Concord City Council
January 10, 2022

Information
Technology Building Compensated
Replacement Maintenance Absences Total
9,892,631$ 3,515,567$ -$ 25,705,114$
- - - $4,253,546
9,892,631 3,515,567 - 29,958,660
6,711,441 2,823,042 12,821 21,691,734 - - - 69,010
1,900,842 1,345,674 - 4,277,038
- - - 2,580,161 -
8,612,283 4,168,716 12,821 28,617,943

1,280,348 (653,149) (12,821) 1,340,717 213,286 30,013 - 620,581
(122,114) - - (122,114)
- - - 1,196

91,172 30,013 - 499,663
1,371,520 (623,136) (12,821) 1,840,380 - 5,980 - 5,980
- (195,077) - (195,077)
- (189,097) - (189,097)
1,371,520 (812,233) (12,821) 1,651,283 19,236,659 19,827,546 (5,298,217) 49,005,433 20,608,179$ 19,015,313$ (5,311,038)$ 50,656,716$ 137

CITY OF CONCORD

INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS

COMBINING STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021
Risk Post-Retirement Fleet
Workers' Mana gement/ Healthcare Maintenance/
Compensation Liabilit y Benefit Re placement

CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Receipts from Customers 1,912,203$ 668,787$ 4,492,122$ 3,545,071$ Payments to Suppliers - - (4,502,370) (1,120,910) Payments to Employees - - - (672,080)
Claims Paid (1,410,501) (587,888) - -
Net Cash Provided by (Used for)
Operating Activities 501,702 80,899 (10,248) 1,752,081

CASH FLOWS FROM NON-CAPITAL

FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Borrowings of Advances From/To Other Funds 76,924 - 10,248 - Transfers (Out) - - - -
Net Cash Provided by (used for) Non-Capital
Financing Activities 76,924 - 10,248 -

CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND RELATED

FINANCING ACTIVITIES
Acquisition and Construction of Capital Assets - - - (746,127) Principal Paid on Debt, Bond Maturities - - - -
Interest and Fiscal Charges Paid - - - -
Proceeds from the Sale of Capital Assets - - - 1,196 Net Cash Provided by (used for) Capital and
Related Financing Activities - - - (744,931)

CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES
Interest Received 216,464 49,052 -
111,766
Net Cash Provided by (used for) Investing Activities 216,464 49,052 - 111,766 Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash and
Cash Equivalents 795,090 129,951 - 1,118,916 Cash and Investments at Beginning of Period 14,997,031 3,685,515 - 7,055,269 Cash and Investments at End of Period 15,792,121$ 3,815,466$ -$ 8,174,185$ Reconciliation of Operating Income (Loss)
to Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities:

Operating Income (Loss) 100,035$ (121,375)$ 47,692$ 699,987$ Adjustments to Reconcile Operating Income
to Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities:

Depreciation - - - 1,030,522
Change in Assets and Liabilities:

Receivables, Net 22,156 (400) (57,940) -
Accounts Payable - - - (1,687)
Accrued liabilities 413 - -
20,518
Compensated Absences - - - 2,741
Self Insurance Claims Payable 379,098 202,674 - - Net Cash Provided by (Used for) Operating Activities 501,702$ 80,899$ (10,248)$ 1,752,081$ NONCASH TRANSACTIONS:

Contributions of capital assets, net - $ -$ -$ -$
138

Information
Technology Building Compensated
Replacement Maintenance Absences Total
9,892,631$ 3,515,567$ -$ 24,026,381$
(4,523,554) (1,546,930) - (11,693,764)
(2,230,770) (1,259,895) - (4,162,745)
- - - (1,998,389)
3,138,307 708,742 - 6,171,483
- - - 87,172
- (195,077) - (195,077)
- (195,077) - (107,905)
-
(143,837) - - (889,964)
(329,570) - - (329,570)
(67,992) - - (67,992)
- - - 1,196
(541,399) - - (1,286,330)
-
213,286 30,013 - 620,581
213,286 30,013 - 620,581
2,810,194 543,678 - 5,397,829
13,269,024 1,662,396 - 40,669,235
16,079,218$ 2,206,074$ -$ 46,067,064$
1,280,348$ (653,149)$ (12,821)$ 1,340,717$
1,900,842 1,345,674 - 4,277,038
- - - (36,184)
(185,537) (20,568) - (207,792)
94,528 42,157 -
157,616
48,126 (5,372) 12,821 58,316
- -
- 581,772
3,138,307$ 708,742$ -$ 6,171,483$
-$ 5,980$ -$ 5,980$
139

This Page Left Intentionally Blank

CITY OF CONCORD JUNE 30, 2020

STATISTICAL TABLES AND OTHER SCHEDULES (UNAUDITED)

This Page Left Intentionally Blank

CITY OF CONCORD JUNE 30, 2021

STATISTICAL TABLES AND OTHER SCHEDULES (UNAUDITED)
This part of the City’s Comprehensive Annual Financial Report presents detailed information as a context for understanding what the information in the fina ncial statements, note disclosures, and required supplementary information discusses ab out the City’s overall financial health. In contrast to the financial section, the statistical section information is not subject to independent audit.

Financial Trends
These schedules contain trend information to help the reader understand how the City’s financial performance and well- being have changed over time:
• Net Position by Component
• Changes in Net Position
• Fund Balance of Governmental Funds
• Changes in Fund Balance of Governmental Funds
Revenue Capacity
The schedules contain information to help the reader assess the City’s significant local revenue sources, the property tax and the sales tax:
• Assessed and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable
Property
• Taxable Sales by Category
• Property Tax Rates, Direct and Overlapping
Governments
• Sales Tax Rates
• Principal Property Taxpayers • Top 25 Sales Tax Producers • Property Tax Levies and Collections
Debt Capacity
These schedules present information to help the reader assess the affordab ility of the City’s current levels of outstanding debt and the City of Concord’s ability to issue additional debt in the future:
• Ratio of Outstanding Debt by Type
• Direct and Overlapping Debt
• Computation of Legal Bonded Debt Margin
• Sewer Revenue Bonds Coverage
• Bonded Debt Pledged Revenue Coverage - Tax Allocation Bonds Demographic and Economic Information
These schedules offer demographic and economic indicators to help the reader understand the environment within which the City’s financial activities take place:
• Demographic and Economic Statistics
• Principal Employers
Operating Information
These schedules contain service and infrastructure data to help the reader understand how the information in the City’s financial report relates to the services the City provides and the activities it performs:
• Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) City Government Employees by Function • Operating Indicators by Function/Program
• Capital Asset Statistics by Function/Program
Sources
Unless otherwise noted, the information in these schedules is derived from the Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports for the relevant year. The City implemented GASB Statement 34 in 2002. 143

This Page Left Intentionally Blank

Table 1: Net Position by Component
Last Ten Fiscal Years (Accrual Basis of Accounting)
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Governmental Activities
Net Investment in Capital
Assets $643,967,033 $634,988,057 $618,444,600 $585,592,444 $589,252,002 $587,171,677 $582,183,019 $572,790,039 $561,198,070 $541,706,437 Restricted 64,677,611 63,076,928 46,681,397 41,237,857 40,851,626 66,326,202 62,391,506 64,537,706 65,058,755 66,839,604 Unrestricted 19,513,748 31,345,470 56,944,430 (56,475,621) (47,810,150) (75,116,464) (110,301,555) (119,503,391) (123,583,432) (110,262,539) Total Governmental
Activities Net
Position $728,158,392 $729,410,455 $722,070,427 $570,354,680 $582,293,478 $578,381,415 $534,272,970 $517,824,354 $502,673,393 $498,283,502 Business-Type Activities
Net Investment in Capital
Assets $56,121,427 $54,902,054 $56,304,062 $53,687,074 $50,820,240 $47,536,924 $46,948,620 $49,674,672 $50,328,261 $50,550,507 Restricted
Unrestricted 20,279,362 16,229,947 10,651,600 12,127,606 15,646,475 21,202,439 24,478,697 25,679,978 28,073,896 33,477,518 Total Business-Type
Activities Net $76,400,789 $71,132,001 $66,955,662 $65,814,680 $66,466,715 $68,739,363 $71,427,317 $75,354,650 $78,402,157 $84,028,025 Primary Government
Net Investment in Capital
Assets $700,088,460 $689,890,111 $674,748,662 $639,279,518 $640,072,242 $634,708,601 $629,131,639 $622,464,711 $611,526,331 $592,256,944 Restricted 64,677,611 63,076,928 46,681,397 41,237,857 40,851,626 66,326,202 62,391,506 64,537,706 65,058,755 66,839,604 Unrestricted 39,793,110 47,575,417 67,596,030 (44,348,015) (32,163,675) (53,914,025) (85,822,858) (93,823,413) (95,509,536) (76,785,021) Total Primary
Government Net
Position $804,559,181 $800,542,456 $789,026,089 $636,169,360 $648,760,193 $647,120,778 $605,700,287 $593,179,004 $581,075,550 $582,311,527 Fiscal Year Ended June 30,
$0
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
$700
$800
$900
$1,000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Millions
Net Investment in Capital Assets Restricted Unrestricted 145

Table 2: Changes in Net Position
Last Ten Fiscal Years (Accrual Basis of Accounting)
2012 (a) 2013 2014 2015 2016
Expenses
Governmental Activities:

General Government $13,101,551 $17,203,231 $17,720,024 $19,637,142 $13,936,670 Public Safety 43,363,091 46,357,766 43,124,635 48,814,600 48,436,133 Public Works 32,023,754 33,607,422 37,036,728 33,134,581 20,568,699 Community Development 10,592,117 8,677,518 8,634,948 9,953,592 14,089,870 Economic Development and Base Reuse
Parks & Recreation 6,979,013 6,045,819 5,803,618 4,870,437 5,062,929 Interest on Long Term Debt 3,334,049 1,282,725 1,356,197 1,273,563 1,216,836 Total Governmental Activities Expenses 109,393,575 113,174,481 113,676,150 117,683,914 103,311,137 Business-Type Activities:

Sewer 23,196,668 24,908,709 26,764,449 25,835,431 26,720,865 Golf Course 1,313,458 1,308,344 1,351,250 1,333,597 1,530,829 Total Business-Type Activities Expenses 24,510,126 26,217,053 28,115,699 27,169,028 28,251,694 Total Primary Government Expenses $133,903,701 $139,391,534 $141,791,849 $144,852,942 $131,562,831 Program Revenues
Governmental Activities:

Charges for Services:

General Government $1,553,733 $1,528,975 $1,960,144 $2,207,723 $1,597,487 Public Safety 1,635,124 1,255,763 1,459,631 1,222,722 1,384,021 Public Works 8,528,881 5,675,622 2,568,214 349,321 568,733 Community Development 548,425 3,226,130 4,421,290 4,105,601 5,307,348 Economic Development and Base Reuse
Parks & Recreation 3,019,879 2,531,616 3,140,708 2,928,447 2,732,366 Operating Grants and Contributions 7,926,836 8,281,796 7,839,509 40,439,282 38,455,430 Capital Grants and Contributions 6,586,825 4,021,042 8,240,626 5,941,945 9,732,184 Total Governmental Activities Program Revenues 29,799,703 26,520,944 29,630,122 57,195,041 59,777,569 Business-Type Activities:

Charges for Services:

Sewer Wastewater 19,359,526 19,420,225 22,099,344 24,349,277 27,319,039 Golf Course 1,382,491 1,381,788 1,442,836 1,449,756 1,406,707 Capital Grants and Contributions 33,945 96,626 85,532 173 Total Business-Type Activities Program Revenue 20,742,017 20,835,958 23,638,806 25,884,565 28,725,919 Total Primary Government Program Revenues $50,541,720 $47,356,902 $53,268,928 $83,079,606 $88,503,488 Net (Expense)/Revenue
Governmental Activities ($79,593,872) ($86,653,537) ($84,046,028) ($60,488,873) ($43,533,568) Business-Type Activities (3,768,109) (5,381,095) (4,476,893) (1,284,463) 474,225 Total Primary Government Net Expense ($83,361,981) ($92,034,632) ($88,522,921) ($61,773,336) ($43,059,343) General Revenues and Other Changes in Net Position
Governmental Activities:

Taxes:

Property Taxes $19,353,337 $15,017,785 $15,707,019 $17,457,504 $18,211,711 Sales Taxes 33,855,151 36,423,806 40,070,675 11,554,083 12,134,557 Transient Occupancy Taxes 1,478,874 1,832,615 2,262,589 2,619,411 2,713,073 Business License Taxes 3,377,278 3,365,317 3,324,299 3,423,860 3,521,309 Other Taxes 4,784,146 5,269,956 5,962,699 6,188,928 7,222,669 Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 8,117,461 7,682,740 8,073,738 8,864,341 9,519,809 Investment Earnings 623,823 98,740 1,304,981 2,507,489 2,631,738 Miscellaneous Revenues 357,827 (482,500)
Restructure Investment in Partnership (2,362,972)
Transfers
Gain (Loss) on Sale of Land
assumed by Successor Agency 20,298,845
Total Governmental Activities 91,888,915 70,048,786 76,706,000 50,252,644 55,472,366 Business-Type Activities:

Investment Earnings 286,744 73,758 208,050 93,481 127,810 Miscellaneous Revenues 37,500 38,549 92,504 50,000 50,000 Transfers
Total Business-Type Activities 324,244 112,307 300,554 143,481 177,810 Total Primary Government $92,213,159 $70,161,093 $77,006,554 $50,396,125 $55,650,176 Change in Net Position
Governmental Activities $12,295,043 ($16,604,751) ($7,340,028) ($10,236,229) $11,938,798 Business-Type Activities (3,443,865) (5,268,788) (4,176,339) (1,140,982) 652,035 Total Primary Government $8,851,178 ($21,873,539) ($11,516,367) ($11,377,211) $12,590,833 Note: (a) In 2012, Engineering was reorganized into Community Development and the Redevelopment Agency was dissolved. (b) In FY 2020-21, Economic Development was transferred from Community Development to Economic Development and Base Reuse.

Fiscal Year Ended June 30,
146

Table 2: Changes in Net Position (continued)
Last Ten Fiscal Years (Accrual Basis of Accounting)
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 (b)
Expenses
Governmental Activities:

General Government $16,582,756 $19,717,835 $39,757,686 $39,791,046 $39,002,810 Public Safety 55,692,961 68,736,160 72,492,181 66,267,792 Public Works 35,438,199 36,908,454 15,317,513 14,497,917 13,593,654 Community Development 13,965,084 15,904,601 18,245,689 17,769,196 15,430,089 Economic Development and Base Reuse 4,211,689
Parks & Recreation 5,886,667 5,439,542 7,147,114 7,069,156 6,041,570 Interest on Long Term Debt 1,160,987 1,494,780 1,020,071 941,699 1,439,649 Total Governmental Activities Expenses 128,726,654 79,465,212 150,224,233 152,561,195 145,987,253 Business-Type Activities:

Sewer 27,761,599 31,036,421 32,911,331 36,565,521 35,308,937 Golf Course 1,456,261 1,484,585 1,447,348 1,601,547 1,676,402 Total Business-Type Activities Expenses 29,217,860 32,521,006 34,358,679 38,167,068 36,985,339 Total Primary Government Expenses $157,944,514 $111,986,218 $184,582,912 $190,728,263 $182,972,592 Program Revenues
Governmental Activities:

Charges for Services:

General Government 1,612,058 1,595,480 843,783 898,676 908,898 Public Safety 1,228,543 1,401,039 1,269,483 1,495,111 723,768 Public Works 1,491,617 1,068,348 636,304 3,405,245 1,350,050 Community Development 7,165,958 6,945,682 7,901,518 7,099,717 7,857,293 Economic Development and Base Reuse 2,709
Parks & Recreation 2,859,377 3,131,394 2,959,467 2,098,265 1,577,804 Operating Grants and Contributions 6,909,863 4,654,854 4,377,022 3,970,247 5,163,840 Capital Grants and Contributions 11,109,794 14,048,546 13,505,029 11,815,948 13,418,012 Total Governmental Activities Program Revenues 32,377,210 32,845,343 31,492,606 30,783,209 31,002,374 Business-Type Activities:

Charges for Services:

Sewer Wastewater 29,921,759 33,133,014 35,880,678 38,409,908 39,723,870 Golf Course 1,329,987 1,510,340 1,476,636 1,632,993 2,610,973 Capital Grants and Contributions 16,427
Total Business-Type Activities Program Revenue 31,251,746 34,659,781 37,357,314 40,042,901 42,334,843 Total Primary Government Program Revenues $63,628,956 $67,505,124 $68,849,920 $70,826,110 $73,337,217 Net (Expense)/Revenue
Governmental Activities ($96,349,444) ($46,619,869) ($118,731,627) ($121,777,986) ($114,984,879) Business-Type Activities 2,033,886 2,138,775 2,998,635 1,875,833 5,349,504 Total Primary Government Net Expense ($94,315,558) ($44,481,094) ($115,732,992) ($119,902,153) ($109,635,375) General Revenues and Other Changes in Net Position
Governmental Activities:

