Pinole City Council
January 20, 2026

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 35
preserving Pinole for future generations. The Safety Element fully integrates with the goals and policies related to climate change and resiliency in the Sustainability Element.

2.5.6 Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
The City of Pinole adopted the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) in 2024. The primary purpose of the City’s CAAP is to chart a clear path to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and become more resilient to changing climate. The City recognizes the need for comprehensive, fiscally responsible solutions while employing actionable, measurable, and time-bound metrics to gauge its success. The CAAP includes a thorough analysis of communitywide systems, including an updated GHG emissions inventory (2017) and social vulnerability assessment, and builds upon the City's existing sustainability efforts to establish a series of measures and actions that guide the City towards long-term GHG emissions reduction and resilience goals. The CAAP is integrated by reference into the Safety Element.

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 36
Figure 14: Critical Facilities Map

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 37
Table 4: Critical Facilities
Map
ID Facility Name
Dam Inundation
Drought
Flood
Landslide
Hazardous
Materials
Seismic - Fault
Rupture
Seismic- Ground
Shaking
Wildfire
1 Argyle #2 Reservoir N Y N N Y N Y Y
2 Maloney Reservoir N Y N N Y N Y N
3 Caretaker’s Building at Dog Park N Y N Y Y Y Y Y
4 City Corporation Yard - 1 N Y N N Y Y Y N
5 City Corporation Yard – 2 (at
Pinole Hercules Water Pollution
Control Plant)

N Y N N Y Y Y N
6 Pinole City Hall/Emergency
Operations Center

Y Y N N Y Y Y N
7 Pinole Fire Station 73 Y Y N N Y Y Y N
8 Pinole Fire Station 74 N Y N Y Y Y Y Y
9 Pinole Library N Y Y N Y Y Y N
10 Pinole Police Department Y Y Y N Y Y Y N
11 Pinole Post Office Y Y N Y Y Y Y N
12 Pinole Senior Center N Y Y N Y Y Y N
13 Pinole Tiny Tots N Y Y N Y Y Y N
14 Pinole Youth Center Y Y N N Y Y Y N
15 Kaiser Permanente Pinole
(owned by Kaiser Permanente)

N Y N Y Y Y Y N
16 St. Joseph School Y Y N Y Y Y Y N
17 Collins Elementary School
(owned by)

N Y N N Y Y Y N
18 Ellerhorst Elementary School N Y N Y Y Y Y N
19 Pinole Middle School and West
County Mandarin Elementary
School

N Y N Y Y Y Y N
20 Pinole Valley High School N Y N N Y Y Y N

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 38
Map
ID Facility Name
Dam Inundation
Drought
Flood
Landslide
Hazardous
Materials
Seismic - Fault
Rupture
Seismic- Ground
Shaking
Wildfire
21 Shannon Elementary School N Y N Y Y Y Y N
22 Stewart Elementary School N Y N Y Y Y Y N
23 Pinole-Hercules Water Pollution
Control Plant

N Y N N Y N Y N
24 San Pablo Lift Station Y Y N Y Y N Y N
25 Hazel Lift Station N Y N N Y Y Y N
26 Fiber Optic Line Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N
27 San Pablo Avenue Bridge over
Pinole Creek (Caltrans Bridge
#28C0061)

N Y Y Y Y Y Y N
28 San Pablo Avenue Bridge over
BNSF Railway Right Of Way
(Caltrans Bridge #28C0062)

N Y N Y Y Y Y N
29 Pinole Valley Road Bridge 1 over
Pinole Creek (Caltrans Bridge
#28C0076)

N Y N N Y Y Y N
30 Tennent Avenue Bridge over
Pinole Creek (Caltrans Bridge
#28C0133)

Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N
31 Pinole Valley Road over Pinole
Creek 2 (Caltrans Bridge
#28C0134)

N Y Y N Y Y Y N
32 Pinole Valley Road over Pinole
Creek 3 (Caltrans Bridge
#28C0136)

N Y Y Y Y Y Y N
33 Ramona Street Bridge over
Pinole Creek (Caltrans Bridge
#28C016)

N Y Y Y Y Y Y N
34 Simas Street Bridge over Pinole
Creek (Caltrans Bridge
#28C0417)

N Y Y Y Y Y Y N
35 Henry Avenue Bridge over Pinole
Creek (Caltrans Bridge
#28C0517)

N Y Y Y Y Y Y N

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 39

2.6 Drought
Drought is defined as an extremely dry climatic period where the available water falls below a statistical average for a region. Drought is also defined by factors other than rainfall, including vegetation conditions, agricultural productivity, soil moisture, water levels in reservoirs, and streamflow. Droughts or water shortages are a gradual phenomenon, occurring over multi-year periods and increasing with the length of dry conditions. When Precipitation is less than normal for a period of time, the flow of streams and rivers declines, water levels in lakes and reservoirs fall, and the depth to water in wells increases. If dry weather persists and water supply problems develop, the dry period can become a drought.

