Pretrial Transitional Housing and Case Management Agreement

Recommended Action:

A)  Authorize the Chief Probation Officer to execute a professional services agreement with Interfaith Shelter Network, Inc. (IFSN) for the initial term December 1, 2024, through November 30, 2027, in the amount of $2,105,870, and to execute up to two one-year renewal options for a maximum five-year agreement value of $3,691,122 in addition to amendments that do not exceed $50,000 per year or otherwise substantively change agreement.  

B)  Authorize the Chief Probation officer to retroactively amend the current agreement expiring 11/30/24 with Interfaith Shelter Network by $135,000 for a maximum five-year value of $2,235,000. 

Executive Summary:

The Probation Department requests Board approval to execute a professional services agreement with IFSN to provide services for individuals on pretrial release who are homeless and have mental illness or co-occurring mental illness and substance abuse disorder.  Such individuals pose difficult challenges to the courts because while the crimes for which individuals are charged might not warrant incarceration while awaiting trial, their mental health and living conditions increase their likelihood of committing new crimes, failing to appear in court, causing harm to themselves, or being victimized in the community.  To reduce these risks, courts may require such individuals to remain incarcerated until adjudication.  The continuing services proposed under this agreement provide the courts a viable alternative to incarceration whereby individuals on pretrial release can remain safely in the community and receive supportive housing and intensive case management.  Overall program goals are to reduce unnecessary incarceration and associated costs, provide treatment and services to improve outcomes of justice system-involved individuals, and increase public safety.

Additionally, the Probation Department requests a retroactive increase of $135,000, bringing the 5-year maximum agreement value to $2,235,000. When the contract was originally prepared  in 2019, inflation was estimated to be 3 percent per year. However, the CA Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers has averaged 4 percent per year for the past 5 years. In addition, rent, utility, insurance, and living wage increases have contributed to the increase. These updated costs have been programmed into the agreements and contracts within the Community Corrections Partnership’s FY 24-25 budget.

The Sonoma County Community Corrections Partnership (CCP) and Measure O allocate funding for this program and have approved the FY 24-25 expenses.  Future funding will depend upon continued CCP approval and Measure O funding.

Discussion:

Background

In 2016, the U.S. Department of Justice released a competitive grant for the Justice and Mental Health Collaboration Program (JMHCP).  Sonoma County was awarded $250,000 for a three-year project to improve public safety and serve individuals with co-occurring mental illness and substance abuse disorder who encounter the justice system.  This grant continued through September 30, 2020 and was expanded upon in 2018 with an additional $750,000 award.

In FY 21-22, upon exhaustion of JMHCP funds, Probation requested partial year funding from the CCP to continue housing and case management for mentally ill individuals on pretrial release.  In FY 22-23, CCP funding was expanded to cover the full year and combined with Health Services allocation of Measure O funds for case management.  The CCP and Measure O have continued to fund pretrial housing and case management, and the CCP has allocated funding for this program as part of FY 24-25 expenses.  Future funding will depend upon continued CCP and Measure O approval.

Request for Proposals

The Probation Department issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) announcement in August 2024, which was distributed to 714 suppliers as well as 2,200 notifications to subscribers on Purchasing’s RFP posting list.  The RFP sought proposals from organizations that could provide eight or more supportive housing beds along with case management services to individuals with mental illness on pretrial release.  Additionally, the RFP requested an array of supportive services to help individuals on pretrial release stabilize their lives, such as permanent housing assistance, enrollment in health care, and job search assistance.  Finally, the RFP required that the successful organization develop a quality assurance and outcome reporting plan to ensure high service standards and to help stakeholders determine program performance.

Sonoma County received proposals from IFSN and Committee on the Shelterless (COTS).  A panel of representatives from the Probation Department and the Department of Health Services rated the proposals using clear criteria such as qualifications and experience, staffing, program services, and cost of service. 

While both IFSN and COTS presented viable programs, the panel rated IFSN more highly based on the alignment of program services offered with the County’s needs, the ability to provide uninterrupted services, and the cost to provide services.  Additionally, the COTS proposal included community-based case management only, while IFSN offers transitional housing, case management for house occupants, as well as community-based case management.

Based on its proposal review, the panel recommends awarding supportive housing and case management services to IFSN.

