Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Federal Regulation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee to forward opposition to proposed federal rule OMB202634, citing risk to grants and research

Albany County Board of Supervisors personnel, administration and legislation committee · June 8, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Albany County personnel, administration and legislation committee voted unanimously to recommend the full board oppose OMB202634, a proposed federal rule the committee said would allow political appointees to terminate grants midstream and restrict gender-related research.

The Albany County personnel, administration and legislation committee voted unanimously June 8 to recommend the full board oppose a proposed federal regulation, OMB202634, after hearing a request from Alameda County Health.

Chair Supervisor Tam said the county was asked to oppose the rule because “the rule would basically empower a political appointee to terminate, grants and awards midstream at their discretion and restrict the grama, gender related research or service and certain international collaborations.” Supervisor Portunato Bass moved to forward the county’s opposition and Supervisor Tam seconded the motion.

Clerk roll-call voting recorded both supervisors as voting in the affirmative and the motion passed. No members of the public spoke on the item during the meeting.

The committee’s description of the rule focused on two concerns raised by Alameda County Health: (1) removing consistent grant protections by allowing terminations at the discretion of political appointees, and (2) limiting certain gender-related research and international collaborations. The county asked the full board to formally register its opposition and the committee complied.

The committee did not take additional actions such as directing staff to draft alternate language or legal analyses; the vote forwarded the opposition recommendation to the full board for its consideration at a later meeting.