Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MINUTES - 04301993 - MR.1
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS r Contra ti FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator J s Costa County DATE: April 30, 1993 rT'�CT-U!1 SUBJECT: BUDGET COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNTY BUDGET SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)i BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Direct the County Administrator to prepare recommendations resolving the known budget problem and report back to the Board on May 25. 2. Direct the County Administrator to keep the Board advised of any additional information on the state budget problem. 3. Approve the attached list of assignments for subsequent follow-up and study. 4. Accept the preliminary listing of Department performance indicators and measures of service outcomes provided by Departments at the budget workshop. 5. Acknowledge accomplishments of organizational and service efficiencies as examples of Contra Costa County's leadership in productivity improvement. 6. Receive testimony from the AD Hoc Budget Committee, the Revenue Task Force and the general public regarding the County budget. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON_April 30- 1993 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X See Addendum to April 30, 1993 order on Budget Committee Recommendations for County Budget, attached. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT- AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: County -Administrator ATTESTED April 30, 1993 PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY DEPUTY M382 (10/88) , -2- BACKGROUND: On April 20 and 22, the Board of Supervisors, sitting as the Budget Committee, conducted a two day budget workshop on the County budget. The Board received a 540 page report from the County Administrator presenting the budget challenge next fiscal year, two budget reduction scenarios, alternatives solutions to resolving budget deficits and a detailed program budget for each department. The County Administrator proposed that the Board adopt 16 recommendations relative to approaching the County budget. The Board heard testimony from each Department Head who discussed the service and organizational impacts that the two budget reduction plans will have on their department. Additionally, each Department Head outlined the most promising employee suggestions and potential savings generated from their Department's "time out" and indicated their plan to implement thee suggestions in the future. Finally, the Department discussed some organizational performance measures as well as some past and future cost saving measures. After deliberation, the Board of Supervisors adopted 15 of the sixteen recommendations and modified the other recommendation, which is included as recommendation number one above. The Board set May 25 as the date to resolve the known budget problem for 1993-1994. Also, the Board determined that a number of referral and study items require future reports to the Board, and directed that the County Administrator compile a preliminary list of department performance measures which were discussed during the Budget Committee Hearings. Finally, the Board requested a listing of some of the productivity and cost saving measures implemented by County departments over the years. I Attachment A Budget Committee Study and Referral Items Department Item 1. Community Services Submit memorandum comparing performance to other counties. 2. County Administrator/Data Processing Report on staffing levels of Data Processing department relative to other county data processing departments. 3. County Administrator/Risk Mgt Provide detailed cost report on risk management and associated costs for outside attorneys. 4. County Counsel Report on extent of pro-bono work. 5. Health Services Finalize language regarding financial Maintenance of Effort requirements for inclusion in legislation. Submit memorandum comparing administrative staffing to other counties. 6. Health Services/CAO Obtain copy of Mosquito Abatement's line item budget and explore the feasibility of assuming these functions in the County Health Services Department. 7. Personnel Examine the current level of the personnel function within operating Departments. 8. Private Industry Council Submit memorandum comparing performance to other counties. 9. Social Service Provide comparative caseload statistics of foster care versus family preservation including turnover data. Submit historical staffing comparison of line to management staff. Attachment A Quantify the future fiscal consequences of reducticns in G.A. programs, that foster self-sufficiency. Submit memorandum comparing performance to other counties. 10. Social Service/CAO Work with FACSAC and Community Based Organizations (CBO) to develop and submit performance measures for CBOs. 11. Veterans Service/CAO Submit memorandum on estimated annual Medi-Cal cost avoidance and diversion of G.A. recipients to veteran benefits. Attachment B Preliminary List of Department Performance Indicators and Output Measures ANIMAL SERVICES 1. Total calls per officer. 2. Total animal impounds per officer. 3. Total citations issues per officer. ASSESSOR 1. The number of property tax roll units processed per employee. 2. The cost to process a property tax roll unit. AUDITOR-CONTROLLER 1. Number of payroll transactions processed per employee. 2. Number of purchase orders and employee demands processed per employee. BUILDING INSPECTION 1. Percentage of applications for which a permit is issued within five working days or less. CLERK-RECORDER 1. Case filings per judicial position. 2. Documents recorded per employee. 3. Cost per voter. COMMUNITY SERVICES 1. Percentage of targeted children served in head start programs. 2. Amount of required in-kind match for head start and other programs that is generated within the community. 3. Initiatives taken to establish new programs and funding sources. Attachment B -2- COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 1. Actions taken to increase organizational effectiveness and efficiency. 2. Percentage of time that Data Processing's batch production jobs processed do not require reruns. 3. Percentage of time that Data Processing's mainframe computer is available to users. 4. Ratio of revenue collected by the Office of Revenue Collection to the cost of collection. 5. Ratio of open liability and workers' compensation cases to claims filed. 6. Maximizing County revenue. 7. Stimulating and promoting excellence in the County organization. 8. Increasing public awareness of County efforts. 9. Providing leadership within Contra Costa County and throughout the state. COOPERATIVE EXTENSION 1. Incoming calls per clerk. 2. Cost per 4H Club participant . 3. Number of newsletters produced and mailed per year. GENERAL SERVICE 1. Cost per square foot for custodial services. 2. Ratio of vehicles maintained to Fleet Management worker. 3. Number of impressions per print shop employee per month. HEALTH SERVICES 1. Initiatives taken to reduce cost of care of mentally ill clients, at the institutional level. Attachment B -3- HEALTH SERVICES cori�Jnued 2. Initiatives taken to reduce and prevent hospitalization by providing better support in the community setting. (per Lorna) 3. Percentage of pregnant women receiving prenatal care within the first trimester. 4. Average monthly number of immunizationsof preschool children. 5. Number of initiatives HIV-infected individuals identified prior to onset of AIDS that are enrolled in early intervention and treatment programs. 6. Maintenance of Contra Costa Health Plan voluntary disenrollment rate at less than 50% of industry average (ie. 2.5%). MUNICIPAL COURTS 1. Ratio of dispositions to filings as compared to the Statewide average. PERSONNEL 1. Contra Costa County ratio of personnel department employees to all employees is 1:1100 versus "industry" standard for government of 1:300. 2. Number of grievances processed by Department over three year period. PRIVATE INDUSTRY COUNCIL 1. Department rating on federal performance standards of: a. follow-up employment rate for adults b. follow-up weekly earnings for adults C. welfare follow-up employment rate for adults d. welfare follow-up weekly earnings for adults e. entered employment rate for youth f. employability enhancement rate for youth PROBATION 1. Cost per month to supervise adult cases. 2. Caseload per deputy. Attachment B -4- PUBLIC WORKS 1. Flood Control - contact citizens within 3 working days after receiving a complaint related to Flood Control District owned facilities. 2. Drainage maintenance - ten to fifteen culverts or more should be flushed clean per day in order to keep pipes at one-quarter or less full. 3. Airport - number of aircraft landings and takeoffs per year over a 5 year period. 4. Design - number of estimated and actual engineering projects designed per year over a three year period. 5. Road maintenance - crack sealing should be done within one month of crack routing and cleaning. SOCIAL SERVICE 1. Percentage of children in Family Preservation Program not put in out-of-home placements. 2. Food Stamp payment error rate, compared to state error rate and federal tolerance level. 3. AFDC payment error rate, compared to state error rate and federal tolerance level. 4. Number of adoption placements resulting in foster care cost reductions. 5. Number of early fraud referrals that result in identification of fraudulent AFDC, Food Stamp or General Assistance applications. SUPERIOR COURT 1. Number of filings per judge compared to other counties. 2. Staffing ratio per judicial position compared to other counties. 3. Filings and dispositions per judicial position compared to other counties. Attachment B -5- TREASURER-TAX COLLECTOR 1. Total revenues collected for secured and unsecured rolls per employee. 2. Total employees per capita. 3. Total business license tax revenues collected per employee. VETERANS SERVICES 1. Number of Medi-Cal awards to medically indigent veterans. 2. Number of veteran benefits awarded to General Assistance recipients. 3. Number of non-welfare veteran benefits awarded. Attachment C SUMMARY OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DEPARTMENTAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS and PERFORMANCE The accomplishments of Contra Costa's Departments summarized here were achieved last fiscal year, a period of significant changes in County revenues and responsibility. Realignment"legislation shifted responsibility for many health, social service and juvenile justice programs from the State to the County and then tied `unding to dedicated revenue sources.A stubborn recession caused revenues from all sources,including realignment revenues, to lag behind projections with consequent budget reductions for many departments. In the light of the challenging events of this fiscal year, the departmental achievements summarized here are even more impressive. Contra Costa County provides a multitude of services to the citizens of Contra Costa. How well does it accomplish its responsibilities? ■ Department performance judged over time indicates increasingly high productivity. For example: ► With no increase in staff,the Data Processing Department increased the number of batches processed by 13%over last year while increasing accuracy 1%. ► The number of property title documents filed by the County Clerk increased 18% over the last 4 years, although staffing decreased by 2%during the same time period. ► In the Probation Department, Adult Caseload increased 16%and Juvenile Caseload increased 11%over the last 5 years, while staffing has decreased 5%during this time period. ► The Risk Management Division decreased workers'compensation claims processing costs by$500,000 and liability claims adjusting costs by$150,000. The chart below illustrates how the performance indicators were distributed. Contra Costa County Performance Indicators 60% Compared to Other Counties 1 50% 40% 30% 20% F `> yg` 10% Sgt`;::: 0% ...... —� First Top 25% 26-33% 3450% ■ Comparisons with other counties show that Contra Costa ranks high in cost-effective operations. For example: ► The District Attorney has the highest family support collections per capita among 6 Bay Area counties. ► The Superior Court ranks highest of 15 comparable counties in total number of dispositions per judge. ► The Social Service Department ranks second lowest of the 13 largest counties in AFDC payment error rate. ■ In addition to overall economy and efficiency, County Departments have also instituted many changes which will achieve major cost savings over the years. For example: ► The General Services Administration opened an automated fueling station which will save 200 to 240 per gallon over commercial stations. ► The Public Defender's Office created the Alternate Defender Office to provide juvenile dependency representation in place of the county bar association Conflicts Panel. This is estimated to save$1,000,000 per year. ADDENDUM TO APRIL 30, 1993 .ORDER ON BUDGET COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR COUNTY BUDGET Chairman Torlakson opened the public hearing with opening remarks followed by remarks from Supervisor Bishop, Chair of the Finance Committee. Phil Batchelor, County Administrator, reviewed the budget process Sara Hoffman, County Administrator' s office, reviewed the material prepared by the County Administrator' s office showing the various areas of cost savings activities the departments have initiated. Rick Aubrey, Committee Spokesperson, presented a report from the Ad Hoc Budget Advisory Committee. The Chair declared the hearing open and the following persons appeared and gave testimony: 1 . Carol Dalton Sebilia, member of the Management Council, presented a document entitled "Budget Strategies, " which is a consensus document of the Management Council . 2 . Paul Katz, P. 0. Box 222, Martinez, representing the Contra Costa Health Plan Advisory Board. 3 . Jeanne Will, 105 St. Mary' s Court, Martinez (left card but did not wish to speak) 4 . Diana Rodger, 1241 Gregory Avenue, Martinez, representing herself and the Contra Costa County Substance Abuse Board. 5 . Randy Burke, .500 Morway Court, Martinez 6. John Wolfe, 820 Main Street, Martinez, representing the Contra Costa Taxpayers Association, advised that he was impressed by the process used in this County. 7 . Suzanne Schmale, spoke on alcoholism and the help she received from the Ozanam Center. 8 . Carlos De La Cerda, 1201 Liberty Street, #2, El Cerrito, representing the Drinking Driving Program of the Health Services Department, submitted signatures of clients of the DUI Program asking that the program not be cut. 9. Amy Worth, 304 La Espiral, Orinda, representing Friends of the Orinda Library, presented a resolution in support of SB . 566 adopted by the City of Orinda. 10 . Killis Love, alumni of Diablo Valley Ranch, spoke against cuts in the alcohol and drug programs for Diablo Valley Ranch. 11 . Mary Fitzgerald, Ozanam Center spoke against cuts in the Substance Abuse Program. 12 . Maria Pergakis, Ozanam Center, spoke against cuts in the Alcohol Program. 13 . Rose Snead, Ozanam Center, former employee of Ozanam Center, spoke against cuts in the Alcohol Program. 14 . BJ. alumni of Diablo Valley Ranch, spoke against cuts in the funding for Diablo Valley Ranch. 15. Steve Rudolph, Diablo Valley Ranch, spoke against cuts 16. Kay Quinnie, 500 School Street, Pittsburg, representing East County Woman' s Programs, spoke against cuts in residential programs . 17 . Billie Jo Wilson, Local #1, spoke on Health Services Budgets . 18 . Ray Dryer, Health Services . 19. Judy Anderson, CC Library Commission 20 . Chris Adams, 3146 Margola Court, Lafayette, Corrections Commission, spoke on mental health funding. The following spoke for the East County Women' s Program and against cuts to residential programs : 21 . Judy Sparks, 5490 Round Tree Drive #F, Concord. 22 . Ali Burden, 2300 Lemon Tree Way, #2, Antioch. 23 . Vickie Heun 521 W 18th Street, Antioch. 24 . Patricia Warren, 500 School Street, Pittsburg. The following spoke for funding for the programs of the Juvenile Justice/Delinquency Prevention Commission: 25 . Gwen Johnson, 50 Douglas Drive, Martinez . 