Program and Scope Overview

Housing:  The program will provide an eight-bed housing facility, which has averaged 91 percent occupancy for the last 12 months, and support individuals with mental illness or co-occurring mental illness and substance abuse disorder maintain stability on pretrial release and achieve better outcomes.  Desired outcomes include participants not committing new offenses, making their court appearances, and complying with court orders, and, post-adjudication, being better prepared to live successfully in the community.  The broader goals are to enhance public safety, rehabilitate individuals in the criminal justice system, and reduce unnecessary incarceration.

Case Management:  A case manager working outside the jail will support participants during the pretrial process, including accompanying them to court.  This case manager will work closely with a case manager in the jail to ensure that information regarding participant needs is included in the planning process, and that those selected for the program benefit from a warm handoff and avoid service gaps.  Additionally, a case manager will work on site at the supportive house to help participants connect with stabilization services, obtain medication, address health issues, and other related activities.

Quality Assurance:  IFSN will collaborate with the Probation Department to develop and implement quality assurance and data collection plans to ensure high-quality program implementation and allow the Probation Department to evaluate program performance. 

Conclusion

This program intends to promote public safety, improve outcomes, and reduce costs for justice-system-involved individuals with mental illness.  Commonly, this population ineffectively-and expensively-accesses multiple community services, including police and fire first responders, hospital emergency departments, mental health crisis services, and jails.  Most treatment is short-term and non-rehabilitative, resulting in repeated cycles through these services.  By providing stable housing, intensive case management, and 24-hour monitoring, this program intends to break the cycle.

Behavioral Health Services Staffing Allocation Request to BOS on Dec 3rd

Recommended Action:

A)   Adopt a personnel resolution amending the Department Allocation List of the Department of Health Services, adding 2.0 full-time equivalent Behavioral Health Clinician positions and 1.0 full-time equivalent Senior Client Support Specialist, effective December 3, 2024.

B)   Adopt a Resolution authorizing budgetary adjustments to the fiscal year 2024-2025 adopted budget, increasing appropriations in the Department of Health Services by $468,207 to reflect revenue and expenditures associated with the requested position allocations.

 (4/5th Vote Required)

Executive Summary:

As part of our response the California Department of Health Care Services’ Corrective Action Plan, Department of Health Services (DHS) management requests the addition of 2.0 full-time equivalent (FTE) Behavioral Health Clinician position allocations for the Behavioral Health Adult Access Team (not to be confused with ACCESS – Accessing Coordinated Care and Empowering Self Sufficiency – which is a separate program of the same name located in the Homelessness Services Division). These positions will provide Behavioral Health Assessments, case-management, and referrals for clients requesting services through the Access Team.

Additionally, the Youth and Family Services section of the Behavioral Health division within DHS is requesting approval from the Board to add 1.0 FTE Senior Client Support Specialist (SCSS) to staff the mandated Child and Family Team Meetings for youth who qualify for Intensive Care Coordination and Intensive Home-Based Services. These positions will leverage Medi-Cal Federal Financial Participation and Medi-Cal Administrative Activities, with approximately 50% matching funds provided by the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA).

Discussion:

Access Team – 2.0 FTE Behavioral Health Clinicians

The Behavioral Health Adult Access Team under the Adult Services unit is the first contact for clients requesting mental health services and are responsible for providing initial assessment and case-management services for clients requesting services with Behavioral Health. Access team assessors determine the level of need for mental health services, provide assessment, linkage, and information and referral for mental health services for children, youth, and adults. Clients qualify for different levels of care based upon these assessments.

The California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) requires that the initial service appointment for new clients be offered within 10 business days of request. The current volume of requests has exceeded the existing capacity of the assessors and is resulting in timeliness issues, with some requestors waiting 6 weeks for their initial assessment. DHCS issued a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) on 4/26/23 regarding this issue during DHS’ last annual network certification; but despite adding additional 1.5 FTE of case-management coverage on the team in the Spring of 2024, the volume continues to exceed assessor capacity. DHCS issued a new CAP finding on 10/7/24, identifying timeliness to services as the leading issue.

