{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 1, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\n1.\nROLL CALL\nJenn Barrett, Acting Chair: Okay, I'd like to call this meeting to order. It's a little past 6:30 on\nWednesday, April 11th. Laurie, can you do roll call for us?\nJenn Barrett: Present.\nJenny Linton: Present.\nSusan Deutch: Present.\nArnold Brillinger: Present.\nJennifer Roloff: Here.\nLaurie Kozisek: Elizabeth Kenny, Lisa Hall and Anto Aghapekian are not present. Tony Lewis has\nresigned. We have a quorum.\n2. MINUTES\nJenn Barrett: Thank you. Moving on to item number two, minutes. Does anyone have any\ncomments from the meeting minutes from our last meeting which was on February 14th?\nLaurie Kozisek: We have no minutes available at this time.\n3.\nORAL COMMUNICAITONS/NON-AGEND (PUBLIC COMMENT)\nJen Barrett: Okay. Thank you. Moving on to oral communications, do we have any speaker slips?\nLaurie Kozisek: No.\n4.\nNEW BUSINESS\n4-A\nChanging Commission meeting dates to second Wednesday of odd months, starting May or\nJuly. New meeting months will be January, March, May, July, September, and November.\nJen Barrett: Okay. Item number four, new business. 4A is changing of the commission meeting\ndates to the second Wednesday of odd months starting in May or July. New meeting months will be\nJanuary, March, May, July, September, and November.\nJennifer Roloff: Will this start next year?\nLaurie Kozisek: It can start now.\n04/11/18\nPage 1 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 2, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nJenn Barrett: Okay. So if we had one starting in May, that would be seven meetings this year. Do\nwe want to vote on it?\nJennifer Roloff: I would make a motion to have the meeting in May, unless you want to have\ndiscussion before.\nJenn Barrett: I second that.\nLaurie Kozisek: You should also include that you want the meetings to be in odd months.\nJennifer Roloff.: So I'll make a motion to change the odd months and start in May.\nJenn Barrett: Okay. Can I be the second for that? Okay. All in favor?\nJenn Barrett, Susan Deutch, Arnold Brillinger, Jennifer Roloff: Aye.\nJenn Barrett: No. At all?\nJenny Linton: Not in May.\nJenn Barrett: Okay.\nJenny Linton: Well we'll have an extra.\n4-B\nPresentation: Karen Nakamura, Chair of Haas Institute's Disability Studies Cluster, UC\nBerkeley.\nJenn Barrett: Yes. So we'll move on to our next item, 4B, which is the presentation by Karen\nNakamura, Chair of Haas Institute's Disability Studies Cluster at UC Berkeley.\nKaren Nakamura: Great. Thank you very much. Do you have your little screen working so you\ndon't have to hurt your necks?\n[Pause for A/V to be corrected.]\nKaren Nakamura: Thank you, Commissioners, and especially thank you, Commissioner\nBrillinger, for inviting me to speak today. So I was just hired by UC Berkeley to head the\nDisabilities Studies program. I was speaking to Commissioner Barrett earlier that I'd previously\nbeen about 20 years in New Haven, Connecticut teaching at Yale. And I'm particularly pleased that\nthe proposed topic was to talk about intersectionality because I think it is increasingly an important\ntopic for anyone who's in the disability space to think about it. So I'm an anthropologist, and it's\nnatural for us to think about what diversity is. And increasingly, we've been thinking of disability as\na natural part of human diversity. Disability has always existed across time, disability exists across\ncultures.\n04/11/18\nPage 2 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 3, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nKaren Nakamura: And so anthropology, as a discipline that studies diversity across time and\ncultures is in a particularly good space to think about what it means especially in terms of all of its\ndifferent ramifications. Now, disability also has an expressive component. So it's also a new way of\nthinking about human diversity. And one of the complexities of disability is that we are always\nconstantly being changed by emerging disabilities. So the disabilities that we thought about 30 or 40\nyears are still with us, but there are also new emerging disabilities and new ways of thinking about\ndisability that challenge and bring us to different places. And so the topic I want to talk about today\nis intersectionality. Now, I am the Chair of the Disability Studies Cluster in the Haas Institute for a\nfair and inclusive society which is a new institution that was created by UC Berkeley with generous\nfunding from the Haas Foundation to really think about what intersectionality is.\nKaren Nakamura: Although I'm the Chair of the Disability Studies Cluster, there are other clusters\nthat are thinking about race, questions about gender, questions about sexuality, questions about\neconomic disparity, religion, socio-economic differences and so forth. And the goal of the Hass\nInstitute is to try to figure out how all of those work together to try to bring us to a place where our\nsociety is more fair and inclusive. Now, the concept of intersectionality was brought forth by two\nAfrican-American study scholars, Kimberle Crenshaw and Patricia Collins. And it comes out of\nmany of the criticisms that especially black feminism and third world feminism had of second wave\nfeminism in the US, that they were feeling increasingly left out of the conversations and out of\nsome of both the political as well as the intellectual developments that were coming out of\nfeminism, and they wanted to emphasize that identities interact in complex ways.\nKaren Nakamura: So if you look at that little chart that I have there, in many ways black women\nfound themselves at If we think back to the '60s and the '70s there are two major movements,\nthere's the feminist movement happening and the civil rights movement happening at the same time.\nAnd in some ways the civil rights movement was supposed to be addressing the concerns of\nAfrican-American men and women, but it was really focusing on the men. And feminism was\nsupposed to be dealing with the questions that affect all women, but was really addressing the\nquestions that were being posed by white women. And so black women were put in this position of\nfeeling left out of both movements, and both movements saying \"Well, if you're a black woman.\nthe civil rights movement was saying \"Well, you know, women's issues should be handled by the\nfeminist movement\", and feminists were saying, \"Well, your questions about race, that it was really\na question of the civil rights movement,\" and so they were betwixt and between and really feeling\nthat actually the circumstances that affect people who are at the intersection of two categories are\noften unique and addressed by neither of the individual ones by themselves.\nKaren Nakamura: So that in a nutshell is intersectionality, but it proves to be much more complex\nin practice. So we can think for example of the disability rights movement and how the disability\nrights movement interacts, and so we can think, \"Well, the disability rights movement and its\ninteractions with, for example, gender.\" So we have the disability rights movement on one hand\naddressing the questions of disability, but really focusing in many ways on the needs of disabled\nmen and not in particular thinking about disabled women. While at the same time we have\nfeminism really not thinking about disability at all. And so again, people who are at the intersection\nof those two find themselves, disabled women, find themselves left out of both movements. Now,\nwhere intersectionality gets complex is that there are so many different categories that we can be\n04/11/18\nPage 3 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 4, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nintersectional within, there is gender, there's race, there's ethnicity, there's immigration status,\ndisability of course, religion, socio-economic status, geographic locations, I don't think I have\nsexuality up there, occupation.\nKaren Nakamura: And so all of these are interacting in extremely complex ways, so that someone\nwho might be, for example, might be a DACA status, also disabled, who's female but might identify\nas gender queer, they're in a very particular location. And it becomes difficult when all of our\nservices, for example, at the university are compartmentalized. So we have the program for the\nDreamers, we have the program for the LGBTQI students, we have the program for the disabled\nstudents. But each of those are only addressing one component and unable to grasp, or in many\nways pushing out to other things, to the other units. If you're coming to the disabled student and\nyou're having questions about also race, well, that should be handled by another unit, so they find\nthemselves getting passed amongst different departments. I think this is a common experience for\nmany people who find themselves in intersectional categories.\nKaren Nakamura: So in some ways the problem of intersectionality can get boiled down to really\ntwo types of questions. One is who are we imagining when we think of the problem of X? And\nbecause we come up, we have a particular thought or imagination of who X is dealing with, our\nsolutions take a particular bent. So that sounds kind of on the ambiguous side, so let me be more\nspecific. So when we think of \"Well, what are the problems that disabled people have?\" Well, the\nquestion then gets begged, \"Who do we think of when we think of who are disabled people?\" And\nto a great extent when we think of disabled people, and in Google Image when we search famous\ndisabled, we get a particular array of faces, most of them are white, most of them are male. There\nare a few who are not. Most of them have mobility disabilities, so physical-apparent disabilities, and\nso, well that might an unfair one. So let's just do a Google Image search for disabled people, and\nstill that same array of faces. And I think to a large extent when the public thinks \"Well, who are\ndisabled people? Who are the disabled?\" and this becomes important when it comes to government\norganizations such as your commission you think who are the disabled people that we should be\nhelping? Who are the disabled people who need access?\nKaren Nakamura: You have a particular imagination about certain groups of people and in that\nimagination other people fall out of those categories. Because we think of disabled people and in\nmany ways the first things that do come to mind focus around apparent disabilities for example\nPeople with non-apparent Disabilities fall out of this imagination. This affects what our solutions\nlook like. So if we think about the signature legislation that's come out of the disability movement\nover the past 40 years most of them have in their basic construction, a model of who the ideal\ndisabled person is. Who benefits the most from the ADA? Who benefits most from the\nRehabilitation Act? Who benefits most from how we construct social security?\nKaren Nakamura: And in many ways the person who benefits the most is the one who\napproximates the closest to the model. And part of this harkens back to the original roots of the\nRehabilitation Act which was a white middle class male soldier who unfortunately got injured in the\nwar, comes back, gets the GI bill, gets access to university, graduates and then cannot find a job.\nAnd from the Rehab Act then to the ADA that's really the model of some white cis heterosexual\nmale who has a physical disability which doesn't affect his ability to be a white collar worker and so\n04/11/18\nPage 4 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 5, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nthe bills are constructed, the laws are constructed in ways that enable that category of people to\nwork, but it leaves out a whole group of other forms of disabled people in their imaginations.\nKaren Nakamura: And we can see this in all the ways that the ADA hasn't helped people. So if we\nthink about the ADA and I'm sure you're all familiar that in the 28 years since the ADA has passed,\nemployment rates for disabled people have not increased, in fact they've actually decreased. And so\nwhat does that mean? What does it mean when our employment rates are decreasing? What does it\nmean that the number of disabled people are also increasing? Why is there so much difficulty\naccessing services? Why is our infrastructure breaking in particular ways? So these are deep\nquestions that we need to ask ourselves and at the same time we need to ask ourselves what are the\nprotections we're building and who are we imagining are the people who are worth protecting. So in\nmany ways the important question here is, who's getting left out? What questions are getting left out\nwhen we have a particular imagination of who a disabled person is.\nKaren Nakamura: So I'm going to have a couple of categories of people. One for example, is\nwhen we think about disability we often don't think for example about diabetes as a disability. We\nmay if we think oh, yeah I'm sure, sure. But diabetes is a major cause of amputation and\namputations caused by diabetes disproportionally affect African Americans. And so in any\nimagination of what disability policy is, we can't think of just people with amputations but we have\nto think well, if diabetes is a health crisis that affect populations disproportionately, then really we\nshould start to think, well, if we have a disability policy we should start thinking about diabetes\nwhich then leads into earlier concerns, well what are the pre-cursors to diabetes? It high cortisol\nlevels. What's causing high cortisol levels? Stress. What communities are encountering a lot stress?\nMany of our racialized minority communities are engaged in that. Food supply; so in many ways\nyou can think is being in a food desert a disability issue? Yes, it's a disability issue because if you're\nin a food desert that doesn't have access to fresh food and vegetables then it's going to lead to a\nparticular health conditions which then lead to disability.