26. Cliff Taylor 27 . Donna Haas 28 . Linda Baker 29. Elaine Pendergast, 1410 Kelsey Street, Richmond, representing the CHD North Richmond office. The following spoke for funding for the programs of the Fauerso New Way Center, and against budget cuts for residential recovery homes . 30 . Willie Conway, 208 23rd Street, Richmond. 31 . Fagis Carter, 208 23rd Street, Richmond. 32 . Cliffton Ferrell, 208 23rd Street, Richmond. 33 . Richard Washington, 208 23rd Street, Richmond. 34 . Michael Edmondson, 208 23rd Street, Richmond. 35 . Scott Curtis, 208 23rd Street, Richmond. 36 . Kennith Scott, 208 23rd Street, Richmond. 37 . Roger Peters, 860 Brittany Lane, Concord, representing Contra Costa Volunteer Services Corporation. 38 . Ross Nays, Alumni, Diablo Valley Ranch. 39 . Wendy Hanmons, homeless, urged unity for our community. 40 . Herbert B. Putnam, 1747 Bishop Drive, Concord, representing the Mental Health Coalition (The other members of the Coalition were present and introduced themselves prior to their Chairman' s presentation) . The following representatives of Children and Family Services Contractors Coalition of Concord and Walnut Creek spoke on contracts for social services and advised that they want to be funded by proceeds of Measure B, and requested that they be referred to the Finance Committee for review: 41 . Barbara - Family Stress and CC Child Care Council Deborah - Child Abuse Prevention Council Ish Mendosa - Meals on Wheels Larry Sly, CC Food Bank 42 . Brian Treadwell, 1780 Muir Road, Martinez, Contra Costa County Deputy Sheriffs ' Association, reviewed last year' s cuts in funding and the increased jail population with reduced staffing and urged the Board to make public safety its No . 1 priority. 43 . Edward P. South, M.D. , 910 Calle de Caballo, Suisun, California, part-time psychiatrist at the County Detention Facility, representing himself, spoke on the impact of reduced mental health staff in detention facilities and his concern that proposed cuts will hurt or impact public safety. 44 . Jim Hicks (AFSCME) offered to work closely with the Board to identify savings and efficiencies, and urged all organizations and interest groups to march on Sacramento on May 19, 1993 . 45 . Ellen Tabachnick, Contra Costa Legal Services, spoke on the need for funding for her agency, and spoke against the Social Service Department ' s plan to centralize. 46 . Ronda Garcia, 2450 Stanwell, #110, representing the Children' s Coalition, urged continued funding for children' s services . 47 . Damita Davis Howard, SEIU 535, spoke about the impact of shortages in the Social Service Department and the increased workload. The Chair noted that this concludes the public testimony. Sara Hoffman spoke on Social Service needs and litigation and the amount of work involved in this effort. Supervisor Torlakson spoke on the need to pursue with Congressmen Rainey and Miller the various rulings and interpretations of State and Federal law. Supervisor Bishop proposed the Board go through the suggestions of the management employees and review State mandates . Board members considered the matters brought before them today. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the hearing on the County Budget is CLOSED, the recommendations of the County Administrator are APPROVED, and staff is REQUESTED to report on May 25, 1993 on the issues raised during this hearing. MEMORANDUM DATE: April 30, 1993 TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Ad Hoc Budget Advisory Committee BY: Rick Aubry, Committee Spokesperson 1 SUBJECT: Recommended Policy for Budget Hearings The Board of Supervisors created an Ad Hoc Budget Advisory Committee consisting of representatives of a wide range of County citizens: employee organizations, chambers of commerce, the Contra Costa Council, Taxpayers' Association, City-County Relations Committee and the Council of Chairs (the chairs of the County's health and welfare advisory boards and commissions and the chairs of the community-based organizations alliances). The Board charged the Committee with the task of advising the Board on managing changes due to realignment, budget shortfalls and other circumstances. The following recommendations are a refinement and revision of policy alternatives developed by the Committee and presented to the Board of Supervisors during the FY 92- 93 budget hearings. The Committee submits these recommendations to the Board for their use in setting program priorities and budget alternatives. Policy Recommendations 1. Urge Sacramento to restore AB8 and SDAF for fire and public protection. The Committee again endorses its previous position of the need to restore AB8 and SDAF funds to local government. Furthermore, the Committee recommends that all business and civic organizations,as well as individual citizens, immediately contact their legislators and the Governor to protest the seizure of $2.6 billion local government property taxes. 2. Provide legal protection for use of local property taxes first for local services. The proposed seizure of local property taxes by the State will cripple the County's ability to fund programs of local priority. There is strong unanimity that local control of funding decisions on health, welfare and public protection must be maintained. If the legislature will not listen to the need for local control, then this issue should be taken directly to the voters as soon as possible. 3. Consider the potential loss/gain of federal, state or other revenue when evaluating programs. Special consideration should be given to programs that leverage the County's financial resources, provided that the program is also necessary, effective and cost—efficient. Information on revenue, including other revenue such as Medi—Cal generation, foundation matching grants, etc. should be provided to the Board of Supervisors with the budget reduction recommendations. In addition, the Committee believes that the County should try to work with the State and federal government to create "shared savings" agreements that would give incentives to the County to institute efficiencies and to the State/Federal governments to be flexible in their regulatory requirements. 4. Consider the service needs of children and vulnerable adults when making budgetary decisions Services for children and vulnerable adults (due to age or disability) have been carefully constructed over time. County government has certain unique responsibilities for the most vulnerable citizens that no one else will inherit if these responsibilities are dropped. The current system includes a partnership of services from the County and community—based organizations both of whom provide basic, essential services. Once dismantled, the system will be very difficult to rebuild. The County needs to look at the long range implications of its actions and the service needs of this population when making budgetary decisions. 5. Consider reorganizing/consolidating services and operations The County needs to look at how best to utilize its employee resources. In doing so, however, the Board should consider the impact on clients being served by the programs. Where possible, the County should encourage and support reorganization, mergers, etc. which will, in the long run, improve services and improve efficiency. 6. Clearly identify program benefits of any proposed new revenue sources Citizens need to understand the direct relationship between revenue (taxes, fees) and service levels, particularly when voter approvals are necessary. If and when a tax increase is necessary, it is best to explicitly show taxpayers what their money will buy. Additionally, rather than a "shotgun" approach to new taxes, with multiple taxes imposed at different times, the Committee believes that taxpayers would be more receptive to a single, comprehensive tax increase measure. 7. Consider both new revenue potential and program reductions when making budgetary decisions The magnitude of budget reductions forced upon Contra Costa County by the State is almost overwhelming. Program cuts will affect many people who have no other 2 sources of assistance. Yet, taxes could be a burden to people and businesses struggling to cope with the effects of the recession. The Committee believes that a balanced—approach of tax increases and reductions would be the most equitable solution to the budgetary dilemma. Board Referral on Employee Suggestions The Board of Supervisors requested that the Ad Hoc Budget Committee review the employee suggestions submitted to the Board of Supervisors as part of the budgetary process. In reviewing the employee suggestions, the Committee thought that many were excellent and wants to commend employees for their efforts. However, the Committee recognized that adequate review of the suggestions requires time, expertise and objectivity. Consequently, the Committee would like to recommend that the Board establish a process and format for the evaluation of the suggestions. As a first step, the Committee felt that the suggestions should be organized into categories such as a) revenue alternatives, b) operational/cost savings, c) meet and confer issues and d) suggestions requiring legislative action. Next, the suggestions could be evaluated according to their: • feasibility • practicality • potential result (savings, revenue, better service, efficiency) • whether the results are worth the time/effort to achieve them • legality (and if legislative reform was warranted) Overall County Objectives As an outgrowth of the discussion on employee suggestions, the Committee concurred that an overall objective of the County should be cost—effective, quality service. The Committee strongly endorses the Board's move to look at outcome rather than process measures. In developing these measures, the Committee felt that there should be measures of both efficiency and quality. Particularly in the services area, measures must be carefully developed to adequately assess the quality and effectiveness of the "caring nature" of the service along with the more quantitative and fiscal measures. In addition, the Committee discussed the need to encourage departments to demonstrate creativity and initiative. One employee suggestion that was strongly supported by the Committee was to provide an incentive to the departments to operate more cost— effectively by allowing them to keep a portion of their year—end fund balance if their actions result in services of the same or better quality. WO:aubry.mem 3 e CHILDREN'S °• °x =', C James1.Spradley,Jr. (•t�C85�IlC Hill, l,/� rJ-{71) PresiChief Ex and Chief Executive Officer HOME ,�J7J 825.1;0, SOCIETY OF OFFICERS (:HAIR CALIFORNIA Jahn F Branton 11.11 Morgan lldl VIC:F CHAIR I,.Hunter Tracht San Diego PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER RECEIVED SECRETARY Spradley,Jr. ERTARl' Doris R.Chamberlin Burbank TREASURER NOV 2 8 IM4 Dianne Easton San Rafael November 23, 1994 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BOARDCharlotte S.S.Bird DIRECTORS CONTRA COSTA CO. y � San Diego 1...........,.— Juhn F.Branton Morgan Hill Rarbara Burns Rig Bear Lake Mr. Tom Power, Chairman Doris R.Chamberlin Burbank Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors James R.Cutright 651 Pine Street Room 16 r),,iniiha / f?Iannr Fasten Martinez, Ca. 94553 San Rafael Patricia Girvin EI Dorado Hills Cad W.Locke Dear Mr. Power, Red B,.ff Barbara Pollard Massey Newport Beach On behalf of Children's Home Society of California, I would Barbara J.Parker Venice like to extend our condolences in the recent death of Joanne Pochubradsky. San Francisco Perfecto Villarreal I.ou Reyes Oakland It is with great sadness that we write to the Board of T'da" chneider, Supervisors in recognizing the death of Perfecto Villarreal I-,Angelus""""'Jr. and to relay our condolences to the County and Mr. Ernest H.Smith,M.D.Los Angeles Villarreal's family. l:o)].Sranaway Millbrae G—rgia Drew Stewart LonChildren's Home Societyof California is a provider for oz M.Th P Joan M.Thorny out-of-home services to children of Contra Costa County, R.... lonarhan C.Tihbirts,Ir and we recognize this is a great loss for the County, San Diego bbs Social Service employees and the families served. Il,;,m,e L. ark l,anu•ran Park L.I lunter Tracht S:,n D.,Ro With deep regret, Per 11.Trebler Con+na Del Mar Laur:1 L'dall San lose j Ikni S.Viiaplana • San Diego Kathie Tunstall BOARD OF TRUSTEES Program Manager L,•„is F.Boddie,M.D. Sherman House Assessment Transition Pro g B—Angeles B—Angeles da Blau Boucher Sar,Frannsa, Mn.Willian,Il.Clark Nrwl?ort B,-.,,h Dennis B.Ring Menlo Park Mary Ripley 14rctola Valley CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS 2-27 WestStreet Angeles.Los Angeles. C CA A10-9 1/-. \ OFFICES �✓ p_ Ohicu Fresni, ✓"�Cyv�dL. ��� �GLLf�Z-G�iZ, �/ \ Oak]; s An s .I Plum{rings Pleasant Hill • Redding R.v—side Sacramento San Diego San Francisco San Ji+s • tian Luis ObisFx, Santa Ana Santa Barbara C� }�� tianm Rasa • Stockton Va lljl"�J.IIn Nuys Ventura Yuba City Probation DepartmentContra Gerald S.Buck County Probation Officer Administrative Offices Costa 50 Douglas Drive,Suite 201 County Martinez,California 94553-8500 (510)313-4180 (510)313-4191 FAX To: ^' s • Date: Board of Supervisors 4/30/93 STA C From: Gerald S. Buck, Subject: Fact Sheet Distributed Co ' ty Probation Officer April 30, 1993 at Public Budget Hearing While I recognize this fact sheet was not intended to be lengthy or detailed, I found it disappointing that there was no reference to the cuts taken by Probation in 1992/93 . While Public Protection service cuts are highlighted, the fact that Probation lost 76 positions and sustained a cut of 24% is not even mentioned. Other services not sustaining this percentage of cut are highlighted. I would hope that Probation as a priority service will be given more attention by the Board than this fact sheet does . I 've attached a summary of our cuts and impacts of FY 1992/93 for your interest. GSB:ds Attachment cc: Phil Batchelor Judge Haight Judge Swager - e,:. :.::-..n_.r.,,:,_ .a�,c.r._,«.:f..- .,..-w .,._ ..i..,. .a.a"':._w 'r;..«-.' :...1. '•:y�')':T• c.F::�F�z,:i., r�-4:: ',t•,:-s,'i,%:..,..:..':�..-�::.:: �'t.',n ...,. ... C�!�,f:.�.5^.f?., w >r �,�.r'-' fia-J f�':•�,• � .� ktt\+. ...•4":'.,rr1A, r:F-t:-r'.•',x�.; �..�, �.P.'. ,:-t:rr..- •:-•�, rsrerr? 'NSFr ,}'�5 ur � '��«5'xf 'kY�-:C} -•,'�,e t ,."t .�:• ._.Ps: .)!':��.:'T.. :t�.'•le, Y -1�;a i�:ly!•w"�'': >•.s_ .L <�1T9: .'E5. x..t: r-...r -. : ,`, .. 'r t• to-.a`�'n '.n 3' :�:i:x #+'" "�;:w_�:�'; - :;�� 1.tF�,:;t�h,j.:�;,.:' .a..ri.v: 'k�"�ty ?��� Y:J� .._:� N. ..,.�.iO. • .a �•'�r�. nes :ti�r.,v:P. .��' _ r.R - 1} •:1 vlt�i �-! v'a..^#4( C�i. j¢};Ct. .1 ,7:• ; ,•''q:}���,.✓,.�' �i� ,:� .m! :.'Si�,e°":;..,,.� nIfftC?STAC:O UiV11 qf,� _. 44 ±,.1 _ TY � "Jx .r .�+y:,....:.L:_.::a' re� .-.�._r.,�,.3�... �:�..4;y.�.�::,.,ri ..�, :�.� .:� �A ■per, T,�:.�::��: � : u } c• Y,•I:L;.i ,1.4a..t'.. ..'..:'r .. , -:• ..nw�xJ•' - ..,x -t _ :-i' ,ay,... :cNf+•:;•x:-r.rtP...' ..,,.,:n�'•"r`.r:�s�.t w'4Y ,e,...''IP ......w .d,t,. .,,.4 _ .4i .tK'}� },� :A�'�kr ��d_, .F.;r,F: .:�.r' fi... ..,. �'+°...a:.,.:,r ..'`•��a• •.'1y � t:�.,. Y'aW.. r r� �•ft'.71,. M.ft• �.k:.:�� t�,J.W J+,� ;.'.r: :.nT/. '\F x.iq,_ a, rr'F-:.r.:.:L r,.s-.._.p,5,:.a,:•.-:��. 'ai{_ a�"�„ �•• �.>�.F" G'i"... �',�t.�r :K�.r :! _ _ .. ��:i'a".'.'yir '.�'•'t••M��Y:'�.•.�.._.:�. .r[yf;,='��'�.�`.�'.�e�'t»'rV'PC�k�s!•a it,.�{..°��-�':eas+�.'S[9rryc.'•''u''�.'�.i"�y cyr :rti `�.�' li_� �",ski.: ►ai�J�'�a��y��yLrn,,,•�.��_� ttt. �;tl�t��.::,e,eN�a�,v: .:.->r,_.,. �i :�"! tee. ,• y: .. .::J,.: ". •!R:- ,r' •tN ':aaR3ylJefh' zvt:,[k;9[ •,t��` a4afilC 'I: •Y O7sFina ,... .....3•ss.•.. A i„ � � - ,..:. y. ...d'.::•.—}'r ., r'.�.:"•.�. "m''�,"'tl}.'. ,t!' :w•, ,'Grr.. ,:a�"5.'�s •x� �<.�+,'_ -3. .et§::1*-���r�'i�! ,`iilr�!R:� , Contra Cc::;ta;Count ,.has Seen.faced with an:increasin ae and:'fo se ` ices-but:w t -- ` - -:•t.:'af.4d :: r! .:,.rt;::•r:w?r.. .,r•v>,-•";s" .:.�'ry,:.,,,..,aSS;i^:<:.�_ ..;np,:l: :•L.C.: •::�f•.::"y.,::•.::':r ,.::..' 'fi':ri};`e1ti ....... . ... .. ...... .:fin..:....,. . .:.: ::..`.,rv.