This webinar is being recorded
and summarized.
>> Good morning everyone.
Welcome to today's October 13th
meeting of Echo Ending
Community Homelessness
Organization. I'm Glen Yung. I
serve as chair. I'm Clark
County Councilor. And we will
go ahead and get started with
welcome and introductions
headed this way.
>> Councilor Wil Fuentes Clark
County.
>> Jamie Spinelli, City of
Vancouver.
>> Kevin McClure, city of
Vancouver.
>> Sunny wonder. Council for
the homeless.
>> Destinie Fany Jones. Council
for the homeless.
>> Good morning, Michael Torres,
Clark County Community Services.
>> Terren Boger Clark County.
>> Andy Silver.
>> Good morning, Andy silver,
Vancouver Housing Authority.
>> Council member. Perez.
>> Good morning everyone. Diana
Perez here. City of Vancouver.
>> Matt Morton.
>> Good morning, Matt Morton,
community Foundation for
Southwest Washington.
>> Thank you. Vanessa. Gaston.
>> Good morning. Good morning.
Vanessa Gaston, director for
Clark County Community Services.
>> And Marilyn Burke.
>> Good morning, Marilyn Burke
from whoops sorry my video.
Marilyn Burke, city of Kamea
city Council.
>> Victoria Ferrer.
>> Good morning.
>> Victoria Ferrer, city of
battleground.
>> Thank you.
>> Great. Thank you, everybody,
for being here this morning.
We'll go ahead and move forward
to our first item of business,
which is our approval of the
minutes from September 8th,
2026. Are there any corrections?
>> Chair.
>> Sure. Go ahead.
>> Council. Approve minutes
from September 8th, 2026.
>> Have a motion. Is there a
second?
>> Second Perez.
>> Great. It's been moved and
seconded. Any discussion?
Hearing none. All those in
favor say I, I, I and any
opposed? Motion passes. Thank
you. We'll go ahead and move
forward updates and report back
on our action items. And we'll
start with the systems analysis
update, which is currently in
the process of getting all of
the Eilee or the Elya arranged.
Jordan. Go ahead.
>> Yeah. So we are quite close
to being able to send this out
to all the jurisdictions we've
had legal review, the Ila, I
think it's in pretty good shape.
So we're just kind of in final
review now. And I would
anticipate that folks will
likely see that end of this
week or early next week for
getting that out to each of
your individual councils and
signed. And then once that is
approved by everyone in back,
we'll move forward with the RFP
process itself.
>> Do we know approximately
when that will be just any kind
of ideas?
>> I think we're going to ask
for folks to sign the Ila as
soon as possible. So let's say
we could get that done by the
end of the year. That would
mean we'd be putting RFP
together and releasing it
probably in the first quarter
of 27.
>> Lots of DocuSign.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. Thank you for that. Go
ahead.
>> Yeah, this is Diana Perez. I
just want to acknowledge what a
huge milestone this is for all
of us and for our new members.
Recent council member Burke,
this is this is really an
accomplishment for me being on
echo since I first joined in
2022. So I am proud of this
significant step that we've
been able to take this far, not
just the city alone, but with
Richfield, with battleground,
with chemists, the all the
jurisdictions in the county. So
this is just an example of how
we can work together to get
something done and to take it
to this step. And the amount of
effort that went in to even
just put together the proposal
for the system analysis. So
thank you to each of you who
have been a part of this from
the beginning, and who stepped
in and were able to take it to
this point. So the real work
starts after the Ila. And, and
I just wanted to thank all of
you for making this happen
today.
>> I would echo those comments.
Thank you. Diana. Okay. Moving
forward to Severe weather
Council for the homeless, sunny
and Chesney.
>> Good morning. This is sunny
Council for the homeless. We're
just I don't have any
significant updates. We're in
the process. Obviously, with
the colder weather, we've been
experiencing it. There's a
cooldown transitioning into our
winter weather response and
severe weather response during
the winter. We do have our
winter sheltering that happens
November 2nd through March,
which is a different response
from the actual severe weather
response in response to cold
temperatures, snow, ice, sleet,
etc. so we are in the process
of getting that started and
getting supplies, which
obviously looks different from
heat response. So getting
supplies and outreach planning,
as well as support for the site
based sheltering that happens.
That's it.
>> Thank you for that. Just a
quick question. Do we have any
restrictions or do we have any
closures or additional openings
or anything that changes our
response from last year? Our
our resources.
>> Are. So I'm guessing we're
talking about the winter
sheltering. So I think that
with the last update that I had,
I'm anticipating all of the
same locations are open as last
year, which is a decrease from
the previous year where the
city of Vancouver had
identified a couple of
locations in response to severe
weather, winter weather, I
guess that was severe weather,
like actually increasing
capacity. A little bit of both.
Yeah. I can't remember two
years ago. So the same as last
year.
>> Thank you chair. All right.
Yes. Go ahead.
>> This is Jamie from the city
of Vancouver. I would also just
mention, even though it's not a
severe weather shelter, bridge
shelter should be opening
towards the end of November. So
that'll be an additional 120
beds that'll be available. And
don't know if it'll be ready
this year for severe weather
kind of expansion. But there is
the ability for additional
capacity in that space in the
future for severe weather.
>> Thank you for adding that.
That is going to be a great
welcome addition to our
community. Anything else before
we move on? Okay. Is there any
updates from our law
enforcement subcommittee? Not
today. Okay. And then do we
have Director Shook or Anna
here for just a briefing on the
jail?
>> Many of them are here, are
online.
>> Okay.
>> But if I can point you to. I
know that, Jamie, you had asked
for those numbers and those are
included in the packet. The
pre-pandemic numbers, along
with their data sheet for the
month, if you wanted to review
it.
>> Okay, well, we will circle
back with them if they join and
have any information for us. So
moving forward to the work plan
and expectations from 2024.
Jordan, did you have anything
on that or.
>> Yeah, so I think folks just
wanted to kind of revisit the,
the prior work plan that that
the group had put together. So
as you'll recall, back in 2024,
this group worked with a
facilitator to put together
some different goals and had
identified some of the
different priorities that that
this group would like to work
forward with. And a lot of that
was around kind of the
expectations on how the group
works together. I think that
has largely remained intact. I
think a lot of the work that
was identified kind of has
coalesced into the systems
analysis work and moving
forward there. So I think as as
we look at that, some of the
consensus approved work plans
or identify systemic issues and
develop strategies that can
prevent and reduce homelessness
and move people into stable
housing, facilitate connection
and information sharing among
relevant Clark County entities,
develop a unified legislative
agenda, and then track
potential changes to the
charter for reconsideration as
needed. And so I think just.
Kind of at this point, if folks
want to take a look at that, I
don't know if people have
anything that they feel like is
working or isn't working that
they'd like to change in, in
the work plan. But I think we
just had this kind of as an
item for folks to think about
as we move into the end of this
year and thinking about 2027,
you know, what kind of
direction does the group want
to go? Go in.
>> One thing.
>> This is Perez.
>> Go ahead.
>> Diana Jordan, what I don't
see with the document that was
shared was the Dot exercise
that we did. And the flip chart
work, which had next tier level
of information as far as any, a
little more specificity on what
exactly to look at, given the
lens that we were applying back
then, is that a document that
could be added and sent out for
us to review?
>> Absolutely. Yeah. I can send
that out to the group right now.
>> Okay. So with the caveat
that that is a document for us
to take a look at and see what
was prioritized back then
confirm whether that continues
to be a priority or add new
items to it or reprioritize.
>> Thank you. Go ahead.
Victoria.
