The County of Santa Clara
California

Board Referral
100282
Approved as Amended
Feb 11, 2020 9:30 AM

Approve referral to Administration to report to the Board with options for consideration relating to the continuation of the countywide Student Work Study Program with Cristo Rey San Jose within 30 days. (Cortese)

Information

Department:Supervisor Dave Cortese (Supervisorial District Three)Sponsors:
Category:Board Referral

Body

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS

The financial implications are currently unknown at this point.

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION

Cristo Rey San Jose (Cristo Rey) is a high school that serves grades 9 - 12, located in San José, California in Santa Clara County. Cristo Rey offers a Corporate Work Study Program (CWSP) that gives students access to professional mentors - builds their social capital, builds their on-the-job skills, grows confidence and executive functioning skills, and exposes them to career/education pathways that the average teenager would have no knowledge of.

Since 2016, the County of Santa Clara has been contracted with Cristo Rey to provide students workers for a Countywide pilot work-study program. The term of agreement for the existing contract with Cristo Rey is scheduled to come to an end on September 30, 2020. My office has met with County staff regarding the continuation of the pilot work-study program.

Cristo Rey has expressed interest in continuing to partner with the County commit to placements for 28 students each year for the next three school years (approximately Nov. 2020 - Oct. 2023 (36 months)). This would equate to 7 work teams of four students each at a total cost of $250,000 per year, or $9,000 per student placement each year.

I am asking County staff to conduct negotiations with Cristo Rey for a new service agreement that continues the existing pilot work-study program and report back to the board within 30 days.

BACKGROUND

On September 27, 2016, the Board of Supervisors approved an Agreement with the Cristo Rey San Jose Work-Study Corporation for the provision of student workers for a countywide pilot work-study program. A single source exception to competitive procurement was approved by the Office of Countywide Contracting Management pursuant to Board of Supervisors Policy 5.6.5.1(D)(2)(a).

On June 6, 2017, the Board of Supervisors approved an Amendment with the Cristo Rey San Jose Work-Study Corporation to extend the terms of the agreement for an additional 4-month period. The extension of the service agreement provided the needed extra time for the Cristo Rey San Jose Work Study student workers to complete the agreed-upon scope of services to the County departments they had been placed in. There was no increase to the maximum financial obligation.

In the 2016-17 academic year, 375 Cristo Rey students participated in Cristo Rey CWSP, including 20 students who participated in Santa Clara County’s Work Study pilot program, approved by the County Board of Supervisors. In October 2017-18, the County Board of Supervisors approved an RFP to provide placements for Cristo Rey Student Workers for three years, ending May 2020. During this 33 month partnership, the County has hosted 72 unique student placements in 14 departments, supporting path-changing career readiness work and student college matriculation. For the 20-21 school year, Cristo Rey anticipates a full enrollment with 480 students participating in the CWSP. During the 19-20 school year, the County was the largest CWSP Partner hosting 26 students.

Prior service agreements that the County has agreed with Cristo Rey has been in the amount of $580,000 for a 3-4 year period.

The following County departments have hosted students at some point during the past three years of funding: 

              Assessor’s Office

              District Attorney’s Office

              Office of Supervisor Dave Cortese

              Finance Agency

              Alternate Defender’s Office

              Public Defender’s Office

              Equity & Social Justice

              Valley Medical Center - Volunteer Services

              Valley Medical Center - EMS

              Valley Medical Center - Education Services

              Valley Medical Center - Graduate Medical Staff Office

              Valley Medical Center - Nursing Administration

              Valley Medical Center - Health Administration

              Valley Medical Center - Ambulatory Care

 

Meeting History

Feb 11, 2020 9:30 AM Video Board of Supervisors Regular Meeting

President Chavez recused herself from the item due to her goddaughter's recent application to Cristo Rey San Jose, and left the room at 1:57 p.m.

Eleven individuals addressed the Board, and one individual submitted written comments for the record.

Approved as amended to direct Administration to report to the Board with options for consideration relating to the continuation of County-wide student work study programs for eligible students from participating schools in Santa Clara County, including, but not limited to, Cristo Rey San Jose, within 30 days.