-; :,. � .,:a-scarci y�o :.::^ya:•w•w=i;.a:�r�-![ev:.s+r.?'.c.xw - ,., .H,, ::..•:,'.::.'.:•:'(. ..r:i:...: ", ..r..- ...:- _.: ,..,1.: t_.;,, :°i':s:: t:•r<-.::,_,•.:.y:.,. .,».',•�+k•;r::a •r:•e{rr . �,[r.;.resburces to:meet;servicedemands:;,yEfficiencies in.operation have helped to mi nimize:sevice.level: :�, Yrt:+.r a; M :, � - ._ rJ•- ieS'a•v a.11 J rL >_i.,_5.,1: ....� ..,_:. • _ 7(i �` aim' acts:`of bud et.,cuts:}However` the tate`.s iA � 44 .. 4 ,e,i_frai_SE.:SlPRfrL�Z iC_ �:y.r.,..�•,4+.:+: `!:PM•+n.... w4W �:[o - cal::p -_..�,. „__.�seizur•,; .:3;billio,n.in.lo; ropetty '- `"'_y t` i�93; ind th-e�: ro osed:.seizure"of 2:6 billi 'i "� 1, r._. :"._.. $.__ - -. on.for=FY-93=94_ s'forcin ;Contra_Cost9:Conn to reduce::=: = ;; „,:,:','•,r.a-,.. .n.,i m� .-.. -,..,._-.:-: .,.: a--,x r" - - - ,,{-•: "F - - - is - ___.. -.. '•.ti3:TM.._ . , ., r ... .. - :::Ca s:i:v--,: q4r:�,.n:oi .-P:� d:�.:.�WS_::Si':r:-:f::r*Vl:?•nYi5'..�.'._ii _ __ services_to:the: eo le:of=Contra-Costa Coun =:::� ; _ -_ : tu. ;�zi,::L:•L:;_ _:',.:,F:-� _._�:�:.. _z .-,•%s'`.. :dZ' •.)t�-'{J.: • ..,.'..:.,:.i:...::'.'v .'_.. ad. 'i: w.Y.s:�A _=t-=�'�:.... _ .�.2.. ai-�_,t.r'^1_rir......s s_:L.^a: . v.+..., ',�•i: ......... ...� ._ c.....J.._ _.:...s.. ,::E..9:-. �k•_ ;rt',;Y:.. "`�:?'� - v.:fl r3,,. - .[. .:.1.'R. - _J, "'.? !•4:#:.44-:.- ..95,}, i3,r._ .�,3:•:fir_ -.1.. �S•:.'•-°�.4'.1(s':.':i�S.r.::nr��^,.::i.,e,'t8'.,5 !,r.._ .-..< ,•n'..'.,. a> ,.. . .._. :-, -.. _,n�:i4:� .: n "•}•.:et:"i2„ •✓:•4:,.(?!�r]S•':Jitil'<�.`.:�til:•' t,}L!%•}t,t1'nw.,I.:lar-.M: :�tLMI.::::t:a�.L:Yl,trh:!YF+^.4••L:w MJv:.':.r.a:J '::{ f..q.c.1Ja±„•,t,,,-r...y,:, s.,......ES.sa.wra._._.:..fi,n..,,.t t#:.wp[-Jn...xaa:tx,-v�'sair•r,.x.a.,nr,;,r+:_':��:.i:ceir:.L!:.:_:.:ry?^=ii� 3.• -}•? __ _ _ _ _ r:u:.:'f:--:tLat.:•x.:.<*.;Y,,.y�,.s>.rez•v::aa)z:•c.:,.�cr.._•'-:.r-.. -a-_v:'wre.:ro-ex,;.„• ` _.._ ., ,.^in::.. •w+as,'t.•:s:.:r::.r.�:c:�,:x..lr••;::•.cx-:..:::.-::q.. n.s,F3, -r..^- i^y. - _ — _ ,,33 a-:,.,,.=•rL;�.,.:,aS.I.:i.�-k:ift:f-:...a;Krrwn.>•r:txirau:y.cr.;...:::nuc',:..�iz�'c_•a•!n:n�.;:J.:.^n.r�:'::ay...4?.•t•.,T.,.c;,r'.t.• ......:..::....:.:.f_! .vy,.�,:_Y.,. r..a.v...ya:1,::..e.,_..:a•,:,.a.e,::a�:s,.J V:.y:.f,.rn 4 'sray,,y...,fsw•.:;ca.a.J....:t'n r,.. :•r..:",..,[..:.:•::�•.:J:. ,..t,,•:r r',. .,sFa.va:r r.::as:?a i.4}4,:� 5<.n,}!-i 4:=, _ !✓qy_:v: .Y .,r. .. 4..... ...SY.;:.:Wrv•r..,. .. .. - s .........,_i..•fi..:....-. :••nS... .a .t.f]±,...J.•u I..rY :'. ;,pve Ji a•t.:, _ }.. _ r. .. .: ...: .. ......r ..,.],n .e,: V....r•,.ss,•.:::::., w_::."i -9:'.' '.Y.k.•' ^r4:Y. •:i_:',•.'.,[- - <1, - ...,F,., -ii7•� ix.. _Lr wtin .:�:ry '<i r'a.` --r,,:�ww�..�� -':y:-t,=.:.,n,:....: .Y:.,.'• ....�..:.ri. ::y,: ..,�.,,- x;t4ti.q:_.:t2••:Y'iL.•r:y.:ti" i':.4y.i:44- i ud get, .Ia:,,r:L-..:•„" ..,a';y+<„• F...'�.f.=:::':� •_=-•,.>.,w- n,:A�[._!:r. =�;a� •"f� -H. •_ g. �Tr / Lr .t - .,S ..:7•:!4�•' .a - -.4w;.d,Wv09••':.y..' •�K', :;h:::;:..:Jy:'_. r...r' v._.,..,+.. -....,'..a ... :_f•_,..r r._,-i�. "- n •t. a_v:':,,'x!:�e. .•iv il:r /..1 _. :... >�'i.ii..... .:/........:.... "'« __ .”. , fY: ,s .1(.... + • ..: -? ..fir ap •:. .,T _._4 W •.--t_.__...,..._ L.._a.. ..._,..>_1_ .L2..s..._,.:.,t.i:)L...__tG.-, _:.:•6-61'-b _. L_Y'.,-•1� ciJ_a.:41:":G7�;3:. _ __!1_' _ _ -•i--'t..:�:F.::^.::�:'_'• .Con - ,.: - - - tra:Costa.Coun e i :has be n;cutt n bud et's for14 "ears includin r• 3 ...: ....... ,.J,.,.,•r.... .s i-:J .. ........ ....r. r. - _tic..._x , .... _......... .,.-y' - �... - -T '..198 -9 _ _ 9 0:: 12 1 _ 2': illi _ 7r m on;and 104 r e manent - ositions:�cu ._.r-��',---.-,+-rte:...-,.-,_-..J•_.. a•_.t:.._,,.;,:r,a::•_i,•... ..r..._._.-r......._.:r-. - - _. _ _ _ - _ - _..:._..'.,.5'.r,_..?.w <-.-._:.._eal.r1 r•._�yFe.,_.a,..,�..J.f-.ti'i ....J.t.,N_.r.,i•'M1e4:-In'ix. atr:�}..� - ��n" - - , ., ., .. .. ,. -. w:,c_,.,...r✓n,....:t._ .a. r r .:,.a:.�.\ v...:,n.b.,..4-..r..ay _:i!',v a.,1.' _•M... -..i>ra~ ..1- , _ .5 millio _ n•and:146 e rmanent - ositions.c - - ut::� w ...,,v:... - i:Y. - -'rJ. �:?_:x...:�';,,.:; .:: :.,::.:-;-•:'-: '- ., °;'. ..,�_� - - - - :.t::1::x.:..:':z•::z:":r:�_r-+ -_ ;:s-•:'�c:^ -:;>'�. _...,.. .._. _, ;,._,.::199 92•�: .Q;:7.8_ million.and-145= ermanent' �•ositois°c_u_ - -_- _ _ ....�: r ,�:::r,..:a�<�w�•:,..�rc,.,rf::::, .,_.:-...-i,.�ve:.:..✓..c:.:a:.er._w`:,...-r:_-r.,�:=.::u:J_e:,..e.a-a:_',�e:..,_. ,._,..:.,:...,r...:.:.:..... ..:_.. %.r=ter ..a-�_.-r_._^t-4_:rc.t-'-_rte:-Y-_.. i.t"i__-_Y•1Tr=•:_�.._Y:::.-_:_-'tc�:f-�S���"3'�=.�:T`:.'^:-_.._,.- _ __ -_ ___ -- - -- - -- - - _ _- - __ -- ....._.-•r..yv'::..... .l_.•,:--,a,.4�.•,•. ,rew,.....�:,..,�r.,.•':'r,., ..,,n.y....-,••.,..r.._,n.,w,.. ..,.,..._.=.. _ - - -.Y1 f21.- T�.•1'. _ . .r_).,..... .._.:.... ..U.,..s...1. ._ .... .. .. ..':.. ': ..'..:'. ::1992-93' positions, - - million�aa d 0 - - :.r n 6 6 ermanent � cuf�� - -- _ .. .rs:.._ � _...:f ,+:::4r'^'�:':-::•Sn=::-r:-:.cr.E_-.�...-.r:��r.'r..:x�:r:-•. _ _ _ •ti. a . a 0 -- -- - -- - - -- -_- -- - _,-.'� .✓=..v:,,.. .:....,. . ,;.,.�-.$ 01. ermanent ositions_cut=• - - - - P ._-....L�_..J.._....._._.�.v,._..-_._..�,.�__.,._.-_1s_,.._..1:.......��.._r....__.i_...-.s.--,3•_._.�s.._..:,.r:_._,.f_sa_.r:'.•,..,,-._'�=_•:_.:1 %'.n�'i�.._:,S•� _ _ __- _ - _ - _ _ _ .. :z__:.f.. .'.,._:rJ:•-.-:.-_ ��::-'_fix .-F.>_= _ _ __ __ _ _ _ _ _ ..... _ ... .. .. ....-4. . FY 92-9 _ - 3Pro ra C m uts- A . T_..�__..:....: .. Few Exam les � _ - _:- - - - - _ ME " ' •= Justice Agencies'; ";courts,jails; sheriff, public defender;district attorney : _:`:; were. . ::=: ::::.t .r .. z CUt b _ 9 1 million - - -- --- - - _ �.-. ;r,::: :District`Attorney.-:27,-;positions cut,-_mcludirig 9_attorneys;:weakening the.County s- :- _._:r ;. 4 .< = _ ability to:prosecute crimes and support'special prosecution teams,.including:sexual,..,':',.,..,:, • .:, .,.,. assaul and ', ..,::::;- _ _- - •:>_:: _ _ - t homicide. �` Sheriff Department==a104 positions cut;�educiri atrol, mvesti ation,su ort seniices.'.' -.:,•:.,..:;:::3,:.-.,:::.1.._5::::•,:fi-_;.:::and�co _ =_ -_ - - mmuni services`and eliminator 39% of the Division_Commanders::.;.=° :=::='. ` '== _ •s. ._•., raeY rt+ .,:r:,: v _\._. - .aJ•�,.,r.., w_a..,.v. ,J-:e,-:.::'-. �•j �is''•r�,.�.(. 'Jj' >f - - - - `et cuts`i 'racer?1,^•-:t'+.x,r:a.:,,.:.,_,..•-.:i�.l,:a,'•••'Y ..a'_.^l,:,Y,,.. :n L..V•�..� - _-- _ - _ _ _ _ _ ..........- , _. ea t" .... .--._. .._>.._ ., .• .. .. ..._:.y _ -.:,'z:ry-...:._,.:•v �,:�,.. '.i4: .._"i',-,•`r....,,.J ....-.r,.1..�.._r-z.,..;..._...�..:............tE.,...,_:.-._....W._..•....._.....3_.a_;:...:......_-_..:., .,l,: _r•"',_' ,'}rr .''_I.:in-'':::-:a�� ::......:._:.._ r�• - - - ► services.to rotect.abused child _ _ - - _ - F=- b -= _ ... .. .�....:.. ren'_._:' _ _ •�'i: T r - . t� _ �:assistance:-:.to::ra e.victi ms and ba 5 tte�ed�wome�� - - - - - -..:'_"."�:.:t;..tl_..,:-,... •..._.r...r..:,, -_,..t;...-.., �,:�:�' .:Rim _ s i :.•:rte._ .. ..,.,... -................_-. .-._.._ - �r'� -�'-�. revention of.dru -and-alcoh i �� - __ _.�_ _►_.R of cr ores_ - - _ _ - ��� - _ - ,I - - i •Jr - - 1. — .. ._ _. ,.. ,:.i.._...,.:fix.._ .. , ..,.,.. .i.._.,r....,.., . .:.._.. ... .,...:.� •'..:•,..,.^.Psr.;';,.'.JSI..:•-':.a .. =.:.a -•. ..... _:. ... ^.::'::':;:.";:•r._r.:i. _(i;:.:�:�_''.'�'��:'..:..e"i:.:..:_-.:.:r.i_.�:::°.'.::.'.�.:���:..'_:�::.. � .-.:_ ..;:•.....:._ .,_..: .. '- _<:=_:: .THE STATE IS.SEIZING LOCAL'"PROPERTY TAXES.THAT_PAY FOR LOCAL SERVICES:a_= . ;::: :NEEDTO=:BRING;CON7'RQL BACK:TO°THEJ LOCAL' LEVEL SO'WE CAN. MEET,. ..5.... _ O ALP _ RIO - RIT - - - _ - .. ..: .... y .._.:.,. ." �!._ ... ... .......... .._ ...,.-.._.�. _.Z..... ,_."1, _ ,a. - ti::• .:Sl P:J'=.14•- �T,-]`1',:.L- ',:7_ , `.('i,-::.)•'='__:. 1 ' >...,...E..[._ ....'{...Tf•::Y. _. ..__... ..... JJ._.J.,._...,.T... .. ........J.. ..,_..,t.... i.l. 'r•{:.� ,�..,:[.:`. ^.t.5:'_:_r.:.�r.r Probation Departme, .L Contra Gerald s. 6"`k Goumy ProDatwn Officer Administrative Offices .. Costa 50 Douglas Drive,Suite 201 County " Martinez,California 94553-8500 (510)313-4180 r (510)313-4191 FAX _ To: Juvenile Justice ^� Date: 10/19/92 Commission From: Gerald S. Buck, subject: Summary of Probation County Probation Officer Department Budget Cuts and Impacts FY 1992/93 Juvenile Probation Services Dollars Cut = $1,191 ,380 . Positions Eliminated: 16 Deputy Probation Officers 7 Clerks 2 PS I ' s (Supervisors ) 1 Supervising Clerk Service Impacts: Substantial reduction in number of juveniles on Probation who will be supervised. A reduction . of active supervision of 1, 800 cases to about 550 ( -700) . Adult Probation Services Dollars Cut = $1,369, 164 Positions Eliminated: 21 Deputy Probation Officers 3 PS I ' s (Supervisors) 6 Clerks Service Impacts: Municipal Court services eliminated but the Courts have since funded four Court Officer positions. Superior Court supervision limited to one-third of probationers at 1,200 county wide. Juvenile Hall Dollars Cut = $114,770 Positions Eliminated: 1 Services Supervisor 1 Cook 1 Nurse Service Impacts: No significant impact, supervision staff will cover vacancies. JJC - 2 - 10/19/92 Administration/Support Dollars Cut = $489, 520 Positions Eliminated: 1 Director (Administrative Services) 1 Probation Supervisor II (Personnel Mgr. ) 1 ASA III (Administrative Support) 1 Dept. Systems Specialist (Automation) 4 Clerks 2 Supervising Clerks Service Impacts: No managers in charge of personnel matters or administrative support services , loss of automation/systems expert, records function decentralized, drug testing costs reduction (fewer tests) . Office Closures Dollars in Occupancy Costs Cut = $307, 820 Offices Closed: 938 Main Street, Martinez 1820 Peerless Avenue, El Cerrito 213 G Street, Antioch Program Elimination ( Contract) Youth Crisis Services ( Sherman House) Cost Reduction = $336 , 000 Service Impact: Eliminates emergency shelter and crisis counseling for status offenders. Revenue Increases Revenue increases have offset even greater potential cuts to staff and services. I. Title IV-E Probation Revenues + $261, 000 2. Municipal Court Revenues for Court Officers + $171, 000 3. Juvenile Community Service Program Fees + $ 20, 000 4. Increase in Probate Filing Fees + $170 ,000 Total + $622, 000 JJC - 3 - 10/19/92 Total Cuts to Probation Department Dollars - $4, 410,654 Less Revenues + 622 , 000 _.... Net - $3,788, 654 =- - Total Positions Eliminated and Retained Deleted Retained Deputy Probation Officers 37 88 Clerical 20 45 Probation Supervisors 5 oil Managers 4 10 Other 6 133 72 287 GSB:ds cc: Judge Minney Directors Superintendents PS II ' s - : Probation Departme� it Contra Gerald ���Cer Administrative Offices Costa 50 Douglas Drive,Suite 201 County Martinez,California 94553-8500 (510)313-4180 - " (510)313-4191 FAX _'` • Date: 10/6/92 Board o£ Supervisors �'"�"''`- To: Q.a �.'. From: Gerald S. Buck, Subject: Probation Department County robation Officer In relationship to the Department' s ability to provide satellite regional services, the following is provided for your information. I . General Impacts of Budget Cuts 1992/93 A. 72 positions were cancelled: Deleted Retained Deputy Probation Officers 37 88 Clerical 20 45 Probation Supervisors 5 11 Managers 4 10 Other 6 133 Total 72 287 B. General Fund expenditures were reduced by $2, 800 , 000 . C. Three offices were closed: 1. E1 Cerrito 2 . 938 Main Street, Martinez 3 . Antioch D. Two offices and two facilities remain: 1 . 50 Douglas, Martinez ( 107 staff) 2. San Pablo ( 28 staff) 3 . Juvenile Hall ( 96 staff) 4 . Byron Boys ' Ranch ( 25 staff) -x-..ar.'--'•.'`_�T::.:.;�,.::;.z..,-.;'.TSP�:;:_.-..:_;... . .. .. ......._ --.: .. _. . .. ... - .....__ ._. _ - . .- .. ..___ _ ., Board of Supervisors -2 .. 10/5/92 II . Distribution of Staff -- A. 50 Douglas Drive, Martinez 1 . Administration/Management: 1 County Probation Officer 2 Directors 3 Probation Supervisor II ' s 1 Administrative Service Officer 4 Clerical (Personnel, Purchasing, Training and Executive Secretary) 11 2 . Probation Unit Supervisors - 8 3 . Deputy Probation Officers: Adult - 30 + 1 Group Counselor ` Juvenile - 29 4 . Clerical Supervisors •- 3 5 . Clerks - 25 ( 8 general clerical support for Adult and Juvenile who do court report typing for the Superior Court) B. San Pablo 1. Probation Unit Supervisors - 2 2 . Deputy Probation Officers: Adult - 8 + 1 Group Counselor Juvenile - 9 3 . Clerical: Supervisor - 1 Line Clerks - 7 ( 3 generalist clerks) C. Juvenile Hall 1. Juvenile Intake: Probation Supervisor - 1 Deputy Probation Officers - 9 2. Clerical: Supervisor - 1 Line Clerk - 6 3•. Administration/Management: Superintendent - 1 Assistant Superintendent - 1 Supervising Nurse - 1 Board of'- Supervisors -3- 10/6/92 - 4:::-:. Supervisors Shift Supervisors (IS II ) - 3 Supervising Cook - 1 Unit Supervisor (IS I ) - 6 5. Group Counselors - 51 6. Cooks - 4 7 . Custodians - 5 8. Storekeeper - 2 9 . Other (Vacant) - 4 D. Byron Boys ' Ranch ' Superintendent - 1 Institutional Supervisor I - 3 Group Counselors - 16 Cooks - 3 Deputy Probation Officer - 1 III. Service Reduction and Preservation Resulting From Budget Cuts Adult A. All services to Municipal Courts eliminated, including supervision of 4,500 probationers. B. Supervision of felons on probation limited to active supervision of only one-third of probationers. ( 1, 200 probationers = 600 West County, 300 East County, 300 Central County. ) C. Felony Adult Probation investigations will continue. D. Computer monitored caseloads of other felons. Juvenile A. Referral screenings and court reports continue. B. Juvenile placement continues.- - - C. Supervision of juveniles limited to about 550 of 1,700 Juveniles on probation. (West County - 225, East County - 175, Central'- County - 150 . ) -;' Board of Supervisors -4- 10/6/92 . - - -IV. Closure of Antioch Office = A. Closure of this leased office was not in our original cut back plan. B. The Board of Supervisors asked to. retain the Juvenile Community Service Program (Weekend Work) and $146,000 was - needed to do this. C. The Board was presented a plan which was adopted August 4th. 1. Additional Revenues - $ 20 , 000 2. Lease and operation cost of Antioch Office - 99 , 820 3 . Reduction of 1 Clerk-Receptionist - 26 , 360 $146 , 180 D. Subsequently, concerns were expressed regarding Probation' s lack of a physical presence in East County. 1. 19 staff who would have been in the Antioch office were moved to 50 Douglas Drive September 16th, filling unused, County owned office space at that location. It should be noted that not all 19 staff who would have remained in Antioch had East County caseloads. About 12 have caseloads (Adult and Juvenile) in East County. A total of not more than 475 probationers will now be supervised in East County. E. In order to maintain a presence in the community where Probation clients reside, Probation Officers have arranged for "drop-in" office space at little or no cost. 1 . Brentwood Community Center 2. Antioch Police Department 3 . Various Schools 4 . Pittsburg Social Services Office 5 . Delta Court 6 . Reach Center in Antioch F. The need torequireprobationers to report to Martinez would be infrequent and often in connection with a court appearance in Martinez. G. Officers assigned caseloads in East County will maintain their business office at 50 Douglas where they will have access to clerical support pooled for efficiency and other office equipment, such as computer access, fax machines, etc. ...._...;_... . ....... == Board of Supervisors -5- 10/6/92 H. . In order, to facilitate communication, Probation will: -- 1. Secure additional cellular telephones. 2.... Probationers needing to make. long.- distance . telephone . calls may call collect. 