Additionally, DHS has been approved to implement the Drug Medi-Cal Organized Delivery System (DMC-ODS) waiver starting in December. Based upon feedback from other bay-area counties, DHS anticipates an initial 50% increase in request volume that will taper off within the first quarter to an average of an ongoing 25% increase in request volume.  Currently there are 5.0 Assessor FTEs on the Access Team, and 2.0 Senior Client Support Specialist FTE (to perform case-management). Each Assessor FTE can handle 20 new Assessments per month, plus a 30-member ongoing caseload. The current volume of inquiries is 200 per month, with 75% resulting in Assessment; and is anticipated to increase to an ongoing 175-200 Assessments needed per month after DMC-ODS. As such, DHS is requesting the addition of 2.0 FTE Behavioral Health Clinicians to improve the current wait time concerns, as well as in anticipation of the ongoing increase resulting from DMC-ODS. 

This request is also responsive to the programmatic changes necessitated by the California Advancing and Innovating Medi-Cal (CalAIM) directives and the expansion of Substance Use Disorder Services through DMC-ODS.

Behavioral Health Clinicians perform duties which include, but are not limited to, the following: conduct comprehensive assessments to diagnose mental health conditions; develop treatment plans to authorize and guide specialty mental health services; provide emergency interventions in the field; provide a variety of case management and therapeutic support services to clients; may provide transportation, placement assistance, advocacy, and skills coaching for activities of daily living and other client support services; collaborate with other client-serving agencies to ensure the most supportive environment for each client; and perform related duties as required.

Youth and Family Services – 1.0 FTE Senior Client Support Specialist

Child and Family Teams (CFTs) within the Youth and Family Services section of the Behavioral Health division within DHS bring together loved ones and experts to support the child in reaching their potential and are dedicated to helping the family thrive. CFTs draw on a child’s and family’s strengths, experiences, knowledge, and network of support to create a plan for the safety, stability, and well-being of the children and family. The CFT process is intended to be inclusive of multiple formal support systems a family may need, as well as the informal, community, and natural supports that surround a family. CFTs are a required service for foster youth meeting the Katie A subclass, and for children who screen as qualifying for Intensive Care Coordination and Intensive Home-Based Services.  These children are the higher needs children serviced by our system, many of whom are involved in multiple systems such as Behavioral Health, Child Welfare, or Juvenile Probation.

DHS is currently on a 2021 Corrective Action Plan with DHCS because the division is not facilitating any Child and Family Team Meetings for youth who qualify for Intensive Care Coordination and Intensive Home-Based Services. 

These services are mandated by DHCS as part of the Mental Health Plan, and provide required and mandated Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic and Treatment services to youth. DHS has never had staff to provide this requirement. Youth and Family Services will need to provide approximately 1,600 CFTs per year. 1.0 FTE SCSS can provide approximately 350 CFTs per year. 

There are not currently any staff available to provide these required and mandated services. Adding this 1.0 FTE SCSS will bring the total SCSS allocated to Youth and Family Services to 2.0 FTE (the second FTE is an underfill using an existing position) and will enable Youth and Family Services to begin providing the required services to children, including foster youth and youth on our Full Service Partnerships; the Family Advocacy, Stabilization and Support Team; and Transitional Age Youth. These 2.0 FTE SCSS will be able to provide close to half the required CFTs. DHS is planning to request addition staff next fiscal year to address the shortfall.

Finding the Village

One of the goals of HEAPA is to research program designs dreamed up by other innovators.  So when I heard that Mackenzie Scott and Jeff Bezos had collectively given $260 million to over 4,000 affordable housing and homeless service organizations, I wondered how I could learn who they were, and why they deserved the ex-couple’s support.  MacKenzie had given $2 million recently to a local, very deserving organization I helped audit, and if the rest of the gifts were to similarly effective groups, I wanted to know more about them.

Fortunately, Mackenzie has chosen to help us learn.  The website she created (Yield Giving) contains narratives and linked databases to $17 billion she has given away to 2,300 organizations.  It provides us with her reasoning for the choices she made, and directs us to the recipients and their work.  It is a treasure well worth reading. 