RESULT:APPROVED AS AMENDED [4 TO 0]
MOVER:Dave Cortese, Supervisor
SECONDER:Susan Ellenberg, Supervisor
AYES:Mike Wasserman, Dave Cortese, Susan Ellenberg, S. Joseph Simitian

Transcript

Feb 11, 2020 9:30 AMVideo (Windows Media) MP4 VideoBoard of SupervisorsRegular Meeting

 
1:55 PMHer. Never did we think for her to bein a setting like she is now. As a parent, i'm very proud of her and very thankful that thecorporate work study program hasalliance with the county. You are change young adult lives and moving them to a differentdirection that their parentsprobably could not do.

1:57 PMOpportunity for the students todo what she's doing. It's to have access to publicservant to understanding of government, to know how policyworks, to know how theassessor's office work and howit works. What better way to lift ourcounty than to have countystudents go to school at a rateof 85%, come back and have an interest what we do to raise ushere. It's a lifelong journey. Without that access, I wouldn't be standing before you todaywithout that access. I wouldn't be promoting that toour families. It's really crucial that weunderstand the separations andwe understand those realities. We can't raise our communities from the outside and we have toraise them from the inside.thank you for your time.
Students have assisted in maintaining our institutionalexemption files, not only is itvalue add in the production workwe do, the students provided opportunities for workers likemyself to mentor thesetremendously bright young peoplefor me, I get to work with them. They are usually the best partof my work day and brightestpart coming to work. It gives me hope that the future is bright.
1:59 PMThey get to work with you.>> good afternoon i'm kaytanner. I also have the opportunity tosometimes pick up these kidsfrom work. I drive sometimes. I love doing that because I canhear about their work days andsometimes not necessarily to mebut to themselves and what they do. These are not only about my ownkids but about otherconversations I hear about the other kids. I really appreciate the workstudy program. I see how these youth grow. They grow in ways they are notable to do in school. As freshman, they start out verynervous. Through this program exposed toa variety of people. They learn time management andtake pride they have accomplished they need to domore that day. Sometimes they're happy they'vebeen able to prep for the next worker or for their next workday. Because of these experiences,they're able to -- now that I have a college student, they'reable to go on to college andhave a little better chance ofsucceeding in college. They know the skills they haveacquired and they're able tobuild upon that. I ask my son what he enjoyed. He said I have a resume ready. I can go on and build upon it. There's so much more to say butnot enough time. Thank you for consideringhelping this program.thank you.
2:01 PMThat close public portion on this.supervisor cortese, do you haveadditional comments?
I made a motion, thank you.
Supervisor ellenberg.i ask a question of countycounsel.as I said before, the county is the third largest employer insanta clara county. It's such I believe that it'sour responsibility to invest in our local talent pipeline byproviding work-base learningopportunities. I've been impressed with cristo rey around the needs of lowincome students. One of those needs many of thespeakers acknowledged is a network. More than 50% of jobs come fromnetwork connections. Low income students often suffer from that social capital gap. As our traditional publicschools begin to expand, theirinvestments in career technical education, I would love to seeour county expand the work-baselearning opportunities that weoffer to all students that make up our local talent pipeline. I want to address supervisorsimitian's comment about thechurch-state. Then turn to county counsel. It's something that I thinkabout often and from myperspective, I don't think in general we do separate. There's plenty of precedent. I'll note couple of them. One is very often when we have invocation, they lead withprayer. That's an interesting piece thati grapple with too and wonder why we do begin with prayers. We also have precedent ofsupporting organizations thathave religious affiliations, catholic charities. We know it's religious-based. Beautiful day program that wementioned this morning is connected with a church. What I do believe, contrary tofeeling excluded, when ourfaith-based communities reach out to serve withoutdistinction, I did check thismorning just to reconfirm formyself that you don't have to be part of a particular religion toattend cristo rey. We should be embracing thoseopportunities for partnership. I don't think it's supporting aparticular religion when theaccess is universal. Last point that I want to make before I turn for an answer onmy religious separation comment,this really is a unique modeland I know that in another circumstance, the city of sanjose experienced push back foroffering a similar opportunityto students at cristo rey and san jose unified high schooldistrict, wanted to have accessto that sort of similar program. When I worked at the svo, we engaged with those schooldistricts to offer internshipprograms and job shadowprograms. The difference was, why I thinkcristo rey has applied for thisprogram and other schools don'thave the infrastructure ready is that the whole model here is thework study where kids areexpected to go out and work oneday a week and in the most of the traditional public schoolsin our community, they're notset up that way. We're not really -- there aren't schools in the position ready totake it. It's something that I think thatwe should look at in the future as schools do build out. This is our talent pipeline. If you're educating kids that goto college and want to come back and work at the county, we wouldlike to have them please. What can you tell me about the2015 memo and constitutional concerns?