The term "drought" can have different meanings depending on how a water deficiency affects day-to-day activities. Drought is a complex natural hazard, which is reflected in the following four definitions commonly used to describe it:
• Agricultural – Agricultural drought is defined principally in terms of naturally occurring soil moisture deficiencies relative to water demands of plant life, usually arid crops. • Hydrological – Hydrological drought is related to the effects of precipitation shortfalls on stream flows and reservoir, lake, and groundwater levels. • Meteorological – Meteorological drought is defined solely on the degree of dryness, expressed as a departure of actual Precipitation from an expected average or normal amount based on monthly, seasonal, or annual time scales. • Regulatory (or socioeconomic) – Regulatory drought can occur when the availability of water is reduced due to the imposition of regulatory restrictions on the diversion and export of water out of a watershed to another area.

Although the climate is a primary contributor to hydrological drought, other factors such as changes in land use (i.e., deforestation), land degradation, and the construction of dams can affect the hydrological characteristics of a region. Because regions are geographically interconnected by natural systems, the impact of meteorological drought may extend well beyond the borders of the precipitation-deficient area. Changes in land use upstream may alter hydrologic characteristics such as infiltration and runoff rates, resulting in more variable streamflow and a higher incidence of hydrologic drought downstream. Land use change is one way that human actions can alter the frequency of water shortage even when no change in Precipitation has been observed.

Droughts cause public health and safety impacts, as well as economic and environmental impacts. Public health and safety impacts are primarily associated with catastrophic wildfire risks and drinking water shortage risks for small water systems in rural areas and private residential wells. Examples of other impacts include costs to homeowners due to loss of residential landscaping, degradation of urban environments due to loss of landscaping, agricultural land fallowing, and associated job loss, degradation of fishery habitat, and tree mortality with damage to forest ecosystems. Drought conditions can also result in damage to older infrastructure that is located within dry soils with the potential to leak or break. Dead or dying vegetation poses a risk of falling and damaging structures and infrastructure systems.

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 40

2.6.1 Drought Severity
Drought severity depends on numerous factors, including duration, intensity, and geographic extent, as well as regional water supply demands by humans and vegetation. The severity of drought can be aggravated by other climatic factors, such as prolonged high winds and low relative humidity. The magnitude of drought is usually measured in time and the severity of the hydrologic deficit.

The United States Drought Monitor is a map released weekly that indicates the portions of the United States that are experiencing drought and the severity of the drought based on five classifications: abnormally dry (D0), showing areas that may be going into or are coming out of drought, and four levels of drought: moderate (D1), severe (D2), extreme (D3), and exceptional (D4) (refer to Table 5).

The Drought Monitor is not a forecast but looks backward, providing a weekly assessment of drought conditions based on how much precipitation did or did not fall. Because drought is a slow-moving hazard, it may take more than one good rainfall to end a drought, especially if an area has been in drought for a long time. Figure 15 depicts the California drought monitor map, which identifies areas of drought and labels them by intensity, as shown in Table 5. The map also includes a table identifying the percentage of the area of California experiencing each level of drought intensity. For example, 100 percent of California was experiencing Category D1 (moderate) drought or worse for the majority of 2021. As of June 2022, the entirety of Contra Costa County is classified as Category D2 (severe).

Table 5: Drought Severity Classification
Category Description Possible Impacts
D0 Abnormally Dry Going into drought: short-term dryness slowing planting, growth of crops or pastures.

Coming out of drought: some lingering water deficits; pastures or crops not fully recovered.

D1 Moderate Drought Some damage to crops, pastures, streams, reservoirs, or wells is low. Some water shortages are developing or imminent; voluntary water-use restrictions are requested.

D2 Severe Drought Crop or pasture losses likely; water shortages common; water restrictions imposed.

D3 Extreme Drought Major crop/pasture losses; widespread water shortages or restrictions.

D4 Exceptional Drought Exceptional and widespread crop/pasture losses; shortages of water in reservoirs, streams, and wells create water emergencies.