\nKaren Nakamura: So you can see the expansion of what we might think about disability moving\ninto other areas. Okay, in a similar vein we might also think about asthma. Do we think about\nasthma as a major disability issue? In some ways we do, in some ways we don't. But when we again\nthink about the disproportionate effect of asthma across various racialized populations, then of\ncourse it becomes more apparent. Well, then what becomes the disability issue? Access to clean air,\naccess to exercise and so forth. Policies that affect equality all become disability issues too.\nKaren Nakamura: Okay, so I've done food, air, next we move to water. Water is also an important\ndisability issue and we don't have to think beyond Flint, Michigan, right? Even in Alameda County,\nwe have disparate impacts. We have a disparate lead measurements between children in different\ncommunities. So it's not only our water supply and which of the water mains aren't freed of lead\npipes, we also have paint concerns. Which children are living in buildings with leaded paint still\nremaining? And so forth. So there's an environmental concern about the consumption of toxic\nchemicals that might still be in our ground water system. This is a particular concern in Alameda\nbecause of the remaining effects of the naval base and some of the chemicals that might have been\nstored. Policing as a disability issue. Yeah, now I'm starting to sound like a broken record but again\npolicing has a disparate impact.\n04/11/18\nPage 5 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 6, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nKaren Nakamura: Now there are two effects of police violence that make it a disability issue. One\nis the disparate impact of police violence on racialized communities, African American and\nHispanic, especially young men, and then the other is mental illness and Police violence. When you\nlook at those statistics you see the people who are getting injured and killed by police violence are\nAfrican American young men and young men with mental illness. And so we need to think about\nthat I think as a disability issue. And then one of my final slides is thinking about addiction. Part of\nthe complexity of the ADA when it was signed, Jesse Helms put in small addendum to the ADA that\ncreated a whole group of people who are not considered disabled. Some of them sort of make sense.\nPyromaniacs, he didn't want as people with disabilities but he also included Alcoholism, he also\nincluded trans sexuality and bisexuality. But these were all carved out as particular named\nexceptions to the ADA.\nKaren Nakamura: At this point at ADA plus 28, let us rethink why don't we consider, particularly\naddiction, substance abuse, to be a disability and what would it mean for our disability policy, either\nout in the City of Alameda, Alameda County, if we seriously thought that people who were addicted\nwere disabled, if they were our people, what is our responsibility as the disability community to\naddicts? And how does that change what policy means, what access means and so forth. And my\nfinal slide is the question, why don't we do all of this? And I think much of it is because of fear. We,\nin the disability community, we have, and I'd identify myself as disabled, we have gotten to a place\nwhere things are relatively stable, but at the same time I think all of us are also realizing that there is\na real risk of backslide. That regardless of what your disability is, things don't seem to be getting\nbetter. They're stable, but falling behind. And I think there's a great amount of fear that if we include\nthe other categories that we'll continue to lose.\nKaren Nakamura: And I think part of the reason why I joined Cal and part of the reason why I\njoined the Haas Institute is because it was taking a brave next step, which is saying absolutely not.\nThe only way that all of our civil rights movements are going to succeed is if we say that the issues\nthat face African-Americans, that the issues that face the addict community, the issues that face\nundocumented immigrants, the issues that face folks with mental illness, these are all in some ways\ndisability issues and disability issues are very much part of the same issues that they face. And that\nthey in their communities shouldn't say, \"Well, if you're an African-American person with a mental\nillness, well why don't you just go over to the other organizations that just deal with mental illness?\"\nNo, but we need to do a better job of both networking and accepting that we have a responsibility\nfor all of the other minoritized identities and think seriously about how we can incorporate them\nwhen we rethink our policies. Thank you for your attention and I'm not sure if I'm supposed to\nbreak for questions, but I'm open for questions now.\nJenn Barrett: Yes definitely, if anyone has any questions?\nJennifer Roloff: I have a question. Thank you for the presentation, that was very enlightening.\nWhen you bring up some of the disability issues, you said diabetes can lead to amputations, and\nasthma, air quality issues, does addiction lead to people with disabilities and does diabetes lead to\npeople with disabilities or are you looking at diabetes and addiction as disabled, you're disabled\nwith those anyway?\n04/11/18\nPage 6 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 7, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nKaren Nakamura: Yes. Thank you. That's an excellent question. I think that my answer would be\nthat they are only in our domain once they cross a particular line and we'll draw a line in the sand.\nSo, once it crosses the line in the sand of amputation then they're our people. I think when we think\nabout diabetes and the larger effects of diabetes even if you're pre-diabetic, the effects on your body\nare already apparent. We don't do this on, with other disabilities saying \"Well oh you're just a little\nbit blind so we won't count you until you can't see enough or we don't do it with deafness.\" We don't\nsay, \"Well if you only have some hearing loss, you're not disabled until you get to a certain stage.' I\nthink in general in the disability community, we have tried to create a big tent, but the big tent has\nparticular patchy areas and some of the patchy areas we have to think, why are some of the areas\nthat we have patchy?\nKaren Nakamura: Is it because in some ways we have either internalized ableism or is sometimes\nour internalized racism or our fear that if we accept people who other people see as unworthy of the\ndisability status then we shouldn't include them? I think that's what drives sometimes our decisions\nof when we consider something to be a disability or not.