Good morning. I'm Dan Rondi. I hold the Shrier Chair here at CSIS. We're meeting today to talk about U.S. leadership and global food security, and Senator Casey will be making an address about this very important topic. I want to welcome Senator Casey to CSIS. Current farm productivity is not keeping pace with population growth, increased urbanization, and changing dietary preferences. And we're going to need major improvements in agricultural productivity, the adoption of improved seeds, and greater private sector investments in agriculture. And that's going to imply improved property rights, governance, and infrastructure, so that we can feed the world. Trade systems and international agreements matter as much as the science and technology behind food production. And even with improvements in fertilizer, farming methods, and seed technology, the right trade policies and regulations must be in place to allow food to get to where it's needed. This event also is a kickoff event for the new director of CSIS's Global Food Security Project, Kimberly Flowers. Welcome, Kimberly. And Kimberly is going to be building off of the important work started by Joanne and Nesseth and a number of other colleagues who started the Global Food Security Project more than five years ago. Kimberly comes with more than 15 years of experience in international development, food security, and strategic communications experience, including nearly eight years living in developing countries. Most recently, Kimberly was the communications director for FinTrack, a leading international development company that specializes in agriculture. She has had important experience at USAID, or among other roles, she led strategic communications for Feed the Future, the U.S. Government's Global Hunger and Nutrition Initiative, and was a public affairs officer for USAID Haiti following the earthquake in 2010. She's also served at USAID in Ethiopia and in Jamaica. She's also a former two-time Peace Corps volunteer, once in Bulgaria and once as well in Jamaica. Without any further ado, I'm going to turn the floor over to our new Global Food Security Project director, Kimberly. Good morning. Thank you, Dan, for that kind of introduction and for all your work here on critical development issues. I'm really humbled and honored to be in this position, particularly at such a prestigious place like CSIS, and to work on a topic that's incredibly important to me and something I'm very passionate about. I can tell by the large, diverse crowd that's actually here at 8.30 in the morning that I'm not alone. There are other people who actually care about global food security. I think it was probably my years in Ethiopia when I really started to see how U.S. development assistance programs can change lives of people, of communities, of regions. And when I was there, the United States invested about $5 million in agricultural development and about $500 million in food aid. And this was in a country that their economy is based on agriculture, and 85% of the population works in agriculture. Now, that was about a decade ago, and there's been some dramatic changes that have happened since then, both in the U.S. leadership as well as global leadership on food security. But I believe that we can do a lot better. I believe that we can eradicate hunger and extreme poverty in my lifetime, and I believe that we have to do this through a number of tools, but that includes a comprehensive, strategic for an assistance approach that includes inclusive, sustainable agricultural growth and improves nutrition. First, I want to thank Senator Casey for being here today to talk to us about global food security. And I want to start the discussion by defining the subject. I find a lot of people are not quite sure what we're talking about when we talk about food security. So there's really four dimensions. You can talk about availability, access, utilization, and stability. But in other words, food security is about having the physical access to and the economic ability to purchase healthy, nutritious food. And right now, as many of you in this room probably know, there are 108, I said that wrong, 805 million people in this world who are hungry, who are not food secure. So when we talk about food insecurity, we're talking about hunger and extreme poverty. And hunger and extreme poverty have long-reaching effects, both on vulnerable children, families, communities, but also has long-reaching effects on economic growth and trade and political stability. So food security is directly linked to global stability and economic prosperity. So addressing hunger and malnutrition is also a moral issue. It's a nutrition issue, it's a security issue, and it's an economic issue. But I believe that it's a problem with solutions. Those solutions include increasing agricultural productivity for smallholder farmers in developing countries, especially women, and includes engaging the private sector all across the value chain from farm to fork, and includes increasing research and development for innovative solutions. So the renewed CSIS Global Food Security Project aims to spark a new dialogue through sound research, bipartisan analysis, and clear recommendations. We're going to be examining the effectiveness of U.S. foreign assistance programs to clarify progress, identify roadblocks, and recommend next steps. We plan to take U.S. leaders, I hope to convince Senator Casey to come with me, to feed the future focused countries where we can see what's working and what's not. We will collaborate with leading thinkers and bring together new voices to explore and highlight global food security efforts that are effective and sustainable. We're really fortunate to kick off the Global Food Security Project with Senator Casey. Senator Casey's top priorities include fostering economic growth, advocating for the well-being of children, and pursuing a national security strategy that protects our interest. So it's a natural fit for him to be a champion for global food security. In particular, his work to support nutrition assistance programs for Pennsylvania families demonstrates that he understands the critical need for children to eat a balanced, healthy diet. Senator Casey was elected in 2006 as Pennsylvania Senator and re-elected in 2012. He's received more total votes than any U.S. Senator candidate in Pennsylvania history. He currently serves on five Senate committees, including as a member of the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry. What I find most impressive though about Senator Casey is his commitment for years to give out hunger across the globe and improving nutrition and developing nations. In 2008, he co-chaired a CSIS task force on global food security along with Senator Luger. That task force also issued a report on the then global food crisis and called for the United States to provide stronger leadership. And currently, including this week, he's now a sponsor for the Global Food Security Act of 2015, which I'm sure he'll tell you a bit more about. Senator Casey? Well, good morning. Kimberly, thank you very much for getting us started. And best of luck on your work here. So we're grateful that you've dedicated so much of your life to this topic and this challenge, food insecurity. And I'm humbled to be in the presence of so many people here who have, if I can use an old expression, labored in the vineyards for a long time. So I want to thank you, Kimberly and Dan and Mr. Ambassador, for all of your commitment on these issues and so many others. And I also appreciate this invitation from CSIS to speak here today, because I believe global food security is not just another issue that we consider in Washington. It's an issue of great urgency. And I think it's an issue of great consequence for our country and for the world. I've been working on it for years in the Senate, and I'll continue to work until we get the Global Food Security Act passed, and then we'll probably have more work to do after that, of course. But I speak about this challenge with a measure of humility. So many people in this audience have done so much work over many years.  And if you're new to the issue, we're grateful that you're with us this morning. But I don't come here to impart all wisdom and knowledge on the subject, and I don't believe that I'm omniscient. There may be some in the room who are, but I'm not one of them. So I do approach it with a measure of humility. But we're grateful for your interest and your dedication, because I believe, just as the Beatitudes tell us, that blessed are they who hunger and thirst for justice, for they shall be satisfied. And in the work that we're all trying to do together, we're literally concerned about people who are hunger and thirsting for life itself. We have to do everything we can to make sure that we're hungering and thirsting for justice, because I believe this is a matter of basic justice. You can't say that about every issue that confronts us here in Washington. There are a lot of important issues, but few are as urgent as this. I believe the United States is in a unique position to lead the international community in making a strong and sustained commitment to improving food security and nutritional outcomes for the developing world. Agriculture has always been a key part of the American economy. I know that as a Pennsylvanian, where most of our economy has bases in agriculture for a good part of the 1800s and even beyond, and still is in our State the number one industry, we have across the country some of the most entrepreneurial agricultural producers, academic and research institutions that are, if I can say, the envy of the world in so many ways. But these academic and research institutions are creating innovative technologies. And then, thirdly, we have aid implementing organizations that are leading the way in adapting assistance programs to target communities. The United States can and should lead in at least three key ways. First, we should continue to increase investment that the United States is making in agricultural development through the Feed the Future initiative. The remarkable investment that U.S. taxpayers have made, especially over the last five years through Feed the Future, is beginning to yield results, but some adjustments to the way the U.S. delivers this assistance may be necessary. Second, we should look for new and expanded opportunities to leverage the particular strengths of different stakeholders, which include aid organizations, private voluntary and faith-based organizations, academic institutions, of course, civil society representatives, private sector businesses, and many U.S. government agencies that participate in the Feed the Future program. And third and final, the Congress of the United States needs to step up to give authorization, legislative authorization, to U.S. food assistance and international agricultural development programs while strengthening the mechanisms to ensure U.S. taxpayer dollars are being used effectively. This will ensure that these life-saving programs carry on for many more years. Many of you know, as Kimberly referred to and others will refer to today, that the Feed the Future initiative didn't just develop the last couple of years. It was actually born during the Bush Administration in response to the food price spikes of 2008. For many, 2008 was a wake-up call about how dependent developing countries can be on agriculture and how vulnerable they are to price shocks. A 2011 World Bank study estimated the food price shocks alone sent 44 million individuals into poverty, 44 million. I'm not sure, in the last couple of days, I had a sense of that. So I decided to add up