Source: US Drought Monitor, Drought Classification, https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu/About/AbouttheData/DroughtClassification.aspx, accessed March 15, 2022.

Droughts in California are regional events. In a drought, all areas of Pinole will be affected.

Based on previous occurrences and trends in California, the likelihood that the City of Pinole will continue to experience drought conditions in the future is considered high. EBMUD supplies water for the City of Pinole. Water used by EBMUD comes from the 577-square-mile protected watershed of the Mokelumne River, which collects the melting snow on the west slope of the Sierra Nevada. Snowmelt watersheds are generally more sustainable than groundwater supplies. However, watersheds that rely on Precipitation may still be susceptible to drought-related concerns.

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 41
Figure 15: Drought Monitor Map

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 42

2.6.2 Water Supply
The EBMUD water supply system collects, transmits, treats, and distributes high-quality water from its primary water source, the Mokelumne River, to its customers in the San Francisco East Bay Area. The Mokelumne Aqueducts convey the Mokelumne River supply from Pardee Reservoir, located upstream of Camanche Dam, across the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta (Delta) to local storage and treatment facilities in the East Bay. After treatment, water is distributed to the incorporated cities and unincorporated communities in Alameda and Contra Costa counties, including Pinole. EBMUD has developed a portfolio of water supply projects to help supplement any shortage in its water supply. These projects are expected to not only provide customers with relief from frequent and severe water rationing during multiyear droughts but will also help EBMUD respond to other adverse situations that lead to water shortages. Figure 16 provides a summary of EBMUD’s shortand long-term supplemental supply portfolio18 .

Figure 16: EBMUD’s short- and long-term supplemental supply portfolio 18 Urban Water Management Plan. https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-your-water/water-supply/urban-watermanagement-plan. Accessed October 13, 2022.

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 43
Ground Water Banking and Exchange
Bay Side Phase 1 and 2: The Bayside Groundwater Project is being developed in phases to provide a diverse and robust water supply using a conjunctive water management approach that sustainably manages the East Bay Plain Subbasin.

DREAM: Groundwater banking efforts are currently focused on Eastern San Joaquin County, where the Demonstration Recharge Extraction and Aquifer Management (DREAM) Pilot Project is underway.

Water Transfers
EBMUD has developed a water transfer program to secure dry-year water supplies to meet customer demands. The Freeport Regional Water Authority (FRWA) is a cooperative effort by the Sacramento County Water Agency (SCWA) and the East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) of Oakland to supply surface water from the Sacramento River to customers in central Sacramento County and the East Bay area of California. FRWA is in the final stages of the construction of a new water intake facility and pumping plant on the Sacramento River and 17 miles of underground water pipelines within Sacramento County. Upon completion, the intake facility will allow EBMUD to use up to 100 mgd of water during dry years only, estimated to be three out of every ten years, as a supplemental water source to complement existing conservation programs19. Currently, EBMUD has been working on agreements with senior water rights holders in the Sacramento River Watershed- This includes Placer County Water Agency, Yuba County Water Agency, and Sycamore Mutual Water Company.

Water Supply Management Program 2040
The Water Supply Management Program (WSMP) 2040 is a program-level effort that estimates EBMUD's water supply needs over a thirty-year horizon and proposes a diverse portfolio of policy initiatives and potential projects to ensure dry-year needs. The WSMP 2040 seeks to provide a diverse and robust water supply portfolio that ensures water reliability in an uncertain future while also protecting the environment. Through the implementation of the WSMP 2040, EBMUD is meeting future growth with aggressive conservation and recycling, while supplemental supply components allow a lower rationing level and thereby decrease direct impacts on EBMUD customers during dry years. The WSMP 2040 pushes conservation and recycling to the maximum, with a total of 50 million gallons per day (MGD) of future supply being provided from those two component categories. The WSMP 2040 Portfolio includes the following rationing, conservation, and recycled water goals:
20 • Rationing Up to 15%
19 Freeport Regional Water Project- Explore the Project. http://www.freeportproject.org/nodes/explore/. Accessed October 13, 2022.
20 Water Supply Management Program 2040- Revised WSMP 2040 Final Plan. https://www.ebmud.com/water/about-yourwater/water-supply/water-supply-management-program-2040. Accessed October 13, 2022.

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 44
• Conservation Level D (39 MGD)
• Recycling Level 3 (11 MGD)
The Water Supply Management Program 2040 provides 53 measures for conservation and is divided into five levels ranging from level A to E. In order to Achieve 39 MGD savings as listed above, the program level D is targeted and will include 43 out of the 53 measures.

