of houses during high-risk search warrants and SWAT callouts.
As far as less lethal capabilities, we have 77 launchers.
These are in 37 millimeter and 40 millimeter.
There's no grenades, obviously, as mentioned earlier, that is launched out of these.
We launch sponge rounds, impact rounds, chemical agents that are equipped with pepper spray, tear gas, and also our aerial flash beams can be launched from these.
We have 589 shotguns.
These are less lethal 12-gauge Remington 870 shotguns that utilize our beanbag rounds.
One of the reasons we have so many is because every field officer is required to hit the field on every single patrol shift carrying either a 40 millimeter launcher or a less lethal shotgun.
Can I ask a question about the shotguns?
Yes, sir.
So, if I'm not mistaken, your units, your patrol units, the vehicles themselves, do they still have kind of a center console mounted shotgun holder?
Yes, sir.
And I assume that the shotgun is, at the beginning of the workday, the shotgun is loaded in that vehicle.
And it's, but is it loaded with a lethal round or a non-lethal round?
No, sir.
We do not have any lethal rounds for our shotguns across the entire department.
Okay.
That's important for the public to know, so I'm glad I asked the question.
Thank you.
Yes, sir.
Diversioning devices, commonly known as flashbangs.
These are assigned to our SWAT team.
Combined, we have about 520 different types of flashbangs that are used solely by trained personnel and high-risk events.
I would like to add that these are not used against people.
These are not impact munitions in any way.
These are placed on the ground in a safe location prior to deployment.
As far as rifles and ammunition, 24 .308 caliber rifles.
These are precision long-range rifles.
Two 9mm MP5s that are currently not in service and stored at the range.
650 .223 caliber rifles assigned to our patrol teams, our SWAT teams, and other specially trained investigatory units.
These are our common patrol rifles.
And then one .50 caliber rifle assigned to the SWAT team, only to be used by very specifically trained officers.
As far as explosive materials, we are authorized up to 750 feet of detonating cord with 50 blasting caps.
These are used by our bomb squad technicians to disrupt packages and also from our SWAT breachers in high-risk events and tactical situations.
Chemical agents, often referred to as tear gas or pepper spray.
We have just under 2,000 different types of munitions.
Again, this may sound like a lot, but each one is very specifically crafted for individual applications.
Some have a lot of chemical agents.
Some have a little bit.
Some are deployed through dispersion or vapor or aerosol or gas.
Some have a lot of chemical agents.
And so, we try to keep a little bit of everything on hand so that we're not using the wrong tool for the job.
We want to make sure that we only limit the exposure that's necessary for that situation.
Of that number, of those kind of, those agents, those munitions, are they reserved?
Is there a certain number that are reserved for training?
We typically try to use expired munitions for training.
Okay.
We have sting ball grenades.
These are less lethal grenades.
Contain rubber pellets.
Some of those are also combined with chemical agents.
These are primarily used in the jails.
And then smoke grenades, again, given to our SWAT team.
These are outdoor only, used to mask tactical movements or mark locations.
We also have eight pepper ball launchers with about 1,200 pepper ball rounds.
I'm going to show you guys our deployments from the year 2024.
The county districts and zip codes don't match up perfectly, so you might see some redundancy in some of these slides.
But I would like to invite any of the supervisors, as you see your district representative, if you have any questions about our deployments in that area, please let me know.
I'm sorry, what are we looking at?
Great question.
So this is district one, and you can see the outline of district one.
Overlaid on top of the districts are zip codes.
And so we don't keep stats by individual districts.
We keep stats by zip code.
And so you'll see underneath each zip code within the district how many deployments for our SWAT team we had there.
Again, the two lines don't exactly match up, so there might be some overlap.
I guess what I'm trying to reconcile is I see some deployments.
I guess they're near city-county boundaries, but there wouldn't be any deployments necessarily in the city of Sacramento, correct?
Yes, sir.
We often help out our partners in surrounding agencies.
In fact, just this morning, we were in the city serving a search warrant, and that was because there were four simultaneous search warrants that needed to happen.
And so they call in extra help.
They go on vacation just like any other unit, and we co-mingle as necessary.
Gotcha.
Thank you.
Supervisor Hume.