3 . Consider installation of hard line telephones and fax machines in some drop in offices. V. Future Restoration of a Permanent East County Presence A. If an economic arrangement can be made with the City of Antioch regarding use of the old police building, and if any added cost or staffing needs are provided by the Board, we are prepared to move toward jthis end. B. Under the present budget and staffing levels, we cannot manage to do this without further diminishment of service to the Superior Court, which is unacceptable to the Court. GSB:ds J/Eastoff.doc F , REC E�V E D,' APR 2 9 1993 1' Catholic Charities .111131 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA CO. Diocese of Oakland 433 Jefferson Street, Oakland, CA 94607 510/834-5656 Fax 510/451-6998 April 27 , 1993 Mr.Tom Torlakson, Chairman Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street Martinez , CA 94553 Re: County Plan to Centralize GA and Food Stamp Offices Public Hearing, April 30 , 1993 and Future Public Hearings Dear Mr. Torlakson and the Board of Supervisors : This letter is written to express opposition to the proposed plan by Contra Costa County for the centralization of General Assistance and Food Stamp services and the closure of local service offices in the east and west county areas and to voice the serious concern that this action would cause severe hardship to the clients needing services in those areas , many of whom are newly arrived refugees and immigrants . Catholic Charities , Diocese . of Oakland has resettled over 17 ,500 refugees and immigrants in the East Bay area since 1975 - at least 13,000 of them in Contra Costa County. The majority are Southeast Asian. Since 1980 , Catholic Charities has assisted these refugees and immigrants through a variety of educational and employment services with bilingual support to find stable employment , to adjust to their new culture, and to become successful and productive residents and eventual citizens of Contra Costa County. The closure of service offices in east and west county, both areas which are predominately populated by minority clients , including refugees and immigrants, demonstrates obviously inequitable treatment by requiring them to undergo the hardships of traveling very long distances in order to receive services that clients in predomimately non-minority central county receive more easily and with less personal burden. Clients with disabilities, including the disability of speaking limited or no English, will be especially harshly burdened. Most refugee clients on GA have resided five or less years in the U. S. - many less than one year. They have come from the dissettling background of war , detention in prison camps, and years spent waiting in refugee processing camps . They are not the so called hardcore poor who have been on GA for years . They are still in need of services that allow them the opportunity to move into eventual employment and self-sufficency. Many come from rural areas of Southeast Asia and are at the beginning stages of CCC Board of Supervisors April 27 , 1993 p. 2 acquiring English. It is not at all a simple event for them to travel long distances to government offices . The intricacies of accessing public transportation and getting around outside the immediate community are daunting. Many do not own cars . In addition to public transportation adding an excessive cost burden to obviously already "strapped" finances, it presents other barriers caused by lack of linguistic and cultural understanding. The offer of the provision of free buses operated by the County to solve these problems is not a viable solution because it does nothing to address the communication disability of non-English speaking Southeast Asian and refugee clients . These recipients are legally entitled to receive translation services under their civil rights of equal access to benefits and services . In addition, it puts them under even more stress because of serious health, safety and security risks . It is well known that Social Services offices have armed security guards for a very real reason. We have not heard that the County proposes to provide security for the buses . Also we have not heard that the County proposes to provide translation and protection. It seems that this plan in a very short time would generate more problems than it proposes to solve. In addition, it is not clear that the added cost of running such transportation services in an effective manner has been taken into consideration in any cost savings calculations of centralization. Furthermore, the County's other offers in attempt to solve the problems of centralization, such as 800 numbers and the right to apply at any welfare office do not eliminate the the disperate impact . As we understand, the County has now presented a modified proposal to continue the operation of local offices in west county but to centralize services for east county by closing offices there and relocating them to Martinez . At the same time, the County reserves the right to revert to its original proposal at a later time should it decide this is necessary. This compromise looks like the beginning of delay tactics . It is seriously doubtful whether the fiscal cost effectiveness of closing and relocating east county services would justify the disciminatory adverse effects on east county recipients . The underlying but unspoken real cost savings of the plan could be construded as resulting from forcing minority and disabled clients off the welfare rolls . At this point we understand there will be another impact study to be done by the County. It is necessay for this study to completely address the full impact upon all minorites , including the physically and linguistically disabled, to include specifically the ethnic breakdowns of all county areas and to demonstrate how CCC Board of Supervisors April 27 , 1993 p.3 the plan will provide equal access to benefits for limited- English speaking Southeast Asians , other refugees , immigrants , and all minority and disabled GA/FS recipients . We are requesting that the County send us a copy of this next impact study after it has been completed. We urge you to consider strongly the disparate impact this plan would have. We feel that any centralization of General Assistance and Food Stamps services, whether it be west or east county or both, demonstrates a non-caring social services attitude whose focus is more on productivity than people. Sincerely, BARBARA RACEK Assistant Director Refugee and Immigrant Services cc: Glenda Johnson, Director FNS Office of Civil Rights Alicia Martinez , Chief Civil Rights Bureau SDSS James Westbrooks , Deputy Associate Director USDA Ellen J . Tabachnick CCLF Philip J. Burtenthal , Ralph- Murphy CCLF Ken Reggio, Executive Director Catholic Charities Sister Elisabeth Lang Greg Kepferle Catholic Charities Perfecto Villareal , Director CCC Dept . of Social Services JA ce W� DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: .�2@PHONE: �W6 -0?1070 ADDRESS: PD. gpZf 8 CITY: Wr I am speaking formyself OR organization: r 614. Check one: NAME ORGANIZV-10%) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of 71-e /V: I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. Management Council Contra Costa County Members: c/o Auditor's Office Renee Goldstein 625 Court Street,2nd Floor Bud Murphy Martinez, CA 94553 ,' Jerry Nichols . .= I Carol Dalton Sebilia F °• Bill Shinn Rodney Smith Jennifer Utt Sandra Winn APRIL 30, 1993 MEMBERS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, DEPARTMENT HEADS AND CITIZENS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY: MY NAME IS CAROL DALTON SEBILIA AND I AM HERE BEFORE YOU AS A MEMBER OF THE MANAGEMENT COUNCIL. OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS THE MANAGEMENT COUNCIL HAS HELD LUNCHTIME GATHERINGS WITH MANAGERS. THESE MEETINGS HAVE BEEN OPPORTUNITIES TO COME TOGETHER ACROSS DEPARTMENT LINES IN ORDER TO BRAIN STORM SOLUTIONS AND REVENUE ENHANCEMENTS TO HELP SOLVE THE COUNTY BUDGET PROBLEMS. DESPITE THE GRIM TOPIC, I WAS CONTINUALLY IMPRESSED WITH MY FELLOW MANAGERS. THE IDEAS RANGED IN SIZE AND SPECIFICITY WITH AN EVEN OCCASIONAL BRILLIANT SUGGESTION. AT THE END OF THESE SERIES OF MEETINGS, I WAS LEFT FEELING A DEEP APPRECIATION FOR THE DEDICATION OF SO MANY MANAGERS. THE COMMITMENT TO EXCELLENCE WITHIN AVAILABLE RESOURCES IS AS STRONG AS EVER DESPITE THE UNFAVORABLE ECONOMIC CLIMATE. OUT OF THESE MEETINGS CAME A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "BUDGET STRATEGIES" (ATTACHErD) . THIS IS A CONSENSUS DOCUMENT AND CAN BE VIEWED AS REPRESENTATIVE OF MANY MANAGERS. AS YOU WILL READ, THE THEMES OF EQUITY, FAIRNESS, AND EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT REOCCUR. .. THE MANAGEMENT COUNCIL HAS BEEN MEETING WITH MR. BATCHELOR MORE REGULARLY SINCE THE BEGINNING OF THE BUDGET CRISIS. HE HAS Management Council Contra Costa County Members: c%Auditor's Office Renee Goldstein 625 Court Street,2nd Floor Bud Murphy Martinez,CA 94553 ,' ' Jerry Nichols Carol Dalton Sebilia S Bill Shinn Rodney Smith Jennifer Utt Sandra Winn BUDGET STRATEGIES March 1993 After inter-and intra-department meetings with concerned management employees, we have compiled the following list of strategies to approach all budget issues: 1. All employees(management,unrepresented,and represented)should share in cuts to income and/or benefits that the Board approves. 2. All "give-ups" should be suspensions for one year with automatic re-instatement and be compensated for with "trade-offs". 3. The County's long-term budget problem should be addressed through program-based evaluations and streamlining, not just short-term fixes. 4. Budget actions should include a combination of program reductions with corresponding layoffs, improvements in efficiency as well as mandatory furloughing. 5. Any suspensions should preserve salary base and retirement base. 6. Salary lost in furlough hours should be calculated on the basis of 173.33 hours per month,so as not to penalize employees furloughed in months with fewer work hours. Additionally,the cost to the employee should be spread evenly throughout the entire fiscal year. 7. There should be a corresponding public impact if staff hours are reduced by furlough (public service hours/days reduced). 8. During any mandatory furlough period, COLA's should continue to accrue. 9. In considering removal of management benefits, it must be cautioned that such actions may trigger application of FLSA rules regarding overtime compensation. 10. Outdated work rules that decrease efficiency for represented employees should be reviewed. 11. The County Adminstrator is urged to maximize information to employees through continued use of the "Budget Bulletins". 12. Actual costs/cost savings, number of employees effected, and employee morale should be considered in decisions. ASKED US TO REVIEW THE LIST OF SUGGESTIONS FROM THE "TIME OUT" SESSIONS WHICH CROSS • DEPARTMENTAL LINES. WE HAVE FORMED A COMMITTEE TO DEVELOP SPECIFIC SUGGESTIONS. ONE FREQUENTLY MENTIONED IDEA IS A MANDATORY FURLOUGH PLAN. IF THIS COUNTY DECIDES THAT MANDATORY FURLOUGH IS NECESSARY, WE BELIEVE THAT CAREFUL ADVANCE PLANNING CAN MITIGATE THE EFFECTS ON EMPLOYEES AND ALLOW PROGRAMS THE FLEXIBILITY THAT THEY NEED TO PROVIDE SERVICES. WE RECOGNIZE THAT IT IS THE JOB OF MANAGEMENT TO BALANCE THE DAY-TO-DAY IMPLEMENTATION OF BUDGET REDUCTIONS AGAINST THE QUALITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE. WE APPRECIATE THE AVENUES OF COMMUNICATION WHICH HAVE BEEN OPENED TO US TO GIVE INPUT INTO THIS PROCESS AND URGE THEIR CONTINUATION. IN CLOSING, THE MANAGEMENT COMMUNITY RECOGNIZES THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE BUDGET PICTURE, AND STANDS READY TO TAKE ITS FAIR SHARE OF THE MISERY. HOWEVER, WE CANNOT SHOULDER A DISPROPORTIONATE SHARE. LET'S CONTINUE TO WORK TOGETHER TOWARDS RESOLUTIONS THAT SERVE BOTH THE PUBLIC AND THE WORK FORCE. ATTACHMENT CRLSPCH i 1 Contra Costa Health Plan Advisory Board Paul Katz, Chair Testimony Budget Hearing April 30, 1993 I am Paul Katz, Chair of the Contra Costa Health Plan Advisory Board. The Advisory Board realizes that the Board of Supervisors is again faced with very difficult decisions caused by the state of the economy and the State's budget. As the Contra Costa Times said in its editorial on Wednesday, Contra Costa has a "significant bright spot that could save taxpayers money and improve a critical service....it's Contra Costa's innovative managed care plan (Contra Costa Health Plan)."The editorial urges Contra Costa to go forward in managing Medi-Cal, but as you well know, if the county is to go forward with its plans to manage Medi-Cal, it must not dismantle health services. I am here to alert the Board of Supervisors that you may have to take steps to ensure that CCHP can continue offering its Medicare program. In September, 1992 at the Beilenson Hearing, the HMO Advisory Board warned that there could be serious consequences if you changed the BAC program so that the County would no longer pay for out-of-plan emergency services. We testified that "these changes in the BAC program could jeopardize our Medicare contract because the federal government requires we meet certain membership ratios." At that time we also said, "We do not believe it is prudent to curtail a program which accounted for more than $3.5 million 2 in revenue in 1991-92. In the past three years almost 700 seniors joined CCHP." We further told the Board that the change would "result in our closing our doors to any other seniors who want access to our health plan. It will also raise the premiums for the hundreds of seniors on fixed incomes in our plan. With no new enrollments, current members 'age in place' and become higher cost." We have just been notified by the Department of Corporations that the actions the Board took concerning payment for out-of-plan ER services may result in CCHP not being able to maintain the required membership ratios. We have petitioned the DOC to allow us to use Tobacco Tax funds to pay for emergency services. If the DOC disallows this request, it will put our Medicare program, including that portion which serves low income seniors who receive Medi-Cal along with Medicare, in jeopardy. The Advisory Board will then be back to recommend that you return to your pre- September 1992 policy and again provide for direct CCHP payment of BAC out-of- plan emergency care. The HMO Advisory Board does support two items in the proposed 1993/94 Health Services Department budget: 1 . The Health Plan could be an effective purchasing agent for certain health care services used by County employees covered by First Choice. CCHP should build on its successful role in obtaining volume pharmacy discounts and explore expanding its assistance to First Choice claims administration. We believe the County General Fund will see reduced 3 expenditures through administrative savings and volume discounts on purchased services. 2. The Advisory Board also supports new ways of "doing business" that save money while at the same time continue to provide excellent service. i Therefore, we recommend CCHP explore how it can achieve even greater savings in purchasing out-of-plan pharmacy services. We recommend that you take actions which strengthen the Health Plan's ability to be a prudent purchaser of care and that if it becomes necessary you reinstate CCHP's payment for BAC ER coverage. Then CCHP can continue to assist the County financially while it assists our older residents with affordable high quality health coverage. Thank you. L28:JMT DATE: `Y - 3 REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM 3 THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box- near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: _ V PHONE: c� ADDRESS: ( CITY: G 1' 0 ' I am speaking formyself y/_ OR o anization: Check one: (NAME OF ORCANIlNTION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of �- I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board tP consider. 