Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Policy Reparations Unincorporated Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Alameda supervisors back exploring funding for reparations commission and creation of office for unincorporated services
Summary
Board members supported policy directions to explore funding for the reparations commission (commission budget discussions expected this fall) and to study creation of an Office of Unincorporated Services to better serve Castro Valley, Fairview, San Lorenzo and other unincorporated areas; no budget vote was taken at the June 25 meeting.
President Miley on June 25 asked the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to consider two policy directions: directing the County Administrator to examine a budget and funding for the county’s reparations commission and to explore creating an Office of Unincorporated Services to give unincorporated communities a central point of contact.
"I'd like to see if the board would be supportive of directing the county administrator to look at a budget and funding for our reparations commission," President Miley said, urging the Board to consider the commission’s forthcoming report and potential funding needs.
Board members responded with broad support but emphasized process and timing. Supervisor Marquez, who serves on the ad hoc reparations committee, said the committee will receive a report from the commission in July and signaled the committee will review the commission’s budget request in the fall. "The next ad hoc reparations committee meeting is going to be on July 16 at 4PM," Marquez said, and noted the state has identified $12,000,000 for reparations work that the county should track.
On a separate policy direction, Miley described the longstanding Eden Area Livability concerns and said a centralized Office of Unincorporated Services — likely housed in the County Administrator’s Office — could give unincorporated areas (including Castro Valley, Fairview, San Lorenzo, Ashland, Hayward Acres) a clearer pathway for service delivery and policy voice. Several supervisors said they supported studying the idea and requested additional detail and history, with staff asked to return with analysis on structure, authority and funding mechanisms.
County officials clarified that these are policy directions for future work rather than immediate budget approvals; adding new items to the current budget would require properly noticed future agenda items. The Board did not vote to allocate funds for either measure at the June 25 meeting.