\nJenny Linton: I have a question. I've been a member of the National Association of the Dually\nDiagnosed, which looks at the developmentally disabled community that also suffers from mental\nillnesses. And one of the most striking things I learned in the most recent conference I went to was\nthat two of the new places, domiciles for this population are in the jail system, as well as\nhomelessness. What are we doing to combat this?\nKaren Nakamura: Yes. That's a huge issue and in some ways it's bigger than the scope of a city.\nIt's a national issue. Right now, the three largest psychiatric institutions in the US, in terms of the\nnumber of people who are housed in them, are the Chicago Jail System, New York Jail System, and\nthe LA County Jail System. And that is an astonishing figure. We all talk about de-\ninstitutionalization. Well, it's really great, but in many ways we have re-institutionalized them in jail\nsystems. And the question with the homeless population is harder because often, the situation of the\nhomeless is so hard that folks who didn't have a mental illness before they became un-housed,\ndeveloped one because the circumstances are just so hard right now.\nKaren Nakamura: But it's an incredibly difficult situation. And I think that's one of the biggest\nchallenges for the cities in the Bay area, is how we think about the homeless crisis. And then also,\nwhat we think about how we can change the jailing system, how we can think about how to use the\n5150 institutionalization, temporary institutionalization processes, hospitalization processes, and\nwhether or not there are ways that we can nudge policing policies to either be more\naccommodating, to figure out better solutions, but, boy, it's an incredibly tough situation, and I feel\nlike it's not one that we talk much about.\nKaren Nakamura: Early on in my career, I had wondered one thing which is one, you don't see a\nlot of adults with Down syndrome, and when we do see a lot of adults with Down syndrome, they\nall seem happy. And the kids generally seemed happy. In some regards, many people with Down\nsyndrome, adults and children are happy, but I once spent some time volunteering around Down\nsyndrome and there are a lot of unhappy Down syndrome children, who then become unhappy\n04/11/18\nPage 7 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 8, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nDown syndrome adults, but you don't see the unhappy Down syndrome adults. And what I came to\nthe realization with is that's because they become institutionalized. And so that is the situation that\nfaces many different communities, is that I know, within the psychiatric disability end, the sort of\nmanagement that one has to have of affect and so forth is incredibly draining. But one has to do it\nbecause of continuous concern of institutionalization or other forms of violence against them. And\nthat in itself is the cause of more traumatization, so it is incredibly difficult. And that's where I think\nthe importance of different communities, who haven't allied in the past is really important, so\nI\nappreciate your question. Thank you.\nJennifer Roloff: My other question is, so right now there's petitions going around to get sort of a\nrevision of Prop 13 back on the ballot. And I remember coming from a family, personally, who, I\nhave a brother with disabilities after Prop 13 and then following Prop 9 in California, a lot of the\nresources closed up for people with disabilities. So, I think they're trying to put something back. I\nthink it's its own measure, but you're probably familiar with it, I forget what the number is. It\namends Prop 13 to include commercial that was excluded from the whole property tax. And I'm\nwondering does your organization get behind any political initiatives or do they do any lobbying?\nKaren Nakamura: We don't do lobbying per se because we're part of the University of California.\nThat's not our goal, but we do produce white papers, and so we do have white papers that think\nparticularly about the housing crisis and what are the factors behind the housing crisis and behind\nthe de-funding of the state government. Many times, whether it's at the city, county, or state, or\nFederal level we're finding that we just don't have the money to do things and, in many ways, that\nwas a deliberate strategy. If you can control the money supply, you can control what's possible. And\nso, I think we need to rethink how we fund things. And certainly, reform of real estate taxes is really\ncritical, especially in the current environment that we're in. And so many things could be done if\nProposition 13 was even partially revoked. But there's so much fear around that. Everyone is afraid\nthat if we tinker with it, there will be devastating consequences, but it's hard to also remember that\nif we don't do anything, we have devastating consequences. We already have devastating\nconsequences.\nJennifer Roloff: Does your organization have a website with a link that has a different white papers\nthat you produce?\nKaren Nakamura: It does, yes.\nJennifer Roloff: Okay, great. And will you leave that with Laurie or this deck or whatever? Thank\nyou.\nKaren Nakamura: Yes I will. Thank you very much.\nJenn Barrett: I also had a question. I really enjoyed your presentation, I thought it was very\ninteresting. Can you go over a little bit about what the Haas Institute does and then provide any\ninformation on outreach for people who want to get involved in some of these issues?\nKaren Nakamura: Yes. So we were funded as a distinct unit on campus that tries to think\n04/11/18\nPage 8 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 9, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nintersectionally across different issues and so we have seven different clusters, and I mentioned\nthem earlier on. And I am the Chair of the Disabilities Studies cluster, but our goal is as\nCommissioner Roloff asked about, is to think through what policy could look like and to produce\nanalyses of the situation that we're in and different directions that we could head. And so, through\nLaurie, I will send a link to our homepage and to the white papers that we've produced.\nJenn Barrett: Well thank you again so much for coming to speak. We really appreciate it.\nArnold Brillinger: Karen, I'd like to thank you personally for coming. I heard you at the Berkeley\nCommission for Disability, and I said, \"This is somebody we need to bring in here and enlighten our\ngroup and also because we broadcast this, and there are people at home that are hearing this and\nbecause it's our way of spreading the word and thank you very much. I really appreciate it.'\n4-C Overview of City of Alameda Service Request System: See Click fix (City Staff)\nJenn Barrett: Okay, we're going to move on to 4C, a presentation about SeeClickFix.