>> Yes, I'll echo exactly what
Perez said, because I know that
on my mind is remembering the
dots that were all over the
wall. And I'm, I was
specifically looking at, you
know, moving towards the
legislative agenda and just
wanting to know if that's still
the same direction that this
board would like to continue
moving on, as well as the other
ones. And then what would that
look like? But again, until
we're able to, you know, look
at where we were at the past
and deciding whether we want to
move forward on that, because I
would be leaning heavily on
wanting to focus on the on a
legislative agenda and whether
this group would want to create
some kind of subcommittee to
have, you know, members of this
group to start working on
legislature that would actually
be helping our our homeless
that are dealing with mental
health and drug addictions.
>> Great. Thank you. And we
actually do have that later on
in our agenda to bring up. So
we will have some level of
discussion on that today.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> Any other comments? I would
just like to say that, you know,
it has been some time since
I've looked at that document
and we are pretty much sticking
to it. So that is good news.
But it's always good to review.
All right. Well, it is now time
we have the pleasure of having
Kevin McClure from the City of
Vancouver City Prosecutor
office. And we also have Jamie,
who's always with us, not a
guest today, but we love having
you here. And we have the
awesome opportunity here about
community court and how it's
working and hopefully how it
isn't working, and any things
that could be done to help make
it a more effective tool for
our community. So thank you so
much for coming today.
>> Thank you. I'm Kevin McClure.
I'm the Vancouver City
prosecutor. I helped found
community court and then have
been representing the city
Attorney's office as the
prosecutor as well as the Clark
County Prosecutor's Office, as
the prosecutor in community
court since its founding. And
I'm here with Jamie Spinelli,
and I'm going to turn it over
to her to start this
presentation.
>> Thank you again. I'm Jamie
Spinelli, the homeless response
manager for the City of
Vancouver. The last time we did
a community court presentation
here was, I think about nine
months into community court
operating. I think it was
around December of 2023, if I
remember correctly, that was
either here or with law and
justice. But either way, back
then, it was largely everyone
got kind of an overview of what
community court is the model.
You'll get a little bit of that
today, but because the
executive committee had
specifically asked certainly
for some data, but but also
what does all that data mean?
So this will be hopefully a
little more than just kind of a
broad overview and, and
discussion afterwards. So Kevin
can talk about why we chose
this model.
>> So just from practical
experience, we've had a statute
on unlawful camping in
Vancouver for probably as, as
long as I can remember, and
I've been working as a
prosecutor here since 1998, the
we people did cycle through
this. The system that you might
get arrested, but then either
you didn't show up for court
and you got a warrant, or you
did show up and you entered a
plea and maybe you got a fine,
or maybe you got a day on the
work crew. But the court was
not providing really any
services to people who were
convicted of this crime. And in
fact, the model created
additional barriers for people
who were getting the had the
conviction on their record, had
things that they sort of had to
do or fines that they weren't
able to pay. So we wanted to
create something, recognizing
that public space impacts still
need to be addressed. So we
worked with our community
members to pair accountability
with services and support. So
as far as what community court
is. This is an alternative to
just traditional prosecution.
It is voluntary. So if if a
person is cited with an
eligible charge, they have the
choice of do you want to go
through the traditional court
system, have an attorney take
this case to trial if you want?
Or do you want to go through
this alternative? On the right
of the slide, I just listed
some of our most common
offenses, which include
pedestrian interference.
Unlawful camping is is the
number one unlawful storage of
personal property in public,
urinating in public, and also
criminal trespass in the second
degree, which could be just
people who are on private
property. Maybe it's a gas
station, maybe it's it's just
somewhere. But they are have
been asked to leave. They
decline to leave. Those are our
most common charges. So what
happens when somebody comes to
community court is they get an
individual requirement
assessment. I think I will talk
about this a little more in the
next slide, but the
requirements are based upon a
determination of each
individual's needs. The person
who participates then does make
a weekly court appearance for
as long as they're in the court.
During that time, they're
connected to services which
include mental health,
substance use, and most of the
providers have a representative
at the court. So it's a one
stop area and there is a
requirement of community
restitution, which can involve
volunteering at an agency which
helps people who are unhoused.
At the end of completing all
their requirements. We dismiss
the charges if they've
successfully completed. So this
is sort of a flow chart into
the process. There's that first
court date, an arraignment,
where the person decides after
consulting with an attorney
because there's a defense
attorney there to, to go over
their options with them. They
get a, the needs assessment
screening to identify what is
going to help this person. We
come up with a case plan of
what are your requirements to
get this case dismissed? And
then each week the judge will
pick one requirement off the
person's list of needs to say,
this week, I'd like you to get
a mental health assessment and
then the person will return the
following week. Hopefully with
that assessment. If not, since
the providers are mainly there,
we can redirect them, take them
right out of the courtroom and
say, hey, you weren't able to
do it this week, but here's
somebody you can talk to who
can help you. If there was some
kind of a barrier. And then
ideally, graduation occurs in,
we try for six weeks with
people on their first time
through the court. And it does
take maybe double that, maybe
12 weeks if they were a
returning participant. Anything.
Okay.
>> So nope, last one should be
on five, please. Okay, there we
go. So this was kind of
separately from the process.
This is just a little bit about
how the program has evolved
over time over the last three
years. In 2023, it started
pretty small. We were, you know,
I want to say we started with
like 20 ish people a week is
what we were seeing. One thing
that was not mentioned before,
but community court got its
name because we do court for
community court, literally in
the community, coming to a
courthouse for a whole lot of
reasons is, is, is a common
barrier for people to even
attend their court date for
people who are experiencing
homelessness. So community
courts usually try to find a
location out in the community
that's accessible and, and
maybe feels a little more less
intimidating. Probably would be
my would be my guess. So we
looked for a location and
recovery cafe over on fourth
Plain gave us a location for I
want to say our first year,
which was great. The only
limitation was that they of
course still had all their
programing that they needed to
do. So we had borrowed space
and we had very limited time to
use that space. So as we moved
forward, Recovery Cafe needed
their space back and, and we
really needed a larger space
anyway. So we ended up moving
to another location not far
from there on the fourth plain
corridor that is dedicated
space. So it gave us some more
flexibility with how long court
could occur, how many people we
could have, including staffing,
security, things like that all
at one time. And, and then that
allowed us to add because we
had some additional office
space, some, some additional
staffing capacity on the
probation side to do the Seacat,
which is the assessment that
Kevin mentioned previously. So
where we are today is that we
essentially have like a full
day docket where we previously
started with like a half day.
They've, we've separated
arraignment from main docket.
And, and I think that's gotten
us kind of a better flow on the
kind of flip side of that. What
that's allowed is a shortening
of that time period for, for
how long it takes somebody to
get from referral to like
actual admission. So we started,
it was taking about 20 days,
and now we are closer to just 9
to 10 days. And that's
important because it's in that
period of time, the longer
somebody has to wait to
actually kind of opt in, the
the more likely it is, or
there's just a higher
probability of kind of losing
their engagement, you know, or
their willingness or interest
in that, in that time period.
So that, that lets us. Kind of
keep people engaged in the
process along the way a little
bit better.
>> I'll just add that part of
that is also the, the community
nature, the, the cooperative
nature of this program. Because
with the Vancouver Police
Department, the officers, if
they're issuing a citation on a
Monday or Tuesday or a
Wednesday. They are citing
people in for the same week on
Friday. So it doesn't. We try
and move people into the court
more quickly than we normally
would with regular court.
Because of those barriers. And
so we moved them in quickly.