2:07 PMWe'd be happy to provideupdated advice to the boardthrough an updated memo. this is an area of law that'sevolving. There are actually pending u. S. Supreme court case about aid to religious schools specifically. We can provide an update. We were able to work through aprocess obviously for the last iteration of this. Because it's something a programthat the county do support. We can provide an updated analysis.we wouldn't provide thatanalysis in public setting.
I look forward to that.
Supervisor simitian.>> could staff clarify whetheror not the funds that are paidfrom the county go directly to the work study program andschool for tuition payments? The alternative going to thestudent/parents or families that are participating in the programdirectly.
2:08 PMDr. Smith.>> good afternoon. we receive invoices from cristorey specifically and we pay themdirectly. They in turn pay the students.
Do they or does that money godirectly to offset tuitioncosts?>> yes, sir, that's correct. to offset the tuition cost.
That's a very significantclarification don't you think?>> yes, sir, it is. I stand corrected.thank you.
2:09 PMWell, let me be clear aboutthis again for the folks here from cristo rey. I'm not opposed to finding wayto make this work. I have previously abstained because I don't think our boardand our county have gotten to aplace that is constitutionallysupportable under both the california constitution and thecalifornia constitution whichhas different provisions. I have abstained I say that it folks at cristo rey so theyunderstand where i'm comingfrom. Be assured, my colleagues will attest if i'm opposed tosomething, i'm not reluctant tocast a no vote. I have abstained because of my concerns about the way theseissues have been addressed or inmy view, not addressed. Cristo rey is according to the network, this is information,cristo rey network, informationthat was provided to us fiveyears ago, "explicitly catholic in mission and enjoys churchapproval. "if we go to the website today,under campus ministry, it mentions major part of thedevelopment at cristo rey jesuithigh school occurs through thecampus ministry program. They seek to nurture and developspiritual lives of all studentsthrough retreats, monthly prayerservices, masses, morning prayers and other formationalactivity. Our community reflects jesuscare and concern for all people and so on and so forth. Later in the religious studies,students are given uniqueopportunity to respond to the teachings of jesus christ andthe gospel message throughshared inquiry, self-reflectionand prayer experiences and build right relationships with god. Under prayer and worship, dailymorning prayer, monthly prayerservices all school and class masses, so on and so forth. Let me also be clear with thefolks at cristo rey. Those are worthy goals in my view. The question is not whether theyare worthy goals, the questionis what can we lawfully and appropriately andconstitutionally fund. The county counsel is anxiousand worried that I might read from the March 26, 2015 opinion. What I will do is read fromsection 5 of the californiaconstitution article 16. Which is pretty direct. Neither the legislature nor anycounty, city and county,township, school district or other municipal corporationshall ever make an appropriationor pay from any public fundwhatever or grant anything to or in aid of any religious sect,church, creed or sectarianpurpose or help to support orsustain any school, college, university, hospital or otherinstitution controlled by anyreligious creed, church orsectarian denomination whatever. So on and so forth. Maybe the californiaconstitution has been recentlyamended. I'm not aware of that. If it has, then that would behelpful and importantinformation. As the counsel comes back, myhope and expectation is that allthese issues will be addressedin a legal memo and the reason I felt compelled, supervisorellenberg, to abstain previouslyis precisely, one of the issueshave been addressed which was that prior opportunities weremade available through an r. F. P. Process. Which cristo rey participated in very successfully and wasawarded. That was a good thing. The problem that was not addressed in my view was thatthe payments, went to the schoolfor the payment of tuition. Which I believe raises serious constitutional questions bothunder the california codes thati referenced as well as thethree prong that the u. S. Supreme court which says weought not to foster excessivegovernmental entanglement withreligion. Once we start paying with publicfunds, the tuition for religiousinstruction, I think that'sexcessiving entanglement. There is another way around it,i mean respecting theconstitutional imperatives. The way around it, would be inconvenient for cristo rey. I understand it. The way around it would perhapsto be pay the students and their families directly and then leaveit to cristo rey to charge thetuition that they charge andcollect the funds from those students and their families. I'm not going to second guesswhether