\nLaurie Kozisek: There are two online resources that I want to tell you about, that I want everybody\nto know about. One of them is called SeeClickFix. You go to S-E-E-C-L-I-C-K-F-I-X.com This is\nthe page here, that you get when you do that. You click on \"I'm a Citizen\" or you click on 'Sign up\"\nover here and 'Sign up as a citizen', and then you put in your name, your display name, you might\nwant to just have your last initial, and your email address, which will not show up in SeeClickFix,\nand your password, and where you either live or work, and it will assign you to the SeeClickFix for\nAlameda. You put in the Alameda address and then let me show you what it looks like here.\nLaurie Kozisek: Because I have a membership here as a citizen, and it looks like this. On the left\nhand lower side there, there's a scroll of a ticker tape of issues that are coming in. And you'll see\nthat almost all of them are illegal dumping. That's the most popular one, we get hundreds of those.\nThe other ones we get that are really common is sidewalks. If you have any kind of a tripping\nhazard or something that's not quite ADA Compliant, a curb ramp or sidewalk, that's in the public\nright away, you can report that and we get a lot of reports for that.\nLaurie Kozisek: And that's how we have the citizens as our eyes and ears to help us find the places\nwhere we need to respond because part of the ADA is that, not only do you build it correctly, but\nyou must maintain it correctly, and we have to find out where it has deteriorated so that we can fix\nit. If you're a citizen, you would come in here and you'd go, \"I want to report an issue.' You go here\nto report an issue and open it all the way up here, and then, if you've got it on your phone, that's\nwhy they call it SeeClickFix - you see it, you click a picture of it, and we fix it and we even know\nwhere it is. Because theoretically, you click it and you upload it right there. Sometimes people will\nclick the picture and then they go upload it at their house and then it's got the wrong address. But\nwhat you do is you type in the address. I'm going to put in the City Hall West address here.\nLaurie Kozisek: Okay and it pops up with a map as soon as it realizes what I'm doing, and then I\ngo \"next\", and I put in my issue and this is the important thing I want to tell you about, is these\ncategories. I'm going to read them out in case people can't see them on their TV. The highlights. If\n04/11/18\nPage 9 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 10, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nyou have anything to do with Alameda Municipal Power that is not like a downed power line, you\ncan put that down. AC Transit, paratransit, anything to do with Alameda Point, the animal shelter,\nBoards and Commission information, bus shelters, cable TV, city council, city manager, or code\nenforcement if you think there's something wrong with something someone is building.\nLaurie Kozisek: If you want to get your curb painted blue for an accessible space, election\ninformation, disaster preparedness, fire prevention, all kinds of graffiti, illegal dumping, lagoon\nproblems, library, parking enforcement. Then we get down to your pedestrian or bicycle issues and\na popular one is pothole repair, Public Works complements, recreation and park requests so if you\nhave a tripping hazard in the park you would put it there or trees getting in the way so you have\naccess issues. And then sidewalks is a very popular one if you have any sidewalk issues.\nLaurie Kozisek: And if you have any problems with signs or street sweeping or a streetlight out. If\nyou have suggestions for traffic calming. Anyway, there's all kinds of things you can click on here.\nSo you'd click on one and then you'd put a little description on it and then you'd go to the bottom\nhere and click: Report your issue. I'm not going do that now. And then you would get an automatic\nresponse saying: Yes we got your request and it's put into our queue. And then we have a program\ncalled Lucity, that's just internal to us, that takes all of our requests and routes them to the correct\nperson who gets a notification saying: \"Here's something in our inbox you need to work on this\".\nAnd then you have to assign it to somebody and follow it through and it keeps reminding you until\nyou get it done.\nLaurie Kozisek: Great way to make the city more accessible is to let us know where there are\nissues. I put in a SeeClickFix for the door here. We had not gotten a button on it, but I have\nrequested it. And just have at it, if you're not sure what to do, if you're not comfortable with this\ncomputer interface, then what you do is you call up the public works main number 510-747-7900,\nand ask to do it over the phone. We'll be happy to have someone upload it for you.\nLaurie Kozisek: What I see when I sign up as an official is a whole ticker tape of things that are\ngoing on, and what their status is, who they've been assigned to, what their number is. And then I\ncan look up the whole dialogue. Say, when somebody writes in and says, \"Every time I get out of\nmy car, I step into a big puddle.\" Or, \"My wallet falls into the puddle, do something about it.\" And\nso I will send messages to, say the inspector, to go look at it and take some pictures, and they'll\nupload some pictures, and we'll maybe talk with another engineer about what we can do about it.\nAnd we'll come to a conclusion, we'll talk back and forth with the person who made the request by\nemail, and we'll try and get it resolved that way. So you can see a whole list of things going on for\neach item. So I've got a different way of looking at it here. That's really all I have on SeeClickFix.\nDo you have any questions?\nJenn Barrett: My sister and I use it, and we think it's really easy and accessible, so I think it's a\ngreat program.\nLaurie Kozisek: Good.\nJennifer Roloff: I have a question. For traffic issues around the school's pick up and drop off that\n04/11/18\nPage 10 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 11, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nseem to be causing repetitive problems, would that be logged here, and you would work with the\nschool district? Where's the intersection with schools and city?\nLaurie Kozisek: We manage the Safe Route to Schools program, so you would talk to us. I believe\nthere is one there on schools. If you're not sure, just put in say, \"Traffic calming\" And that will go to\nthe same person, and they would try and get back with you about what the specific issue is, and\nmaybe go out and observe it, and see what kind of traffic difficulties there are, and what can be\ndone about it.\nJennifer Roloff: Okay. Thank you.\nArnold Brillinger: I'm just particularly interested in the part about calling it in, and having\nsomeone else fill out the thing. And thank you very much for that. A lot of us can't make our phones\nwork in that way, where we can click, and take a picture of it right away, and stuff. And it doesn't\nwork when we've got one hand, or whatever.\nLaurie Kozisek: Yes. So, we realize that many of the people that we talk to are not computer savvy.\nThey call up and they say, \"I've been in Alameda for 80 years.