Homeless America – Pepperdine University

On Tuesday, March 26, 2024 The Pepperdine School of Public Policy hosted “Homeless America: Creative and Compassionate Responses to a Cross-Sector Challenge” conference in downtown Los Angeles. Before COVID struck the United States in early 2020, California governor, Gavin Newsom, gave his annual “State of the State Address”, which was focused on addressing the burgeoning homelessness crisis in the state. As the impact of the virus has receded, the issue of homelessness has returned to center stage. A recent survey of Californians by the Public Policy Institute of California found that a full 89% of those questioned view homelessness as either a “Big Problem” or “Somewhat of a Problem”. The issue of homelessness draws so many policy domains from housing to mental health services and public safety. It’s also a true “cross sector” challenge, requiring engagement by the government, nonprofit, and business sectors. Through an afternoon of panels and keynotes, we explored how the public sector and nonprofit leaders are taking a variety of approaches to respond to this crisis. Keynote Address:

PANEL 1: The Role for Government MODERATOR

  • Rick Cole , Adjunct Faculty, PepperdineSchool of PublicPolicy and Chief Deputy Controller ,City of Los Angeles

PANELISTS

  • Kevin Faulconer, Visiting Professor of Community Leadership and Government Innovation, Pepperdine School of Public Policy
  • Elizabeth Mitchell, Partner, Umhofer, Mitchell & King, LLP
  • Brandon Young, Partner, Manatt, Phelps & Phillips

Keynote Address

PANEL 2: The Role for Nonprofits MODERATOR

  • Soledad Ursua, Board Member, Venice Neighborhood Council

PANELISTS

  • Matthew Dildine (JD ’08, MPP ’08, 04), Chief Executive Officer, Fresno Mission
  • Jim Palmer, Chief Executive Officer, TrueSight Solutions
  • Brian Ulf, Chief Executive Officer, SHARE!

CLOSING REFLECTIONS SPEAKERS:

  • Byron Johnson, Distinguished Visiting Professor of Religious Studies and the Common Good,

Pepperdine Schoolof PublicPolicy

  • Robert Marbut, Professor, Northwest Vista College
  • Pete Peterson, Dean, Braun Family Dean’s Chair, Pepperdine School of Public Policy

Behavioral Health Transformed

Proposition 1 is a two-part ballot initiative. It includes a bond to build treatment facilities and permanent supportive housing for people with mental health and addiction challenges. It also proposes changes to a longstanding tax on personal incomes over $1 million, known as the Mental Health Services Act, by requiring counties to spend 30% of that revenue on housing instead of other services.

Proposition One, passed by the voters of California last March, is changing the landscape of county behavioral health departments. For the first time, local behavioral health boards and commissions will be responsible for substance use disorder programs meeting local needs. To do so, and continue to meet the needs of those needing mental health services, counties are required to develop three-year Integrated Plans for all funding received from federal, state, and local sources.

Sonoma County’s Behavioral Health Board is implementing the new requirements, referred to as Behavioral Health Transformed, over the next six months. Initially, it is adding new members to its board and establishing a planning committee to establish a process for bringing the current plans for its funding into focus.

Here’s the actual instructions to Sonoma County from the California Department of Health Care Services, received on November 9, 2024: “The Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA) requires counties1 to submit three-year Integrated Plans for Behavioral Health Services and Outcomes (Integrated Plans (IPs)). Whereas the Three-Year Program and Expenditure Plan required under the MHSA focused exclusively on MHSA dollars, the BHSA establishes the IP to serve as a three-year prospective global spending plan that describes how counties plan to use all available behavioral health funding, including BHSA, 1991 and 2011 Realignment, federal grant programs, federal financial participation from Medi-Cal, opioid settlement funds, local funding, and other funding to meet statewide and local outcome measures, reduce disparities, and address the unmet need in their community. In accordance with the BHSA, the IP provides a description of how counties will plan expenditures across a range of behavioral health funding sources and deliver high-quality, culturally responsive, and timely care along the Behavioral Health Care Continuum for the plan period.2 

IPs require counties to conduct a thorough data-informed local service planning process and provide transparency into county planning for expending BHSA funding and all other behavioral health funding sources overseen by counties. IPs will also facilitate local and statewide data collection by providing baseline data on services and planned expenditures and supporting analysis of county goals and outcomes.”

Redesigning California’s Behavioral Health System

BOS Authorizes Payments

Oct 15th, BOS Agenda Item 8A

The Department of Health Services contracts with a network of providers to deliver behavioral health, homelessness and housing support, and other public and behavioral health wrap-around services. These services include mental health treatment, substance use recovery programs, housing assistance, and other services.

At the start of each fiscal year, the Department renews and updates provider contracts to reflect changes in service needs, funding levels, and regulatory requirements. This process can take several months for completion. ​While the FY 2024-25 contracts are in the process of development, providers have been rendering services without disruption since July 1, 2024. However, without fully executed agreements, payments have not been processed. Consequently, many of our providers are at risk experiencing financial challenges as a result of these delayed payments.

Given completion of current fiscal year agreements is expected to take an additional several months, staff is requesting authority to execute payments for properly supported providers invoices thru December 31, 2024, in advance of an executed FY 2024/25 agreement, for those providers that had fully executed agreements for similar FY 2023/24 services. The Department will utilize the terms of the FY 2023/24 agreements to current year payments, and execute a reconciliation process once current year agreements or amendments are fully executed.  The Auditor-Controller-Treasurer-Tax Collector will use the Resolution adopted with this item as authority to release payments to service providers under the terms of the executed FY 2023/24 agreements listed in Attachment 2. 

Attachment 2 to the requested Resolution includes a list of the FY 2023/24 contracts which the Department is requesting authority to utilize, for execution of FY 2024/25 payments, for services received thru December 31, 2024. 

For transparency, this approach will not resolve all financial consideration for all current year partners.  For contractors which are new to the Department and did not provide services in FY 2023/24, and for which a corresponding FY 2023/24 contract does not exist, payments in FY 2024/25 without a current year agreement will not be feasible and these are not included in the requested Resolution and Attachment 2. Department staff will prioritize the execution of contracts to these vendors immediately, should this requested action be approved.

Additionally, some providers are aware that the County does not historically pay invoices without an executed agreement. There may be providers which have not yet submitted invoices to the Department for audit review and payment processing as a result. The Department will actively communicate with all vendors listed on Attachment 2 to make them aware of the payment authority and encourage them to submit completed invoices for payment as soon as possible. Separately, item #2024-0935 on today’s agenda, is requesting the Board allow for 1/12th monthly advance payment for thirteen Medi-Cal partners to deliver Specialty Mental Health Services across the county. This model was reviewed and is endorsed by County Counsel, the Auditor-Controller-Treasurer-Tax Collector’s office, and the County Administrator’s Office.

Staff have been actively working to improve the contract development process to prevent such delays in future fiscal years. This includes implementing multi-year contract terms where appropriate and designing an internal system towards the goal of negotiating agreements which are ready for execution prior to the start of the next fiscal year. These improvements are intended to provide greater predictability for providers and ensure the uninterrupted delivery of essential services as well as payments to our community partners.

There is no new financial impact associated with this request. Payments for services will be made in accordance with the FY 2024-25 budget allocations for behavioral health, homelessness and housing support, and other public and behavioral health wrap-around services and the previous delegated authority provided by the Board for FY 2024/25 services and budget.

Sonoma County Secure Families Collaborative Funded

Executive Summary:

Consistent with California Code, Government Code – GOV § 26227 during the budget development process for fiscal year 2024-25, the Board approved Board Budget Request BOS-16, submitted jointly by Supervisors Coursey and Hopkins, which consists of a payment of $300,000 to the Secure Families Collaborative to support the Collaborative’s legal representation of undocumented people in Sonoma County.

CG 26227 allows for the county to appropriate and expend money from the general fund or to fund programs deemed by the Board of Supervisors to be necessary to meet the social needs of the population.

This item authorizes the County Administrator and/or designated staff to execute the agreement between the County and the Collaborative, and operationalizes the payment approved during budget. This action brings the total funding provided by the Board to the Collaborative since 2017-18 to approximately $1.2 million.  

Discussion:

In 2018, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors established the Sonoma County Secure Families Collaborative (the Collaborative, website: https://sonomacountysecurefamilies.org/) to meet the needs of the community due to changes in federal immigration policy and the North Bay wildfires. The Collaborative has been a registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization since 2021. The Collaborative’s partners include nonprofit and community-based organizations such as the University of San Francisco Deportation Defense Clinic in Healdsburg, the Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Santa Rosa, the Immigration Institute of the Bay Area, Sonoma Immigrant Services, North Bay Organizing Project, Queer Asylum Accompaniment (QAA) Team, and Legal Aid of Sonoma County.