the populations of New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. And it's less than 44 million people. It's about 41 or a little more than that. So just imagine that each and every person living in those three states was in poverty because of an economic event in a rather short timeframe. It's staggering not to mention the number, Kimberly, that you mentioned, about the number of people in the world who are indeed food insecure. So this food insecurity at that time triggered instability of all kinds. We know that competition for scarce resources can lead to corruption, migration, and violence. In 2014, in the Worldwide Threat Assessment Report, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence stated, and I quote, lack of adequate food will be a destabilizing factor in countries important to U.S. national security that do not have the financial or technical abilities to solve their internal food security problems. Unquote. He also identified the threat that insurgent groups could capitalize on food and nutrition insecurity to exploit food aid and discredit local governments. So indeed, this is an issue of our own national security, in addition to, of course, the security of so many countries and regions of the world. By way of example, we know that the terrorist group ISIS has employed this strategy, cutting off resources to embattled communities in Iraq and Syria until they are so starved for food and fuel that resistance is diminished. We also know that extremist groups in the world sometimes ambush assistance, convoys, and steal food to sell on the black market for profit. It's clear that combating international food insecurity is indeed national security imperative, an imperative for the United States of America. The Feed the Future Initiative was established to ensure that U.S. assistance in the food security sector was coordinated and drawing on the particular mission of each U.S. Federal Agency involved. As many of you know, the Feed the Future Initiative has the dual goals of accelerating inclusive growth in the agricultural sector and improving nutritional status, particularly for women and children. Major progress has been made since its inception. I think that's an understatement. In 2013 alone, Feed the Future reached 7 million farmers and more than 12.5 million children with its programs. Our assistance has helped improve crop yields, pushed governments to make needed policy reforms on issues like land tenure rights, and has increased household incomes. This effort by President Obama and his administration should be applauded and they should be accorded with the commendation that's appropriate. And we should support their efforts going forward. One of the ways to support them is to pass the bill that I've been working on. We'll get to that in a moment. But more work needs to be done. We know that. We want to see the U.S. assistance program, not only assistance programs, I should say, not only improving agricultural production, but we must ensure that they're also empowering, empowering the most vulnerable populations. Of course, in most of these countries, that means women, children, and smallholder farmers. We know that women in developing economies often have less access to key inputs, like seeds and two other financial resources as well, like loans or saving accounts. They may also not have the vehicle needed to transport their produce to market or the access to information to know what the prevailing prices are. Women and smallholder farmers, those that farm less than two hectares of land or less, are less likely to have the political clout needed to influence policy on a local or a national level. They're also less likely to hold leadership positions in local government or to have the educational opportunities to learn about advanced agricultural practices. In short, they face a number of serious obstacles to improving their agricultural productivity and their families' nutritional status. So it's appropriate for U.S. assistance and U.S. assistance programs to focus on these key populations as they often are the most vulnerable. USAID has made this commitment in its strategies, but more work needs to be done at the field level to ensure that assistance is reaching women. A case study by the Group Oxfam recently found that, quote, at the implementation level, participation in the projects examined was skewed towards men, unquote. It is vital that addressing the specific barriers to women's participation in the agricultural sector be integrated into the U.S. programs from the earliest possible planning stages. We also want to ensure the sustainability of U.S. programming over time, and that requires early engagement and buy-in from all relevant sectors in the partner country, including government, civil society, and, of course, the private sector. It does the target community no good at all to have an infusion of assistance just to have it taper off after a matter of years with no framework to keep it going. So it's important to work on enhancing sustainability of these programs in at least two key ways. First, by ensuring that the programs are country-owned from the start, the partner country's national, regional, and local governments must be actively engaged in the earliest stages of programmatic, I should say, planning. The United States should encourage governments to make the legal and policy reforms that support the continuation of agricultural programs beyond the life of U.S. assistance programs. In developing programs for specific communities, assistance implementers and USAID should consult closely with local government officials. I'm sure this is happening already in a lot of places, but we need to emphasize it yet again. The goal is to develop these mechanisms so that as countries and communities graduate from the Feed the Future program, the gains are not lost. We should also be investing more in the development of the next generation of leaders in the agricultural sectors of developing countries. This should include farmers, extension agents, and even policy professionals that understand food security challenges themselves. American institutions of higher education are already engaged in capacity building programs in the Feed the Future programs, and we should seek to expand their efforts whenever possible. For example, Penn State University, just a little local reference here, is home to a Feed the Future Innovation Lab, which focuses on climate resilient beans. This team, which draws on expertise from U.S. universities as well as research institutions in Mozambique and Honduras, is looking at ways to ensure that beans, a staple protein source in many countries, can thrive even in poor growing conditions, like sandy soil or periods of drought. This is the kind of cooperative research that not only improves capacity in target countries, but plants the seed, so to speak, for innovative technologies that can profoundly improve crop yields. Thanks to modest grants from USAID, this kind of work is going on in universities around the United States. And more could be done to give emerging agricultural leaders access to the cutting edge technology and unparalleled educational opportunities that U.S. universities offer. Now, by expanding efforts to reach women and smallholder farmers, and by focusing on building the government and non-governmental structures that will sustain U.S. investments over time, we can improve the reach of our assistance programming. The next way the United States should exhibit leadership is by leveraging the unique expertise of different stakeholders. Just two examples. The first is access to expertise of private voluntary organizations, many of which are faith-based, which work with some of the most vulnerable communities in the world. These organizations have insight into the unique challenges facing families displaced by violence or by instability, or those living in the most resource-poor areas of the world. These are the communities that traditionally receive substantial amount of emergency food assistance from the U.S. and the international community. I'd like to see USAID engage these partners and others in an effort to focus on improving the resilience of these vulnerable communities so that they can transition away from the need for emergency food assistance. For example, I learned recently from Mercy Corps that the Pastoralist Resiliency Improvement and Market Expansion Program, acronym PRIME, the PRIME Program in Ethiopia, which is assisting communities in areas hit by drought and instability to improve resilience and move away from the need for the emergency food assistance in the long term. We should build on this type of experience to ensure that resilience is a key element of U.S. agricultural development programming. Second example is to leverage the experience and resources of private sector businesses in the U.S. and, of course, internationally. This has already begun through the New Alliance for Food Security and the Grow Africa Partnership, two multilateral initiatives designed to leverage public investment to expand responsible private sector investment and participation. Feed the Future has also established an online portal for private sector entities looking to engage with the U.S. government in a public-private partnership on food security. I'd also like to see the expansion of exchange programs designed to expose producers from Feed the Future countries to best practices in the U.S. agricultural sector. We should continually be exploring new ways to leverage the expertise and resources of the private sector to augment U.S. government efforts. The third area where the U.S. should demonstrate its leadership on food security issues is by ensuring that the good work that has already been done gains the legislative authorization to continue for at least the next five years. That's why I'm sponsoring a bipartisan bill with Senator John Isaacson from the State of Georgia, the Global Food Security Act of 2015. We're looking to reintroduce this legislation as early as this week, and we're not sure what day. If I knew the day, I would tell you. But Caitlin Gehran, who's done such good work with us, she's sitting in the front row, maybe able to tell you the estimate of hours, but we believe it will be this week. And I want to say, parenthetically, how good it's been to work with John Isaacson, someone I've worked with a long time on a number of issues, health care issues and other issues that confront our states and confront the country. I've worked, as Kimberly noted earlier, I began my work on this issue back in 2008 with Senator Dick Luger, who was representing the State of Indiana and a wonderful man and a great senator. Then I worked with Senator Mike Johans before he left the Senate, so I'm on my third Republican partner, and the third time will be the charm. But I'm grateful, and I also appreciate not just Senator Isaacson's dedication to this, but his long experience, of course, in the continent of Africa. He and I run the Foreign Relations Committee, and he spent so much of his time working in and leading that subcommittee. I guess most of his time was in the minority as a ranking member, but we're grateful for his commitment. We know that every year the Congress appropriates the funding that the President has requested for Feed the Future, and we continually have expressed our support for these life-saving initiatives in other ways. However, it's time for a legislative push to give Feed the Future the authorization, the authorization it needs to continue on for years to come. We've done this with other major global health programs like PEPFAR, Remarkable Success, and I firmly believe