Taxes:

Property Taxes $19,185,672 $20,469,886 $21,818,338 $23,212,753 $24,115,482 Sales Taxes 46,004,776 48,474,643 49,185,212 48,059,150 58,795,766 Transient Occupancy Taxes 2,917,223 3,039,725 2,933,099 2,531,487 1,960,534 Business License Taxes 3,738,976 3,795,848 4,015,577 3,792,877 3,685,324 Other Taxes 7,623,072 8,174,327 8,282,066 9,059,762 8,592,910 Motor Vehicle In-Lieu 10,056,999 10,610,977 11,445,342 12,195,444 12,784,112 Investment Earnings 2,910,663 3,531,722 4,146,894 6,676,564 666,435 Miscellaneous Revenues
Restructure Investment in Partnership
Transfers (5,575)
Gain (Loss) on Sale of Land 1,098,988
assumed by Successor Agency 456,483
Total Governmental Activities 92,437,381 98,097,128 102,283,011 106,627,025 110,594,988 Business-Type Activities:

Investment Earnings 221,459 549,179 928,698 1,171,674 270,789 Miscellaneous Revenues 17,303
Transfers 5,575
Total Business-Type Activities 238,762 549,179 928,698 1,171,674 276,364 Total Primary Government $92,676,143 $98,646,307 $103,211,709 $107,798,699 $110,871,352 Change in Net Position
Governmental Activities ($3,912,063) $51,477,259 ($16,448,616) ($15,150,961) ($4,389,891) Business-Type Activities $2,272,648 $2,687,954 $3,927,333 $3,047,507 $5,625,868 Total Primary Government ($1,639,415) $54,165,213 ($12,521,283) ($12,103,454) $1,235,977 Fiscal Year Ended June 30,
147

Table 3: Fund Balance of Governmental Funds
Last Ten Fiscal Years (Modified Accrual Basis of Accounting) 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
General Fund
Nonspendable $2,188,620 $2,043,766 $3,166,230 $5,300,213 $7,678,457 $9,459,544 $9,445,016 $8,386,175 $11,746,479 $11,804,305 (b) Restricted - 14,424 12,180 10,101 872,011 (b) Assigned 7,571,120 1,082,256 795,794 1,252,513 4,475,678 1,923,138 2,067,659 2,029,710 1,983,462 3,304,968 (b) Unassigned 2,867,298 16,499,789 20,700,348 27,381,312 23,648,756 28,174,416 26,940,887 32,178,645 29,029,216 42,634,838 (b) Total General
Fund $12,627,038 $19,625,811 $24,662,372 $33,934,038 $35,802,891 $39,557,098 $38,467,986 $42,606,710 $42,769,258 $58,616,122 (a) All Other Governmental Funds
Nonspendable $5,378,858 $1,862,800 $4,646,748 $11,784 $2,561,514 (b) Restricted $49,559,344 $45,936,715 46,681,397 70,264,462 67,547,802 66,326,202 62,391,506 $70,914,380 $71,493,015 $187,787,269 (b) Assigned 976,992 594,718 889,276 1,310,956 3,765,571 4,861,181 5,609,181 3,565,866 6,872,198 7,556,051 (b) Unassigned (1,037,217) (357,792) (533,646) (1,463) (1,423) (1,380) (1,320) (1,230) (1,144) (52,993) (b) Total All Other
Governmental
Funds
$49,499,119 $46,173,641 $52,415,885 $73,436,755 $75,958,698 $71,197,787 $70,560,881 $74,479,016 $78,364,069 $195,290,327 Notes:
(a) Change in total fund balance for the General Fund and Other Governmental Funds is explained in Management's Discussion and Analysis.
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
$35
$40
$45
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Millions
#REF! #REF! Pavilion Lease Revenue Bond Nonspendable Restricted Assigned Unassigned see note (b)
148

This Page Left Intentionally Blank

Table 4: Change in Fund Balance of Governmental Funds Last Ten Fiscal Years (Modified Accrual Basis of Accounting) 2012 (a)(b) 2013 2014 2015 2016
Revenues
Taxes $74,875,127 $69,592,219 $75,401,019 $50,108,127 $53,323,128 Motor Vehicle in Lieu, Unrestricted
Licenses and Permits 1,365,186 1,595,963 1,970,553 1,850,505 2,190,733 Intergovernmental 11,135,482 12,378,380 12,885,940 41,713,386 46,499,748 Charges for Services 4,865,682 5,261,683 5,612,534 5,978,672 5,876,652 Fines, Forfeitures and Penalties 922,745 691,038 761,785 796,512 774,534 Parks and Recreation 2,668,759 2,685,527 2,818,062 2,928,447 2,831,036 Use of Money and Property 1,371,958 1,309,506 1,009,907 2,310,630 2,354,703 Special Assessment Collections 11,621 163,596 6,832 1,125 Other 1,176,402 4,342,263 5,275,468 6,011,512 1,768,268 Total Revenues 98,392,962 98,020,175 105,742,100 111,698,916 115,618,802 Expenditures
Current:

General Government 12,407,521 14,985,503 18,605,624 19,047,800 15,581,374 Public Safety 42,205,234 42,704,531 44,136,225 45,819,891 50,507,794 Public Works 9,942,358 11,347,815 10,425,279 10,951,657 11,854,456 Economic Development and Base Reuse
Community Development 10,001,434 7,996,949 8,749,004 9,498,491 14,294,898 Parks & Recreation 6,440,498 5,393,965 5,713,152 4,550,920 5,004,907 Capital Outlay 11,755,006 7,456,646 3,663,569 5,259,873 8,653,279 Debt Service:

Principal Repayment 5,427,190 2,077,019 3,013,844 1,971,156 3,355,956 Interest and Fiscal Charges 3,875,398 1,329,310 1,246,501 1,197,281 1,220,728 Total Expenditures 102,054,639 93,291,738 95,553,198 98,297,069 110,473,392 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over
(Under) Expenditures (3,661,677) 4,728,437 10,188,902 13,401,847 5,145,410 Other Financing Sources (Uses)
Transfers In 16,227,980 3,908,060 3,
686,553 4,694,031 12,921,595
Transfers (Out) (14,533,190) (3,240,875) (3,541,691) (5,401,418) (13,676,209) Issuance of long-term debt
Bond issuance premium
Proceeds from Sale of Property
Proceeds from Refunding Bonds
Proceeds from Debt Issuance 20,000,000
Payments to Refunded Bond Escrow
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) 1,694,790 667,185 144,862 19,292,613 (754,614) Special/Extraordinary Items
Assets transferred to Housing Successor 30,708,498
Partnership Note Restructuring (2,384,126)
by the Successor Agency (54,046,744)
Total Special/Extraordinary Items (23,338,246) (2,384,126) Net Change in Fund Balances ($25,305,133) $5,395,622 $10,333,764 $30,310,334 $4,390,796 Debt Service as a Percentage of
Non-Capital Expenditures 9.6% 10.2% 4.0% 4.4% 3.4%
(a) The City underwent reorganization during 2010 and 2012. (b) The Redevelopment Agency was dissolved during 2012. ( c) Economic Development was transferred out of Community Development during 2021. (d) Motor Vehicle in Lieu was moved out of the Taxes category in fiscal year 2021. Prior year amounts were not revised.

Fiscal Year Ended June 30,
150

Table 4: Change in Fund Balance of Governmental Funds (Continued) Last Ten Fiscal Years (Modified Accrual Basis of Accounting) 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 (c)(d)
Revenues
Taxes $89,526,717 $94,565,406 $97,679,634 $98,461,535 $97,076,921 Motor Vehicle in Lieu, Unrestricted 12,784,112
Licenses and Permits 3,457,297 3,249,276 2,483,185 4,997,645 3,314,719 Intergovernmental 12,386,529 14,019,651 16,676,525 11,521,918 16,345,516 Charges for Services 7,317,423 7,042,046 8,041,075 8,075,358 7,965,906 Fines, Forfeitures and Penalties 723,440 719,231 935,560 718,220 294,925 Parks and Recreation 2,859,377 3,131,397 2,959,467 1,845,834 1,329,657 Use of Money and Property 2,594,695 3,079,499 3,789,572 6,135,591 687,412 Special Assessment Collections 8,486 6,033
Other 4,737,973 5,502,246 5,171,706 5,244,106 1,432,252 Total Revenues 123,603,451 131,308,752 137,736,724 137,008,693 141,237,453 Expenditures
Current:

General Government 15,525,619 19,243,077 15,978,713 16,665,500 15,861,573 Public Safety 54,183,706 57,813,409 59,348,021 61,971,216 58,860,621 Public Works 12,282,569 12,683,894 13,107,750 13,394,012 13,534,439 Economic Development and Base Reuse 4,213,506
Community Development 13,648,938 15,688,158 17,529,921 17,188,821 15,576,523 Parks & Recreation 5,311,993 5,340,701 5,689,238 5,690,676 4,933,881 Capital Outlay 19,124,097 17,831,088 13,442,007 12,166,259 6,054,893 Debt Service:

Principal Repayment 3,394,025 3,340,000 3,622,000 3,703,000 12,790,000 Interest and Fiscal Charges 1,182,775 1,464,343 1,014,616 967,893 1,595,584 Total Expenditures 124,653,722 133,404,670 129,732,266 131,747,377 133,421,020 Excess (Deficiency) of Revenues Over
(Under) Expenditures (1,050,271) (2,095,918) 8,004,458 5,261,316 7,816,433 Other
Financing Sources (Uses)
Transfers In 6,911,566 10,983,035 10,424,941 8,822,097 6,108,973 Transfers (Out) (6,867,999) (10,807,816) (10,372,540) (11,134,800) (5,919,471) Issuance of long-term debt 109,480,000
Bond issuance premium 15,287,187
Proceeds from Sale of Property 1,098,988
Proceeds from Refunding Bonds 6,820,000
Proceeds from Debt Issuance
Payments to Refunded Bond Escrow (6,625,319)
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses) 43,567 369,900 52,401 (1,213,715) 124,956,689 Special/Extraordinary Items
Assets transferred to Housing Successor
Partnership Note Restructuring
by the Successor Agency
Total Special/Extraordinary Items
Net Change in Fund Balances ($1,006,704) ($1,726,018) $8,056,859 $4,047,601 $132,773,122 Debt Service as a Percentage of
Non-Capital Expenditures 5.3% 4.1% 4.0% 3.9% 11.9%
(a) The City underwent reorganization during 2010 and 2012. (b) The Redevelopment Agency was dissolved during 2012. ( c) Economic Development was transferred out of Community Development during 2021. (d) Motor Vehicle in Lieu was moved out of the Taxes category in fiscal year 2021. Prior year amounts were not revised.

Fiscal Year Ended June 30,
151

Table 5: Assessed and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property Last Ten Fiscal Years
Redevelopment Total Real Total
Fiscal City Agency Secured Unsecured Total Estimated Direct Year Property Property Property Property Assessed (a) Full Market (a) Tax Rate (b) 2012 $10,463,115,683 $1,527,127,911 $11,990,243,594 $502,406,363 $12,492,649,957 $12,492,649,957 1% 2013 10,123,412,924 1,351,812,885 11,475,225,809 479,678,800 11,954,904,609 11,954,904,609 1% 2014 10,742,832,848 1,363,624,486 12,106,457,334 451,080,860 12,557,538,194 12,557,538,194 1% 2015 11,811,954,307 1,433,031,794 13,244,986,101 476,697,389 13,721,683,490 13,721,683,490 1% 2016 12,681,944,657 1,526,960,513 14,208,905,170 493,146,035 14,702,051,205 14,702,051,205 1% 2017 13,449,336,453 1,589,761,444 15,039,097,897 499,520,206 15,539,072,098 15,539,072,098 1% 2018 14,199,964,301 1,714,612,342 15,914,576,643 500,022,045 16,415,052,683 16,415,052,683 1% 2019 15,160,081,885 1,983,980,866 17,144,062,751 534,262,345 17,678,830,545 17,678,830,545 1% 2020 15,991,867,840 2,264,563,696 18,256,431,536 583,376,968 18,840,313,953 18,840,313,953 1% 2021 16,699,330,758 2,420,552,771 19,119,883,529 626,998,306 19,747,387,284 19,747,387,284 1% Notes:
(a) The State Constitution requires property to be assessed at one hundred percent of the most recent purchase price, plus an increment of no more than two percent annually, plus any local over-rides.

These values are considered to be full market values.
(b) California cities do not set their own direct tax rate. The State Constitution establishes the rate at 1% and allocates a por
tion of that amount, by an annual calculation, to all the taxing entities within a tax rate area.

The City of Concord encompasses more than 15 tax rate areas.

Source: Contra Costa County Auditor-Controller's Office, Certificate of Assessed Valuations $0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Billions
Unsecured Property Secured Property
152

Table 6: Property Tax Rates, Direct and Overlapping Governments Last Ten Fiscal Years
Contra Costa East Bay Mt. Diablo Unified
Fiscal City & County Bay Area Water Land Regional Park School District & Year Direct Rate Rapid Transit Levy District Community College Total 2012 1.0000 0.0041 0.0051 0.0071 0.0756 1.0919
2013 1.0000 0.0043 0.0045 0.0051 0.0958 1.1097
2014 1.0000 0.0075 0.0042 0.0078 0.0873 1.1068
2015 1.0000 0.0045 0.0037 0.0085 0.1105 1.1272
2016 1.0000 0.0026 0.0035 0.0067 0.1032 1.1160
2017 1.0000 0.0080 0.0032 0.0032 0.0884 1.1028
2018 1.0000 0.0084 0.0030 0.0021 0.0904 1.1039
2019 1.0000 0.0070 0.0028 0.0021 0.1035 1.1154
2020 1.0000 0.0120 0.0026 0.0094 0.1096 1.1336
2021 1.0000 0.0139 0.0025 0.0014 0.1070 1.1248
Notes:

Source: HdL Companies
Overlapping Rates
In 1978, California voters passed Proposition 13 which set the property tax rate at a 1.00% fixed amount. This 1.00% is shared by all taxing agencies for which the subject property resides within. In addition to the 1.00% fixed amount, property owners are charged taxes as a percentage of assessed property values for the payment of any voter approved bonds.

Overlapping rates are those of local and county governments that apply to property owners within the City. Not all overlapping rates apply to all city property owners.
$0.0
$0.2
$0.4
$0.6
$0.8
$1.0
$1.2
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Per Hundred $
Contra Costa Water Land Levy
Mt. Diablo Unified School District & Community College
East Bay Regional Park District
Bay Area Rapid Transit
Basic County Wide Levy
153

Table 7: Principal Property Taxpayers
Current Year and Nine Years Ago
Percentage Percentage
Assessed of Total Assessed of Total
Primary Land Use Value Rank Assessed Value Value Rank Assessed Value Tri Pointe Homes Inc Commercial $293,258,587 1 1.56%
Concord Centercall LLC Commercial 207,775,550 2 1.10%
Concord Technology Center Properties Commercial 148,998,305 3 0.79% SPPI Commercial LLC Commercial 144,443,413 4 0.77%
Willows Center Concord Commercial 122,873,618 5 0.65% $45,071,517 10 0.38% Sequoia Equities Concord PC LLC Residential 119,807,424 6 0.64% Renaissance Res Holdings LLC Residential 114,270,367 7 0.61% Jamestown Concord Technology Commercial 105,156,492 8 0.56% Clayton Valley Shopping Center Commercial 77,330,381 9 0.41% 63,533,777 8 0.54% BOF California One Concord Center LLC Commercial 73,296,180 10 0.39% SFG Owner D And B LLC Commercial 179,393,368 1 1.51%
Taubman Land Associates LLC Commercial 162,719,457 2 1.37% Chevron USA Inc Commercial 127,272,991 3 1.07%
Sierra Pacific Properties Inc Commercial 101,899,237 4 0.86% Westcore Willow Pass I LLC Commercial 101,499,251 5 0.86% Seecon Financial and Construction Co Commercial 83,288,740 6 0.70% Concord Airport Plaza Associates Commercial 67,199,876 7 0.57% Behringer Harvard Renaissance Residential 48,395,321 9 0.41% Top Ten Total $1,407,210,317 7.48% $980,273,535 8.27%
City Total $18,851,114,200 $11,865,340,904
Source: Tables provided by HdL Companies.
2020-21 2011-12
Property Owner
154

Table 8: Property Tax Levies and Collections
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Percent of
Current Percent Delinquent Total Total Tax County
Fiscal Total Tax of Levy Tax Tax Collections Delinquency Year Tax Levy (a) Collections (b) Collected Collections (a) Collections to Tax Levy Rate (c) 2012 19,731,365$ 19,731,365$ 100.0000% n/a 19,731,365$ 100.0000% n/a 2013 15,017,785 15,017,785 100.0000% n/a 15,017,785 100.0000% n/a 2014 15,707,019 15,707,019 100.0000% n/a 15,707,019 100.0000% n/a 2015 17,457,504 17,457,504 100.0000% n/a 17,457,504 100.0000% n/a 2016 18,211,711 18,211,711 100.0000% n/a 18,211,711 100.0000% n/a 2017 19,185,672 19,185,672 100.0000% n/a 19,185,672 100.0000% n/a 2018 20,469,886 20,469,886 100.0000% n/a 20,469,886 100.0000% n/a 2019 21,818,338 21,818,338 100.0000% n/a 21,818,338 100.0000% n/a 2020 23,212,753 23,212,753 100.0000% n/a 23,212,753 100.0000% n/a 2021 24,115,482 24,115,482 100.0000% n/a 24,115,482 100.0000% n/a Notes:

Current tax collections beginning in 1993 have been reduced by a mandatory tax reallocation imposed by the State of California.
(a) During fiscal year 1995, the County began providing the City 100% of its tax levy under an agreement, the Teeter Plan which allows the County to keep all interest and delinquency charges collected. (b) Tax collections in fiscal year 2005 to 2012 are net of pass-thru payment and Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund withholding. During 2012, tax increment was no longer distributed due to the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency. (c) Data is not available for the years being reported.