Our office, in turn, provides
the police reports, the
discovery to the defense
attorney prior to that date. So
usually we can take a couple
weeks to get all the reports
gathered and provided to the
defense, but we've streamlined
this. So the attorneys will
have access to the police
reports within days so they can
have a meaningful conversation
with their client at that first
court date.
>> Thank you. Next slide please.
Okay. So we're going to get
into a little bit of data. I'm
going to caution you ahead of
time. And I'm sure my friends
in the homeless service
industry will will understand
when I say the data doesn't
tell you everything, but we are
going to talk about some and
then I'll get to kind of what,
what that data actually tells
us and what it doesn't. So this
was included because Council
Member young, some of the
executive committee had
previously asked about this
specifically. So I wanted to
give a breakdown by a breakdown
in in referrals by jurisdiction
or referral source. And so
while community court is sort
of a regional program, at least
between city and county, city
of Vancouver and county, the
way people get referred, you
can see, is not so evenly
distributed across the
jurisdictions or referral
sources. Vancouver Police has
consistently been the largest
direct referral source, and
admittedly, most of those are
via heart officers because
their role is specifically
dedicated to engaging with the
unsheltered community within
the city. However, this was new
to me. We've seen a pretty
significant increase in cases
coming through judges or
district court more broadly.
When they see cases come
through court or come to court
that they believe would be a
good fit for community court,
they have started referring
over. So that's the the green.
I think it's green. Maybe it's
light blue, but those those
middle bars. So you can see
that's actually been a pretty
big increase 175 this year, it
looks like. And then of course,
by comparison, there's only
been about 13 direct referrals
from the sheriffs department
since it launched. I will say
we're likely to see that number
increase in the next year or so,
because we're partnering with
the county and CSO to expand
the heart team up into the
county. And that's really an
anticipation of the bridge
shelter opening. I want to also
just give the, the, the kind of
sidebar it is not my preference
to cite people to have people
cited into court. My preference
is that, you know, people are
able to, while they're outside,
kind of comply with public
space usage kind of
requirements. And, and they
connect to services and move on
into, into shelter or housing,
whatever is available to them.
That's just not always the case.
Sometimes people need a little
more support to get there along
the way. And that's what
community court does. So that's
really, I think, just a
consideration as we as we move
through this, if more people
are coming in, we may need to
keep an eye on capacity at
community court because of the
county.
>> And I'll just add one. We
can it's fine. We moved on to
the next slide, but with the
referrals from the court, the
other thing that our team
started doing is with our daily
arraignment dockets, the court
staff screens, looks at all of
the cases and identifies
charges that are eligible for
community court and emails the
judge each day to say, this
person, if you choose to refer
them, they would be eligible.
This is an eligible charge and
an eligible person for
community court. So that allows
the court to have that right in
front of them and know
sometimes those are just
returning warrants. Sometimes
it's an older case with one of
these charges, and sometimes
it's something like a criminal
trespass in the second degree,
where the officer didn't refer
it to community court, but the
judge may choose to do so. So
I'll talk now a little bit
about the the process referral
to participation over the
timeline. Since we've been
going 801 unique individuals
referred, 476 unique
individuals opted in 455 unique
individuals admitted and 212
unique individuals graduated.
So it's a it's a big number of
people who've graduated in
looking at reasons tracked in
court for participation drop
off. I mean, some people will
not. Some people arrive at
court and just decide right
away, I'm not even going to do
I'm not going to screen. I'm
not going to screen for this.
Or they they're being screened
and they just say, I want to go
back to regular court. We do
have people who don't show up
for the court, for community
court, either for admission or
along the way during the time
frame. Since this is court, if
you don't show up, it's likely
the judge. If you don't show up
and you don't contact the court
to let someone know why you're
not able to make it, it's
likely that a warrant is going
to issue. And. We do. We do at
some point, terminate people
from participation if their
repeated failures to appear or
if they simply. We do. We have
some people who, you know, just
aren't able or decide not to
complete their obligations. And
we try and give them as much
time and leeway as possible and
support using peer navigators,
taking them right to the
treatment agencies, our team, I
mean, there are people there
who will offer rides. So
everything we can do to keep
individuals because it is a a
unique situation in this court
where everyone is essentially
on the same side and wanting to
dismiss the case. So when
somebody shows up and starts to
participate, my goal is the
prosecutor defense attorney's
goal, the judge's goal, the
police officer's goal, it's all
to end up dismissing this case
and having this person in a
better place and, and starting
on the road to a better place.
>> Diana. Go ahead.
>> Yes. Thank you. Quick
question on the data here. I
was trying to get a sense for
the success rate and looking at
the top right number, it says
1609 total referrals. Then
there's 801 unique individuals
referred. But then then I'm
looking at the unique
individuals admitted and just
trying to get a sense for what
number we should be looking at
to get a good percent success
rate. So if I use a unique
individuals admitted, then
that's nearly half of the folks
that admitted into the program
have graduated. But can you
explain that difference between
the 1609 and the 801?
>> Yeah, this is Jamie. I can
so the 1609 is essentially the
total number of citations. So
not unique individuals, but
just the number of citations
that have resulted in somebody
being asked to go to community
court at any point in the
program's time being open. Most
of the data that's that's more
readily tracked with law
enforcement, jails, courts. I
think we've talked about this
with jail data as well. Is is
less about unique individuals,
the number of actual people who
are served and more about like
the activity, because law
enforcement is going to be
going out and doing that work
kind of regardless, I was able
to, to kind of break that down
just by looking at like sort of
a master list of who all has
actually who the people
attached to those citations.
And so that was 801 unique
people that make up those 609
referrals. And then as Kevin
was saying, not everyone opts
in. It's a it's a voluntary,
it's a voluntary program, but
476 have over time, unique
individuals. But I would also
say some of those unique
individuals opted in more than
once. That's not captured in
this data. We'll see that
actually. Next slide I think is
is talking about repeats. But
this. So you can't really get
like a, a graduation rate from
this set of numbers because
this just captures for each of
those buckets a unique
individual for each one of them,
whether or not they someone
made it to that stage in the
process. And then I'll get into
repeat stuff next. But I think
your question will start to get
answered over the next few
slides.
>> Okay. Thank you Jimmy.
>> You're welcome. Okay. I
think we can go to the next
slide. There we go. So to
Diana's point, one of the
things that we as we were
looking through the prior data,
wanted to understand was kind
of how frequently some people
were coming back. And that's
because like anecdotally, we
see some of the same people
coming back multiple times. So
when we looked across the
lifetime of the program of the
801 unique individuals referred,
423 of those had at least two
involvements with the court,
205 unique individuals had
three or more, and 48 had five
or more. A repeat referral
doesn't necessarily mean that
the program failed, because I
think that's what people are
trying to look. They're trying
to get at when you when we
start asking about graduations
and I, I am going to get into
that as well. It's like, what
do we define success in a court
program? How do we define that?
I think it's not as simple as
just looking at these numbers.
So for example, 100 people with
repeated involvement eventually
graduated in 42 of those had an
earlier unsuccessful
involvement before they
ultimately completed the
program. So sometimes it is
that repeat those repeat
touches for folks that kind of
helps move them forward. And I
think that's it then becomes a
little more complex because
you're getting into things that
are not as easy to measure,
which I will also talk about in
a minute, because we then did a
little deep dive on 24
participants, like repeat
participants and why they were
repeated. And that took a lot
of qualitative information. So
we should not just treat
repeated involvement as either
a positive or negative. I just
want to be clear about that.
And then we can go to the next
slide, because that's where I'm
going to talk about what
success looks like and how we
define it. So graduation, which
I know is what a lot of people
tend to focus on, is, is one
potential measure of success.
