Pinole City Council
November 15, 2022

PINOLE CITY COUNCIL

MEETING AGENDA

CITY COUNCIL
Vincent Salimi, Mayor
Devin Murphy, Mayor Pro Tem
Anthony Tave, Council Member
Maureen Toms, Council Member
Norma Martínez-Rubin, Council Member

TUESDAY
November 15, 2022
5:00 P.M
Please note: HYBRID MEETING FORMAT
Attend in Person: PINOLE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 2131 PEAR STREET OR
Attend VIA ZOOM TELECONFERENCE – Details provided below Please note: Updated COVID-19 safety protocols will be posted outside the City Council Chambers. Please review this information before entering the Council Chambers.

How to Submit Public Comments:

In Person: Attend meeting at the Pinole City Council Chambers, fill out a yellow public comment card and submit it to the City Clerk.

Via Zoom:

Members of the public may submit a live remote public comment via Zoom video conferencing. Download the Zoom mobile app from the Apple Appstore or Google Play. If you are using a desktop computer, you can test your connection to Zoom by clicking here. Zoom also allows you to join the meeting by phone.

From a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89335000272
Webinar ID: 893 3500 0272
By phone: +1 (669) 900-6833 or +1 (253) 215-8782 or +1 (346) 248-7799 • Speakers will be asked to provide their name and city of residence, although providing this is not required for participation.
• Each speaker will be afforded up to 3 minutes to speak (subject to modification by the Mayor)
• Speakers will be muted until their opportunity to provide public comment.

When the Mayor opens the comment period for the item you wish to speak on, please use the “raise hand” feature (or press *9 if connecting via telephone) which will alert staff that you have a comment to provide and press *6 to unmute. To comment with your video enabled, please let the City Clerk know you would like to turn your camera on once you are called to speak.

CORONAVIRUS ADVISORY
INFORMATION:

CLICK HERE for City Updates
CLICK HERE for County Updates
1 of 677
City Council
Agenda – November 15, 2022

Written Comments: All comments received before 3:00 pm the day of the meeting will be posted on the City’s website on the agenda page (Agenda Page Link) and provided to the City Council prior to the meeting. Written comments will not be read aloud during the meeting.

Email comments to [email protected] Please indicate which item on the agenda you are commenting on in the subject line of your email.

Please note: Updated COVID-19 safety protocols will be posted outside the City Council Chambers. Please review this information before entering the Council Chambers.

OTHER WAYS TO WATCH THE MEETING
LIVE ON CHANNEL 26. They are retelecast the following Thursday at 6:00 p.m. The Community TV Channel 26 schedule is published on the city’s website at www.ci.pinole.ca.us.

VIDEO-STREAMED LIVE ON THE CITY’S WEBSITE, www.ci.pinole.ca.us. and remain archived on the site for five (5) years.

If none of these options are available to you, or you need assistance with public comment, please contact the City Clerk, Heather Bell at (510) 724-8928 or [email protected] .

Americans With Disabilities Act: In compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, if you need special assistance to participate in a City Meeting or you need a copy of the agenda, or the agenda packet in an appropriate alternative format, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (510) 724-8928. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.

Note: Staff reports are available for inspection on the City Website at www.ci.pinole.ca.us. You may also contact the City Clerk via e-mail at [email protected] .

Ralph M. Brown Act. Gov. Code § 54950. In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly. The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies, which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.
2 of 677
Pinole City Council
Agenda –November 15, 2022

1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS

2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present, and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.

3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision: (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself /herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov't Code § 87105.

4. CONVENE TO A CLOSED SESSION
Citizens may address the Council regarding a Closed Session item prior to the Council adjourning into the Closed Session, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk.

A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: Andrew Murray, City Manager, Stacy Shell, Human Resources Director
Represented employees: Local 1, IAFF, PPEA

5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION

6. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker. Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting. PLEASE SEE THE

COVERSHEET OF THE AGENDA FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO SUBMIT PUBLIC COMMENTS

7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Mayor Report

1. Announcements
B. Mayoral & Council Appointments
C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
E. City Manager Report / Department Staff

F. City Attorney Report
3 of 677
City Council
Agenda – November 15, 2022

8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS A. Proclamations

1. United Against Hate Week
B. Presentations
None

9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine or noncontroversial. These items will be enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any interested party or Council member(s) wishes to comment on an item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of the Consent Calendar.

A. Approve the Regular Meeting Minutes of November 1, 2022 B. Receive the October 29, 2022- November 11, 2022 List of Warrants in the Amount of $524,664.82, the November 11, 2022 Payroll in the Amount of $540,208.93.

C. Resolution Continuing Authorized Remote Teleconference Meetings Pursuant to AB 361 [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Casher)] D. Resolution Approving an Agreement with RSG For Affordable Housing Consultation Assistance Including Monitoring, Compliance and Reporting, and Appropriating Funding from the Housing Successor Fund for this Purpose [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Whalen)] E. Authorize The City Manager to Execute Amendments to Extend Existing On-Call Service Contracts for Engineering and Environmental Services And Execute New On-Call Service Contracts Related To Wastewater And Stormwater [Action:

Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Mishra)]
F. Receive the Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 First Quarter Financial Report [Action:

Receive Report (Guillory)]
G. Receive the Quarterly Investment Report for the First Quarter (Ending September 30, 2022) [Action: Receive Report (Guillory)] H. Receive The Quarterly Report on Implementation of the Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Climate Action and Adaptation Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 First Quarter [Action: Receive Report (Whalen)]
I. Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 First Quarter Report on Implementation of Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Projects [Action: Receive Report (Mishra)] J. Receive the Quarterly Report on Implementation of the Strategic Plan for Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 First Quarter [Action: Receive Report (Murray)] K. Award a Construction Contract for Installation of an Electric Vehicle Charging Station (CIP Project # FA2002) [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Kaur)]
4 of 677
City Council
Agenda – November 15, 2022

L. Approve an Amendment to Extend the Term of the Employment Agreement for the City Manager [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Shell)] M. Placement of Liens for Delinquent Unpaid Waste Collection Charges Falling Delinquent between May and August 2022, Considered at an Administrative Hearing on October 6, 2022 [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Stone)]

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Citizens wishing to speak regarding a Public Hearing item should fill out a speaker card prior to the completion of the presentation, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk. An official who engaged in an ex parte communication that is the subject of a Public Hearing must disclose the communication on the record prior to the start of the Public Hearing.
o
A. Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance to Adopt the 2022 California Building Standards Code and Update the City’s Building and Fire Code [Action:

Introduce and waive the first reading of an Ordinance adopting the 2022 Building Standards Code with updates to the City’s Building and Fire Code (Casher)]

11. OLD BUSINESS
A. Review and Feedback on Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element Update and Authorize Submittal to State HCD [Action: Receive Report and Provide Direction (Whalen)]

12. NEW BUSINESS
A. Receive Information Regarding Potential Sister City Arrangements and Provide Direction [Action: Receive Report and Provide Direction (Rogers)]

13. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Continued from Item 6) (Public Comments) Open only to members of the public who did not speak under the first Citizens to Be Heard, Agenda Item 6
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes for City Council items and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker. Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future meeting.

14. ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting of December 6, 2022 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.

I hereby certify under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing Agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of Pinole City Hall, 2131 Pear Street Pinole, CA, on the City’s website, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date set forth on this agenda.
5 of 677
City Council
Agenda – November 15, 2022

POSTED: November 10, 2022 at 10:00 AM
_________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
6 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

CITY COUNCIL MEETING

MINUTES
November 1, 2022

1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS
The City Council Meeting was held in a hybrid format (in-person and via Zoom videoconference and broadcast) from the Pinole Council Chambers, 2131 Pear Street, Pinole, California. Mayor Salimi called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 5:00 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.

2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.

3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision; (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself/herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov. Code § 87105.

A. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT
Vincent Salimi, Mayor
Devin Murphy, Mayor Pro Tem
Norma Martinez-Rubin, Council Member
Anthony Tave, Council Member
Maureen Toms, Council Member
B. STAFF PRESENT
Andrew Murray, City Manager
Heather Bell, City Clerk
Eric Casher, City Attorney
Alex Mog, Assistant City Attorney
Sanjay Mishra, Public Works Director
Neil Gang, Chief of Police
Misha Kaur, Capital Improvement and Environmental Program Manager Roxane Stone, Deputy City Clerk
City Clerk Heather Bell announced the agenda had been posted on Thursday, October 27, 2022 at 3:00 p.m. with all legally required written notices. Witten comments were received in advance of the meeting, posted to the City website and distributed to the City Council and staff and made available in the Council Chambers.
9A
7 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Following an inquiry, Mayor Salimi and Council member Tave reported due to the proximity of their residences they would have a conflict of interest with Item 10A and would be required to recuse themselves from the discussion.

4. CONVENE TO A CLOSED SESSION:

Citizens may address the Council regarding a Closed Session item prior to the Council adjourning into the Closed Session, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk.

1. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Gov. Code §54957
Title: City Manager

2. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code §54957.6
Agency designated representatives: Mary Egan, Municipal Resources Group Unrepresented employee: City Manager

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
City Clerk Bell reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION At 6:38 p.m., Mayor Salimi reconvened the meeting into open session. There was no reportable action from the Closed Session.

6. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.

Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.

Rafael Menis, Pinole, provided an update on COVID-19-related case statistics for the City of Pinole and encouraged people to continue to wear masks indoors at large gatherings. He also thanked Tony Vossbrink for meeting with him and going over concerns he had related to the Pinole Dog Park and a fire trail related to the dog park, which had a significant portion fail due to improper drainage and with a failure in the dog park itself leading to garbage the dog park had been built upon to remerge hazardous to humans and dogs. He reported he had reached out to City staff with images for possible remediation and staff had responded.

Mr. Menis also reminded everyone that November 8, 2022 was Election Day and he detailed the voting options available to registered voters, identified the City Council candidates including himself, described each candidate’s qualifications and urged registered voters to vote. 8 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

City Clerk Bell identified a request to read a two-page letter from James Tillman, dated, November 1, 2022, into the record, which Deputy City Clerk Stone did at this time; however, Mr. Tillman was in the audience and addressed the City Council on some of the points in that letter along with a request for clarification of the number of Pinole Police Officers who had retired and left the City this year, how many were on-duty now, how many active Police Officers were doing shift work and how many shifts each Police Officer performed. He requested the consideration of more Police Officers in Pinole.

Mayor Salimi stated the City Council supported the Pinole Police Department and City staff would get back to Mr. Tillman with a response to his questions. He added that based on the statistics, the number of reported crimes in Pinole had consistently decreased over the past few years and Pinole was a safe City.

Jeff Rubin, Pinole, President of the Pinole Historical Society, reported the Pinole Historical Society had resumed in-person programs after the pandemic, with its first program in September. The Historical Society would host a presentation from the Contra Costa History Center on Friday, November 4, 2022 at the Pinole Sportsman’s Club at 201 Pinon Avenue at 6:30 p.m., which would be free to all Pinole Historical Society members, their guests and the public. Volunteers from the History Center would highlight the vast research archives telling the story of the County’s past with more information available at the Pinole Historical Society website pinolehistoricalsociety.org and at the History Center website at cocohistory.org. In addition, the Annual Veteran’s Day Memorial and Flag Retirement Ceremony would be held on Friday, November 11, 2022 at 11:00 a.m. in Fernandez Park with participation from the Pinole Valley High School marching band and choir and the community. Anyone with an American Flag could bring the flag to the event so that Boy Scout Troops 81 and 86, who would be present at the ceremony, could retire the flag with dignity.

Tony Vossbrink, Pinole, asked why the information to call into the meeting had not been provided to the public on the top and bottom banner of the Zoom screen to allow for public participation and a timer displayed. He otherwise reported on a number of street lights in the City which had been inoperable for almost a year; reported the Pinole Library parking lot lights had been repaired after months if not years of non-service; and the security camera at the Senior Center had been repaired but crime in Pinole continued to increase regardless of the statistics reported by the Mayor. He reported on a recent incident that involved a low flying helicopter with spot lights in his neighborhood, but nothing had been reported to the community. He also suggested the City should also post a reward to address the criminal activities occurring on Fitzgerald Drive, assign a special task force and consider a police station in that area.

Mayor Salimi asked technology staff to ensure that an identification number and telephone number was displayed on Zoom for public participation but noted that information had been posted on the City Council agendas.

Maria Alegria, Pinole, read into the record written comments she would provide to the City Clerk to be part of the public record. She referenced the Pinole Historical Society and the Pinole History Museum, which she suggested had engaged in political campaigning for three candidates for the Pinole City Council, including Council member Martinez-Rubin. She pointed out that Section 501 (c)(3) organizations were prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in or intervening in any political campaign on behalf of, or in opposition to any candidate for elected public office. 9 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Ms. Alegria suggested Council member Martinez-Rubin’s husband Jeff Rubin, President of the Pinole Historical Society, a non-profit organization, had violated this section by posting on both the Pinole History Museum and Pinole Historical Society Facebook pages to encourage the public to attend a Pinole City Council Forum on October 22, 2022 at Pinole Valley High School, and had also encouraged the public to vote for three candidates for the City Council while also disparaging another Council member for not voting for the renovation of the Faria House. Also, Council member Martinez-Rubin and her husband had made personal contributions to the Pinole Historical Society and Pinole History Museum of over $15,000. She suggested Council member Martinez-Rubin had a conflict of interest related to decisions to support the renovation of the Faria House for the Pinole History Museum and she urged the City Council to reject any further discussions with the Pinole History Museum regarding its role in securing a lease agreement to have the museum at the Faria House.

City Attorney Eric Casher advised a question had been posed to him as the City Attorney regarding the City’s role in enforcing what had been suggested in the comments. He stated it was not the City’s position or had it ever been to enforce the tax exempt status of non-profits within the City of Pinole, which would apply for any organization within the City and which had been communicated to the member of the public who had posed the question.

Mayor Salimi modified the meeting agenda and moved to Item 8. Recognitions/Presentations/ Community Announcements at this time.

8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMNUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS A. Proclamations

1. Honoring St. Joseph’s School – 75th Anniversary
The City Council read into the record the proclamation honoring St. Joseph’s School’s 75th Anniversary.

Mark Bryne, a member of the St. Joseph Parish for 35 years, explained that Father Geoffrey Baraan had been unable to attend given that he was on a tour of the Holy Land and he had been asked to accept on his behalf and on behalf of St. Joseph’s Parish He thanked the City Council for the recognition and looked forward to serving the community for years to come. He also commented that as a friend of Carol Lujan he wanted to be part of future plans to make Tennent Avenue safer for pedestrians.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
B. Presentations

1. Updates from the West Contra Costa County Unified School District (WCCUSD) - Superintendent Kenneth Chris Hurst
10 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Dr. Kenneth Chris Hurst, Sr. Ed.D, Superintendent, West Contra Costa County Unified School District (WCCUSD) introduced the WCCUSD Team including Trustee Area 1, Jamela SmithFolds; Elizabeth Sanders, Director of Communications; LaResha Huffman, Chief Academic Officer; Michael Booker, Disaster Preparedness and Safety Consultant; and Dr. Robert McEntire, Chief Business Officer.

An extensive PowerPoint presentation was provided which included an overview of the background and experience of Dr. Hurst; the details for the WCCUSD Strategic Planning Process and next steps; highlights of the STAR Reading and Math State benchmarks by Primary Ethnicity, CSU and UC Systems Admission Rates 2021; UC System Admission Rates Over Time; Core Instructional Programming; Efforts to Improve Climate and Enrollment; Wrap–Around Services and Supports; COVID Safety, S.M.A.R.T.E.R Strategy; COVID Resources; Safety Resources; School Safety Tracker; Opportunities and Risks to Fiscal Condition; Budget Changes Since Adoption; Increased LCFF Funding Changes Assumptions; Changes to Revenues, Expenditures and Fund Balance 2022/23; and the Components of the Ending Fund Balance.

Jamela Smith-Folds was pleased to be the WCCUSD Trustee for Area 1 and identified all of the Pinole schools in the WCCUSD and their distinguished achievements. She stated that Pinole had great schools with a lot of student involvement.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy thanked Dr. Hurst for his achievements; reported he had attended one of the Strategic Planning meetings at Pinole Valley High School and was pleased with the interaction and engagement and hoped that information would be made available to the City so that it could be disseminated to the public. He also thanked the WCCUSD for allowing him to conduct a back to school tour of all Pinole schools on the occasion of the new school year and hear from the students on what they wanted such as more counselors, health centers at every school and before and after school program activities. He encouraged his fellow Council members to do the same back to school tour. He also wanted to see the City increase its partnership with the WCCUSD and amplify the needs of the students.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy asked whether the WCCUSD owned land within the City of Pinole given there had been student interest in community gardens and he wanted to promote such activities at all schools in the City, and Dr. Hurst stated he would have to get back to the Mayor Pro Tem with information.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy also spoke to the traffic issues around Pinole Middle School and West County Mandarin School and asked for an update, to which Michael Booker, Disaster Preparedness and Safety Consultant, explained that the WCCUSD had been in conversations with the City as to those traffic issues and the City had assisted with cones and police availability as needed,. The WCCUSD would continue to address some of the issues on a more permanent basis.
11 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Public Works Director Sanjay Mishra reported he had worked directly with the school Principals to provide traffic cones and signs as temporary measures, with no left turn into the school facility, and with the red curbing and loading and unloading zones to be painted in front of the school along with permanent no left-turn signs. Staff was also working with a consultant to provide a permanent solution such as a crosswalk and other proposed changes in the area including a rightturn lane to Appian Way and widening the sidewalk, all of which would take some time. As part of next steps, the City would engage with the residents and business owners in the area when a final and permanent solution had been identified.

City Manager Andrew Murray reiterated the City had installed some short-term temporary improvements such as the traffic cones and no left-hand turn signs, and would paint the No Parking and loading and unloading zones, weather permitting. School stakeholders and City staff understood that permanent engineering solutions were needed. The City had a consultant onboard, promised to get back to the WCCUSD by the end of the calendar year with options such as a dedicated right-turn lane as one left Mann Drive onto Appian Way, permanent no left-turn signage into the parking lot, a raised and possible beacon crosswalk, along with permanent signage and possible engineering barriers to address U-turns onto Mann Drive along with the widening of the sidewalk on Mann Drive on the school site.

Mr. Booker advised that the WCCUSD had a few meetings with the community of Pinole Middle School and West County Mandarin School on the plans moving forward and the Principals of those schools had communicated with the school families about the traffic issues in those areas.

City Manager Murray emphasized the City followed the three E’s of traffic safety; education, enforcement and engineering and he commended the WCCUSD for establishing expectations and communicating around the safety needs, with the City to design effective engineering solutions.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy asked the status of any plans for student transportation and was informed by Dr. Robert McEntire, Chief Business Officer that the WCCUSD contracted out for all of its transportation services and regularly went out to bid and set the criteria for what they valued given the importance of being good stewards in the community.

Trustee Smith-Folds added that transportation was an equity issue with Area 1 busing students with special education needs in addition to students at West County Mandarin School who were also bused given a required transfer from one location to another. There was no district-wide transportation, but that was to be discussed as an equity barrier or uplifter through an environmental lens. Additionally, it was noted that some students in the WCCUSD used WestCAT and transportation was an issue the WCCUSD was aware of and needed to address.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy thanked the WCCUSD Team for all of their work, and again spoke to his tour of Pinole schools, and was pleased Pinole was the only city in the State of California that addressed dual-Mandarin needs with West County Mandarin School. He added the school tracker in the PowerPoint presentation needed to be modified to identify Pinole schools, not unincorporated Contra Costa County. He again was interested in the feedback from the students and teachers and urged metrics be prepared on those issues to track the progress and improvements for students and teachers. He suggested the City would benefit from a stronger and strategic partnership with that information.
12 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Council member Toms also thanked the WCCUSD Team for the presentation and reported she had participated in a recent tour of Pinole Valley High School with past alumni and the City should be proud of its achievements. She clarified with Mr. Booker the start and end times for Pinole Middle School and West County Mandarin School had been staggered with all options considered to mitigate the traffic situation and with the possible additional staggering of times for both schools.

Council member Toms found that WestCAT had been convenient for many middle school students and reminded everyone that the month of October had been free for WestCAT users and that should be promoted more in the future. She also highlighted with Dr. McEntire the current budget numbers and concerns raised by the County Office of Education with the continued risk to the WCCUSD negotiations.

Council member Tave thanked the WCCUSD Team for the presentation and asked whether or not there was a performance metric that identified below, at, and above-grade level students that could be monitored in-house. He reported he had been contacted about shuffling teachers at several schools and he asked for an update.

Dr. Hurst advised that the data requested could be made available on the WCCUSD website. A presentation would be made at the November 2, 2022 WCCUSD Board meeting on that same data. He highlighted the number of teachers who had resigned prior to the summer and the effort with job fairs to close that gap, although numerous vacancies remained and were being filled with long-term substitute teachers and peer teachers.

LaResha Huffman, Chief Academic Officer, detailed the staffing process the WCCUSD followed pursuant to contractual requirements and guidelines required to consolidate teachers.

Council member Tave also commented that in 2018/2019 there had been discussions about security on-campus and the removal of the School Resource Officers (SROs), which discussion had split the community. He asked whether there was any data available to show that criminal activities on-campus had decreased even with the removal of the SROs and was informed by Dr.

Hurst that he and Mr. Booker had spoken with every Police Chief and City Council in the WCCUSD on what a positive relationship looked like between the WCCUSD and the cities and there had been a request for that information to be provided in writing. Once they had all that information the WCCUSD would engage the community on what that positive relationship looked like with feedback and guidance from the WCCUSD Board.

Mr. Booker reiterated the WCCUSD had been actively engaged for some time with the Police Chiefs in the WCCUSD, as discussed, with that information to be presented to each city and the WCCUSD Board; however, every city was different and they had to look at a non-cookie cutter approach and needed to get all information in an appropriate manner before moving forward.

Council member Tave sought time on the local level to have that conversation with the community.

He also sought a metric of WCCUSD positions filled and vacant. He thanked the WCCUSD for it’s after school programs and thanked the WCCUSD Team and Trustee Smith-Folds for their leadership.

Council member Martinez-Rubin suggested safety was an area that needed attention and should complement whatever metric/data could be obtained. She referred specifically to the mass shooting at Uvalde, Texas which highlighted the importance of prevention. 13 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Council member Martinez-Rubin supported public schools, found all of the programming that existed was of great value but emphasized that the safety of students and teachers required the prevention aspect of safety. Of the staff tracked, she asked about the top three issues over the past three years.

Mr. Booker explained that they look at the number of intruder incidents on the campuses, number of fights and number of weapons brought on campus, and address those issues moving forward.

The WCCUSD had a collaborative relationship with the Pinole Police Department to make sure that any information deemed worthy of their knowledge would be provided to the Pinole PD. The statistics for 2018/2019 were not one way or another in terms of incidents on-campus or fights, and with the pandemic there was little data for that period and the WCCUSD was currently tracking some highlights from previous years.

Council member Martinez-Rubin sought an actual partnership with the WCCUSD to include the funding of SROs and along with those conversations and interactions between school staff and the community recommended ongoing discussions of the prevention aspects. She recognized that different systems needed to be at play and the intersection of those systems, education, justice and safety in schools must not ignore the prevention or escalations on-campus that occurred by students on-site or some other way. She also recognized that they lived along a corridor where there were crimes of opportunity and with the community bisected by I-80 had led to concerns for students and residents. She urged the WCCUSD to move quickly beyond the discussions and partner with other cities with what was already evidence on the value of SROs and if in the future the City could partner with funding that would be a great plus.

Trustee Smith-Folds explained that the WCCUSD listened to its stakeholders and one of the greatest stakeholders were the students who had been asked about safety. Many wanted the wrap-around services on-campus, such as a trusted adult on campus. Efforts had been made to instill in students that if they see something, say something and go to an adult or consider an anonymous tip line. Many incidents had been prevented in this way and campus security officers were the first line of defense for the students and could point them to the resources on campus, but as discussed students had identified greater needs. The one point of entry after the pandemic and having lanyards had increased safety and work was being done with consistency over time to allow the students to see the change they were looking for since the students were guiding this conversation.

Dr. Hurst acknowledged the comments from the City Council and the perspectives on emotional and physical safety, and advised as a Superintendent he must listen to stakeholders and the conversation around SROs was not an easy conversation. He stated the City Council’s comments on SROs would be broached carefully with information brought to the WCCUSD Board but he did not have a timeline. He emphasized that physical, social and emotional safety was very important but there was no guarantee there would be SROs on-campus and that would depend on stakeholders, teachers and students.