Source: City of Concord Finance Department
$0.0
$2.5
$5.0
$7.5
$10.0
$12.5
$15.0
$17.5
$20.0
$22.5
$25.0
$27.5
$30.0
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Millions
Total Tax Levy (a) Tax Collections
155

Table 9: Taxable Sales by Category
Last Ten Calendar Years (Dollars in Thousands)
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Apparel Stores $117,070 $124,291 $129,620 $133,503 $136,181 $141,627 $140,357 $157,811 $145,008 $112,206 General Merchandise 297,590 308,564 313,737 311,632 304,235 302,708 310,299 315,108 313,669 242,950 Food Stores 57,320 58,813 58,695 62,148 63,762 65,119 66,570 70,102 73,683 75,372 Eating and Drinking Places 167,615 180,918 193,612 206,775 224,981 243,400 256,054 276,945 306,720 213,225 Building Materials 228,147 247,999 290,222 312,706 338,340 349,203 386,929 433,854 443,058 465,029 Auto Dealers and Supplies 508,151 634,960 687,440 750,936 854,959 911,390 952,802 905,250 885,338 771,103 Service Stations 168,709 168,552 165,377 167,619 152,664 135,818 147,571 167,445 170,388 119,341 Other Retail Stores 341,885 332,337 336,146 337,166 364,231 371,300 376,720 381,443 358,435 308,505 All Other Outlets 538,044 598,935 652,266 744,168 845,687 887,130 947,905 1,053,588 1,134,733 1,370,657 Total $2,424,531 $2,655,369 $2,827,115 $3,026,653 $3,285,040 $3,407,695 $3,585,207 $3,761,546 $3,831,032 $3,678,388 Note:

Sources: State Board of Equalization, California Department of Taxes and Fees Administration, State Controller's Office, The HdL Companies Due to confidentiality issues, the names of the ten largest revenue payers are not available. The categories presented are intended to provide alternative information regarding the sources of the City's revenue.
$0
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2,000,000
$2,500,000
$3,000,000
$3,500,000
$4,000,000
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
All Other Outlets
Other Retail Stores
Service Stations
Auto Dealers and Supplies
Building Materials
Eating and Drinking Places
Food Stores
General Merchandise
Apparel Stores
156

Table 10: Sales Tax Rates
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year City Direct Rate Contra Costa
County
Bay Area Rapid
Transit
Contra Costa
Transportation
Authority
State of
California Total
2012 1.25% 0.25% 0.50% 0.50% 6.25% (b) 8.75%
2013 1.25% 0.25% 0.50% 0.50% 6.50% (c) 9.00%
2014 1.25% 0.25% 0.50% 0.50% 6.50% 9.00%
2015 1.25% 0.25% 0.50% 0.50% 6.50% 9.00%
2016 1.25% 0.25% 0.50% 0.50% 6.50% 9.00%
2017 1.50% (d) 0.25% 0.50% 0.50% 6.00% (d),(e) 8.75%
2018 1.50% 0.25% 0.50% 0.50% 6.00% 8.75%
2019 1.50% 0.25% 0.50% 0.50% 6.00% 8.75%
2020 1.50% 0.25% 0.50% 0.50% 6.00% 8.75%
2021 2.00% (a) 0.75% (f) 0.50% 0.50% 6.00% 9.75%
Notes:
(a) A full-cent use and transaction tax (Measure V) was originally approved in November 2020 and will continue until ended by voters. (b) The State Revenue and Taxation Code Section 6201.7 one percent rate increase expired July 1, 2011. (c) Proposition 30 increased the sales tax by 0.25% on January 1, 2013. (d) The end of the revenue "swap" of Proposition 57 resulted in a 0.25% increase to the local sales tax rate, and 0.25% decrease to the state. (e) Proposition 30 0.25% sales tax increase expired on December 31, 2016. (f) A half-cent sales tax approved by county voters in November 2020 and expires in 20 years..

Source: California Department of Tax and Fee Administration

0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

6.00%

7.00%

8.00%

9.00%

10.00%
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
City Direct Rate Contra Costa County Bay Area Rapid Transit Contra Costa Transportation Authority State of California 157

Table 11: Top 25 Sales Tax Producers
Current and Nine Years Ago
2020-21 2011-12
Acura of Concord Acura of Concord
Ashby Lumber Arco
Audi Concord Ashby Lumber
Audi Leasing Bently Leasing Audi of Concord
BMW Concord BMW Concord
Bombardier Transit Corporation Chevron
Concord Chevrolet Concord Chevrolet
Concord Honda Concord Honda
Concord Toyota Concord Kia Concord Mitsubishi
Costco Concord Nissan
Dolans Concord Lumber Concord Toyota
Financial Services Vehicle Trust Costco
Future Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram of Concord Dolans Concord Lumber Future Ford Lincoln of Concord Frys Electronics
Golden State Lumber Future Ford Lincoln of Concord
Home Depot Home Depot
Lehmers Buick/Pontiac/GMC JC Penney
Lexus of Concord Lehmers Buick/Pontiac/GMC
Lowes Lexus of Concord
Macys Lowes
Pacific States Petroleum Macys
Patterson Dental Supply Neillo Infiniti
Sigler Orchard Supply Hardware
United Rentals Safeway
Vici Sears
Fiscal Year Total Paid By Top 25 Accounts
= 46.37%
Source: HdL Companies.

Fiscal Year Total Paid By Top 25 Accounts =

47.16%
158

Table 12: Ratio of Outstanding Debt by Type
Last Ten Fiscal Years (Dollars in Millions)
Refunding Lease
Fiscal Certificates of Revenue Lease Agree- Notes Capital Purchase Year Participation Bonds ment (b) Payable Lease Agreement Total 2012 $10.4 $4.3 $1.4 $1.8 $8.3 $26.2
2013 9.1 3.9 1.4 1.9 8.0 24.3
2014 7.7 3.5 0.5 1.8 7.7 21.2
2015 24.6 2.6 1.3 7.4 35.9
2016 22.1 2.1 0.7 7.0 32.0
2017 19.7 1.6 0.3 6.6 28.1
2018 17.2 7.6 0.1 24.9
2019 14.6 6.5 0.0 21.1
2020 12.1 5.3 2.5 19.9
2021 $124.8 4.6 2.2 131.6
Business-Type Activities
Certificates Total Percentage
Fiscal of Primary of Personal Per
Year Participation Total Government Income (a) Capita (a) 2012 $22.1 $22.1 $48.3 1.19% $376.6
2013 20.3 20.3 44.6 1.03% 335.19
2014 20.4 20.4 41.6 1.39% 454.72
2015 19.5 19.5 55.4 1.43% 443.28
2016 18.2 18.2 50.2 1.28% 361.14
2017 17.1 17.1 45.2 1.13% 352.26
2018 16.2 16.2 41.1 0.98% 318.01
2019 14.9 14.9 36.0 0.81% 277.44
2020 13.8 13.8 33.7 0.71% 258.37
2021 12.7 12.7 144.3 2.80% 1,116.24
Notes:

Debt amounts exclude any premiums, discounts, or other amortization amounts. (a) See Demographic and Economic Statistics for personal income and population data. (b) During 2012, debt service liabilities were assumed by the Successor Agency upon the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency.

SourcesCity of Concord Finance Department
State of California, Department of Finance (population) U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census (income) Governmental Activities
0 15
30 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Millions
Total Governmental Total Business
159

Table 13: Direct and Overlapping Debt
As of June 30, 2021
Percentage Amount
Net Applicable Applicable
Debt to City of to City of
Outstanding Concord Concord
Direct Debt
CONCORD 2021 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT $109,480,000 100.000% $109,480,000 CONCORD 2018 REFUNDING LEASE PURCHASE
AGREEMENT 4,630,000 100.000% 4,630,000
Total Direct Debt $114,110,000 $114,110,000
Overlapping Debt
CCC PENSION OBLIGATION BOND $44,925,000 8.326% $3,740,600 CCC PFA 1998A LRB 6,435,000 8.326% 535,799
CCC PFA 1999A LRB 6,310,000 8.326% 525,391
CCC PFA 2002A LRB 4,065,000 8.326% 338,465
CCC PFA 2003A LRB 3,445,000 8.326% 286,842
CCC PFA 2007A LRB 61,030,000 8.326% 5,081,554
CCC PFA 2009A LRB 6,407,008 8.326% 533,468
CCC PFA 2010A-2 LRB 11,995,000 8.326% 998,742
CCC PFA 2010A-3 LRB 20,700,000 8.326% 1,723,549
CCC PFA 2010B LRB 6,055,000 8.326% 504,159
CCC PFA 2012 LRB 6,212,865 8.326% 517,303
CCC PFA 2015 A&B LRB 37,900,000 8.326% 3,155,676
CCC PFA 2017 A LRB 42,320,000 8.326% 3,523,699
CCC PFA 2017B LRB 76,930,000 8.326% 6,405,439
CONTRA COSTA FIRE 26,670,000 18.044% 4,812,377
BART BOND 328,172,932 8.326% 27,324,733
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK BOND 125,395,149 8.326% 10,440,803 MT DIABLO 2002 BOND 244,095,000 40.684% 99,306,996
MT DIABLO 2010 BOND 269,216,615 40.684% 109,527,411
MT DIABLO 2018 BOND 14,538,000 40.684% 5,914,603
CONTRA COSTA COMMUNITY COLLEGE 2002 BOND 311,230,151 8.354% 26,001,028 CONTRA COSTA COMMUNITY COLLEGE 2006 BOND 354,509,849 8.354% 29,616,734 CONTRA COSTA COMMUNITY COLLEGE 2014 BOND 274,130,000 8.354% 22,901,579 Total Overlapping Debt $2,282,687,569 $363,716,950
Total Direct And Overlapping Debt $477,826,950
2020/21 Total Assessed Valuation $19,119,883,529
Less Redevelopment Incremental Assessed Value: 2,420,552,771 Adjusted AV $16,699,330,758
Debt to Assessed Valuation Ratios: Direct Debt: 0.690%
Overlapping Debt: 2.210%
Total Debt: 2.910%
Sources: HdL Coren & Cone
Certificate of Assessed Valuations from the County Office of the Auditor-Controller Overlapping governments are those that coincide, at least in part, with the geographic boundaries of the city. The percentage of overlapping debt applicable is estimated by using taxable assessed values. Applicable percentages were estimated by determining the portion of another governmental unit’s taxable assessed value that is within the city’s boundaries and dividing it by each unit’s total taxable assessed value. 160

Table 14: Computation of Legal Bonded Debt Margin
As of June 30, 2021 (Dollars in Thousands)
Assessed Valuation:

Secured Property Assessed Value, Net of
Exempt Real Property $18,107,365
Bonded Debt Limit (15% of Assessed Value) (a) $2,716,105 Amount of Debt Subject to Limit:

Total Bonded Debt $0
Less Tax Allocation Bonds and Sales Tax Revenue
Bonds, Certificate of Participation Not Subject to Limit 0 Amount of Debt Subject to Limit 0
Legal Bonded Debt Margin $2,716,105
Total Net Debt
Total Net Debt Legal Applicable to the Limit
Fiscal Debt Applicable to Debt as a Percentage
Year Limit Limit Margin of Debt Limit
2011 $1,907,026 $0 $1,907,026 0.00%
2012 1,873,897 0 1,873,897 0.00%
2013 (b) 1,883,631 0 1,883,631 0.00%
2014 1,695,697 0 1,695,697 0.00%
2015 1,867,287 0 1,867,287 0.00%
2016 2,010,013 0 2,010,013 0.00%
2017 2,128,436 0 2,010,013 0.00%
2018 2,251,362 0 2,251,362 0.00%
2019 2,432,813 0 2,432,813 0.00%
2020 2,592,346 0 2,592,346 0.00%
2021 2,716,105 0 2,716,105 0.00%
Note:
(a) California Government Code, Section 43605 sets the debt limit at 15%. The Code section was enacted prior to the change in basing assessed value to full market value when it was previously 25% of market value.

Source: City of Concord Finance Department
161

Table 15: Sewer Revenue Bonds Coverage
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Net Revenue Debt Service Requirements
Fiscal Gross Operating Available for
Year Revenue (a) Expenses (b) Debt Service Principal Interest Total Coverage 2012 $19,645,294 $15,479,402 $4,165,892 $750,000 $907,989 $1,657,989 2.51 2013 19,492,824 16,854,333 2,638,491 845,000 1,059,754 1,904,754 1.39 2014 22,301,111 17,842,173 4,458,938 875,000 710,884 1,585,884 2.81 2015 24,439,221 17,889,711 6,549,510 900,000 685,684 1,585,684 4.13 2016 27,439,280 17,943,895 9,495,385 925,000 662,184 1,587,184 5.98 2017 30,136,204 18,208,086 11,928,118 945,000 638,971 1,583,971 7.53 2018 33,672,715 19,436,037 14,236,678 990,000 427,193 1,417,193 10.05 2019 36,795,345 20,066,107 16,729,238 1,025,000 494,551 1,519,551 11.01 2020 39,507,521 20,341,412 19,166,109 1,010,000 504,981 1,514,981 12.65 2021 39,974,490 20,468,000 19,506,490 1,045,000 476,181 1,521,181 12.82 Notes: (a) Includes all Wastewater Operating Revenues, Non-Operating Interest Revenue, Connection Fees and Other Non-Operating Revenue.
(b) Includes all Wastewater Operating Expenses less Capital Improvement Expense, Depreciation and Interest.

Source: City of Concord Annual Financial Statements
(6.00)
(4.00)
(2.00)

0.00 2.00

4.00 6.00

8.00 10.00

12.00 14.00
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Coverage
162

Table 16: Bonded Debt Pledged Revenue Coverage,
1988(Refunded), 1993(Refunded), 2004 (Refunded), and Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds Series 2014
Last Ten Fiscal Year
Tax Debt Service Requirements
Fiscal Increment
Year Revenue Principal Interest Total Coverage
2012 $14,829,000 $3,835,000 $2,513,671 $6,348,671 2.34
2013 * 13,387,000 3,985,000 2,357,271 6,342,271 2.11
2014 13,213,000 4,145,000 2,194,671 6,339,671 2.08
2015 14,330,318 4,100,000 3,520,158 7,620,158 1.88
2016 15,269,605 4,205,000 1,630,450 5,835,450 2.62
2017 15,897,614 4,380,000 1,462,250 5,842,250 2.72
2018 17,146,123 4,605,000 1,243,250 5,848,250 2.93
2019 19,839,809 4,825,000 1,013,000 5,838,000 3.40
2020 22,645,637 2,440,000 771,750 3,211,750 7.05
2021 24,205,527 2,560,000 649,750 3,209,750 7.54
Note: * FY2013 data is updated and adjusted to reflect data collected during refunding of the 2004 Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds.