It's got it's a, it's a clear
kind of court outcome. And it
means that somebody followed
through on whatever
requirements that they agreed
to. But I think particularly
when we're working with folks
who have experienced or are
currently experiencing chronic
homelessness, some maybe with
significant substance use
issues, mental health issues,
medical challenges. Progress is
almost never linear. Some
people who previously wouldn't
engage at all, like early on,
might start showing up for
appointments, and that is a
success. Somebody might
complete an assessment that
previously was very difficult
to get them to engage with, and
that is also a success.
Somebody may connect to
treatment, whether that's
inpatient, outpatient or start
getting medication. They may
accept shelter or even a
housing program for the first
time. Right. And those are all
meaningful steps for people,
even if they don't ultimately
graduate in one of those
attempts, if that makes sense.
Community court is really kind
of a hub. It's a connector to
those things. It is not a
housing program. It is not a
shelter provider. It's not a
treatment provider. It's really
just kind of a connector in
that way. And I so I don't want
to confuse because Diana, you
specifically had asked in the
executive committee meeting,
how does this connect to the
the overall, the larger goal of
ending homelessness and court
cannot do that. I'll talk I'll
talk about that in a little bit.
But. These are all the court
can do is attempt to help
somebody connect to the the
people and the places and the
programs that can help them get
there. But people themselves
also have to be ready and
willing in any given moment.
And a and a service, a resource
also has to be open, accessible
and available all at the same
time. So this just kind of
keeps people engaged along the
way so that we don't lose them
along the way. We keep them
connected in that way. And I,
this is just one quote. We
actually had many, but on the
right hand side where it says,
I've never gotten this far
before, there are many other
quotes. Kevin might actually
have some of the other ones,
but. People feel many people
who have gone through court,
whether they've done it once,
they've done it five times,
they often feel a little more
connected to people and the
system and proud of themselves
for getting as far as they do.
And that can go a long way with
keeping them engaged with the
process. I do think, though,
that it gives it gives us a
place to look at things that we
could track in the future. Okay,
so kind of in that same vein,
oh, back to ten, please. So
that data, it gives us numbers
about what happens in court,
but it doesn't necessarily tell
us why. So we can see the
referrals, the admissions
warrants, terminations, but
it's very difficult to see
what's going on in a person's
life that gets us to those
numbers. So my team went back
and reviewed 24 individual
cases that showed kind of
different patterns of
involvement over time. So we
included people who never
really got started, like just
have they've been cited in
multiple times and never wanted
to opt in. People who just put
their participation,
participation kind of broke
down over time. People with
frequent or repeat involvement,
and then people who eventually
succeeded after repeat
involvement. This was not like
a representative sample. Don't
draw any like major conclusions
about this, but it was
something that my team could do
with the information that we
had. And I think it did help us
identify some recurring
circumstances that I mentioned
previously. The data does not
doesn't show. It's never going
to, it's never going to show.
But and it gives us an
understanding or at least more
visible of where that program
intersects with the larger
homeless response system and
other local systems. We can go
to the next slide, please.
There we go. So in cases where
people did eventually make
progress, it rarely looked like
community court made the
difference itself. It. It's a.
It again was a connector. So a
concrete intervention like
shelter or housing or treatment
became available around the
same time that that person was
in court and ready and willing
to participate in that
intervention. For several
people, that was a safe day
community, but certainly other
shelters are on that list as
well. For others, treatment or
mental health care became
available. At the same time,
the eventual success entries in
this little review also
described the access to ongoing
case management, peer support
and outreach that they get at
community court. So it's just
kind of this regular point of
contact that they can count on
every single week. As a former
outreach worker, I can tell you
that as much as we try to
consistently stay engaged with
people that we're working with
who are outside, it is often
not as consistent because we're
kind of all over the place
trying to put out fires for
folks. So this is a regular,
consistent place that they can
get that that ongoing support
and have someone help them
navigate the requirements for
court, as well as acting on any
opportunity that shows up. But
certainly readiness, someone's
individual readiness and timing
is important. It's relevant
here because some people have
been offered help before they
were ready to take that step
for themselves, or maybe even
before they were able to, to,
to meaningfully engage in that,
in that step. And their
circumstances and priorities
kind of changed along the way.
So those, again, are just
associations in kind of a small
review. They're not proof that
any one intervention caused
graduation in, in community
courts, but the court can and
does provide another point of
engagement that I think is, is
very important. And whether it
leads somewhere is very much
dependent on what is available
and accessible outside of court
and what that person needs.
Next slide please. So the cases
where people struggled were
also very informative. We saw
people with significant mental
health needs, severe substance
use, difficulty navigating,
even like relatively basic
requirements for some attending
appointments, keeping track of
their court dates or just
following through consistently
was a substantial challenge.
It's one of those are a lot of
the reasons that some of those
folks ended up falling out. We
also saw people who could not
remain successfully in shelter
or housing programs or other
community settings, even when
those opportunities were
available. And that gets into
an issue I think we're
encountering across multiple
systems where people whose
needs exceed what our existing
community based programs are
equipped to manage or support,
but they also don't necessarily
meet criteria for a higher
level of intervention. So I'm
talking about people with
pretty significant mental
health or behavioral health
challenges who can't do court,
but they also don't meet
criteria for a hold.
Councilmember Perez, I see your
hand.
>> Yeah, Jamie, if you had to
put a percentage of. That
situation to the folks, would
you say that's like 5% of
people or 10% or.
>> Of people who fall in that
gap?
>> Barriers to participation
and progress of the items that
you listed here? More
specifically, the. Mental
health, severe issues with that.
>> Kevin, do you have any I
can't remember off the top of
my head how many people we had
that cannot come back because
just competency issues. It's
not a massive number.
>> That's a fairly small number
because if you're anyone who is
is not competent due to mental
health, since it is a court
process, the attorney will take
them back to regular court and
get an actual competency
evaluation to see if they can
are even competent to be in the
court system.
>> And, and I, I think people
may not understand that
someone's competency, their
level of competency does not
necessarily equate to people
being placed on a hold and
being like mandatory treatment,
mandatory engagement or
something like those two things
are not the same thing. And so
we've got this relatively small
group of people who live
outside but have a lot of
engagement with a lot of these
systems, and they kind of fall
in this kind of in this gap of
their they've not been able to
successfully kind of remain in
even very low barrier shelter
or housing situations. But they,
they can't be compelled to
access treatment. And it's not
likely the jail or court system
is going to hold them. So it's
a small number of people, but
impactful.
>> I think there's an important
distinction between choosing
not to. Yes and unable to.
>> Yes.
>> And don't want the two mixed
up. And so when we look at you
say a small number, so less
than 5%, less than 3%. I mean,
just of what you've seen so far,
some guests.
>> I mean, I can think of
probably about 40 people on the
streets right now.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah.
>> All right. And then choosing
not to.
>> Yeah. Choosing not to.
That's that's different. That
is a higher number, but it
tends to go down over time. So
we've got people who initially
don't engage. And then kind of
over time, some of those will
start to will start to engage
with the more they are kind of
met with engagement.
>> Correct. Okay. Thank you.
>> Did I, did I finish
everything on that slide? I
think so probably. Let's just
go to the next one. So I the
reason that I mention all that
and I'm going to say the
current system, but it's
actually multiple systems. So
this is not just like the
homeless crisis response. This
is like, it's really kind of
community community. What we
have kind of falls short
because the reality is that the
city or the I wrote this as the
city, but certainly this is
true for any government or
jurisdiction. We still have a
responsibility to respond to
unsafe behavior, things that
are disruptive, significant
impacts that are happening in
shared public space. And we
need, I think, all of us.
That's why the program was
created, know that jail is not
a behavioral health
intervention that we would
design like willfully right for
behavior for people with severe
mental illness or, or addiction
issues. That's not often the
solution. But when a government
has to respond to disruptive
behavior, sometimes criminal
activity, things that are
unsafe, unhealthy just for the
public at large, this is this
is kind of where we find
ourselves. There is no there is
no thing that can make that
better. The government has to
intervene. And outreach workers
cannot compel treatment.
Community court cannot compel
recovery or shelter and. And
even shelter can't eliminate
all like behavioral
expectations to allow just like
anybody to be able to stay
because they also have to pay
attention to the safety of
everyone in that community. So
we can't just stop managing
serious impacts while we're
waiting for everybody to become
ready. And then, of course, as
I mentioned, there are some who
are not necessarily going to be
ready, but they don't meet that
level of of criteria. So
repeated violations are still
going to require a response.
Repeated citation is not
necessarily like an
inappropriate thing because
again, we see people start to
evolve over time. Although I do
not believe that repeat
citation should be utilized
just because, just because an
officer feels like it. And so
community court just gives us
another tool to provide some
level of accountability that's
not just punitive with the hope
that some people, hopefully
more over time, will continue
to engage and accept the
support that's available. It
certainly has limits, and I
think we need some better
options for people whose needs
exceed what this model can
address, as well as what the
rest of the system can actually
manage. Next slide please. So
this is really just kind of a
wrapping up, although I do have
some there's like three slides
after my end slide that's got
just a bunch of data for any of
you who are just data wonks.
But I think. And this is just
my view, Kevin can certainly
chime in. I think we should
probably continue to maintain
the program as an alternative
to traditional court. I think
that we've seen more actual
engagement in this program from
people who did not previously
engage, and just had a lot of
barriers piled on top of them
with traditional court. So I
think certainly that and I
think more kind of cross
jurisdictional partnership and
coordination is always better.
So I think that we can we
should continue. I think that
there are certainly places
where we can reduce barriers
between opting in and active
participation. You know,
somehow making whether it's the
evaluation or some part of that
process, maybe a little simpler,
maybe shorter, certainly that's
possible or matching kind of
identified needs with resources.
But I'll tell you, I mean, the
court's limited to what
resources are available so that,
you know, they can't mandate
beyond that. I there's a place,
I think, for tracking outcomes
beyond the court. I think with
housing and shelter, certainly
this can be helpful with that
potentially. But like
recidivism with health care
usage and jail and the court
system usage, there's there
there's a, there's a place
there, I think, for figuring
out how to capture some better
data post graduation. And then
I will, in addition to the
larger system gaps there, I
think I mentioned we do need a
long term location. So the
location where it's currently
at is in a space that's being
master planned by the city
because the it's currently near
the old ops center, which is
moving. So starting sometime, I
think next year, 2028 ish, we
need to find a long term
location for community court.
So I'm going to put in a plug
for that. If any of you know,
anybody on a good bus line,
we'll take it. And you want
anything Kevin, to that one.
>> As far as location.
>> Just literally anything on
that slide.
>> You know, I, I think that in
the future we talked about
possible expansion of county
cases. I mean, that would we
started as a half day program.
We're now really a full day
program. I don't know how much
there there is some capacity at
the current levels. If we
started getting some county
cases in there, but there's a
limit under the current
resources of how many cases
that we can handle. And I guess
as. Thinking about Jamie's
earlier comments on, you know,
people who who don't succeed in
this program, I would also like
to to point out that when
someone does fail out of
community court, I mean, that
often means they're going back
to regular court where we're
still I mean, I'm still the
prosecutor there too. So that
gives our office the ability to
say, hey, we recognize you did
all of these things. And then
something happened and you had
you disappeared for three
months or, or whatever. But
we're still you had one more
thing to do. Just do that and
we'll go get that substance use
evaluation. We'll still dismiss
your case. So even though there
are cases in here that show up
on those numbers of they didn't
graduate. For some of those
people, we're still, even after
they're out of our program,
trying to recognize what they
accomplished in the court and
give them the opportunity to
get that case dismissed. If
they can complete, complete
those obligations.
>> That's pretty much it.
Unless you guys really wanted
to see the data at the end, but
it's in your packet, I believe.
>> I, I have a couple questions
as well as comments just on
your last comment there. I
think this is really the
struggle. You know, we're we're
contending with this right now
also on the opioid abatement
councils. How do you measure
success? You know, what kind of.
In in our instance, where we're
looking at what data are we
requesting from the individuals
that we give grant funding to?
And, you know, like some of
these folks that are outside
for a really long time, they
may not graduate, but just
having them in the building,
talking with people and service
providers is a success in and
of its own. And I think the
challenge is that we want to
have a clear cut graph, you
know, showing us the success
rates and, and, you know, with,
with things like, you know,
viruses, outbreaks and things
like that, it's very clear cut
and dry. Either either you have
Covid or you don't, you know,
either you prevented it or you
didn't. And in this situation,
each individual's path is so
unique that there is no perfect
way to capture the data that we
need to measure that success. I
was curious, though, in my
opinion, there's a very
extremely high level of value
to this program. But do we know
just in terms of dollars and
cents, is this is it more
expensive or is it less
expensive to provide the
alternative court in this
particular regard?
>> I think this is much less
expensive because we're keeping
people out of jail, where even
reducing if they were going to
say, oh, under the old system,
we might say, okay, you get
jail or you get work crew. And
there's a cost to the
government for either of those
options here. With the
community restitution, people
could pick an organization
that's helping the unhoused
population go do their four
hours of community service
there. So that decreases the
costs. Just just the other
keeping people out of the
system essentially reduces the
costs in my mind. So I think I
think it's a
>> A much more efficient way to
spend your money.
>> Great. Thank you for that.
And then the last thing I would
like to say is this is an
important point to make. So the
county right now, we're
contending, we're working
through our annual budget. And
we just had all of the
departments and elected offices
come and present what their
plans are, which we have asked
every department to look at
approximately 2.5% budget cut.
And I just want to raise
awareness that the prosecuting
attorney's recommendation for
their cuts is directly to
alternative court systems. So I
think that's an important thing
for us to be aware of. And I
would ask that you get involved
in the county budget discussion.
If they think that that is an
important issue to discuss. Any
other thoughts or questions
from everyone?
>> Chair. I think the other
maybe kind of plug I would make
is that I think I think
communities who have diverse
kind of options for people to
engage with options that meet
their individual needs, or it
can't be done for every single
individual difference. I know,
but if you're it just makes
more sense to me that it's,
it's more equitable service
delivery. I mean, you we've got
people, many whom never
participated in regular court
and had lots of, lots of
warrants, lots of failures to
appear, lots of jail time for
those who even though 100% of
them, but a decent percentage
of them are now actively
participating. I mean, that to
me seems worthwhile. You've
created something. Something's
been created that meets, you
know, kind of a niche need. We
should do that for lots of
people with varying needs.
>> And just my final thought,
I'd encourage anybody. A lot of
you have been to the court, but
if you haven't, it's open to
the public. I mean, this is the
happiest part of my week of
going to this court. And we
have a surprising I mean, Jamie
did a great job of covering the
numbers. But if you look at the
stories, I think that the
people who've succeeded, some
of them have just succeeded
magnificently, and they come
back and visit us, which I've
never heard of somebody coming
back and visiting the judge
when they've been had a
criminal charge. But people
come back. And just last week
there was a gentleman. He, I,
he was waiting for me at the
door. He had on an ID badge for
his employment, which I noticed
right away. Oh. And so he told
me about his employment. He
told me about how he had a key
to the building, which was his
way of saying they trust me.