Council member Martinez-Rubin further clarified with Ms. Huffman the data provided had included special education students but the data had not been segregated. She would ensure that information was available on the WCCUSD website.
14 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Council member Martinez-Rubin, as a member of the WestCAT Board, updated the services provided to students of Pinole Valley High school and the integration of the students outside of the Pinole zip code, which had been made possible due to the WestCAT lines and which had continued through the pandemic. She thanked the WCCUSD Team for the presentation and looked forward to ongoing and future changes.

Mayor Salimi appreciated the work of the WCCUSD Team and the challenges they had faced for years. He added a large portion of taxes had been devoted to education, he supported education, and he pointed out the more successful the school district the greater the property values in a community.

The WCCUSD Team thanked the City Council which had been invited to participate in all WCCUSD public meetings, with all information available on the WCCUSD website.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafael Menis, Pinole, stated he had been asked by Christy Lam-Julian to provide her comments.

She had asked how much the WCCUSD had earmarked for the consultant cited for the guiding coalition and questioned the prudency of that expenditure given ongoing labor negotiations. As to Pinole Valley High School and the UC Admission Rates as shown in the PowerPoint presentation, he noted the admission rate for Pinole Valley School was one of the lowest for 2019, had spiked to around 80 percent in 2020 but had decreased in 2021 to 64 percent. He asked if that was a product of the pandemic or the applicant pool. Pursuant to the budget figures, he recognized that the cost for books and supplies had increased over the initial costs but stated that even with inflation those costs were remarkable and he requested clarification.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

2. Update from the California Department of Insurance – (CDI) – Mary Beth Bykowsky
City Clerk Bell reported there had been a request to reschedule the presentation to a future meeting.

Mayor Salimi again modified the meeting agenda and moved on to the Consent Calendar.

9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any interested party or Council member(s) wishes to comment on an item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of the Consent Calendar.

A. Approve the Special Meeting Minutes of October 10, 2022 and the Regular Meeting Minutes of October 18, 2022
B. Receive the October 15, 2022 – October 28, 2022 List of Warrants in the Amount of $861,471.37, and the October 28, 2022 Payroll in the Amount of $545,125.51 15 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

C. Resolution Authorizing the City of Pinole Membership in the CivicWell [Action:

Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Whalen)]
D. Adopt a Resolution Amending the Master Salary Schedule [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Shell)]
E. Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Legal Services Agreement with Sher Editing LLP Regarding PCB Litigation [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Shell)]

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Cordell Hindler, Richmond, supported the Consent Calendar, as is.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED

ACTION: Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Murphy/Council member Martinez-Rubin to approve Consent Calendar Items 9A through 9E, as shown.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Mayor Salimi again modified the meeting agenda and moved on to Item 12. New Business, with the items taken out of order from how they had been shown on the meeting agenda.

12. NEW BUSINESS
C. Establishment of a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) Ad Hoc Subcommittee [Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Murray)] City Manager Murray presented the staff report and recommended the City Council adopt the resolution contained in Attachment A to the November 1, 2022 staff report.

Council member Toms expressed the desire to serve on the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) Ad Hoc Subcommittee given her experience with Public Works projects.

Council member Tave also expressed the willingness to serve on the PLA Ad Hoc Subcommittee.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy offered a motion, seconded by Council member Tave, to adopt the resolution in Attachment A.

On the motion, Council member Martinez-Rubin requested a revision to the last Now, Therefore Be it Resolved clause as shown on Page 1 of the resolution, as follows:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole does hereby establish the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) Ad Hoc Subcommittee composed of 16 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

two Council Members appointed by the City Council and a Planning Commissioner and a Community Services Commissioner selected among the Planning Commission and Community Services Commission by its respective members and appointed by the Mayor, staffed by the Public Works Director.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy retracted his motion.

City Clerk Bell clarified the City Council also needed to appoint two Council members to serve on the Ad Hoc Subcommittee.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Joe Lubas, Policy Analyst, Associated Builders & Contractors, Northern California Chapter, expressed disapproval of this action given what had happened with the Pinole-Hercules Water Pollution Control Plant Upgrade, a PLA project supported by the City Council with the most reasonable low bid for the project significantly over the Engineer’s Estimate of what the project would cost. He asked the City Council to not move forward and that any subcommittee should include contractors both union and merit so that at all views had a seat at the table.

Maria Alegria, Pinole, encouraged the City Council to approve the PLA Ad Hoc Subcommittee.

She pointed out the Council Chambers had been built with a PLA, the building was beautiful, sustainable and welcoming. She asked that there be regular reporting from the PLA Ad Hoc Subcommittee to the public to allow the public to opine on any issues and that the labor partners union also have a seat at the table.

Eric Christen, Executive Director, Coalition for Fair Employment in Construction, a statewide organization formed in 1998 solely to oppose discriminatory and wasteful PLAs, asked what problem the PLA would seek to remedy given record inflation and the fact the construction industry was facing construction industry inflation not previously seen. He suggested a PLA would not be considered unless someone was pushing for it, such as special interest groups and former politicians for big labor interests who wanted a monopoly and to exclude the labor force that chose to work labor free, which was evident in the State of California pursuant to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. He questioned why the City Council sought to change the way it did business and asked for a rationale for that action.

If a PLA Ad Hoc Subcommittee was formed, Mr. Christen suggested it should include all parties including supporters and those opposed to these types of discriminatory agreements. He suggested that PLAs only forced non-union construction firms to hire an all-union work force, those that were non-union must pay into union health and welfare pension plans and would never invest since investing requirements were five to ten years in length. PLAs precluded one from wanting to bid since construction companies did not get a user work force, PLAs excluded nonunion apprenticeship programs and forced non-union workers to pay union dues. He suggested PLAs had no use or purpose in 2022. If the City Council voted for a PLA Ad Hoc Subcommittee all sides should be represented.

Tom Hansen, Business Manager, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW) Local 302 and President, Contra Costa County Building Trades, commented that this was something the City Council had considered for some time.
17 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Mr. Hansen was present as a resource for staff and looked forward to working with City staff through the details of the PLA. He appreciated the commitment to labor in the Bay Area.

Mayor Salimi stated for the record he was not running for re-election but when he had run for office in 2018, he been approached by the labor union and had refused the money, explaining that he would help the union because he believed in unions and the quality of work and unions made the country stronger, but he was not voting for their money but what was right for what needed to be done.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Council member Toms recommended the last Now, Therefore Be it Resolved clause as shown on Page 1 of the resolution, be further modified, as follows:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole does hereby establish the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) Ad Hoc Subcommittee composed of two Council Members appointed by the City Council and a Planning Commissioner and a Community Services Commissioner selected among the Planning Commission and Community Services Commission by its respective members and staffed by the Public Works Director.

Mayor Salimi advised there was consensus to appoint Council members Tave and Toms to serve on the PLA Ad Hoc Subcommittee. He clarified the Ad Hoc Subcommittee would include two Council members, one Planning Commissioner and one Community Services Commissioner.

City Manager Murray requested two separate motions; one on the resolution and another the City Council appointments to the PLA Ad Hoc Subcommittee.

ACTION: Motion by Council members Martinez-Rubin/Tave to adopt a Resolution of the City Council, County of Contra Costa, State of California, Creating the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) Ad Hoc Subcommittee, to be modified as follows:

Revise the last Now, Therefore Be it Resolved clause as shown on Page 1 of the resolution, to read:

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole does hereby establish the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) Ad Hoc Subcommittee composed of two Council Members appointed by the City Council and a Planning Commissioner and a Community Services Commissioner selected among the Planning Commission and Community Services Commission by its respective members and staffed by the Public Works Director.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
18 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

ACTION: Motion by Council member Toms/Mayor Pro Tem Murphy to Select Council members Tave and Toms to serve on the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) Ad Hoc Subcommittee.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
A. Adopt Resolution Approving Communication and Engagement Plan [Action:

Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Murray)]
City Manager Murray presented the staff report and recommended the City Council adopt the resolution contained in Attachment A to the November 1, 2022 staff report.

Jennifer Nentwig, Principal, and Karen Villasenor, Business Analyst, Tripepi Smith, provided a PowerPoint presentation for the City of Pinole’s Communication and Engagement Plan, an overview of the research and development of the plan to provide a framework to strengthen the City’s communication efforts and help City Hall more effectively reach and engage residents by improving access to timely, helpful and accurate information about Pinole and its services while also providing easy, meaningful and successful ways to engage with residents and promote transparency in the City’s decision-making process and outcomes of key citywide issues.

Recommendations the City Council was asked to consider included:

Planning: Recommendation to shift from reactive to proactive communications and crossdepartmental communications planning to help increase public engagement.

Website: Highest profile and most utilized communication platform by residents, visitors and stakeholders with recommended focus on a user-friendly, easily navigable design.

Social Media: Recommendation for consistent and compelling content, leveraging both City and Police Department platforms and building a strong presence.

City Branding: The City of Pinole used the seal as the City’s logo, with a recommendation for a consistent use of branding tools throughout City Hall with easily identifiable logos and colors in all messaging.

Newsletter: The bi-monthly City Manager’s Report covered critical and interesting City information and would benefit from an updated look and feel with a recommendation to leverage social media to increase traffic and subscriptions.

Policies and Procedures: Recommendation for the establishment of policies to help manage communications efforts with formal policy examples including a Social Media Policy (internal and external), Media Relations/Inquiry Policy and a Branding/Style Guide.

Crisis Management: Preparation was key with a recommendation for a clear process to lessen confusion and provide clear next steps for residents and staff. 19 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Media Relations: Recommendation to build and cultivate relationships with reporters and increase connections with news outlets and regularly develop and share press releases with the media.

Language Access: Recommendation to expand language access to ensure all information was accessible to all parts of the community.

Residents Academy: Recommendation for resident engagement and encourage education about the inner workings and processes of local government through a Residents Academy; and
Metrics: Recommendation to regularly analyze metrics to gather insights to help improve communications efforts, use a data driven approach to help guide important decisions and help the City know what efforts are more efficient and effective in reaching its residents.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Maria Alegria, Pinole, was ecstatic to see the presentation and was glad to see the City Council would do what it said it would but wanted the Council to be aware when evolving out of the pandemic that person-to-person contact was needed. She suggested the Police Chief had done an excellent job reaching out to the community and with the consolidation with the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD), this was an opportunity to reach out to the community further and consider more outreach such as the Mayor Pro Tem’s coffee chats as an example.

She also referenced the recent United Against Hate Week (UAHW) efforts and she was proud to be a citizen of Pinole, was proud of the work the City Council had done, and would like the City Council to build on that vision for a united community. She urged the City Council to adopt the Communications and Engagement Plan.

Cordell Hindler, Richmond, thanked the consultant for the presentation, found the concept to be unique, and agreed with the previous speaker and asked the City Council to approve the Communications and Engagement Plan.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Council member Toms reported she had participated in the on-line presentations and had received all of the information she needed from that presentation and from the staff report.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy thanked the City Manager for the work with community engagement which had been a priority of his and it was great to see the plan was one of action. He acknowledged some of the elements were already at work and thanked the Communications and Technology Subcommittee for its early work on this effort. He was interested in seeing some of the metrics the consultant had recommended which could be considered as quarterly updates.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy referenced Pinole Community Television (PCTV) and commented that public transparency was important and PCTV was part of the Communications and Engagement Plan. He hoped the investment in PCTV would not just be met with the plan but with a budget behind it to ensure that PCTV had the resources beyond the bare minimum, ways to creatively increase its capacity and some of the programming it had offered in the past, such as supporting public media education for youth in Pinole.
20 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy also wanted to see a Youth Commission as part of the Communications and Engagement Plan and referenced the cities of Antioch and Pittsburg that allowed youth to serve on regular Commissions such as the Planning, Community Services and Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Commissions, and he wanted to see that explored for Pinole.

Council member Martinez-Rubin thanked the consultant for the extensive presentation but acknowledged not all of the recommendations would be feasible. She appreciated the recommendation for a Residents Academy and reported in 1994 she had joined a Municipal Services Task Force that had educated her on the services provided by cities. She agreed with many of the tasks recommended but wanted appropriate representation for residents of all ages in the community given the leaning towards digital and social media in that an inclusive city needed to recognize the traditional means of communication, in-person types of events, and City sponsored and created content to highlight the City’s talent and ability to present its factuallybased information rather than content that could be co-opted by another organization and represented incompletely, which had occurred in the past. She looked forward to some of the recommendations actually being implemented.

Mayor Salimi commented the City’s website domain was easy to remember but he would recommend a rebranding of the website that was easy to type and remember.

ACTION: Motion by Council member Toms/Mayor Pro Tem Murphy to Adopt a Resolution of the City of Pinole, County of Contra Costa, State of California, Approving the City of Pinole Communication and Engagement Plan.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
B. Traffic Safety Improvements on The Tennent Avenue Corridor [Action: Discuss and Provide Direction (Mishra)]
Public Works Director Mishra introduced Misha Kaur, Capital Improvement and Environmental Program Manager, who provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Safety Improvements on the Tennent Avenue Corridor, which included an overview of the corridor collision history for the segment of Tennent Avenue between San Pablo Avenue and Pinole Valley Road. The presentation also included the background of a traffic fatality that had occurred in July 2022 on Tennent Avenue and Pear Street; the details of the Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) that would identify, analyze and prioritize roadway safety improvements to reduce fatalities and injuries using existing conditions analyses from 2015-2019 collision data; and as part of the collision analyses identify collision trends, types, severity, violation category, lighting conditions and geographic analysis, which included spatial identification of top trends. The Tennent Avenue Corridor had been identified as a high-injury corridor with two high-injury intersections at Tennent Avenue and San Pablo Avenue and Tennent Avenue and Pinole Valley Road. The LRSP Tennent Avenue Corridor Countermeasures and Recommendations included a number of improvements which were also identified.
21 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Ms. Kaur introduced Traffic Consultant Robert Stevens, CSW-ST2, who provided an overview of the concepts and ideas to address the immediate concerns at Tennent Avenue and Pear Street and Tennent Avenue and Plum Street, and highlighted the traffic study which included a speed survey, traffic counts (auto, pedestrian and bicycle), evaluation of current circulation patterns and community input, including feedback from a meeting at St. Joseph School on October 5, 2022.

He also walked through the guidelines and standards for the use of stop signs and explained that based on the data and traffic volume neither of the two streets warranted a stop sign.

Based on the analysis, the consultant and staff recommended the following traffic safety improvements for the two intersections on the Tennent Avenue Corridor:

Tennent Avenue and Pear Street
• Bulb outs at all the corners which will require removal of several parking stalls to increase visibility; high-visibility crosswalks and pavement markings on all legs; and high-visibility yield road signs.

Tennent Avenue and Plum Street
• Bulb outs at all the corners which will require removal of several parking stalls to increase visibility; a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB); high-visibility crosswalks and pavement markings on all legs; and high-visibility yield road signs.

In addition, continued meetings with St. Joseph School to review its student drop-off and pick-up procedures to minimize the potential of pedestrian and vehicular conflict was recommended.

Mr. Stevens described some of the measures that had been considered but had not been recommended for either of the two streets included a traffic-calming circle, roundabout and speed humps and a High-Intensity Activated Crosswalk Beacon (HAWK) Signal and noted the reasons why each had not been warranted had been outlined in the November 1, 2022 staff report.

Ms. Kaur asked the City Council to provide direction on the next steps that may include a revision to the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and appropriate funding to implement the recommended traffic safety improvements at Plum and/or Pear Streets; complete additional analysis on the feasibility of other types of traffic safety improvements (i.e. roundabouts, K-71 bollards and the like); or wait to receive the LRSP and take any desired action on its recommendations related to the Tennent Avenue Corridor.

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafael Menis, Pinole, referenced the traffic and circulation guidelines and the thresholds that must be met to warrant certain safety improvements and asked for clarification. He understood why the City would not want the same beacon for any particular roadway but questioned why any beacon was not warranted for the Pear and Tennent Avenue intersection given the recent fatality that had occurred at that intersection. As to the higher visibility markings for crosswalks, he questioned how fast they would fade and how often they would have to be maintained. 22 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Public Works Director Mishra clarified the high-visibility markings at both intersections involved a concrete surface and would likely wear out faster than other surfaces and would have to be maintained more regularly at least every three years.

Mr. Stevens again clarified the stop warrant analysis threshold and noted that two Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) should not be placed adjacent to one another since drivers would not pay attention and it would be more effective to ticket the intersection. He also noted the bulb-outs would prevent vehicles from parking on the shoulder so that if a person walked out, a vehicle would not be able to drive around them and two vehicles would be unable to pass one another. The bulb-outs would regulate the right-of-way (ROW). He again detailed the thresholds warranting stop signs and traffic signals and confirmed that neither intersection met the criteria.

Maria Alegria, Pinole, commented her granddaughter was a student of the pre-school at St.

Joseph School and she would like nothing more than to walk with her to school and take her to Fernandez Park, but she was terrified to walk across the street from St. Joseph School across San Pablo Avenue given the traffic conditions. She suggested the City needed to stop people from speeding and from using Tennent and San Pablo Avenues as a speed way to the freeway.

The staff report had not mentioned the traffic from the freeway and what was driving motorists to drive so fast to reach the freeway, which also passed Collins Elementary School. She urged the City Council to consider a greater vision and make traffic-calming and pedestrian safety the top priority of the CIP. She cited all of the resources available to the City and emphasized lives mattered, people wanted to come to the downtown and it should be made safer for families. She urged the City Council to have a wider vision when deliberating the issue.

Tony Vossbrink, Pinole, stated the call-in numbers for the Zoom meeting had still not been posted and he asked that he not be cut off at three minutes since other speakers had been allowed an extended period of time to speak, which he suggested was a violation of the Brown Act. He asked why input from the City’s Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Committee (TAPS) or the Police Department had not provided any input on this discussion. He also questioned why none of the recommendations had emphasized traffic enforcement and asked of the current enforcement numbers for the Tennent Avenue Corridor as well as those before and during COVID. He understood the Police Department had curtailed enforcement and citations during COVID due to other priorities and accidents were not being reported and suggested the numbers cited in the collision data were questionable given the number of unreported accidents.

Frankie Martinez, Pinole, a resident of Old Town Pinole, reported on the number of erratic drivers and while the majority of drivers were following the rules, the others must be addressed. He too was uncertain of the accuracy of the collision data and enforcement numbers and spoke to the use of speed trailers and suggested if a camera was added it would allow fines to be imposed, which could impact a speeder’s driver’s license. He asked the City Council to consider everything possible to slow the speed of traffic in the difficult and scary areas of the City.

Peter Murray, Pinole, spoke to the recent fatality along the Tennent Avenue Corridor, which he understood had occurred due to distracted driving. He asked how the staff recommendations would address erratic and distracted drivers and liked the idea of a camera on the speed trailers that would capture whether someone was talking on a cell phone. He was otherwise uncertain how to change the culture of distracted drivers.
23 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

City Manager Murray clarified that TAPS had discussed traffic interventions throughout the City and in particular the Tennent Avenue Corridor, and their comments had been forwarded to the traffic consultant. Similarly, the Police Department had been involved in those conversations and were in support of the proposed engineering solutions intended to address the distracted driving problems with the RRFB, specifically intended to get drivers attention. He suggested that distracted driving was a societal, behavioral and cultural issue and no amount of police enforcement would counteract that behavior. The intent was also to have persistent intervention methods in place to avoid the requirement of having someone constantly monitor drivers. He added that staff would have to get back to the speakers who had suggested cameras on top of the speed trailers/radar devices and would discuss that with the Police Department.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Council member Tave asked whether temporary fixes with feedback from St. Joseph School had been considered and was informed by Public Works Director Mishra that temporary fixes could be considered such as the use of K-71 bollards but would involve a cost to remove any temporary solutions when a permanent solution had been installed.

Council member Tave recommended that temporary fixes be considered now to see if they worked to educate and train drivers to be ready for the future permanent improvements and to create the choke point where people would reduce their speed in the affected areas. He liked the plans, emphasized the need to address concerns now, and understood the need for all improvements.

City Manager Murray was uncertain the K-71 bollards were the right option and suggested possibly some water-filled barriers that may also mimic the bulb-outs, but staff was seeking direction from the City Council on the recommendations provided or options through a future CIP update. A full-blown permanent installation would require some appropriation of funding in the CIP, and in the meantime a temporary solution could be considered. Feedback and educating drivers was also important as effective measures.

Mr. Stevens suggested temporary solutions were great since they helped people to be comfortable with changes but he would not expect a reduction in vehicle speeds with the K-71 bollards, although they could provide a visual cue to help drivers navigate the intersection. He found that people were less observant of conditions on the road, and there needed to be a design where pedestrians and people navigating the street were able to clearly see oncoming vehicles and make eye contact with drivers, to ensure drivers were not distracted. He reiterated that while the K-71 bollards would provide that visual cue, they would not provide the same level of security a true bulb-out would provide. He suggested an easy and quick solution would be to remove some of the on-street parking to improve site distances.

Council member Martinez-Rubin supported the more permanent solution and means of creating safety and visibility. She suggested safety over speed should also be considered and appreciated consideration and existence of the RRFB and having something that both enhanced visibility during the day and which would also be helpful at dusk. Also, the Tennent Avenue Corridor was not the only area in the City where residents had expressed concern.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy again clarified with staff the collision data for the Tennent Avenue Corridor had not included solutions for the intersection at Tennent and San Pablo Avenues. 24 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Public Works Director Mishra advised that the data provided was part of the LRSP, the City was in the process of completing that plan and the solutions for that segment would be part of the LRSP and was not part of this effort.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy asked whether the closure of Tennent Avenue during particular hours of the day had been considered to address pedestrian safety and Public Works Director Mishra stated that option had not been evaluated. Tennent Avenue was an arterial roadway that connected to the I-80 on- and off-ramps, impacting the entire arterial system in the City, and it would not be prudent to close it although the traffic data could be reviewed to determine whether or not it would be possible. The same would apply to the San Pablo Avenue and Pinole Valley Road segments.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy liked the bulb-out idea but asked whether or not full sidewalks could be extended on both sides of Tennent Avenue, to which Public Works Director Mishra suggested if there was adequate ROW and funds that option could be possible.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy also clarified with Public Works Director Mishra that the K-71 bollard was a type of bollard manufactured by a certain company used for situations where delineation was needed for a bicycle and pedestrian way from vehicles. It was not a hard bollard but offered visual cues for separation from a bicycle and pedestrian path.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy again suggested an extension of the sidewalk could be a solution to the issues on Tennent Avenue and that trees could possibly be added along the sidewalks. He asked whether that solution had been considered, and Mr. Stevens agreed that mature trees with a beautiful canopy and anything that constrained or made the road appear narrow and tunnel-like tended to slow vehicles down. Some cities had also implemented gateway symbols or markers as one entered a community but care needed to be taken with what would be implemented and how the corridor was treated as a whole.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy suggested trees would be an added benefit, add to the beautification of Pinole, provide the ability to cool down the community and provide mental health benefits. He asked whether trees could be included in the staff recommended options, and Public Works Director Mishra stated for this proposal the improvements were only for the two intersections and not for the entire corridor. When the entire corridor was considered, adding trees could be considered at that time. The LRSP was scheduled to be presented to the City Council at its November 15, 2022 meeting and at that time staff would provide an update on the progress to date, with another workshop required to be conducted prior to the final adoption of the LRSP.

City Manager Murray suggested they were really speaking of a Complete Streets project for this area of Tennent Avenue and he did not expect the LRSP would likely include recommendations with expanded sidewalks which could narrow the corridor, the planting of trees or other curb management. He suggested those options could be considered as a potential CIP project which would include economic and community development benefits. He also suggested that discussion be considered during the CIP since he was not of the opinion those options would naturally flow from any of the other projects, such as the LRSP or a Tree Master Plan.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy emphasized that discussion needed to be had especially for an evidencebased solution that may also benefit the City’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) when developed. 25 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

The Mayor Pro Tem also commented that he walked downtown Pinole daily, had a conversation with a constituent around the loss of life in the corridor, and saw this effort as a strategic plan for a more walkable downtown Pinole. He sought a broader thought process about why Tennent Avenue was so important in downtown Pinole. While he appreciated the staff recommendations and highly supported the recommendations for both intersections, he was also challenged with what he saw as a lack of connection and development of plans across different agencies. He wanted to see staff work to integrate the plans more, recognized it would not be easy, but emphasized that collaboration was important when considering solutions.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy added he had received feedback from the St. Joseph community about the mental health impacts of the recent fatality on students at St. Joseph School and that piece could be mitigated in the design such as consideration of using the crosswalk as another beautification project in Pinole. He suggested the use of rainbow crosswalks could make people remember that a school was nearby and that there had been a fatality at that crosswalk. He looked forward to the staff recommendations including drainage improvements, use of recycled water and the replacement of Prune Street.

Council member Toms verified with Public Works Director Mishra that the LRSP would be presented to the City Council on November 15 with the final LRSP anticipated to be adopted by the City Council in early January 2023. She supported the staff recommendations which were important for the school community and those who walked in the downtown. As part of the LRSP, she hoped the next phase of this project would include the elimination of the free right-turn at San Pablo Avenue to Tennent Avenue, which in her opinion encouraged speeding on Tennent Avenue as one left San Pablo Avenue. She found the bulb-outs would increase the line of sight for pedestrians on the sidewalk, would narrow the street and provide some traffic calming and she described an accident in the past related to passing vehicles where the bulb-outs would help to prohibit such traffic maneuvers.

As to the recommendation for considering K-71 bollards, Council member Toms was not interested in seeing those used. As an example, the City of Richmond had used the same bollards in its community but half were run over or missing and offered a false sense of safety.

Council member Toms asked about the next steps if the City Council were to move forward with the staff recommendations, whether there would be a discussion as part of the next quarterly CIP report or a review of the CIP, and City Manager Murray suggested that would be appropriate timing.

Council member Toms also asked of the design timing and her hope the construction of the improvements could occur in the summer to avoid conflicts with school traffic.

Public Works Director Misha suggested once funding was available the design could occur in a couple of months given there were only two intersections and construction could occur during the summer months.

Mayor Salimi suggested the City should not just rely on the traffic/collision statistics but also consider safety citing the recent fatality in the intersection. He asked staff whether or not the cost of tickets could be increased for distracted drivers.
26 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

City Attorney Casher advised it was a violation of the State Vehicle Code to use cell phones while operating a vehicle with a base fine of $20, but sections of the Vehicle Code included a not-toexceed penalty amount. There may be an option to impose a higher fine for that type of traffic offense and he would have to consult with the Police Chief on how that could be implemented.

Mayor Salimi asked the City Attorney to get back to the City Council with an update Council member Toms offered a motion, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Murphy to move forward with the safety recommendations that had been identified in the PowerPoint presentation.

On the motion, City Manager Murray understood the direction to staff was to come back with a quarterly report and potential modifications to the CIP to include this item. To move this item forward would require the appropriation of funding and to do that would be to consider the quarterly update on the CIP. The appropriation of funding was not on the agenda at this time.

That discussion had been scheduled to occur in February 2023 when more detailed costs could be identified.

ACTION: Motion by Council member Toms/Mayor Pro Tem Murphy to move forward with the safety recommendations identified in the PowerPoint presentation as follows:

Tennent Avenue and Pear Street:

Bulb outs at all the corners which will require removal of several parking stalls to increase visibility; high-visibility crosswalks and pavement markings on all legs; and high-visibility yield road signs.

Tennent Avenue and Plum Street:

Bulb outs at all the corners which will require removal of several parking stalls to increase visibility; a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB); high-visibility crosswalks and pavement markings on all legs; and high-visibility yield road signs; and
Provide direction to staff to come back with a quarterly report and potential modifications to the CIP to include this item.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Responding to the public comment, Police Chief Neil Gang reported the Pinole Police Department had been involved with the item the entire time, which had involved a total collaborative approach with City staff, residents and St. Joseph School. He also spoke to the increase in poor driving behavior nationwide after the pandemic and clarified in response to suggestions to use speed cameras stated that was not an option since they were prohibited in the State of California. Red light cameras were allowed to be used but were not an option for the corridor being discussed. 27 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Police Chief Gang explained that distracted driving was difficult to enforce on a two-lane road as opposed to highway traffic, and while a tool that was used it was typically reactive to distracted driver behavior. The Police Department would continue to educate the public about distracted driving. He also clarified the Police Department had not been ordered not to enforce traffic laws, and while there had been a reduction in enforcement during the pandemic that had related to staffing challenges, which had driven some of the results the community may have seen. He added that while raising fees could be considered, no studies had shown a nexus that increased fees would stop some of the poor driving behavior but he would sit down with the City Attorney to discuss that issue.

ACTION: Motion by Mayor Salimi/Mayor Pro Tem Murphy to extend the City Council meeting to 11:30 p.m.

Vote: Passed 5-0
Ayes: Salimi, Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Tave, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: None
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy commented that the safety improvements would include drainage improvements and road reconstruction and he would like at the next City Council meeting a conversation around a Tree Master Plan, which had been a recommendation of the Beautification Committee. He asked that staff identify the types of safety improvements in line with infrastructure plans in place so that it did not appear the City was only spending funds on the seven safety improvement items described but also setting the tone on infrastructure.

City Manager Murray clarified the reference to drainage improvements and road reconstruction was localized to just the intersection under discussion where the bulb-outs would be installed, but was not on the corridor and would not have the same efficiencies if combined with other projects.

Public Works Director Mishra confirmed the City Manager’s comments with respect to drainage improvements to address catching rain/storm water from one side and directing it to the next point to drain to an inlet required as part of the installation of a bulb-out, which was the reason the cost was a bit higher. Demolition of the road was required to construct the bulb-out just for the two intersections but if any future projects came along for the sidewalk those would be the areas to consider recycled water pipes and other improvements.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy did not understand the complexity of the issue and suggested many residents also struggled with the engineering framework. He spoke to cost efficiency and integration of known improvements and wanted the City Council to continue the conversations to make them more connected.

Council member Martinez-Rubin suggested the Mayor Pro Tem narrow his interest and suggest a future agenda item in January to discuss his approach.

The City Council moved to Item 7. Reports & Communications.

7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
28 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

A. Mayor Report

1. Announcements
Mayor Salimi reported he had received requests from the Iranian community to do some free tree art decorations and murals and had forwarded the requests to the City Manager. He also reported he had received around 300 comments since the October 18, 2022 City Council meeting thanking the City of Pinole for the Human Rights in Iran proclamation and with the distribution of the press release.

B. Mayoral & Council Appointments: None
C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy thanked the WCCUSD staff, teachers, Parent Teacher Associations (PTAs) and the school communities for the Trunk or Treat events at Pinole schools; thanked the Recreation and Community Services Department staff for the recent evening outdoor movie; Dolan’s Lumber for the recent breakfast to celebrate its accomplishments and customers; and Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed, the Contra Costa Resource Conservation District and several Pinole Valley High School students for hosting the first in-person Pinole Creek Allies Clean-Up.

Council member Toms reported she had attended an online composting workshop with a link of the recording planned to be shared with the City Council; outdoor movie night; and announced the Ellerhorst Elementary School community would be marking Ruby Bridges Walk to School Day on November 14, 2022, which was also the start of UAHW, and encouraged everyone to participate.

Council member Martinez-Rubin reported she had attended the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) Board and West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) meetings, and briefed the City Council on the discussions and presentations provided.

D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
Council member Martinez-Rubin requested a future agenda to recognize the Pinole Valley High School Girls Volleyball Team for winning the Tri-County Athletic League Championship, and the Pinole Valley High School Girls Tennis Team for winning its league title, to be recognized at the City Council meeting on December 6, 2022. Consensus given.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy requested a future agenda item for a presentation from EBMUD.

Consensus given.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy requested another future agenda item for consideration of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) or an agreement with EBMUD where the City of Pinole would have one pipeline to be repaired immediately for all City residents to use for water in the event of a major earthquake or other emergency. Consensus given.

Council member Martinez-Rubin also suggested as part of a presentation from EBMUD that it include the exploration of partnerships in the MOU, and City Manager Murray suggested as part of a presentation from EBMUD it could be asked to identify potential partnerships and have a conversation about that separate from the prior future agenda item request. 29 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Mayor Salimi requested a future agenda item for consideration of murals and tree decoration from the Iranian community.

On the request, City Manager Murray understood that multiple forms of art were being installed in different communities related to the human rights issue in Iran where artists would install art in Pinole free of charge if the City was interested. An agenda item could include a discussion of what could be presented subject to City Council approval. Consensus given.

E. City Manager Report / Department Staff
City Manager Murray updated the City Council on events for UAHW with more information on the City website and social media platforms; and identified the tentative items scheduled for the November 15, 2022 City Council meeting.

F. City Attorney Report: None

PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
The City Council moved on to Item 10A. Mayor Salimi and Council member Tave stepped down from the dais due to potential conflicts of interest and both left the meeting at 11:23 p.m.

ACTION: Motion by Council members Toms/Martinez-Rubin to extend the City Council meeting to 12:00 a.m.

Vote: Passed 3-0-2
Ayes: Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: Salimi, Tave (recused)

10. PUBLIC HEARINGS:

Citizens wishing to speak regarding a Public Hearing item should fill out a speaker card prior to the completion of the presentation, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk. An official who engaged in an ex parté communication that is the subject of a Public Hearing must disclose the communication on the record prior to the start of the Public Hearing.

A. Ordinance Adding Chapter 17.28, Historic Preservation Overlay, to the Municipal Code [Action: Introduce and waive the first reading of an ordinance adding Chapter 17.28, Historic Preservation Overlay, to the Municipal Code per Staff Recommendation (Casher)]
Assistant City Attorney Alex Mog provided a PowerPoint presentation which included the background of the effort to consider a Historic Preservation Overlay (HPO). He highlighted the existing Old Town Design Review regulations and the parameters of the proposed HPO, which would create a Historic Preservation Overlay Zone.
30 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

The overlay was a type of supplemental zoning designation that established extra regulations but would not change the permitted uses. The proposed ordinance would designate properties for inclusion within the HPO Zone by the City Council, the initial HPO Zone was in Old Town Pinole and properties could be added or removed in the future. The Old Town Design Guidelines would be applied through the otherwise applicable design review process and no new permit or entitlement would be required, rather the Design Guidelines would be considered when evaluating a permit or entitlement request from a property in the HPO Zone. The changes to be made as part of the HPO Zone included the elimination of the Zoning Administrator’s authority to determine whether a project would be a cultural resource and elimination of a section that identified potential incentives for historic preservation.

The Historic Preservation Overlay Design Guidelines adopted in 1997 as the Old Town Design Guidelines had not been applied in recent years. Projects in the HPO Zone would be required to comply with the guidelines that contained a mix of mandatory requirements and recommendations. The Design Guidelines would ensure special attention and consideration of the historic character and uniqueness of Old Town rather than strict compliance with specific detailed requirements. A project would not need to satisfy every single element in order to comply with the guidelines overall and the ability to impose subjective guidelines may be limited in some situations.

Assistant City Attorney Mog also highlighted the review hierarchy of the General Plan, Three Corridors Specific Plan, Zoning Code and Design Review Guidelines, and clarified where an inconsistency existed the higher document would control. He added the Municipal Code Update Subcommittee had reviewed the ordinance and proposed specific changes that had been incorporated into the revised Design Guidelines in an effort to ensure consistency with the Three Corridors Specific Plan, but clarified the Design Guidelines may be amended at any time by resolution of the City Council. The Design Guidelines were not before the City Council at this time for adoption but would be presented to the City Council concurrently with the second reading of the proposed ordinance if that occurred.

If the City Council, members of the Committee, or the public had any additional feedback on the Design Guidelines, that could be incorporated prior to the next Council meeting. If adopted, the Ordinance would go into effect 30 days after adoption. The Design Guidelines may be adopted at any point prior to the effective date of the ordinance.

Assistant City Attorney Mog recommended the City Council introduce and waive the first reading of an ordinance adding Chapter 17.28, Historic Preservation Overlay, to the Pinole Municipal Code (PMC) and provide direction regarding related Design Guidelines.

PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Rafael Menis, Pinole, expressed concern with the size of the area that the HPO covered in that the Three Corridors Specific Plan, San Pablo Avenue Sub-Framework Figure 6.1, as shown on

Subarea that was much smaller in size and with all of the area to the north and south of San Pablo Avenue not included in the Subarea. The area to be covered by the HPO was far larger than the Old Town Subarea, and intruded into the Mixed-Use Subarea between Alvarez Avenue and Appian Way, tied into the extension of the types of architecture that fell under the purview of the Design Review Guidelines.
31 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Mr. Menis suggested that spoke to adding in 1960s style architecture that was culturally valuable and worthy of preservation, but which went beyond the original scope of the Old Town Design Guidelines intended to preserve the nature of the downtown area. As such, he suggested the HPO would have to be expanded to include 1960s architecture but at the same time became less coherent as a set of goals when not just covering 1940s and Victorian architecture rather than just the nature of the Old Town Corridor itself. As a result, he found the HPO to be too broad.

Frankie Martinez, Pinole, understood the agenda would include consideration of the HPO and adoption of the Old Town Design Guidelines. He commented that in 2021, a committee at the direction of the City Council and comprised of members of the City Council and the Planning Commission had discussed numerous changes to the documents, now 100 pages in length. Last fall, that committee had asked City staff to finalize the many changes and bring them back to the committee for review. He had contacted City staff to ask why that committee had not been given the opportunity to review the HPO document. The same concerns had been raised with the Chair of the Planning Commission and he expressed concern the committee had not completed its work on a very complex document.

In particular, Mr. Martinez referenced Section 17.28.040, Designation Process subsection A, and Section 17.28.050, Special Guideline for Design Review subsection B, and the fact the language read as if this was now a mandatory process. He hoped that neighbors would be asked whether or not they wanted to opt into the HPO, with many examples that were incorrect in the document.

He added the Planning Commission had also requested the removal of a section related to homes past Tennent Avenue, past the Burlington-Northern Sante Fe (BNSF) Railroad out towards the water on Tennent Avenue, and had requested the removal of Orleans Drive, Calais Drive, Tennent Court, La Salle Drive and others from the HPO; however, the HPO still showed those streets in the document.

Mr. Martinez requested a joint workshop to again review the document with those changes in mind given that more needed to be done and to solicit input from City leadership and neighbors.

He asked that the City Council refer the HPO back to the committee to allow the opportunity to review and complete its work.

David Ruport, Pinole, a resident outside of the proposed HPO, reported he had submitted documents to the City in the past which were of interest in considering the HPO. As he had mentioned in 2021, he had suggested the City consider the City of Pasadena, a community that had considered an overlay very well, to determine whether or not an overlay was feasible for Pinole. He was uncertain that recommendation had been considered. He concurred with the comments raised by Mr. Menis that the HPO was overly inclusive, could cause problems for properties that may not fall under the definition of a historical residence, and agreed with the comments raised by Mr. Martinez that the HPO should be referred back to the committee that had been formed for further input and review of the questions that had been raised and the process being used to create the HPO to ensure it benefitted all citizens of Pinole.

Maria Alegria, Pinole, suggested it was not good practice to make decisions that would guide planning, zoning and guidelines for Old Town at such an hour. Rather, she asked the City Council to heed the advice of the Planning Commission and go slow to ensure this was done right and listen to the members of the community who had been appointed to provide wisdom, particularly as it related to Old Town Pinole and the earlier discussions on pedestrian safety and traffic calming to see how that could be incorporated into the plan. 32 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Ms. Alegria also asked the City Council to refer the matter back to the committee and provide clarification whether incentives would be provided, who would pay for those incentives, and whether the City would create its own historical area and be thoughtful in the process.

PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
Council member Toms responded to the public comments and clarified that the mid-century neighborhoods had been included in the HPO. As a member of the committee, she recalled there had been a suggestion that be removed but there had also been a discussion that neighborhood was one of the first standard neighborhoods in Pinole and the mid-century neighborhood had value, not just the Craftsman and Victorian homes, and that inclusion had been purposeful and did not have to meet the same outline as the Three Corridors Specific Plan. The area of the bowling alley, Sprouts and Kaiser had also been intentionally included in the HPO so that as new uses came in, such as potentially around the bowling alley and changes that could occur over time on some of the other newly developed parcels, those would be included as well.

Council member Toms did not oppose a continuation of the agenda item but based on her notes everything that had been discussed had been included, although it made sense to have a final redline version of the document be reviewed by the committee. She suggested staff had done a good job to ensure the Design Guidelines complied with Senate Bill (SB) 9 and the Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) requirements. She asked whether the item could be continued to a date certain so that re-noticing was not required to allow the committee to review the final product.

Council member Martinez-Rubin understood the committee had the opportunity to review the final document as recently as a week and a half ago, with discussions that were deliberate and thoughtful over a period of two years since discussions had started on this matter. Also, some of the commenters were members of that same committee. She emphasized the time spent already and noted that the last committee meeting had the full attendance of its members, and by the time of the second reading there would be another opportunity for more public comment. She found there had been ample discussion and review of the item.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy was not opposed to continuing the item to the next meeting of the City Council.

City Clerk Bell reported the next City Council agenda included five discussion items and if the item was continued to a date certain it could be re-noticed for the benefit of the public, although if that was done one of the five items on the next meeting agenda may have to be deferred.

Council member Martinez-Rubin offered a motion in support of the staff recommendation. There was no second to the motion and the motion failed.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy offered a motion to extend the City Council meeting to 12:08 a.m. There was no second to the motion and the motion failed.

City Attorney Casher advised that given the motions and lack of a second, there was no action on Item 10A, which would have to be re-noticed for the first reading. 33 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

ACTION: Motion by Council members Toms/Martinez-Rubin to continue an Ordinance Adding Chapter 17.29, Historic Preservation Overlay to the Municipal Code, to the November 15, 2022 City Council meeting.

Vote: Failed 2-1-2
Ayes: Martinez-Rubin, Toms
Noes: Murphy
Abstain: None

Absent: Salimi, Tave (recused)
ACTION: Motion by Council members Toms/Martinez-Rubin to extend the City Council meeting to 12:10 a.m.

Vote: Passed 3-0-2
Ayes: Murphy, Martinez-Rubin, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None

Absent: Salimi, Tave (recused)
Council member Toms offered a motion to refer the ordinance adding Chapter 17.29, Historic Preservation Overlay to the Municipal Code to the committee with a meeting to be scheduled in the next two to three weeks to close the loop on some of the concerns that had been raised.

Council member Martinez-Rubin stated the committee had the opportunity to provide written comments.

Council member Toms recommended the item be continued to a date certain of December 6, 2022 but was informed by the City Clerk that was the date for reorganization but she deferred to the City Manager on agenda planning.

City Manager Murray suggested it was up to the City Council.

Council member Martinez-Rubin wanted the existing members of the committee to be part of the discussion to avoid the need to potentially start over if there were new members.

On the discussion, Council member Toms stated the Planning Commission had previously reviewed the HPO and had been satisfied with the base document.

Assistant City Attorney Mog confirmed that the Planning Commission had reviewed the HPO with minor changes recommended and the City Council had later appointed the committee to review the document further but it had not been sent back to the Planning Commission.

Mayor Pro Tem Murphy commented he had heard from many residents about the HPO and he had identified issues that had not been discussed including an elimination of the incentives, which was something he wanted to see included. Residents had concerns with additional and supplemental permitting and he had concerns with the erasure of indigenous communities, extra red tape, limited support for small businesses in the HPO and the use of staff time. If this matter needed to be moved to the next City Council with a conversation in 2023, he would be happy to do that since he currently did not see a path forward given the concerns. 34 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Council member Toms suggested if the item was continued several of the issues identified could be addressed. She noted in 1997 when the Old Town Design Guidelines had been adopted, the City had a Redevelopment Agency which helped provide financing and assistance for design, which the City no longer had. The HPO had been streamlined to eliminate some of the red tape.

Council member Martinez-Rubin added that even with all of the discussions and comments, one of the main thrusts for the HPO was to maintain the historic character of Pinole, but comments were being made that detracted from that effort. She suggested if people were as interested as they claimed to be they were coming in far too late in this process, which had been under discussion and had involved staff time for the past two years. Also, additional steps had been taken to mail notices to everyone in the area who could be affected by the HPO, with no response.

The comments received were from people who had continually provided input to defer this matter again and again, which was interesting and rather than have something that maintained the character of Pinole they were continually detracting from the ordinance.

Council member Toms restated her motion, seconded by Council member Martinez-Rubin to refer the ordinance adding Chapter 17.29, Historic Preservation Overlay to the Municipal Code to the committee, with a meeting to be scheduled in the next two to three weeks to close the loop on some of the concerns raised and continue the public hearing to a date certain of December 6, 2022.

ACTION: Motion by Council members Toms/Martinez-Rubin to Refer an Ordinance Adding Chapter 17.29, Historic Preservation Overlay to the Municipal Code to the HPO committee and continue the public hearing to a date certain of December 6, 2022.

Vote: Failed 2-1-2
Ayes: Martinez-Rubin, Toms
Noes: Murphy
Abstain: None

Absent: Salimi, Tave (recused)
Mayor Pro Tem Murphy explained that he could not offer a motion since he did not want to support the item moving forward. He opposed the use of more staff time on this matter or another item on the December 6 meeting agenda.

Council member Toms pointed out the City had a set of Design Guidelines that were 25 years old. If not updated, the Design Guidelines would be out of date and non-compliant with ADU and SB 9 requirements. She suggested possibly a future agenda item was needed to bring the item back, otherwise it would die.

Council member Toms offered a motion, seconded by Council member Martinez-Rubin to return the Ordinance Adding Chapter 17.29, Historic Preservation Overlay, to the Municipal Code to the HPO committee.

ACTION: Motion by Council members Toms/Martinez-Rubin to Return an Ordinance Adding Chapter 17.29, Historic Preservation Overlay, to the Municipal Code, to the HPO committee.
35 of 677
Pinole City Council
Minutes – November 1, 2022

Vote: Failed 2-1-2
Ayes: Martinez-Rubin, Toms
Noes: Murphy
Abstain: None

Absent: Salimi, Tave (recused)
Council member Toms stated at a future meeting she would request a future agenda item to discuss the Ordinance Adding Chapter 17.29, Historic Preservation Overlay to the Municipal Code in order to determine the next steps.

11. OLD BUSINESS: None

13. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Continued from Item 6) (Public Comments) Only open to members of the public who did not speak under the first Citizens to be Heard, Agenda Item 6.

Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.

Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.

Deputy City Clerk Stone reported there were no comments from the public.

14. ADJOURNMENT to the Regular City Council Meeting of November 15, 2022 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.

At 12:12 a.m., Mayor Pro Tem Murphy adjourned the meeting to the Regular City Council Meeting of November 15, 2022 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.

Submitted by:
_________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
Approved by City Council:
36 of 677
37 of 677
38 of 677
39 of 677
40 of 677
41 of 677
42 of 677
43 of 677
44 of 677
45 of 677
46 of 677
47 of 677
48 of 677
49 of 677
50 of 677
51 of 677
52 of 677
53 of 677
54 of 677
55 of 677
56 of 677

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
9C
DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2022
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: ERIC CASHER, CITY ATTORNEY
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION CONTINUING AUTHORIZED REMOTE
TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS PURSUANT TO AB 361

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the continued use of remote teleconference meetings pursuant to AB 361.

BACKGROUND
On March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom declared a State of Emergency to make additional resources available and formalize emergency actions across multiple state agencies and departments to help the State prepare for the spread of the novel coronavirus disease (“COVID-19”). The State of Emergency will expire on February 28, 2023.

On March 18, 2020, the City Manager, acting as Director of Emergency Services, proclaimed a local state of emergency due to COVID-19 pursuant to California Government Code Section 8630 and Pinole Municipal Code Chapter 2.32. The local emergency expired on March 31, 2022.

All meetings of the City Council and the City’s other legislative bodies, such as the Planning Commission, are open and public, as required by the Ralph M. Brown Act (Government Code section 54950 et seq., “Brown Act”). Any member of the public may attend, participate, and watch the City’s legislative bodies conduct their business. On March 17, 2020, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain provisions of the Brown Act in order to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or by other means during a declared state of emergency and in order to slow the spread of COVID-19. On September 16, 2021, Governor Newson signed AB 361 into law. AB 361 will sunset on January 1, 2024.

Under AB 361, a public agency may hold a remote meeting if a proclaimed state of emergency is in effect and: (1) state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing; (2) the public agency holds a meeting for the purpose of determining, by majority vote, whether as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees; or (3) the public agency holds a meeting and has previously determined by majority vote that as a result of the emergency, meeting in person would present imminent 57 of 677
City Council Report
November 15, 2022
risks to the health or safety of attendees. A local agency must make a finding by majority vote that one or more of these conditions exist every thirty (30) days to continue using the bill’s exemption to the Brown Act rules.