that this is an appropriate and overdue step for Feed the Future. Let me talk a little bit about it. I'm on my last set of sentences here in remarks before we go to questions, but here's what the bill does in a very brief summary. It emphasizes, I should say, that the Administration must have a comprehensive strategy to fight food and nutrition insecurity, which pulls from multiple agencies. We require that the Administration consult with a number of important stakeholders, many of whom are represented here today, and we're grateful for your presence here today. We also enshrine some important mechanisms to improve transparency into the way that U.S. taxpayer dollars are spent on these programs. I have to add a personal side here. I spent 10 years in State government, 8 of them as the Auditor General, the person who shows up at a State agency or school district, and does the audit, either review of the financial statements more of a dry kind of audit but necessary for accountability. But often we would show up and do performance audits, which meant that you were focusing on the effectiveness of the program or the economy and efficiency of it or both. And I believe, sometimes I guess Democrats don't say this enough, I believe that we need to subject more programs to that kind of review. We can't just simply say it's working, take our word for us, give us more tax money. That's not going to work too well over time. We need to be able to prove to demonstrate the effectiveness and the efficiency of every government program and certainly one that has impact around the world. If we do that consistently, we will not just maintain credibility and support for the program, we will be able to have the sustainability that I talked about earlier in terms of the funding over time and the support over time. It makes it a lot less likely that an initiative like this and legislation like this and a program like this would become a political football in Washington if we do the job of making sure it's accountable. So we talk about the requirement for review of the program to make sure the taxpayers are getting their money's worth and that the dollars are reaching the intended recipients. One of the ways to do that is to push as we did for the inclusion of a GAO study, Government Accountability Office, independent assessment of the administration's implementation of the Global Food Security Strategy, and I mean every administration, including asking for details about what percentage of assistance funding goes to contracts, grants and cooperative agreements. These elements will help ensure that these taxpayer dollars are being used wisely and efficiently to achieve our objectives. The bill has significant bipartisan support and I'm glad to have the help of Senator Isakson and others on this. In the House, representatives Smith and McCollum and we know we have more work to do to sign up some others in the Senate. When we can find an issue, especially a foreign policy issue on which both sides of the aisle agree, it's important that we capitalize on that increasingly rare opportunity. I'm optimistic that the Global Food Security Act will pass this Congress and I want to thank all of you who have helped us get to this point and helped us improve the bill and are continuing, I should say, to seeing it delivered to the President's desk. Advancing inclusive agricultural sector growth and improving the nutritional outcomes for women and children who are often most vulnerable to fluctuations in food prices and as I said earlier lack adequate or lack access to resources needed to be successful, both of these are goals worthy of a great nation. Leading the world as the U.S. does and will continue to do if we do our job, leading the world to combat the scourge of food insecurity and the real pain and the darkness and death that follows. The United States of America has been and should continue to be that shaft of light in that awful darkness. Let it be said of us in our time that we met this challenge head on, that we did our job to lessen substantially the food insecurity endured by so many people around the world. Thank you very much for your time and look forward to your questions. Thank you. Those were great remarks. I think I'd like to start with a question. I know as a senator you know this well that Americans are often a little resistant to foreign funding. Many of them think that we spend a lot when as you know we spend less than 1%. So I'd like you to talk about why you believe that food security and nutrition is an important American investment. Why is it important to our country? Well I think it's essential for a couple of reasons. Number one is the, I think it's an issue of great moral gravity and I think people get that, they understand that. I think it's the challenge of it in terms of making the case on a regular basis is a failure of government. It's not that the American people have changed their view I don't think. There's still in I think in the soul of America the willingness to help just as we did going back generations, the Marshall Plan or all of the international support we've provided to countries especially at the time of a crisis or an emergency. So I think that soul is still embedded in the American being or the American psyche. It's those of us who fight for these initiatives sometimes who don't do a good job of communicating it. How important it is and I don't think it's inappropriate to talk about it as a moral issue. That's number one in a real commitment to justice. Number two there's a national security imperative and I use that word purposefully. It is an imperative. I mean I really believe on some bills like this and I'm not just saying this because it's my bill. But if this were a book, the Global Food Security Act, one of the subtitles you could fill in other subtitles but one of the subtitles would be the terrorism reducer program or the terrorism reduction program. That sounds a little better. I literally believe that these efforts are consistent with not just our broad national security objectives but the ongoing and unfortunately the fight for the ages will be against terrorism. Terrorism will find fertile ground where people don't have the agriculture capacities that they need. Where women are not able to feed their children, where they lack access to education so they can be literate and be able to hold down a job and do what so many women around the world do in a miraculous fashion already but we need to help them. So whether it's on the moral commitment or whether it's on national security I think we can make the case. And then also I think we can make the case that we get it when people say that there's waste in government and we need to be responsive to rooting out that waste and first of all acknowledging the problem. But I think most Americans if they're given the information about results, about effectiveness, about efficiency, understand and get that this is very important not only to the world but to their own lives. I do think that of late and I'll end with this it's become probably more difficult because of the expenditure of treasure and soldiers and the remarkable contribution of our military and their families to conflicts and I think they tend to be fused together. Once in a while I hear people say even people I know fairly well say why are we spending all this money over there why don't we keep it home and build bridges and all that. The good news is if we get it right and we haven't gotten it right we can and should do both. We need to rebuild our infrastructure we also need to be engaged in the world and help the most vulnerable. But I do think that the conflicts in both Iraq and Afghanistan especially Iraq I think have made it harder to make the commitment on something that may not have a direct military connection but is a major foreign investment and often at the end of that people don't see a quantifiable result. Here we can highlight and reiterate the numbers on the literally now double figure millions of people being positively impacted. Absolutely. So moral imperative security imperative talk a little bit more or expand on the economic factor you know having fostering financial security is a big party for you and so you know how do you when you talk about Pennsylvania and all the hard working farmers there you know why should they care about farmers in Bangladesh or Tanzania and proving their lives. Yeah good question. I think it's one is markets. I mean it does develop more markets and also I think that there's a there's a basic understanding that we live any farmers understand I think anybody who has a significant stake in the economy knows that that we live in an interdependent world. Our economy can't exist on its own. We can't simply hope that that these places around the world will figure out a way out of the darkness. We have to use our our expertise and our experience to help them and we should emphasize especially for taxpayers that we want to do such a good job on this. I think the administration can say they're on the way to doing this that we can win these countries off this. We don't we don't want this to be a permanent initiative in one country for the next 50 or 100 years. We want them to be to use that biblical reference to be you know their own fishermen and to teach a man to fish and increasingly it's our folks are teaching women how to fish and we know it works. One final question before we turn to the audiences. You know as we both mentioned you've been working on this since 2008. So I'd love to hear what's the personal side for you. You know why is this important to you on a personal level to spend this kind of energy commitment to those living in developing countries. Well part of it is how you approach your work in government. How you prioritize issues or priorities. I've always had a try to put a high or a quarter high priority to children and women families. So it comes naturally to me. But I guess the origins of it is probably pretty simple. My parents and the Jesuits. That's probably the best way to describe it. I went to a Jesuit high school and a Jesuit college and then was a Jesuit volunteer for a year in the inner city.  