Thank you, Chair.
Appreciate the clarification on what the larger numbers represent.
That's the number of deployments, and then what is embedded in that as far as what constitutes a deployment.
And so if I were trying to track down just because it's a question I'm going to have later, how many times the Bearcat was deployed?
There's no way necessarily within these numbers to know that, right?
This is any time any of these munitions or equipment or drones or anything.
Is that correct?
This is going to be specific to SED callouts, to our SWAT team callouts.
We do break down some of the deployments by drones also in the actual report.
They have their own zip codes that they have responded to.
That's going to be significantly up to interpretation of the data because we did have the drone as a first responder in our central division.
So one zip code for the drones is going to have an exorbitantly more amount of deployments for that area during that time that we did.
But these are specific to SED deployments.
There is some breakdown about how many times we use the Bearcat, but not by area.
And so then for that special enforcement detail, is it fairly uniform what's involved in every time they're deployed?
In other words, so if I'm looking at some of the higher numbers on this slide, and I'm just using this slide because it's the one on the screen,
not because I'm trying to get into supervisor service business.
So take the nine or the eight, for example.
Are those fairly consistent as far as what those deployments were, or what constitutes calling out nine deployments?
So I don't have the exact breakdown, but typically our SWAT team gets deployed around 125 times a year consistently through our history.
This last year was 109.
Okay.
The vast majority of those are high-risk search warrants.
Okay.
And I would say typically there's about 100 of those every year.
Then on top of that, your spontaneous call-outs, your hostage situations, your barricade situations that develop through patrol,
we're going to have about 12 to 15 of those a year.
And so then if I'm drilling down a little further there, as far as the threshold on those 100 search warrant or the more common deployments,
that's typically just personnel armed with particular equipment.
And then on the high-risk hostage situations is when some of the more armored equipment might come out.
I mean, I'm just trying to get to an idea of how much usage is taking place on an annual basis.
Everywhere the SWAT team goes, we bring the both Bearcats with us.
So the Bearcats are deployed probably on 99%.
I guess I can't say 100%, but if it's a high-risk event, the Bearcats are coming with us.
The Rook is on an as-needed.
They will always have less lethal capabilities with them.
Our robots, the SWAT team, they have the two robots that they take with them everywhere.
If they need something bigger than that or more powerful, maybe the bomb squad will come out.
As far as some of the explosive breachers, they also have those on hand.
They also have flashbangs on hand.
So the drones are also called out typically when our SWAT team is called out.
So for those 109 deployments, I would say the vast majority of them,
everything with the exception of the Rook pretty much comes with us as a package deal.
Okay.
That's the information I was looking for.
Thank you.
Absolutely.
I just want to make a clarification here.
So these numbers, the big numbers here, that's the number of deployments in that zip code, correct?
Correct.
Okay.
So I just want to point out zip codes don't match supervisorial districts.
So when you see the nine down in the south there, there may be a sliver of that zip code that overlaps with district one.
But especially along the edges of the supervisorial districts, it could be a little misleading in terms of the total deployments in the districts
because the title of the label of the map just says first supervisor district.
So I just want to make that point.
Thank you for the clarification, sir.
Yeah.
So for the record, district one is much safer than this.
That's right.
Yeah.
Okay.
Any other questions?
Great.
Thank you.
Supervisor Hume.
Thank you, Chair.
Yeah, I did have just a couple of questions.
And so I'll start with the first one that kind of continues on the previous line of questioning I was asking about.
What is the metric that determines the shelf life of a bear cat?
Is it simply a ticking clock and it ages out rather than wears out?
Well, our primary concerns with our older bear cat currently is that it's a 2008.
It is at the bare bones.
It is a Ford F-550 that Lenco buys from the factory and they build up.
So although the armor portion of the vehicle is still intact and probably will be forever,
we are starting to see significant problems with the drivetrain, the engine.
You know, we're having problems just like you would in any 15-year-old car.
We're seeing the check engine light come on, needing the air conditioner replaced.
All of these things that are just general vehicle maintenance concerns that are showing us that the shelf life of the bear cat is reaching an end.
Also, the other concern is that it's about a two-year turnaround time from the time that we place the order.