And he had, you know, he'd been
through the substance use
treatment, he'd been through
this program, and he totally
transformed his life. And we
have many people who come back
and they want to go in and tell
the judge, here's what I'm
doing now. And they want to
work with our program, and they
want to help other people in
the program. Some of them
become peer navigators. So it
really is a program that if you
look at the costs of for the
for those people who graduated
and succeeded, just the costs
not only of the criminal
justice system, but to not
having them camping, having
them doing something meaningful
with their lives. I just think
it's a wonderful program and
I'd encourage anybody to come
visit any time you want.
>> I would agree with that. I
did attend one time and
witnessed several people who
gave their testimony of their
success in the program. And
when you talk about data
capturing and success, changing
lives is the success that we
seek after. And I would say
just just a side comment here,
you did a very good job of
presenting some of the barriers
and the system gaps and
everything. There is a lot of
success coming out of it that I
think is very underrepresented
in this report. Somebody did.
Diana. Go ahead.
>> Sorry, that must have been
an accident. My apologies.
>> No problem. Is there anyone
else that had their hands up?
Okay, before we move on, what I
would like to do is, is ask.
Just take a couple minutes. The
group what we want to do with
this information. Is there
anything that we want to touch
on? Is there anything that we
want to add to our agendas in
the future? Do we want to
create a subcommittee to make
recommendations? What is
everybody's thoughts on this?
>> Chair? Sure. Good morning.
Thank you. First of all, this
is great information. And
regardless of, you know, the
the outcome and the numbers
presented, whether they're low,
whether they're high, you know,
people have different opinions.
It sounds like an incredibly
successful program. I think to
your point, it's really, really
hard to quantify, you know,
people's struggle, people's
addictions, people's mental
health, and quantify that into
numbers that show us what that
success looks like. I think
that somebody that even goes
through a third of the program
knows that they have access to
resources, to information. That
in itself is success, and
they'll come back, right? Maybe
in the future they'll remember,
you know, that this
organization was able to help
me with, with something that
they might be struggling with.
I'll just say is I think that
it's, you know, you mentioned
that, you know, you at this
point, you may have the
capacity to be able to support
some of the cases that the
county has, but I think it
needs to be expanded. As
Councilor Young mentioned
earlier in this conversation,
there is a reduction for many
departments, including law and
justice, that we are looking
and contending with over the
next couple of months as we go
over the budget. But I think
that it's something that we
really start looking at
examining and figuring out how
we can participate in similar
programs. The county can
participate in similar programs,
and the county can support it.
Because I see this long term as
a very successful, successful
program. The numbers, in my
opinion, are evidence of that.
And so I think we need to get
on board. And maybe this
organization, echo, can lobby
the county Council to ensure
that we are also actively
participating in a program that
changes lives. And and we need
to be more involved because at
the end of the day, you know,
if people care about budgets,
people care about money, it'll
save us. But more importantly,
it'll save lives.
>> Well said. Or is that Will
said. Any thoughts? There is a
suggestion to lobby the county
council. We're we'll get back
to our legislative agenda here,
but we could add that to it.
We'll bring that back later.
Okay. Sure. Yes. Go ahead.
>> Yes. I think this is a tool
in the toolbox for us in our
mission and goal. And I think
supporting it is important to
do in keeping track of what the
budget implications mean. On
the success of this program is
something that we can do. And
then translate what that impact
is when those budget decisions
are made. And I think that's a
place where echo can put our
minds together and figure out,
you know, what gaps. Another
gap that we'll have to address.
That would be my position at
this point.
>> I missed that last sentence.
That would be what.
>> That would be. My position
at this point is to ensure that
this is a valuable tool in our
toolbox. As we work as a group
on an echo focused on the
mission, we track the budget
implications that are happening.
I think it's clear the
importance of this program. And
if we want to send a letter to
the county council saying how
important this program is, I
think that's something we can
do. But if we do that, then we
have to go back to our
jurisdictions. So maybe
individually the different
jurisdictions can submit a
comment to the county on the
importance of this program. But
I think the real discussion is
if there is a change in the
budget and supporting this
program from the county level,
what those what that means for
the success of this program.
>> We'll deal with that.
>> Sure. I think those are
great opportunities. Victoria.
Go ahead.
>> Yeah. Victoria city of
battleground, I agree that I, I
don't know that we have to
necessarily go back. I guess
that would be a question that I
would want to get clarified is
I don't think we necessarily
need to go back to our, you
know, jurisdictions just
because or I mean, we are
effectively here as echo. We
are representatives of our
district. So we're not coming
back asking for policy changes
or, you know, money from an ask
for our, you know,
jurisdictions for more money
like we are with the ILA and
everything that. But I think
that definitely I, I agree with
Will and Diana that we need to
be utilizing our, this board
and asking and maybe draw
something up if we maybe want
to have Jordan or somebody draw
something up that it could go
to the county council and just,
you know, reiterating what you
other counselors have just said
that we need to show support
for this program because we see
the benefit of it. And this
will, this, this is going to
help us move towards our goals,
which is ending community
homelessness, because we do see
the benefits of it. And also,
if it's not there, what's the
outcome that these people could,
you know, it could create more
barriers for them.
>> Thank you. I think we will
bring that back up here in just
a few minutes. When we get
towards the end on our
legislative agenda items. Are
there any last we are running a
little bit behind. Are there
any last questions at this
point? Okay. Thank you so much
for presenting to us today. And
one thing I would suggest is
maybe if you could send an
email out to all of us and with
an invitation to attend, that'd
be great. All right. Thank you.
So we'll go ahead and move on
to development of onboarding
process. I know that Councilor
Fuentes is good at talking fast.
>> Thanks. You know, I went
back and watched the video a
few nights ago as I was
updating because I wanted to
make sure that I captured
everybody's record. And I
realized that I do speak fast.
Of course, it was set up at 1.5,
so I couldn't understand what I
was saying. Good morning
everybody. Thanks for, you know,
the time to be able to go over
this really quickly. Something
to keep in mind that this is
the second iteration of the
echo new member onboarding
process. It's a practical guide
for your first 90 days as a
member, whether you are a brand
new member to echo, or you are
an existing member and would
like to go through this
onboarding process because you
didn't have an opportunity to
do so in the past. I won't go
through every specific detail.
We don't have a heck of a lot
of time, but there's a couple
of changes that I made based on
recommendations from this, from
the members in echo. One of
them was linking resources. Now,
if you have a hard copy, the
chances of you trying to click
on a link would probably be
impossible. But if you have a
soft copy or a or an online
copy, you're able to click on
the echo web page and meeting
materials, for example, the
Memorandum of Agreement on page
one and Homeless System
overview graphic. Another thing
that I incorporated was the
statement on. Participate with
Choice and Respect. We know
that we have folks that
potentially might have
experienced trauma at some
point when dealing with
homelessness or any other other
issues. And so we wanted to
make sure, I wanted to make
sure that there was a statement
that, you know, nobody is
required to disclose personal
information. Nobody is required
to provide anything that they
believe is private. And if they
feel uncomfortable, for example,
with a ride along with VPD or
Keesee, or if they feel
uncomfortable going to jail or
going to jail, going going on a
tour of the jail, then they
absolutely are not required to
do so. Keep in mind that these
are just recommendations of
agencies that individuals new
members could participate in,
but are absolutely not required
to engage if they feel
uncomfortable. And we flip to
the next page a couple of pages.