So since I did Peace Corps twice I'm doubly run. But it ruined in a good way. But I think that's the basic origin. But I do think that there's a foundation in both parties. So we just haven't done enough work yet to marshal those areas of solidarity to get the job done. On the bill I mean not the future. Right. So we want to take some audience questions and I'm going to ask that you please give your name your affiliation and keep it brief since we have a limited amount of time. We have microphone runners. Come on up. We'll do take Paul here in the front. Thank you Senator. Paul Gannett. I'm with ACDI VOCA. I liked your phrase that the fight for the ages is against terrorism. And particularly here at CSIS we've heard some good logic connecting global food insecurity with security. That I'd like your comments on how effective that argument might be to build that necessary bipartisan support. Well I look I'm a believer that believer in the basic premise that you gather support for a bill or an initiative or a program over time in any way that you can. And if there are folks out there who will only be persuaded by that argument I'm ready to make it. The good news is it's credible. We don't have to try to design some talking points here. We know that it's we know that it has the tour directly connected. And I think that that it might be as difficult as it's been in this period because of what's happened in on kind of the military side of this with our commitment of Americans and dollars. I do hear a lot of my constituents saying less about why we're sending money over to this country that country but but more about my goodness we can't we can't solve these problems. You know the Sunni Shia conflict has been around for so long and how are we going to solve it and no one's been able to solve it. So why do we even try. It's kind of the basic question they ask me. I don't have a great answer for that. Why should we even try. I think we have to try. I think we have to remain engaged. But when it when it gets to that basic question about how do how do we invest our time in our resources. I do think people have a basic sense that we have capacity here. We have expertise here that other countries don't have. And being able to make the case not just on the broader national security argument but also making the case that this lessens the likelihood that we have to be involved in different places is also I think a feature of the argument we should we should emphasize. And of course I'd be I'd be wrong to try to oversell it. You know having great success on feed the future or our legislation I think connected to that is not going to solve the Sunni Shia divide. But certainly in some some countries where it's not part of that conflict. It's kind of a local or regional conflict. This certainly will help. Good morning senator ladies and gentlemen. Thank you so much senator for your wonderful presentation. My name is Rosemary Seguero. I'm a president of an organization called Hope for Tomorrow. I'm based here in the U.S. and Washington D.C. and I come from Kenya. Thank you so much for talking about women and children. I was born in Africa in Kenya and raised in Kenya on a farm. I wrote an executive summary at the U.S. African Summit last year on agriculture. I'll send you a copy of what I wrote. It's only agriculture that can get Africa out of poverty in the rural area is where we have farms and those farms the African women are very hardworking like me. They just need to push. They don't need science or anything big. This is where there is poverty fighting in the rural areas. We need to collaborate with the government U.S.I.D. Senate. I've known Senator Isakson for so long. We've been talking about the same story on agriculture. So how you know how do we partner that collaboration getting together working things together. We don't know what the future has. The future has few countries. Africa has 54 countries and as you say vulnerable people we have poverty there and conflicts, violence, what causes poverty and to get out of that people come to town. It's where the two terrorism and but if we had a way of developing rural areas where there is agriculture, industrialization and others. So how do we partner and work together with everybody talking about agriculture. There are participants and the people are on the ground and nothing reaches them. Nothing is happening there. So we want to work together with them to make sure what country and what is working and what is not working. Thank you so much and I'll be sharing with you more information and you need to accompany us at President Obama summit in July in Kenya so that I take you to the rural area of Kenya. Thank you so much. Well thanks very much. Did you say that you did farming? Sounds like where I live. Women are doing most of the hard work. When I said at the beginning I expressed some humility when approaching these topics because of the knowledge and experience and expertise in the room. I guess I was talking to you. I've never done farming so I'm going to have to learn from you about better ways that we can be helpful. And I don't profess to have all the answers on that engagement either between and among folks in a farming community and in our aid organizations or our government. But I do think we've made significant progress under Feed the Future and part of what we're trying to do with the legislation is not to start over but to build on some of the progress. But I'm also mindful that legislation is just that. It's language on a page and you still have to implement it well and even as you're implementing it well you'll make mistakes or the premise upon which you went in this direction versus that direction may be faulty. So we may find that even the improvements that we seek to make with our bill may need further revision or adjustment or improvement. So I'd love to have the opportunity to spend more time with you to kind of walk through where you think we're missing our opportunity or missing an element of this that would make it work better. So I'd be anxious to do that. Maybe Caitlin and I can figure out a way to connect with you. I should learn a lot more about farming. And I guess I'll learn a good bit when we talk. Thank you. I'm Lori Rowley with the Luger Center. I want to thank you for your fine comments and kind comments. Yes it is. Yes. So thank you very much on behalf of the Senate for continuing the fine work that you built together beginning in 2008. I wanted to ask you about the current situation with regard to your upcoming bill and the House bill as well and the engagement with the administration and the urgency as the administration begins to wind down about moving this program from an initiative to something that's a commitment between the legislative and the executive branch. Yeah we've got we've got a lot of urgency not just because of the administration kind of moving into their last 18 months but the urgency of the the challenges is what I think motivates most of us. And I don't I don't have a account necessarily yet. I mean most of the most of the efforts we've undertaken this calendar since Mike Joann's left was to get that lead Republican sponsor and then and then of course Caitlin does all the difficult work after that. Caitlin and her team make it taking suggestions and trying to negotiate or work through those proposed those proposed changes. I have to say and I know that we don't yet have Dr. Shah Raj Shah's replacement confirmed Yale but we will continue to work to make sure that happens. But I'd say Raj was very effective. I'll call him a lobbyist even though he's not technically one of those. He was he did an excellent job engaging with individual senators in both parties and not just a phone call here and there. I mean literally visiting them calling them visiting them again calling me really worked it. And I think I know not think I know in the process developed a foundation of respect and admiration that that allowed us to move forward with more support. So I know he's in another chapter of his life. But maybe I'll call him back and figure out a way to plant him in our office for a while. But but he was he was especially especially effective because he had that that passionate commitment to move in this forward. So any other ideas that you were the Luger Center have we could certainly use the help as we wrap up. I'm going to take three questions. So he can summarize and take. Let's take one right here in the corner in the back. His hand raised there and right here. I'm the National Chairman for the Congress for Democratic Change the main opposition party in Liberia in the United States. Mr. Honorable Casey. I appreciated your discussion in terms of accountability for the Feed the Future program. But from a program at a standpoint and objectives that is set in regards to diversity diversifying value chains and enabling people from a technology you know production level and also the sustainable environment. I don't believe that those objectives have been achieved. I appreciate you requiring transparency. But maybe we should also look at program objectives. Where were we when we set the baseline at the beginning of the program in 2011 to where we are in 2015 in achieving those objectives. So we hope that lessons can be seriously learned from that in terms of who manages the process. How to integrate the stakeholders to achieve the objectives of the process. And you know so that I can really benefit people because the whole Ibolacid issue exposed the lack of full security in Liberia. And it's extremely significant that with 72 percent of the population focus on subsistence farming and we have not moved from subsistence to some kind of mechanization in our farming processes. It really limits our ability to ever achieve full security in Liberia. So hope you can address that. Thank you. Well thanks. I think what would be helpful for us is if we can take and almost side by side take the reported results and how the program is working so far along with our bill. And if you could take a look at both and if you have some suggestion we'd love to hear them. We need to get this right. And I have this wild theory that all knowledge and wisdom doesn't reside in the capital. There's actually smart people outside the capital. On some days a lot more people outside the capital are smarter. But if you could if you if you don't mind maybe you've already walked through this. If you can undertake that as a as kind of your own project and maybe you've already done this but just kind of look at the two of them and see if there's we're still missing a piece or for kind of head in the wrong direction. That'd be great. Yeah. I'll make sure we can get Katelyn get you the bill and of course the feed the feed. I mean obviously that's on the feed the future website. We can walk walk through that. And in particular in the context of Liberia be helpful for us to learn that. Sure. Well no I have not been there. There were a couple I know that Senator Coons was there more than once actually I think he was more than once. I'm not sure. I know there were others. Not many but but Senator Coons. He's the the the ranking member of the meeting the lead Democrat on the subcommittee for Africa. And I'm overdue to visit Africa. I haven't you're going to come with me. That's right. Kimberley already made the plan. I hope so. Yes. So actually for timing we're just going to take one more question. So apologies for that. Paul Randolph with GRM Futures Group just wanted to thank CSIS for this event this morning the discussion and Senator thanks for your diligent work on the Club of Food Security Act. I really took note of your emphasis on empowerment of small holders women children and also the link to local government and how that is the foundation of where farmers start their engagement in the economy and improving their lives and access. Interesting that in mentioning that I wanted to know if in your in your authorization bill that you talk about actual funding on governance issues to me empowerment local government that is resides in governance. And if you look at the trend from US government investments in the last four years since 2010 in democracy rights and governance work there's been over 40 percent decline in budget and investment in those areas. And so as we invest more in food security is there going to be some mention and emphasis on increasing that investment on the governance side of this. I know on the policy there's there is a focus but when you break it down down to the lowest levels there seems to be some gaps in that. And just on the side I grew up in Iowa Farm Boy and we've known for years that it's the women that are working harder than. That's an important aside you just put on the record. But in terms of the something very specific about governance Caitlin I don't know if there's something in that speaks directly to that both governance and the appropriation or funding for it because we're going to be. As I said spent 10 years in state government a little easier back then where we're in state governments your budget is both the authorization the appropriation together. You have one documents called the budget. Here