that would meet thestandard today. What i'm go ask, as part of yourmission, as part of yourmessage, which I think islaudable in every description i've heard, don't want to tellthese young people as we go theright thing, we have to do itright the way. I know that's consistent withyour values as an institution. I hope it can be consistent withthe way we do our business here at the county. My question for supervisorcortese is, could we in today'sreferral rather than simply ask for continuation of the countywide -- with options forconsideration relating to thecontinuation of the countywide study, cristo rey san josewithin 30 days. Amend the request to be optionsfor consideration relating to the continuation of countywidestudent work study programs oreligible students fromparticipating schools here in santa clara county, includingbut not limited to, cristo rey,san jose within 30 days. If so, I can support the motion because it is simply a requestfor a report back. If not, I would abstain for thereasons that I described.
2:16 PMI have no problem with theadditional language on therecommendation as you stated it.i do have a sharp difference of opinion as to whether this is asubsidy of the school or bargainfor consideration. I think that there's a huge distinction there as wellsupervisor simitian. When somebody does work and wepay for that work irrespective who they designate payee it'sone for one in terms of bargainfor exchange, there's to subsidyof religious institution. This is not a voucher. I oppose school vouchers. I have all my political career. It's not what this is. There's better ways to structureit you among others have abetter way to do that. I think that's great. I agree with some of whatidentified thoughts of mine iidentified with supervisorellenberg. I don't want to misstateanything she said or what yousaid, we do contracts with santaclara university with a law clinic in order to getordinances written to augmentour legal department here thatresulted in things like pay equity ordinances or whatever. I don't consider those to besubsidies of jesuit school. I consider those to be bargain for exchange. We pay a dollar, we get a dollarback in terms of services. Contract for services, I think structure propers, it'sfundamentally not a subsidy. It's not an entanglement. Difference of opinion. I'm not the lawyer for thecounty. Supervisor ellenberg isn't, youaren't. None of us are. I'm also eager to see if there'sbeen a change to the law or ifcounty counsel wants to admonishes it differently. That's the way i'm going intothis at this point. I'm happy top change that language as you suggested. I think more importantly, is toget the referral move forward toget some clarity what we can and cannot do and how much it'sgoing to cost if we do it. That's what i'm trying to getdone today.
2:18 PMWith that understanding,mr. chairman, I will be an ayevote.i would encourage all of my colleagues who are voting onthis to take a look at themarch 26, 2015 memo, even inadvance of the memo that we expect to get from countycounsel prior to our nextmeeting on this subject.
2:19 PMThank you, I appreciate that. supervisor ellenberg, you'refine what you heard?thank you very much. I know everyone voted. If you can bring it up on thescreen shows supervisor chavezaway as she had to recuse fromthis item. Will pass 4-0. The referral goes forward. Thank you. Supervisor chavez, come on back.
Mr. Chairman, I do want totake the opportunity to say thatthe folks out cristo rey, thankyou for the good work you do. I mean that from the deepestplace I can convey it. Please do not for a momentmisunderstand my concerns about the issues that I have raisedwith anything other than respectfor the work you do.
Thank you everyone. we're going to move ton it up18. This is student universal mealsprogram. I will turn to supervisorellenberg.
2:20 PMSanta clara county has ahistory of leading to meet the needs of children most notablywith the healthy kids insurancecoverage which has beenincorporated by the state into expanded medi-cal forundocumented kids. Supervisor chavez, I recall youhad an instrumental role in that. I admire and appreciate theleadership of my boardcolleagues on issues of equity and access and i'm excite tocontinue that focus for childrenand families including throughthis referral. I want to thank supervisorssimitian for joining me in thisreferral and for the great workthat he has done over many years and addressing food insecurityincluding in partnership withschools in your district. This referral represents an important opportunity to addresschildhood hunger which wasidentified one of the keychallenges in the child health assessment champion bysupervisor cortese. States and d. C. Have providedfunding to schools to shift to universal meal models inrecognition that the federalschool meal reimbursement isinsufficient to cover the cost for schools and making sure thatkids are fed and ready to learnhas substantial health andacademic benefits. This referral seeks to bringthat model as a pilot program. We will be the first county inthe state. Santa clara county has acritical need for this type ofsupport particularly given thehigh cost of living impacting school budgets and family foodinsecurity for our residents. It is my hope thatadministration can partner with schools and hunger advocates toestablish a robust,well-evaluated and replicablepilot in our community. Addressing childhood hunger iscritical to supporting healthychildren growth and developmentachieving goals and stabilizing families across our communityand i'm pleased to ask for yoursupport in this referral today.