So even if I place an order today, now that whatever 17-year-old vehicle is now 19 years old by the time we get the replacement.
So it's a cost analysis of how much maintenance we can do to keep it up and running versus buying a brand new one.
Additionally, the new ones, well, they're newer and they're better, right?
They come with increased capabilities, more the ability to transport, more personnel, more bells and whistles.
Like our newer one has fire suppression capabilities that our older one doesn't.
So we would additionally look at some of those additional things that have become standard on the new bear cats.
But I guess what I'm trying to wrap my mind around is even if they aren't utilized in the intensity for which they were designed, right?
Like they're deployed but not necessarily, quote unquote, needed.
There's still general wear and tear that happens with driving them to and from wherever they're being staged.
Yes, sir.
And additionally, I think that for most vehicles, something that goes, you know, we typically think about it in terms of miles.
Right.
These are more low mileage vehicles.
Yeah.
But the idle time, the engine time are off the charts with these vehicles.
They're very high.
They sit idling for hours and hours and hours.
Gotcha.
Thank you.
And my second question then is related to the mobile booking and command vehicle.
You mentioned is staged down at RCCC.
Is that used?
Give me an idea of when that would be utilized.
It's used for if there's some sort of function where there's going to be a lot of bookings that are maybe low risk or low complexity but high bodies.
When would that trailer be utilized?
Yes, sir.
That's exactly what it would be.
And like many, many years ago, you know, we had the agriculture festival come through.
Farmers are a rough and tumble crowd.
Yes, you would know.
Yes, sir.
I saw your one deployment in Isleton, you know.
Yeah.
So it would be one of those things.
It doesn't come to memory when we last use it for an event.
Okay.
So let me ask this, and I'm really getting a field of what we should be talking about today, but I'm going to do it anyway.
Is there a way to utilize the capabilities of a mobile booking unit to augment these constraints we're feeling at the main jail as far as the space of our booking loop?
That's my question, by the way.
So, yes, but I will take you back to our primary problem with our booking process right now that I'm very hopeful that's going to be solved very soon with some innovative thinking is passing the medical.
Right?
So we can't do that from a mobile command vehicle like that.
And so then I have a feeling I know the answer to this just based on that and on your previous answer, but there would be no way to deploy this trailer, say, to the eastern or southern parts of the county in order to offset some of that booking time that we were hearing relative to the officers having to transport all the way down to the main jail.
Not really.
And basically the main reason is, and just this last year, when ATEMS got up and running the new jail booking system, the jail management system, we've actually rolled out.
So any agency that has the ability for CIGIS or the other booking software that's needed to book somebody, they can do it remotely.
So a lot of the bookings are actually, the paperwork's actually been doing, is in the field already.
They have to take them to the jail.
They have to get through the medical screening.
That's where our problem lies.
Okay.
But I'm pretty hopeful that we'll get that fixed pretty soon.
Okay.
Thank you.
Any other questions?
I have a question for county council's office.
Procedural question.
As it relates to item 26, is it possible to bifurcate part of this action, if it's the will of the board,
the authorization to purchase future equipment part until sometime after consideration of the recommended budget?
Certainly.
Okay.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
All right.
I have one more thing just because we like to overshare a little bit back to Supervisor Kennedy's
questions about the amount of drones we have.
Just as an example, in one of our barricaded subject callouts this year, five of the indoor drones were destroyed by one person.
And so all this stuff, the drones, the less lethal, the gas, even up to the barricade, we have to plan, right?
It's like shelf life, destruction, all that stuff.
So I just wanted to clarify that.
Great.
Thanks again for your presentation.
Appreciate it.
Madam Clerk, we have members of the public sign to speak on these four items.
We do.
I'm going to bring that up.
Just one second.
Chair?
You're going to bring it back here, right?
Yeah, of course.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
Okay.
And just to clarify, because I signed up for all four items, I get to speak on each
one, right?
Two minutes, please?
Yeah.
I'll give you three minutes.
How's that for all four?
That's like half of my time, and it's a lot of items that have been put out for the public
to consume.
So I would appreciate at least four minutes.
I have a feeling you're probably going to run over three minutes, so why don't you start?
Appreciate that understanding.