we have a budget resolution which doesn't have the effect of law and then the authorization process and then the appropriations process. So it's the alignment of those or the the progress you can make on each of those can be difficult to to get right sometimes but I'm not aware. Caitlin is there one particular part of it. And then and obviously the appropriations process will be will be a separate process. I'm not an appropriator some not allowed to pretend some days I'd like to pretend I am but we'll have to engage getting the authorization. I think is essential first to kind of get the the policy and the authority to execute on over time but the appropriation process is going to be a whole other. I think we'll get good support but it may be that in that process is a way to target more specifically but that's a that's a good question. We should we should examine just not broadly on governance. I know there are a lot of people in this room who know the the governance challenges faced by countries around the world better than I do. But one of the most interesting example or insights I'll call it that I got was on this issue was years ago so much we take for granted right here in the United States. We we complain about our government and governance I guess but but it's it's still the envy of the world. But I was at a presentation by an individual who's I think back back in the world of think tanks but at that time had just left a major military post and was about to come back into government. But this was a military man through and through. I mean his whole life was the military but a very very committed and capable person on other issues and very bright. But he gave a presentation. I had to leave early. It was at one of our lunches way back in 2008 I guess it was. So I missed a lot of what he said and I caught up to him in the capital later and he was talking about Afghanistan in 2008. And I said to this military man expecting a military answer. I said you know what I missed most of your presentation today had to run out to a meeting and I missed it. What do you think is the most important thing we should focus on here. And I thought he'd say well this is what we got to do militarily or we this is the money we have to spend. I thought it'd be much more directed than that. He said the justice system in the courts. He said it's a mess or he said it's a real problem and there still are challenges in Afghanistan. And it struck me how fortunate we are to have a system of justice which doesn't always work as we've seen more most recently. But but but is in place now for all these generations. And these countries just often don't have any comparable to that. And the more that we can make progress on governance the better the overall strategy will be. So sorry for that little story but that's OK. I'm at that age. I'm telling more stories now. That's OK. Thank you for this. Thank you for the leadership that you've given on this issue. Thanks for your work.


ection of the county. Yet, and maybe causally or at least correlated. There was an increase in the southern portion of the county that did not occur in the north which saw a reduction and so I think that more directly to supervisor Hernandez's point I think that the board should be providing additional information for us to look into this allocation I don't think that this is. The intention of the all in plan I don't think this is the intention of a number of the equity initiatives that we've done I don't think this is the intention of some of the core analysis. Funding programs that we have done where we look at how the money is being distributed across the county in particular I would take your guidance on how we can do it in such a way to provide an analysis that would be useful for the board for consideration of future allocations because while I don't think that it needs to necessarily be just populationally based or something like that I do think that there needs to be some flexibility in how this money is moved because you can't have the county spending tens of millions of dollars in one section of the county that it's not in another area. In particular an area that has historically been an unquestionably been under invested in in all services and access to government services in the county has tried to lift up we had an earlier board item on the Westridge center for example tried to lift up for services so my first question I suppose for Dr. Ratner would be how would you recommend that the board address this funding and equity and how do you suppose it has one of the recommended actions is provide direction for coming back in six months in regards to the plan and how can we look at ways to kind of smooth out that funding and equity. Thanks for the questions who rise a friend I have a couple of ideas and definitely open to other ones I think one element of the new planning process should be exactly what you talked about a deeper analysis and not just off of the top of my head but actually advising us a staff to look at you know what to the extent that we have useful data and it's imperfect like who are the people that are being served by the county wide programs where are people actually securing housing I think we could do more detail analysis kind of the geography of how things are playing out with people who are losing housing and so what where are people losing housing and where are people securing housing and then looking at where the programs are the kind of wide programs are picking up new clients. So one way in which we can address this is with our new coordinated entry process the unexpected process of assessing people experiencing homelessness and when we create new programs we can articulate particularly county wide programs we can have as a policy that we bring to the spectrum of care board we want to have a preference for people from this geographic region for certain programs in addition to looking at the distribution of funding overall. I think another strategy is to really look at and we did this when partnering with Monterey County what funds are available and can we collaborate with our partners in the city of Watsonville to apply for and secure more funding in ways that really meet the needs and to the extent that we can support the city of Watsonville the housing element and becoming the pro housing community in terms of housing the more we can align with the state's directions of getting approved housing elements becoming a designated pro housing community that increases the funding for availability of funding for jurisdictions. So I think leaning in and South County and then from my personal experience the process of making decisions about how core and general fund investments the sooner the board starts those conversations around the equity issue and looking at the distribution of the dollars that we have some local control over that can be a factor as well and in looking at how with the next round of core funding you know how do we want to distribute those dollars in a way that addresses some of the disparities that you articulated. I appreciate that I mean I'm concerned also with just when we just geographically create a bright line because what we need these are evolving issues and you need flexibility in it but nobody can look at a distribution of estimated at three quarters one quarter 80 20 and be proud of how that is being equitably distributed I mean I think the county needs to take a very serious and significant look as to how resources are being invested in the area not just in the northern section of the county and to supervisor Hernandez's point build up those relationships in ways that maybe we haven't historically done because it is a more challenging area to ensure that we have the correct data to know what the sense of the problem is and I think one of the challenges also on doing the analysis Dr. Ratner as I'm sure I mean it kind of akin to the point in time count is that because of an under investment I think that the data that we're going to have is going to be challenging to even show what the extent of the problem actually is or may skew what the need actually is but I think that at the end of the day we know that there's a growing problem in the South County that's not being addressed because of funding and so to the degree that as part of this additional direction when we when we come back in six months we can look at a process that helps smooth that over time I think that that will be good and I appreciate that I do want to address there was a point that supervisor Koenig had brought up in regards to the state and state funding and flexibility and for that matter in regards to the hearing that I'm testifying out in about an hour and a half here the state is functionally removing local flexibility on a lot of these funding in both behavioral health as well as homeless services there's a movement to be more prescriptive and what it is and that's one of the challenges and it's going to that's what the legislature is debating right now that's what we're working on the amendments in order to ensure that that flexibility still exists. One of the challenges that we face in Santa Cruz County is that we've done a good job leveraging money we've done a good job with our accountability and showing how the money is being spent we don't leave money on the table. Some other counties have struggled or in particular a couple of unnamed particularly large counties in the state have struggled with this and that has led to I believe the governor's office trying to create more accountability protocols but that one size fits all doesn't work for accounting can have real impacts on our safety net here in Santa Cruz County so that's what I'm actually here to speak about so I wish I could give you a greater speech of hope supervisor Koenig in regards to this but actually what we're trying to do today is prevent this greater prescriptive element that's currently proposed by the state. So I would like to open it up now to the community I know there's been some members of the community that have been waiting for a long time on this item so first we'll do it in chambers are there's anybody in chambers I'd like to address this please feel free to step forward. Thank you. Thank you Steinbrunner. You know what I always appreciate about your presentations Mr Morris and Dr Ratner is that they're very human. You don't throw up a bunch of statistics and graphs and make everybody blurry I tried to make a point. You really talk with us and explain things well on a human dimension so thank you. I really appreciate that. I have at times been a volunteer food deliverer for Teen Kitchen Project. So I've seen a lot of different living conditions and the ones that always disturbed me the most were the ones in Watsonville where people had lost their homes because of their health crisis. And they were staying with friends of friends of friends and it was a very eye opening situation. So I think what we really would really help set help us set more meaningful effective goals is to really find out why are these people homeless. What happened. COVID certainly had a huge piece in it. People lost their jobs. People lost their businesses. Utilities went up. They continue to go up. So why are they homeless. Is it drugs. If it's drugs. I really would love to see this county embark upon a pilot project using Ibogaine that can help people with their consent get off of the addictive pathway. Then we can teach them life skills that can help them help themselves and their families pull themselves out of homelessness and poverty and being dependent on the government to help them live. I asked this board why the county is using 12 