Source: County Redevelopment Successor Agency Property Tax Revenue Report Long Term Debt Schedule - City of Concord Finance Department $0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Millions
Tax Increment Revenue Debt Service Payment
163

Table 17: Demographic and Economic Statistics
Last Ten Calendar Year
Total Per Capita Contra Costa City
Calendar City Personal Personal Unemployment County Population Year Population Income Income Rate Population % of County 2012 123,206 $3,764,559,000 $30,555 11.2% 1,065,117 11.57% 2013 123,812 3,822,819,000 30,876 7.6% 1,074,702 11.52% 2014 124,656 3,864,336,000 31,000 6.6% 1,087,008 11.47% 2015 124,977 3,877,661,000 31,027 6.7% 1,102,871 11.33% 2016 129,707 3,926,050,000 30,268 5.4% 1,123,429 11.55% 2017 128,370 4,008,751,000 31,228 4.8% 1,139,513 11.27% 2018 129,159 4,207,822,000 32,578 3.9% 1,149,363 11.24% 2019 129,889 4,438,716,000 34,173 2.8% 1,150,215 11.29% 2020 130,435 4,762,661,000 36,595 2.9% 1,150,621 11.34% 2021 129,273 5,151,420,000 39,849 8.7% 1,153,854 11.20% Sources: State of California, Department of Finance The HdL Companies

0.00%

2.50%

5.00%

7.50%

10.00%

12.50%
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Unemployment Rate

11.00%

11.50%

12.00%

12.50%

13.00%

13.50%

14.00%
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
City Population as Percentage of County
$0
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Millions
Total Personal Income
$20
$25
$30
$35
$40
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Thousands
Per Capita Personal Income
164

Table 18: Principal Employers
Current Year and Nine Years Ago
Number of Percentage Percentage
Employees of Total City Number of
Employer (Range) Rank Employment* Employees Rank Employment John Muir Medical Ctr 1,000 to 4,999 1 4.8% 1,100 6 1.7% Wells Fargo 1,000 to 4,999 1 4.8% 1,500 2 2.3%
PG&E 1,000 to 4,999 1 4.8% 1,450 4 2.3%
Bank of America 1,000 to 4,999 1 4.8% 1,300 5 2.0%
Mt. Diablo Unified School District 500 to 999 2 1.2% 4,320 1 6.7% Fresenius Medical Care 500 to 999 2 1.2%
City of Concord 500 to 999 2 1.2%
Costco 250 to 499 3 0.6%
Home Depot 250 to 499 3 0.6%
Assetmark 250 to 499 3 0.6%
Chevron Corporation 1,500 3 2.3%
Conco Cement 549 7 0.9%
Safeway 460 8 0.7%
Adecco Employment Services 400 9 0.6%
Macy's 400 10 0.6%
Subtotal 6,500 - 27,990 24.4% 12,179 20.2%
Total City Day Labor Force: 63,000 64,300
Source: City of Concord Economic Development & Base Reuse Department * 2021 Percentage of total is based on median in the ranges provided. 2021 2012
165

Table 19: Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) City Government Employees by Function Last Ten Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year
2012 (a) 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 (b) Function
General Government 59 61 63 64 65 65 62 62 62 56
Public Safety 205 205 211 213 215 215 216 213 209 185
Public Works 63 64 64 64 64 64 64 69 69 65
Economic Development & Base 5
Community Development 35 37 39 43 46 46 52 52 54 49
Parks & Recreation 14 15 14 13 13 13 13 13 13 12
Sewer 11 10 10 11 11 11 12 13 11 11
Golf Course
Total 387 392 401 408 414 414 419 422 418 383
Source: City of Concord
Notes:
(a) In Fiscal Year 2012, Engineering was reorganized into Community Development Department and Code Enforcement was moved to Public Safety. (b) In Fiscal Year 2021, the Economic Development division was transferred out of Community Development and combined with the Base Reuse project. 0 50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2012 (a) 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 (b) FTE's
General Government Public Safety Public Works
Economic Development & Base Reuse Community Development Parks & Recreation Sewer Golf Course
166

Table 20: Operating Indicators by Function / Program
Last Ten Fiscal Years
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Function/Program
Public Safety
Police:

Number of Community Service Desk Contacts 27,225 22,350 32,989 36,469 30,225 24,233 21,040 20,117 21,969 659 Police Calls for Service 116,858 113,527 118,009 123,151 121,433 122,187 125,429 127,024 123,776 112,186 Law Violations:

Part I Crimes 4,527 4,210 5,267 5,594 4,849 4,820 4,919 4,695 4,999 4,035 Physical Arrests (Adult and Juvenile) 3,836 2,837 3,413 4,126 3,853 3,916 3,229 3,532 2,528 2,241 Parking Violations 10,415 8,471 8,107 9,408 7,282 6,002 6,920 7,081 7,282 2,353 Public Works
Street Resurfacing (millions of square feet) 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 0.10 Potholes Repaired 260 374 526 704 1,272 3,168 1,460 5,251 2,122 1,433 Culture and Recreation
Community Services:

Recreation Class Participants 11,424 10,736 11,636 12,335 13,251 13,476 12,568 12,540 10,364 3,213 Senior Center Activity/Event Participants 15,484 16,522 17,034 21,886 22,018 18,377 22,075 23,250 25,436 1,067 Human Services/Club Activity Participants 49,598 47,705 33,668 41,868 38,592 33,853 38,740 40,241 7,096 456 Library:

Volumes in Collection (thousands) 79,630 80,573 80,955 80,291 80,692 76,049 77,702 57,523 55,195 52,196 Total Volumes Borrowed (thousands) 330,451 313,743 300,517 247,737 253,522 219,157 195, 562 200,639 139,482 79,560
Wastewater
Storm Drain Inlets 5,583 5,583 5,583 5,583 5,583 5,583 5,583 5,583 5,583 5,583 Sewer Overflows 18 34 28 12 9 8 19 10 19 13
Average Daily Pumping (millions of gallons) N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Source: City of Concord
167

Table 21: Capital Asset Statistics by Function/Program Last Ten Fiscal Years
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Function/Program
Public Works
Miles of Streets 309 309 310 310 310 310 310 310 310 310 Street Lights 8,254 8,254 8,254 8,256 8,256 8,256 8,256 8,290 8,325 8,379 Traffic Signals 156 157 158 158 158 165 173 173 180 195 Culture and Recreation
Community Services:

City Parks 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18 18
City Parks Acreage 379 379 379 379 379 379 379 379 379 379 Playgrounds 18 18 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19
City Trails 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
Miles of City Trails 19 19 22 22 22 22 22 22 22 22
Roadway Landscaping Acreage 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 52 Regional Park Acreage (a) 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 2,256 2,256 Regional Park Facilities:

Golf Courses (18 holes) 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Banquet Facility 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
His
toric House 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
Community Gardens 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Community Centers 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Senior Centers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Sports Centers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Performing Arts Centers 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Swimming Pool/Spray Park 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Tennis/Pickleball Courts 17 17 17 17 27 27 27 27 27 27
Baseball/Softball Field Complexes 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 Soccer/Football Field Complexes 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 Library:

City Libraries 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Wastewater
Sewer Lines (miles) 383 383 389 389 389 389 389 389 389 389 (
a) The East Bay Regional Park District took possession of the former Concord Naval Weapons Station from the National Park Service and Navy in 2020.

Source: City of Concord
168

CITY OF CONCORD JUNE 30, 2021

MUNICIPAL DEBT CONTINUING DISCLOSURE

MUNICIPAL DEBT CONTINUING DISCLOSURE
City of Concord Joint Powers Financing Authority
Certificates of Participation (2021 Capital Improvement Project) a. Principal Amount of Certificates Outstanding (ACFR, page 71) b. General Fund Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in F (ACFR, page 30) c. General Fund Balance Sheet (ACFR, page 28)
d. General Fund Tax Revenues By Source (ACFR, page 30)
e. Assessed Valuations (ACFR, page 152)
City of Concord Joint Powers Financing Authority
Certificates of Participation (2004 Wastwater System Improvement Project), Refunded Certificates of Participation (2007 Wastwater System Improvement Project), Refunded Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds Series 2012
2018 Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds
a. Ten Largest Users of the Wastewater System (Table 2) b. Sewer Rates (Table 3)
c. Debt Service Coverage Ratio (ACFR, page 161)
d. Principal Amount of Bonds Outstanding (ACFR, page 71) Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency of the City of Concord (Central Concord Redevelopment Project) Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds Series 2004, Refunded
a. Historical Taxable Values and Tax Increment Revenues (Table 4) b. Largest Property Taxpayers by Assessed Value and Revenue (Table 5) c. Annual Assessed Value Appeals (Table 6)
d. Tax Revenue Collection (ACFR, page 155)
e. Principal Amount of Bonds Outstanding (ACFR, page 71) Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency of the City of Concord (Central Concord Redevelopment Project) Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds Series 2014 a. Assessed Valuation by Category of Use (Table 7)
b. Historical Taxable Values and Tax Revenues (Table 8) c. Largest Property Taxpayers by Assessed Value and Revenue (Table 9) d. Annual Assessed Value Appeals (Table 10)
e. Debt Service Coverage (ACFR, page 162)
f. Tax Revenue Projection (Table 11)
City of Concord Joint Powers Financing Authority
Lease Revenue Bonds (Concord Pavilion) Series 1995
a. Summary of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances (Table 1) b. Principal Amount of Bonds Outstanding (ACFR, page 71) 170

City of Concord Joint Powers Financing Authority
Lease Revenue Bonds (Concord Pavilion) Series 1995
Table 1: Summary of Revenues & Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances Last Eight Fiscal Years
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
REVENUES:

Debt Contribution $700,832 $1,391,030 $630,995 $456,321 $434,514 $511,066 $327,296 $0 Nonoperating Income 924,791 1,129,112 1,005,736 983,136 1,029,002 1,314,894 731,367 688,490 Total Revenues 1,625,623 2,520,
142 1,636,731 1,439,457 1,463,516 1,825,960 1,058,663 688,490 EXPENDITURES:

Debt Service 703,817 625,913 555,869 493,998 434,334 511,066 327,216 281,649 Nonoperating Expenditures 803,558 1,592,827 760,142 584,395 597,323 651,870 542,730 649,969 Total Expenditures 1,507,375 2,218, 740 1,316,011 1,078,393 1,031,657 1,162,936 869,946 931,618

EXCESS (DEFICIENCY) OF REVENUES
OVER EXPENDITURES 118,248 301,402 320,720 361,
065 431,859 663,024 188,717 (243,128)
Net Change in
Fund Balance 118,248 301,402 320,720 361,
065 431,859 663,024 188,717 (243,128)
0 118,248 419,650 740,370 1,101,435 1,533,294 2,196,318 2,385,035 Fund Balance at End of Year $118,248 $419,650 $740,370 $1,101,435 $1,533,294 $2,196,318 $2,385,035 $2,141,907 Source: City of Concord Financial Statements
Fund Balance at Beginning
of Year
171

City of Concord Joint Powers Financing Authority
Certificates of Participation - 2007 Wastewater System Improvement Projects (Refunded) Certificates of Participation - 2004 Wastewater System Improvement Projects(Refunded) Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds Series 2012
2018 Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds
Customers Type of Use Percent

1. MT. DIABLO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 29 Sites 0.79%

2. JOHN MUIR MEDICAL CENTER Hospital and Medical Campus 0.54%

3. PALM LAKE APARTMENTS 300 Apartments 0.51%

4. CLAYTON CROSSING APARTMENTS 290 Apartments 0.51%

5. VERANDA Shopping Centers 0.45%

6. DALIS GARDENS MOB HOME PARK 260 Spaces 0.45%

7. STERLING COVE APARTMENTS 218 Apartments 0.37%

8. CLAYTON CREEK APARTMENTS 208 Apartments 0.36%

9. HERITAGE TOWERS APARTMENTS 196 Apartments 0.34%

10. ARCADIAN APARTMENTS 192 Apartments 0.33%

10. CONCORD MOBILE HOME PARK 192 Spaces 0.33%
Source: City of Concord Public Works Department
12 MONTHS THROUGH JUNE 30, 2021
Table 2: Ten Largest Users of the Wastewater System
172

City of Concord Joint Powers Financing Authority
Certificates of Participation - 2007 Wastewater System Improvement Projects(Refunded) Certificates of Participation - 2004 Wastewater System Improvement Projects(Refunded) Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds Series 2012
2018 Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds
Table 3: Sewer Rates for Fiscal Year 2020-21

RESIDENTIAL OWNERS

1. Minimum rate for any premises $682.00

2. Each single-family dwelling unit 682.00

3. Each dwelling unit in a multiple dwelling structure 682.00 per unit

4. Mobile Home Park 682.00 per space
COMMERCIAL OWNERS - Charge based upon quantity of water used in cubic feet

1. Minimum rate for any premises $682.00

2. Bowling Alleys 6.03/100 cu. ft.

3. Car Washes 6.03/100 cu. ft.

4. Health Studios and Gymnasiums 6.03/100 cu. ft.

5. Hospitals - Convalescent 6.03/100 cu. ft.

6. Multiple Lodging Structures (hotels, motels and rooming houses) 6.03/100 cu. ft.

7. Laundromats and Laundries 6.03/100 cu. ft.

8. Restaurants 11.99/100 cu. ft.

Restaurants with pretreatment facilities approved annually 6.82/100 cu. ft.

9. Bakeries Determined Individually

10. All others 6.82/100 cu. ft.

INSTITUTIONAL OWNERS

1. Minimum rate for any premises $682.00

2. As defined in Section 110-31, except for Convalescent Hospitals 6.82/100 cu. ft.

INDUSTRIAL OWNERS - Charge based upon quantity of water used and quality of effluent

1. Minimum rate for any premises $682.00

2. Flow/Million Gallons 5,291.00

3. Biochemical Oxygen Demand (B.O.D.) per thousand pounds 1,243.00

4. Suspended Solid (S.S.) per thousand pounds 1,059.00

SPECIAL DISCHARGE PERMITS, AS ISSUED BY THE DISTRICT

1. Charge based upon quantity of water used and quality of effluent Determined Individually SPECIAL CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT Determined Individually
Note: The sewer service charges are set by separate City Ordinance under c;lkcv. 173

Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency of the City of Concord (Central Concord Redevelopment Project) Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds Series 2004, Refunded Fiscal Year Ended June 30,
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Total Assessed Values $1,929,347 $2,054,198 $2,323,567 $2,604,150 $2,760,139 Base Year Values (339,586) (339,586) (339,586) (339,586) (339,586) Incremental Assessed Values 1,589,761 1,714,612 1,983,981 2,264,564 2,420,553 Incremental Property Taxes 15,898 17,146 19,840 22,646 24,206 Less:

Educational Revenue Augmentation Fund
Tax Increment Pass Through (1,047) (1,320) (2,245) (2,323) (4,211) Tax Increment Rebate (490) (500) (506) (682) (319)
Net Tax Revenues $14,361 $15,326 $17,089 $19,641 $19,676 Note: ***Updated and adjusted to reflect data collected during refunding of the 2004 Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds Source: City of Concord Finance Department
Table 4: Historical Taxable Values and Tax Increment Revenues Last Five Fiscal Years ($Thousands)***
174

2019-20 2020-21 2020-21
Assessed Assessed Projected
Property Owner Primary Land Use Value Value Revenue (a)

1. Concord Central LLC Commercial $201,297,391 $207,775,550 $2,077,756

2. Concord Technology Center Properties Commercial 146,076,985 148,998,305 1,489,983

3. Willows Center Concord Commercial 230,461,890 122,866,618 1,228,666

4. Sequoia Equities Concord PC LLC Residential 117,478,593 119,807,424 1,198,074

5. Renaissance Residential Holding Residential 88,310,580 114,270,367 1,142,704

6. Jamestown Concord Technology Commercial 103,094,600 105,156,492 1,051,565

7. Bof CA One Concord Center LLC Commercial 71,859,000 73,296,180 732,962

8. L and L Hospitality Holdings LLC Commercial 67,119,824 67,610,982 676,110

9. Seecon Financial and Construction Miscellaneous 49,453,834 54,047,790 540,478

10. SPPI Commercial LLC Commercial 53,884,820 538,848
Total $1,075,152,697 $1,067,714,528 $10,677,145
Notes:
(a) Projected Revenue is calculated using the 1% Basic County Wide Levy Rate.