6 .L DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. /4< NAME: I PHONE: --2 ADDRESS: IV e Crry: /4-;/ am speaking formyselfAJR, organization: (NAME OF ORGANIZATION) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against L"111, I wish to speak on the subject of A I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM S THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: V1OJU PHONE: 228 ADDRESS: SDC M"uh+)f CRY: r� I am speaking formyself OR organization: NAME OF ORCA!VI"/.a1'I07%) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # _P L) My comments will be: general for 1,� against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: _ 1,30 REQUEST TO SPEAK '' ORM THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: PI-TONE: zz� div n ADDRESS: CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: � � Check one: L NAME OF ORCANI!iTION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item #�JCf�C(�,'� My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: 4 3o S REgvEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: L ` PHONE: ADDRESS: CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: NAME OF ORGANI7_-V'f0N) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against &0 . I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. ere, ung' I 1 t._, 45 i� . DATE: ye , REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM �! (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: DS ��� L� ,�/' i� PHONE: ADDRESS: ��/ �iLfl� � c�--- CITY: / I am speaking formyself OR organization: �i�-- Check one: NAME F ORGANI7NON) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. -Wqi3 DATE: 1 4- RR EQuEsT To SPEAK FoRm (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: PHONE: .CISH' Crry: ODY-AdA - ADDRESS: I am speaking for myself OR organization: (NAME OF ORGANIZATION) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of Lc raW I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. 9 BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ORINDA In the Matter of: A Resolution in Support) of SB 566 ) Resolution No. 27-93 WHEREAS, public libraries throughout California are experiencing significant budget reductions which threaten the future of local public library services; and WHEREAS, the State shift of property taxes to schools is further affecting the ability of local governments to adequately finance all public services, including libraries; and WHEREAS, the California State Library has recently published a report showing that funding for public library services is eroding on a statewide basis; and WHEREAS, the California Legislature has declared that public libraries are a supplement to the formal system of free public education and deserve adequate financial support from government at all levels; and WHEREAS, a viable statewide system of public libraries is essential to assist the schools, support children and to serve the general public in all local communities; and WHEREAS, public libraries lack sufficient fee authority to replace lost revenues resulting from the State budget crisis and need a stable and independent source of financing; and WHEREAS, the public interest is served by providing adequate resources to properly fund public library services; and WHEREAS, the California Library Association and the County of Los Angeles are co-sponsoring legislation to provide authority for local agencies to use benefit assessment financing for public libraries, and Senator David Roberti has introduced SB 566 for that purpose; and WHEREAS, approval by the Legislature of SB 566 would provide an added local revenue option to protect the financial future of California's public libraries without appropriating additional State funds or creating a new state mandate on local governments; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of Orinda hereby endorses and supports the passage of SB 566 (Roberti) by the Legislature, and directs the City Clerk to notify the Speaker of the Assembly, the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, the Governor, Senator Boatwright and Assembly Member Rainey of its support. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Orinda at its regular meeting held on April 27, 1993 , by the following vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Guidotti, Hawkins, Landers, Wheatland, Dabel NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None William J. DabTI / Mayor ATTEST: oma C. Sinclai , City Cle - TIFIED A TRUE C i ...'.':AS. S.; AIR r 1,zCalifornia DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) I6 Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: k \VVs \-o 11-4-1c-i PHONE: LM- CKL3 ADDRESS: CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: Check one: NAME OF ORGANI7-TION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against CA.5 . I wish to speak on the subject of MCG o� a.�d ru r __6 , U %:;> N 0..b\":5 \4 QSU,. CA*•,. . I do not wish to speak but leave these commentsic r the Board to consider. DATE: 1 �5 REQUEST TO :SPEAK '' ORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Il Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. n NAME: ( a�,- �. i� M C �.r� v LQ PHONE: 13S~W,8'� ADDRESS: CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: (NAME OF ORGANl7-Xl'ION) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against LULZ A I wish to speak on the subj ect of Oz,AIkA M 0--e ni e- v ur J I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: EtEgumT To SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: 6,oack S PHONE: ADDRESS: CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: (NAME OF ORGANIZATION) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # for against My comments will be: general N1_C-ID 0 I wish to speak on the subject of Q I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK '' ORM THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: PHONE: 'S ADDRESS: /�3 3 Q 1 CrN: OLW� I am speaking formyself OR organization: - Check one: ( 'A: E OF ORCANI!_NTIO`) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these c ents for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK '' ORM [� (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: .�. PHONE: ADDRESS: �9 HT1 le CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: ._ (NAME OF ORGAN17.aTlOti) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for ag t I wish to speak on the subject ofd I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: L\\ .3 v ata REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. \ NAME: ��' Zy �- �V c�o� Y� PHONE: ADDREss: CITY: I am speaking formyself_ (� OR organization: (NAME OF ORGANIJ-\l'lOti) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subj ecto f D 100 ct-\� e-u Ra y\CV, I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. li DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM A7 (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing a Board. NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: dl/d �� CITY:-00 I am speaking formyself OR organization:<:EA-�L0 ��i.eo+�s (NAME OF RGAN17,NTION) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # . My comments will be: general for againsf��� I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. A J 1 1 NAME: �/ ( 1 & u PHONE: ADDRESS: C ( CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: Co Check one: (NAME OF ORGANI7�TION) _ I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against r1/ I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: 3 REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMrr) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: PHONE: q3 S ADDRESS: �✓ / /,a ,- Q l a C T CITY: �- I am speaking formyself OR organization: /o�-D S C Check one: (NAME OF ORGANITaTION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of nz� I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: `X- -..30-9 3 REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: T CITY: (25e,-7Ce;1Z A I am speaking formyself OR organization: 2� Check one: (NAME OF 0RQAN17,-%T10N) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of r7co fs I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: '-.��'' R .olMST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) a ' Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: O e©o �QyCITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: NAME OF ORGAN IZ-NTIO N). Check one: L I wish to speak on Agenda Item # . My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I/ 6±9� M I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: q 3 REouEsT To SPEAK FORM 023 . (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: - � -��� e�t�i+-rte PHONE: ADDRESS: 1 �.� / yam? CITY: /�•n���h T I am speaking formyself OR organization:E.,-sr- Coc-n�e, Check one: (NAME OF ORGANIZATION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # �. My comments will be: general for against z,.--e . I wish to speak on the subject of Ce,--rCs 7v I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: �1-30-9,5 REgtmsT TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. / NAME: `�J lig/ PHONE: ADDRESS: CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization:,FAsTG`04,/7ol-,� Ce-lorm�s (NAME OF ORGANI%aTIOti) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # ` fes My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of zf7etl-S 7d �s�a����A.� i'�,���►2s I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME:S PHONE: - /3 Y/OU ADDRESS: SV CH-y; I am speaking formyself OR organization: (NAME OF ORCA!VI!_Nl'IOti) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. :g� 9042A r A au U JJ •saptsuoa of pxeog agj jo3 sjuau tuoa asagp aseai Inq xeads of gsTm IOU op I 3o}aafgns agp uo xeads of gspnn I • jsurE�?E .ioj juaaua�? :aq ipnn sjuauiuioa AW • # mall iepual�v uo }heads of gslnn I (tiOIIVZINV'�ap :40 SWVN) :auo 3100qo :uopuzgm?.io gp ;iasAtujo3 ?uT4uads tine I :ss323Qclv :3NOHd :3wvN •p.reog alp ?uissaippr o io3aq ulrulsoi ,slaXuads agp .reau xoq agp uT IT amid pue cuio3 snp .alaidwoz) (JlWl"I 3lnNIIw (E) 33UH.L) PM03 xvaas OZ zsan8am :3idQ DATE: y3v REQUEST TO SPEAK '' ORM THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) # 3� Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: 1--L ✓ YjJ DI PHONE: 23Y-tg. _ r �l ADDRESS: 13116 CITY: I am speaking for myself OR organization: Check one: (NAME OF ORCANIZV-10%) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of - p4n m.-- lYN., /V. 121. I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: 0 /q3 REQUEST TO SPEAK '' ORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: /.PIi �E (!'e,���>r� c( PHONE: 032 -- 38,20 ADDRESS: 90r�3 Sl iZ�F� CITY: i I C9140A10 I am speaking formyself X OR organization: FALwRso 1f CM WAY C'.ENTEL4, Check one: (NAME OF. ORGANIZ-VIO:N) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # -�O My comments will be: general for against _ . I wish to speak on the subject of Budner 0`aZ: - &PouaizY 1,1,nme- Wc-,f ogyTl, I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: �3 g`3 REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) #3 Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: /i% PHONE: 93,2 - 3 8,a o ADDRESS: d 3 S% E E CITY: I am speaking for myself OR organization: /-A u 6 izs n 1 C- W WAY CEM-MK Check one: (NAME OF ORGANI1.�11ON) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # 0 'My comments will be: general ' for against _ . I wish to speak on the subject of Bud e ET n k-r- Racyo ,ky aame I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQtMST To SPEAK FORM 3 (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. rem) NAME: 0• l � PHONE: °� � 2 ADDRESS: 2-t9� � �� � CITY: I am speaking formyself R organization: (ZA Check one: (NAME OF ORGANIZV ION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # W My comments will be: general for against �. I wish to speak on the subject of I30dq,(,?'4'N h gecovaq Pew 47JOA) i I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. 4f®r+, # tc 1`aG� adv Ot / �O{ 042 fi e{ e INIP 01& CIO No G°6{�,5 ®b sept pfi z,� �%• .filo 4� �4 �a'�� C1 O Q,`IY� ti°0 p Ofi c�Q Oi5 �G �4+Lpg4 Gam' ,res � apfi c!. f0?. self. b°,�. �l Ao �y t° S sA �` k pie 46 121 .0 s \ Leh°� °rd°' A��k © •' ° �s t��er�Q, a� • � ers'r o` ��e l46, fee °� °S r .- Ae� e �• b ot/ e� er � L of al '�1�, R to eons f� er °S aOOreAsI ete .QtT7' N,4,y1�_ sig the forte fz��E p °�'�O Al (3)�t�Oe � sS ace it 41 N LI �p �4?' rr �: c � sAea �° � �e 'bei$ 04e.. k. for o near the S'3 Sys S ' Ae � Ielf S Akers, ' ash t � p��U roses I ��'e° sAeak °rg °hr�' before wzSh °xh'rne °Aj Cry,, -Q3 c/o to sAe 4tS ke�Oa I �c�E- ,� -�o not�s ak°�� l be: tern # IN�E© � � � h to SAe e sub�ec gener�� o�.Q,�� � akb tof ro,1. �tleaIe for J '� hese co a$ �S �ie12ts for the Oto c012s. Oer, °�plete ZrE.S x T address this f°rr ( � O SPS L) . N�'�E• the $° 'a d Alace MINS FATE, Aw r--- it t ell L j tTl 0 y I DESS: e box near ) � spea�� �- . Z-2,? � the s"Pe�.ers, he,�� ode. g fog-�Yse j f rose bef Off, °re % I Sh to s Org�a too Cry,. ' 6 I Iqon ash t0 oments Agenda Ite I d0 no SAe�on X11 be; g # �Rrq.vr� , . t'"Sh to s e s�b�eet O ercd��.,.� >> _. Ae�.b�tleav f d��r forte �. e these eorn�.n against is for the 8 oard t©const der. '1 Corn �T Pro Complete this f UTN E (3) pEAI� �y DATE: dressinorrnMINUTE g d LIMIT1 "` d��j 93 NAME: the $oard• plaoe it a . the box near � DRESS: � �� the speaker l am kingpea ,3 s' roster be fore Chec on formYsel f, � —moo ' -0?,e• organoma Com: a `� 38 ? a 1 ash to Speak � hon.�� �- 10 My co,mlmeen°nenda It Am, of p� 1 jVts is �'f11 er2Z # rANt7A1't0:ti, - h to speak on '' be. ener�---• a1 d4 not ash to$ the sub.Ieet o f -` for peak butleave _ F against Ithese eom • I men is for the Board ' i - • .� t �. �_ °consider. C°�, �T To add plete this f� (��E (3) �p'�AI�' '�ATE: ressingorni and MjN� LMrr .�`O``�+�[ 1Ve �o�-d_ place it ine Uci C box ne ' � the speak.... I speaks 2, 7 -Tw y T2srostrum be Check o 'ng fornlYself _ aNE, fore IIe -�_ �, �--` 4R organa C-0 ems: �. I ash to tl°n: 114 -I'`,A T c speas k N 7-C S I MY comrnents '`agenda It... (N,�,E a R_��ti�s wzshtospeak.° ;�WVI be: m # G'�vu�Tro�� �". .... gene -- - IdO not�'sh to n the sub.�ect of ral for speakbutleav, �` against these corn ---„_. — mems for the Bo o consider. aa�re fetethi N. Sig the foipj ���� 2O E• It I` SAee boy. a ne C eck oile.- ng f°r� the s . I .Yself ,;y ¢� I 41kers r 9 l7 �`` 0� °s�t.r 27�s �. �?ytD Sperm t, °rgarz .� before I ash to e° "7e17 Q4 ts e alior2 c � � I ` SAe ' cta I d°nOt� �.°�the S� ge.-I SAe .I ect cw— b a \ akb�tle of fOr ave ,. these - e est tsfOrtb ara to slier, i` 1 :10p DATE: REguEST To SPEAK FORM G (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: PHONE: �,� 3 07 l ADDRESS- Co`4�15�o.� 4.J-S tV e CITY: �ncatd I am speaking formyself OR organization. (NAME OF ORGANIZ,\1 ) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general v` for against I wish to speak�on the subject of j I do not wish tospeak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. Gk- DATE: 3 93 REQUEST TO SPEAK '' ORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing --� - L the Board. / �- NAME: , AIA) PHONE: 313- ADDRESS: 2-7.3D GCA-)CVA S7— CrIY: ,'W7/1"LS I 'am speaking formyself OR organization: 1Af6A;iRL N(rAG7'k �'a�n�sSid� Check one: (NAME OF ORGANIZ-NTIOti) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subj ect of /3 UO 6 L-i C w S I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: �i -9il.f�_ � �(/� -�L� PHONE: ADDRESS: / � �J - CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: Check one: NAME OF ORGANIZNTION) ��� ._..—�!� I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. c DATE: REQUEST To SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: (� (�,M IkG(i� " t L; M Ad PHONE: ADDRESS:-JJ)—° LLP�1i �D ,�.� Crry: CI)Ayc �2✓J I am speaking for myself OR organization: c ►A (4 C AL--i N C d An-1 n 6-d Check one: (NAME OF ORGANIZNTION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: a REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. P NAME: ° 67- L SS 25,t- PHONE: 2 L/7 Z� ADDRESS: 326 G-L Nc,l V ie-- CITY: ( f 7 I am speaking formyself J�f _ OR organization: Check one: (NAME OF ORCANIZNTION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: RE$UEST TO SPEAK FORM_ (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. � - C NAME: � � �`- �� .�2� �n �� PHONE: i ADDRESS: cav -c:0 W, •P CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: .