2:23 PMWe have a motion up on the board.we have couple of speakers.supervisor wasserman.
I will invite up tracy and doctor.
I'm vice president ofstrategy and advocacy.i got to say, we are just thrilled to be partnering withsupervisor ellenberg's officeand supervisor simitian's officeto bring this referral forward. We live the food insecurity inour community everyday. As supervisor chavez pointed outin her state of the county, we have the greatest incomeinequality of any county in thestate. We see that and there's so much need in the midst of so muchplenty. One in three children are atrisk of food insecurity in our communities. We think that the school mealsare the most crucial tools tomake sure the kids are ready to learn and thrive. We have federal meal program tomake sure all kids can eat atschool all the time. Breakfast and lunch. They are once again kind ofslightly out of reach for lot ofour schools. They May qualify but there's abig gap between what it takes toparticipate and what it takes tofeed the kids. This is a really groundbreakingpilot here in california. It's being tested couple ofother places in the country. But we are on the vanguard andwe especially see that in ourschools, people are becomingmore afraid to apply for free and reduced priced meals. They are fewer who can qualify,given minimal wages and there'sno variation of cost of living. We want to build communities. We really want to thank you fortaking on this groundbreakingeffort to try to feed our communities and make sure thatour children are ready to learnand ready to thrive. Thank you so much.
2:25 PMGood afternoon presidentchavez.i'm county superintendent ofschools. I first want to thank you forall of the partnerships andcollaborations that we havetogether. I think they're makingincredible impact for childrenand families in our county. I know there's more to do everything all at once. The intersection between healthand education is undeniable. Families in santa clara county are facing real challengesrelated to housing, child careand food insecurity. Food insecurity is top of mind for many families. The lack of consistent access toinadequate amount of nutritiousfood has harmful, educational and health consequences. That's why school meals are suchan impactful educationalsupport. They improve behavior ability tofocus and academic performance. School meals are an importantsource of nutrition, they prevent hunger and hungerrelated illnesses such asheadaches, tiredness and nausea. Students are less likely to be tired. They retain more information,have better attendance and aremore likely to develop normally. That's why i'm grateful for thisopportunity to offer my supportfor the referral to establishthis pilot program. I'm deeply committed to thiscollaborative and appreciate theinvestment of the county toassist our schools in combating school insecurity on the frontlines. Thousands of children willbenefit. By filling in this funding gaps,schools will be able to takeadvantage of existing federalprograms. Further, I affirm our commitmentto provide the annual datamatching and partnership withschool districts and ssa for direct certification of studentsrelative to the universal peopleeligibility and we will providetechnical assistance to help districts shift to the universalmeal models.
2:27 PMThank you very much.we don't have any other speakers on this item. Ly go -- I will go to supervisorwasserman and then supervisorsimitian.
2:28 PMTwo questions that I have isdata matching.this is referral, I will seewhat comes back. seeing about any type ofmatching funds from if not theschool districts or the state orthe feds or anything else. I've been on constant soap box,we picked lot more of thehousing. I'm always trying to look for ways for others to help thecounty do what its mission is asmuch as I applaud our helpingothers do what their mission is and in this particular instance,i'm hoping by the county if wego forward in the direction thatwe are, to help provide meals for individuals, breakfast andlunches through the schools and60 cents per meal is a greatrate. I'm just hoping whatever dollarswe put out there we can look atoptions to match that. Whether it's from the districts, the state, the federalgovernment, high-tech companies,whatever it May be. Each time the county puts dollars towards anotherorganization's efforts. We don't have enough to doeverything that we want to do as much as I love schools. That's number one. Number two on the bottom of thesecond page of the referral, it talked about the $2 millionassuming 50% participation. Just as the last example wefinished with cristo rey goes, we're supporting one school,what if other schools comeforward, whether or not they areready at this time to do so, etcetera. The $2 million in the referralhere, assumes 50% participation. I need to know what happens if the other schools come forward. How that is addressed and wherethe funding would be and ideaslike that. How decisions are made and howpriorities are given. Such as we give out grantfunding for all exclusive parks. Thank you.