practically new mobile homes that were given to the county during COVID for the transitional youth sheltering. They're being used as office space for parks department. Why aren't we using them for homeless shelter. Can I have one more minute. Yes, one more minute please. Thank you very much. So that's a travesty right there that we have shelter that was given to us and it's not being used to shelter anymore. I I demand that this county board look into that and hand over the keys to those trailers to the homeless services people and put them to use for shelter. I think that a number of people also became homeless during this easy you fire. I think that the power valley floods had a huge piece in the increase in homeless families in South County this winter. So again it comes back to the question is why are these people on the streets were in their cars or couch surfing because that's what we have to know in order to help them help themselves. I am happy to hear some discussion of the city of Watsonville being included. I think we should also include capital city. And Scott Valley because they also have homeless in their jurisdictions and we're all here to work together. Thank you very much. I appreciate the extra time. Yes, thank you for your comments. Is there anybody else in chambers that would like to address us. Seeing none. Madam clerk or is there anybody online. Yes chair we have five online. Thank you. Ellen your microphone is now available. Thank you. Good morning chair and supervisors county staff and community members. I'm Helen you and story assistant director for the Community Action Board of Santa Cruz County. The county's designated anti poverty agency for almost 60 years. We're based in Watsonville and serve over 10,000 low income individuals annually throughout the county with programming including homelessness prevention and intervention services. Housing and homelessness ranked in the top five issue areas in our recent community action plan not surprising given the last few years of fire COVID and recent floods. And as we all acknowledged earlier in the meeting you know our county had the dubious distinction of being identified as the most expensive metropolitan area in the county this year or in the country this year with two bedroom housing wage identified at just over $63 an hour. This is in stark contrast to the 20% of cabs recent cap plan respondents stating they make under $5000 annually that's just over $400 a month. County supported services such as cabs rental assistance programming youth homeless response team and navigation services. Watsonville works homeless work crew South County housing connector and emergency payment programs including the housing assistance fund all serve hundreds annually and are critical to helping community members stay housed or be rehoused in this challenging environment. Cab has been actively engaged in the housing for a healthy Santa Cruz strategic framework and implementation. While encouraged this year that the pick couch showed a reduction in homelessness County wide. It's disheartening but not surprising to see that the numbers in Watsonville including that next families has increased. Cap supports the reports conclusions that homelessness is primarily housing challenge and that large income and housing cost gaps, including those we see in the city Watsonville and South County increase rates of homelessness. Have further believes it's crucial that local jurisdictions and I hope I can have about 30 more seconds. Please go ahead. Thank you. Have further believes it's crucial that local jurisdictions work together and with state and federal government to continue to bring resources for eviction prevention like rent assistance, as well as very affordable low income housing and the resources and support services to support them. And so we hope that there's continued focused in collaboration there. I will now turn over to our next speaker I'm hoping she's next in line cabs director of programs and impact pass Padilla to continue our statement. Thank you. As Padilla your microphone is now available. Good morning. When was the as chair and supervisors as Helen mentioned my name is pass Padilla. I'm camps director of programs and impact overseeing caps programming, including the homelessness prevention and intervention services. In addition to supporting the recommendation of the age for age report cap also encourages your board, your board to support flexible, no low barrier rent assistance for families and households and overcrowded housing with two to three or many more individuals and families living in one house. Because of the gap between wages and sectors, such as a farm and service work, and made even it may even worse by the loss of housing to to the reason winter storms. Many families in this overcrowded conditions aren't on a formal lease that would make them eligible for the majority of available rent assistance, or many be undocumented and ineligible for other assistance, making them specially vulnerable to homelessness. Further assisted in attachment to the report we encourage your board to provide additional resources to the cap left South County housing collaborative to decrease South County homelessness and families with school age children and increase family housing stability and the equitable distribution of county resources where they are most needed. Additionally, we encourage your board to continue to collaborate with the County of Monterey and City of Watsonville to rehouse the over 50 power of families, many with children and PV USD schools displaced by the winter storms and are currently slated to loser temporary lodging at a Watsonville hotel. Thank you. Muchas gracias for your ongoing focus and partnership on this issues. And please know that cap stands ready to continue to collaborate to accurately resolve homelessness and housing vulnerability and Santa Cruz County. Thank you. Carol, your microphone is now available. Thank you. Good morning, Chair and Supervisors. My name is Carol Pojimas. I'm speaking on behalf of West Side neighbors, which is a neighborhood organization of several thousand lower West Side residents. Santa Cruz's lower West Side has been greatly impacted by issues related to unregulated vehicle camping. There's a nightly average of 60 plus vehicles camping on just the foremost impacted streets, Schaefer, Natural Bridges, Swanton and Delaware. The point in time data states that 46% of the 1804 unsheltered people are living in vehicles. That is 829 people living in vehicles, the highest number ever. The Armory Safe Spaces Program is great and Evan and Corey are doing a wonderful job, but their program has a waiting list of over 50 people who want to participate in the Safe Spaces Program and who have already signed up for it. Providing safe spaces for people to park overnight with services makes so much sense. People sleeping in vehicles already have shelter. They just need a sanction placed to park. Consolidated parking will provide for easier intake and access to necessary social services toward the goal of securing permanent housing. Consolidating parking also makes the delivery of sanitation services more efficient. The county has property it already owns to use for temporary Safe Spaces parking. We know that Supervisor Koenig is working on an ordinance to expand the possible member of Safe Spaces parking and we commend and appreciate him for this work.  The fact that Safe Spaces parking is not discussed in this report is surprising. Please designate at a minimum parking for 100 vehicles per night at several locations throughout the county. This will alleviate both the issues related to unsanctioned vehicle camping in the neighborhoods and the challenge of providing outreach and access to social services for people living in vehicles. This will also help the residents of the county to get their vehicles out of necessity. I need 10 seconds, please. Thank you so much. Designating Safe Spaces parking immediately will alleviate suffering much faster than waiting years for future permanent housing to come online. Please prioritize safe parking areas and include this in a three-year plan going forward. Thank you so much for listening to our comments. Thank you for that. Thank you. 3377, your microphone is now available. Caller 3377 to unmute, hit star six. Hi, yeah. My name is Chief McHenry and I've been feeding the homeless for 43 years and I was involved in providing the only hot meal for homeless people in Santa Cruz for three years of the lockdown. I would say, you know, we have plenty of money, but the policies and dictated by both the federal, state and local governments make this crisis impossible really to resolve. And as I'm sure everyone there is aware, we're entering into a severe great depression where in March, according to Lending Tree, there are already nearly 9 million families who are behind on their rents and we're facing homelessness in the United States. So this is going to be, you know, many, many more homeless people on the streets and it's odd that I should support somebody from West Side who's been tacking the homeless for so many years, but she is right. They need to be a lot more safe parking locations throughout the county and it's frightening how many people lose their cars and get towed and then they come to food on bonds, I hand them the pup tent and then we send them to the levy only to be swept from the levy. So the one of the increases, even though the numbers are horribly bad, and to give the impression in the point in time count that the numbers went down is a tragedy because that means people are going to think the problem is being resolved and that just only the evil homeless that they see that are causing the problem rather than the county really resolving the crisis. I get calls probably, but often not as many as 20 a day from people that are seeking food and many of them express their anger that we have billions for Ukraine, but we can't feed our own selves here in the United States. And so I think that, you know, and then I've got to really point out that homeless people in this that have to deal with the shelter program. The one thing that they uniformly ask is that Jeremy lens fire because he is just like outrageously vicious and violent. Thank you. Call in user to your microphone is now available. I'd like to hear more comments by Keith McHenry and food not bombs. Ask him his ideas for solutions. The title is in the program isn't it? Our money is going to the military industrial nuclear telecom media complex and not to feed and house people at home. I think back often to the trip I made in 1966 to the former Soviet Union. And there were not people hungry on the streets. And my second cousin paid about 5% of her income for rent in a small but very pleasant apartment near the forest. People in your meeting there have talked about shifting of priorities and where is the money coming from. And we need to have money stop being siphoned out of our county to go to this military industrial complex. And the pandemic I call it part of it was a great reset which is drainage of resources and diminishing the power of local government. And here's a quick quote in one year Tony Fauci his cronies his intelligence agencies the farm of the physical companies and these billionaires from Silicon Valley. Have engineered a shift of almost $4 trillion from the middle class globally to a handful of Robert Baron such a quote from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. In a top entitled when money intersects public health policy. And you can see the whole thing at Weston a price dot org and the wise traditions publication of winter 2021. Thank you