� Check one: (NAME OF ORCAN17-M-10%) C(A,�O i C �(eC� r i /2- - I wish tspeak on Agenda Item My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of �n t YL C7 �1 -7�,K Jr, I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. r1 y i ALLIANCE FOR FAMILIES AND CHILDREN Child Abuse Prevention Council of Contra Costa County, Inc. Last year CAPC provided child abuse prevention education and resources to over 40,000 county residents, information and referral to nearly 7,500 callers, training programs to 5,000 community members and community agency personnel, and consultation and advocacy services to 350 abused or at-risk children and their families in Contra Costa County. All services are provided free of charge. Contra Costa Child Care Council Since July, the Contra Costa Child Care Council has assisted 15,000 parents in finding the best child care placement for their family through referrals, parent education and parent choice subsidies. The Council has assisted 2,650 child care providers and potential providers build the supply and improve the quality of child care services through workshops and conferences, technical assistance, site visits and newsletters. The Council also works with decision makers and the general public with programs of public education, advocacy, research and planning. Contra Costa Food Bank The Contra Costa Food Bank collects approximately five million pounds of donated food per year and distributes it to 37,000 disadvantaged and destitute Contra Costa County residents every month. Crisis and Suicide Intervention of Contra Costa Crisis and Suicide Intervention provides free services to county residents who are in crisis, including 24-hour hotlines for intervention in crisis and suicide, child abuse, spouse abuse and grief. In addition to its own crisis lines, CSI is responsible for 24-hour coverage of the phones for Battered Women's Alternatives, and evening and weekend coverage of the Children's Protective Services phones through a contract with that Department. FFgmily and Community Services of Contra Costa Meals on Wheels of Contra Costa serves 160 meals per day to homebound elderly and disabled persons of all ages in Central and East County. Hot meals are delivered daily by volunteers who are "gatekeepers" as well as food deliverers. Prevention of malnutrition and premature institutionalization is the program's goal. Charged on a sliding scale, clients are eligible because of inability to buy and prepare adequate meals. Fly Stress Center The FSC Counseling program provided 2,481 hours of counseling to 259 families in FY 91/92 at a cost of $9.50 per hour for Counseling. FSC trains and recruits volunteer M.A. interns specializing in family therapy to provide counseling, a true bargain. All of the families referred from CPS have severe problems and the children are at high risk of out of the home placement. Many of the families are court ordered into therapy due to child abuse and neglect. The FSC Parent Aide Program served 540 clients in FY 91/92 with three Parent Aides who worked in tandem with CPS Workers. The Parent Aides teach parenting and home management skills to low income families who have abused or neglected their children. They also transport children in foster care to medical and legal appointments and supervise visitations between the children in foster care and their parents. The one remaining West County Parent Aide will be terminated if we are not refunded. DATE: REQUEST TO .SPEAK '' ORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: S S' C" PHONE: ADDRESS: 130-V C ,V "C C)Vr(' vim, CITY: ti a f�,< C'v,-c I am speaking formyself OR organization: s o o, (Alk e kf (NAME OF ORCANIlNI'IOti) Check one: F� b � ��� �� e � r- ,� ',- &- _ I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of 0a�'f Y� (,✓�'�'G` C a`,,F X I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. C-. 1 ZC .7.i-.. :U. �rl X, U Al I � zr;, ::c rrl ro r'('I L•n I c.n it if :1 c.nU I•17 tz; rl.n aj CO LM 'C' rn t rrl E, Cd rc. i I;Q . ..... C,-., -,-I r I 1^J r .. : JJ , C.'1 vl rl -'� -1 1 II .!I J-I 11 1-II 11 It II 4:1 I 14 un I It 1 in v In it rx.. i 3r ; •r i •tel A..: i +J II y, !yJ i !w? II 'ri 1 \ II 'r II - '`? I it I 1 1 1 I 1- I i `1 11 ; r:pC II C.lc I I , I I -- II 'I iIr t Un 4. A it 1 ii cn liwi: r-11 :21 A Z2-DATE: ✓"4 O REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board.. NAME: C-Af?- TL `I S�-`l PHONE: 7 G - -7 'S ¢-3 ADDRESS: 5/2- t Po2T G-} i c/A G U CITY: C ou c.e i?-p `�5�S to I am speaking formyself OR organization: CSN-rrY; co-rrA /�t>cs'o i3 Check one: i� NAME OF ORCAN17�T10N) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider-: DATE: L/" 3 Q REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and- place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: &2161e1 112h 1JFJ-.D_ PHONE: ZZ a -q!-7,// O ADDRESS: l 7 RQ `t/1y/ )?b CITY: /"Al� /i/E-Z I am speaking formyself OR organization: r6ld-MA 62M0 'oM & Z �Sr�!F_A�r��S (NAME OF 0RCAN17N1'I6ti) ljgd' 1471' Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subj ect of��HZW I (FIS 0�;�/ Z�JL�'�f-7_ I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: �/ -110 °l REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: L�Cl r✓A�� c��C4rl�i . �K. 1 PHONE(< ADDRESS: 117 D 0.41je . CL c 0,* b,*fl. CI1Y: S t.� r s k-�� Cid I am speaking formyself _ OR organization: (INANE OF ORGAN17.aTlOti) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against mac_ I wish to speak on the subject of 374-4 14,9,,O O MC004 #tAl rk I AIJIU•-? I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: / REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressin oard. aS NAME: /�/� f PHONE: ADDREss: CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: Check one: (NAME of ORGAN17-NT10% 7>�� I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. a CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION 1.017 MACDONALD AVENUE 'P.O. BOX 2289 RICHMOND, CA 94802 SSI' YI -, 5 TESTIMONY OF ELLEN J. TABACHNICK CONTRA COSTA LEGAL SERVICES FOUNDATION APRIL 30, 1993 Proposed Consolidation of General Assistance/Food Stamp Offices Contra Costa County Summary of the findings of the FNSZCDSS In August, 1992 Contra Costa County, California adopted a budget which authorized, effective January, 1, 1993, the termination of Food Stamps services through its Richmond, Antioch and E1 Sobrante offices for General Assistance (G.A. ) recipients. All Food Stamps application interviews and other operations for G.A. recipients would be handled at one office in Martinez, California. The purpose of the action was to save money. On September 10, 1992 Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation (CCLSF) filed a discrimination compliant against the County. On November 2, 1992 the California Department of Social Services, Civil Rights Bureau took jurisdiction over the case and began a joint investigation with the United States Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Services, Western Regional Office, Civil Rights Office after a complaint filed with their agencies. On December 30, 1992 the state CDSS/OCR and federal USDA/FNS/CRO issued a joint interim report of the complaint. The report found that the plan "will have a disproportionate impact on clients who are homeless, the disabled (mobility impaired and persons with mental disabilities) , the aged, the non-English speaking and minorities. /° It also found that the County failed "to conduct adequate impact studies and to properly notify the public, grass root organizations, and applicants and participants". It also found that "there is insufficient indication that there will be (a) equal access to the homeless, disabled (mobility impaired) , the aged, the non-English speaking and the minority GA/FS clients; (b) equal treatment in different parts of the county based on race, national origin, the aged, and the disabled; (c) equal accommodations for clients with mental or physical disabilities will (be] provided. " Actions after the investigation report Because of the report, this Board of Supervisors decided on January 5, 1993 not to implement the plan until further action by the Board. Currently this matter is under review by the United States Department of Agriculture. We believe that the proposal to consolidate in Martinez violates the appropriate provisions of law because it fails to assure effectively equal access to residents of East and West County. It is our understanding that a revised plan which only involves closing the East County office will be submitted and that the Board will take no action until that new proposal is developed. We believe such a plan would still run afoul of the appropriate provisions of law. We will have more detailed comments when the new plan is released. In conclusion, one needs to ask why, during a recession this County would forget the most vulnerable members of our society. This County has serious fiscal problems. We recognize that and we maintain that the steps this County wants to take to help to save their budget deficit is discriminatory. We encourage this Board not to engage in illegal conduct, but rather consider recommending to the Department of social services that they withdraw their plans to consolidate. It is, as proposed impractical, a waste of resources, and unconstitutitial. Resolving this will save far less then any projected savings and will show this County's low income community but the Board cannot and will not accept discrimination. As you are well aware of this Board must also comply with Civil Rights laws. Please do your duty you were elected for. Thank you. FOOD RSCH b aCT:C!iJ 'ENTER WAS-H DC P . 0 2)/G •R•A• C March 16, 1993 Director, Complaints & Adjudication Division Office of Advocacy and Enterprise Department of Agriculture FOOD RESEARCH 14th and Independence, SW 6 ACIION CENIER South Building Room 1371 Washington, DC 20250-9400 RE: Contra Costa County Welfare Centralization Plan Dear Sir/Madam: I am writing to express concern at the apparent continuing disregard of the rights of GA/food stamp recipients in Contra Costa County as evidenced by the county' s intention to proceed with the plan to centralize GA/food stamp offices . As I understand it, despite clear findings of discrimination in the interim report from the Office of Civil Rights, the County intends to continue with the centralization. The Contra Costa centralization plan will place a burden on persons wishing to apply for and receive food stamp benefits along with GA. This burden will be disproportionately harsh for the thousands of elderly, disabled and homeless persons who will be unable, physically or financially to travel to the central office. Proposed county-provided transportation, and homeless check-cashing agencies (which will charge a fee to cash the ATP) will not resolve these problems . Thus, the plan violates federal nondiscrimination requirements. The Food Stamp Act at 7 USC 2020 (c) and the federal regulations at 7 CFR 272 . 6 expressly prohibit discrimination against any applicant or participant in any aspect of the program. The federal regulations explicitly incorporate the provisions of the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. In addition, the federal regulations at 7 CFR 274 . 2 (a) place an affirmative duty on states to make special accommodation for homeless, disabled and elderly recipients in the distribution of food stamp benefits. The centralization plan violates all these requirements. In addition to the obvious legal problems with the plan, I am particularly distressed by the apparent intention to circumvent procedures, ignore the findings of the interim report, issue an unacceptable final report without the consent of USDA and proceed with the 1875 C'c+nnccii�u� �cc., N��� Suite 540 _ Mar 20, 93 17 ; 38 FOOD RSCH & ACTION] CENTER WASH DC P . 03/0 Director, Complaints & Adjudication Division March 16, 1993 Page Two centralization. This circumvention of rules and procedure evidences a lack of good faith and a blatant disregard for the thousands of low-income persons who will be affected by the centralization. I urge the Office of Advocacy and Enterprise to continue efforts to protect the rights of low-income persons and to ensure that Contra Costa County will not be allowed to violate the law and contravene the civil rights of low income persons. I thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely yours, Carrie M. Lewis Staff Attorney `':.''1 • Mexican American 182 Second Street • MALDEF Legal Defense 2nd Floor and Educational Fund (4 15)543 598n FranccAsalos FAX(415)543-8235 1 O D \_..i•401 March 29, 1993 ^. Mr. James A. Westbrooks Deputy Associate Director - Office of Complaints and Adjudications Division Independence Avenue, S.W., Room 1371 Washington, D.C. 20050 Re: Discriminatory Consolidation of General Assistance/Food Stamp Offices Dear Mr. Westbrooks: The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, joins the Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation in requesting that the U.S. Department of Agriculture immediately stay a State of California administrative ruling permitting Contra Costa County to discriminatorily close down General Assistance/Food Stamp operations in the Latino and other minority areas, while keeping open operations in the predominately white area of the County. The purpose of the stay is to permit the Department to continue administrative proceedings on a charge of discrimination filed by minority food stamp recipients. The charge led to an interim finding of discrimination by the Office of Civil Rights of the Department's Food and Nutrition Service and the Civil Rights Bureau of the California State Department of Social Welfare, dated December 30, 1992 (Exhibit A). The Director of the California State Department of Social Services unilaterally closed the case on February 17, 1993 without just cause (Exhibit B). The Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation's February 18, 1993 letter of appeal to the Department's Office of Advocacy & Enterprise is attached hereto as Exhibit C. Without an administrative stay, the county will close down food stamp operations in the minority areas of Contra Costa County, and leave open only its Martinez Office, leaving a disproportionate effect on the Latino and other minority populations. The issues concern (a) discriminatory State enforcement of the food stamp program, to the detriment of minority recipients and (b) the integrity of procedures for handling complaints of discrimination concerning the food stamp program. National Office Regional Offices 634 South Spring Street 542 South Dearborn Street 182 SecoAd Street The Book Building 733 15th Street,N.W. 11th Floor Suite 750 2nd Floor 140 E.Houston Street Suite 920 Los Angeles.CA 90014 Chicago. IL 60605 San Francisco,CA 94105 Suite 300 Washington,D.C.,20005 (213) 629-2512 (312)427-9363 (415)543-5598 San Antonio,TX 78205 (202)628-4074 FAX: (213) 629-8016 FAX: (312)427-9393 FAX: (415)543-8235 (512) 224-5476 FAX: (202)393-4206 FAX: (512) 224-5382 Satellite Offices - Sacramento - Santa Ana - EI Paso Contributions Are Tax Deductible The Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund is a national organization that promotes and protects the civil rights of Latinos in the United States. The case at hand involves discrimination and the unequal treatment of Latino's by the County of Contra Costa. The East County consist of primarily Latino families. African Americans populate the West County, and the Central County of Contra Costa is predominately white. In an attempt to save money, the County wants to close down Food Stamp/General Assistance operations in theUest and East Counties, while keeping services available in the Central county. The county's plan will have an adverse impact on minority recipients, who are singled out to bear the burden of traveling from their homes to Martinez; in Central Contra Costa County. This plan will have more of a harsh effect on those recipients that are predominately Latino, African American, and Asian, and denies equal access to services to those with disabilities, non-English speaking, the homeless and aged GA/FS recipients. The race of recipients served by the to-be closed Antioch office was 15% Latino, and 31% Black, the Richmond office was 75% Black, and in EI Sobrante the population is 32% Latino, and 49% Vietnamese. On the other hand "the GA/FS population served through the Martinez office is 74% White and these clients will continue to receive services in their local office " by imposing a severe transportation burden on recipients and potential recipients in the West and East County, Contra Costa's centralization plan may well drive recipients off the rolls for no proper reason. The Contra Costa case is especially striking because the County, according to the interim findings, altogether failed to study the adverse impact or to give proper prior notice. The County also failed to provide recipients and other groups an opportunity to respond to its plan. The interim findings also demonstrate that the County's justifications for its plan are pretextual. The interim findings comply fully with the command of the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.0 sec. 2000 (d), and the Department's implementing regulations, 7 CFR Part 15, that there be no discrimination in federal programs. The interim findings, moreover, are useful guidance for other States and localities administering the Department's food stamp program, in the present, troubled fiscal climate. The interim findings make clear that minority and other protected groups of recipients are not to be singled out for discriminatory treatment in order to meet fiscal constraints. the regulatory requirements for adverse impact studies, for the burden to shift to States and localities when adverse impact is shown, and for prior notice and a hearing are necessary safeguards for the enforcement of Title VI. The unilateral decision of the California Department of Social Services to pretermit the administrative proceedings without consulting or obtaining the participation of the -2- Department or complainant minority food stamp recipients is contrary to the Department's regulations and, if followed elsewhere, would wholly thwart the command of Title VI to provide for nondiscrimination in federal spending. The fact that the California Department's decision was made by political authorities after ex parte discussions with County officials, moreover, calls into question the integrity of the administrative proceedings and the Title VI enforcement effort. Jhe Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund therefore urges the Department to stay immediately the California Department's February 18, 1993 letter decision so that further proper administrative proceedings under the auspices of the Nutrition Food Service's Office of Civil Rights can go forward under Department regulations. Sincerely, Manuel A. Romero Regional Counsel cc: Charis Moore, CC Legal Services Foundation -3- �.sj;r ...