Source: HDL Coren & Cone
Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency of the City of Concord Table 5: Largest Property Taxpayers by Assessed Value and Revenue Fiscal Year 2020-21
(Central Concord Redevelopment Project) Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds Series 2004, Refunded 175

Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency of the City of Concord (Central Concord Redevelopment Project) Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds Series 2004, Refunded Table 6: Annual Assessed Value Appeals
Last Five Fiscal Years
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Total Appeals 6 11 9 20 43
Resolved Appeals 6 11 4 1 1
Pending Appeals 0 0 5 19 42
Successful Appeals 2 8 3 1
Success Rate 33% 73% 75% 100% 0%
Successful Original Value 12,743,829$ 11,606,572$ 41,462,164$ 319,852$ -$ Successful Appeal Value Loss 213,094$ 3,670,156$ 1,490,910$ 79,963$ -$ Loss Rate 2% 32% 4% 0% 0%
Notes: Data in this report is updated with Suceessor Agency values only Source: HDL Coren & Cone
176

Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency of the City of Concord (Contra Costa County, California) Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds Series 2014 Table 7: Assessed Valuation by Category of Use
Fiscal Year 2020-21
No. of Parcels Taxable Value % of Total
Commercial 385 1,793,304,238$ 63.7 %
Residential 399 458,990,154 16.3 %
Industrial 77 130,947,446 4.7 %
Other Secured 129 197,713,497 7.0 %
Unsecured 987 234,479,123 8.3 %
Total 1,977 $2,815,434,458 100%
Source: HDL Coren & Cone
FY2020-21
177

Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency of the City of Concord (Contra Costa County, California) Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds Series 2014 Table 8: Historic Tax Revenues ($Thousands)
Fiscal Year Ended June 30,
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Assessed Value 1,929,347$ 2,054,198$ 2,323,567$ 2,604,150$ 2,760,139$ Base Year Value (339,586) (339,586) (339,586) (339,586) (339,586) Incremental AV 1,589,761 1,714,612 1,983,981 2,264,564 2,420,553 Tax Rate* 1.000% 1.000% 1.000% 1.000% 1.000%
Secured/Unsecured 15,898 17,146 19,840 22,646 24,206
Unitary 824 850 869 835 849
Supplemental / Other 250 362 226 1,993 428
Subtotal Gross Revenue 16,972 18,358 20,935 25,474 25,483 Less: County Admin** (142) (153) (178) (205) (213)
Less: Pass Through** (1,047) (1,320) (2,245) (2,323) (4,211) Net Tax Incr. / RPTTF Revenue 15,783$ 16,885$ 18,512$ 22,946$ 21,059$ Less: Senior Reimb. Agreement (578) (577) (578) (568) (428) Historic Tax Revenues 15,205$ 16,308$ 17,934$ 22, 378$ 20, 631$ Note: *Weighted average inclusive of Contra Costa Water Levy applicable to land AV only. **Non-subordinate.

Source: City of Concord Finance Department
Last Five Fiscal Years
178

Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency of the City of Concord (Contra Costa County, California) Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds Series 2014 Assessed
Value
Property Owner
Number of
Parcels
FY2020-21
Secured
FY2020-21
Unsecured Total
% of Total
AV**
% of AV
Incr.**

1. Concord Central LLC 1 $207,775,550 $207,775,550 7.5% 8.6%

2. Concord Technology Center Properties 4 148,998,305 148,998,305 5.4% 6.2%

3. Willows Center Concord 2 122,866,618 122,866,618 4.5% 5.1%

4. Sequoia Equities Concord PC LLC 2 119,807,424 119,807,424 4.3% 4.9%

5. Renaissance Residential Holding 4 114,270,367 114,270,367 4.1% 4.7%

6. Jamestown Concord Technology 2 105,156,492 105,156,492 3.8% 4.3%

7. Bof CA One Concord Center LLC 3 73,296,180 73,296,180 2.7% 3.0%

8. L and L Hospitality Holdings LLC 1 67,610,982 67,610,982 2.4% 2.8%

9. Seecon Financial and Construction 3 54,047,790 54,047,790 2.0% 2.2%

10. SPPI Commercial LLC 2 53,884,820 53,884,820 2.0% 2.2% Total Top 10 Taxpayers 24 $1,067,714,528 $0 $1,067,714,528 38.68% 44.11% Note:
**Percentages calculated based on FY2020-21
Total assesssed value of 2,760,138,589
Total Incremental Assessed Value of 2,420,552,771
Source: HDL Coren & Cone
Table 9: Top 10 Taxpayers for Project Area
Fiscal Year 2020-21
179

Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency of the City of Concord (Contra Costa County, California) Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds Series 2014 Fiscal Year 2020-21
FY2020-21 Appeals
Number of
Filings
County Roll Value
($Millions)
Applicant
Opinion
($Millions)
Estimated/Actual
Resolved Value
($Millions)
Estimated/Actual
Loss Value
($Millions)
% Reduction
Appeals Resolved 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 0%
Appeals Pending 42 347.8 190.0 330.6 17.2 5%
Total Appeals Filed 42 $347.8 $190.0 $330.6 $17.2 5%
Source: HDL Coren & Cone
Table 10: Assessed Value Appeals for Project Area
180

Successor Agency of the Former Redevelopment Agency of the City of Concord (Contra Costa County, California) Tax Allocation Refunding Bonds Series 2014 Table 11: Projection of Tax Revenues for Debt Services Next 5 Fiscal Years (dollars in thousands)
Year
Ending
6/30
Parcel I Tax
Revenue
Parcel II Tax
Revenue
Parcel IV
Tax
Revenue
Parcel V
Tax
Revenue
Total Centaral
Concord Project
Revenues
Debt Service
Total Concord
Project Tax
Revenues
Debt Sevice
Coverage
2021 $8,144 $4,922 $514 $452 $14,032 $3,146 $17,178 4.46x 2022 8,144 4,922 514 452 14,032 3,145 17,177 4.46x
2023 8,144 4,922 514 452 14,032 3,142 17,174 4.47x
2024 8,144 4,922 514 452 14,032 2,586 16,618 5.43x
2025 8,144 4,922 514 452 14,032 2,583 16,615 5.43x
Source: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. September 15, 2014 181

CITY OF CONCORD JUNE 30, 2021
182

CITY OF CONCORD

REQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2021
Attachment 2

This Page Left Intentionally Blank

CITY OF CONCORD

REQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS
For The Year Ended June 30, 2021
Table of Contents
Page
Required Communications ................................................................................................................................ 1 Significant Audit
Matters:

Accounting Policies .......................................................................................................................... 1 Unusual Transactions, Controversial or Emerging Areas ............................................................... 2 Accounting Estimates ....................................................................................................................... 2 Disclosures ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit ........................................................................... 3 Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements ...................................................................................... 3 Disagreements with Management .................................................................................................... 3 Management Representations ............................................................................................................ 3 Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants ................................................. 3 Other Audit Findings or Issues .......................................................................................................... 3 Other Information Accompanying the Financial Statements ................................................................... 4

This Page Left Intentionally Blank

REQUIRED COMMUNICATIONS
To the City Council of
the City of Concord, California
We have audited the basic financial statements of th e City of Concord for the year ended June 30, 2021.

Professional standards require that we communicate to you the followin g information related to our audit under generally accepted auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards and the Uniform Guidance.

Significant Audit Matters
Accounting Policies
Management is responsible for the selection and use of appropriate ac counting policies. The significant accounting policies used by the City are described in Notes #1 and #2 to the financial statements. No new accounting policies were adopted, and the applica tion of existing policies was not changed during the year, except as follows:

GASB 84 - Fiduciary Activities
The objective of this Statement is to improve guidance regarding the identification of fiduciary activities for accounting and financial reporting purposes and how those activities should be reported.

This Statement establishes criteria for identifyi ng fiduciary activities of all state and local governments. The focus of the criteria generally is on (1) whether a government is controlling the assets of the fiduciary activity and (2) the beneficiaries with whom a fiduciary relationship exists. Separate criteria are included to iden tify fiduciary component units and postemployment benefit arrangements that are fiduciary activities.

The pronouncement became effective, and as disc losed in Note 1 to the financial statements required a prior period restatement for the cumulative effect on the financial statements.

GASB 90 – Majority Equity Interests (an amendment of GASB Statements No. 14 and No. 61) The primary objectives of this Statement are to improve the co nsistency and comparability of reporting a government’s majority equity intere st in a legally separate organization and to improve the relevance of financial statement information for certain component units. It defines a majority equity interest and specifies that a ma jority equity interest in a legally separate organization should be reported as an investment if a government’s holding of the equity interest meets the definition of an investment. A majority equity interest that meets the definition of an investment should be measured using the equity method, unless it is held by a special-purpose government engaged only in fidu ciary activities, a fiduciary fund , or an endowment (including permanent and term endowments) or permanent fund. Those governments and funds should measure the majority equity interest at fair value.

The pronouncement became effective, but did not have a material effect on the financial statements.
1

Unusual Transactions, Controversial or Emerging Areas
We noted no transactions entered into by the City during the year for which there is a lack of authoritative guidance or consensus. All significant transactions have been recognized in the financial statements in the proper period.

Accounting Estimates
Accounting estimates are an integral part of the fi nancial statements prepared by management and are based on management’s knowledge and experience about past and curr ent events and assumptions about future events. Certain accounting estimates are particul arly sensitive because of their significance to the financial statements and because of the possibility that future events affecting them may differ significantly from those expected. The most sensitive estimate(s) affecting the City’s financial statements were:

Estimated Fair Value of Investments: As of June 30, 2021, the City held approximately $386.6 million of cash and investments as measured by fa ir value as disclosed in Note 3 to the financial statements. Fair value is essentially market pric ing in effect as of June 30, 2021. These fair values are not required to be adjusted for changes in general market conditions occurring subsequent to June 30, 2021.

Estimate of Depreciation: Management’s estimate of the depreci ation is based on useful lives determined by management. These lives have been determined by management based on the expected useful life of assets as disclosed in Note 1 to the financial statements. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the depreciation estima te and determined that it is reasonable in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.

Estimate of Compensated Absences: Accrued compensated absences which are comprised of accrued vacation, holiday, and certain other comp ensating time is estimated using accumulated unpaid leave hours and hourly pay rates in effect at the end of the fiscal year as disclosed in Note 7 to the financial statements. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the accrued compensated absences and determined that it is reasonable in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.

Estimated Claims Liabilities: Management’s estimate of th e claims liabilities payable is disclosed in Note 15 to the financial statements and is based on actuarial studies determined by a consultant, which are based on the claims experien ce of the City. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop th e estimate and determined that it is reasonable in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.

Estimated Net Pension Liabilities and Pensi on-Related Deferred Outflows and Inflows of Resources: Management’s estimate of the net pension liabilities and deferred outflows/inflows of resources are disclosed in Notes 10, 11 and 12 to the financial statements and are based on actuarial studies determined by a consultant, which are based on the experience of the City. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the estim ate and determined that it is reasonable in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.

Estimated Net OPEB Liability and OPEB-Related De ferred Outflows and Inflows of Resources:

Management’s estimate of the net OPEB liabilities and deferred outflows/inflows of resources are disclosed in Note 13 to the financial statements and are based on actuarial studies determined by a consultant, which are based on the experience of the City. We evaluated the key factors and assumptions used to develop the estimate and determ ined that it is reasonable in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole.
2

Disclosures
The financial statement disclosures are neutral, consistent, and clear.

Difficulties Encountered in Performing the Audit
We encountered no significant difficulties in dealing with management in performing and completing our audit.

Corrected and Uncorrected Misstatements
Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are clearly trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management. Management has corrected all such misstatements. Except for the adjustment made to the unearned revenue balances and the long-term debt balances none of the misstatements detected as a result of audit procedures and corrected by management were material, either individually or in the aggregate, to each opinion unit’s financial statements taken as a whole.

Professional standards require us to accumulate all known and likely uncorrected misstatements identified during the audit, other than those that are trivial, and communicate them to the appropriate level of management. We have no such misstatements to report to the City Council.

Disagreements with Management
For purposes of this letter, a disagreement with ma nagement is a financial acc ounting, reporting, or auditing matter, whether or not resolved to our satisfaction, that could be significant to the financial statements or the auditor’s report. We are pleased to report that no such disagreements arose during the course of our audit.

Management Representations
We have requested certain representations from ma nagement that are incl uded in a management representation letter dated December 21, 2021.

Management Consultations with Other Independent Accountants In some cases, management may d ecide to consult with other account ants about auditing and accounting matters, similar to obtaining a “second opinion” on certain situations. If a consultation involves application of an accounting principle to the City’s fi nancial statements or a dete rmination of the type of auditor’s opinion that may be expr essed on those statements, our professional standards require the consulting accountant to check with us to determine that the consultant ha s all the relevant facts. To our knowledge, there were no such consultations with other accountants.

Other Audit Findings or Issues
We generally discuss a variety of matters, including the application of accounting principles and auditing standards, with management each year prior to retention as the City’s auditors. However, these discussions occurred in the normal course of our pr ofessional relationship and our responses were not a condition to our retention.
3

Other Information Accompanying the Financial Statements We applied certain limited procedures to the requir ed supplementary information th at accompanies and
supplements the basic financial st atements. Our procedures consisted of inquiries of management regarding the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We did not audit the required supplementary information and do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the required supplementary information.

We were engaged to report on the supplementary information which accompany the financial statements, but are not required supplementary information. With respect to this supplementary information, we made certain inquiries of management and evaluated th e form, content, and methods of preparing the information to determine that the information complies with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, the method of preparing it has not changed from the prior period, and the information is appropriate and complete in relation to our audit of the financial statements. We compared and reconciled the supplementary information to the underlying accounting records used to prepare the financial statements or to the financial statements themselves.

We were not engaged to report on the Introductory, Statistical Section and Municipal Debt Continuing Disclosure Sections which accompany the financia l statements, but are not required supplementary information. Such information has not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements, and accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on them. ******
This information is intended solely for the use of City Council and management and is not intended to be, and should not be, used by anyone other than these specified parties.

Pleasant Hill, California
December 21, 2021
4

Staff Report
Date: January 10, 2022
To: City Council/City Council Sitting as the Local Reuse Authority/City Council Sitting as the Concord/Mt. Diablo Health Care District From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Prepared by: Joelle Fockler, MMC, City Clerk
[email protected]
(925) 671-3390
Subject: Considering adoption of a Resolution to continue conducting City Council, Local Reuse Authority, Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District, standing City Council Subcommittees, and all City board, commission (including the Planning
Commission), and committee meetings remotely, pursuant to AB 361.

CEQA: Not a project/exempt pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21065, 14 Cal Code Reg. Sections 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), 15061(b)(3) and/or 15378.

Report in Brief
Adopt a Resolution to continue conducting City Council, Local Reuse Authority, Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District, standing City Council Subcommittees, and all City boards, commissions (including the Planning Commission), and committees remotely, pursuant to AB 361.

Recommended Action
Adopt a Resolution to continue conducting City Council, Local Reuse Authority, Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District, standing City Council Subcommittees, and all City boards, commissions, and committees remotely, pursuant to AB 361.

Background
On March 4, 2020, the Governor of the State of California (“Governor”) issued a Proclamation of a State of Emergency due to COVID-19. Such proclamation remains in effect, as are the facts, circumstances, and emergency under which it was issued.

3.g3.g

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 3.g
January 10, 2022
On March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 allowing local legislative bodies to hold meetings via teleconference and to make meetings accessible electronically without violating the open meeting laws found in the Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Code Sections 54950 et seq., “Brown Act”).

On March 19, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 20-12 ratifying the City of Concord Director of Emergency Services Proclamation of Local Emergency dated March 13, 2020.

Since the enactment of the Executive Order, local legislative bodies in California have been able to hold public meetings by “teleconference” (a term that includes video conferencing) without complying with all the following Brown Act requirements for teleconference meetings.
 Give notice of each teleconference location from which a member will be participating in a public meeting and each teleconference location must be specifically identified in the meeting notice and agenda, including full address and room number;
 Each teleconference location must be accessible to the public;  Members of the public must be able to address the body at each teleconference location;
 Post agendas at all teleconference locations; and
 During teleconference meetings, at least a quorum of the members of the local body must participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over which the local body exercises jurisdiction.

In March 2020, staff transitioned meetings to TEAMS and then Zoom for all City meetings. Zoom meetings have allowed the City Council, City Council Committees, and the City’s boards, commissions, and committees to continue to conduct City business from the safety of their homes. The usage of Zoom for public meetings for the last 18 months has allowed the City to ensure the public’s continued access to meetings while also ensuring the public’s safety.

On June 11, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-08-21, which, among other things, rescinded his prior Executive Order N-29-20 and set a date of October 1, 2021, for public agencies to transition back to public meetings held in full compliance with the Brown Act.

On September 20, 2021, the Health Officer of the County of Contra Costa (“Health Officer”) issued recommendations for safely holding public meetings, including strongly recommending teleconferencing meetings as those meetings present the lowest risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and further

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 3.g
January 10, 2022
recommended social distancing and face masking of all Attendees:
https://cchealth.org/covid19/pdf/recommendations-for-safe-public-meetings.pdf.

Additional requirements are being imposed due to the recent Omicron variant surge:

Home | Coronavirus (cchealth.org).