\" And then, they proceed to tell us\nwhat the problems are, and we try and find out where they are. And a photo helps, but you don't\nhave to do a photo. And if you do a photo, do a close up, and do one far away, because sometimes\nwe get pictures of a pothole, we don't know where it is. So it's nice to have the surrounding also.\nBut yes, we would like to be accessible as possible, so that we can help people who cannot interface\nwith us through a phone or through a computer. And I think, we even have a TTY, if you look it up.\nWell, I don't think that's used much anymore. Did you have any further follow up?\n4-D\nOverview of \"211\" System Alameda County Social Service Referral Line (City Staff)\nJenn Barrett: Great. Thank you. We'll move on to item number 4D, overview of the 211 system.\nLaurie Kozisek: Okay, the 211 system. It happens that I volunteer for the Walnut Creek, with the\nContra Costa County 211. And so I know about the 211 in general, but I thought I'd tell you about\nthe Alameda County 211. A 211 is a nationwide program for social service agency referrals. So just\nabout wherever you are, you can type in 211, like I did there, 211.org or you can dial 211. There are\nsome rural areas that don't have it, but they're trying to get 100% coverage. They're county based.\nSo there's a 211 for Alameda County, there's one for Contra Costa County, there's an aggregate one\nthat covers San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Solano, Marin and Sonoma County or Napa\nCounty. It covers a larger area, but in general, they're county based. The people that serve for 211 in\nAlameda County is Eden I&R, I&R standing for Information and Referral.\nLaurie Kozisek: And so to get them, you either dial 211, or you use these backdoor numbers. The\nreason they have these backdoor numbers is, let's say, you got a cousin in Virginia who's having a\nsubstance abuse problem. You would put in their ZIP Code, get their backdoor number for their 211,\nand you call them up and you say, \"What are the local resources available for my cousin?\" And\nthen, you'd be able to help somebody like that, remotely. So anyway, I'm going go to Eden I&R,\nbecause that's ours. And there's a resource finder for health, housing and human services, and\n04/11/18\nPage 11 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 12, "text": "stay? Do you have a source of income?\" All these different things that you need to know, and then\nguide you to people that can help you. So it's a wonderful resource, and I wish everyone knew about\nit. Any questions?\nJenn Barrett: If you're calling on a cellphone that's in another area, but you're physically in the\narea that you want assistance, it'll work?\nLaurie Kozisek: Generally the cell tower you are closest to is where it will go. So, sometimes if\nyou're right on the border in the Oakland hills, you will end up in the wrong one. And in that case,\nwhoever you get to will say, I'll get a call from someone who lives in Brentwood but is working in\nOakland, and she calls on her lunch break and says, \"I need some services in Brentwood.\" But she\ngets to the 211 in Alameda County, so they switch her over to me in Contra Costa County and do\ntheir live transfer, or you just give them the backdoor number.\nJenn Barrett: Great, thank you.\n04/11/18\nPage 12 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 13, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nOLD BUSINESS\n5-A\nCommission and Board Liaison Report (All Commissioners)\nJenn Barrett: Okay, we'll move on to our next item, number five, old business. 5A, Commission\nand Board Liaison Reports. Does anyone have a report that they would like to state? Commissioner\nBrillinger.\nArnold Brillinger: Thank you. A while back when we decided on going to different commissions\nand councils, I chose transportation. And so I go to various, not just the transportation commission\nhere in Alameda, but I go to other places too, to find out what's happening in the area of\naccessibility, and so forth. And so I went to the AC Transit accessibility committee meeting. And\nthere, I've got something that I thought, \"Oh, this ought to be broadcast around to various people.\"\nNow when I look here, you guys probably don't fit here, but the United Seniors of Oakland and\nAlameda County is having their 27th annual convention on May 25th. And I'm sure that if you look\nthem up, you will find more information on how that works, and how to register for it. But in the\nAAC meeting, that's the Accessibility for Alameda or AC Transit, they spend a lot of time talking\nabout RM3, and I'm thinking, \"Why don't I hear about these things except when I go to certain\nmeetings?\"\nArnold Brillinger: And RM3 is the thing that's going to be on the ballot in June, and it's in the nine\nBay Area, or nine county, it's in the Bay Area, and it's about increasing the toll on the Bay Bridge,\nand the other bridges. They plan to increase it a dollar in 2019, and another dollar three years later\nin 2022, and another dollar in 2025, and this is on the seven different bridges connecting in the Bay\nArea. Now it doesn't include the Golden Gate Bridge, because that's under a different ownership.\nBut I thought, \"This is something that we ought to all know about.\" And also, I want to talk a little\nbit about the SRAC. The SRAC is the Service Review Advisory Committee, and that's where I'm\nthe chair of that, that meets in Oakland, and it's about the paratransit of the Bay, East Bay\nParatransit. If you get problems, you could come to our meetings and let us know what they are.\nBut, we just approved the Measure B and BB paratransit plan, and funding application, and we also\napproved the staff's recommendations on East Bay Paratransit on their current no-show cancellation\npolicies.\nArnold Brillinger: If you have six no-shows or late cancellations, if you have six of them, you're\npossibly going to be suspended. But we decided that because it is fairly liberal in how we do this,\nyou're sent a letter after four times and they say, \"You've already missed four in this quarter.\" And\nwhen you get six, you get a letter that says you'll be suspended, but you can come in and plead your\ncase. And very few times do we really suspend anybody, but it makes them more aware of. \"Hey,\nyou've got quite a few.\" And it disrupts the service. And, the next meeting is going to be May 2nd at\n12:30 in the afternoon, at 1750 Broadway, that's the East Bay Paratransit building. And then, I also\nwanted to talk about the Transportation Commission and the Planning Commission, and I saw Jen\nthere. She even went up and introduced herself as being kind of a watchdog, I think.\nArnold Brillinger: And, the Transportation Commission and Planning Board had an interesting\nmeeting. It took about two hours just for the joint one and then a lot of people left, and the Planning\n04/11/18\nPage 13 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 14, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nBoard, they continued with their meeting. But I heard a couple of things that were kind of\ninteresting. And they showed some figures on the actual, and the projected growth of California in\nthe 20 years from 1990 to 2010, it grew from 29 million to 37.2 million, 28% growth.\nArnold Brillinger: In the next 30 years, from 2010 to 2040, they expect that it will grow from the\n37.2 million to 46.6 million, which is a 25% growth. And of course Alameda is part of California,\nand needs to plan correctly on how they're going to deal with this. Now, the Bay Area growth in the\n20 years from 1990 to 2010, it grew from 6 million to 7.1 million. 18% growth. Now, they expect\nthat in the next 30 years, that it will grow from 7.1 million to 9.3 million, which is 30% growth.\nAnd this is a higher percentage than California's growth rate. And the city of Alameda, in those 20\nyears, 1990 to 2010, it actually lost some of its population, about 3.5% but they expect to regain\nthat, so they've got to work on how to plan for this.\nArnold Brillinger: And, now I don't want to bore you with a bunch of figures, but a couple of\nthings that were brought out is that in the planning they can't say, \"Oh, we've already got way too\nmany cars trying to use the tube and the bridges, we don't want any more housing, we don't want\nany more people here.\" Traffic is not a way that you can decide on your building program. It has to\nbe safety and something else, but it has to be safety and it's not a matter of just saying, \"Oh, we've\ngot more cars than we want to deal with, or more people.\" That's pretty much the end of my report\nbut I just wanted to say that. And then Jenn, you probably had a different take on the meeting?\nJenn Barrett: I thought it was really interesting. They talked about the requirements that the state\nhas on providing additional housing, so every plan - I'm not sure how long the plan is, but three year\nplan, you have to increase. The state gives you mandate on how much housing that you have to\nincrease, so it's very interesting how that's state driven and then one of the public comments about\nthe transportation, they brought up the Alameda free shuttle, when they're talking about increases in\ntransportation and not single ridership of cars and stuff. It was nice to have someone who\nrepresented the Alameda shuttle there.\nArnold Brillinger: I do have a couple more things. There's a inter agency liaison commission or\nsomething like that, committee, and it met today. And what this is, is three people from AC transit\nand three people from Alameda, and they're city council people, and those are board people from\nAC Transit. And they get together quarterly, and they had their meeting today and at that time they\ntalked about the Transbay tomorrow. That's their whole thing on, using the brand new building that\nthey're building over there. And also they talked about the different bus lines here in Alameda, the\n19, and the 96 especially up at Alameda Point, and they talked about the sink hole.\nArnold Brillinger: They said, \"Well something else, will happen again to clog up the works at the\ntube and how are we going to deal with that? Let's use this.\" And so the people, the transportation\nperson, they're all on this, and trying to put together plans for this. Now I don't know if any of you\nuse the ferry from Harbor Bay, they're trying to get people to ride the buses. I was on a bus that I\nactually stopped there other day, I was coming from the airport going through Alameda and three\npeople got on, out of the whole ferry load of people. And they realized that that's a problem, that\npeople are not taking the bus, but they are really working on it, they've got supervisors there to\nmake sure that the buses get there on time and stay long enough to take people off and so forth.\n04/11/18\nPage 14 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 15, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nThey're working on it, they're working on it and they need to let people know that they are working\non it and put it in the papers or get the word out, because there's just not enough parking down\nthere, for all the people that want to use the ferry.\nSusan Deutch: I just wanted to comment on the Harbor Bay Ferry. I do take that ferry and I live\nnear that, and they took away street parking near the ferry and made it two hour parking, so there\nare limited parking spots now for people that need to take the ferry. And some people really do need\nto use their car to get to the ferry and when the parking lots filled up, they can't park in the street\nand there's no place for them to park, but some people have to get their kids to school in the\nmorning and then get to the ferry on time and there's only three ferries. It's been an issue in Harbor\nBay and a lot of people are talking about it, especially on that Nextdoor app, where people talk\nabout issues. And they're trying to come up with some solutions to the parking problems so that\nmore people will use that Harbor Bay Ferry, it's limited.\nArnold Brillinger: Because the ridership has gone up.\nSusan Deutch: Yes.\nArnold Brillinger: But they want to get more people on the bus, get there.\nSusan Deutch: Yes, it's just some people can't take bus for reasons.\nArnold Brillinger: And they did talk about the fact that some people needed to drop their kids off\nfirst and then make it over to somewhere else and it just doesn't work out.\nSusan Deutch: Yes, and they took away the street parking there. And so it's become more difficult\nto take that Ferry. A lot of people in Harbor Bay are actually driving all the way across Alameda to\nget the other Ferry.\nJennifer Roloff: Where there's more parking?\nSusan Deutch: Yes.\nJennifer Roloff: I have another comment. You made a point that at the joint commission meetings\nthey were saying, something like, \"We don't want to hear about over development that causes traffic\nbut is it a safety concern?\" And my daughter rides her bike down Central towards Encinal High\nSchool; she's at the middle school there. And since she started last year, we started building up a list\nof the accidents. And yesterday she got hit, and she got hit on her bike. Two girls, they were riding\nnext to each other and both got knocked over and it was an intersection outside of Paden School.\nAnd I believe that is Highway 61, is at central as it goes towards the high school.\nArnold Brillinger: It's a state road. [Editor's comment: It's not.]\nJennifer Roloff: Yeah, I believe its state road and it brought me to think about what Karen\nNakamura had said, the intersections. So as a commission, luckily she doesn't have any disabilities\n04/11/18\nPage 15 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 16, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nbut as I shared my story with our friends and you hear about \"This person became disabled from\nthis biking accident.\" And I've been to City Council meetings for Bike Walk Alameda and other\nbiking organizations who come and talk about the pretty bad accidents that have happened with the\nbiking community. I know for liaisons, there is a health and safety issue around all the bikes and\ntraffic in Alameda.\nArnold Brillinger: I just now looked at my notes here. There was the public health and safety,\nthose are the only reasons for accommodating, for zoning the land differently.\nJennifer Roloff: Oh okay.\nArnold Brillinger: Because the state says, \"You can't use transportation issues as reason for\nrezoning or blocking housing.\"\nJenn Barrett: Does anyone else have any items they want to comment on for their board liaison?\nJenny Linton: Like Arnold I tend to go to meetings outside of Alameda as well. And we spent last\nmonth a couple of days at the public policy conference in Sacramento. It was put on by the Arc of\nCalifornia and United Cerebral Palsy. And they went through some of their priorities for 2018, a\nvery nice overview of the state of support for the developmentally disabled in California. They're\nlooking at things like a uniform holiday schedule. The state is trying to cut back on the daily\nservices and it's causing problems for families and individuals that want to live independently. And\nthere was a $25 million bridge funding proposed by Assembly Member Holden, that that they're\nhoping to part of the budget as well.\nJenny Linton: Social groups were cancelled as a result of the recession or postponed. They've not\nyet been restored. We're looking to restore some campaign outdoor opportunities for the\ndevelopmentally disabled population. And they put together an integrated living program. The\nhousing and community development agency, the state has closed their last developmental center,\nthe institutions, I think in 2006, and they're sitting on land across the state that they are hoping to\nsell and put back into the general budget. And this agency is proposing that we take the money on\nthe sale of these lands and put it back into the budget to support the developmentally disabled, for\nwhich it was built to begin with. Those were some interesting issues I've learned about in\nSacramento.\nJennifer Roloff: Just a quick question, that $25 million bridge, is that what you were talking about\nthat's going to be on the ballot for increasing the bridges? Is that the same?\nJenny Linton: No it's a bridge loan to get from one year to the next.\nJennifer Roloff: Oh, it was a loan. Sorry.\nJenny Linton: It's a bridge fund, bridge grant.\nJennifer Roloff: Oh got it.\n04/11/18\nPage 16 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 17, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nSusan Deutch: Trying to cover some of the services that aren't being funded by the previous year's\nbudget into this year's budget.\nJennifer Roloff.: Oh, okay. Thank you.\nJenn Barrett: Commissioner Deutch or Commissioner Roloff, do you have any liaison report?\nSusan Deutch: I am a liaison to the Library and the Park Department but there hasn't been anything\non their agenda. Keep checking their agenda.\nJenn Barrett: Thank you.\nJennifer Roloff: And I will be attending Parks and Rec Commission tomorrow night.\nJenn Barrett: Great.\nJenny Linton: One more thing. At the City Council meeting last week we declared April, Autism\nAwareness Month in the City of Alameda.\n5-B\nSubcommittees Report and Schedule\nJenn Barrett: Yeah, Jennifer and I and Beth were all there. Okay, we'll move on to subcommittees\nreport. Commissioner Brillinger, do you have anything for this?\nArnold Brillinger: I don't. I don't know that I'm on any subcommittees.\nJenn Barrett: Really? They were assigned during our retreat. We can look into that. Does anyone\nelse have a subcommittee?\nArnold Brillinger: I had a question. We do have a subcommittee. It's dealing with making sure that\ndifferent buildings in Alameda are ADA accessible, right? And is that dealing with businesses?\nJenn Barrett: Yes, so Anto and I are working on that and I actually maybe want to add to the next\nagenda but I came up with 10 ways for businesses to improve accessibility and so the thought that\nwe had come up with was that if a business can show that they did something to help people with\ndisabilities enter their businesses or use their services that we would, provide them with a sign, and\nthis is just a draft that I've come up with so far but it says, \"Alameda supports people of all\nabilities.\" Businesses displaying this poster have completed steps to make their businesses more\naccessible to all. We're still in a planning process of it and hopefully we can add it to the agenda,\nand we can get comments for the next meeting, but that's what Anton and I are starting to work on.\nArnold Brillinger: Okay, I was just going to say that San Francisco, their Disability Council had a\nreport from their small business part of the city government. And how they have put together and\nthey've got a deadline for places to become accessible, businesses. And I think that they also help\n04/11/18\nPage 17 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}
{"body": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities", "date": "2018-04-11", "page": 18, "text": "ITEM 2-A\nCOMMISSION ON DISABILITY\nMEETING MINUTES OF\nWednesday, April 11, 2018 6:30 p.m.\nthem out if they need help, but I'd like to share some of that. Get some of that information for you\nand for you to take a look at it.\nJenn Barrett: Great! Yeah, I think that for the purpose of this just right now is that we want to be\nas encouraging as possible and it's very expensive for businesses. Although it is the law that you\nreadily achievable, make your businesses accessible, we want to be like a guiding force and work\nwith the business to help them and reward them for small changes that they made in the hopes that\nthey'll continue to make changes as financially, able to do so. That was our beginning thinking but\nwe're definitely, excited to hear comments from the rest of the commission.\nSusan Deutch: We've done that in the past with some businesses and it works out pretty well. And\nwe didn't pressure.\nJenn Barrett: Okay, great! I'm glad to hear that you had success with that.\nSusan Deutch: Like the Marketplace they were not accessible, but we worked with them.\n5.\nSTAFF COMMUNICATIONS\nJenn Barrett: That's awesome. Great. Okay, are there any other subcommittee reports? We'll move\non to staff communications. I think just that there's the position open.\nLaurie Kozisek: There are two positions open to fill one existing and one potential vacancy for the\nCommission on Disability.\n6.\nANNOUNCEMENTS\nJenn Barrett: Great, thank you, and we saw the email go out from you last week so that was great.\nThank you so much! Item seven announcements, does anyone have any announcements? Okay, I'd\nlike to adjourn this meeting at this time, do I have a second?\n7.\nADJOURNMENT\nSusan Deutch: Second.\nJenn Barrett: All in favor?\nAll: Aye.\nJenn Barrett: Okay, thank you so much everyone.\n04/11/18\nPage 18 of 18", "path": "CommissiononPersonswithDisabilities/2018-04-11.pdf"}