Um, yeah, these are honest to God.
I've been watching these meetings since, uh, AB 481 was first taken into effect, uh, in 2022.
And I'm going to note right here, uh, on a legal basis, um, the sheriff's department and most of the other county agencies have not complied with AB 481 since it was at first implemented, but especially the sheriff's department.
First and foremost, uh, the sheriff's, uh, MEU policy 706 currently states that when stocks of military equipment have reached significantly low levels or been exhausted, the department may order up to 10% of stock in a calendar year without the board of supervisors approval.
This language right there clearly violates state law, which requires all military equipment acquisitions by the department to be approved by the governing body without exception.
Look it up.
Uh, second, it's fiscally irresponsible.
To waste, uh, to waste over a million dollars, uh, for more military equipment purchases when it's not even required, especially when we're considering cuts to other life affirming community care programs.
Um, as well as, uh, defensive, uh, like within things like, uh, our legal community.
Um, for instance, uh, there are like two items in particular, that bear cat that was being mentioned, which was, uh, which one of which was replaced, uh, as recently as 2022.
And then the Boston Dynamics robot, uh, are both valued at $950,000.
And AB 41 government code section seven, uh, 7071 requires this governing body to only approve military equipment purchases.
If it meets four minimum requirements, which include that it is necessary because there is no reasonable alternative that can achieve the same objective of officer and civilian safety.
The, uh, that that will safeguard the public's welfare safety, civil rights, and civil liberties.
Uh, and that the equipment is reasonably cost effective compared to available alternatives, uh, that can achieve the same objectives.
Uh, and that prior use complied with, uh, military equipment policy.
And that any non-compliant uses, uh, were corrected within the policy.
So, two out of the four requirements under there, uh, based on your, uh, questioning and their, and the sheriff's department's responses, don't actually meet the minimum requirements for you to approve, uh, the purchases of the equipment here today.
So, uh, really encourage you to split this off and save this conversation and actually require the department to bring these purchases up individually at a later date after the budget.
Specifically because none of these, uh, equipment purchases are actually listed under the, uh, recommended growth requests that are in the budget documents for tomorrow.
Um, and that's actually tracked from last year too.
That mobile, one of those mobile incident command vehicles that were approved, that was listed in the recommended, uh, uh, growth request from last year's budget.
But wasn't actually included in, uh, the department's request under its, uh, uh, military equipment use policy renewal.
So, there's clearly a breakdown in the process in which, uh, the sheriff actually complies with AB-481.
Besides a host of other reasons, namely, uh, most importantly which, this is the third year in a row since the, uh, department has begun, um, reporting on its military equipment use.
Uh, that shows black and brown people in this county are the most targeted by the sheriff's military equipment under the guise of safety.
Um, legislatures explicitly declared in passing AB-41 that military equipment deployment in civilian neighborhoods creates a negative net impact on public safety and civilian life.
Um, uh, particularly, uh, for low-income black and brown neighborhoods where they are most frequently deployed.
In Sacramento County, a population of over 1.5 million people where over 60% are white and less than 11% are black, Sacramento Sheriff's Department, uh, reported targeting black people in 50 out of the 109, uh, reported deployments of military equipment compared with just 26 deployments against white people.
And, uh, let's note that the number, uh, who, uh, in the black and brown community are being targeted by the sheriff's military equipment use.
Namely, black and brown youth, uh, who are most frequently, uh, the targets of this equipment where, um, even as a majority of the equipment use, uh, occurred in zip codes where white people made up as many as 53% of residents, black people made up less than 15% of, uh, the sheriff, like, of the sheriff's targeted, uh, youth under, or the sheriff's number of targeted youth under 25 people.
Uh, uh, amounted to 35 deployments, or 32% of all those deployments.
That's more than any other age group.
Can you wrap it up, please?
Yes.
I will just note that the sheriff's department consistently violates state law, one of the reasons which it is currently under federal consent decree.
And, uh, to continue to give it, uh, more spending authority to buy more equipment that it neither needs nor uses, which, according to them, they have never reported using any of those robots that they're, uh, talking about requesting additional purchases for.