On October 19, 2021, the City Council adopted a Resolution Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings Pursuant To AB 361 and established virtual meetings for all City Council and City Council appointed Board and Commission meetings. The City has subsequently reevaluated and reaffirmed its finding every thirty (30) days thereafter and determined that the conditions under AB 361 continue to exist, in that either it continues to directly impact the ability of members to meet safely in person, or state or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing. City Council most recently reaffirmed its findings and adopted a Resolution authorizing continued remote meetings on October 18, 2022.

This staff report discusses whether the conditions under AB 361 continue to exist in order continue the use of remote teleconference meetings, including an in-person hybrid meeting format.

DISCUSSION
Since near the start of the COVID-19 pandemic the City has been able to conduct meetings of its legislative bodies remotely pursuant to Executive Order N-29-20, which suspended certain provisions of the Brown Act. The City has established virtual meetings for all City Council and City Council appointed Board and Commission meetings. The virtual meetings have allowed the Council and advisory bodies to continue to conduct City business from remote locations while ensuring the public’s continued access to government meetings in a safe manner.

AB 361 provides for the continued use of remote meetings and exemption to the Brown Act upon a finding that state or local health officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing. Such a finding is consistent with the goal of AB 361 “to improve and enhance public access to local agency meetings…by allowing broader access through teleconferencing options” consistent with Executive Order N29-20.

The conditions that justified the City Council adopting the Resolution Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings Pursuant To AB 361 in its meeting of October 19, 2021 continue to exist. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) continues to recommend measures based upon COVID-19 community levels based on their local context and their unique needs in efforts to slow the spread of COVID-19 and reduce the rate of infection. The CDC looks at three metrics: new COVID-19 admissions per 100,000 population in the past 7 days; the percent of staffed inpatient beds occupied by COVID-19 patients; and total new COVID-19 cases per 100,000 population in the past 7 days, to determine the COVID-19 community level. Social distancing is just one of the recommended practice measures and must be taken into consideration with the risk in a particular setting, including local COVID-19 Community Levels and the important role of ventilation.
58 of 677
City Council Report
November 15, 2022
Effective March 1, 2022, the CDC and California Department of Health requirement for unvaccinated persons to mask in indoor public settings and businesses was replaced by a strong recommendation that all persons, regardless of vaccine status, mask in indoor public settings and businesses including meetings and state and local government offices serving the public. On March 11, 2022, the universal masking requirement for K-12 and Childcare settings terminated. Effective April 20, 2022, in alignment with the CDC's announcement that its order requiring masking on public transportation and at transportation hubs is no longer in effect, California's requirement for masking on public transit and in transportation hubs terminated.

Notwithstanding, the California Department of Health continues to recommend that individuals in these settings continue to wear a mask and is maintaining the masking requirements in specified high-risk settings such as healthcare facilities, long-term care facilities, and homeless and emergency shelters. The California Department of Health continues to find that wearing a face mask in indoor public settings, regardless of vaccination status, remains a critical component for protecting those that are most vulnerable in our communities, including the unvaccinated, the immunocompromised, or those at risk for severe disease and illness.

On September 20, 2021, and again on March 1, 2022, the Health Officer for Contra Costa County issued recommendations for safely holding public meetings. The recommendations were most recently revised on October 4, 2022. At present, the Contra Costa County Health Officer strongly recommends the use of online meetings as an alternative to in-person meetings, offering the public the opportunity to attend via a call-in option or an internet-based service option, to give those at higher risk of and/or higher concern about COVID-19 an alternative to participating in person.

Remote options and social distancing for those present continues to be the recommended format for public meetings as it presents the lowest risk of transmission of COVID-19, which is particularly important in light of the current community prevalence rate.

The proposed resolution re-affirms the necessary findings in order for the City Council, and all of the City’s legislative bodies, to continue remote teleconference meetings pursuant to AB 361. Additionally, the resolution is necessary in order to allow Staff to return to an in-person hybrid format to allow those at higher risk and/or concern about COVID-19 an alternative to participating in person.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no direct fiscal impact from the adoption of the resolution.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution Authorizing Continued Remote Teleconference Meetings Pursuant to AB 361
59 of 677
1 RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE AUTHORIZING CONTINUED REMOTE TELECONFERENCE MEETINGS PURSUANT TO AB 361 WHEREAS, all City of Pinole (“City”) meetings are open and public, as required by the Ralph M. Brown Act (Cal. Gov. Code 54950 – 54963), so that any member of the public may attend, participate, and watch the City’s legislative bodies conduct their business; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, Governor Newsom declared a State of Emergency to make additional resources available, formalize emergency actions already underway across multiple state agencies and departments, and help the State prepare for an anticipated broader spread of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (“COVID-19”); and
WHEREAS, the State of Emergency declared by Governor Newsom remains in effect until February 28, 2023; and
WHEREAS, on March 18, 2020, the City Manager, acting as Director of Emergency Services, proclaimed a local emergency due to COVID-19 pursuant to California Government Code Section 8630 and Pinole Municipal Code Chapter 2.32.

The local emergency expired on March 31, 2022; and
WHEREAS, On March 17, 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-29-20 suspending certain provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act in order to allow local legislative bodies to conduct meetings telephonically or by other means; and
WHEREAS, as a result of Executive Order N-29-20, staff set up virtual meetings for all City Council meetings and meetings of all City legislative bodies, such as the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, Governor Newsom signed AB 361 (2021) which allows for local legislative bodies and advisory bodies to continue to conduct meetings via teleconferencing under specified conditions and includes a requirement that the City Council make specified findings; and
WHEREAS, on September 20, 2021, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N-15-21, delaying the full application of AB 361 (2021) until 11:59 p.m. October 1, 2021; and
WHEREAS, on February 25, 2022, Governor Newsom issued Executive Order N04-22 further extending the sunset of the State of Emergency to an unspecified date and the State of Emergency continues to present; and

ATTACHMENT A
60 of 677
2 WHEREAS, AB 361 provides that it will sunset on January 1, 2024; and WHEREAS, in order for legislative bodies to conduct meetings via teleconferencing pursuant to AB 361 (2021), a proclaimed State of Emergency must exist and either State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social distancing, or, the legislative body determines that meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health and safety of attendees; and WHEREAS, on October 19, 2021, the City Council adopted Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Pinole Authorizing Remote Teleconference Meetings Pursuant To AB 361 upon a finding that the requisite conditions exist for the legislative bodies of the City of Pinole to conduct remote teleconference meetings without compliance with paragraph (3) of subdivision (b) of section 54953; and WHEREAS, AB 361 (2021) allows the City Council to continue to conduct meetings via teleconference upon a finding every thirty (30) days thereafter, that either a declared state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person, or state or local health officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing; and
WHEREAS, since issuing Executive Order N-08-21, the highly contagious Delta and Omicron variants of COVID-19 have emerged, causing an increase in COVID-19 cases throughout the State and Contra Costa County; and WHEREAS, on August 2, 2021, in response to the Delta variant of COVID-19, the Contra Costa County Health Officer issued Health Order No. COVID19-51, for nearly all individuals to wear masks when inside public spaces and such mandate remains in effect in specified high-risk settings, consistent with California Department of Health recommendations including public transit, healthcare settings and congregate living; and
WHEREAS, on September 20, 2021, and reaffirmed on October 4, 2022, the Contra Costa County Health Officer issued recommendations for safely holding public meetings strongly recommending the availability of remote access as an alternative to participating in person at meetings as it presents the lowest risk of transmission of COVID-19 and such recommendation remains in effect; and WHEREAS, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (“CDC”) recommends safety measures based upon COVID-19 community levels based on their local context and their unique needs in efforts to slow the spread of COVID-19 and reduce the rate of infection; and
WHEREAS, in the interest of public health and safety, and in response to the local recommendation for measures to promote social distancing, the City Council deems it necessary to invoke the provisions of AB 361 related to teleconferencing; and 61 of 677
3 WHEREAS, the City Council desires to provide a way for the Council, staff, and members of the public to participate in meetings remotely as an alternative to having to attend meetings in person; and
WHEREAS, the City Council hereby finds that the presence of COVID-19 and the increase of cases due to the Delta and Omicron variants would present imminent risks to the health or safety of certain attendees, including legislative bodies and staff, during in person meetings; and
WHEREAS, the City shall ensure that it’s meetings comply with the provisions required by AB 361 (2021) for holding teleconferenced meetings; and WHEREAS, the City Council has re-affirmed the necessary findings in order for the City Council, and all of the City’s other legislative bodies, to continue to hold remote teleconference meetings pursuant to AB 361, in whole or in part, and on that basis adopted a Resolution Of The City Council Of The City Of Pinole Authorizing Continued Remote Teleconference Meetings Pursuant To AB 361 on November 16, 2021, and every thirty (30) days thereafter; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reconsidered the need to conduct meetings remotely within thirty (30) days of the Resolution and finds the need continues to exist.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City of Pinole hereby declares as follows:

1. The above recitals are true and correct, and incorporated into this Resolution.

2. In compliance with AB 361 (2021), and in order to continue to conduct teleconference meetings, in whole or in part, without complying with the usual teleconference meeting requirements of the Brown Act, the City Council makes the following findings:
a) The City Council has reconsidered the circumstances of the State of Emergency; and
b) 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.

3. The City Council and all of the City’s other legislative bodies may continue to meet remotely in compliance with AB 361 (2021), whether in whole or part, in order to better ensure the health and safety of the public.
62 of 677
4 4. The City Council will revisit the need to conduct meetings remotely within thirty (30) days of the adoption of this resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 15th day of November, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was introduced, passed, and adopted on the 15th day of November, 2022.
____________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
63 of 677

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
9D
DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2022
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: LILLY WHALEN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH RSG FOR

AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSULTATION ASSISTANCE INCLUDING

MONITORING, COMPLIANCE AND REPORTING, AND

APPROPRIATING FUNDING FROM THE HOUSING SUCCESSOR FUND

FOR THIS PURPOSE

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution (Attachment A) that:

1. Authorizes the City Manager to enter into an agreement with RSG, Inc. (RSG), for affordable housing monitoring, compliance, reporting services, preparation of the annual Housing Successor Report, and general affordable housing consultation in an amount not to exceed $433,451 over a five-year term; and

2. Appropriates $433,451 from the Housing Successor Fund for this purpose.

BACKGROUND
The City of Pinole is the Housing Successor to the former Pinole Redevelopment Agency (the “Agency”). When the former Agency dissolved in February 2012, the City inherited its housing assets and functions. California Health and Safety Code ("HSC") Section 34176.1(f) requires the City to prepare an annual report summarizing activities in the prior fiscal year related to the former Agency's housing assets.

On May 16, 2017, the City approved a three-year agreement with RSG to monitor and assure compliance of the City’s affordable housing restrictions for various properties as well as to complete the Annual Housing Fund report as required under SB 341. The agreement was subsequently extended twice, and currently in effect through November 20, 2022. The agreement contains the following services, which are desired in a new contract:

Affordability Compliance Monitoring
This service includes collection and review of controlling documents, agreements, and funding source guidelines (i.e., HOME, CDBG, NSP, Redevelopment Affordable Housing Set-Aside, or Low-Income Housing Tax Credits) to ensure that affordable housing properties are being managed and maintained according to the standards set 64 of 677
City Council Report
November 15, 2022 2
forth by the City and controlling documents. The services provided by RSG under the agreement evaluates the following:
• 7 rental properties with 1 restricted unit at each property; • 3 multifamily apartments having 2-4 restricted units at each property; • 2 multifamily apartments having 16-19 restricted units at each property; and • 4 multifamily apartments having 65+ restricted units at each property.

SB 341 Reporting
Pursuant to redevelopment agency dissolution, SB 341 created a requirement in 2014 that successor housing entities provide an annual report that details compliance with the expenditure limitations specified in SB 341 during each five-year compliance period ("SB 341 Report''). As the successor housing entity to the former Pinole Redevelopment Agency, the City is required to annually provide the SB 341 Report.

The SB 341 Report details compliance with expenditure limitations, provides an inventory of homeownership units, describes property disposition efforts, and provides information regarding the Housing Fund encumbrances reported on the City's Housing Assets Transfer form.

DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
The existing agreement with RSG for the services described in the background section is set to terminate on November 20, 2022. The City’s Procurement Policy, adopted by the City Council, requires a formal competitive selection process for consultant/ professional services valued at greater than $45,000. The City developed a Request for Proposals that included the services described in the background section (see Attachment B).

Furthermore, the scope of work requested included monitoring services for the anticipated 274 additional affordable housing units which will be produced as a part of recently entitled housing projects, including 31 new affordable ownership units. In addition, staff identified a variety of miscellaneous services that are needed to support the Community Development Department, including the following:

Housing Fund Consultation/Policy Development
The draft Housing Element anticipates the development of an Affordable Housing Policy and it would benefit the City to have an on-call resource to assist with prioritizing and allocating limited Housing Fund resources for affordable housing, including issuing Notices of Funding Availability to inform interested parties of the availability of assistance and other matters pertinent to the program.

Affordable Housing Resources and Educational Materials
The draft Housing Element anticipates the development of educational materials related to housing need and it would benefit the City to have a knowledgeable on-call resource to develop public-facing documents and information for the City’s website related to affordable housing in Pinole.
65 of 677
City Council Report
November 15, 2022 3
Affordable Housing Loan Coordination
The City maintains a number of first time homebuyer loans and/or affordable housing covenants which occasionally require coordination between the City’s lender service (Amerinational) and the homeowner (refinancing, HELOCs, etc) and/or the City and the homeowner (in the case of covenants). The City has identified a need for assistance with this coordination (confirming eligibility, payoff amounts, equity shares, etc).

The City solicited proposals for Affordable Housing Consultant services from seven firms on August 30 with a response deadline of September 27. The City received one proposal, from RSG (see Attachment C). The RSG proposal is for a contract on a time-andmaterials basis that would provide the following annual core services over a five year period:
• Compliance monitoring of twenty-one properties
• Housing Successor Annual Report preparation
• Housing Fund consultation/general advisory services (20 hours) • Affordable housing resources and educational materials (15 hours + $2,500 graphic design)
• Resale/refinance transaction assistance (two properties) Additional optional services offered through the RSG proposal includes assistance with release of Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) that solicits proposals to apply City funding to a new affordable housing development in Pinole. This service may be valuable to the City in future years, after development of an Affordable Housing Policy, and for that reason staff recommends including it as an optional service.

Despite only receiving one proposal, staff is recommending that the RSG proposal is strong, the consultant is familiar with Pinole and will be able to continue to provide seamless service and thoroughly meet the City’s needs for this scope of work.

FISCAL IMPACT
The cost proposal from RSG is presented as an annual not-to-exceed amount over five years, from 2022 through to 2027. Core services to be provided on an annual basis amount to approximately $62,690 annually and include annual compliance monitoring (the bulk of the core services, approximately 60% of the annual fee), affordable housing loan coordination (12% of annual fee), annual housing successor report documentation (11% of annual fee), preparation of resources and educational materials related to affordable housing (approximately 8% of annual fee) and housing fund consultant and general advisory services (approximately 9% of annual fee). See Figure 1 for a breakdown of annual core services by task.

In addition, the optional service proposed (release of a NOFA) is budgeted at $88,645.

The total cost for annual services plus optional services over a five-year contract term is 66 of 677
City Council Report
November 15, 2022 4
$402,105. Staff is recommending a 10% contingency on top of the annual core services to account for unanticipated needs, which adds an additional $31,346. The total recommended not-to-exceed contract cost over a five-year period is $433,451. Table 1 below shows the breakdown of costs per year.

Figure 1: Annual Core Affordable Housing Consultant Services by Task Table 1: Breakdown of Five-Year Budget, Affordable Housing Consultant Scope Year Not-To-Exceed
Budget
Annual Core Services:
• Compliance Monitoring
• Housing Successor Annual
Report
• Housing Fund Consultation &
General Advisory Services
• Affordable Housing Resources
& Educational Materials
• Affordable Housing Loan
Coordination
Year 1 (2022-23) $61,210
Year 2 (2023-24) $61,940
Year 3 (2024-25) $62,680
Year 4 (2025-26) $63,430
Year 5 (2026-27) $64,200
Optional As-Needed Service:

Affordable Housing NOFA
1 NOFA, if
requested, during
five-year period
$88,645
10% Contingency (based on core services) $31,346
Total Not-To-Exceed Budget (2022-2027) $433,451
The costs for these services would be appropriated from the Successor Housing Agency Fund. The Successor Housing Agency Fund had a balance in excess of $5.6 million as of September of 2022, which is expected to increase to roughly $6.5 million by the end of Annual
Compliance
Monitoring ,
60%
Annual Housing
Successor Report,
11%
Housing Fund
Consultation and
General Advisory
Services, 9%
Resources and
Educational
Materials, 8%
Affordable Housing Loan
Coordination, 12%
67 of 677
City Council Report
November 15, 2022 5
fiscal year 2022/23. Of this amount $2 million is committed to the SAHA project at 811 San Pablo, leaving an anticipated balance of $4.5 million at the end of the current fiscal year. The scope of services includes development of a policy for use of Successor Housing Funds.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
Exhibit A: Draft Agreement with RSG: Affordable Housing Services 2022-2027 B. RFP for Affordable Housing Consultant, released August 30, 2022 C. RSG Proposal, received September 27, 2022
68 of 677
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE AUTHORIZING THE

CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH RSG, INC (RSG) FOR A TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $433,451 FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING

CONSULTATION ASSISTANCE INCLUDING MONITORING, COMPLIANCE AND

REPORTING AND APPROVE A BUDGET APPROPRIATION FROM THE HOUSING

SUCCCESOR FUND FOR THIS PURPOSE
WHEREAS, with the dissolution of the Redevelopment Agency, the City of Pinole inherited its housing assets and functions as the Housing Successor to the former Pinole Redevelopment Agency; and
WHEREAS, California Health and Safety Code ("HSC") Section 34176.1(f) requires the City to prepare an annual report summarizing activities in the prior fiscal year related to the former Agency's housing assets; and
WHEREAS, since May of 2017 the City of Pinole has received quality services from with RSG, Inc. (“RSG”), for affordable housing compliance monitoring and reporting; and
WHEREAS, the contract with RSG expires on November 20, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City released Request for Proposals (RPF) on August 30, 2022, for affordable housing consulting services, including monitoring, compliance, reporting services, preparation of the annual Housing Successor Report in addition to miscellaneous affordable housing services; and
WHEREAS, on September 27, 2022 Pinole received one proposal from RSG in response to the RFP; and
WHEREAS, staff evaluated the proposal, which is strong and will be able to thoroughly meet the City’s needs for this scope of work; and WHEREAS, the RSG proposal includes options for desired continued support to Community Development staff including monitoring services for 274 additional anticipated affordable housing units, housing fund consultation/policy development, affordable housing resource/material development and affordable housing loan coordination over a five year period; and
WHEREAS, a budget appropriation of $433,451 from the Successor Housing Agency Fund Balance is necessary for the period of November 21, 2022 through June 30, 2027.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the above recitals are true and correct and made part of this resolution.

ATTACHMENT A
69 of 677
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Pinole City Council serving as the Housing Successor for the former Redevelopment Agency of Pinole does hereby authorize the City Manager to execute an agreement, incorporated herein as Exhibit A, with RSG for affordable housing monitoring, compliance, reporting services, preparation of the annual Housing Successor Report, and general affordable housing consultation through June 30, 2027 and authorizes the appropriation of $433,451 from the Successor Housing Agency Fund Balance for these services.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pinole held on the 15th day of November, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

I, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 15th day of November, 2022
____________________________________
Heather Bell, CMC
City Clerk
70 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

CONSULTING SERVICESAGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF PINOLE AND RSG
THIS AGREEMENT for consulting services is made by and between the City of Pinole (“City”) and RSG, Inc. (“Consultant”) (together sometimes referred to as the “Parties”) as of _______, 20 (the “Effective Date”) in Pinole, California.

Section 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to City the services described in the Scope of Work attached as Exhibit A at the time and place and in the manner specified therein. In the event of a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit A, the Agreement shall prevail.

1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall end on June 30, 2027, and Consultant shall complete the work described in Exhibit A by that date, unless the term of the Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended, as provided for in Section 8. The time provided to Consultant to complete the services required by this Agreement shall not affect the City’s right to terminate the Agreement, as provided for in Section 8.

1.2 Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which Consultant is engaged in the geographical area in which Consultant practices its profession. Consultant shall prepare all work products required by this Agreement in a professional manner and shall conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Consultant's profession.

1.3 Assignment of Personnel. Consultant shall assign only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the reassignment of any such persons, Consultant shall, immediately upon receiving notice from City of such desire of City, reassign such person or persons.

1.4 Time. Consultant shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance provided in Section 1.1 above and to satisfy Consultant’s obligations hereunder.

Section 2. COMPENSATION. City hereby agrees to pay Consultant an amount not to exceed

FOUR HUNDRED THIRTY-THREE THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTY ONE DOLLARS ($433,451), for all work set forth in Exhibit A and all reimbursable expenses incurred in performing the work. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement and Consultant’s proposal regarding the amount of compensation, the Agreement shall prevail. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the time and in the manner set forth herein. The payments specified below shall be the only payments from City to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement.

Consultant shall submit all invoices to City in the manner specified herein. Except as specifically authorized by City, Consultant shall not bill City for duplicate services performed by more than one person.

EXHIBIT A
71 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

Consultant and City acknowledge and agree that compensation paid by City to Consultant under this Agreement is based upon Consultant’s estimated costs of providing the services required hereunder, including salaries and benefits of employees and subcontractors of Consultant. Consequently, the parties further agree that compensation hereunder is intended to include the costs of contributions to any pensions and/or annuities to which Consultant and its employees, agents, and subcontractors may be eligible. City therefore has no responsibility for such contributions beyond compensation required under this Agreement.

2.1 Invoices. Consultant shall submit invoices, not more often than once a month during the term of this Agreement, based on the cost for services performed and reimbursable costs incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information:
▪ Serial identifications of progress bills; i.e., Progress Bill No. 1 for the first invoice, etc.;
▪ The beginning and ending dates of the billing period; ▪ A Task Summary containing the original contract amount, the amount of prior billings, the total due this period, the balance available under the Agreement, and the percentage of completion;
▪ At City’s option, for each work item in each task, a copy of the applicable time entries or time sheets shall be submitted showing the name of the person doing the work, the hours spent by each person, a brief description of the work, and each reimbursable expense;
▪ The total number of hours of work performed under the Agreement by Consultant and each employee, agent, and subcontractor of Consultant performing services hereunder, as well as a separate notice when the total number of hours of work by Consultant and any individual employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant reaches or exceeds 800 hours, which shall include an estimate of the time necessary to complete the work described in Exhibit A;
▪ The Consultant’s signature.

2.2 Monthly Payment. City shall make monthly payments, based on invoices received, for services satisfactorily performed, and for authorized reimbursable costs incurred. City shall have 30 days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the requirements above to pay Consultant.

2.3 Final Payment. City shall pay the last 10% of the total sum due pursuant to this Agreement within sixty (60) days after completion of the services and submittal to City of a final invoice, if all services required have been satisfactorily performed.

2.4 Total Payment. City shall pay for the services to be rendered by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. City shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or cost whatsoever incurred by Consultant in rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. City shall make no payment for any extra, further, or additional service pursuant to this Agreement.

In no event shall Consultant submit any invoice for an amount in excess of the maximum amount of compensation provided above either for a task or for the entire Agreement, 72 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

unless the Agreement is modified prior to the submission of such an invoice by a properly executed change order or amendment.

2.5 Hourly Fees. Fees for work performed by Consultant on an hourly basis shall not exceed the amounts shown on the following fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B.

2.6 Reimbursable Expenses. Reimbursable expenses are specified in Exhibit B, and shall not exceed two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500). Expenses not listed in Exhibit B are not chargeable to City. Reimbursable expenses are included in the total amount of compensation provided under this Agreement that shall not be exceeded.

2.7 Payment of Taxes. Consultant is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.

2.8 Payment upon Termination. In the event that the City or Consultant terminates this Agreement pursuant to Section 8, the City shall compensate the Consultant for all outstanding costs and reimbursable expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as of the date of written notice of termination. Consultant shall maintain adequate logs and timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to that date.

2.9 Authorization to Perform Services. The Consultant is not authorized to perform any services or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of authorization from the Contract Administrator.

Section 3. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth herein, Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, provide all facilities and equipment that may be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement. City shall make available to Consultant only the facilities and equipment listed in Exhibit C, and only under the terms and conditions set forth therein.

Section 4. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Before beginning any services under this Agreement, Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall procure the types and amounts of insurance specified herein and maintain that insurance throughout the term of this Agreement. The cost of such insurance shall be included in the Consultant’s bid or proposal. Consultant shall be fully responsible for the acts and omissions of its subcontractors or other agents.

4.1 Workers’ Compensation. Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain Statutory Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance for any and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Consultant in the amount required by applicable law. The requirement to maintain Statutory Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance may be waived by the City upon written verification that Consultant is a sole proprietor and does not have any employees and will not have any employees during the term of this Agreement.

4.2 Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance. 73 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

4.2.1 General requirements. Consultant, Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain commercial general and automobile liability insurance for the term of this Agreement in an amount not less than TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) per occurrence and FOUR MILLION DOLLARS ($4,000,000) aggregate, combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the work contemplated by this Agreement.

4.2.2 Minimum scope of coverage. Commercial general coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form CG 0001 (most recent edition) covering comprehensive General Liability on an “occurrence” basis. Automobile coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (most recent edition) covering any auto (Code 1), or if Consultant has no owned autos, hired (code 8) and nonowned autos (Code 9). No endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage.

4.2.3 Additional requirements. Each of the following shall be included in the insurance coverage or added as a certified endorsement to the policy:
a. The Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance shall cover on an occurrence basis.
b. City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds for liability arising out of work or operations on behalf of the Consultant, including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations; or automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by the Consultant. Coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Consultant’s insurance at least as broad as CG 20 10 11 85, or both CG 20 10 10 01 and CG 20 37 10 01.
c. For any claims related to this Agreement or the work hereunder, the Consultant’s insurance covered shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and non-contributing.
d. The policy shall cover inter-insured suits and include a “separation of Insureds” or “severability” clause which treats each insured separately. e. Consultant agrees to give at least 30 days prior written notice to City before coverage is canceled or modified as to scope or amount.

4.3 Professional Liability Insurance.

4.3.1 General requirements. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain for the period covered by this Agreement professional liability insurance for licensed professionals performing work pursuant to this Agreement in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) per occurrence or claim covering the Consultant’s errors and omissions.
74 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

4.3.2 Claims-made limitations. The following provisions shall apply if the professional liability coverage is written on a claims-made form:
a. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the date of the Agreement.
b. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the Agreement or the work.
c. If coverage is canceled or not renewed and it is not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date that precedes the date of this Agreement, Consultant must provide extended reporting coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of work under this Agreement. d. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the City prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement.

4.4 All Policies Requirements.

4.4.1 Submittal Requirements. Consultant shall submit the following to City prior to beginning services:
a. Certificate of Liability Insurance in the amounts specified in this Agreement; and
b. Additional Insured Endorsement as required for the General Commercial and Automobile Liability Polices.

4.4.2 Acceptability of insurers. All insurance required by this section is to be placed with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII.

4.4.3 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Insurance obtained by the Consultant shall have a self-insured retention or deductible of no more than ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000).

4.4.4 Wasting Policies. No policy required herein shall include a “wasting” policy limit (i.e. limit that is eroded by the cost of defense).

4.4.5 Waiver of Subrogation. Consultant hereby agrees to waive subrogation which any insurer or contractor may require from Consultant by virtue of the payment of any loss. Consultant agrees to obtain any endorsements that may be necessary to effect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

4.4.6 Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each 75 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein, and Consultant shall ensure that City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are covered as additional insured on all coverages.

4.4.7 Excess Insurance. If Consultant maintains higher insurance limits than the minimums specified herein, City shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant.

4.5 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Consultant fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, City may, at its sole option: 1) obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance from any sums due under the Agreement; 2) order Consultant to stop work under this Agreement and withhold any payment that becomes due to Consultant hereunder until Consultant demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof; and/or 3) terminate this Agreement.

Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND C ONSULTANT’S R ESPONSIBILITIES.

5.1 General Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold City, its officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct of Contractor, its officials, officers, employees, agents, subcontractors and subcontractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages, attorneys’ fees and other related costs and expenses. Contractor shall defend, at Contractor's own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers. Contractor shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against City or its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Contractor shall reimburse City and its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and/or volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Contractor's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by City or its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent Contractor's Services are subject to Civil Code Section 2782.8, the above indemnity shall be limited, to the extent required by Civil Code Section 2782.8, to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor. This Section 5.1 shall survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement. 76 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

5.2 PERS Indemnification. In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services under this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of City, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City.

Section 6. STATUS OF CONSULTANT.

6.1 Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. City shall have the right to control Consultant only insofar as the results of Consultant's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement and assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3; however, otherwise City shall not have the right to control the means by which Consultant accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other City, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing services under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any and all claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.

6.2 Consultant No Agent. Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.

Section 7. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.

7.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.

7.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with all laws applicable to the performance of the work hereunder.

7.3 Other Governmental Regulations. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by fiscal assistance from another governmental entity, Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance program.

7.4 Licenses and Permits. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and its employees, agents, and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required to practice their respective professions. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and its 77 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals that are legally required to practice their respective professions. In addition to the foregoing, Consultant and any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement valid Business Licenses from City.

7.5 Pinole Business License. Consultant shall obtain a City of Pinole business license according to the terms of Title 5 of the City of Pinole Municipal Code and deliver to City proof of such business license prior to beginning work under this Agreement. Work under this Agreement cannot begin until the City receives proof that Consultant has obtained a City of Pinole business license.

7.6 Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity. Consultant shall not discriminate, on the basis of a person’s race, religion, color, national origin, age, physical or mental handicap or disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, or sexual orientation, against any employee, applicant for employment, subcontractor, bidder for a subcontract, or participant in, recipient of, or applicant for any services or programs provided by Consultant under this Agreement. Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, policies, rules, and requirements related to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in employment, contracting, and the provision of any services that are the subject of this Agreement, including but not limited to the satisfaction of any positive obligations required of Consultant thereby.

Consultant shall include the provisions of this Subsection in any subcontract approved by the Contract Administrator or this Agreement.

Section 8. TERMINATION ANDMODIFICATION.

8.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written notification to Consultant.

In the event of termination, Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for services performed to the effective date of termination; City, however, may condition payment of such compensation upon Consultant delivering to City any or all documents, photographs, computer software, video and audio tapes, and other materials provided to Consultant or prepared by or for Consultant or the City in connection with this Agreement.

8.2 Extension. City may, in its sole and exclusive discretion, extend the end date of this Agreement beyond that provided for in Subsection 1.1. Any such extension shall be specified in writing by the City. Consultant understands and agrees that if City issues such an extension, City shall have no obligation to provide Consultant with compensation beyond the maximum amount provided for in this Agreement. Similarly, unless authorized by the City, City shall have no obligation to reimburse Consultant for any otherwise reimbursable expenses incurred during the extension period. 78 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

8.3 Amendments. The parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the parties.

8.4 Assignment and Subcontracting. City and Consultant recognize and agree that this Agreement contemplates personal performance by Consultant and is based upon a determination of Consultant’s unique professional competence, experience, and specialized professional knowledge. Moreover, a substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was and is the personal reputation and competence of Consultant. Consultant may not assign this Agreement or any interest therein without the prior written approval of the City. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the performance contemplated and provided for herein, other than to the subcontractors noted in the proposal, without prior written approval of the City.

8.5 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all provisions of this Agreement allocating liability between City and Consultant shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

8.6 Options upon Breach by Consultant. If Consultant materially breaches any of the terms of this Agreement, City’s remedies shall included, but not be limited to, the following:

8.6.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement;

8.6.2 Retain the plans, specifications, drawings, reports, design documents, and any other work product prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement;

8.6.3 Retain a different consultant to complete the work described in Exhibit A not finished by Consultant; or

8.6.4 Charge Consultant the difference between the cost to complete the work described in Exhibit A that is unfinished at the time of breach and the amount that City would have paid Consultant pursuant to Section 2 if Consultant had completed the work.

Section 9. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS.

9.1 Records Created as Part of Consultant’s Performance. All reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda, plans, studies, specifications, records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any other form, that Consultant prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters covered hereunder shall be the property of the City. Consultant hereby agrees to deliver those documents to the City upon termination of the Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the documents and other materials, including but not limited to those described above, prepared pursuant to this Agreement are prepared specifically for the City and are not necessarily suitable for any future or other use. City and Consultant agree that, until final approval by City, all data, plans, specifications, reports and other documents are 79 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written consent of both parties.

9.2 Consultant’s Books and Records. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged to the City under this Agreement for a minimum of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to the Consultant to this Agreement.

9.3 Inspection and Audit of Records. Any records or documents that Section 9.2 of this Agreement requires Consultant to maintain shall be made available for inspection, audit, and/or copying at any time during regular business hours, upon oral or written request of the City. Under California Government Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds expended under this Agreement exceeds TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000.00), the Agreement shall be subject to the examination and audit of the State Auditor, at the request of City or as part of any audit of the City, for a period of three (3) years after final payment under the Agreement.

Section 10 MISCELLANEOUSPROVISIONS.

10.1 Attorneys’ Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for declaratory relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled. The court may set such fees in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose.

10.2 Venue. In the event that either party brings any action against the other under this Agreement, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Contra Costa or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

10.3 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so adjudged shall remain in full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.

10.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this Agreement does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other term of this Agreement.

10.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the parties. 80 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

10.6 Use of Recycled Products. Consultant shall endeavor to prepare and submit all reports, written studies and other printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or less cost than virgin paper.

10.7 Conflict of Interest. Consultant may serve other clients, but none whose activities within the corporate limits of City or whose business, regardless of location, would place Consultant in a “conflict of interest,” as that term is defined in the Political Reform Act, codified at California Government Code Section 81000 et seq.

Consultant shall not employ any City official in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. No officer or employee of City shall have any financial interest in this Agreement that would violate California Government Code Sections 1090 et seq.

Consultant hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12) months, an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City. If Consultant was an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City in the previous twelve months, Consultant warrants that it did not participate in any manner in the forming of this Agreement. Consultant understands that, if this Agreement is made in violation of Government Code §1090 et.seq., the entire Agreement is void and Consultant will not be entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including reimbursement of expenses, and Consultant will be required to reimburse the City for any sums paid to the Consultant. Consultant understands that, in addition to the foregoing, it may be subject to criminal prosecution for a violation of Government Code § 1090 and, if applicable, will be disqualified from holding public office in the State of California.

Consultant will comply with all conflict of interest laws and regulations including, without limitation, City’s Conflict of Interest Code (on file in the City Clerk’s Office). It is incumbent upon the Consultant or Consultant’s firm to notify the City pursuant to section 10.10 Notices of any staff changes relating to this Agreement. a. In accomplishing the scope of services of this Agreement, all officers, employees and/or agents of Consultant(s), unless as indicated in Subsection b., will be performing a very limited and closely supervised function, and, therefore, are unlikely to have a conflict of interest arise. No disclosures are required for any officers, employees, and/or agents of Consultant, except as indicated in Subsection b.

Initialed by City Attorney’s Office
b. In accomplishing the scope of services of this Agreement, Consultant(s) will be performing a specialized or general service for the City, and there is substantial likelihood that the Consultant’s work product will be presented, either written or orally, for the purpose of influencing a governmental decision. As a result, the following 81 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

Consultant(s) shall be subject to the Disclosure Category “1-5” of the City’s Conflict of Interest Code:

10.8 Solicitation. Consultant agrees not to solicit business at any meeting, focus group, or interview related to this Agreement, either orally or through any written materials.

10.9 Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by Community Development Director who shall act as the City’s representative. All correspondence shall be directed to or through Community Development Director or his or her designee.

10.10 Notices. Any written notice to Consultant shall be sent to:

Tara Matthews, Principal
RSG, Inc.
17872 Gillette Ave., Suite 350
Irvine CA 92614
Any written notice to City shall be sent to:

City Manager
2131 Pear Street
Pinole, CA 94564

10.11 Professional Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the City, the first page of a technical report, first page of design specifications, and each page of construction drawings shall be stamped/sealed and signed by the licensed professional responsible for the report/design preparation.

10.12 Integration; Incorporation. This Agreement, including all the exhibits attached hereto, represents the entire and integrated agreement between City and Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral. All exhibits attached hereto are incorporated by reference herein.

10.13 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement. ///
///
///
///
///
82 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

///
///
The Parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.

CITY OF PINOLE CONSULTANT
Andrew Murray, City Manager Tara Matthews, Principal, RSG, Inc.

Consultant’s City of Pinole Business
License #:_ 22-08169
Attest:

Heather Bell, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:

Eric S. Casher, City Attorney
83 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
The Consultant’s scope of services will include the scope of work listed on pages 15-17 of the Consultant’s proposal of September 27, 2022 and any modifications or additions agreed to by the Parties in writing and signed by the parties pursuant to Section 8.3.
84 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

EXHIBIT B

COMPENSATION SCHEDULE AND HOURLY FEES
The fees charged by Consultant for work performed on an hourly basis shall not exceed the hourly rates shown in the fee proposal contained on page 21 of the Consultant’s proposal of September 27, 2022.

Reimbursable expenses include graphic design services utilizing the Consultant’s graphic design consultant, in a total amount not to exceed two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500). 85 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and RSG
[DATE]

EXHIBIT C

CITY-FURNISHEDFACILITIES
City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space, as may be reasonably necessary for Consultant’s use while consulting with City employees and reviewing records and the information in possession of the City. The location, quantity, and time of furnishing those facilities shall be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall City be obligated to furnish any facility that may involve incurring any direct expense, including but not limited to computer, long-distance telephone or other communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities. 86 of 677

REQUEST FOR

PROPOSALS
City of Pinole
Community Development Department
2131 Pear Street
Pinole, CA 94965
Affordable Housing Consultant
Issue Date: August 30, 2022
Response Deadline: 5pm, September 27, 2022

ATTACHMENT B
87 of 677

CITY OF PINOLE RFP FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSULTANT
PAGE 2

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSULTANT

INTRODUCTION
The City of Pinole (“City”) is inviting Proposals from qualified Consultants for a five-year service term to serve as the City’s Affordable Housing Consultant, conducting annual affordable housing compliance monitoring and reporting activities pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 34176.1(f) on behalf of the City, among other tasks.

Pinole is a bayfront community of just over 19,000 residents in Contra Costa County, incorporated on June 25, 1903. The City is divided by Interstate 80 (I-80) in that approximately 60 percent of the residential units are located on the north of I-80 and 40 percent of the housing units are located on the south of I-80.

The City is bordered by Hercules to the North, San Pablo and Richmond to the South, and the unincorporated areas of Tara Hills and El Sobrante to the southeast and southwest of the City. Pinole has a well-defined, historic downtown, and a range of residential neighborhoods transitioning from older single-family and mixed residential districts on a traditional street grid around the downtown, to more typically suburban neighborhoods arranged around cul-de-sacs and curvilinear residential streets. Higher density apartment townhome complexes, interspersed with commercial sites, are generally located along and near major arterials.

The City of Pinole operates on the City Council-City Manager system of local government with five elected council members serving four-year terms with a rotating mayor.

BACKGROUND
The City of Pinole is the Housing Successor Agency to the former Pinole Redevelopment Agency (the “Agency”). When the former Agency dissolved in February 2012, the City inherited its housing assets and functions. California Health and Safety Code Section 33418 requires the City to monitor, on an ongoing basis, housing restricted as affordable to persons of low or moderate income. California Health and Safety Code Section 34176.1(f) requires the City to prepare an annual report summarizing activities in the prior fiscal year related to the former Agency's housing assets.

The City of Pinole has 21 properties with 433 income-restricted affordable rental housing units that have been counted towards fulfilling the agency’s inclusionary housing requirements. The units must be monitored on an annual basis to comply with California Health and Safety Code Section 33418. There are no owneroccupied income restricted units to date that are required to be monitored.

Pinole’s existing affordable housing stock includes:
• 7 rental properties with 1 restricted unit at each property; • 3 multifamily apartments with 2-4 restricted units at each property; • 2 multifamily apartments with 16-19 restricted units at each property; and • 4 multifamily apartments with 65+ restricted units at each property. 88 of 677

CITY OF PINOLE RFP FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSULTANT
PAGE 3
Prior Housing Successor Agency reports are provided on the City’s website1.

Due to a flurry of entitlement applications in calendar year 2021, there is anticipated to be an additional 274 affordable units in various stages of entitlement and development, many coming online for lease and sale in 2024. These anticipated units will become a part of the affordable housing stock that the Affordable Housing Consultant would monitor, and is anticipated to include:
 One rental property with 26 very-low income and seven low-income units  One rental property with seven very low income, 135 low-income and 37 moderate income units  One for sale condominium property with eight low income and 23 moderate-income units  One rental property with two very low income and two low-income units  One rental property with 13 very low-income and 14 low-income units

THIS RFP AND TIMELINE
The purpose of the RFP is to evaluate responses in order to select an Affordable Housing Compliance Consultant (Consultant) to provide services described below. This RFP will result in an agreement not to exceed five years.

The following table is an outline of the anticipated schedule for the proposal review and contract award.

Schedule is subject to change. The selected Consultant must be available to commence work as soon as November 2022 as outlined in the Timeline below.

Milestone Date
RFP Released for Project August 30, 2022
Deadline to submit questions and requests for clarifications September 12, 2022, 5pm Answers to consultant questions and requests for clarifications posted
September 19, 2022
RFP Closing Date September 27, 2022
Proposals Reviewed by City Staff September 28- September 30, 2022
Virtual Interviews with Consultants, if required October 4, 2022 City Council Contract Award (anticipated) October 18, 2022 Work Commences for up to a five year term November, 2022

SCOPE OF SERVICES

1. Compliance Monitoring
a. Request Monitoring Forms: Prepare and distribute letters requesting property managers/owners to submit: Tenant Forms (e.g., Tenant Income Certification, Income Verification Lease Provisions, Crime Free Lease Addendum, if applicable) and Property Manager/Owner Forms (e.g., Landlord Summary Form and Certificate of Continuing Program Compliance)
b. Analyze Data and Prepare Monitoring Reports: Review the completed compliance monitoring materials to analyze compliance with affordable housing agreements and 1 https://www.ci.pinole.ca.us/cms/one.aspx?portalId=10947056&pageId=14627074 89 of 677

CITY OF PINOLE RFP FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSULTANT
PAGE 4
restrictive covenants. Prepare a monitoring summary report for each property that identifies whether the property is in compliance with the terms of the applicable regulatory documents. Detail areas of noncompliance, if any, and make recommendations for correcting any non-compliance issues. Send monitoring reports to the City for review and edit, then to property owners. Property owners will be given an opportunity to address non-compliance issues, if any. Review 100% of the restricted units listed on the management forms. Review of the Tenant Income Certification forms and supporting income documentation may reflect a minimum 20% sampling of the total income-restricted units.
c. Follow-up with Non-Compliant Properties: Correspond with property managers/owners to address issues of non-compliance that can be addressed by providing additional documentation.
d. Clearance Reports and Summary Report: For any properties that had non-compliance issues, prepare Clearance Reports after the property managers/owners respond to corrective action requests. Provide a compliance review summary table to City staff summarizing the compliance status of each property and remaining non-compliance issues, if any. Propose recommendations for resolving non-compliance issues. e. Website Updates. Updating the required website data pursuant to Assembly Bill 987 (effective January 1, 2008) requiring the City to annually update and post on the City’s website a list of income-restricted affordable housing units assisted by the City.

2. Annual Reporting
The City serves as the Housing Successor Agency to the former Pinole Redevelopment Agency (“RDA”). Senate Bill 341 and related legislation implemented annual reporting requirements in 2014 for successor housing agencies. The City must prepare a Housing Successor Annual Report that details compliance with expenditure limitations, provides an inventory of homeownership units, describes property disposition efforts, and other items. The report is submitted to HCD with the City’s Housing Element Annual Progress Report due by April 1 annually.

The City is also required to prepare an independent financial audit of the Successor Housing Agency’s Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (“Housing Fund”), which is due to the City Council by December 31, annually.

Consultant will prepare the Housing Successor Agency Annual Report for the following fiscal years and associated due dates:

Fiscal Year Due to HCD
FY 2021-22 April 1, 2023
FY 2022-23 April 1, 2024
FY 2023-24 April 1, 2025
FY 2024-25 April 1, 2026
FY 2025-26 April 1, 2027
The following information will be included in the Housing Successor Agency Reports. Reports should be written so staff and the public understand the City’s current compliance status and any actions it must take or avoid to remain in compliance with State law. a. The amounts deposited into the Housing Fund
b. A statement of the balance of the Housing Fund
c. A description of Housing Fund expenditures by category 90 of 677

CITY OF PINOLE RFP FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSULTANT
PAGE 5
d. The statutory value of real property and loans receivable e. A description of funds transferred to the Housing Successor f. A description of projects that receive funding through ROPS (Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule), if any
g. The status of efforts to dispose of former RDA properties transferred to the Housing Successor, if any (there is a five-year disposition deadline) h. An update on inclusionary and replacement housing obligations remaining from the former RDA, if any
i. Compliance with expenditures limitations within a 5-year compliance period j. The percentage of senior deed-restricted units assisted in the last 10 years k. The amount of excess surplus
l. An inventory of homeownership units assisted by the former RDA or Housing Successor m. The amounts received from repayment of any City loans to the former RDA through the ROPS

3. Miscellaneous Services
a. Housing Fund Consultation
Serve as an on-call resource to assist the City with prioritizing and allocating limited Housing Fund resources for affordable housing, including issuing Notices of Funding Availability to inform interested parties of the availability of assistance and other matters pertinent to the program.
b. Affordable Housing Resources and Educational Materials Serve as on-call resource to develop public-facing documents and information for the City’s website related to affordable housing in Pinole
c. Affordable Housing Loan Coordination
The City maintains a number of first time homebuyer loans and/or affordable housing covenants which occasionally require coordination between the City’s lender service (Amerinational) and the homeowner (refinancing, HELOCs, etc) and/or the City and the homeowner (in the case of convents). City is interested in Consultant assisting with this coordination (confirming eligibility, payoff amounts, equity shares, etc).

PROPOSAL CONTENTS
All acceptable proposals submitted must include the following:

1. Table of Contents that identifies the page numbers of where to find the various sections included in the proposal.

2. Letter of Interest, expressing the Consultant teams interest in being considered, introduces the team members who would be assigned, including the lead or program manger, and outlines the proposed services.

3. Team Organization and Experience, which describes the relationship between support, analytical, and management staff. Include the specific relevant experience and billing rates for all key staff members. Include recent examples of experience with managing similar programs and projects. For each project, please include a detailed description for the work performed, the project name, location, type (sale/rental), when the work was completed, project team’s adherence to budget and schedule, and references.
91 of 677

CITY OF PINOLE RFP FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSULTANT
PAGE 6

4. A detailed Scope of Work and fee proposal, including an itemization of all services to be provided and their individual costs. This should include estimated staffing, hours, cost on an annual basis for all services. Consultants are invited to provide additional services and deliverables as optional tasks.

5. Comments/questions on the City’s standard professional service agreement (attached). If the Consultant has any questions/concerns related to the standard form, they must be submitted in writing with proposal.

6. Acknowledgement that the Consultant understands that all documents submitted to the City in connection with the proposal are subject to the California Public Records Act and may be disclosed without notice to the Consultant.

SELECTION CRITERIA
The Director of Community Development will evaluate the proposals and determine if your proposal meets the criteria. A selection team may be formed to complete the review in order to assist the Director.

The criteria to be used consist of the following:

1. The Consultant’s past experience and demonstrated success working with cities in similar programs (20%)

2. The quality and experience of the key staff persons who will be assigned to Pinole (20%)

3. Clarity, comprehensiveness and organization of scope of work that demonstrates understanding of relevant laws and regulations, with a focus on best practices and delivery of services to specialized populations (35%)

4. Demonstrated ability to perform quality work, control costs, and meet time schedules (15%)

5. Total cost of the proposal (10%)
All responses to this RFP will be reviewed and evaluated based on the information contained in the respective responses. The City may prepare an analysis of all proposals depending upon the number and quality of responses. Interviews with top Consultants may be scheduled. The City Council will make the final determination in the selection process.

This solicitation for proposals does not commit the City to enter a contract or to pay any costs incurred in the preparation of the proposal.