Ms. Garrett. We have no further speakers here. Thank you madam clerk will bring it back to the board. This is an action item for emotion. And ideally if we could get some additional direction I actually can't make the motion but the additional direction just in regards to the analysis on the equity side just empowering the staff to come back in six months with a look at those issues. I'll I'll move the recommended action actions with the additional direction that at the next six month report. We have additional analysis of how we can more actively distribute funding for homeless services throughout the county. Second. Thank you. Survisor Connick it's any additional comments. If not, then roll please supervisor comics. Yeah, just one comment. I'm just hoping as well when this comes back if there's or within this process of planning. If there's recommendations that can be considered and brought back around increased tenant protections and various tenant protections that can help people stay in their homes I think that would also be helpful in this process. I don't know if that's okay with the rest of the board. But I think that we have to take this at both approaches, the rehousing people but also trying to figure out how we can keep people in their homes and so I don't know if that needs to be made as a friendly amendment or if that can just be recommended. May I ask a process question. I don't know if it's vice chair chair friend, we will do both. But if you want to codify it I don't know how this works. We will come back for a general six month. We will put in a review of the distribution of resources and I'm hearing supervisor Cummings with a motion or not we can make sure to speak to the tenant protection dynamics the programs we have in place and just speak to it as part of our presentation. But I defer to the board and council if that's a motion or not but we'll I'm tracking both and we'll make sure to speak to both at the next six month report. I'll consider a friendly amendment and happy to include it in the motion. All right, it's added as an additional amendment to the motion by the maker supervisor conic and approved by the second or supervisor Hernandez any additional comments. Seeing none if we got a roll call please. The provisor conic, I Cummings Hernandez, I MacPherson and friend. I and that passes unanimously thank you for your presentation and for those that patiently waited to comment on that item. We'll move on to item nine which is to approve and accept the terms and conditions of the seller financing agreement addendum number four and updated vacant land purchase agreement to purchase real property located at one eight eight on the fighting road APN 05104201 for a total purchase amount of 2.31 million dollars and take related actions that under the memo the deputy CEO and director of community development and infrastructure we have the board memo the financing addendum the land purchase agreement and a number of other items here on the schedule and for presentation. I have unfortunately I can't see who it is but I think it's the director of parks is that you Mr Gaffney and miss oh there we go and miss and like all right welcome. I needed the camera to be turned around. I was trying to make a judgment from behind and you know I didn't want to be wrong. So I appreciate both of you for your presentation please director Gaffney. Good afternoon chair members of the board. My name is Kimberly Finley. I'm the chief property agent with the Department of Community Development and Infrastructure. I would like to recommend approval of the seller financing and updated vacant land purchase agreement to acquire real property located at one eight eight fighting road for parks purposes to further discuss the community need and envisioned use of the property. I will turn the presentation over to the director of parks and open spaces chef Gaffney. My name is Finley and board members staff. I do want to thank Community Development Infrastructure Department for all the work they've done and in particular Kimberly Finley to get us to here today and also CEO plosios. Thank you very much. We've been working on developing the need. I'm sorry. The need for a park has been assessed over the last 70 years in the South County area and we have gone out to the community on a number of occasions. Both through our strategic plan planning process and also three surveys at community meetings and events. And it's it's very clear to us as a department and both through the data and also just anecdotal stories that we are in much need of a park in South County as well as actually in district three. So both district three and four are our park forest districts within this county. So in that process we did develop some of the community needs and some of those were athletic field space. We need open space and healthy environments for people to participate in activities that bring them peace and serenity. We wanted to expand some of our county park trends programs connectivity to open space and also some of the climate resilient practices that we're looking at. And so in that process we found some available space that was potential for Parkland and we came down to where we are today. So next slide please. And that is this property at 188 Whiting as we've talked about. So this is an envisioned idea of where we could go with this. This would be some of this would be the interim uses. Some would be uses that would be long term there at the park property. One of the things we do think is it would be vital to part of the process is developing partnerships with some of the local farmers developing a lease program. It's really for farmers to grow crops out there. Ag tourism is as a result of that and also sustainable ag practices could be demonstrated for local youth nature trails. There's also the potential to create an emergency evacuation point. So next slide please. One of the reasons that we really highlighted this property in particular was its availability to local community based organizations and schools to do a lot of the youth programming and education farms and agricultural practices. This would of course coincide with your typical expectations for a park where we would have these as we talked about the athletic fields nature trails rec programming. In addition to that we would be partnering with the agricultural history project at the fairgrounds the city of Watsonville the power of our unified school district as I mentioned a lot of the community based organizations and as I mentioned the indigenous people representing the area. So next slide. I think also we would partner with a lot of the relatively close organizations that have done parks like this in the past. They're all within less than an hour's drive of here. A lot of really good information that things they've learned practices they've developed programs they've created as a result of having the same type of park. I just wanted to give a quick overview before I turn it over back over to miss Finley I just have some perspective. You can see the slide on the left and the slide on the right. The slide on the right will give you on the top of the screen you'll see Paulson Road which becomes Whiting Road right about the apex of the property up there. And obviously adjacent to that you can see the Baja Valley Water Management Agency and open space and then down at the bottom screen you can see the Santa Cruz County fairgrounds. All of that means that we're connecting to existing open space land and protected lands and has a lot of potential for connectivity. So to provide a history of relevant board actions that have occurred on this matter on August 24th 2021 we appeared in closed session to receive authority to negotiate an option to buy 188 Whiting. December 7th 2021 we appeared in open session and received approval to enter into the option to buy agreement and associated vacant land purchase agreement. On February 28th 2023 we received authority to extend the option to buy and on May 31st 2023 in closed session we received authority to negotiate seller financing terms. So this item has been pending for quite some time. Since entering into the option agreement we have completed the feasibility studies necessary to recommend purchase of 188 Whiting Road. Those feasibility studies include a phase one environmental site assessment, water quality and quantity studies, agricultural viability studies, a biotic report and a determination on CEQA and general plan consistency. The option to buy agreement that was previously approved in 2021 set an agreed upon purchase price of $2,310,000. That purchase price was determined by a county contracted certified third party appraiser. Pursuant to the terms of the option agreement we have now accumulated a $50,000 credit for half of all monthly payments that we have made during the term of the option. We will also receive a $20,000 credit for the option deposit because we are exercising the purchase during the term of the option. So we have a purchase balance of $2,248,000. To help purchase this property we have negotiated the terms of a seller financing agreement. The seller financing agreement requires a down payment of $1,100,000 with a seller finance loan of $1,140,000. The loan will be financed and amortized over 13 years with a 4.03% interest rate. The monthly payments of $9,400 and the down payment of $1,100,000 will be funded with a mix of Measure G funds, Parks Capital Projects funds, 2015 unfunded mandate repayments and park dedication funds. We now recommend the following actions. Approve and accept the terms and conditions of the seller financing agreement, addendum number four, an updated vacant land purchase agreement to purchase real property located at 188 Whiting Road in Watsonville, APN 05104201 or $1,104,000 with a total purchase price of $2,310,000. Authorize the close of escrow if and when all contingencies are met pursuant to the terms of the vacant land purchase agreement. And authorize the chair of the board to execute the certificate of acceptance for the associated grant deed. Escrow documents and loan documents as required to effectuate the transfer of the county property. And take related actions as further outlined in the board letter associated with this item. That concludes our presentation today and we are available for any questions. Thank you, Director Gaffney. Thank you, Miss Finley. Are there questions from board members? I'll start with Supervisor Hernandez. So we had a really nice presentation from the friends of the library. At what point would we be able to do a partnership with, or would we be able to do a partnership with Friends of the Park to do like a capital type fundraiser for this that can incur some of the costs that we're having for the project? Would that be like a second phase that we can do some capital fundraising for this project as well? Absolutely. We have been in partnership with the county park friends, nonprofit, our partners and everything, all parks throughout the county. And for probably the last year and a half we've been working with them as we've looked towards the purchase of this. And so they are well prepared and looking towards the future on what especially I think they're excited about the potential for programming, but also development of all resources available to us for this facility. That'd be great if we can raise funds to, you know, for programming, but also, you know, development as well. Absolutely. Questions from other supervisors? Supervisor Cummings? I just want to start by thanking staff for that presentation. I guess in terms of kind of next steps. So this is obviously the property purchase. And I think to supervisor