Uh, this board should absolutely reject that and actually, uh, declare a moratorium on any further military equipment purchases until the sheriff's department can prove that it is actually necessary for ensuring both officer and civilian safety.
Thank you.
Thank you.
That concludes the public comments for all four items.
Okay.
Uh, Supervisor Rodriguez.
So, I want to thank all the presenters for presenting today.
Um, I am very supportive of the usage of drones and other equipment that can, um, that can, uh, help, uh, our public safety be more efficient.
And, uh, I, I'm such a supporter of using modern equipment, um, and, and the newest technology to be able to, uh, protect the lives of our public safety personnel, but also individuals who are experiencing, um, something that may be going on where public safety is needed.
So, I just want to say that I, I, I'm very supportive of the use of modern equipment and, um, drones for these types of situations.
That's it.
All right.
Thank you.
Um, yeah, Supervisor, Supervisor, sorry.
I demoted you.
Demoted.
County CEO, David Villanueva.
I'm just going to leave that alone.
Um, Supervisor, we did have a moment to check with, um, our General Services.
And General Services does have a delegation from the board.
The purchasing agent does have a delegation from the board to purchase goods.
Um, those goods, um, we're confirming the number, but those goods, um, the, the delegation on goods where they have master contracts do allow them and the sheriff's department and any department for that matter to pull off of those contracts and use us purchasing, that purchasing delegation.
I agree with, uh, uh, uh, county council, um, that the sheriff's department does not have delegated, um, uh, authority to enter in contracts.
But I think those are more on the service side of things.
They also have no delegation to enter into equipment items.
That's why they love, uh, leverage general services.
Um, we don't have any special, um, classification or any, um, restrictions on the AB 481 type of equipment, the military equipment.
So if that's something the board is considering, that, that is an option.
So, so I just, I just need to know something fairly simple then based on what you just shared, uh, Mr. Villanueva.
Uh, if the sheriff's department wants to go purchase 10 drones and at a total aggregate cost of, I don't know, I'm just picking a number, $50,000, um, would, would that then have to go through the, our purchasing agent, um, who has the contract, the contract discretion to execute it?
Yes.
It's my understanding that, um, they have two options, of course.
One is to come to the board and get the board's authority to enter into those contracts.
The other one is to leverage general services purchasing agent or the county's purchasing agent.
It's the option part I need clarification on.
Well, it's the option of the department to make those decisions.
Okay, fine.
All right.
That's, I'm, I'm just, I'm not accusing you.
I just want to know.
So in other words, in this scenario, that interest in a $50,000 acquisition of 10,000,
drones, uh, could happen without us knowing and without us acting.
Is that right?
Well, technically under this AB 481, the authorization has to come from the board to purchase future.
A future.
Equipment.
Yeah.
That's, that's the part.
Right.
So that's.
For instance, in this right now, you're giving them authority to purchase future.
Right.
So they can't do it.
It's a little different than what, what I was hearing earlier.
So here's where I'm going with this.
Uh, thank you for the additional information.
Um, I'm going to make a motion.
Uh, I believe we just have to act on two out of the four, correct?
Two out of the four items.
Because the two, there's two presentations.
There's two authorizations.
Is that correct?
There's.
The way I'm seeing it on the agenda.
Well, there's four items.
There's four items, but there's only.
Is that correct?
For item 24, that was an action item.
And item 25 is an action item.
No, 26 is an action item.
And 25 is an action item.
I mean, 25 and 26.
My apologies.
Okay.
Gotcha.
So here's going to be my motion.
Is that we receive and file, um, the reports from regional parks as it relates to rangers
and from the district attorney's office, um, relative to their, uh, military equipment,
um, uh, report, uh, that we, uh, give authorization to, uh, the probation department, um, for, uh, what
they, uh, are interested in.
However, again, going back to what we know about the sheriff's priorities in terms of, um, what he's put forth
relative to the recommended budget, which we're all well aware of, um, I would like to postpone the authorization,
uh, to, or at least move to, uh, postpone authorization to purchase and acquire military equipment in the future
until after, uh, we have our budget deliberations, uh, for recommended budget, um, and, um, and then reconsider that
at a, at a later time.
That would be my motion.
I look for a second.
So you're saying after tomorrow?
Yeah.
Okay.