The Collaborative and its partners provide legal assistance with removal defense cases, with Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), conduct referrals to wraparound social services, and assist asylum seekers with essential needs such as housing, food, and other services. The Collaborative’s client base and legal work are distinct from County departments like the Public Defender’s Office (PDO) in that the Collaborative represents clients with cases involving the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) and affirmative applications for immigration benefits with the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR). The Collaborative does not represent clients with a criminal conviction. In contrast, the Public Defender’s Office represents justice-involved individuals charged with a criminal offense and handles defensive applications that seek to prevent deportation. 

The Board has provided financial support in varying amounts and from varying sources to the Collaborative over the past seven years. In 2017, the Board approved a $100,000 donation per year for 3 years to the Collaborative using Graton Tribal Mitigation Funds. In 2020-21, the Board provided a payment of $100,000 to the Collaborative using non-guaranteed Graton Tribal Mitigation Funds. Beginning in 2022-23 and again in 2023-24, the Board approved payments of $200,000 per year using one-time General Fund balance.

For 2024-25, the Board authorized a payment of $300,000 to the Collaborative, again drawing on one-time General Fund balance. The $300,000 payment authorized for 24-25 will cover the cost of a .75 FTE Removal Defense Attorney with the University of San Francisco Deportation Defense Clinic, a .75 FTE Sonoma Immigrant Services Removal Defense Attorney, and a .75 FTE Secure Families Collaborative Executive Director (see attached funding breakdown documentation). Each removal defense attorney carries an open caseload of at least 30 cases per year. Removal defense cases are a complex area of law that can take up to 7 years to resolve, and the Collaborative has a waitlist of approximately 100 cases as of September 2024.

The Collaborative plans to return to the Board during the 25-26 budget process and in the out years with additional requests for continued support of these personnel.  In addition to Board support, for 2024-25, the Collaborative will receive approximately $125,000 in grant funds in partnership with the Economic Development Collaborative as part of the California Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development Local Immigration Integration and Inclusion Grant. The Collaborative sources the remainder of its funding from a combination of state funds, grants and donors.

Advances Approved from County

October 15th board of Supervisors Agenda. Contracting Updates Related to Medi-Cal Payment Reform 2024-0935 A) Accept staff recommendation of a 1/12th monthly advance with monthly service review, quarterly performance evaluation and year-end reconciliation for Medi-Cal providers of Specialty Mental Health Services and Drug Medi-Cal Services included in CalAIM Payment Reform contracting with the Department of Health Services. B) Delegate authority to the Director of Health Services, or designee, to amend current contracts with the current thirteen (13) Behavioral Health Medi-Cal providers to implement advanced payment procedures beginning with the month of January 2025, subject to review and approval by County Counsel. There will be no change to the contract maximums or term of the agreements. Department or Agency Name(s): Health Services

Breaking Down Silos

Sonoma County Board of Supervisors

Chair Rabbitt, and other members of the Board,

I’m here today to seek clarification from you and County Counsel on a procedure I intend to utilize to facilitate more comprehensive communication on  advisory boards.   The Brown Act prohibits private conversations among members of local legislative bodies.   The result of which is that the only time any of us appointees ever get to share our advice with each other is in an open meeting on a topic placed on the agenda which is published prior to the meeting. Collective thinking and discussion on our boards on issues not ready for approval hardly ever happens.

But I think I’ve found a workaround.  I’ve read the rules governing emailed communications distributed with agendas.  Most indicate that emails received at least five days prior to the meeting will be distributed to all board members and the public.  Utilizing this procedure, my understanding is that such an email from me to the boards on which I sit will not violate the Brown Act’s prohibitions.

Additionally, at least one of your advisory boards has taken to place on their agenda an item they have called “Board Member Questions and Comments”, at which time the Board could discuss emailed comments provided with the agenda.

Thus, open discussion on any topic within the scope of responsibility of the Board, described in an email circulated with the agenda, and not currently ready for final action, can be addressed.

Unless I am told that such a procedure is a violation of the Brown Act, I am going to promote it’s use to generate collaborative planning, both within and across advisory boards.  It’s time we find ways to open up effective transparent productive, silo-breaking, conversations.Gregory Fearon