2:30 PMI'm happy to address bothquestions.i appreciate the soap box. I have several of my own. The first question aboutmatching funds. I think that's a great point what we're doing right now istrying to help bridge a gap. Some school have taken this onthemselves individually. Many don't have the resourcesright now to be able to fundthat gap and make the leap touniversal meals. Part of the reason that they --they won't have it because theydon't have enough funds ingeneral. Part of the reason that they arereluctant to try to prioritizethat is worrying about how thiswill work, will students sign up for it, will this be aworthwhile expenditure on theirpart. There's a lot that would go into putting this in motion and inorder to have it ready for nextschool year, which is my goal. We do need to keep moving forward. Your second question about whatif more participate. Yes, that would be a great problem to have and we haven'tasked for enough money to cover100% of the districts based onconversations we're not certain that it would be that highinitially. Part of what we're askingadministration to come back with is help in designing what anapplication system would likelike, how we would prioritizedistricts. Is it particular zip codes, isit within the schools and let mebe clear, not every school inthe county qualifies for this in order to qualify for thisfunding for this universal mealsoption, they have to alreadyhave over 70% of student have to qualify for free or reducedprice meals. We're not looking at schools andschool districts that are largely generously funded anddon't have this need.
2:33 PMCould I add one more point inresponse to the question? there's so much here to process. I think the answer to the secondpart or the second questionmr. wasserman raised is that page 3 of 5 in the referralpacket page 486, there's aspecific reference to theprocess by which participant application that prioritizes. It indicates what theprioritization process will beif we get to that unlikely but delightful outcome of havingmore interest in there. There's a process that isreferenced in the referral.
2:35 PMLast sentence says assumes50% of eligible campuses.it's dealing with theeligibility. I was just reading what I readhere and asking about that. I also applaud your optimismabout any program we funded for several years and we've cut themoff. Not sure if I can readily recallan instance of that happening. I'm sure it does happen once ina while. It tends to be the things startout, for instance for inventory item. We put it in our general fund. It becomes the norm, more sothan the other. The reason I brought this up wasthe 50% concern, theprioritizing, also the matchingfunds from other organizations, also as i've been learning aboutthis, to help provide the food,there was a dollar amountprovided per meal that exceeded the cost of the meal. There was sometimes deltabetween the cost of the meal andthe funding and sometimes schools counted on thatdifference to use for fundingfor other programs. Didn't want to get way into the weeds of the referral. I'm supporting it for thatreason. I wanted to express the concerns I had so when administrationbrings back how we can do thisor the problems with this, howwe can and how we can't issues, etcetera, they got myperspective and concerns as wellat this time.
2:37 PMAny other comments. supervisor simitian.
I know I should take yes foran answer.i want to move this forward with as much wind behind as possible. I thank you to my colleagues,supervisor ellenberg forengaging me as a co-sponsor on the item. Supervisor ellenberg madereference to efforts in mydistrict. We have a food truck there incooperation with one of my localdistricts. Someone decided to name it, it's called food for thought. Which I thought was clever. I wanted to underscore here interms of the experience that our districts are having. To me, this is the place where ihope to give my colleagueslittle more comfort, one of the things, we're leaving federalfunds on the table. We're leaving money that otherstates are accessing, untacked because as well the memoindicates, around the country,probably half the schools thatare eligible find a way to take advantage of this universalapproach, here in california,it's only 15% of the schoolsthat are eligible to find a way. Makes california the 47th outof 50 states, third lowest inthe country in terms of the takeup rate. Which means that probably anygiven lunchtime, probably thirdof the kids are eligible aren'tgetting the lunch their eligible for. At breakfast, two thirds are notgetting the breakfast they areeligible for. There's an expenditure. I want to make hure that thatreturn on investment isunderstood to be genuinely financial in term of our abilityto move more federal dollarsinto our system. Kith aren't participate -- kids aren't participating because offear and stigma and bureaucracy. When they do participate, theirattendance will go up. Their behavior will be betterand they're going to be learningmore and that is a great returnon investment by anybody's measure. Thank you again to my colleague,supervisor ellenberg for takingthe initiative on this and for being gracious enough to includeme in the effort. I'm looking forward to actuallymaking this real in the future.

2:40 PMTalking about our society ingeneral.>> it's society, state, federal,etcetera. what's happening here is thecounty is doing what it can tomake things better. Those percentages of kids going without are atrocious.us being 46th or 47th inanything is not good.
Everybody has voted. to the staff who's working onthis body of work for thecounty, I will do this throughdr. smith, I think one of the other great opportunities for usis to learn more about the fuelfood systems in the schools. That's going to be helpful to us.







Powered by Granicus