Sometime after, after our, assuming we get through budget tomorrow.
Yeah.
So we'll have more information at that point.
Okay.
I can second that one.
Okay.
It's been moved and seconded.
Supervisor Hume.
It's moved.
No, I was just going to ask you to break out the first three and then we could take the separate,
uh, the sheriff's separate, but that's fine.
Okay.
Uh, so county council.
Okay.
Excuse me.
County council.
Oh, I was just, I was just going to ask, um, are you just going to continue the whole sheriff's
item?
Because there are two, there's another on the sheriff's item.
They are asking you to, um, for three things.
There's two, there's three items.
It's just, so the only thing I want to hold until after recommended budget is the authorization
for future acquisition.
Okay.
Okay.
Number three.
So just to be clear.
Number three.
Right.
Just clarifying that.
Yep.
Supervisor Rodriguez.
That's it.
That's what I was curious about.
All right.
Very good.
Uh, we have a motion, a second.
Please vote.
And the motion carries with, uh, supervisor Rodriguez voting no and supervisor Desmond is absent.
Very good.
Thank you.
Uh, thanks again to all the presenters.
Appreciate that.
All right.
Next item.
Um, that concludes your items for today.
You do have closed session.
And we do have executive, kind of executive comments.
Oh, yeah.
Do you want to take those up now?
Sorry about that.
I should have thought about that.
Because we don't have an afternoon.
So we have county executive comments.
Item 29.
Thank you, Flo.
Just two quick things.
Um, last week we submitted, uh, letters to, um, both the Senate and Assembly, uh, budget committees
to request funding for Prop 36.
I know that was something that's been very important to this board.
Um, we are partnering with, uh, CSAC, the California, uh, State Association of Counties,
along with other associations to submit that.
So on your, on the board's behalf, we submitted that asking for, um, that, that funding.
That funding should be identified, at least come out about June 15th, if there is any funding.
I'm hopeful that there's funding.
But any levers that you guys could help pull, um, with the Senate and Assembly, um, would be
very helpful, um, in addition to that letter.
The other one was last Thursday we had a ribbon cutting, uh, for Grove Florin.
It was a partnership between Sacramento County, Hope Cooperative, N-Key Development Group,
and, um, a smaller, uh, partner of SMUD that helped us get it across the line, uh, Paul Lau
and his team over there.
Um, the, the Grove Florin includes 72 transitional housing beds, focused mainly on seniors, uh, age
55 and over, um, with care court participants as a priority.
In addition to that, it has, uh, um, kitchen facilities, bathroom and shower and laundry
facilities.
And, um, Hope Cooperative has always been a great partner to, um, on this.
And they will also be, um, staffing this and contracting with them.
Um, they are, we'll be ensuring that, um, our, the daily operations meet not only the counties,
but the state and federal guidelines, um, in complying with that in addition to the county's
good neighbor policy and on-site services provided by, um, behavioral health and other contract
services, our behavioral health supports, case management and housing navigation, employment
and education support as long as health and wellness.
Um, this was on a very fast track to get this done.
And, uh, Dave DeFonte's group, a deputy county executive Dave DeFonte's group have been changing
the way we've been approaching development projects.
And it's a small miracle we got this done in the time that we did.
But I, I, um, have to at least thank, uh, amongst many of the folks that pulled together on Sacramento
County is Rick, um, Belaz.
He's our project development manager.
Um, we call it the white glove service of project development.
Um, and then also Jennifer Sinam, um, who, Simonello, Simonello and Jessica Stockton also played
a big role in those folks are with behavioral health and DHS.
So just want to thank them and those, um, those departments and all the folks that came together
that make this project go in lightning speed.
So thank you very much.
Thank you, David, for, uh, the, uh, acknowledgement of that, uh, celebration we, we enjoyed last,
uh, week.
I was there and had a chance to say a few words and thank, um, many individuals and organizations
that, uh, partnered to get this, as you mentioned, uh, get this project up and running, uh, very,
very swiftly and I, I made mention specifically of Rick as being that, um, uh, conduit between,
um, our, um, building and planning departments, um, and environmental review, uh, to make sure
that, uh, of course, doing things on the up and up as it pertains to local and state and
federal regulations, um, for, uh, building residences.
Uh, but again, I mark it as a, uh, another success story.
I, I, I kind of wanted to brag a little bit and make mention of the fact that, well, yeah,
you can put this in the same category as Amazon and Metro Airport because we've got that up
and running and permitted within a year.
Uh, but, um, it just goes to prove that, um, the, all the initiatives that are under the,
um, supervision and implementation of Mr. DeFonte and his staff, uh, to just be very,
uh, you know, uh, business friendly and, uh, customer service, um, focused when it comes,
when it comes to those that are, um, bringing us great projects, have an environment that they
can really succeed in.
And so I want to thank David as well.
Thank you.
Supervisor Kennedy.
Thank you, Chair.
Um, so I, I recently had an opportunity.
Well, let me back, go back.
Uh, there have been comments that have been made recently publicly in other places, uh,
that, uh, regarding adult correctional health at the jail, uh, that, um, nothing has been
done in the last 20 months.
Uh, also we did have a contingent of local, uh, law enforcement agencies come before us
and lay it correctional health, uh, the, the, the route to why there are delays and officers
are being taken off the street longer than they felt that they should.
Since I found out that, uh, it's laying it all at the feet of adult correctional health
is not accurate.
Um, and as far as us, you know, the county doing nothing to improve adult correctional
health and make changes to adult correctional health in the last 20 months and having done
nothing, um, I was blown away when I met with, uh, Mr. Jones and Ms. Qatari's staff and
received a very thorough report on all of that we have been doing and we are doing to make
the situation better and alleviate my frustration through education.
Um, so Mr. Chair, it's my long-winded way of saying I have, I think that there has been
a lot of great work going on.
There is a lot of great work in the works and we need to talk about it and we need to
get that story out there.
And so I would ask that we can have a workshop, uh, to go over specifically just limited to
adult correctional health and our efforts, uh, here in the near future.
Great recommendation.
Thank you.
And I'm sure our county executive, his team will take under advisement your suggestion.
We'll get that scheduled working with the clerk's office.
Absolutely, supervisor.
And thank you, supervisor Kennedy.
Um, we probably need about 60 days to pull this together.
So I think maybe the August timeframe we can probably bring something back.
Good.
Thank you.
Uh, supervisor Rodriguez.
Uh, on behalf of Sacramento County, I want to extend my heartbelt congratulations
to the Folsom police chief Rick Hillman on his retirement after nearly 40 years of dedicated
service in law enforcement.
His leadership, compassion, and deep commitment to the people of Folsom have made a lasting difference.
Also, um, it is an honor to recognize the 70th anniversary of the North Highlands Recreation
and Park District.
For seven decades, the district has brought people together, created safe spaces for families,
and strengthened the fabric of the community.
And I'm truly grateful for the staff, volunteers, and community members whose dedication has made
the milestone possible.
And that's it for me.
Great.
Thank you.
Uh, I just want to, uh, briefly make mention of the fact that, um, uh, I as chair had an opportunity
to, um, attend as I believe supervisor Kennedy did.
Uh, I know Mr. Villanueva did, uh, Mr. Defonte and others, uh, from the county, uh, last week
at the Visit Sacramento, um, annual, um, uh, luncheon.
And we, we had a chance to hear, uh, about many of the, uh, successes over the past, uh, year
that Visit Sacramento under the great leadership of Mike Testa, uh, has been achieving.
Uh, he's fantastic.
We all know, uh, know his work and his passion for, um, making sure that Sacramento puts its
best foot forward.
Uh, not just Sacramento City or the county, but in fact, the entire region, um, with events,
uh, such as his assistance with Aftershock and the Tower Bridge dinner.
Uh, but one of the exciting things that, uh, we all learned at the luncheon was the debut
of a new event called, uh, Terra Madre Americas, which will be a first of its kind, um, um, kind
of convergence of, uh, uh, uh, um, you know, burgeoning food and foodie culture here in Sacramento,
um, and, uh, as well as, uh, some great, uh, music talent, including the war on drugs, which
I'm a big fan of that band.
Um, and this is going to be, uh, an event that takes place on September 27th.
And so keep your ear to the rail in terms of, uh, more details about that forthcoming event.
It will be a great lineup to all the other terrific events that we have here in, uh, in
our great, in our great county and our associated communities.
All right.
If, uh, that's it, and we don't have any further business before us, we are adjourned.
Thank you.
Discussion Breakdown
Summary
Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Meeting - June 3, 2025
The Sacramento County Board of Supervisors met to discuss several key items, including military equipment reports, annual housing program updates, and various presentations. All supervisors were present except Supervisor Desmond.
Opening and Introductions
- Meeting called to order and broadcast on Metro Cable Channel 14
- Public comment procedures and accessibility information provided
- Two-minute limit per speaker established
Public Comments
- Mike Jaske from St. Mark's United Methodist Church discussed historical quotes from President Johnson and social progress
- Ted Samara, Executive Director of United Public Employees, addressed concerns about wage negotiations for county employees and threatened potential strikes
Consent Calendar
- Items 4-19 approved unanimously
- Notably short consent calendar compared to typical meetings
- Discussion of Beach Stone Lake Area Flood Mitigation program included
Key Presentations
- Housing Trust Fund and Affordable Housing reports showed $33.1M collected since 1990
- 2024 housing achievements: 303 permanent supportive housing units and 1,102 affordable housing units created
- Military equipment reports from Regional Parks, District Attorney, Probation, and Sheriff's Office
- AB-481 compliance discussions regarding drone usage and equipment purchases
Major Decisions
- Board postponed authorization for Sheriff's future military equipment purchases until after budget deliberations
- Approved probation department's request for drone acquisition
- Received and filed military equipment reports from Regional Parks and District Attorney's office
Meeting Outcomes
- Grove Florin ribbon cutting announced - 72 transitional housing beds for seniors
- Request made for future workshop on adult correctional health
- Recognition of Folsom Police Chief Rick Hillman's retirement
- Announcement of new Terra Madre Americas event for September 27th
Meeting Transcript
I'd like to call to order this meeting of the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors for Tuesday June 3rd, 2025. Madam Clerk will you please call the roll and establish a quorum. Yes, good morning. Supervisors Kennedy. Here. Rodriguez. Here. Hume. Here. Serna. Here. And you have a quorum and let's let the record reflect that Supervisor Desmond will not be present with us today. This meeting of the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors is live and recorded and closed captioning. It is cable cast on Metro Cable Channel 14, the local government affairs channel on the Comcast and Direct TV U-verse cable systems. It is also live streamed at Metro14live.satcounty.gov and today's meeting will be repeated Friday, June 6th at 6 p.m. on Channel 14 and viewed at youtube.com forward slash Metro Cable 14. The Board of Supervisors fosters public engagement during the meeting and encourages public participation, civility, and use of courteous language. The Board does not condone the use of profanity, vulgar language, gestures, or other inappropriate behavior including personal attacks or threats directed towards any meeting participant. Seating is limited and available on a first-come, first-served basis. Each speaker will be given two minutes to make a public comment and are limited to making one comment per agenda or off-agenda item. Please be mindful of the public comment procedures to avoid being interrupted while making your comment. Comments made by the public during the Board of Supervisors meetings may include information that could be inaccurate or misleading, particularly concerning topics related to public health, voter registrations, and elections. The County of Sacramento does not endorse or validate the accuracy of public statements made during these open public forums. The recordings are shared to provide transparency and access to proceedings of meetings. If you need to make a comment in person, please fill out a speaker request form and hand it to clerk staff. The chairperson will open public comments for each agenda or off-agenda item and direct the clerk to call the name of each speaker. When the clerk calls your name, please come to the podium and make your comment. If a speaker is unavailable to make a comment prior to the closing of public comments, the speaker waives their request to speak and the clerk will file the speaker request form in the record. The clerk will manage the timer and allow each speaker two minutes to make a comment. Off-agenda public comments will take place for a maximum of 30 minutes, and the remainder of the agenda comments will take place at the conclusion of the time matters in the afternoon. You may send written comments by email to boardclerk at saccounty.gov, and your comment will be routed to the board and filed in the record. If you need an accommodation pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act or for medical or other reasons, please see clerk staff for assistance or contact the clerk's office at