Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ab109 Reentry Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors direct report on AB109 reentry cuts after community speakers warn of impact
Summary
After public comments from reentry providers and formerly incarcerated residents, the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors approved revised AB109 funding with a $550,000 one-time augmentation but directed the administration to return in August with a detailed report on specific contract/service reductions and client impacts.
The Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday approved revised recommendations for AB109-funded programs but directed the administration to return in August with a detailed accounting of proposed contract reductions and the number of clients affected.
Item 53, pulled from a larger batch of budget items for separate consideration, included a recommendation from county staff to add a one-time $550,000 augmentation to limited AB109 reentry contracts. County staff said the $550,000 reflected an attempt to strike a balance between maintaining some services and containing a structural deficit in the AB109 program that will require further work for fiscal year 2027.
"Adding this 550 is functionally adding to the deficit situation that'll need to be addressed for FY27," county staff said during the meeting and noted that staff had reviewed specific contracts after the board's budget workshop and returned with the revised recommendation.
Community advocates and people with lived experience urged the board to preserve reentry and legal-navigation services. Mark Ashford of Santa Clara County CAB said community-run social enterprises hire people with incarceration histories and argued for continued investment: "Let us help allocate resources to build a shared future." Angel Aliano of the Silicon Valley Council of Nonprofits warned the board about racial disparities in the jailed population and said the county should sustain current levels and expand partnerships with nonprofits. Peggy Stevenson, founder and director of the Record Clearance Project at San Jose State University, said the project's funding has not kept up with inflation and that expungement yields net benefits: "In fact, in one year the estimated benefits of expungement outweigh the costs by $6,500 per person."
Vice President Arenas and other supervisors expressed concern that the recommended AB109 reductions could substantially reduce legal services and navigation supports. Vice President Arenas noted a contract cut projection indicating the Pro Bono Project's capacity to provide legal support to justice-involved clients could drop from roughly 400 clients this past year to about 143 next year.
Supervisor Ellenberg moved to approve item 53 while directing the administration to report back in August with specific service-level reductions and the number of clients affected; the motion also added that the policy committee (PSJC) could receive a deeper programmatic review as requested. The motion passed (Aye: Supervisor Abakova; Supervisor Yoon; Supervisor Ellenberg; Vice President Arenas; President Lee abstained) and the board scheduled follow-up reporting.
Board members and county staff emphasized that AB109 funds have a structural imbalance: some functions and staff have been shifted between funding streams to lessen immediate impacts, but a larger shortfall remains for FY27 that will require policy-level decisions about structural trade-offs.
The board's action preserved the one-time augmentation while requiring administration to provide transparent, contract-level detail so supervisors can evaluate the trade-offs before any cuts affecting contracted services or staffing are implemented.