Hernandez's point in terms of developing the different amenities of that park, that's going to be a next step. And I'm just kind of wondering in terms of the planning process and what the next step will be in terms of defining what the use will be of that space. Good question. We're fortunate enough that we feel we can implement some interim uses right away so that the property doesn't sit vacant and not be utilized. Some of those may be leasing it for farming as it is right now as we develop some of the other infrastructure that we need to. And then also potentially athletic fields could be right out the gate, something we can look at in the next nine to 10 months potentially. In addition to that, there are some very basic things that need to be done. The site needs to be cleaned up. There were some folks living out there for a while. We need to do that. The entrance to the park that will now be a park potentially would need to be changed in the way it is laid out for public use. There's a lot of little things that need to be dressed, but right away we'd like to get some use on the property. That's great. And I've got to put my plug in, but I think for kind of longer term use and maybe some multi athletic field use. I know that there's been a lot of some people reaching out about trying to figure out how we can get rugby fields. And so if there's an opportunity to have joint soccer and rugby, and I know there's a lot of people who would be encouraged to bring rugby to South County as well. And have that be another activity. So there's opportunity for conversation. We'd love to have that offline. I can talk to Felipe a little bit more about that and see how we might be able to bring out some more activities down in South County. Happy to maximize the use of all our parks as much as we potentially can. Thank you. Thank you, Supervisor Cummings, the captain of our new rugby team for the Board of Supervisors. Let me just, I want to thank Ms. Finley, who's been working very hard in the negotiation on this and trying to bring what will now be the largest investment in South County parks since the opening of Pinto Lake County Park. This is a pretty significant investment and it'll take some time to be fully realized. But now it's coming into the fold in public ownership and I think will be very important for future generations in South County. So I just wanted to appreciate all the work that's been done behind the scenes on it. Are there any other questions or comments from my colleagues before we open it up to the community? Yeah, Mr. Chair, I don't know where former Supervisor Greg Capitas today, but when he hears about that, he's going to have a big smile on his face. He's been working at this for years with the Parks Department and for, you know, he has been consistent and not arrogant, but really, he's been really pointed to say, let's get this done. And then Supervisor Hernandez for following up on that. And I think this is another great example recently of how the county is working diligently to improve the services and programming in the South County. When you look at the Watsonville Hospital Project, the County Government Center and the work on the future of the Pahua River and improving that, we can be proud of all the funding and resources that have been invested and have been invested. And now we'll be more heavily invested in the Pahua River Valley. I think it's a credit to the county that it's really taken a targeted approach to improving the services in the South County. Thank you. Thank you for pointing that out Supervisor McPherson. Any additional comments or questions before we open it up? Sure, Chair. I'll just add that I'm also excited about the potential for this site. I've already seen a number of creative ideas for it and I look forward to seeing those blossom with the support of the community active rugby enthusiasts and other enthusiasts, as well as hopefully some help from county park friends. And I, you know, you mentioned in the presentation, but I think the proximity to the fairgrounds there and the potential evacuation site also just mean this strategically. This is a good purchase for the county. And I also want to thank Kimberly Finlay for her work in structuring a creative deal that ultimately works well for both parties. And also, I think, I think that our ability to raise funds for the park should increase now that we have it in public ownership. I know that was a challenge when we went out for the grant previously. A state grant is that they said, well, hey, you guys are on the site yet, so why should we give you millions of dollars for it? So hopefully we've got a good answer for them when we go back. Thank you. Thank you. Now open up for the community. Is there anybody in chambers that would like to address us on this item? Thank you, Becky Steinbrunner. I cannot agree more that South County needs a park. This is not the place for it. If you could please put the slide back while I talk about the aerial view of this, ma'am, it will become painfully clear. Where do the people live that would be using this park? They don't live near this land. This park should be put on the county-owned property behind the master gardener's place and existing community garden at the intersection of Freedom Boulevard and Crestview. That's where the people are. That's where the kids are. That's where the gardens are. That's where this park should be. You could put soccer fields there. The water is there. I'm not so sure if the water for a soccer field or a rugby field is going to be there with an old agricultural well. This is not the place for a park. How are the kids going to get there? Are they going to ride their bikes on 152 or Paulson Road, which is even more dangerous? There's no bus service there except Sundays for the farmers market. No bus service. And during the county fair. Where is the tie-in with the county fairgrounds? There's no access across that ravine. Who's going to build that access? I spoke with CEO Zeke Fraser about this. He's the new CEO of the county fairgrounds. He knew nothing of this. Maybe you've been talking with the Kegabinds and Bag History, but they didn't tell the CEO anything about this. It's a surprise. So this is not the place for a county park that will serve the youth and the elderly for recreation. It needs to be in a place that the county already owns. You already own the land on the bus route. It's easy access. It's easy water. The farmland issue has been, there's a farmland that has been for rent across the way for months and months. It's not being farmed. One quick second. I would just give an additional minute please. Thank you very much. I'm thinking that farmers will flock to this land and rent it and use it for farming is not realistic because they're not renting the land on the other side of College Lake to farm that now. Using it for soccer fields is great, but again, where's the water and the access? This is not where the people are. Who is it really going to serve and how can any sequel analysis of vehicle miles travel make this pencil out? It's not going to serve the people in the way that we all want to do in South County. So please do not approve this. I am distressed that the county has already spent $50,000 in purchase order payments. We should not move any further with it and instead invest the money instead of $9,000 on a dream that maybe people will come to invest that money in improving the park land on Freedom Boulevard and Cresview. Thank you, Ms. Steinbrunner. Thank you. Is there anybody else in chambers that'd like to address us? Madam clerk, is there anybody online? Yes, chair. We have one speaker online. Colin user to your microphone is now available. Thank you, Becky for a reality check. What Becky Steinbrunner stated makes total sense. I had no idea in your presentation by staff. You left out these critical points of the access and somewhere people live, et cetera. It's just shocking to me how omission of facts is like, it's like a deception. You don't get the whole picture. So I agree with Becky. I also wonder with farmland, the pesticide use, how toxic sites are. And I was trying to picture where this location is the cross street. I remember going out to the fairgrounds from the city of Watsonville. And there's a rather large cell tower near there. And I'm always noticing where cell towers are and I'm always feeling sick around where the locations are. So this does not sound like a good plan. We definitely need parks, but take up Becky Steinbrunner's suggestion. That sounds like a good place to put it. I'm not again spending that amount of money for parks, but we need to have it in a good location. I know that it's like $20 million just went to Telecare, which my friend got picked up for and had a terrible time, not a blink of an eye to approve that money. But let's have parks where we need them. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Garrett. Are there any other speakers, Madam Clerk? There's no further speakers chair. All right, we'll bring it back to the board for action. I'd like to move the recommended item. Is it A and B that we're moving on the recommended items? And I've got some additional comments as well. So is that a motion for all of the recommended actions? Supervisor Hernandez? All of the recommended actions. Is there a second? A second. We have a second from Supervisor Cummings. Additional comments, Supervisor Hernandez? I'm just happy and seeing this vision finally become a reality as a dream come true for many South County residents. We're proud to finally have secured this land. And on behalf of the community, we look forward to opening it up to the public. I think this park acquisition addresses a lack of recreational spaces in South County. And it's like a region that's been under-resourced in terms of open space, outdoor opportunities, with a dedicated focus on promoting physical activity. The park is really going to counteract a lot of the chronic health conditions that we're facing, especially amongst young people. You know, studies have always shown that positive impact of physical activity on both physical, mental and emotional well-being. So it's something that's tremendously needed, you know. I think the groundbreaking, this is a groundbreaking project that exemplifies District 4 and the County's commitment to equity and a better quality of life. For everyone recognizing the scarcity of parks within the district, we hope to create a vibrant hub of activities that cater to people of all ages from landscape, greenscapes, walking, versatile range of attractions, soccer fields, organic demonstration farms. The parks can be designed to captivate the hearts of youth and families alike. I want to thank all the Board of Supervisors, my colleagues, CEO Carlos Palacios, the Parks Director, and of course, making sure that the whole deal went through as well. But I also want to thank former District 4 Supervisor Greg Caput for helping identify this location and putting funds aside for the land acquisition as well, and always being pit bull and making sure that the project happened as well. So thank you to him as well, and I think that's my comments. Right, we have a motion and a second. If we could have a roll call, please. Supervisor Koenig. Hi. Cummings. I just wanted to also thank staff for all their hard work on this. Thanks for getting this across a lot. Nandis. Yes. McPherson. Hi. And friend. Hi, and that passes unanimously. Thank you. And that is the end of our regular agenda. We have a closed session agenda. Council, is there anything expected to be reportable at a closed session? No. All right, then we will move straight into closed session. Thank you, everybody.