These measures are documented in Table 6, Conservation Measures Selected for Programs of Appendix D TM-1- Raw Water Infrastructure Reliability Review21.

EBMUD practices various sustainability methods and develops sustainability plans to ensure it provides reliable water and wastewater services. Sustainability measures include a Climate Action Plan that analyzes impacts and mitigation measures for issues related to climate change. Also, EBMUD prepared a sustainability report in 2018 and promotes and practices water conservation measures to ensure it is able to provide water and wastewater services sustainably over a long-term period22.

2.6.3 California Drought History
Drought has affected virtually every County in California, and California has experienced numerous severe droughts over the past century. FEMA declared one drought emergency for California in January 1977, and other drought emergency declarations have been declared by the state.
23 According to the 2018 State Hazard Mitigation Plan, from 1972 to 2016, there were fifteen drought state emergency proclamations in California.24 The most severe drought on record began in 2012 and continued through 2017. On January 17, 2014, the governor of California declared a state drought emergency, and on April 1, 2015, the governor announced the first-ever mandatory 25 percent statewide water use reduction and a series of actions to help save water, increase enforcement to prevent wasteful water use, streamline the state's drought response, and invest in new technologies that would make California more drought resilient. At the time of the announcement, the volume of the Sierra Nevada snowpack was approximately 14 percent normal. Despite multiple storms in February 2014, drought conditions persisted. By the end of May 2014, all of California was in a condition of "extreme" or "exceptional" drought. At the same time, the volume of the Sierra Nevada snowpack had decreased to less than 10 percent of normal, and water stored in Lake Oroville, the major reservoir for the State Water Project, was at 58 21 Water Supply Management Program 2040- Revised WSMP 2040 Final Appendix D. https://www.ebmud.com/water/aboutyour-water/water-supply/water-supply-management-program-2040. Accessed October 13, 2022. 22 Sustainability. https://www.ebmud.com/about-us/sustainability. Accessed October 13, 2022. 23 Federal Emergency Management Agency, Disaster Declarations, https://www.fema.gov/disaster/3023, accessed March 15, 2022. 24 California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services, 2018 California State Hazard Mitigation Plan, September 2018, https://www.caloes.ca.gov/HazardMitigationSite/Documents/003-2018%20SHMP_FINAL_ACK-TOC.pdf, accessed March 15, 2022.

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 45
percent of normal.25 On April 7, 2017, the governor issued an executive order ending the drought emergency in most of California, including Contra Costa County.

Table 6: Historical Droughts
Date Area Affected Notes
1827–1916 Statewide Multiyear: 1827–29, 1843–44, 1856–57, 1863–64 (particularly extreme), 1887–88, 1897–1900, 1912–13.
1917–21 Statewide,
except for the
central Sierra
Nevada and
north coast
Simultaneous in affected areas, 1919–20. Most extreme in the North. 1922–26 Statewide,
except for the
central Sierra
Nevada
Simultaneous effect for the entire state only during 1924, which was particularly severe.
1928–37 Statewide Simultaneously in effect for the entire state, 1929–34. Longest in the state's history.
1943–51 Statewide Simultaneously in effect for the entire state, 1947–49. Most extreme in the south.
1959–62 Statewide Most extreme in the Sierra Nevada and the central coast. 1976–77 Statewide,
except for
southwestern
deserts
Driest 2 years in the state's history. Most severe in the northern two-thirds of the state.
1987–92 Statewide Moderate, continuing through 1989. Most extreme in the northern Sierra Nevada.
2000–02 Statewide Most severe in southern California.
2007–09 Statewide Twelfth driest 3-year period on record at the time. Most severe in western San Joaquin Valley.
2012–17 Statewide Most severe California drought on record. 2021–
present
Statewide 2021 became the second driest year on record. The drought emergency expanded Statewide as of October 2021.

Sources
• Paulson, R. W., E. B. Chase, R. S. Roberts, and D. W. Moody, Compilers, National Water Summary 1988-89: Hydrologic Events and Floods and Droughts: US Geological Survey Water-Supply Paper. • California Department of Water Resources, California's Most Significant Droughts: Comparing Historical and Recent Conditions, February 2015.
25 California Department of Water Resources, California’s Most Significant Droughts: Comparing Historical and Recent Conditions, February 2015.

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 46

2.7 Hazardous Materials
A "hazardous material" is defined by California Health and Safety Code Section 25501 as "any material that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment." Improper handling of hazardous materials or waste may result in significant impacts on human health and the environment. Hazardous materials can be in the form of explosives, flammable and combustible substances, poisons, and radioactive materials. Hazardous materials accidents can occur during production, storage, transportation, use, or disposal.