On September 28, 2021, the City Council adopted City Council (CC) Resolution No. 21- 52, Local Reuse Authority (LRA) Resolution No. 21-27, and Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District (CPHHCD) Resolution No. 21-019 enabling the City to continue holding public meetings by teleconference through October 28, 2021 (30 days). On October 26, 2021, CC Resolution No. 21-58, LRA Resolution No. 21-28, and CPHHCD Resolution No. 21-020 were adopted enabling the City to continue holding public meetings by teleconference through November 25, 2021. On November 9, 2021, CC Resolution No. 21-62, LRA Resolution No. 21-30, and CPHHCD Resolution No. 21-021 was adopted, enabling the City to continue holding public meetings by teleconference through December 9, 2021. On December 7, CC Resolution No. 21-64, LRA Resolution No. 21-31, and CPHHCD Resolution No. 21-022 was adopted, enabling the City to continue holding public meetings by teleconference through January 6, 2022. Because the City Council was not going to meet again until January 10, 2022, the City Council adopted CC Resolution No. 21-64, LRA Resolution No. 21-32, and CPHHCD Resolution No. 21-23 on December 14, 2021, to continue holding meetings by teleconference through January 13, 2022. The City Council sitting as the City Council, Local Reuse Authority, and Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District must adopt a Resolution at tonight’s meeting to continue holding public meetings by teleconference for the next 30 days, which is February 9, 2022.

Analysis
AB 361 provides that, if the state of emergency remains active for more than 30 days, a local agency must make the following findings by majority vote every 30 days to continue using the bill’s exemption to the Brown Act teleconferencing rules.  The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the emergency; and  Either of the following circumstances exist: The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of members to meet safely in person, or State or local officials continue to impose or recommend social distancing measures.

The City Council must make findings regarding the circumstances of the emergency and vote to continue using the law’s exemptions every 30 days. Resolution No. 21-69, LRA Resolution No. 21-32, and Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District Resolution No. 21-023, adopted on December 14, 2021, enabled the City to continue holding public meetings by teleconference through January 13, 2022. To continue holding meetings by teleconference through February 9, 2022, the City Council must adopt a Resolution to continue using AB 361’s exemption, and the conditions under which such Resolution was passed are and remain in effect as of the date hereof.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 3.g
January 10, 2022
The stated aim of AB 361 is “to improve and enhance public access to local agency meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future applicable emergencies, by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options” consistent with Executive Order N-29-20. The bill sunsets as of January 1, 2024.

Environmental Determination
This action does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of Public Resources Code Section 21065, 14 Cal Code Reg. Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and/or 15378 because it has no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

In addition, this action is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3), “Review for Exemptions” of the CEQA Guidelines because there is no possibility that it may have a significant effect on the environment, and no further environmental review is required.

No unusual circumstances exist and none of the exceptions under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. This determination reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis.

Financial Impact
There is no fiscal impact.

Public Contact
The City Council Agenda was posted.

Attachment

1. Resolution declaring the need to continue to meet remotely, pursuant to AB 361

Res No. 22-XX
LRA Res. No. 22-XX
CPHHCD Res. No. 22-XX 1

BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CONCORD, CITY COUNCIL SITTING

AS THE LOCAL REUSE AUTHORITY, CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE

CONCORD/PLEASANT HILL HEALTH CARE DISTRICT

COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A Resolution Declaring the Need for the City Council,
Local Reuse Authority, Concord/Pleasant Hill Health
Care District, Standing City Council Subcommittees,
and all City Boards, Commissions, and Committees to
Continue to Meet Remotely Pursuant to AB 361
City Council Resolution No. 22-XX
Local Reuse Authority Resolution No. 22-XX
Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District Resolution No. 22-0XX /
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, the Governor of the State of California (“Governor”) issued a Proclamation of a State of Emergency due to COVID-19. Such proclamation remains and is in effect as of the date of this Resolution, as are the facts, circumstances, and emergency under which it was issued; and
WHEREAS, on March 19, 2020, pursuant to Resolution No. 20-12, the City Council of the City of Concord (“City Council”) ratified the City of Concord Director of Emergency Services Proclamation of Local Emergency dated March 13, 2020; and WHEREAS, the Health Officer of the County of Contra Costa (“Health Officer”) has issued various health orders and updates designed to slow the spread of COVID-19 (including variants thereof) such as vaccinations, quarantines, face covering requirements, and social distancing recommendations designed to protect public health. The health orders and recommendations can be found on the Contra Costa Health Services website: https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/health- orders; and
WHEREAS, on September 20, 2021, the Health Officer issued recommendations for safely holding public meetings, including strongly recommending teleconferencing meetings as those meetings present the lowest risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and further recommended social distancing and face masking of all Attendees: recommendations-for- safe-public-meetings.pdf (cchealth.org); and
//
Attachment 1

Res No. 22-XX
LRA Res. No. 22-XX
CPHHCD Res. No. 22-XX 2
WHEREAS, Contra Costa Health Services recommends masking for all, social distancing, and avoiding crowded places, close contact settings, and confined places with poor airflow:
https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/safer-social-interactions; https://www.coronavirus.cchealth.org/prevention; and
WHEREAS, COVID-19 continues to spread, the Delta and Omicron variants (highly- infectious COVID-19 strains) are prevalent in the Bay Area; in December 2021 at least seven Contra Costa County residents died from COVID-19 (source: https://www.c oronavirus.cchealth.org) and the
Omicron variant is surging (source:| Coronavirus (cchealth.org)); and WHEREAS, on March 17, 2020, the Governor issued Executive Order N-29-20 allowing local legislative bodies to hold remote meetings via teleconference and to make such meetings accessible electronically without violating the open meeting laws found in the Ralph M. Brown Act Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Code Sections 54950 et seq., “Brown Act”); and WHEREAS, on June 11, 2021, the Governor issued Executive Order N-08-21, which placed an end date of September 30, 2021 on such authority; and WHEREAS, since the issuance of Executive Order N-08-21, the Delta variant has emerged, causing a spike in COVID-19 cases throughout the state; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Executive Orders N-29-20 and N-08-21, the legislative bodies of the local agency City of Concord (“City”) including its City Council, standing Council subcommittees, Local Reuse Authority, Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District and all City boards, commissions (including the Planning Commission), and committees) and the Local Reuse Authority, and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District (collectively, “City Bodies”), have been holding remote meetings using teleconferencing and virtual meeting technology in an effort to help protect the public, members of City Bodies, and City staff attending such meetings (“Attendees”) from COVID-19; and WHEREAS, due the rise in COVID-19 case, including due to the Delta and Omicron variants, the City continues to be deeply concerned about protecting the health and safety of Attendees, particularly given that even fully vaccinated people have contracted the Delta and Omicron variants, people may have and transmit the virus before knowing they are infected and/or if they are

Res No. 22-XX
LRA Res. No. 22-XX
CPHHCD Res. No. 22-XX 3
asymptomatic; meetings of City Bodies often last several hours, and City meeting facilities are limited in space with seats are close together, and City facilities have restricted air flow; and WHEREAS, the California state legislature adopted AB 361 as an urgency measure that was signed by the Governor on September 16, 2021, effective immediately. AB 361 amends the Brown Act to allow local legislative bodies to continue meeting remotely using teleconferencing and virtual meeting technology as long as there is a gubernatorial “proclaimed state of emergency” upon the local legislative body finding that state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing or that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of Attendees; and
WHEREAS, the City desires to continue holding public meetings of the City Bodies remotely using teleconferencing and virtual meeting technology in order to avoid the imminent risk to the health and safety of Attendees; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, the Local Reuse Authority, and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District passed Resolution No. 21-69, Local Reuse Authority Resolution No. 21-31, and Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District Resolution No. 21-023 on December 14, 2021 in compliance with AB 361. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54953(e)(1)(B), such meeting was held during a proclaimed state of emergency, each of the City Council, the Local Reuse Authority, and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District determined, by majority vote, 5-0, that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of Attendees; this January 10, 2022, meeting of the City Council, the Local Reuse Authority; and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District was held remotely using teleconferencing pursuant thereto; and
WHEREAS, the facts, circumstances, and emergency under which such determination was made and Resolution No. 21-69, LRA Resolution No. 21-32, and Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District Resolution No. 21-023 was adopted continue to exist as of the date of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Council, the Local Reuse Authority, and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District after giving all public notices required by State Law and the Concord Municipal Code, held a duly noticed joint public meeting on January 10, 2022; and

Res No. 22-XX
LRA Res. No. 22-XX
CPHHCD Res. No. 22-XX 4
WHEREAS, at such public meeting, the City Council, the Local Reuse Authority, and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District considered all pertinent oral and written information, exhibits, testimony, and comments received during the public review process, including, without limitation, information received at the public meeting, the oral report from City staff, the written report from City staff dated January 10, 2022, this Resolution, and all other information on which each of the City Council, the Local Reuse Authority, and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District has based its decision (collectively, “Remote Meeting Information”).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL, THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS

THE LOCAL REUSE AUTHORITY, AND THE CITY COUNCIL SITTING AS THE

CONCORD/PLEASANT HILL HEALTH CARE DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF CONCORD DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

Section 1. Recitals. Each of the City Council, the Local Reuse Authority, and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District hereby finds and determines that the foregoing recitals are true and correct; the recitals are hereby incorporated by reference into each of the findings as though fully set forth therein. The recitals and the information below constitute findings in this matter, and together with the Remote Meeting Information, serve as an adequate and appropriate evidentiary basis for the findings and actions set forth herein. The exhibits attached to this Resolution are incorporated herein by reference.

Section 2. CEQA. This action does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of Public Resources Code Section 21065, 14 Cal Code Reg. Section 15060(c)(2), 15060(c)(3), and/or 15378 because it has no potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. In addition, this action is categorically exempt pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3), “Review for Exemptions” of the CEQA Guidelines because there is no possibility that it may have a significant effect on the environment, and no further environmental review is required. No unusual circumstances exist and none of the exceptions under CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. This determination reflects the City’s independent judgment and analysis.
//

Res No. 22-XX
LRA Res. No. 22-XX
CPHHCD Res. No. 22-XX 5
Section 3. AB 361 Findings. Each of the City Council, the Local Reuse Authority, and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District hereby finds the following:
a. A state of emergency remains active.
b. State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing.
c. Each of the City Council, the Local Reuse Authority, and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District have reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency. d. The following circumstances exist:
(i) The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of Attendees to meet safely in person.
(ii) State or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.

Section 4. As of January 10, 2022, meetings of City Bodies will continue to be conducted remotely using teleconferencing and virtual meeting technology for the next 30 days in compliance with AB 361. The City Council, the Local Reuse Authority, and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District will revisit the need to so conduct meetings of City Bodies within 30 days of the adoption of this Resolution.

Section 5. This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Concord, the Local Reuse Authority, and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District on January 10, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: Councilmembers -
NOES: Councilmembers -
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers -
ABSENT: Councilmembers -
//
//
//

Res No. 22-XX
LRA Res. No. 22-XX
CPHHCD Res. No. 22-XX 6
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing City Council Resolution No. 22-XX, Local Reuse Authority Resolution No. 22-XX and Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District Resolution No. 22- XX, were duly and regularly adopted at a regular joint meeting of the City Council of the City of Concord, the Local Reuse Authority, and the Concord/Pleasant Hill Health Care District on January 10, 2022.

Joelle Fockler, MMC
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Susanne Meyer Brown
City Attorney

Staff Report
Date: January 10, 2022
To: City Council
From: Valerie J. Barone, City Manager
Prepared by: Justin Ezell, Assistant City Manager
[email protected]
(925) 671-3155
Subject: Considering a report on the redistricting process and permissible criteria to be considered to redraw Council district boundaries, and receiving input from the community and
direction from the City Council prior to maps being considered for revision. (Public Hearing #2)
CEQA: Exempt under CEQA Guidelines Sections 15320, 15378, and 15061(b)(3).

Report in Brief
On November 2, 2021, the City held the first public hearing (Public Hearing #1) to receive input on the composition of voting districts based on the 2020 Census data prior to maps being considered for revision. Pursuant to California Elections Code Section 21607.1, tonight’s hearing is one of at least four legally-required public meetings to inform the public about the redistricting process and receive community input on how to redraw the boundaries of the voting districts. During tonight’s public hearing, the City Council will see the results of the outreach performed to date and receive additional public input. At the conclusion of tonight’s public hearing, the City Council will provide direction to the City’s independent demographer to prepare draft district map boundary alternatives for discussion during Public Hearing #3 scheduled for February 1, 2022.

Recommended Action
Hold the public hearing to receive input on the composition of voting districts and to provide direction to staff and to the City’s independent demographer on potential revisions of existing boundaries.

4.a4.a4.a4.a4.a4.a

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 4.a
January 10, 2022
Background
On January 2, 2018, the City Council adopted a resolution of intention to transition from at-large to by-district elections. The final district-based maps were adopted on February 27, 2018; the adopted ordinance included five new Council districts and a phase-in election schedule from 2018-2020. At this point in time, all five Councilmembers have been elected to their Council seats through a District election.

After each decennial census, the City must conduct a process whereby the City Council adopts districts using new census data. The process is called redistricting, and it must be completed by April 17, 2022. The City Council desires to conduct five public hearings1 during the redistricting process. The first public hearing occurred on November 2, 2021.

The City has also hosted two public workshops to receive community input and to explain how to use the available online tools to provide additional input. These workshops were held over zoom on November 15 and 172 and led by staff and the City’s independent demographer.

Public Input
During Public Hearing #1 on November 2, only one member of the public spoke on the topic. The speaker advocated to keep District 3 intact as it is currently drawn. The same speaker provided slightly revised comments in an email dated November 29 by suggesting that Reganti Place be included in District 3, given that the street is comprised of high density apartment complexes (email included in Attachment 1).

Also included in Attachment 1 is a proposed council district map that was drawn and submitted by a member of the community. This map, and others like it that are submitted prior to the January 18, 2022 due date, will be presented with supporting maps and demographics by the City’s independent demographer during Public Hearing #3 that will occur on February 1, 2022.

Two workshops were held via Zoom on November 15 and 17. The purpose of holding these workshops was to provide an informal setting where participants could receive information about the redistricting process and demonstrations of how the map drawing tools work. Despite extensive outreach, which included a direct mailing to all Concord postal customers and use of social media, both workshops were lightly attended, yielding approximately 14 participants in total. Attachment 3 includes a full listing of the outreach performed by staff throughout the redistricting process. 1 For convenience, the Council-led public hearings are referred to in this staff report as Public Hearing #1, Public Hearing #2, Public Hearing #3, etc.
2 Although one of those staff/consultant-led workshops legally qualifies as a public hearing pursuant to Elections Code Section 21607.1(e), this staff report does not identify it in the Council-led Public Hearing count referenced in the preceding footnote.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 4.a
January 10, 2022
As the redistricting process continues, City staff are available to meet with interested community groups such as HOAs, businesses or service organizations, faith-based groups, and other community organizations. These would be informal meetings either in person or online where attendees can ask questions directly of staff. One such meeting was held by request on December 1, 2021. Interested persons wanting to schedule a briefing with staff should do so utilizing the below contact information. This ability for community members to meet with staff has been communicated in all outreach materials, including mailings, social media posts, e-newsletters, website, etc.

To further help interested persons participate in the redistricting process, City staff has scheduled virtual “office hours” from 12 pm to 1 pm on Tuesday, January 11 so that any member of the public can drop in during their lunch break to ask questions of staff. The public is being made aware of these office hours through social media posts, the City’s e-newsletter and website. The Zoom link can be found under the “schedule” tab at www.cityofconcord.org/redistricting.

In addition to the ability to receive information at the various informal meetings and provide testimony during public hearings, the City has developed several other ways to allow residents to submit input on the City’s redistricting process. These include:

1. Sending an e-mail to [email protected]

2. Mailing or dropping off comments and/or map submission forms at 1950 Parkside Drive, Concord, CA 94519

3. Communicating directly with the Assistant City Manager by emailing or calling [email protected] or (925) 671-3155
As mentioned throughout this report, a webpage on redistricting has been created at:
www.cityofconcord.org/redistricting. All information related to the City’s process is on this webpage, including opportunities for when and how the public can contribute to the decision-making process. The webpage and supporting materials have been translated into Spanish, and those are posted on a dedicated web page linked to the main redistricting page.

Analysis
In September 2021 the U.S. Census Bureau released the official data necessary for the City to begin the redistricting process. This data must be used to be in compliance with the Fair Maps Act, which was adopted by the California Legislature as AB 849 and took effect January 1, 2020. Under the Act, any changes in district boundaries shall be drawn and adopted using the following criteria in the listed order of priority pursuant to Elections Code Section 21601:

1. Comply with the federal requirements of equal population and the Voting Rights Act

2. Be geographically contiguous

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 4.a
January 10, 2022

3. Keep neighborhoods and “communities of interest” (socio-economic geographic areas) together

4. Use easily identifiable and understandable boundaries

5. Be drawn so that districts are relatively compact (do not bypass one group of people to get to a more distant group of people)

6. Neither favor or discriminate against a political party By law, the City must hold at least four public hearings that enable community members to provide input on the drawing of district maps:
 At least one hearing must occur before the City Council draws draft maps  At least two hearings must happen after the drawing of draft maps  City staff or consultants may hold a public workshop instead of one of the required pre-map public redistricting hearings
As indicated in the bullet point above, city staff or a consultant may conduct one or more public workshops in lieu of one of the public hearings required before the Council draws a draft map or maps of the proposed council district boundaries (Elections Code Section 21607.1(e)) so that one of the November 15 and 17 Zoom workshops may legally count towards the total four-hearing requirement. Taking into account Public Hearing #1 on November 2, 2021, one of the workshops, and tonight’s Public Hearing #2, technically three of the four legally-required hearings have occurred. That said, the City Council prefers to hold five (5) Council-led public hearings as detailed under “Next Steps” below in order to solicit additional public participation and enhance transparency. It is possible, however, that the City may adjust the number of Council-led public hearings in response to public input.