It's still the same agencies
that I had highlighted last
time. I don't believe in
looking at the video a few days
ago. I don't believe anybody
suggested any new ones, but
there is an opportunity on page
four to add additional visits
with any other agency that have
been identified with their
mentor, so please keep that in
mind. And again, you know, the
five agencies highlighted are
not required to attend if
somebody doesn't feel
comfortable and if there is an
agency that somebody would be
would like to get to know a
little bit more and participate
in, there is an option of doing
so. And then on page five,
there is journey mapping.
During the 90 days, I've never
done any mapping before. So
this was kind of a learning
experience for me. And I hope
that this is sufficient for
this onboarding document. Take
a look at it. If you have any
questions or comments or
feedback, please feel free to
share with the group. If we go
down a little further under
Journey Mapping, there are
questions you can ask any
agency. Choose 1 or 2 questions
that fit the visit. The same
questions can be asked of every
agency. If somebody feels
comfortable. And then below
that is the completion
checklist. One of the another.
Another suggestion or
recommendation that was made
was adding graphics and images.
For the life of me, I couldn't
think of any other graphics or
images to add to a checklist to
an onboarding. So if somebody
is feels strongly that we need
to add graphics or images,
please, please feel free to
email me and let me know what
they should be. Because I could
not think of anything that I
felt or I believe belong on
this checklist. And then
finally, another recommendation
was that it was too long. It
was nine pages at that point.
So this was reduced from nine
pages to five pages to make it
a little bit more digestible.
And with that, any questions or
comments? All right. Sounds
like we're ready to adopt Diana.
>> Go ahead.
>> Well, Will, just real
quickly that last end brief to
debrief, I brief mentor debrief.
Maybe it was just feels kind of
weird. What is that really?
>> The brief mentor debrief.
This is an opportunity for the
mentor and the participant to
have a discussion and debrief
of any of the agency visits, or
just the experience of going
through the onboarding process.
Again, it's a 20 minute, 30
conversation. If it's
sufficient, it's not it's not
required. It is just an option.
>> Okay.
>> Thinking perhaps maybe after
their first several echo
meetings, having a little
debrief afterwards with the
mentor on that as well. So that
it.
>> Wasn't an option. Nothing
here in this document is set in
stone. It is absolutely
flexible and changes can be
made as needed to fit the needs
of the individual, the
participant, and the mentor.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> Thank you for looking into
that and making some changes.
Based on the feedback, I think
that this is something that can
evolve over time. And since
this will be the first time
that we do this, we can get
some feedback from the
individuals that go through the
process and revise as needed.
Does everybody feel comfortable
at this time adopting this? Go
ahead. Victoria.
>> Sorry, I just have a follow
up question. Can you remind me,
is this for everybody who owns
boards like new council members
that are coming on to to the
board? Or is this specific to
like the positions that we're
we're, we're, aren't we paying
for these positions? I sorry,
I'm my mind is not working this
morning.
>> No it's okay. Council member
for yes, absolutely. This is
for new participants, including
the two that have been selected
with lived experiences and will
be joining echo, I believe,
next month. And it is also an
onboarding process for existing
members who would benefit from
going through this process and
visiting some of these agencies
if they've not already done so.
>> Okay, that's what I was
thinking. Okay. So then, so
then can you remind me are
those two that were onboarding
with lived experience? Are
those going to be paid
positions? Did we ever.
>> There is a stipend and I
believe that has been. Yeah. No,
it has been approved by the
council, the county. We
approved it. The county council
has approved the stipend for
those two individuals.
>> And can you remind me what
that amount was?
>> I think it was $1,000 a year,
2000 per person. Oh, up to a
thousand. Thank you.
>> It's based on. Per per
attendance. Yeah. Per meeting.
>> Okay. Because I was just
going to say if they're getting
paid well, then we should
probably make these more of a
mandatory requirement than just
a I mean, not every single one,
obviously. I totally understand
for those who might have, you
know, traumas that don't want
to do a tour of the jail, you
know, and stuff like that, but,
you know, having but going to
at least go through some
onboarding requirements. But I
mean, I guess like you said,
that's only a thousand a year.
So never mind.
>> Absolutely. I think there is
an expectation for new members
to go through the onboarding
process in the new member can
work with their mentor to
determine what makes sense for
the individual.
>> Okay, thanks and thank you,
Will, for doing all that, I
appreciate that.
>> Yeah, absolutely.
>> Are we comfortable?
>> Will is fine.
>> Are we comfortable? Go ahead
and adopting this for our first
round and then looking at and
looking at it again after the
first couple uses.
>> Council member Frazier from
battleground. I will move to
adopt.
>> Okay. We have a motion.
>> Council member Stover second.
>> Second. Councilor Stover,
thank you. Okay. All those in
favor, say aye, aye aye aye.
And any opposed? Great. Motion
passes. Thank you, Councilor
Fuentes.
>> I did in seven minutes.
>> Not bad, not bad. I've seen
you do better. Okay. All right.
So moving on. I'm going to kind
of switch these things up a
little bit. I wanted to start
with the legislative agenda
item. So I think we had asked
last month to send email. Do we
do that? AM I remembering
correctly? If there were ideas?
>> So it has been a little
while since I have been in echo
meeting, so I'm not totally
sure what you all discussed at
the last meeting. But yes, I
would say that if folks have
items they would like to
include on a legislative agenda,
items to consider or discuss,
please send those in ASAP and
we can discuss those here
before the end of the year and
the new session starts.
>> Okay. And that has to do
with state, correct? If there's
any interest in doing something,
the county council that needs
to be right now.
>> Like right now in this
meeting.
>> Yeah, I think so. If we're
going to take any direction
with recommendations to the
county council, I think we
should really make that
decision now and give Jordan
the opportunity to draft
something for it so that we
could approve it in November.
Yeah, but that would be the
latest that it would work.
>> As we were having a
conversation earlier about the
community cord, I think it
would be worth exploring a
potential pilot at the county
level to participate in the
program. Is that.
>> Say that again.
>> As we were talking earlier
about the community cord, I
think it would be a good
opportunity for the county to
explore piloting a program,
participation in the community
cord program.
>> Like you mean like Keesee?
Oh, correct. We they already do.
>> They know I'm talking about
actually participating in the
court. So having our folks that
are go through our court system,
participating in community
court.
>> They can they can it just
has not been widely used by
Keesee, which is why I was
saying I think the like heart
expanding into the county is
going to be helpful with that
because. Keesee. So you all
actually did approve another
FTE for for a heart deputy,
which they've already posted
that position, and we'll be
doing interviews for that
person for those folks soon. So,
so that work will expand into
the county and then the program
will get more use, more county
use in particular. So cutting
the program would be a okay.
>> So at this point, I think it
would be worth in waiting to
see how that expands. Once the
person that we allocated
funding for gets hired. And
then and then I think we can we
can make a decision later based
on that data.
>> Yeah. And I will just say
it's been a bit of a mystery up
to this point. Why Co hasn't
been more involved in the
process. So I think that the
expansion of heart into the
county, I think maybe will be
the catalyst into larger
development into their policies
and procedures.
>> Got it.
>> Is there perhaps a motion to
give Jordan direction to draft
a letter to the county Council?
>> So moved.
>> Second Burke.
>> It's been moved and seconded.
And what exactly would the
content of that letter be that
the person who made the motion.
>> Wait.
>> I made the motion to move
forward. Well, that's a well,
that's a good question. I think
I'd like to maybe hear
suggestions from Echo members.
Well, I, yeah, that's I, I'm
not sure exactly what the
content of the letter should be.
>> Chair can I hi, this is
Stephanie with counsel for the
homeless. There has been a push
to remove junk fees from. For
folks that are renting. So it
could be because there's a
forum tonight for a junk fee
town hall. So there's a lot of
fees associated with folks that
are renting properties
throughout Clark County. Pet
pet rentals, pet fees, late
fees that are astronomical. So
there's been a push throughout
the state. I think King County
has some legislation around,
you know, capping fees. So that
can be a place where echo can
actually, you know, write
something up that to basically
end junk fees.
>> Okay, that is something that
we can add. Want to circle back
to our motion though, that is
on just the county for not what
is that language look like? And
we need to give Jordan
instruction on this. My, my
initial thought is the question
that I asked earlier that
you're actually saving money
through the program and that it
is going to be detrimental to
our system. If there are cuts
made to, quite frankly, any of
the alternative court systems
that we have, but in particular
community court.
>> This is sunny counsel for
the homeless. Do we have data
on the amount of money saved? I
think that that is one of the
challenges that we're talking
about positive outcomes, but we
don't necessarily have like, do
we have comparisons? Because I
think data, court data from
pre-pandemic is completely
different data from what we're
talking about today. So just
noting that because if we're
talking about saving money,
then we would probably need to
have data in there about what
that looks like.
>> I don't I don't have this
Jamie from the city. I don't
have numbers on that. I'm sure
somebody could look that up.
That actually works for the
courts. What I can tell you is
that I was looking at this,
this jail data from
pre-pandemic, because I know
that what they previously were
giving us. Kind of pandemic to
now numbers, but we are
actually way under on arrests
related to homelessness or of
people experiencing
homelessness. It's about half
the number of arrests from
pre-pandemic days. If you look
at 2018, 2019.
>> This is Destinie again for
Council for homeless at one
point. Mr. McClure, you talked
about like a lot of the savings
around what's happening with,
you know, state, you know,
particular things that, you
know, funds that are being
saved by people not going
through the regular court. Can
we be that vague in the letter?
If we were talking about things
in general?
>> We can do whatever we want.
>> I think we can, but I can I
can see the council coming back
and asking for concrete data
that's going to happen.
>> Well, you have you have jail
data right here in 20 in 2018,
over 2700 people were
experiencing homelessness, were
booked.
>> By all agencies.
>> By all agencies. And now in
2026, it's well just look at
2025. We have a full year 1530.
>> But this is funny. Can that
be attributed directly to, I
think the question that will be
asked, like, can we. It can be
partially attributed, but are
there other factors that the
letter would need to be very
transparent on? Here are some
additional factors that need to
be acknowledged, because I
think the number of people
ultimately, that have gone
through the court is very small
within the context of the
number of people who have gone
through the court system. So I
do think that it is important
on, hey, here are the benefits.
These are the wraparound
supports, here are the
successes. And we're seeing the
investment and commitment
having an impact. Here are
other factors that could be
playing a part. Is this.
>> A. Strong argument system.
>> Versus just saying this is
positive. This is the number of
people have gone through
because inevitably we'll go and
look at wait, these numbers
don't necessarily match.
>> Yeah. So I mean capacity
across the system.
>> I have a suggestion. Let's
let Jordan work on this. Based
on our conversation. He could
come to the executive committee.
We could review that and then
bring something to the board
next month. Does that work?
Okay, great.
>> We need to do it today.
>> We'll be approved.
>> We proved to to to have
Jordan draft something for us.
Yes. So okay, a couple couple
things left. So proposed
legislative agenda items.
Cessna, you brought something
up. I would suggest at this
point when when do we need to
have this ironed down by like
December, January.
>> So December would be ideal.
And I know that there's a
question here also on the
agenda about whether this group
wants to meet in in December or
not. But yes, if folks were
able to send items between now
and the November meeting, I
could collect those. And we
could look at them as a group
to see if these are things that
echo would like to take on or
propose as a potential
legislative agenda. You know,
echo. It's sort of similar to
the letter. Like there's a
world in which you all can
endorse as individuals, but if
you want it to have like the
weight of all of the
jurisdictions, anything would
need to go back to all the
other jurisdictions to sign on
to any agenda. If we were going
to lobby and say that this is
the position of any of the the
county or any of the cities,
>> Right, we wouldn't be taking
a position for our cities or
the county, but we would be
taking a position of echo the
group explicitly.
>> Yeah. And I.
>> Think you think that we
still need to go back to.
>> Our jurisdiction. I think I
think as long as you're very
clear that it was the position
of echo and that it wasn't
formally endorsed by any of the
jurisdictions in the county,
you you'd be okay. But you just
need to be we just want to be
very clear on that. Yeah.
>> Yep. Okay. So what I would
suggest then is everybody send
emails to Jordan if they have
ideas. And then in our next
meeting next November meeting,
we will have probably about a
half an hour or so. Sunny will
be presenting on Continuum of
Care and filling those seats.
So we'll have that discussion.
I would suggest that we have
another larger discussion on
agenda item or a legislative
agenda items in our next
meeting, the last piece of
business. And then we'll let us
go. Are we is everybody okay
with meeting in December?
>> Well.
>> I won't be here.
>> Do we have enough attendance?
Should we cancel our December
meeting?
>> I'll be here in order to
make sure this gets done.
Battleground.
>> Could I get the date of that
December meeting about closing
my computer?
>> Yeah. Second Tuesday of
December.
>> Okay, I'll be here. I'll be
here. That's all I needed to
know.
>> I believe it's December 8th.
>> Yes, yes.
>> Okay, so Counselor Fuentes
would not be able to make it.
Is there anyone else that would
not? Okay. All right. Let's go
ahead and plan to hold our
December meeting.
>> Counselor young, I want to
point out that that agenda had
got changed prior to or after I
had printed the agenda. So
there was one other item under
takeaways, recommendations and
next steps. And that was
mentors for the lived
experience members. We have two
that will be joining us for the
November meeting. So we need
two mentors to step up and
complete the new process.
>> Anybody have an interest in
doing that?
>> And our two new members were
Lorne Klugman and Deborah Brown.
>> I'll volunteer for spot.
>> Okay.
>> We have Counselor Fuentes.
>> I would recommend Counselor
Fuentes to. Lorne Schuckman,
because I believe he is an
employee of the city of
Vancouver. Is that correct?
>> So, yes, that is correct.
>> Yeah. Just to avoid conflict
of interest.
>> And Diane, are you
interested in. Well, you would
be the city of Vancouver as
well, but I'm not sure what
you're saying that. Are you
interested in doing so or for
the other.
>> Not at this, not at this
time.
>> Okay. We need one more
volunteer.
>> For Deborah.
>> Yeah.
>> This is Marilyn from Camas.
I just have no business being a
mentor right now. Sure. I'm
very interested in the
mentorship program. And so
perhaps next year I would be,
you know, know enough to be a
viable mentor. I just didn't
want to sit in silence because
I'm a very supportive of the
program.
>> Okay. I will go ahead and
volunteer to work with the
second, second person. That was
Deborah. You said Deborah. Okay.
Thank you. All right. Anything
critical? We're a little bit
past our meeting. Sorry for
keeping you a few minutes late.
>> I just want to ensure that
we have enough time for the
legislative. Since Council
Member Fuentes isn't going to
be able to be there in December,
I think it would be nice for us
to be able to thoroughly go
through it so we can get
collectively everybody's view
on these. And then just in case,
we have to go into December for
the actual finalization of it
sounds like we might have a lot
on our plate in November. Yes.
>> We we do, but I think we can
make it work just between the
two things, the continuum of
care. And then the other
priority will be the
legislative agenda.
>> Okay. Thank you. I will.
>> Just add that it depends on
what part of the world I find
myself in. I may be able to log
in remotely. So.
>> Okay. All right. With that,
we are adjourned. Thank you
everybody. We'll see you in
November