The impacts of hazardous materials release can vary, depending on the type and amount of material released. Hazardous materials exposure can include the following effects: skin/eye irritation; difficulty breathing; headaches; nausea; behavior abnormalities; cancer; genetic mutations; physiological malfunctions (i.e., reproductive impairment, kidney failure); physical deformations; or birth defects.

Many businesses and residents in the City use hazardous materials and generate amount of hazardous waste. Common hazardous waste is generated from gasoline service stations, dry cleaners, automotive mechanics, auto body repair shops, machine shops, printers, photo processors, and agriculture.

2.7.1 Hazardous Materials Incidents
Potential threats from hazardous materials exist where they are manufactured, stored, transported, or used due to the risk of spill and exposure to hazardous materials.

The magnitude and severity of the hazard would be highly dependent on the type of spill, location, and the extent to which hazardous materials enter the water system. Hazardous materials can be flammable, radioactive, infectious, corrosive, toxic/poisonous, or otherwise reactive. Heavy rains or winds could spread hazardous materials over a larger geographical area and create challenging cleanup conditions.

Hazardous materials are used in every manufacturing operation by retailers, service industries, and homeowners in the City of Pinole. Operations known to handle hazardous materials in the City include gas stations, dry cleaners, medical facilities, commercial/retail businesses, and roadway and railway transportation. Most hazardous materials operations are small-scale and pose a minimal risk; however, commercial transportation of hazardous materials via roadway or railway would potentially have significant impacts on the City during an incident, given the volumes of hazardous materials being transported.

2.7.2 Transportation of Hazardous Materials
The California Code of Regulations Title 26 regulates transportation of hazardous materials/wastes. The US Department of Transportation (DOT) is the primary regulatory authority for the interstate transport of hazardous materials. The DOT establishes

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 47
regulations for safe handling procedures (i.e., packaging, marking, labeling, and routing).

Criteria also exist regarding personnel qualifications and training, inspection requirements, and equipment specifications. The California Highway Patrol (CHP) enforces regulations related to the intrastate transport of hazardous materials and hazardous waste. The CHP and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) enforce federal and state regulations and respond to hazardous materials transportation emergencies.

Two rail lines traverse the City, the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF), and the Union Pacific. The Union Pacific and BNSF railroads operate freight services that pass-through Pinole. The Union Pacific tracks are located along the San Pablo Bay shoreline, and the BNSF tracks are located just south of the San Pablo Bay shoreline, running east and west through the City between Del Monte Drive and Hercules Avenue. Both railroads are used to transport hazardous materials, which would potentially impact the City in the event of a hazardous materials incident or spill during transport. Union Pacific or BNSF would be responsible for responding to hazardous materials transportation emergencies for their respective railroads along with local, state, and federal government agencies. Each railroad company has staff to specifically respond to railroad accidents involving hazardous materials.

2.7.3 Hazardous Materials Sites
The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) maintains a data management system called GeoTracker. Sites identified by GeoTracker are sites that impact or have the potential to impact water quality in jurisdictions statewide. These sites are required for cleanups, such as leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites, Department of Defense sites, and cleanup program sites. GeoTracker also contains records for various unregulated projects as well as permitted facilities, including irrigated lands, oil, and gas production, operating permitted underground storage tanks, and land disposal sites.

As identified by the SWRCB, 22 sites have been cleaned up in Pinole since 1995. In 2022, only two sites were shown to have ongoing activities related to the previous known or suspected release of hazardous materials to soil and groundwater in the City of Pinole. These sites and their statuses are identified in Figure 17 and Table 7.

In addition, the EnviroStor is the Department of Toxic Substances Control's data management system for tracking our cleanup, permitting, enforcement, and investigation efforts at hazardous waste facilities and sites with known contamination or sites where there may be reasons to investigate further. Of the four sites that were identified since 1995, one is active, and one is certified for operations and maintenance. These sites and their statuses are identified in Table 7 and Figure 17. There is no action required for the other two sites. 26 26 Department of Toxic substances Control, Envirostor: Project Search Results, https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/search?CMD=search&city=Pinole&zip=&county=Contra+Costa&case_number=&bus

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 48
Table 7: Hazardous Materials Sites
# Facility Address Status Site Type Status Date
State Water Resource Control Board ("GeoTracker")
1 Former Chevron #9-
45912
550 San Pablo
Ave, