&

'N

(■

•fl

iipprovpd /ccopted Adoptod D01

County of Santa Clara
^Office of the County Executive

BY THE BOARD OFR'j;
!•'/ r •.
OFTHhi

Ptasented

RVsR^nS^ OL... '^A

iiBworaii

county Government Center. East Wing
70 west Hedding Street

By

San Jose. California 95110
(408) 299-2424

Data:

.^MAWiloOl

May 15,2001

To:

Board of Supervisors

From:

Alice E. Foster, Deputy County Executive
Chair, Proposition 36 Steering Committee

SUBJECT:

PROPOSITION 36 IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

RECOMMENDED ACTION

The Proposition 36 Steering Committee recommends that the Board of Supervisors take
the following actions:

1. Adopt the Resolution approving the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention
Act (Proposition 36) Implementation Plan, including the recommended
$6,741,246 FY 02 Budget, and forward it to the State Department of Alcohol
and Drug Services;
2. Delegate authority to the County Executive, or his designee, to complete and
submit any documents required by the Plan, subject to review by Coimty
Counsel as to form and legality;
3. Delegate authority to the County Executive, or his designee, through
September 30,2001, to execute any grant applications, contracts, or
—agreements^deemed necessary to-impIement-die-Plan-whieh-are in—
conformance with budgetary allocations in the FY 02 Budget, subject to
review by County Counsel as to form and legality; and
4. Accept the analysis of the drug testing projections and funding needs, and
support a General Fund reserve in the FY 02 County Budget if other funding
alternatives do not materialize.
FISCAL IMPACT

The Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act 2000 provides funds to each county
based on an allocation formula which considers population (50%), arrest data (25%), and
treatment caseload data (25%). Eligible expenditures under Proposition 36 include funds
for residential and out patient treatment, transitional housing, out of custody assessment,
court processes, supervision, ancillary services, administration and some facility costs. In
FY 01, the County received $2,491,506 for planning and infrastructure development, and
has appropriated $556,849 for urgent program needs. Preliminary information from the
Board of Supervisors: Donald F. Gage. Blanca Alvarado. Peie McHugh. James r Beall jr.. Liz Kniss
County Executive: Richard Wittenberg

1

2-00$

MAY 1 E /Hm

c

\

State indicates that the FY 02 allocation is $4,806,589. Cany over ofunexpended funds
is allowed under the regulations. Therefore, the total Proposition 36 funds available in
FY 02 will be $6,741,246.

Drug testing expenditures, which are not eligible for funding under the Act, are estimated

at about $700,000 in FY 02. General Fund support may be necessary to provide this
important monitoring tool, if other funding sources do not become available. The County
Executive’s Recommended Budget for FY 02 includes a $1,000,000 reserve in Special
Programs for Proposition 36 activities not covered by State funding. These funds are
available to cover testing expenditures, ifthe State does not pass legislation or take other
action funding drug testing, with the remaining $300,000 retained for other unknown
costs.

BACKGROUND AND REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS

Proposition 36,the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of2000, diverts non
violent drug offenders from incarceration into community based substance abuse
treatment programs. The purpose ofthe Act is to provide appropriate and effective
treatment alternatives for those individuals who do not present a danger to the
commimity, with the goals ofenhancing public safety, reducing recidivism and drugrelated crimes.

In order to receive Prop 36 funds, the State Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs

(DADP)requires that counties develop an Implementation Plan by June 1“^. The plan
must be approved by the DADP within 15 days ofsubmittal, or returned to the County
for modifications. Assuming approval,the County will then receive its FY 02 allocation.

The State has notified counties that as part ofits oversight of Prop 36 implementation, it
will request additional documents related to actual expenditures, service delivery and
client participation. Delegating authority to the County Executive,or his designee,to
submit the appropriate documents will facilitate compliance with the State requirements.
As part ofthe implementation ofthe Plan,the County will need to lease facilities and
contract for various treatment and ancillary services. The delegation ofauthority to
execute any grant applications, contracts or agreements necessary to implement the Plan
would assist ttie County by assuring the prompt execution of agreements for the timely
start up of services. All documents,grant applications, contract and agreements would
be in conformance with the budgetary allocations for FY 02 and subject to review by
County Counsel as to form and legality.
Both the Health and Hospital and the Public Safety and Justice Committees have had
frequent status updates on the development ofthe Plan. Although the actual State
required documents were not completed in time for the May 2,2001 meeting ofthe

Health and Hospital Committee,a comprehensive overview ofthe Plan was provided to
the Committee. The Committee accepted the overview report ofthe Plan, but did not
take any action due to the absence ofa quorum. The Public Safety and Justice
Committee reviewed the Plan at its May 10,2001 meeting and recommended Board
adoption.

2

\

■

(

The County Executive's Office, as the designated lead agency in Santa Clara County, has
worked collaboratively with the Proposition 36 Steering Committee to develop the
Implementation Plan (Attachment 1). The protocols, which form the basis ofthe plan, are
submitted in draft form and will be finalized by June 30,2001 (Attachment 2). The
Prop 36 recommended FY 02 Budget is included for Board approval as Attachment 3.
Overview

Proposition 36 has been called one ofthe most revolutionary changes in the criminal
justice system's approach to drug use. The impacts on the criminal justice and substance
abuse treatment systems will be significant. Fortunately, Santa Clara County has been a

leader in providing treatment and court supervision to drug offenders, through its Drug
Treatment Court. This successful model provided the foundation for the development of
the Implementation Plan. The Plan also attempts to incorporate the valuable lessons
learned from the challenges of building effective collaborations among the various
stakeholders.

The Steering Committee estimates that between 500-600 defendants a month, or 6,000 to
7,000 defendants annually will be eligible for participation in Prop 36. Since many
criminal justice defendants are already receiving services though the Department of
Alcohol and Drug Services(DADS),the actual number of"new" clients may be around
1,700. State parolees, who are determined to be eligible for Prop 36 services, will also

receive treatment and other ancillary services as part ofthe County's program.
The Implementation Plan is built around seven core objectives:
1.

To provide for an integrated court, probation and treatment system that permits
defendants to move to different treatment and supervision levels as they progress or
fail in treatment;

2.

To use a non-adversarial approach in which prosecution and defense counsel promote
public safety while supporting participants' success in treatment;

3.

4.

To provide for a team of Judges,Probation Officers and Case Managers with training
and or experience in supervising substance abusing defendants while they are under
court supervision and in treatment;
To provide participants with access to a continuum of treatment and other

rehabilitation services, based on assessments of individual needs;
5.

To provide for a variety of means of monitoring participants' compliance with Court

6.

orders, treatment plans and progress toward goals;
To provide for meaningful collaboration among the criminal justice system. Health

and Hospital System, Social Services Agency,treatment and other community service
providers; and
7.

To evaluate the effectiveness of the Prop 36 Implementation Plan in achieving the
identified objectives.

Eligibility
Proposition 36 will increase the number of defendants who receive treatment and other
services instead ofjail time, since first-time offenders as well as those with numerous

drug possession and use convictions are potentially eligible. Given the extensive use in

Santa Clara County of existing diversion programs,such as the Deferred Entry of
3

c

I

Judgment and the Drug Treatment Court,few people will be out of custody as a result of
Proposition 36 who would otherwise be incarcerated.

Proposition 36 applies to nonviolent drug possession offenses, which include the

unlawful possession, use or transportation of drugs for personal use. It is anticipated that
the majority of persons eligible for Prop 36 will be those charged with being under the
influence of cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine,PCP(a violation of Healthy & Safety
Code section 11550, a misdemeanor) or persons charged with possessing small amounts
of one of these drugs (violations of Health & Safety Code sections 11377 or 11350, both
felonies or potential felonies), or possession of marijuana, a misdemeanor. Other

offenses are covered under the Act including the possession of drug paraphernalia, false
prescriptions, use and possession ofother drugs than those identified above (Attachment
4&5).

Persons charged with the sale of drugs, possessions of drugs for the purpose of sale, or
manufacturing drugs will be ineligible for Prop 36 services, as will those charged in the
same proceeding with any other non drug related offense (ex. drunk driving and
possession of small amount of cocaine). Defendants also charged with the use of a
firearm are ineligible. A defendant with prior convictions for strikes (serious or violent
offenses) within the last five years is also ineligible, unless he has not been convicted of a

misdemeanor involving violence or a felony, other than nonviolent drug possession.
For those defendants who refuse treatment, or are determined to be unamenable to all

forms of treatment and a danger to others, traditional sentencing alternatives would apply.
The District Attorney has the responsibility for determining new clients’ eligibility for
participation in Prop 36, based on the defendant's current charges, prior criminal history
and previous Prop 36 experiences. For probation violations matters where the client is

on formal probation, eligibility will be determined by the Probation Department. The
Public Defender and private defense counsel will be active participants in ensuring that
all who are eligible have access to Prop 36 services. The Court plans to create a team
consisting ofthe District Attorney, Public Defender, and Probation staffto provide
primary support to Prop 36 defendants throughout the court processes.
Assessment and Orientation

Upon conviction, all clients, including eligible parolees, will receive an assessment which

will be provided collaboratively by DADS and Probation staff The purpose of both the
orientation and assessment is to ensure that clients have access to the most appropriate
treatment, and that appropriate levels of supervision and monitoring are maintained to
support the client's rehabilitation and ensure public safety.

The assessment processes will use standardized clinical and public safety tools to identify
the severity of the client's substance abuse, other psychological, medical, vocational and

social needs, as well as the appropriate level of supervision and monitoring necessary.
The level of supervision is determined by a Risk/Need evaluation instrument based upon
a National Institute of Corrections’ program. The DADS assessment will result in a

recommendation for placement based on the American Society of Addiction Medicine
Patient Placement Criteria. The assessment will be available to the Court within 2 weeks

4

(

r

of conviction for clients out of custody; assessments for in custody clients will be
completed within 1 week.

Probation and DAD assessment staff will be co-located in a centrally located facility;
assessments in north and south county will be provided in existing County facilities near
the San Martin and Palo Alto court facilities. Potential space near the Sunnyvale court
facility is under consideration. General Services Administration staff are in active lease
negotiations for a suitable assessment site located near the Court Annex on Terraine

Street in San Jose. This site is expected to be available for use on or near July
Should negotiations fail, alternative sites have been identified and will be explored.
Client orientation will include a review of the law,the difficulties of overcoming serious
substance abuse, benefits of participation and completion oftreatment and an overview of
support services available in the community. The orientation will provide a "near
immediate" in-person introduction to the realities and benefits oftreatment and other

supportive services. Orientations sessions will be conducted frequently, including in the
evenings and on Saturday mornings, at conveniently located sites. Clients who violate
the conditions oftheir probation(VOP)and are in custody will also receive an
orientation.

The proposed budget allocates $522,000 for assessment which funds 3 positions in
DADS and 6 positions in Probation. This portion ofthe allocation was approved by the
Board of Supervisors on April 10, 2001 as part ofthe Urgent Needs Request. DADS
may also use existing assessment resources as needed, including its Jail Assessment
Coordinator.
Treatment

At the conclusion of the assessment process, DADS will develop a treatment
recommendation and schedule an intake appointment for the client with a treatment

program . Although the client may in fact begin treatment prior to Sentencing, the
treatment plan is considered an interim plan, subject to Court review and approval.
Within thirty days, the treatment provider is to provide the Court with a recommended
plan.

Because of a client's specific needs and motivational level, treatment plan components
vary and will require ongoing adjustments. Treatment modifications will proceed based
upon clinical necessity without formal Court review, although the provider is required to
provide notice to the Court. The provider will also be required to furnish progress
reports, which the Court will use proactively to monitor the client's participation and
compliance with the conditions of probation.

The Prop 36 treatment continuum consists of differing levels of treatment intensities and

modalities. Clients are expected to use as many ofthe modalities as necessary for their
successful recovery. The modalities include:

• Psychoeducation only - a new treatment level for clients with no history of addiction
or criminality, consisting of24 hours of psychoeducation classes;

5

\

Standard Outpatient - for clients without a history of serious recent substance abuse

and/or criminality, consisting of group and individual counseling, 12 Step (or other
support) meetings and random drug testing;
Enhanced Outpatient - a new treatment level, for those clients with more serious
abuse histories, consisting of case management,relapse prevention, individual and
group counseling, support meetings, plus ancillary services;

Outpatient/Enhanced Outpatient Plus Transitional Housing(THU)- provides a clean
and sober living environment for 2-3 months for those clients with serious abuse

problems who currently live in unstable or unsafe housing;
Residential - serves addicted clients who are unable to maintain abstinence; if
necessary detoxification will occur prior to beginning treatment;
Methadone Modality - narcotic replacement therapy which provides effective
outcomes for heroin addicts;

Perinatal Modalities - pregnant and parenting women will receive specialized
services including intensive medical support, child development assessments,
parenting classes in addition to the appropriate services for their level ofaddiction.

It is anticipated that there will be Prop 36 eligible clients who will be dual diagnosed with
both substance abuse issues and mental illness. These clients will receive psychological
examinations to determine their mental health needs, and will be referred for psychiatric
and medication services in conjunction with other treatment services. These clients may
participate in the Mental Health Court.

The Steering Committee estimates that the majority ofProp 36 clients will require
outpatient treatment and approximately 18 % will require residential treatment and

another 10-15% will need transitional housing units. Requests for Proposals have been
issued for an immediate expansion oftreatment capacity, following the Board of
Supervisor's approval ofthe Proposition 36 Urgent Needs Request at its April 10, 2001
meeting.

The proposed budget allocates $3,336,661 for treatment and ancillary services, which
consists of454 outpatient slots, 52 residential treatment beds,68 THUs,$150,000 for
dual diagnosis services, and $150,000 for additional services such as literacy and
vocational training and family counseling. In addition, $693,000 is allocated for
administrative support.
Supervision and Monitoring

Upon sentencing, clients will be assigned a Probation Officer. Based upon the
assessment's determination of the appropriate level of supervision, a client may be
assigned to one of the following levels:

• Banked Caseload - no direct supervision, monitor for compliance issues only
• Regular Supervision - staffto client ratio of 1:175
• Prop 36 - staff client ratio of 1:100
• Drug Treatment Court - staffto client ratio of 1:60

The Court Order will include the client's participation in the identified treatment program
as well as any ancillary services. Probation will monitor compliance with Court orders
6

and treatment programidirectives and provide the Court with appropriate information,
reports and recommendations. Drug testing will be conducted according to the Court's
directives and based on individual client's needs. Violations of probation for substance
abuse only will be calendared in the designated Prop 36 courts.

CASE MANAGERS are a new resource which will be employed to help Prop 36 clients
maintain appropriate participation in treatment and ancillary services, as well as
compliance with the conditions of probation. Those clients needing direct case
management will be assigned a Case Manager based on the assessment, or reassessment,

following Court reviews. The Case Manager will provide more intensive support to those
clients who are at greater risk of relapse or non compliance, or need greater assistance
with basic life skills. The Case Manager will function as a "coach" for the client, will be
available at night and on the weekend, and will maintain frequent contact with the client

to help resolve crises and avoid relapse. The Case Manager will also be assigned to a
courtroom for up to two days per week to assist the Judge in Court reviews and facilitate
communication between the providers. Probation and the Court.

The proposed budget includes $609,585 to fund 8 Probation positions and $500,000
to fund 8 Case Managers.
Court Process

The Court has submitted a proposed process which is currently under review. According
to the proposal, the Superior Court will use a court supervision model for all Prop 36
cases. Cases will be consolidated on specialized Prop 36 calendars at the Superior Court
Annex (Terraine), as well as the Hall of Justice and outlying facilities. The Court will

designate a team ofjudges with specialized training and/or experience in supervising
substance abuse defendants for Prop 36 cases. The Court recognizes that no single
treatment is appropriate for all defendants. Sentencing orders will be based on the

assessment of the individual's level of addiction and level of need of supervision. The
frequency of Court reviews will be determined based on each individual's assessment and

progress. The review process will also function as an opportunity to make modifications

that support a defendant's successful completion oftreatment. Timely and thorough
progress reports from treatment providers will be an essential component ofthe review.

When a defendant requires more intensive supervision, modification may include
participation in Drug Treatment Court.

Violations of Probation will be heard on these same specialized Proposition 36
calendars, and by the same team of Judges, ifthe violation does not disqualify the
defendant from Proposition 36 participation. Should a defendant receive a third violation,
traditional sentencing alternatives would apply. However, it is important to note that
Judges retain their discretion at all hearings, and, further that although they may
determine that a defendant is no longer eligible for Proposition 36 treatment after a third

violation, the Judge may modify Probation and continue the defendant in other(non-Prop
36 funded) treatment, including custody treatment(Attachment 6).
Although the District Attorney and Public Defender are integral participants in
Proposition 36, neither Office requested additional resources at this time. The actual
7

('

impact ofProposition 36 on their staff along with other program needs will be reviewed
as implementation progresses.

The Presiding Judge has approved $30,000 in FY 01 for training needs, as a

demonstration of the commitment ofthe Superior Court to the success ofthe program.
The proposed Proposition 36 budget for FY02 includes $30,000 to continue the training
of key stakeholders in the criminal justice and treatment systems.
Evaluation

The Steering Committee proposes a comprehensive process and outcome evaluation of
Prop 36 implementation that meets the following goals:
1. Documentation ofthe impact ofProposition 36 on the criminal justice and treatment
systems(number of participants, treatment modalities, in custody time, recidivism.
Pleas vs. Trials, crime rate, length of abstinence, medical history, etc.);
2. Documentation ofthe effectiveness ofProp 36 as it relates to client recovery and
system response;

3. Documentation of a comprehensive Prop 36 client profile; and

4. Improved access to information for the identification offuture policy direction and
research issues.

The County's evaluation design is intended to avoid duplication of client data entry and
provide appropriate access to Proposition 36 data elements across agencies. The
County's evaluation process will be compatible with the State's criteria, which is still in
development. As the evaluation design is developed, additional technical resources from

universities and the federal government may be identified as potential partners in the
evaluation efforts.

The proposed budget includes $480,000 for evaluation, which funds software and

programming costs, data entry positions, and an analysis component.
Drug Testing

The Court, Probation, and treatment providers use drug testing as a means of monitoring
a client's success in abstaining from drug use. The frequency oftesting may be based on
the clinical needs of the client or scheduled on a fixed or random basis, depending on the
severity of abuse, progress in treatment and relapse potential. Positive tests will trigger a
review of the treatment plan and may result in revisions to the plan and/or referral to a
different modality. The Steering Committee recommends that drug testing be a
component ofthe Implementation Plan for Prop 36 and available for all appropriate
clients.

The Drug Testing Protocol presents a plan which identifies start up testing resources that
can be expanded as Prop 36 clients increase. Estimates are based on the assumption of
twice a month testing for each client(which allows the flexibility to require more
frequent testing ofsome clients, and less frequent or random testing of others).
Resources build on the potential expanded capacity of existing sites as well as the excess
capacity of a provider. Should these not be sufficient, additional locations will be

identified. Cost estimates include collection expenses, primarily staff necessary to
8

(

r

maintain Chain of Custody procedures, analysis and facility modification costs. The

Steering Committee proposes consideration of$708,694 for drug testing.
Although drug testing costs are recoverable as part of a client's probation fee, revenue
estimates are extremely low, given the financial circumstances of most ofthe client

population. The legislature is currently considering Senator Burton's bill(SB223)which
would provide funding for drug testing. Without new State funds, expansion of drug
testing capacity will be a General Fund expense. The County Executive’s Recommended

Budget for FY 02 includes a $1,000,000 reserve in Special Programs for Proposition 36
activities not covered by State funding. These funds are available to cover testing
expenditures, should the State not pass legislation or take other action to fund drug
testing, with the remaining $300,000 retained for other unknown costs.
Conclusion

The Prop 36 Implementation Plan FY 02 Budget of $6,741,246 allocates 8% for
assessment,67% for treatment and other services, 9 % for supervision, and 16% for

administrative activities such as evaluation and facility costs. The FY 02 Budget uses
FYOl excess funds for both one-time as well as on going expenditures. Should carry
over balances not be available in subsequent years, reductions will be required.
As with any new initiative, assumptions are made independent of actual experience. The
Prop 36 "unknowns" are many - number of participants, actual treatment needs, intensity
ofsupervision required, number of Court reviews, etc. Given that changes in these
assumptions are inevitable, the Implementation Plan will be closely monitored and
appropriate budget modifications made as necessary.

The Steering Committee members are to be commended for their thoughtful dedication to
the development of the Proposition 36 Implementation Plan.(Attachment 7)
As collaborative partners in this challenging initiative, each member has demonstrated an
overwhelming commitment to the success ofProp 36. The Plan could not have been

developed without the excellent support of many other staff whose keen professional
insights led to creative solutions to long standing issues. Their contribution to this effort
has been invaluable.

CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION

The County will be unable to meets its legal obligation to implement the Substance
Abuse and Crime Prevention Act and will not receive its FY 2002 funding allocation for
implementation.
STEPS FOLLOWING APPROVAL

Upon approval ofthe resolution adopting the Implementation Plan and the budget, the
appropriate documents will be submitted to the State by the June 1, 2001 deadline. The
State has 15 days in which to review and approve the Plan or return it for modifications.

Assuming approval by the State, staff will submit all of the Prop 36 identified positions,
expenditures and revenues for Board action as part ofthe final FY 02 Budget adoption.
The implementation protocols will be finalized by June 30, 2001 and disseminated to the

appropriate parties. The Steering Committee will meet quarterly, or more frequently as
necessary, to monitor the implementation and provide continued guidance on policy and
9

operational issues. Ongoing oversight ofthe Implementation Plan will be provided by
the Office of the County Executive, as the Lead Agency for Proposition 36.

Attachments(7)
Cc:

The Honorable Richard Turrone, Presiding Judge, Superior Court
Richard Wittenberg, County Executive
Prop 36 Steering Committee

10

(

RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
AUTHORIZING

THE SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND CRIME PREVENTION ACT OF 2000

COUNTY PLAN AND FUNDING REQUEST FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001-2002
AND DELEGATING AUTHORITY TO THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO
EXECUTE CONTRACTS NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THE COUNTY PLAN

WHEREAS,the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000("SACPA")
became effective January 1,2001, and must be implemented by July 1, 2001; and
WHEREAS,the State Department of Alcohol and Drug Services is responsible for
annual allocations of the funds available to counties pursuant SACPA;and
WHEREAS,the California Code of Regulations, Title 9,Section 9515 requires
counties to submit a plan for services to the State Department of Alcohol and
Drug Services on or before June 1, 2001 in order to receive the Fiscal Year 20012002 allocation of SACPA funds; and

WHEREAS,the California Code of Regulations, Title 9,Section 9515 requires that
said plan be approved by either the Board of Supervisors or the county lead
agency pursuant to a delegation of authority; and

WHEREAS,the Health and Hospital Committee, the Public Safety Committee,
and the Board of Supervisors have reviewed the plan components recommended
by the Proposition 36 Steering Committee and the County Executive; and

WHEREAS,the County must lease space and contract with service providers in
order to implement the plan; and

WHEREAS,the Board of Supervisors may delegate contracting authority to
County officials, and has done so from time to time as deemed necessary and in
the interests of the County; and

//

Resolution - Prop 36 County Plan FY2001-2002

1
HI

F-'

♦'Y n A 4

r'

f

WHEREAS,delegating authority to the County Executive, or his designee,
through September 30,2001, to execute any grant applications, contracts, or
agreements deemed necessary to implement the plan, which are in conformance
with budgetary allocations in the FY 2002 Budget, would assist the County by
assuring a prompt execution of agreements and a timely start-up of services.
NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED,by the Board of Supervisors of the
County of Santa Clara:
1.

That the Board of Supervisors hereby approves the county plan,
completed pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 9,
Section 9515; and

2.

The County Executive, or his designee, is authorized to complete
the plan documentation and submit it on behalf of the Board of
Supervisors pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 9,
Section 9515, by the June 1, 2001 deadline; and

3.

The County Executive, or his designee, is delegated authority
through September 30, 2001,to execute any grant applications,
contracts, or agreements deemed necessary to implement the Plan
which are in conformance with budgetary allocations in the FY
2002 Budget,subject to review by County Counsel as to form and
legality; and

4.

The County of Santa Clara shall comply with the provisions of
SACPA and the California Code of Regulations, Division 4,
Chapter 2.5; and

//

//

Resolution - Prop 36 County Plan Rr2001-2002

2

H

5.

The County of Santa Clara has established and maintains a trust
fund,and assures that the County of Santa Clara shall deposit all
funds received into that trust fund.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Boar|i of Suo^isors of the County of

Santa Clara,State of California,on
AYES:

Supervisors

NOES:

Supervisors

None

ABSENT:

Supervisors

None

MAY ^ 5 ZUul by the following vote:
BEALL, GAGE, KillSS, KCiraGH

wn/f) 7b^ES T. BEALL,JR.,Chai
^ard of Supervisors
ATTEST:

PHYLLIS PEREZ,Clerk

Board of Supervisors

APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY:

Deputy County Counsel

Resolution - Prop 36 County Plan FY2001-2002

3

erson