The City reserves the right to accept or reject any and all proposals, and to negotiate with any and all qualified consultants, or to cancel in part or in its entirety this RFP.

The City reserves the right to accept any proposal received, to reject any or all proposals, in whole or in part, to waive irregularities, formalities, or both, as deemed appropriate, to request clarification of any submittal, and to negotiate with the preferred Consultant to provide the requested services.

The City hereby notifies all consultants that no person will be excluded from participation in, denied any benefits of, or otherwise discriminated against in connection with the award and performance of any contract on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity, or veteran status. 92 of 677

CITY OF PINOLE RFP FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSULTANT
PAGE 7
Once the consultant is selected, the City and the consultant will execute the City’s Professional Services Agreement, which will set forth the scope of work, the estimated time schedule, and the applicable rates and reimbursements.

GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS

1. The City is not liable for any expenses incurred by any proposer prior to issuing the contract.

2. The consultant, once selected, is required to submit monthly billings.

3. The consultant selected for the project must obtain a City business tax certificate and maintain liability and workers compensation insurance coverage in accordance with the City Professional Services Agreement template, attached.

4. All work product generated by the Agreement will be owned by the City.

PUBLIC RECORDS ACT
All proposals submitted in response to this RFP will become the property of the City upon submission and a matter of public record pursuant to applicable law (including the California Public Records Act, Government Code section 6250 and following). The City reserves the right to make copies of all proposals available for inspection and copying by interested members of the public as records of the City and the City will be under no obligation to the consultant to withhold such records. Insofar as a proposals contains information that the consultant regards as proprietary and confidential, it is the responsibility of the consultant (and not the City) to specifically identify which items of information are proprietary and clearly identify in writing which specific pieces of information are proprietary. It will be insufficient for the consultant to merely identify the entire proposal or an entire page or set of pages of proprietary information. Not-to-exceed sums, hourly rates and the like that may be set forth in the proposal will not constitute proprietary information nor will any information readily available to the general public or any other information not regarded as proprietary and confidential under federal or state law.

ADDRESS PROPOSALS AND QUESTIONS TO:

Lilly Whalen
Community Development Director
[email protected]
(510) 724-9832
All proposals must remain firm for a period of ninety (90) days following the last day to accept proposals.

PROPOSALS ARE DUE ON TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 2022 BY 5PM SUBMIT VIA EMAIL ONLY TO:

[email protected]
93 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF PINOLE AND
[NAME OF CONSULTANT]
THIS AGREEMENT for consulting services is made by and between the City of Pinole (“City”) and (“Consultant”) (together sometimes referred to as the “Parties”) as of , 20 (the “Effective Date”) in Pinole, California.

Section 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to City the services described in the Scope of Work attached as Exhibit A at the time and place and in the manner specified therein. In the event of a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit A, the Agreement shall prevail.

1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall end on , and Consultant shall complete the work described in Exhibit A by that date, unless the term of the Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended, as provided for in Section 8. The time provided to Consultant to complete the services required by this Agreement shall not affect the City’s right to terminate the Agreement, as provided for in Section 8.

1.2 Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which Consultant is engaged in the geographical area in which Consultant practices its profession. Consultant shall prepare all work products required by this Agreement in a professional manner and shall conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Consultant's profession.

1.3 Assignment of Personnel. Consultant shall assign only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the reassignment of any such persons, Consultant shall, immediately upon receiving notice from City of such desire of City, reassign such person or persons.

1.4 Time. Consultant shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance provided in Section 1.1 above and to satisfy Consultant’s obligations hereunder.

Section 2. COMPENSATION. City hereby agrees to pay Consultant an amount not to exceed , for all work set forth in Exhibit A and all reimbursable expenses incurred in performing the work. In the event of a conflict between this Agreement and Consultant’s proposal regarding the amount of compensation, the Agreement shall prevail. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the time and in the manner set forth herein. The payments specified below shall be the only payments from City to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement.

Consultant shall submit all invoices to City in the manner specified herein. Except as specifically authorized by City, Consultant shall not bill City for duplicate services performed by more than one person. 94 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

Consultant and City acknowledge and agree that compensation paid by City to Consultant under this Agreement is based upon Consultant’s estimated costs of providing the services required hereunder, including salaries and benefits of employees and subcontractors of Consultant. Consequently, the parties further agree that compensation hereunder is intended to include the costs of contributions to any pensions and/or annuities to which Consultant and its employees, agents, and subcontractors may be eligible. City therefore has no responsibility for such contributions beyond compensation required under this Agreement.

2.1 Invoices. Consultant shall submit invoices, not more often than once a month during the term of this Agreement, based on the cost for services performed and reimbursable costs incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information:
▪ Serial identifications of progress bills; i.e., Progress Bill No. 1 for the first invoice, etc.;
▪ The beginning and ending dates of the billing period; ▪ A Task Summary containing the original contract amount, the amount of prior billings, the total due this period, the balance available under the Agreement, and the percentage of completion;
▪ At City’s option, for each work item in each task, a copy of the applicable time entries or time sheets shall be submitted showing the name of the person doing the work, the hours spent by each person, a brief description of the work, and each reimbursable expense;
▪ The total number of hours of work performed under the Agreement by Consultant and each employee, agent, and subcontractor of Consultant performing services hereunder, as well as a separate notice when the total number of hours of work by Consultant and any individual employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant reaches or exceeds 800 hours, which shall include an estimate of the time necessary to complete the work described in Exhibit A;
▪ The Consultant’s signature.

2.2 Monthly Payment. City shall make monthly payments, based on invoices received, for services satisfactorily performed, and for authorized reimbursable costs incurred. City shall have 30 days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the requirements above to pay Consultant.

2.3 Final Payment. City shall pay the last 10% of the total sum due pursuant to this Agreement within sixty (60) days after completion of the services and submittal to City of a final invoice, if all services required have been satisfactorily performed.

2.4 Total Payment. City shall pay for the services to be rendered by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. City shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or cost whatsoever incurred by Consultant in rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. City shall make no payment for any extra, further, or additional service pursuant to this Agreement. 95 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

In no event shall Consultant submit any invoice for an amount in excess of the maximum amount of compensation provided above either for a task or for the entire Agreement, unless the Agreement is modified prior to the submission of such an invoice by a properly executed change order or amendment.

2.5 Hourly Fees. Fees for work performed by Consultant on an hourly basis shall not exceed the amounts shown on the following fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B.

2.6 Reimbursable Expenses. Reimbursable expenses are specified in Exhibit B, and shall not exceed ($ ). Expenses not listed in Exhibit B are not chargeable to City. Reimbursable expenses are included in the total amount of compensation provided under this Agreement that shall not be exceeded.

2.7 Payment of Taxes. Consultant is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.

2.8 Payment upon Termination. In the event that the City or Consultant terminates this Agreement pursuant to Section 8, the City shall compensate the Consultant for all outstanding costs and reimbursable expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as of the date of written notice of termination. Consultant shall maintain adequate logs and timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to that date.

2.9 Authorization to Perform Services. The Consultant is not authorized to perform any services or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of authorization from the Contract Administrator.

Section 3. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth herein, Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, provide all facilities and equipment that may be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement. City shall make available to Consultant only the facilities and equipment listed in Exhibit C, and only under the terms and conditions set forth therein.

Section 4. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Before beginning any services under this Agreement, Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall procure the types and amounts of insurance specified herein and maintain that insurance throughout the term of this Agreement. The cost of such insurance shall be included in the Consultant’s bid or proposal. Consultant shall be fully responsible for the acts and omissions of its subcontractors or other agents.

4.1 Workers’ Compensation. Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain Statutory Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance for any and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Consultant in the amount required by applicable law. The requirement to maintain Statutory Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance may be waived by the City upon written verification that Consultant is a sole proprietor and does not have any employees and will not have any employees during the term of this Agreement.

4.2 Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance. 96 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

4.2.1 General requirements. Consultant, Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain commercial general and automobile liability insurance for the term of this Agreement in an amount not less than TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) per occurrence and FOUR MILLION DOLLARS ($4,000,000) aggregate, combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the work contemplated by this Agreement.

4.2.2 Minimum scope of coverage. Commercial general coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form CG 0001 (most recent edition) covering comprehensive General Liability on an “occurrence” basis. Automobile coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (most recent edition) covering any auto (Code 1), or if Consultant has no owned autos, hired (code 8) and nonowned autos (Code 9). No endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage.

4.2.3 Additional requirements. Each of the following shall be included in the insurance coverage or added as a certified endorsement to the policy:
a. The Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance shall cover on an occurrence basis.
b. City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds for liability arising out of work or operations on behalf of the Consultant, including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations; or automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by the Consultant. Coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Consultant’s insurance at least as broad as CG 20 10 11 85, or both CG 20 10 10 01 and CG 20 37 10 01.
c. For any claims related to this Agreement or the work hereunder, the Consultant’s insurance covered shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and non-contributing. d. The policy shall cover inter-insured suits and include a “separation of Insureds” or “severability” clause which treats each insured separately. e. Consultant agrees to give at least 30 days prior written notice to City before coverage is canceled or modified as to scope or amount.

4.3 Professional Liability Insurance.

4.3.1 General requirements. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain for the period covered by this Agreement professional liability insurance for licensed professionals performing work pursuant to this Agreement in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) per occurrence or claim covering the Consultant’s errors and omissions.

4.3.2 Claims-made limitations. The following provisions shall apply if the professional liability coverage is written on a claims-made form:
97 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

a. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the date of the Agreement.
b. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the Agreement or the work.
c. If coverage is canceled or not renewed and it is not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date that precedes the date of this Agreement, Consultant must provide extended reporting coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of work under this Agreement. d. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the City prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement.

4.4 All Policies Requirements.

4.4.1 Submittal Requirements. Consultant shall submit the following to City prior to beginning services:
a. Certificate of Liability Insurance in the amounts specified in this Agreement; and
b. Additional Insured Endorsement as required for the General Commercial and Automobile Liability Polices.

4.4.2 Acceptability of insurers. All insurance required by this section is to be placed with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII.

4.4.3 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Insurance obtained by the Consultant shall have a self-insured retention or deductible of no more than ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000).

4.4.4 Wasting Policies. No policy required herein shall include a “wasting” policy limit (i.e. limit that is eroded by the cost of defense).

4.4.5 Waiver of Subrogation. Consultant hereby agrees to waive subrogation which any insurer or contractor may require from Consultant by virtue of the payment of any loss. Consultant agrees to obtain any endorsements that may be necessary to effect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

4.4.6 Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein, and Consultant shall ensure that City, its officers, 98 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are covered as additional insured on all coverages.

4.4.7 Excess Insurance. If Consultant maintains higher insurance limits than the minimums specified herein, City shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant.

4.5 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Consultant fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, City may, at its sole option: 1) obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance from any sums due under the Agreement; 2) order Consultant to stop work under this Agreement and withhold any payment that becomes due to Consultant hereunder until Consultant demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof; and/or 3) terminate this Agreement.

Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND C ONSULTANT’S R ESPONSIBILITIES.

5.1 General Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold City, its officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct of Contractor, its officials, officers, employees, agents, subcontractors and subcontractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages, attorneys’ fees and other related costs and expenses. Contractor shall defend, at Contractor's own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers. Contractor shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against City or its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Contractor shall reimburse City and its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and/or volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided. Contractor's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by City or its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent Contractor's Services are subject to Civil Code Section 2782.8, the above indemnity shall be limited, to the extent required by Civil Code Section 2782.8, to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor. This Section 5.1 shall survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement.

5.2 PERS Indemnification. In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services under this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System 99 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

(PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of City, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City.

Section 6. STATUS OF CONSULTANT.

6.1 Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. City shall have the right to control Consultant only insofar as the results of Consultant's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement and assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3; however, otherwise City shall not have the right to control the means by which Consultant accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other City, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing services under this Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any and all claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.

6.2 Consultant No Agent. Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.

Section 7. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.

7.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.

7.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with all laws applicable to the performance of the work hereunder.

7.3 Other Governmental Regulations. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by fiscal assistance from another governmental entity, Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance program.

7.4 Licenses and Permits. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and its employees, agents, and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required to practice their respective professions. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and its employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals that are legally required to practice their respective professions. In addition to the foregoing, 100 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

Consultant and any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement valid Business Licenses from City.

7.5 Pinole Business License. Consultant shall obtain a City of Pinole business license according to the terms of Title 5 of the City of Pinole Municipal Code and deliver to City proof of such business license prior to beginning work under this Agreement. Work under this Agreement cannot begin until the City receives proof that Consultant has obtained a City of Pinole business license.

7.6 Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity. Consultant shall not discriminate, on the basis of a person’s race, religion, color, national origin, age, physical or mental handicap or disability, medical condition, marital status, sex, or sexual orientation, against any employee, applicant for employment, subcontractor, bidder for a subcontract, or participant in, recipient of, or applicant for any services or programs provided by Consultant under this Agreement. Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, policies, rules, and requirements related to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in employment, contracting, and the provision of any services that are the subject of this Agreement, including but not limited to the satisfaction of any positive obligations required of Consultant thereby.

Consultant shall include the provisions of this Subsection in any subcontract approved by the Contract Administrator or this Agreement.

Section 8. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.

8.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written notification to Consultant.

In the event of termination, Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for services performed to the effective date of termination; City, however, may condition payment of such compensation upon Consultant delivering to City any or all documents, photographs, computer software, video and audio tapes, and other materials provided to Consultant or prepared by or for Consultant or the City in connection with this Agreement.

8.2 Extension. City may, in its sole and exclusive discretion, extend the end date of this Agreement beyond that provided for in Subsection 1.1. Any such extension shall be specified in writing by the City. Consultant understands and agrees that if City issues such an extension, City shall have no obligation to provide Consultant with compensation beyond the maximum amount provided for in this Agreement. Similarly, unless authorized by the City, City shall have no obligation to reimburse Consultant for any otherwise reimbursable expenses incurred during the extension period.

8.3 Amendments. The parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the parties.
101 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

8.4 Assignment and Subcontracting. City and Consultant recognize and agree that this Agreement contemplates personal performance by Consultant and is based upon a determination of Consultant’s unique professional competence, experience, and specialized professional knowledge. Moreover, a substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was and is the personal reputation and competence of Consultant. Consultant may not assign this Agreement or any interest therein without the prior written approval of the City. Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the performance contemplated and provided for herein, other than to the subcontractors noted in the proposal, without prior written approval of the City.

8.5 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all provisions of this Agreement allocating liability between City and Consultant shall survive the termination of this Agreement.

8.6 Options upon Breach by Consultant. If Consultant materially breaches any of the terms of this Agreement, City’s remedies shall included, but not be limited to, the following:

8.6.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement;

8.6.2 Retain the plans, specifications, drawings, reports, design documents, and any other work product prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement;

8.6.3 Retain a different consultant to complete the work described in Exhibit A not finished by Consultant; or

8.6.4 Charge Consultant the difference between the cost to complete the work described in Exhibit A that is unfinished at the time of breach and the amount that City would have paid Consultant pursuant to Section 2 if Consultant had completed the work.

Section 9. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS.

9.1 Rec ords Created as Part of Consultant’s Performan ce. All reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda, plans, studies, specifications, records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any other form, that Consultant prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters covered hereunder shall be the property of the City. Consultant hereby agrees to deliver those documents to the City upon termination of the Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the documents and other materials, including but not limited to those described above, prepared pursuant to this Agreement are prepared specifically for the City and are not necessarily suitable for any future or other use. City and Consultant agree that, until final approval by City, all data, plans, specifications, reports and other documents are confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written consent of both parties.
102 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

9.2 Consultant’s Books and Rec ords. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged to the City under this Agreement for a minimum of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to the Consultant to this Agreement.

9.3 Inspection and Audit of Records. Any records or documents that Section 9.2 of this Agreement requires Consultant to maintain shall be made available for inspection, audit, and/or copying at any time during regular business hours, upon oral or written request of the City. Under California Government Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds expended under this Agreement exceeds TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000.00), the Agreement shall be subject to the examination and audit of the State Auditor, at the request of City or as part of any audit of the City, for a period of three (3) years after final payment under the Agreement.

Section 10 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.

10.1 Attorneys’ Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for declaratory relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled. The court may set such fees in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose.

10.2 Venue. In the event that either party brings any action against the other under this Agreement, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Contra Costa or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

10.3 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any provision of this Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so adjudged shall remain in full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.

10.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this Agreement does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other term of this Agreement.

10.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the parties.

10.6 Use of Recycled Products. Consultant shall endeavor to prepare and submit all reports, written studies and other printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or less cost than virgin paper.
103 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

10.7 Conflict of Interest. Consultant may serve other clients, but none whose activities within the corporate limits of City or whose business, regardless of location, would place Consultant in a “conflict of interest,” as that term is defined in the Political Reform Act, codified at California Government Code Section 81000 et seq.

Consultant shall not employ any City official in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. No officer or employee of City shall have any financial interest in this Agreement that would violate California Government Code Sections 1090 et seq.

Consultant hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12) months, an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City. If Consultant was an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City in the previous twelve months, Consultant warrants that it did not participate in any manner in the forming of this Agreement. Consultant understands that, if this Agreement is made in violation of Government Code §1090 et.seq., the entire Agreement is void and Consultant will not be entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including reimbursement of expenses, and Consultant will be required to reimburse the City for any sums paid to the Consultant. Consultant understands that, in addition to the foregoing, it may be subject to criminal prosecution for a violation of Government Code § 1090 and, if applicable, will be disqualified from holding public office in the State of California.

Consultant will comply with all conflict of interest laws and regulations including, without limitation, City’s Conflict of Interest Code (on file in the City Clerk’s Office). It is incumbent upon the Consultant or Consultant’s firm to notify the City pursuant to section 10.10 Notices of any staff changes relating to this Agreement. a. In accomplishing the scope of services of this Agreement, all officers, employees and/or agents of Consultant(s), unless as indicated in Subsection b., will be performing a very limited and closely supervised function, and, therefore, are unlikely to have a conflict of interest arise. No disclosures are required for any officers, employees, and/or agents of Consultant, except as indicated in Subsection b.

Initialed by City Attorney’s Office
b. In accomplishing the scope of services of this Agreement, Consultant(s) will be performing a specialized or general service for the City, and there is substantial likelihood that the Consultant’s work product will be presented, either written or orally, for the purpose of influencing a governmental decision. As a result, the following Consultant(s) shall be subject to the Disclosure Category “1-5” of the City’s Conflict of Interest Code:
104 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

10.8 Solicitation. Consultant agrees not to solicit business at any meeting, focus group, or interview related to this Agreement, either orally or through any written materials.

10.9 Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by who shall act as the City’s representative. All
correspondence shall be directed to or through or his or her designee.

10.10 Notices. Any written notice to Consultant shall be sent to:

Any written notice to City shall be sent to:

10.11 Professional Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the City, the first page of a technical report, first page of design specifications, and each page of construction drawings shall be stamped/sealed and signed by the licensed professional responsible for the report/design preparation.

10.12 Integration; Incorporation. This Agreement, including all the exhibits attached hereto, represents the entire and integrated agreement between City and Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral. All exhibits attached hereto are incorporated by reference herein.

10.13 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement. ///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
///
105 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

The Parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.

CITY OF PINOLE CONSULTANT
Andrew Murray, City Manager [NAME, TITLE]
Consultant’s City of Pinole Business
License #:_
Attest:

Heather Bell, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:

Eric S. Casher, City Attorney
106 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

EXHIBIT A

SCOPE OF SERVICES
.
107 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

EXHIBIT B

COMPENSATION SCHEDULE AND HOURLY FEES
108 of 677
Consulting Services Agreement between
City of Pinole and
[DATE]

EXHIBIT C

CITY-FURNISHED FACILITIES
City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space, as may be reasonably necessary for Consultant’s use while consulting with City employees and reviewing records and the information in possession of the City. The location, quantity, and time of furnishing those facilities shall be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall City be obligated to furnish any facility that may involve incurring any direct expense, including but not limited to computer, long-distance telephone or other communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities. 109 of 677

PROPOSAL
Affordable Housing Compliance Monitoring and Reporting
RSG, INC.
17872 GILLETTE AVE, STE 350
IRVINE, CA 92614
WWW.WEBRSG.COM
Tara Matthews
(714) 316-2111 / [email protected]

ATTACHMENT C
110 of 677

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TEAM ORGANIZATION AND EXPERIENCE.............................................................................................. 3 Firm Background .........................................................................................................................................................................3 Firm Qualifications...................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Key Personnel .................................................................................................................................................................................7 Relevant Experience and References.............................................................................................................................9 SCOPE OF SERVICES.....................................................................................................................................15 Compliance Monitoring.........................................................................................................................................................15 Annual Reporting.......................................................................................................................................................................17 Miscellaneous Services ...........................................................................................................................................................17 COST PROPOSAL ...........................................................................................................................................21 111 of 677
September 27, 2022 Via Electronic Mail
Lilly Whalen, Community Development Director

CITY OF PINOLE
2131 Pear Street
Pinole, CA 94564

PROPOSAL FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSULTING SERVICES
Dear Ms. Whalen:

RSG, Inc. (“RSG”) is pleased to present this proposal to the City of Pinole (“City”) for an Affordable Housing Consultant in response to a Request for Proposals (“RFP”) dated August 30, 2022.

Proposed services include compliance monitoring, Housing Successor annual reporting, and miscellaneous on-call services such as issuing Notices of Funding Availability (“NOFA”), creating educational materials for the public, and loan coordination related to the sale or refinancing of affordable properties.

It has been RSG’s privilege to provide affordable housing services to Pinole since 2015. Our relationship began with annual compliance monitoring and Housing Successor reports. RSG went beyond simply meeting legal requirements to advise on how the City could maximize its limited resources to increase affordable housing activities. The information gleaned from annual reports led to issuing an RFP/NOFA to develop 811 San Pablo Avenue with 33 units of affordable housing. RSG would be honored to continue our partnership with the City to preserve the integrity of its existing affordable housing stock and to create future development opportunities.

Pinole has an impressive inventory of affordable units, with 433 income-restricted units at 21 properties (existing and under construction) that require annual compliance monitoring.

Annual monitoring ensures that property owners meet affordable income and rent limits set by City agreements and State law. RSG has fostered a positive relationship with property managers/owners over the years, enabling us to provide streamlined services based on our knowledge of the overall process and historic issues.

The City as Housing Successor will have an estimated $4.5 million cash balance by the end of fiscal year 2022-23. RSG will advise on how these funds could be spent to meet the City’s housing goals while complying with strict income and age targeting requirements set by State law. If desired by staff and City Council, RSG can issue a NOFA that solicits proposals to apply City funding to a new affordable housing development in Pinole.

RSG will also continue drafting and submitting Housing Successor Annual Reports, develop educational materials and resources on affordable housing for the public, assist with first-time homeowner and/or multifamily loan refinancing requests, and provide general policy advisory services as needed. Our work is informed by consulting dozens of California public agencies in affordable housing.
112 of 677
Lilly Whalen, Community Development Director

CITY OF PINOLE

Our team for this engagement includes Tara Matthews, Principal; Suzy Kim, Director and Project Manager; Rosa Romero, Associate; Jocelyn Sanchez, Analyst; and Jenny Benitez, Research Assistant. RSG has reviewed the City’s standard professional service agreement and has no comments or concerns. RSG understands that all documents submitted to the City in connection with the proposal are subject to the California Public Records Act and may be disclosed without notice to RSG.

We look forward to a continued relationship with the City and appreciate the opportunity to provide this service to you. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 714.316.2111 or [email protected].

Sincerely,
RSG, Inc.

Tara Matthews
Principal
113 of 677
3 TEAM ORGANIZATION AND EXPERIENCE

FIRM BACKGROUND
RSG is a creatively charged counterpart to California public agencies. We work with the people responsible for creating vibrant places to accomplish their goals. The inspired leaders at RSG create stronger communities capable of achieving bolder futures by bringing four decades of native knowledge to each engagement. As diverse as the agencies we work with, our services span real estate, economic development, fiscal health, and housing initiatives.

RSG is a California-based, Subchapter “S” corporation. Founded in 1979, the firm provides a wide array of community development consulting services to local government organizations and private entities. The firm is managed and owned by principals Jim Simon and Tara Matthews. Jim has been at RSG for 32 years, and Tara has been at RSG for 18 years. We have 26 employees and maintain three offices in California, including our main office in Irvine and two satellite offices in Berkeley and Vista. Our website is www.webrsg.com.