-.. ~x•!. ,•+s;1!:.L•:s7 KN•:�tM'9.^•'. ..r ..K..!-n e...\+t!.•e+E'G:ti.. _ VIP AsianLwCaticus _7•y Asian(aw caucus.Inc. 468 Bush Sneer,rhuo flcor San francrsco.CA 34/08 Phone:!415r3911655 Fax:;41513910356 March 25, 1993 Via Facsimile and U. S . Mail James A. Westbrooks Deputy Associate Director Complaints and Adjudications Division U. S. Department of Agriculture Independence Avenue, S.W. , Rm 1371 Washington, D.C. 20050 Re : Contra Costa County Food Stamps/General Assistance Office Consolidation Dear Mr. Westbrooks: The Asian Law Caucus is the oldest non-profit, Asian community legal services organization in the country. Its mission is to promote, advance, and represent the legal and civil rights of the Asian Pacific Islander communities. Throughout our history, we have provided legal services, community education, and general advocacy on behalf of indigent, immigrant, and non-English speaking Asian Pacific Islanders. We are very disturbed over the proposed closing of Contra Costa County 's Antioch, E1 Sobrante, and Richmond offices which currently handle applications and cases involving General Assistance and Food Stamps ("GA/FS") . The affected populations, including many Southeast Asians, will be adversely impacted and discriminated against for several reasons. It will be difficult for them to simply travel to another office in another city. For instance, many do not own automobiles and must take public transportation. Moreover, they cannot afford, or are not able to take public transportation to another location. Those unfamiliar with English or our customs may feel uncomfortable using public transportation. Even if the County provides cost free van transport, language and cultural barriers will prevent such travel for many non-English speaking Southeast Asians. The county would not only require non- English speaking individuals to travel to another city, but also subject them to possible health and safety hazards, especially if they are traveling after dark. moi} Furthermore, it is also very difficult for limited English speaking applicants and recipients to understand new procedures without proper notification. There are many different languages and dialects spoken by the Southeast Asian community. It is our understanding that none of the affected groups were properly notified in their own language. These and further findings explaining many of the problems associated with the closure of the three offices have been enumerated in a joint report issued by the Californfa DeRartment of Social Services, Civil Rights Bureau ("CDSS/CRB") and your own agency, the United States Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Services, Civil Rights Office ("USDA/FNS/CRO") . According to the report of December 30, 1992 , it is clear that "the county' s plan to centralize the GA/FS violates the Department of Justice regulations, Title 23 ; Food & Nutrition Services regulation 7 CFR 15 , Part A; USDA/FNS Program Instruction 113-7 ; and SDSS Division 21 regulations. " State Department of Social Services, Civil Rights Bureau, Discrimination Complaint Investigation Interim Report, December 30, 1992, at 3 . In fact, your agency found that closing these offices "will have a disproportionate impact on clients who are homeless, the disabled. . . , the aged, the non- English speaking and minorities. " Id at 5 . Thus, the Southeast Asian community is one of the many groups who will be negatively impacted. The report states that the ethnicity of the Food Stamps/General Assistance population served by "the E1 Sobrante office is 49% Vietnamese and 32% Laotian. Id. at 3 . Additionally, "the county currently serves the needs of most of its non-English speaking clients through their office in El Sobrante. . . . [and a] review of the caseload statistics disclosed that th[e] staffing level [was] not likely to be adequate. " Id. at 4 . A complaint by the Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation ( "CCLSF") led to the joint, interim investigation and report by the CDSS/CRB and USDA/FNS/CRO. Your report also found that the County Department of Social Services did not "conduct adequate impact studies" and did not properly inform the community as required by both State and Federal regulations, thus denying equal access, treatment, and accommodations for clients. Id. at 5 . Therefore, the county will be placing unfair and burdensome restrictions on many groups which are entitled to services. The report further recommended that additional studies concerning the impact of the proposed consolidation be conducted before any final action occurs. It also stated that such a comprehensive study could identify the proposed plan' s impact upon minorities, the disabled, the homeless, the aged, and the non-English speaking. Even with an impact study conducted in accordance with the Food Stamp Act and other regulations, the County is still required to comply with its civil rights obligations. It is the obligation of the State and Federal governments to ensure that no disparate 2 treatment occurs. Therefore, any impact study should include the cultural implications of the planned closings on each Southeast Asian group potentially affected. Despite these interim findings and recommendations, and without any further investigation, the Director of the California Department of Social Services, Eloise Anderson, has authorized the County' s proposed plan. In her letter to,,, Ellen Tabachnick dated February 17 , 1993 , Ms. Anderson stated thAt the County would be allowed to implement the consolidation without further study. Thus, we are deeply concerned over the disparate impact on minority populations caused by the planned office closings and the precedent that the State authorized closings set for other counties. We believe that such authorization was premature and in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 , 42 U.S.C. 52000d and its accompanying regulations. Without action by your agency, the County will close the offices as early as March. For this reason, we join with CCLSF in opposition to any discriminatory closure plan and urge your agency to: 1) immediately intervene to prevent the closings; and 2) issue a final report on the impact of the proposed closings upon affected groups. Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. If you have any questions or need any further information, please do not hesitate to contact us at (415) 391-1655. Si.nc ly, Paul Igasaki Doreena Wong (✓ Executive Director Staff Attorney DW: epcg cc: Alicia Martinez , CDSS Eloise Anderson, CDSS Glenda Johnson, USDA Ellen Tabachnick, CCLSF 3 -- -- - - . - . — . raGE . a02 mionlal cz!;Ce ' / { Surto 1600 UUU NMCP L 3CAL DFIENSE 99 Hudson Sot AND E3atJG2710NAL FUND.INC. New York.N.Y. 100t3-2997 (212)219-1900 Fa aM February 26, 1993 The Honorable Mike Espyi Secretary United States Department of Agriculture Room 200-A Administration Building 14th & Independe oe Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20250 Re: Discrim.inarory Closing Down of Food Stamp Operations in MLnortty *eas Dcar Secretary Espy: The I AACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund. Inc., joins the Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation in requesting that the Department: immediately stay a State of California administrative ruling permitting Contra Costa County to discriiminatorl-ly close down Food Stamp/General Assistance operations in African-American, Latino and other minority areas, while keeping open operations in the predominately white area of the County. The purpose of the stay is to permit the Department to coutinue administrative proceedings on a charge of discrimination filed by minority food stamp recipients. The charge led to an interim finding of discrimination by the Office of Civil Rights of the Department's. Food and Nutrition Service and the Civil Rights Bureau of the California State Department of Social Welfare, dated December 30, 1992 (Exhibit A). The Director of the California State Department of Social Services unilaterally closed the case on February 17, 1993 without just cause ( xIn'bit B). The Contra Costa Legal Services Foundation's February IS, 1993 letter of appeal to the Department's Office of Advocacy &Enterprise is attached hereto as Exhibit C. Unless the administrative stay is granted, the County plans to proceed with closing down food stamp operations in minority areas. The administrative charge, as 1 explain below, raises important issues far beyond a single county's food stamp program. These issues concern (a) discriminatory State enforcement of the food stamp program, to the detriment of minority recipients and (b) the integrity of procedures for handling complaints of discrimination concerning the food stamp program. The Legal Defense Fund for many years has prosecuted civil rights matters, Ou.r Western Regional Office recently has been investigating several cases of discrimination �� e&M Detre ac r�es4oad ttad.lie GDF;is am s�301 if&"ax 6s r.s A•roe;aeno4 Sot ri.Adate,o��G(dsie,t�'OPk ar, P"M (%A ACP!a&.0 Lap�.!oath*3e r+AA�d,�;i, WS F Soca VW X11 Won Aad Set" m ITaal Atha!DP has had(w over 313 7ftn a sparge (�)6t2.t�70D�_-MM to Aa�a�CA UM *•�n�« tb Pros � ecc and Dal�et Fu (mm newt_ Pa=)(zt l)�a®s F C L r. 7 3 i F F1l]E i a The Honorable Mi'.ke Espy February 26, 1993 Page 2 revolving the disparate treatment of African American citizens by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors in its spending of federal dollars. This case involves one emgious example. Contra Costa Count-, a:.ross the bay from San Francisco, has a sizable poor minority population consisting principally of African-American families in Vest County (where the City of Richmond is located) and Latino familles in East County. Central Contra Costa County is predominately white. In order to save money, the County plans to close down food stamp operations in local welfare offices in West and East County while keeping local services open in Central County. The County's centralization plan has clear adverse impact on minority recipients who are singled out to bear the exclusive burden of travel of two to three hours on public transportation from their homes to Central County to obtain food stamps. The interim findings were that, "While the plan appears to apply equally to all clients, it falls more harshly on clients whose ethnic origin is African American, Hispanic, Vietnamese and Latino and denies equal access to se:nices with disabilities, non-English speaking, the homeless and the aced GA/FS recipients." (Exhibit A at 3). The race of recipients served by the to-be closed Richmond office was 75go black, in the Antioch office 31% black and 15% Hispanic, and, in the El Sobrante office, 495 Vietnamese and 32% Latino. (Id.) On the a+.her hand, °(tlhe GA/FS population served through the Martinez office is 74% white and these clients o tU continue to receive services in their local office" (Id.) by imposing a severe transportation burden on recipients -- and potential recipients — in 'West and East County, Contra Costa's centralization plan may well drive recipients off the rails for no proper reason. The Contra Costa case is especially striking beause the County, according to the interim findings, altogether failed to study the adverse impact or to give proper prior notice. The County also failed to provide reciplents and other groups an opportunity to respond to its plan. The is terim findings also demonstrate that the County's justifications for its plan are pretex=al. The interim findings, rnmply fully with the command of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §2000d, and the Department's implementing regulations, 7 CFR Part 15, that there be no discrimination in federal programs. 'Ile interim findings, moreover, are useful guidance for other States and localities administering the Department's food stamp program, in the present, troubled fiscal climate. The interim findings make clear that minority and other protected groups of recipients are not to be singled out for discriminatory treatment in order to meet fiscal Constraints. The regulatory requirements for adverse impact studies, for the burden to shift to States and localities FC3 _ = 3 I Hl7E a04 f The Honorable Mike Espy February 26, 1993 Pa ge 3 when adverse impact is shown, and for prior notice and a hearing are necessary safeguards for the enforcement of Title VI. As the Department's Food and Nutrition Service, Western Region, stated, in a letter to all Westcra Region food stamp coordinators, dated December 4, 1992, "in light of current fiscal constraints and possible service cuts which States may be contemplating, we wish to remind you that such changes in office operations require strict adherence to Civil Rights legislation." (Exhibit D at 1) (affinn Z the requirement for impact studies and public notice of changes in food stamp offrA opemtions). The unilateral decision of the California Department of Social Services to pretermit the administrative proceedings without consulting or obtai.nkag the participation of the Department or complainant minority food stamp recipients is contrary to the Department's regulations and, if fbEowed elsewhere, would wholly thwart the command of Title VI to provide for nondiscrimination in federal spending. The fact that the California Department's decision was made by political authorities after er para discu_zssions with County officials, morecwer. calls into question the integrity of the administrative proceedings and the Title VI enforcement effort- The Legal Defense Fund therefore urges the Department to stay immediately the California Departluent's February 18, 1993 letter decision so that further proper administrative proceedings tinder the auspices of the Nutrition Food Service's Office of Civil Rights can go forward under Department regulations. If you have any questions about the underlying facts, please call Bill Lann Lee at the Fund's Western Regional Office in Las Angeles, California at (2131 624-2405. Sincerely, Elaine R Jones Director-Counsel ER.J:sm Enc. ...z.. APR 20 '913 10: CATHOLIC CHARITIES,OAICLHfIP P.2%12 Catholic Charities Diocese of Oakland 433 Jefferson Street, Oakland, CA 94607 510/834-5656 Fax 510/451-6998 April 27 , 1993 Mr-Tom Torlakson, Chairman Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street Martinez , CA 94553 Re: County Plan to Centralize GA and Food Stamp Offices Public Hearing, April 30, 1993 and Future Public Hearings Dear Mr. Torlakson and the Board of Supervisors: This letter is written to express opposition to the proposed plan by Contra Costa County for the centralization of General Assistance and Food Stamp services and the closure of local service offices in the east and west county areas and to voice the serious concern that this action would cause severe hardship to the clients needing services in those areas, many of whom are newly arrived refugees and immigrants . Catholic Charities , Diocese of Oakland has resettled over 17,500 refugees and immigrants in the East Bay area since 1975 - at least 13 , 000 of them in Contra Costa County. The majority are Southeast Asian. Since 1980 , Catholic Charities has assisted these refugees and immigrants through a variety of educational and employment services with bilingual support to find stable employment , to adjust to their new culture, and to become successful and productive residents and eventual citizens of .Contra Costa County. The closure of service offices in east and west ca.unty, both areas which are predominately populated by minority clients , including refugees and immigrants, demonstrates obviously inequitable treatment by requiring them to undergo the hardships of traveling very long distances in order to receive services that clients in predomimately non-minority central county receive more easily and with less personal burden. Clients with disabilities, .including the disability of speaking limited or no English, will be especially harshly burdened. Most refugee clients on GA have resided five or less years in the U.S. - many less than one year. They have come from the diaeettling background of war , detention in prison camps, and years spent waiting in refugee processing camps . They are not the so called hardcore poor who . have .been on GA for years . They are still in need of. services that allow them the opportunity to move into eventual employment and self-sufficency_. Many come from rural areas of Southeast Asia and are at the beginning stages of APR 28 193 10:53 CATHOLIC CHARITIES.OAKLAND P.3/12 . CCC Board of Supervisors April 27 , 1993 P. 2 acquiring English. It is not at all a simple event for them to travel long distances to government offices. The intricacies of accessing public transportation and getting around outside the immediate community are daunting. Many do not own cars . In addition to public transportation adding an excessive cost burden to obviously already "strapped" finances, it presents other barriers caused by lack of linguistic . and cultural understanding. The offer of the provision of free buses operated by the County to solve these problems is not a viable solution because it does nothing to address the communication disability of non-English speaking Southeast Asian and refugee clients . These recipients are legally entitled to receive translation services under their civil rights of equal access to benefits and services. In addition, it Outs them under even more stress because of serious health, safety and security risks.. It is well known that social Services offices have armed security guards for a very real reason. We have not heard that the County proposes to provide security for the buses . Also we have not heard that the County proposes to provide translation and protection. It seems that this plan in a very short time would generate more problems than it proposes to solve. In addition, it is not clear that the added cost of running such transportation services in an effective manner has been taken into consideration in any cost savings calculations of centralization. Furthermore, the County's other offers in attempt to solve the problems of centralization, such as 800 numbers, and the' right to apply at any welfare office. do not eliminate the the disperate impact . As we understand, the County has now. presented a modified proposal to continue the operation of local- offices in west county but to centralize services for east county by closing offices there and relocating them to Martinez . At the same time, the County reserves the right to revert to its original proposal at a later time should it decide this is necessary. This compromise looks like the beginning of delay tactics. It is seriously doubtful whether the fiscal cost effectiveness of closing and relocating east county services would justify the disciminatory adverse effects on east county recipients . , The underlying but unspoken real cost savings of the plan . could be construded as resulting from forcing minority and disabled clients off the welfare rolls . At this point we understand there will be another impact study to be done by the County. It is necessay for this study to completely address the full impact upon all minorites , including the physically and linguistically disabled, to include specifically the ethnic breakdowns of all county areas and to demonstrate how APR, c119 '93 10:5-4 C-ATHOLIC CHARITIES,OAKLArID P.4/12 CCC Board of Supervisors April 27 , 1993 P. 3 the plan will provide equal access to benefits for limited- English speaking Southeast Asians , other refugees , immigrants , and all minority and disabled GA/FS recipients . We are requesting that the County send us a copy of this next impact study after it has been completed. We urge you to consider strongly the disparate impact this plan would have . We feel that any centralization of General Assistance and Food Stamps services, whether it be west or east county or both, demonstrates a non-caring social services attitude whose focus is more on productivity than people. Sincerely, BARBARA RACEK Assistant Director Refugee and Immigrant Services cc : Glenda Johnson, Director FNS Office of Civil Rights Alicia Martinez , Chief Civil Rights Bureau SDSS James Westbrooks , Deputy Associate Director USDA Ellen J . mabachnick CCLF Philip J. Surtenthal , Ralph Murphy CCLF Ken Reggio, Executive Director Catholic Charities Sister Elisabeth Lang Greg Kepferle Catholic charities Perfecto Villareal , Director CCC Dept . of Social Services 2 ao M A N �� N• N M aa o N Q tp tv y � h y� o O Ort c n O . •.t O . o CD `� a o . m O 0 h Q. 4Z7 f~D D• f� !� 0 O �• rl+ ^ y (1) O� 0 W 0 ('D CD n O OFN~ s o KA T a) Q �. ►-� O z 0 Enr O a � � DATE: REQUEST To SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: 1 b lM C. i`i ,jGy k, PHONE: ADDRESS: �z-13 s7` 44/-ey jafuel CITY: 4/-4.11et.Ve,A-- I am speaking formyself OR organization: Check one: (NAME OF ORGANIZNTION) \,Z I wish to speak on Agenda Item # �� 1-0 My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subj ect of 0�-A krw5 A-lae, I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST To SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. 1 NAME:_ �G�J ft-f C� ��`.C /5 d PHONE: gY,5T3 ADDRESS. Ll U ( �L e t /1� U 2� / �c �Y!vc P-z,. Cc�CITY: �(a C �( e z I am speaking formyself tl� organization: AA-�i c cG\. A-Z 0 S 04 (NAME OF ORGANCl.ATION) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for + against ZI wish to speak on the subject of Ja.v- Gip r G I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board.to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: �:!-a-C /C. 04-� k iI 5 PHONE: 6,1,2 7— Sol 3Q ADDRESS: 2-YO D L5.4 C a ✓r, fid CITY: .�+ �1 0 I am speaking for myself �G R- organization: 411 �-<o lord �a Check one: (NAME OF ORGANIZNTIOti) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # ` My comments will be: general for against i/ I wish to s eak on �� � b-04 r the 1,�� t,l � � c.ti � � 1� ��u.� s I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: ..30- 13 REQIMST To SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: /�-L�C� PHONE: w' 7,? ADDRESS: 2 �-.� -����� �✓� / CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: Check one: (NAME OF ORGANIlaT10%) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # MC)ADVO . My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST To SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this' form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: ILA' , 'e I PHONE: l� 3`3 e`c.e�c, seV V 0 `es ADDRESS: .422=a � k it-P /"90 y i u i 10 o CITY: Aa 7-- I I am speaking formyself 6/ OR organization: (NAME OF ORGANIZATION) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against r I wish to speak on the subject o —S o I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: '�� ..-, REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: rtiOh'E: ADDRESS: CITY: �D67) I am speaking formyself/Y.' OR organization: Check one: (NAME OF ORGANIZNTION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in a box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the oar 2 NAME: PHONE: (),k 15W - J (� ADDRESS: CITY: A AA 4 I am spea ng formyself O org ation: AME o Y ORGANvaT10N) Chec one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: gener for 'nst ->� I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: W-3 REQUEST TO SPEAK '' ORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and pi a it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before address' g e o NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: i CITY- I am speaking formysel R organization: Che one: NAM OF: G NIZNTION) I wish to speak en # My comments. will be: gene al for against K - I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave e e omm nts for the Board to consider. DATE: ` REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressin the Boar�I-- NAME: �Omx , PHONE: ;_�B�, V ADDRESS: 0 CITY: AV61-,9�F I am speaking formyself OR rganizatiori: (T— NAME OF 6RCANIZ-V ION) Check o71wish e: to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: gener for agains I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave th se comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: J/-q V/ =SIyl�l �,tG PHONE: :2 32 - 3 ADDRESS: ?Qq �23 L' 5%/fir=GT CITY: !C�d1r7�i✓D �A1O I am speaking formyself _ OR organization: F,4u&ipso &l_w WAY (�eA/'�6l� Check one: (NAME OF ORGANI7.�TIOti) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # d20 My comments will be: general for against X I wish to speak on the subject of r3udG 67 T Cru?- fe�&uJ�Ie y 114i4le A?Es1�C,y77�q I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. /Gelyg.�e M��S /JBL l U .� 4f k<-�� Awc,,e-* e- DATE: REgimsT To SPEAK FoRm (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAMOL- t3 Vti fa, PHONE: ADDRESS: CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: L'b,,,A (NAME OF ORGAWATION) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against if I wish to speak on the subject c 10 . I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: 41. o 193 REQtTMT To SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board.. NAME: ONUJ keOW. PHONE: 9(4 60 ADDRESS: 14SS7 TW-FW - ex-vi--, Zy2 CITY: LoA-, QT- I am speaking formyself OR organization: o" Check one: NAME OF ORGANI7-\TION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of -Sep-vt ce, a±& c�,-{�w►��--� I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: `-/ hol REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUi'E LIMIT Complete this form and place it in the. box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: C �� PHONE: Q3 a — 3 9 2,0 ADDRESS: 3 S T eET CITY: RzL/-l/b!(Jlyt3 .IWO I am speaking formyself X OR organization: rgaegsa AIEW W14Y 65H-rCR Check one: (NAME OF ORGANI7,10-10N) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # ao My comments will be: general for against X . I wish to speak on the subject of Btcd%c;� Cut - Ratloueat I-lour Rf.5i0�u7;,�� I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUMT TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: �5n ,•�.D 7ge CITY: ,. I am speaking formyself OR organization:<:F,os,7- Coe-Ili 01oknAA-zs Check one: (NAME OF ORGAN 17,\1-1 ON) aZ.AJ A-)01d I wish to speak on Agenda Item # c;� . My comments will be: general for against C..�.. I wish to speak on the subjectof I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: 41,2.a REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing r7d. , NAME: /f PHONE: ADDRESS: l ,A-i-[o CITY: ��✓/l/.�/� - /Y` �/� I am speaking formyself OR organization: Check one:, NAME OF ORGANIZV ION) /Z I wish to speak on Agenda Item # �. k E My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I d�t wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST To SPEAK Foptam (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the b e speakers' rostrum before addressing the Bo NAME: PHONE: - ADDRESS: CITY: I am speaking formyself 0 org tion: AME OF ORGAN17.NTION) Chef one: �I 'wish to speak on it # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK '' ORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place ' in the box near the speakers' rostrum before address' B and NAME. PHO1�T E. ADDRESS: CITY: I FI king formyself R organization• Ce: (NAME OF ORCANIZ-V ION) wish to speak on Agenda Item # o My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: ' REQUMT TO SPEAK '' ORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: �' 1 CITY: I am speaking formyself O oron: Check e: (NA. E OF QRGA \TIO.' I wL wish to speak on en ale e My comments will be: general for. a st I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: �v REQUEST TO SPEAK '' ORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. #4e12S,-D- lNAME: /� � PHONE: �/ S�2Z' �- ADDRESS: 7 ��,�/moi¢- ,�,�� 5 CITY: I am speaking for myself OR organization: .o r7.,1iC Check one: NAME OF ORCA!VI!_M -10%) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of e I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK '' ORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: CTIA&U ldnwyu PHONE: 910 n59 ADDRESS: .1'$4 Lo4dtQa ', f CI-IY: b6ftuk(U, I am speaking formyself OR organization: C C-C L.,^A &M Mum,i6h Check one: (NAME OF ORG NIZNTION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of f� I do not wish to speak but leave these comments forte Board to consider. DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: e(-) 55 _ ('�U 5 PHONE: /0 9 ADDRESS: �Lc 1 Gj 214 y "DI CITY: (A ", I am speaking for myself X OR organization: cc_ Res &&)7A LTAO Vim"' (NAME OF ORCAN17-M-10N) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against PW%RAM5 I wish to speak on the subject of f olzr�- I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: �0 9 REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressor the Board. NAME: PHONE: ADDRESS: U CITY: I am speaking formyself OR orgariization:� ! Check one: . NAME OF RCANIZ-VION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of (2" 1- " ' :sem pCA; . I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: 1 �� REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. r C �30NAME: Q t ) I �C /� PHONE: ADDRESS: U� �5� ���Q�(� \�,� CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: Check one: NAME OF ORGA"NIZ- ION I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. am .,k ( ` c, DATE: REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing Board. 1 G 9 � NAME: 6VZ -? /Z/ ��4 �� /'�r. PHONE: / ,9 0 ADDRESS: S!-jv �/� �,�/ G CITY: 4-1, C I am speaking formyself OR organization: NAME OF ORCA!VllNl'lOti) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: -2 DZ C REQUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. r NAME:--5i,-,4,Z1-1a C� /G,�'I,l PHONE: ZZ ` e� ADDRESS: allCITY: �GG I am speaking formyself�[_ OR organization: NAME OF ORGANI7.XTIOti) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. zZ Zrd pGt.�-- DATE. G 3 REgITEST To SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before. addressing a Board. NAME: 1 0. PHONE: �� d 'S� q( .ADDRESS: �5 ) LA I �-i n,I n In 6 J(' Crry: I am speaking formyself OR organization: (NAME OF ORGAN(7-MON) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. �o ` 4 y X�('c NiS —U UA, .