In accordance with state law, there are additional requirements related to the mandated public hearings. Each is discussed below:
 At least one hearing must occur on a Saturday, Sunday, or after 6 p.m. on a weekday
o Each of the public hearings, including the November 15 and 17 workshops, have or will be held at or after 6 p.m. on a weekday  If a redistricting hearing is consolidated with another local government meeting, the redistricting hearing portion must begin at a pre-designated time that is noticed to the public
o Each of the public hearings, including the November 15 and 17 workshops, have or will be held at pre-designated times that were noticed to the public

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 4.a
January 10, 2022
 Local public redistricting hearings should be made accessible to people with disabilities
o The City of Concord offers its public programs, services, and meetings in a manner that is readily accessible to everyone, including those with disabilities, in accordance with the American with Disabilities Act and California Law
Changes from the 2010 Census Data
When City Council district-based maps were adopted in 2018 they had a total population deviation of 4.3%. The 2020 census identifies the demographic makeup of the districts having changed slightly, with the population deviation increasing to a total of

7.5%, which would still fall within a justifiable range if the districts were to remain as they are. A breakdown of the population changes, by district and ethnicity, is included as Attachment 2.

Tonight’s Public Hearing
The purpose of tonight’s public hearing, Public Hearing #2, is for the City Council to see the results of the outreach performed to date and to hear from the community on what factors should be taken into consideration while creating district boundaries, including communities of interest. A community of interest under the relevant Elections Code for cities (Elections Code Section 21601(c)) is “a population that shares common social or economic interests that should be included within a single district for purposes of its effective and fair representation.”
Possible features defining community of interest might include, but are not limited to:
 Shared interests in schools, housing, community safety, transit, health conditions, land use, environmental conditions, and/or other issues;  Common social and civic networks, including churches, mosques, temples, homeowner associations, and community centers, and shared use of community spaces, like parks and shopping centers;
 Cultural identities, including households that predominantly speak a language other than English;
 Similar socio-economic status, including but not limited to income, home- ownership, and education levels.

Communities of interest do not include relationships with political parties, incumbents, or political candidates.

Council shall also consider other traditional redistricting criteria such as:
 Compactness of districts, including their shape and appearance.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 4.a
January 10, 2022
 Keeping communities of interest, such as neighborhoods, school district boundaries, etc., undivided by a district boundary, to the extent feasible.  Using understandable natural and man-made geographical and topographical boundaries as much as possible.

The City’s independent demographer will draw draft maps that satisfy all legally required criteria and will then apply all City directed criteria. Because there are always trade-offs between criteria when drawing maps, it is helpful if Council provides clear direction and priority to all optional criteria. The City’s demographer anticipates producing at least three (3) alternative maps for consideration by the Council and community at the next public meeting occurring on February 1, 2022. Any proposed plans submitted by the public will be considered at the same time.

Next Steps
Council must provide direction to staff and the independent demographer on their criteria for redrawing the district boundaries.

Questions that Council should consider when providing direction to staff and the demographer include:

1. Are there desired changes to district boundaries to account for changes in the City’s population according to the 2020 census?

2. Are there neighborhoods and communities of interest that should be kept whole (when possible) for purposes of fair representation?

3. Are there understandable boundaries that should be considered as potential district boundaries?
The draft map alternatives will be published and posted on the City’s redistricting webpage prior to the third public hearing along with any plans submitted by the public.

The public will then be able to provide input and comment on the maps during the public hearings on February 1 (Public Hearing #3). The council may then request additional revised plans to be considered on March 1 (Public Hearing #4) at which time any final revisions may be made. Adoption of the final map is scheduled for the April 5, 2022 public hearing (Hearing #5).

The next public hearing to receive and consider input from the public concerning draft and public maps for the voting districts is scheduled for Tuesday, February 1, 2022. The remaining schedule of public hearing dates for this effort is presented below. There will be Spanish translation services provided at each public hearing.

City Council Agenda Report
Agenda Item No. 4.a
January 10, 2022
Hearing Date Description
Feb. 1, 2022 Public Hearing #3: Take public testimony on the draft district boundary maps provided by the demographer.

Request adjustments for further consideration. The draft map or maps to be reviewed at this hearing will be published and placed on City’s redistricting webpage.

March 1, 2022 Public Hearing #4: Review the revised map or maps, take public testimony. If no significant changes are proposed, select one map to introduce as part of the district elections ordinance.

April 5, 2022 Public Hearing #5: Adopt the updated district elections ordinance.

All public comment received on this topic by the time of producing the agenda is included as Attachment 1. Any public comment received after this date will be benched for the Council and public at the meeting.

Financial Impact
There is a financial impact on the City’s General Fund to cover staff time and cost of an outside demographer, special legal counsel associated with the redistricting process, and translators. These costs are estimated to not exceed $150,000. These costs were included in the adopted budget.

Environmental Determination
This action is not a project within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15320, 15378 and 15061(b)(3) as it is an organizational structure change and does not have the potential to result in either a direct or reasonable foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.

Public Contact
In addition to the posting of the city Council Agenda and publishing of the redistricting webpage, a significant amount of public outreach has occurred. A full listing of engagement efforts is included in Attachment 3.

Attachments

1. Community Feedback

2. Comparison of 2020 to 2010 Population Data, by Existing Council Districts

3. Public Outreach

Attachment 1

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2021 6:56 PM
To: Redistricting <[email protected]>
Subject: Draft map

Hello. Attached should be my redistricting map proposal.

Reasoning for my plan:
"My plan significantly improves the population deviation of the districts when compared with the current Cobalt map. I only made minimal changes to the original map in my plan, so residents that want the new map to be consistent with the old one should be quite pleased with my proposal. My map plan makes the boundary between districts 4 & 5 less arbitrary: by adding slice #64 to district 4, it allows Cowell Rd to serve as a boundary between the two districts. My map also makes the boundary between districts 1 & 2 less arbitrary as well: by adding slice #7 to district 2, it allows Willow Pass Rd to serve as a boundary between much of the two districts.

Under my plan, there would continue to be a district where a majority of residents belong to an ethnic or racial minority. I propose that districts 1, 3, & 5 be up for election in 2022, and districts 2 & 4 be up for election in 2024. This will ensure that the election cycles fundamentally stay the same."

-D'Marco J. Anthony

Total
# % Dev # # % # % # % # %
125,650 85,285 16,503 19% 12,277 14% 3,685 4% 51,078 60% 0 0 0 0 0 0
24,929 -0.8% 18,337 2,826 15% 2,192 12% 535 3% 12,355 67% 25,204 0.3% 17,492 4,333 25% 2,096 12% 627 4% 9,926 57% 25,339 0.8% 11,778 3,529 30% 2,529 21% 1,159 10% 4,270 36% 24,686 -1.8% 18,239 3,222 18% 2,692 15% 1,013 6% 11,263 62% 25,492 1.4% 19,439 2,593 13% 2,768 14% 351 2% 13,264 68% Total
# # % # % # % # %
2 2 1 28 29 3 10% 1 3% 2 7% 17 59%
2 2 2 2,115 1,299 265 20% 145 11% 5 0% 868 67%
2 2 3 1,631 1,296 240 19% 129 10% 54 4% 758 58%
2 2 4 1,880 1,356 206 15% 174 13% 20 1% 931 69%
2 2 5 1,198 876 276 32% 346 39% 0 0% 255 29%
2 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 1 7 443 441 201 46% 24 5% 0 0% 246 56%
2 2 8 2,169 1,298 375 29% 122 9% 40 3% 728 56%
2 2 9 1,357 1,350 713 53% 8 1% 2 0% 604 45%
2 2 10 1,397 887 275 31% 100 11% 119 13% 367 41%
2 2 11 1,488 574 101 18% 1 0% 32 6% 429 75%
2 2 12 1,000 928 172 19% 131 14% 26 3% 589 63%
2 2 13 1,666 1,210 172 14% 110 9% 28 2% 915 76%
2 2 14 986 725 105 14% 78 11% 18 2% 499 69%
2 2 15 1,311 801 139 17% 98 12% 7 1% 523 65%
2 2 16 432 284 30 11% 42 15% 5 2% 185 65%
2 2 17 1,088 445 90 20% 36 8% 5 1% 314 71%
2 2 18 687 463 60 13% 43 9% 32 7% 305 66%
1 1 19 1,325 1,140 353 31% 22 2% 7 1% 629 55%
1 1 20 1,487 926 86 9% 152 16% 33 4% 604 65%
1 1 21 2,333 1,854 390 21% 375 20% 0 0% 1,060 57%
1 1 22 1,946 1,713 286 17% 209 12% 70 4% 1,118 65%
1 1 23 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 2 24 1,285 1,157 536 46% 189 16% 80 7% 350 30%
2 2 25 1,369 1,065 231 22% 160 15% 124 12% 476 45%
1 1 26 1,594 886 56 6% 91 10% 47 5% 708 80%
1 1 27 1,523 1,213 190 16% 111 9% 9 1% 897 74%
1 1 28 1,472 1,027 52 5% 49 5% 1 0% 918 89%
1 1 29 1,547 1,125 248 22% 178 16% 12 1% 617 55%
1 1 30 2,147 1,551 179 12% 186 12% 13 1% 1,163 75%
1 1 31 806 551 14 3% 51 9% 1 0% 480 87%
1 1 32 2,263 1,798 335 19% 140 8% 3 0% 1,277 71%
1 1 33 1,306 994 96 10% 179 18% 3 0% 696 70%
5 5 34 1,780 1,239 236 19% 276 22% 40 3% 671 54%
5 5 35 975 941 122 13% 89 9% 1 0% 736 78%
5 5 36 1,174 875 59 7% 116 13% 13 1% 659 75%
5 5 37 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 5 38 2,257 1,643 183 11% 242 15% 48 3% 1,148 70%
3 3 39 1,405 949 191 20% 113 12% 68 7% 551 58%
3 3 40 2,024 1,421 226 16% 528 37% 113 8% 524 37%
3 3 41 1,891 938 183 20% 231 25% 95 10% 395 42%
3 3 42 1,435 902 350 39% 300 33% 95 11% 157 17%
3 3 43 2,165 467 146 31% 45 10% 210 45% 71 15%
3 3 44 2,805 1,020 507 50% 51 5% 141 14% 257 25%
3 3 45 498 77 27 35% 3 4% 6 8% 13 17%
3 3 46 1,973 849 235 28% 114 13% 88 10% 391 46%
3 3 47 1,249 627 144 23% 178 28% 45 7% 223 36%
3 3 48 800 250 63 25% 96 38% 82 33% 34 14%
3 3 49 1,951 1,295 496 38% 290 22% 95 7% 386 30%
3 3 50 786 487 180 37% 136 28% 10 2% 150 31%
3 3 51 2,284 554 213 38% 149 27% 57 10% 87 16%
3 3 52 1,590 631 274 43% 112 18% 0 0% 192 30%
3 3 53 1,139 410 141 34% 76 19% 1 0% 206 50%
2 2 54 1,017 424 44 10% 117 28% 0 0% 198 47%
2 2 55 657 584 99 17% 42 7% 28 5% 369 63%
Current
District
4 5
Asian*Latino*Total
#
New
District
Slice Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
White~Black*
3 Black* White~
Total
Unassigned
1 2
Latino* Asian*Total
District Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Concord Redistricting Proposal
Worksheet
Email: [email protected]
My Plan is the Best Because: My plan significantly improves the population deviation of the districts when compared with the current Cobalt map. I only made minimal changes to the original map in my plan, so residents that want the new map to be consistent with the old one should be quite pleased with my proposal. My map plan makes

Name: D'Marco J. Anthony

Total
# % Dev # # % # % # % # %
Black* White~Latino* Asian*Total
District Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Concord Redistricting Proposal
Worksheet
Email: [email protected]
My Plan is the Best Because: My plan significantly improves the population deviation of the districts when compared with the current Cobalt map. I only made minimal changes to the original map in my plan, so residents that want the new map to be consistent with the old one should be quite pleased with my proposal. My map plan makes

Name: D'Marco J. Anthony
4 4 56 817 723 160 22% 70 10% 79 11% 446 62%
4 4 57 976 888 228 26% 99 11% 11 1% 545 61%
5 5 58 2,095 1,257 276 22% 89 7% 20 2% 810 64%
5 5 59 1,904 1,364 185 14% 226 17% 51 4% 910 67%
4 2 60 391 377 103 27% 132 35% 57 15% 114 30%
4 4 61 954 775 212 27% 22 3% 1 0% 537 69%
4 4 62 1,127 1,077 164 15% 202 19% 74 7% 601 56%
4 4 63 1,358 801 83 10% 141 18% 41 5% 512 64%
4 5 64 402 296 48 16% 52 18% 8 3% 165 56%
4 4 65 1,298 965 89 9% 185 19% 69 7% 646 67%
4 4 66 1,302 1,033 221 21% 148 14% 113 11% 558 54%
4 4 67 1,428 1,092 253 23% 127 12% 16 1% 698 64%
4 4 68 1,164 826 90 11% 107 13% 15 2% 624 76%
4 4 69 1,343 1,196 120 10% 92 8% 115 10% 866 72%
4 4 70 1,736 1,150 94 8% 300 26% 145 13% 604 53%
4 4 71 910 419 177 42% 35 8% 1 0% 184 44%
4 4 72 2,236 1,336 492 37% 210 16% 86 6% 513 38%
4 4 73 1,436 802 184 23% 67 8% 21 3% 549 68%
3 4 74 1,344 901 153 17% 107 12% 53 6% 633 70%
4 4 75 1,755 1,318 201 15% 152 12% 11 1% 961 73%
4 4 76 761 519 88 17% 82 16% 14 3% 328 63%
4 4 77 866 533 46 9% 31 6% 28 5% 433 81%
4 4 78 1,194 1,120 103 9% 128 11% 100 9% 785 70%
1 1 79 1,010 583 143 25% 41 7% 78 13% 217 37%
1 1 80 1,435 865 106 12% 39 5% 159 18% 618 71%
5 5 81 1,429 1,385 196 14% 348 25% 4 0% 825 60%
5 5 82 1,173 884 147 17% 54 6% 0 0% 665 75%
4 4 83 467 338 11 3% 108 32% 7 2% 202 60%
4 4 84 765 655 55 8% 202 31% 1 0% 392 60%
5 5 85 1,878 1,430 190 13% 463 32% 89 6% 658 46%
5 5 86 1,240 815 56 7% 109 13% 30 4% 610 75%
1 1 87 591 474 92 19% 109 23% 59 12% 222 47%
1 1 88 1,249 988 102 10% 183 19% 32 3% 648 66%
1 1 89 895 649 98 15% 77 12% 8 1% 483 74%
5 5 90 1,973 1,402 185 13% 45 3% 0 0% 1,158 83%
5 5 91 1,716 1,103 215 19% 185 17% 4 0% 626 57%
5 5 92 1,400 1,048 84 8% 68 6% 1 0% 836 80%
5 5 93 1,537 1,293 121 9% 219 17% 31 2% 811 63%
5 5 94 1,602 1,401 165 12% 174 12% 12 1% 1,067 76%
5 5 95 1,359 1,359 173 13% 65 5% 7 1% 1,074 79%

Proposed District Boundary Changes
Submitted by: Edi Birsan

Move Slice 56 from
District 4 to District 2
Move Slice 57 from
District 4 to District 5
Move Slice 64 from
District 5 to District 4
Move Slice 60 from
District 2 to District 4