RSG’s federal taxpayer identification number is 95-343-5849 and state taxpayer identification number is 27600915. RSG is also a State certified Small Business Enterprise (SBE - 2006876 DGS).

Mission Statement:

RSG creates solutions to enhance communities' physical, economic, and social future.

Core Values:

Our core values define who we are as people and the standards by which we provide services to our clients.
114 of 677
4 FIRM QUALIFICATIONS
At RSG, we believe housing is a basic human right and the foundation of a stable and successful community. We are passionate about creating opportunities for residents to live in housing they can afford, helping to provide the necessary platform to nurture and protect quality of life for all residents. RSG understands the critical role that housing and in particular, affordable housing, for all income levels plays. Affordable housing is the key to providing residents with the income to support other needs and stimulate economic development in their communities, allowing children a safe place to return to after school and a greater chance of attaining educational success, and allowing individuals a place to call home and recharge after work. Without an adequate supply of affordable housing, communities are deprived of the opportunity to thrive and issues like homelessness, overcrowding, and economic decline can take hold.

We see our role as technicians, advisors, and extensions of staff to local governments and developers, sharing a common vision of producing and maintaining healthy and affordable housing in communities. As practitioners, we know firsthand that there is no one-size-fits-all solution to the State’s housing crisis and are ready to dig in and help our clients find solutions that work best for them. RSG’s housing clients have included cities, counties, housing successor agencies, housing authorities, and developers. We have experience working in coastal communities, major cities, urban areas, Central Valley agricultural communities, islands, and rural areas from Southern to Northern California. We are adept at brainstorming and developing strategies and programs, implementing and overseeing affordable housing programs and developments, performing complex affordable housing underwriting, identifying gap financing resources, and ensuring compliance with State and Federal guidelines.

We are not only consultants in the field, but leaders in the industry as well. As active policy committee members of the San Diego Housing Federation and the Non-Profit Housing Association of Northern California, we give a voice to the challenges our clients and communities face in the State by influencing legislative initiatives. We collaborate with industry leaders, other consulting firms, and community stakeholders throughout the State to share local success stories, build capacity and broader successes in the State, and remove impediments to communities’ ability to reach housing goals. Like you, we hope to solve the housing crisis in the State and live in communities where all populations are adequately served and housed. We know there is a ton of work to do and here at RSG we are ready to roll-up our sleeves up and get to it!
Creating and Achieving Strategic Planning Goals
Affordable housing can uplift and transform a community not only through elevating residents’ quality of life, but also, increasing diversity, improving neighboring property values, and attracting more businesses and jobs. Understanding community needs and the role strategic planning plays is a key step in advancing the development of affordable housing. RSG evaluates community needs by understanding State and Federal housing goals and requirements, evaluating local housing element goals and RHNA requirements, evaluating local market opportunities and constraints, assessing local community demand and demographics, and understanding local politics and staffing resources.

RSG fully understands the nuances involved in developing both short- and long-term affordable housing strategies and market studies. We help our clients identify appropriate 115 of 677
5 development programming alternatives, explore policy implementation, and identify available financial and real property resources to help reach goals. We work closely with our clients to formulate precise, accurate, and project-specific solutions and analyses.

Affordable Housing Underwriting and Gap Financing Resources Developing affordable housing is more of an art than a science and each project comes with its own unique issues to ensure that gap financing is secured. We work behind the scenes to help our clients navigate through the complex task of developing affordable housing. RSG advises on crafting appropriate development programs, including funding assistance strategies that balance the developer and community’s interests. Development programming evaluations are performed to identify financially feasible opportunities and examine alternatives that will result in projects having long-term economic viability while fulfilling the community’s development goals and objectives. Based on our long-standing relationships with the State’s community development field, we can identify and facilitate meetings with the affordable housing community to assist in project financing.

RSG has experience with single-family ownership, multifamily rental apartments, and mixeduse development projects that leverage multiple funding sources, including housing asset funds (LMIHAF), State and federal low-income housing tax credits (LIHTC), and other local funding sources, such as HOME, CDBG, PHC, NSP, HOPE VI, MHP, AHP, and inclusionary housing in-lieu fees, as well as other resources. We guide our clients through the financing process to best leverage local public financial assistance.

Real Estate Development Programming and Transaction Structuring Nothing substitutes for knowledge, creativity, and experience when negotiating agreements for affordable housing transactions. In-depth knowledge of applicable laws and regulations, including requirements under the Government Code and other State and federal real estate regulations, coupled with broad experience in preparing development agreements are essential to bringing a project to life. RSG has assisted clients in programming analyses, assembling sites, relocating residents, soliciting developer proposals, and negotiating and drafting disposition agreements. Our staff is well versed in navigating the landscape of real estate in the sphere of affordable housing and we possess the insight and expertise required to help our clients make informed decisions and execute transactions with certainty.

Rent Stabilization and Tenant Protection Program Design and Implementation As housing affordability continues to slip further away from many Californians, local jurisdictions are looking at ways to help protect their most vulnerable populations and ensure that renters remain housed without steep rental increases and unfair evictions. RSG helps our clients implement, evaluate, and revise ordinances for effective outcomes. We accomplish this through engaging the community, preparing informational materials, processing petitions and rent increase calculations, preparing reports for decision makers, conducting hearings, and evaluating the efficacy of existing ordinances.

We have hands-on experience in the administration of rent stabilization and tenant protection programs for all applicable rental units and mobile home parks. Each jurisdiction has specific nuances within their ordinances and RSG is skilled at navigating these to ensure smooth implementation. A key to successful implementation is ensuring neutrality in the process, building off of our in-depth experience in advising both residents and landlords. 116 of 677
6 Program Administration
Affordable housing helps to support the physical, mental, and social well-being of residents and therefore, residents often look to their communities for local support to secure, maintain, and provide affordable housing. RSG is well versed in developing and facilitating affordable housing programs, having assisted many communities with establishing rehabilitation loan programs and first-time homebuyer programs. We work with our clients to tailor programs to the specific needs of the community and identify financial resources to fund such programs.

We monitor and track available funding sources that could be resources to local communities to ensure that we always keep a pulse on the industry. Our team is proficient in working with lenders to ensure homebuyer eligibility and working collaboratively to execute loan documents. Our services span from program design to program implementation. We work closely with our clients to help formulate programs and processes that best fit the overall housing needs of their communities.

State and Federal Regulatory Compliance
We understand that regulatory compliance and reporting is a critical aspect of a local government’s housing responsibilities. Our redevelopment agency roots have positioned our team well to address regulatory compliance and reporting needs. Understanding this work can be burdensome, time-consuming, and complex for some communities, RSG works closely with our clients to ensure that all annual reporting for Housing Successor Agencies, Housing Authorities, and Cities is completed each year. As the State legislature continues to tighten up on local government housing production and compliance with annual reporting and regulatory compliance, it is imperative that reports accurately reflect community progress towards meeting housing goals.

We have hands-on experience in the administration of public agencies’ affordable housing activities for multi-family rental projects and homebuyer assistance programs. RSG ensures that program and project operations are consistent with an applicable bond or other applicable financing provisions, including oversight of a project’s financial status, tenant income recertifications, and affordability requirements, together with annual compliance monitoring and regulatory reporting. We understand the importance of these reporting tools and assist our clients with getting into and maintaining compliance. We strive to have all of our clients audit-ready and off any State “naughty list”! RSG has been in the affordable housing arena for over 40 years and intimately understands what it takes to see a project come to fruition and maintain affordability. Aside from our indepth experience in multiple facets of affordable housing, we see providing housing services as an opportunity to embrace, inspire, and create the changes so desperately needed and deserved in communities all across the State. To put it simply, we are passionate about affordable housing!
117 of 677
7 KEY PERSONNEL
RSG dedicates a Principal to each project assignment and creates a core group of project managers and analytical staff who work on individual assignments throughout all stages of the contract term. Our staff is focused, committed, and passionate about the work we do. We conduct our engagements around our Core Values and are proud of it. We pride ourselves on our ability to appropriately allocate our time and resources to ensure that a project is completed on time and within budget.

This engagement will be led by Tara Matthews, Principal, and Suzy Kim, Director and Project Manager. Suzy will manage all aspects on this engagement with Tara’s oversight. Rosa Romero, Associate, will manage annual compliance monitoring and assist with Housing Successor annual reporting. Jocelyn Sanchez, Analyst, and Jenny Benitez, Research Assistant, will provide analytical support as needed. Tara, Suzy, and Rosa have worked with Pinole in the same capacity since 2015; Jocelyn and Jenny have assisted with the most recent year of compliance monitoring and annual reporting. Our team is supported by an administrative team of three who assist all RSG staff with marketing, branding, invoicing, scheduling, and other duties invaluable to RSG and our clients.

Tara Matthews, Principal ($275/hr), will serve as Principal-in-Charge for this engagement, providing valuable insight, perspective, and expertise from her nearly 20 years of experience focused primarily on all aspects of affordable housing. She has completed similar assignments for numerous communities throughout the state including, but not limited to, Orange County as well as the cities of Fontana, Lake Forest, El Cajon, Merced, Murrieta, Victorville, and Hemet.

Tara is a San Diego Housing Federation Policy Committee member and has been a speaker at the annual San Diego Housing Federation conference. Tara has overseen affordable housing and real estate services for Pinole since 2015.

Suzy Kim, Director ($275/hr), has been with RSG for over 16 years and will serve as Project Manager. She has a broad range of expertise, spanning from drafting affordable housing policies, implementing loan programs to assist low-income homeowners, underwriting affordable housing financing requests, and negotiating and drafting affordable housing agreements. Suzy has expert knowledge of affordable housing production and expenditure mandates tied to multiple Federal, State, and local funding sources. She has solicited and reviewed proposals to leverage local resources for affordable housing in Merced, Pleasant Hill, Tulare, Thousand Oaks, and San Diego County among others. Suzy has managed affordable housing and real estate services for Pinole since 2015.

Rosa Romero, Associate ($185/hr), is a Certified Specialist in blended compliance regulations.

Rosa is accountable for the administration and monitoring of over 6,000 affordable housing units. She maintains and ensures compliance with Federal, State, and local requirements established by the loan funding source set forth in the regulatory agreements. She oversees the requirements for 150 public-agency assisted multi-family projects for the State of California. Rosa hosts, teaches, and conducts annual compliance monitoring workshops to train and equip property management staff, city staff, and new employees at RSG with guidelines and regulations for various topics in affordable housing. Rosa has managed annual compliance monitoring for Pinole since 2015.

Jocelyn Sanchez, Analyst ($135/hr), has a background in sustainability, urban planning, community outreach, and poverty alleviation. They have experience assisting with the preparation of desk monitoring notices for affordable properties to request income 118 of 677
8 certification materials as well as conducting physical unit inspections, common area inspections, and tenant file audits to ensure that affordable properties remain in compliance with state and federal affordable housing requirements. Jocelyn prepared the most recent Housing Successor Annual Report for Pinole.

Jenny Benitez, Research Assistant ($125/hr), has a passion for affordable housing and has reexperience performing on-site inspections of affordable housing units to ensure safe and healthy living standards for apartments in the cities of Huntington Beach and Westminster.

She also has assisted with relocation projects and conducts file audits, reviews tenant income certifications, and evaluates recertifications to ensure property owners who received financial assistance for ownership units live on the property and are not renting to another party. Jenny currently conducts annual compliance monitoring for Pinole.

Additional RSG staff may be assigned as needed. Resumes of all RSG staff can be found at www.webrsg.com.
119 of 677
9 RELEVANT EXPERIENCE AND REFERENCES
The projects below demonstrate RSG’s recent experience providing services of a similar nature as those requested in the RFP. We encourage you to contact our references or follow up with additional questions.

Affordable Housing Advisory Services – City of Pleasant Hill RSG has provided affordable housing advisory services to the City of Pleasant Hill since 2015, who serves as the housing successor to the former Pleasant Hill Redevelopment Agency.

During this time, our services have included:
● Property Disposition and Development – RSG marketed multiple infill properties for redevelopment. In addition to the real estate services, RSG performed initial underwriting review of the projects and evaluated the availability of local inclusionary and housing successor funds to address gaps in developer financing. ● SB 341 Reporting – RSG prepares the annual Housing Successor Agency expenditure report for the City (as well as several other RSG clients). RSG ensures the reporting includes all items required by Health and Safety Code Section 34176.1, a summary of financial activity and affordable housing efforts, the integration of financial data provided by City staff, and information about affordable housing resources and activity. ● Housing Asset Fund Advisement – RSG advises on the best use of Housing Asset Funds by reviewing ad hoc requests for financial assistance. RSG prepared a Housing Asset Fund Expenditure Plan that provided guidelines on how Housing Asset Funds may be spent based on prior activity, and regularly updates projections on estimated Housing Asset and other funds available to finance affordable housing in the future. RSG has assisted the City with soliciting and reviewing proposals to develop property transferred from the former Agency.
● Residual Receipts Analysis – We have reviewed residual receipts to ensure the City received accurate payments from a property owner assisted by the former Agency. ● Compliance Monitoring – RSG conducts annual housing compliance monitoring at ownership and rental properties that have affordability agreements with the City and former Agency.

Contact: Troy Fujimoto, Interim Planning Manager
(925) 671-5284 / [email protected]
Date of Services: 2015 – Current
Contract Budget: $103,500 (2020-21 to 2022-23)
Housing Program Administrative Services – City of Murrieta Murrieta’s Housing Authority originally retained RSG’s services in 2015 for Housing Program Administrative Services. Since then, we have worked on a variety of engagements including:
● Annual Reporting – RSG prepares the annual Housing Successor Agency expenditure report, Housing Element Annual Progress Report, and the Housing Authority Annual Report for the City (as well as several other RSG clients). As part of this work, RSG identified opportunities to leverage funds and housing properties for affordable housing development in the community. Additionally, our report findings included the necessity for the City to adopt the five-year extension set forth under HSC regulations that provides the Housing Authority an extended deadline to develop land obtained through the transfer of housing assets from the former redevelopment agency for affordable housing or sell it within five years. Utilization of the deadline will allow the 120 of 677
10 City to remain compliant with HSC guidelines while they move forward with development activities.
● Property Disposition Strategy – RSG crafted a strategy for the disposition or development of the Housing Authority’s land assets to meet the extended deadline.

RSG evaluated site and community characteristics, market feasibility, and the City’s goals and resources, among other factors. Based on RSG’s analysis and recommendations, the Housing Authority is proceeding with the sale of two properties and plans to use the proceeds to help develop a third property. The Housing Authority continues to employ RSG to advise on the sale process and to prepare the RFP for property development.
● Property Disposition Development – The Housing Authority currently employs RSG to advise on the sale process and affordable housing developer selection for property development. In this capacity, RSG has assisted with the preparation of offering memorandums outlining the client’s criteria and desired terms for purposes of dissemination to third parties (developers, interested parties, and any other parties) for the properties. The OM sets forth the process for reviewing offers and selecting potential buyers and provides links to information to encourage buyers to consider making offers. RSG has also assisted staff with the preparation of an RFP notifying affordable housing developers of available project funding and properties and selecting a qualified developer.
● Monte Vista Resyndication – RSG was retained to evaluate the Developer’s request for the Housing Authority to take certain actions to aid in the project refinancing and rehabilitation of the Monte Vista I affordable housing project and to identify potential considerations for the Authority based on existing controlling documents. RSG reviewed both regulatory agreements for the property and lease terms and provided a summary of the terms of the lease with asset strategies aimed to further maximize the benefit to the Housing Authority. RSG then prepared a summary memorandum detailing the programming and feasibility analysis, including a recommendation based on our professional experience, that staff could consider in preparing a strategy recommendation to the Housing Authority. Our summary memorandum detailed the pros and cons of the various development alternatives and provided a recommendation that helped the Housing Authority achieve its goals while meeting legal requirements.
● Compliance Monitoring – RSG currently provides compliance monitoring services for both rental and home ownership units. For rental units, we certify that the income eligibility and rent verification comply with funding source legal requirements. For home ownership units, we verify occupancy and primary residency. RSG also provided financial audit services to ensure compliance pursuant to related affordable housing agreements and loan documentation with the audits focusing primarily on the review of financial statements and the creation of a cash flow analysis to determine residual receipt revenue for each project. Additionally, we assist with evaluating project refinancing along with any property resale eligibility restrictions and title clearance issues.

Contact: Jarrett Ramaiya, City Planner
(951) 461-6437 / [email protected]
Date of Services: 2015 – Current
Contract Budget: Approximately $100,000+ annually
121 of 677
11 Affordable Housing Annual Reporting and Advisory Services – City of Tulare RSG has provided the City of Tulare with Affordable Housing Annual Reporting and Advisory Services since 2014 to assist with the following:
● Annual Reporting – RSG helps the City of Tulare evaluate and maintain compliance with affordable housing legal requirements. Tasks include drafting the Housing Element Annual Progress Report (APR) and Housing Successor Annual Report. RSG goes beyond simply meeting legal requirements by using annual reporting as an opportunity to identify the city’s housing needs and utilize housing assets to meet those needs. For example, RSG advised Tulare of options to spend $1.5 million in Lowand Moderate-Income Housing Asset Funds on affordable housing and homelessness prevention, resulting in $500,000 set-aside for homeless prevention activities and $1 million set-aside for a Notice of Funding Availability for affordable housing development.
● No Net Loss Analysis – RSG assisted the City with making a No Net Loss finding required by Senate Bill 166. The finding tracked development on Housing Element sites designated to meet Tulare’s RHNA allocation and determined whether any units were “lost” based on the number of units actually built by income level compared to what was designated in the Housing Element. The finding determined that the City had a surplus unit supported by other Housing Element sites designated to meet RHNA needs.
● Affordable Housing NOFA – The City of Tulare had over $1.5 million in Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Asset Funds. RSG presented various options to expend those funds while meeting community needs. The City decided to set-aside $500,000 for homeless prevention activities and $1 million for affordable housing development.

RSG drafted a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) soliciting developer proposals to apply the City’s $1 million to local affordable housing development, with a preference for permanent supportive housing for the formerly homeless. The NOFA requirements helped the City assess developer qualifications and detail selection criteria. RSG is actively reviewing the responses, assisting the City with developer selection, negotiations, and agreement preparation.
● Legislative Monitoring – RSG provides the City with frequent legislative updates regarding matters that may affect them. It is common that we are asked to research or provide input on how legislative matters may impact the work the City does.

Contact: Traci Myers, Community Development Director
(559) 684-4230 / [email protected]
Date of Services: 2014 – Current
Contract Budget: Approximately $80,000 annually
Affordable Housing Technical Review Services – City of El Cajon (Housing Successor Agency)
RSG has had an on-call affordable housing consulting contract with the City of El Cajon since 2018. Under this contract we have assisted with the following:
● First-Time Homebuyer Program Administration – RSG is involved with the administration of the City of El Cajon’s First-Time Homebuyer Program. In this role, RSG pre-underwrites loans based on the borrower’s income and asset eligibility for the approval of maximum purchase price, including the ratio determination of housing and income. The program guidelines are carefully reviewed based on funding sources for 122 of 677
12 State or federal requirements. The FTHB utilizes a combination of funding with HOME, CALHOME, and LMIHAF for the borrower’s eligibility review. Once the applicant locates a property RSG coordinates with the City to issue tentative loan commitment approval to ensure the borrower can gather the City required documents. RSG also assisted the City with the preparation of loan documents and coordinated the closing of escrow (or transaction) with the mortgage lenders, escrow office and title company. ● Lexington Avenue Resyndication – RSG evaluated a proposal from a developer to acquire the leasehold interest in the Lexington Avenue Senior Apartments to identify potential fiscal and regulatory impacts. As part of the process, RSG examined the project underwriting and proposed purchase price to ensure that it was economically feasible and met legal requirements. As part of this process, RSG evaluated cost estimate reasonableness, determined the financial feasibility and if gap financing was warranted, prepared a modeling pro forma, reviewed tax credit and other funding source market conditions, and prepared a 55-year cash flow projection. We then summarized our findings to note key proposal terms, strengths and weaknesses, and need for gap financing.
● Annual Reporting Compliance – As City Staff prepares these reports, RSG provides advisory services to ensure that Housing Successor funds are spent in compliance with legal requirements. We advise the City on the accurate reporting of financial data provided by staff, including data about the balance, deposits, and expenditures pertaining to the Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Asset Fund, along with information about assets reported on the Housing Assets Transfer form. ● Compliance Monitoring – RSG assisted staff with conducting remote desk monitoring for the City of El Cajon’s affordable housing projects. The services consist of initiating the monitoring with the developer/property manager by making contact and drafting notification. Gathering documents to analyze occupancy status report, rent rolls, and reviewing tenant files. Coordinating with property managers on clarifying data and issuing a summarized final report of the monitoring for each affordable project, including findings and recommendations. RSG also assisted with creating income and rent limit charts according to the funding source of each project.

Contact: Jamie van Ravesteyn, Housing Manager
(619) 441-1786 / [email protected]
Date of Services: 2018 – Current
Contract Budget: Approximately $70,000 annually
Affordable Housing (Procedures, Housing Successor Annual Reporting, and Project Implementation) – Orange County Community Resources
Since 2015, RSG has provided on-call housing consulting services to Orange County Community Resources for a wide variety of housing programs and projects. Our services have included:
● Policies and Procedures Manuals – RSG prepared policy and procedure manuals for the County’s CDBG, HOME CoC, and ESG programs as well as for their Affordable Housing Compliance Monitoring at properties assisted by the County. The manuals were written broadly enough to ensure compliance with federal requirements while giving staff flexibility to change internal procedures without a need to constantly revise their policies and procedures. RSG continues to work with the County to routinely update the manuals in order to ensure compliance.
123 of 677
13 ● SB 341 Reporting – RSG prepares the annual Housing Successor Agency expenditure report for the County (as well as several other RSG clients). As part of this work, RSG is proactive to engage our clients in the identification of issues and opportunities for investment to maximize the use of these resources. In this capacity, we have helped the County identify additional funding that was included in their most recent Permanent Supportive Housing NOFA. We also identify and track the use of the County’s HOME funds to ensure they are leveraging funds and meeting legal requirements.
● HOME Compliance – RSG routinely identifies and tracks the use of the County’s HOME funds to ensure they are leveraging funds and meeting legal requirements. Activities include conducting a Subsidy Layering Review that includes:
○ Reviewing the developer’s development pro forma to determine the reasonableness of estimated development costs, revenue assumptions and proposed financing structure, including, but not limited to, the potential for receiving HOME funds.
o Preparing a memorandum detailing our findings and recommendations regarding the economic feasibility of the proposed development, as well as whether the total requested amount of program funding and other governmental assistance exceeds the amount necessary to make the project feasible due to the unreasonableness of the costs and/or projected rate of return.
● RSG also conducts a Neighborhoods Standard Review that includes:
o Researching and determining if the Project site is of adequate size, exposure, and contour to the proposed development, has adequate utilities, and not in an area of minority concentration.
● Agreement Preparation – The County also requested that RSG serve as a project coordinator on multiple projects wherein we were responsible for the preparation and oversight of controlling documents. We were responsible for working with legal counsel and coordinating with the entire development team to prepare project closing documents.
● Legislative Monitoring – RSG provides the County with frequent legislative updates regarding matters that may affect them. It is common that we are asked to research or provide input on how legislative matters may impact the work the County does. We most recently advised them on Opportunity Zones.
● Emergency Rental Assistance Program Evaluation – RSG drafted a memo detailing the evaluation of funding sources for emergency rental assistance payment programs derived by the federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”) and from the federal Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (“CAA”). Both funding sources aim to provide financial assistance to tenants who, as a result of the financial hardships caused by the coronavirus (“COVID-19”), are struggling to meet their monthly rental obligations. The memo detailed a comparative analysis of the requirements and intent of both emergency rental assistance payment programs. Specifically, RSG evaluated the allocated funding amounts, targeted population, eligibility requirements, application process and weighted in on the advantages and disadvantages for each funding program.
124 of 677
14 ● Compliance Monitoring – RSG partnered with the County of Orange to structure, streamline, and implement procedures for their affordable housing compliance monitoring portfolio. Services included:
o Reviewing and summarizing each project’s controlling agreement. o Detailing affordability restrictions, funding source amounts, and documentation requirements.
o Creating a manageable database that details project information and tracks compliance data, including inspection dates, annual and quarterly compliance reporting, project contact information, and affordability requirements. o Training staff on policies and procedures as it relates to compliance monitoring.

In addition to setting up the compliance structure, RSG assisted with compliance monitoring coordination activities. Services included:
o Scheduling on-site monitoring visits.
o Conducting file audit reviews.
o Analyzing income-restricted reporting data.
o Reviewing certificates of compliance to confirm correct set-asides for all income level limits.
o Collecting management plans.
● Residual Receipt Analysis – RSG provided financial audit services to ensure compliance pursuant to related affordable housing agreements and loan documentation. The audits focused primarily on the review of financial statements and the creation of a cash flow analysis to determine residual receipt revenue for each project. Any variances between the property owner’s calculation and RSG’s was discussed between all relevant parties.

Finally, RSG was tasked with training staff to take on all monitoring activities and ensure they were properly qualified in the field of compliance review and residual receipts, all while formulating knowledge of policy and procedures with a monitoring manual, previously authored by RSG.

Contact: Julia Bidwell, Director of Housing & Community Development & Homeless Prevention
(714) 480-2991 / [email protected]
Date of Services: 2015 – Current
Contract Budget: Approximately $50,000 annually
125 of 677
15 SCOPE OF SERVICES
The following details our proposed scope of services.

COMPLIANCE MONITORING
RSG will monitor compliance at the City’s 21 affordable properties with 433 income-restricted units annually for five years, from fiscal years 2022-23 to 2026-27. Annual monitoring ensures that property owners comply with affordable income and rent limits set by City agreements and State law. RSG has fostered a positive relationship with property managers/owners over the years, enabling us to provide streamlined services based on our knowledge of the overall process and historic issues.

Compliance Monitoring of Rental Properties

1. Agreement Review and Set-Up: RSG currently monitors 12 rental properties and 2 ownership properties with 396 affordable units. The RFP has identified a need to monitor 21 properties with 433 affordable units. RSG will review all relevant affordable housing agreements, set up monitoring forms, and contact property owners/managers to initiate annual compliance monitoring at each property upon occupancy and on an annual basis.

2. Monitoring Schedule and Matrix: RSG regularly maintains and updates a monitoring matrix of all affordable housing properties in Pinole to keep staff updated on each property’s compliance status and milestones to date.

3. Monitoring Notification and Forms: RSG prepares and distributes notices to property managers/owners to request tenant- and owner-prepared monitoring forms. The notice gives directions on how to complete the forms and submit them to RSG. RSG sets-up OneDrive links for each project to securely upload requested data. • Tenant Forms (signed by tenant and submitted to property management):
o Tenant Income Certification with supporting income and asset documentation
o Income Verification Lease Provisions
o Crime Free Lease Addendum (East Bluff Apartments only) • Property Manager/Owner Forms (signed by property manager/owner):
o Landlord Summary Form
o Certificate of Continuing Program Compliance
o Rent Roll

4. Income and Rent Limit Chart: RSG drafts and distributes an annual income and rent limit chart to each affordable property. The chart is prepared upon the publication of annual income and rent limits by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) or U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”). Limits are customized based on each property’s controlling documents.

5. Analyze Data: RSG reviews completed compliance monitoring materials to analyze compliance with affordable housing agreements and restrictive covenants. RSG identifies whether the property is in compliance with the terms of controlling documents. RSG considers tenant incomes, maximum affordable rent, recertification 126 of 677
16 timing, set-aside requirements and occupancy standards. If RSG finds noncompliance issues, property owners are given an opportunity to address them.

6. Audit Tenant Files: RSG audits a 10-20% sample of total income-restricted units by reviewing Tenant Income Certifications, mandatory lease addendums, and tenant income and asset documentation. RSG ensures the annual tenant income certifications accurately report the supported income, rent amount, utility allowance, subsidy assistance (if applicable), list of household members, tenant signatures (age 18 and over), manager signature with effective dates, and project information. Other compliance documentation may include tenant certifications of the rent charged.

7. Draft Findings and Address Non-Compliance: RSG corresponds with property managers/owners to address issues of non-compliance that can be remedied by providing additional documentation. The Cost Proposal budgets for up to 10 hours of correspondence and review. More complicated matters, particularly those requiring changes in rents or tenancies, will be addressed jointly with City staff and for an additional fee with the City’s authorization (see “Non-Compliance Negotiations”).

8. Final Report: For any properties that had non-compliance issues, RSG prepares clearance reports after property managers/owners comply with corrective action requests. RSG provides a compliance review summary report to City staff summarizing the compliance status of each property. The report also makes recommendations for correcting any non-compliance issues or findings that are outstanding.

9. Non-Compliance Negotiations: RSG can negotiate with owners, if needed, to resolve complex project compliance issues that require more time than outlined under Item 7.

The Cost Proposal budgets for up to 10 additional hours of negotiation and related work.

RSG will seek authorization from City staff if any time is required in excess of the contract budget.

Compliance Monitoring of Homeownership Units
RSG currently monitors two homeownership units to ensure owners are occupying their affordable properties as their primary place of residence and not renting to third parties. The RFP has identified 31 new ownership units that will be affordable to low and moderate income households. The monitoring process for homeownership units is below:

1. Notification letter: This notification outlines the annual monitoring process, including a request for proof of income and unit occupancy.

2. Recertification of Occupancy Form: The homeowner is required to sign/date this document to certify that they occupy the property as their primary place or residence.

The homeowner is also required to provide a utility statement or similar verification of residency.

3. Confirmation/ Close-Out Letter: After receiving the completed recertification form and supporting documentation, RSG sends a confirmation/ close out letter to the homeowner to conclude monitoring.
127 of 677
17 ANNUAL REPORTING
Housing Successor Agency Annual Report
The City serves as the Housing Successor Agency to the former Pinole Redevelopment Agency (“RDA”). Senate Bill 341 (2014) and related legislation imposed reporting and compliance requirements for housing successors. The City must prepare a Housing Successor Annual Report that details compliance with expenditure limitations, provides an inventory of homeownership units, describes property disposition efforts, and other items. The report is submitted to HCD with the City’s Housing Element Annual Progress Report due by April 1 annually.

The City is also required to prepare an independent financial audit of the Successor Housing Agency’s Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (“Housing Fund”), which is due to the City Council by December 31 annually. The audit may be completed as a component of the City’s Annual Audited Financial Statements.

RSG will prepare the Housing Successor Agency Annual Report for fiscal years 2021-22 through 2025-26 (due April 1, 2023 through 2027) with the following information:
a. The amounts deposited into the Housing Fund
b. A statement of the balance of the Housing Fund
c. A description of Housing Fund expenditures by category d. The statutory value of real property and loans receivable e. A description of funds transferred to the Housing Successor f. A description of projects that receive funding through ROPS, if any g. The status of efforts to dispose of former RDA properties transferred to the Housing Successor, if any (there is a five-year disposition deadline) h. An update on inclusionary and replacement housing obligations remaining from the former RDA, if any
i. Compliance with expenditures limitations within a 5-year compliance period j. The percentage of senior deed-restricted units assisted in the last 10 years k. The amount of excess surplus
l. An inventory of homeownership units assisted by the former RDA or Housing Successor m. The amounts received from repayment of any City loans to the former RDA through the ROPS
The reports are written so the City understands its current compliance status and any actions it must take or avoid to remain in compliance with State law.

MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES
Housing Fund Consultation and NOFA
RSG will advise and support staff as needed on affordable housing-related questions or issues as they arise. Affordable housing efforts are intricately linked to other fields such as real estate, finance, and economic development. We pride ourselves on being a trusted adviser to clients and are available to answer questions on a wide range of topics based on our broad experience. 128 of 677
18 The City as Housing Successor will have an estimated $4.5 million cash balance by the end of fiscal year 2022-23. RSG will advise on how these funds could be spent to meet the City’s housing goals while complying with strict income and age targeting requirements set by State law.

Optional: NOFA
If desired by staff and City Council, RSG can issue a NOFA that solicits proposals to apply City funding to a new affordable housing development in Pinole. RSG will draft a NOFA that will help the City assess developer qualifications and detail selection criteria. Selection criteria may include, but is not limited to:
• Expertise and experience of the development entity and team in designing and constructing high quality affordable housing projects;
• Vision and design for a market-feasible affordable housing project that implements the City’s vision for the community and promotes the community character of Pinole; • Economic viability and financial strength of the proposed project, including marketability and feasibility;
• Experience and ability to creatively negotiate an affordable housing agreement, or other appropriate development agreement, that provides the greatest return on investment to the City; and
• Financial and organizational capacity of the team to successfully complete the project, including the ability to secure financing and leverage other funding sources to build the highest quality housing project.

RSG will work with staff and legal counsel to further define selection criteria that meets the community’s goals. Once the NOFA is finalized, RSG will also assist the City with conducting an informational conference call wherein interested developers can get an overview of the topic and ask questions prior to submitting a response. It is anticipated that this task will include 3 in-person or virtual meetings: 1) staff kick-off meeting to discuss the desired criteria, 2) meeting to review NOFA with staff, and 3) Council presentation and approval of NOFA. RSG can prepare any necessary staff reports or resolutions related to this task.

Developer Selection
RSG can assist the City in evaluating NOFA responses (the budget estimate assumes review of 4 developer submittals and may vary depending on the depth of review required from the NOFA criteria). RSG will prepare for the City’s approval a preliminary Checklist, which will guide the review process and ensure that “like comparisons” are made in terms of each proposal’s completeness and compliance with the submission requirements.

It is estimated that about 4 developer proposals may be submitted to the City. RSG will review and analyze pertinent data and materials provided in each developer submittal to evaluate the completeness of the proposal in accordance with the criteria and requirements identified in the NOFA. The proposal screening will be undertaken using the Checklist approved by the City to ensure consistency in the review process. RSG’s detailed evaluations will emphasize the analysis of the development costs for the improvements based on current third-party cost data obtained from Marshall & Swift Valuation Services, our recent comparable project experience, as well as the related “indirect” construction costs identified by each developer proposal. RSG would also expect to scrutinize the developer’s assumptions to ensure that the anticipated costs, revenues, and operating and replacement reserves are realistic and not 129 of 677
19 over/understated. This would include a detailed look at developer fees and deferred fees. RSG will also prepare a long-term cash flow to ensure that the prospective developer can remain solvent as an operator throughout the duration of the affordability period.

Based on RSG’s detailed evaluation of the proposals, we will recommend finalists to the City and prepare interview questions to be used for the selected developers. RSG will participate in interviews along with Staff to select a developer that best meets the needs of the community.

RSG will also work with staff and legal counsel to prepare and present developer submittals to the Council. It is anticipated that this task will include 2 in-person or virtual meetings: 1) developer interviews and 2) Council developer selection meeting.

Developer Negotiations and Agreement Preparation
It is RSGs understanding that legal counsel will be primarily responsible for the preparation of any ENAs, DDAs, or Affordable Housing Agreements (AHA). RSG will assist in negotiating financial deal points to be included in any agreement between the selected developer and the City. To ensure consistency between agreed upon deal points and documents, RSG will review and provide comments on any agreements. We will also assist the City in reviewing or evaluating any alternate or subsequent developer pro forma revisions (up to 2 revisions).

RSG is available to participate in any developer negotiation meetings related to the preparation of loan agreements and legal documents. Based on our experience, the number of required in-person meetings can vary significantly based on the complexity of the proposed deal and the relationship between the developer and the City. For the purpose of the cost estimate, it is anticipated that 2 meetings will be needed. RSG will also attend the Council meeting approving the project and any related agreements to answer questions related to the project pro forma. It is anticipated that this task will include 3 in-person or virtual meetings: 1) developer negotiation meetings and 2) Council agreement and project approval meeting.

Affordable Housing Resources and Educational Materials
RSG would collaborate with our graphic designer to prepare public information materials on affordable housing in Pinole that align with the City’s branding on an as needed basis. These materials can include content creation and graphics for the City’s website, flyers, and mailers.

If the City would like, RSG could also prepare additional materials, such as handouts regarding Frequently Asked Questions (“FAQ”) and general information on affordable housing. RSG would request feedback from City staff on all drafts and update the materials accordingly.

These services will be performed on a time and materials basis. The Cost Proposal provides and estimated budget, including a reimbursable budget for graphic designer services.

Affordable Housing Loan Coordination
Resale Coordination
RSG can assist the City with all resale transactions that include the tasks below:
• Income Eligibility: Ensure all new applicant/borrower is income eligible pursuant to the agreement for the specific property being purchased.
• Affordable Housing Cost Calculation: Provide a detailed resale price and monthly affordable housing cost calculation to the City and other interested parties. • Forms: Coordinate all City forms and documents with the new purchaser, lender, escrow or title company.
130 of 677
20 • Loan Documents & Closing: Prepare any corresponding City loan documents and coordinate closing as needed.

Refinance Review
RSG can assist with the review of the terms of proposed loan refinancing to confirm compliance with the City’s second trust deed agreements and assist as follows:
• Forms: Draft, complete, and submit corresponding forms to the City and lender as applicable.
• Documentation Preparation: Will be completed for the refinance transaction and as requested by the lender, this may include:
o Pay-off Demand
o Equity Shares
o Subordination Agreement
• Closeout: RSG will coordinate all tasks on behalf of the City and ensure all requested documents from escrow, title and the lender are addressed at the time of closing for the refinance.

These services will be performed on a time and materials basis. The Cost Proposal provides an estimated budget per resale / refinance transaction per unit. 131 of 677
21 COST PROPOSAL
RSG proposes to provide the tasks described in the Scope of Services on a time-and-materials basis with an annual not-to-exceed amount as summarized below. A detailed estimate per task is provided on the last page. Our fee is based upon an estimate of the number of annual hours needed for each task. RSG will notify the City and request a fee adjustment if the Scope of Services is substantially changed in the future .

Year Budget Annual Scope
Year 1 (2022-23) $61,210 • Compliance Monitoring of 21 Properties • Housing Successor Annual Report
• Housing Fund Consultation/General Advisory
Services (20 hours)
• Affordable Housing Resources and Educational
Materials (15 hours + $2,500 graphic design)
• 1 Resale Transaction
• 1 Refinance Transaction
Year 2 (2023-24) $61,940
Year 3 (2024-25) $62,680
Year 4 (2025-26) $63,430
Year 5 (2026-27) $64,200
Five Year Total $313,460
Optional $88,645 • Affordable Housing NOFA (1 NOFA + Evaluation of 4 Developer Proposals)
*Affordable housing services may be paid from the Housing Successor Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund.

Services would be provided per the terms and conditions of a consulting services agreement by and between the City and RSG. The Scope of Services will be billed on a time-and-materials basis at the following hourly rates:

Hourly Billing Rates
Principal / Director $ 275
Senior Associate $ 200
Associate $ 185
Senior Analyst $ 150
Analyst $ 135
Research Assistant $ 125
Technician $ 80
Clerical $ 60
Reimbursable Expenses Cost plus 10%
RSG does not charge clients for travel or mileage (except direct costs related to field work/surveys), parking, standard telephone/fax expenses, general postage or incidental copies.

However, we do charge for messenger services, overnight shipping/express mail costs, and teleconferencing services. We also charge for copies of reports, documents, notices, and 132 of 677
22 support material in excess of five (5) copies. These costs are charged back at the actual expense plus a 10% surcharge.

RSG issues monthly invoices payable upon receipt, unless otherwise agreed upon in advance.

Invoices identify tasks completed to date, hours expended and the hourly rate. 133 of 677
23 Five-Year Affordable Housing Consulting Services (2022-23 to 2026-27) City of Pinole Principal/ Associate Analyst Research Reimb. Total Director Assistant
$ 275 $ 185 $ 135 $ 125
Compliance Monitoring (Estimate for 21 Properties)
Rental Properties
Task 1. Agreement Review and Set-Up (5 new projects) 5 7 $ 1,800 Task 2. Monitoring Schedule and Matrix 2 3 $ 745
Task 3. Monitoring Notification and Forms 2 25 $ 3,495
Task 4. Income and Rent Limit Chart 2 5 $ 995
Task 5. Analyze Data 5 45 $ 6,550
Task 6. Audit Tenant Files 5 50 $ 7,175
Task 7. Draft Findings and Address Non-Compliance 2 45 $ 5,995 Task 8. Final Report 8 40 $ 6,480
Task 9. Non-Compliance Negotiations (up to 10 hr) 7 3 $ 1,670 Homeownership Units 2 8 $ 1,370
Compliance Monitoring - Year 1 (2022-23) - 40 - 231 $ 36,275 Compliance Monitoring - Year 2 (2023-24) $ 37,001
Compliance Monitoring - Year 3 (2024-25) $ 37,741
Compliance Monitoring - Year 4 (2025-26) $ 38,495
Compliance Monitoring - Year 5 (2026-27) $ 39,265
Compliance Monitoring - Five Year Subtotal (2% increase per year) $ 188,777 Housing Successor Annual Report
Annual Budget 3 10 30 $ 6,725
Housing Fund Consultation and General Advisory Services Annual Budget 20 $ 5,500
Affordable Housing Resources and Educational Materials
Annual Budget 5 10 $ 2,500 $ 5,125
Affordable Housing Loan Coordination (Per Transaction Estimate) Resale Transaction per Unit 25 $ 4,625
Refinance Transaction per Unit 16 $ 2,960
YEAR 1 (2022-23) TOTAL $ 61,210
YEAR 2 (2023-24) TOTAL $ 61,936
YEAR 3 (2024-25) TOTAL $ 62,676
YEAR 4 (2025-26) TOTAL $ 63,430
YEAR 5 (2026-27) TOTAL $ 64,200
FIVE YEAR TOTAL $ 313,452
*Cost Proposal includes 1 Resale Transaction and 1 Refinance Transaction Per Year Optional: NOFA (1 NOFA, 4 Developer Proposals)
Task 1. NOFA
Draft NOFA 5 20 5 $ 4,700
Informational Call 4 - 2 $ 1,370
NOFA Checklist 3 2 4 $ 1,735
Meetings and Preparation (3 meetings) 24 8 $ 7,680
Task 2. Developer Selection
Developer Submittal Review (4) 30 90 60 $ 33,000
Recommendation 20 10 - $ 7,350
Meetings and Preparation (2 meetings) 16 8 4 $ 6,420
Task 3. Negotiations and Agreements
Deal Points/Negotiation 20 20 - $ 9,200
Agreement Review 10 30 - $ 8,300
Meetings and Preparation (3 meetings) 24 8 6 $ 8,890
OPTIONAL: NOFA TOTAL 156 168 104 $ 88,645
TOTAL WITH OPTIONAL SERVICES $ 402,097
*Affordable Housing Services may be paid from the Housing Successor Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund Final Cost Proposal rounds up to the nearest $5 per year 134 of 677

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT
9E
DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2022
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: SANJAY MISHRA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENTS TO

EXTEND EXISTING ON-CALL SERVICE CONTRACTS FOR

ENGINEERING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES AND EXECUTE

NEW ON-CALL SERVICE CONTRACTS RELATED TO

WASTEWATER AND STORMWATER

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution to authorize the City Manager to execute amendments to extend certain existing on-call service contracts and execute new on-call service contracts related to wastewater and stormwater.

BACKGROUND
The City of Pinole uses on-call consultants for assistance with various aspects of capital project delivery. The City had an active list of on-call consultants for wastewater and stormwater related services, engineering services, and environmental services, most of which will expire on November 20, 2022. The City would like to extend on-call contracts for engineering and environmental services and create an updated list of oncall consultants for wastewater and stormwater services. The City issues task orders for consultants with on-call contracts for specific projects as a need arises.

On October 7, 2022, the City released a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for On-Call Consultant Services regarding National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) related tasks. These include the following:
• Assisting City staff in performing condition assessment of the City’s wastewater collection system using City equipment;
• Performing onsite engineering assessments and spot repair methods; • Supporting geographic information system (GIS) integration with various industry leading software systems for wastewater and stormwater infrastructure; and
• Conducting inspection, engineering design, construction management, and project management with specific focus on wastewater and stormwater infrastructure.
135 of 677
City Council Report
November 15, 2022 2
The RFQ was posted to the City’s website, emailed to local plan counters, and posted to Public Purchase.

REVIEW & ANALYSIS
The City received eight Statements of Qualifications (SOQs), which were reviewed by City staff. Based on the review of the SOQs, all of the interested consultants have the ability to provide quality services to the City. The City would like to engage all eight consultants to maximize the City’s access to qualified firms, increase the redundancy across the providers, and vary the size and locale of the service providers. This approach will afford the greatest flexibility and access to resources, which will hopefully increase productivity and response rates.

Staff recommends that the City grant four-year on-call contracts to the eight consultants listed below who responded to the RFQ and determined to be qualified. • GHD,
• LEE + RO
• Alpha CM
• Pipe and Plant Solutions
• AAX Engineering
• SKL Solutions
• Freyer & Laureta
• UNICO Engineering
The City has a number of existing on-call consultants for engineering and environmental services. City staff believes that these firms remain an effective pool.

Staff recommends that the City grant two-year extension to all existing on-call firms for engineering and consulting services, which are the following.

Engineering
• A-N West
• Avila Project Management
• Bellicci and Associates
• BKF Engineers
• Celbrity Consulting Group
• Coastland Engineering
• CSG
• Cunha Engineering
• Harrison Engineering
• HydroScience
• Interwest
• Kister Savio and Rei
136 of 677
City Council Report
November 15, 2022 3
• P/A Design
• Parisi CSW
• Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar
• S Kwok Engineers
• Schaff and Wheeler
• West Coast Code Consultants
• Willdan
Environmental
• BKF Engineers
• HydroScience
• S Kwok Engineers
• Schaff and Wheeler
• West Coast Code Consultants
• Willdan
• GEOsphere
• Kennedy and Associates
• M Group
• MIG
• Raney
• Stantec

FISCAL IMPACTS
The creation and extension of on-call consulting lists will not in itself have any fiscal impact. Funding for any work to be performed by the consultants would need to be appropriated by the City Council. Individual or cumulative task orders of over $45,000 with a particular on-call consultant will require further approval from the City Council.

ATTACHMENTS
A: Resolution
B: List of On-Call Consultants
C: Standard Consultant Agreement for Professional Services 137 of 677
RESOLUTION NO. 2022 – XX

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE, COUNTY OF

CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER

TO EXECUTE AMENDMENTS TO EXTEND EXISTING ON-CALL SERVICE

CONTRACTS AND ADD NEW ON-CALL SERVICE CONTRACTS
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department, relies on certain professional services from the private sector to assist in the delivery of projects and services; and WHEREAS, the professional services required include regulatory compliance, engineering, inspection, project management, surveying, geotechnical engineering, environmental review, and staff augmentation; and
WHEREAS, the current on-call contracts expired on November 4, 2022; and WHEREAS, on October 7, 2022, a request for qualifications (RFQ) was published by City for wastewater/stormwater infrastructure services; and WHEREAS, the (RFQ) was posted to the City website, emailed to existing on-call providers and made available on Public Purchase; and
WHEREAS, staff received and reviewed Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) from eight Consultants who were qualified to deliver requested services; and WHEREAS, staff recommends that City grant four-year on-call contracts to the eight consultants; and
WHEREAS, to afford the greatest flexibility and access to resources, staff recommends that certain existing on-call contracts be extended for a period of two years; and
WHEREAS, funding for any work to be performed by the consultants would need to be appropriated by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, individual or cumulative task orders of over $45,000 with a particular on-call consultant will require further approval from the City Council.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole as follows:

1. Authorize the City Manager to execute new on-call service contracts, in a form approved by the City Attorney, for wastewater and stormwater for a period of four-years with the following consultants:
• GHD,
• LEE + RO
• Alpha CM

ATTACHMENT A
138 of 677
Pinole City Council

• Pipe and Plant Solutions
• AAX Engineering
• SKL Solutions
• Freyer & Laureta
• UNICO Engineering

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute amendments, in a form approved by the City Attorney, to extend the following on-call service contracts for engineering services by two years:
• A-N West
• Avila Project Management
• Bellicci and Associates
• BKF Engineers
• Celbrity Consulting Group
• Coastland Engineering
• CSG
• Cunha Engineering
• Harrison Engineering
• HydroScience
• Interwest
• Kister Savio and Rei
• P/A Design
• Parisi CSW
• Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar
• S Kwok Engineers
• Schaff and Wheeler
• West Coast Code Consultants
• Willdan

3. Authorize the City Manager to execute amendments, in a form approved by the City Attorney, to extend the following on-call service contracts for environmental services by two years:
• BKF Engineers
• HydroScience
• S Kwok Engineers
• Schaff and Wheeler
• West Coast Code Consultants
• Willdan
• GEOsphere
• Kennedy and Associates
• M Group
• MIG
• Raney
139 of 677
Pinole City Council