Total
# % Dev # # % # % # % # %
125,650 85,285 16,503 19% 12,277 14% 3,685 4% 51,078 60% 0 0 0 0 0 0
25,372 1.0% 18,778 3,027 16% 2,216 12% 535 3% 12,601 67% 25,578 1.8% 17,774 4,292 24% 2,142 12% 706 4% 10,126 57% 23,995 -4.5% 10,877 3,376 31% 2,422 22% 1,106 10% 3,637 33% 24,237 -3.6% 17,529 2,987 17% 2,630 15% 976 6% 10,905 62% 26,468 5.3% 20,327 2,821 14% 2,867 14% 362 2% 13,809 68% Total
# # % # % # % # %
2 2 1 28 29 3 10% 1 3% 2 7% 17 59%
2 2 2 2,115 1,299 265 20% 145 11% 5 0% 868 67%
2 2 3 1,631 1,296 240 19% 129 10% 54 4% 758 58%
2 2 4 1,880 1,356 206 15% 174 13% 20 1% 931 69%
2 2 5 1,198 876 276 32% 346 39% 0 0% 255 29%
2 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 7 443 441 201 46% 24 5% 0 0% 246 56%
2 2 8 2,169 1,298 375 29% 122 9% 40 3% 728 56%
2 2 9 1,357 1,350 713 53% 8 1% 2 0% 604 45%
2 2 10 1,397 887 275 31% 100 11% 119 13% 367 41%
2 2 11 1,488 574 101 18% 1 0% 32 6% 429 75%
2 2 12 1,000 928 172 19% 131 14% 26 3% 589 63%
2 2 13 1,666 1,210 172 14% 110 9% 28 2% 915 76%
2 2 14 986 725 105 14% 78 11% 18 2% 499 69%
2 2 15 1,311 801 139 17% 98 12% 7 1% 523 65%
2 2 16 432 284 30 11% 42 15% 5 2% 185 65%
2 2 17 1,088 445 90 20% 36 8% 5 1% 314 71%
2 2 18 687 463 60 13% 43 9% 32 7% 305 66%
1 1 19 1,325 1,140 353 31% 22 2% 7 1% 629 55%
1 1 20 1,487 926 86 9% 152 16% 33 4% 604 65%
1 1 21 2,333 1,854 390 21% 375 20% 0 0% 1,060 57%
1 1 22 1,946 1,713 286 17% 209 12% 70 4% 1,118 65%
1 1 23 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 2 24 1,285 1,157 536 46% 189 16% 80 7% 350 30%
2 2 25 1,369 1,065 231 22% 160 15% 124 12% 476 45%
1 1 26 1,594 886 56 6% 91 10% 47 5% 708 80%
1 1 27 1,523 1,213 190 16% 111 9% 9 1% 897 74%
1 1 28 1,472 1,027 52 5% 49 5% 1 0% 918 89%
1 1 29 1,547 1,125 248 22% 178 16% 12 1% 617 55%
1 1 30 2,147 1,551 179 12% 186 12% 13 1% 1,163 75%
1 1 31 806 551 14 3% 51 9% 1 0% 480 87%
1 1 32 2,263 1,798 335 19% 140 8% 3 0% 1,277 71%
1 1 33 1,306 994 96 10% 179 18% 3 0% 696 70%
5 5 34 1,780 1,239 236 19% 276 22% 40 3% 671 54%
5 5 35 975 941 122 13% 89 9% 1 0% 736 78%
5 5 36 1,174 875 59 7% 116 13% 13 1% 659 75%
5 5 37 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 5 38 2,257 1,643 183 11% 242 15% 48 3% 1,148 70%
3 3 39 1,405 949 191 20% 113 12% 68 7% 551 58%
3 3 40 2,024 1,421 226 16% 528 37% 113 8% 524 37%
3 3 41 1,891 938 183 20% 231 25% 95 10% 395 42%
3 3 42 1,435 902 350 39% 300 33% 95 11% 157 17%
3 3 43 2,165 467 146 31% 45 10% 210 45% 71 15%
3 3 44 2,805 1,020 507 50% 51 5% 141 14% 257 25%
3 3 45 498 77 27 35% 3 4% 6 8% 13 17%
3 3 46 1,973 849 235 28% 114 13% 88 10% 391 46%
3 3 47 1,249 627 144 23% 178 28% 45 7% 223 36%
3 3 48 800 250 63 25% 96 38% 82 33% 34 14%
3 3 49 1,951 1,295 496 38% 290 22% 95 7% 386 30%
3 3 50 786 487 180 37% 136 28% 10 2% 150 31%
3 3 51 2,284 554 213 38% 149 27% 57 10% 87 16%
3 3 52 1,590 631 274 43% 112 18% 0 0% 192 30%
3 3 53 1,139 410 141 34% 76 19% 1 0% 206 50%
2 2 54 1,017 424 44 10% 117 28% 0 0% 198 47%
2 2 55 657 584 99 17% 42 7% 28 5% 369 63%
Current
District
4 5
Asian*Latino*Total
#
New
District
Slice Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
White~Black*
3 Black* White~
Total
Unassigned
1 2
Latino* Asian*Total
District Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Concord Redistricting Proposal
Worksheet
Email: [email protected]
My Plan is the Best Because: It creates more defined and easily identifiable boundaries for Districts 2, 4 and 5.

Name: Edi Birsan

Total
# % Dev # # % # % # % # %
Black* White~Latino* Asian*Total
District Population^ Citizen Voting Age Population+
Concord Redistricting Proposal
Worksheet
Email: [email protected]
My Plan is the Best Because: It creates more defined and easily identifiable boundaries for Districts 2, 4 and 5.

Name: Edi Birsan
2 4 56 817 723 160 22% 70 10% 79 11% 446 62%
5 4 57 976 888 228 26% 99 11% 11 1% 545 61%
5 5 58 2,095 1,257 276 22% 89 7% 20 2% 810 64%
5 5 59 1,904 1,364 185 14% 226 17% 51 4% 910 67%
4 2 60 391 377 103 27% 132 35% 57 15% 114 30%
4 4 61 954 775 212 27% 22 3% 1 0% 537 69%
4 4 62 1,127 1,077 164 15% 202 19% 74 7% 601 56%
4 4 63 1,358 801 83 10% 141 18% 41 5% 512 64%
4 5 64 402 296 48 16% 52 18% 8 3% 165 56%
4 4 65 1,298 965 89 9% 185 19% 69 7% 646 67%
4 4 66 1,302 1,033 221 21% 148 14% 113 11% 558 54%
4 4 67 1,428 1,092 253 23% 127 12% 16 1% 698 64%
4 4 68 1,164 826 90 11% 107 13% 15 2% 624 76%
4 4 69 1,343 1,196 120 10% 92 8% 115 10% 866 72%
4 4 70 1,736 1,150 94 8% 300 26% 145 13% 604 53%
4 4 71 910 419 177 42% 35 8% 1 0% 184 44%
4 4 72 2,236 1,336 492 37% 210 16% 86 6% 513 38%
4 4 73 1,436 802 184 23% 67 8% 21 3% 549 68%
4 4 74 1,344 901 153 17% 107 12% 53 6% 633 70%
4 4 75 1,755 1,318 201 15% 152 12% 11 1% 961 73%
4 4 76 761 519 88 17% 82 16% 14 3% 328 63%
4 4 77 866 533 46 9% 31 6% 28 5% 433 81%
4 4 78 1,194 1,120 103 9% 128 11% 100 9% 785 70%
1 1 79 1,010 583 143 25% 41 7% 78 13% 217 37%
1 1 80 1,435 865 106 12% 39 5% 159 18% 618 71%
5 5 81 1,429 1,385 196 14% 348 25% 4 0% 825 60%
5 5 82 1,173 884 147 17% 54 6% 0 0% 665 75%
4 4 83 467 338 11 3% 108 32% 7 2% 202 60%
4 4 84 765 655 55 8% 202 31% 1 0% 392 60%
5 5 85 1,878 1,430 190 13% 463 32% 89 6% 658 46%
5 5 86 1,240 815 56 7% 109 13% 30 4% 610 75%
1 1 87 591 474 92 19% 109 23% 59 12% 222 47%
1 1 88 1,249 988 102 10% 183 19% 32 3% 648 66%
1 1 89 895 649 98 15% 77 12% 8 1% 483 74%
5 5 90 1,973 1,402 185 13% 45 3% 0 0% 1,158 83%
5 5 91 1,716 1,103 215 19% 185 17% 4 0% 626 57%
5 5 92 1,400 1,048 84 8% 68 6% 1 0% 836 80%
5 5 93 1,537 1,293 121 9% 219 17% 31 2% 811 63%
5 5 94 1,602 1,401 165 12% 174 12% 12 1% 1,067 76%
5 5 95 1,359 1,359 173 13% 65 5% 7 1% 1,074 79%

From: Chuck Gabrysiak <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 5, 2022 7:49 PM
To: Redistricting <[email protected]>
Subject: District 1 and District 5

Redistricting -

The boundaries between 1 and 5 seem contrived. A simpler boundary arrangement would be to use Clayton Rd. and Treat Bl. As boundaries.

Thx, 1/5/2022

From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2021 1:44 PM
To: Redistricting <[email protected]>
Subject: Change in District lines

My suggestion would be to add Reganti Pl to District 3. Reganti Pl is made up of apartment complexes. I think that most residents on this street are similar to the majority of those in Council District 3 now, those being Latinx renter households.

Thank you for receiving my suggestion.

George Fulmore
Concord

Total Deviation % Dev Total Latino Asian Black White Total Deviation % Dev Total Latino Asian Black White Total Deviation % Dev Total Latino Asian Black White 1 25,372 242 1.0% 18,778 16.1% 11.8% 2.8% 67.1% 24,702 289 1.2% 9474 17.1% 9.3% 4.2% 67.8% 670 -47 -0.2% 9,304 -1.0% 2.5% -1.4% -0.7% 2 25,152 22 0.1% 17,428 24.3% 12.6% 3.9% 56.2% 24,401 -12 0.0% 17840 20.9% 11.8% 3.7% 61.4% 751 34 0.1% -412 3.4% 0.8% 0.2% -5.2% 3 23,995 -1,135 -4.5% 10,877 31.0% 22.3% 10.2% 33.4% 23,660 -753 -3.1% 18301 27.3% 16.7% 13.5% 40.9% 335 -382 -1.4% -7,424 3.7% 5.6% -3.3% -7.5% 4 25,237 107 0.4% 18,467 17.5% 14.2% 5.4% 62.9% 24,624 211 0.9% 17989 17.3% 12.6% 5.0% 64.1% 613 -104 -0.5% 478 0.2% 1.6% 0.4% -1.2% 5 25,894 764 3.0% 19,735 13.4% 14.3% 1.8% 68.0% 24,680 267 1.1% 18199 11.5% 15.7% 3.9% 67.5% 1,214 497 1.9% 1,536 1.9% -1.4% -2.1% 0.5% Total 125,650 85,285 19.4% 14.4% 4.3% 59.9% 122,067 81,803 17.9% 12.8% 5.3% 62.4% 3,583 3,482 1.5% 1.6% -1.0% -2.5% City of Concord
Current Plan Demographics
2010 Population2020 Population
Current Difference
Citizen Voting Age PopulationPopulation
District
2011-2015 Citizen Voting Age Population2015-2019 Citizen Voting Age Population When Adopted
Attachment 2

Attachment 3
Public Outreach
City Council Redistricting Process
October 2021 – January 2022

Email to Community Based Organizations:

Oct. 21 (introduction to process, website and sharing public hearing schedule) Dec. 2 (update on process and link to workshop video)
Jan. 3 (reminder about January 10 public hearing and information about process) Facebook:

Nov. 8 (post re: upcoming workshops)
Nov. 8 (event - workshop promotion)
Nov. 8 (event - workshop promotion)
Nov. 15 (post reminding community of workshops)
Nov. 29 (post about Nov. 28 e-newsletter with article about redistricting) Nov. 30 (post about winter/spring activity guide containing article about redistricting Dec. 29 (post about January 10 public hearing)
Jan. 5 (post reminding community of January 10 public hearing) Jan. 10 (public hearing reminder and January 11 office hours) Nextdoor:

Nov. 8 (event – workshop promotion)
Nov. 15 (event – workshop promotion)
Nov. 17 (event – workshop promotion)
Dec. 6 (re: activity guide containing article about redistricting) Jan. 5 (event – public hearing promotion)

Twitter:

Nov. 8 (event – workshop promotion)
Nov. 15 (event – workshop promotion)
Nov. 29 (re: e-newsletter containing article about redistricting) Nov. 30 (re: activity guide containing article about redistricting) Jan. 5 (public hearing promotion)

E-Newsletter:

Nov. 10 (workshops announced)
Nov. 23 (article discussing redistricting process with links to workshop video) Jan. 5 (article about upcoming public hearing)

Website:

Launched in October in both English and Spanish

Activity Guide:

November article about redistricting efforts published; activity guide mailed to all Concord addresses, posted to website, and shared through social media. Physical copies also placed in all City facilities and delivered to several community partners, including the Concord Library and Visit Concord. Spanish version of the City News portion was also created, posted to website, and shared at Library and through Monument Crisis Center.

Public Engagement
City Council Redistricting Process

Press Releases and Publications:

Oct. 26 (Public Hearing notice published in East Bay Times) Oct. 29 (press release)
Dec. 29 (press release)
Jan. 5 (public hearing notice published in East Bay Times) Workshops:

Nov. 15 (information about redistricting process and training on mapping tools) Nov. 17 (information about redistricting process and training on mapping tools) Meetings with Community Groups:

Dec. 1 (Zoom meeting requested by members of the community) Public Hearings:

Nov. 2 (formal setting to share information and receive public testimony) Jan. 10 (formal setting to share information and receive public testimony) Upcoming:

Virtual Office Hours:

Jan. 11 (opportunity for residents to ask questions directly of staff)

Redistricting Process
Jennifer Ortega
Community Relations Manager
January 10, 2022
1

Meeting Format
• Public Outreach
• Schedule of E vents
• Demographer Presentation
• Council Questions
• Public Comment
• Council Comments and Direction
2

Public Outreach
3 •City News & Activity Guide
• Winter/Spring issue
mailed November 29, 2021
• All postal customers: 52,200+
(inc. residents & businesses)

Public Outreach (cont.)
4 •Website
• October 4, 2021
• English / Spanish
• Continuously updated
www.cityofconcord.org/Redistricting www.cityofconcord.org/Distritos

Public Outreach (cont.)
5 •E-Newsletter
• November 10, 2021
• November 23, 2021
• January 5, 2022
•Email to CBOs
• January 3, 2022

Public Outreach (cont.)
6 •East Bay Times
(public hearing notice)
• January 5, 2022

Public Outreach (cont.)
7 •Additional Push
• Dec. 29, 2021
• Jan. 5-10, 2022:
• Press Release
• Nextdoor
• Facebook
• Twitter
• Newsflash (web)

Schedule of
Events
8 Date and Time Description
November 2, 2021
7:00 p.m.

Public Hearing
(Online)
November 15, 2021
6:00 p.m.

Workshop
(Online)
November 17, 2021
6:00 p.m.

Workshop
(Online)
January 10, 2022
7:00 p.m.

Public Hearing
(Online)
January 11, 2022
12:00 p.m.
“Office Hour” (drop-in)
(Online)
January 18, 2022 Draft Maps Due
February 1, 2022
7:00 p.m.

Public Hearing
TBD
March 1, 2022
7:00 p.m.

Public Hearing
TBD
April 5, 2022
7:00 p.m.

Public Hearing
TBD

Council Comments and Direction
•Questions that Council should consider when providing
d
irection to staff:
• Are there desired changes to district boundaries to account for changes i
n the City’s population according to the 2020 census?
• Are there neighborhoods and communities of interest that should be k
ept whole (when possible) for purposes of fair representation? • Are there understandable boundaries that should be considered as po
tential district boundaries?
9

1 1

2 Actions Requested
Conduct second of two public hearings to receive input on the composition of voting districts before maps are drafted
Provide initial direction to demographer on composition of draft maps 2

3 Timeline
Hearing Purpose Date
1 • Education
• Public input
November 2
2 • Public input
• Initial direction
January 10
3 • Review plans (public & draft)
• Provide additional direction
February 1
4 • Review or further revise plans
• Select final plan
March 1
5 • Adoption of ordinance and maps April 5
3

4 Criteria
In order of priority:
• Equal Population
• Federal Law
• Contiguous
• Neighborhoods & communities of interest
• Understandable boundaries
• Compactness
4

5 Current Lines
^ 2020 Census Redistricting Data. Adjusted for incarcerated populations + Boundaries adjusted to conform to 2020 Census geography when necessary. # 2020 Population^
Total Deviation
1 25,372 +1.0%
2 25,152 +0.1%
3 23,995 -4.5%
4 25,237 +0.4%
5 25,894 +3.0%
Total 125,650
Ideal 25,130
5

6 Neighborhoods and Communities
6 Community of Interest:

Population with common social or
economic interests that should be in a
single district for fair/effective
representation
Examples:

Common assets like schools and
shopping areas, housing, culture and
language, and employment
Can consider existing data such as city
planning information
No definitive dataset. Need public
testimony!

7 Things to Remember
Strive for population equality. Be
prepared to justify deviations
Focus on traditional criteria. Draw
contiguous districts that respect
communities, while using
understandable boundaries, and are
compact when possible
Do not use race as the
predominant factor. Only as one of
many factors and cannot subordinate
other redistricting criteria
7

8 Resources
Webpage
• www.cityofconcord.org/redistricting
• Will be maintained for ten years
E
mail
• [email protected]
P
hone
• Justin Ezell, Assistant City Manager
(
925) 671-3155
8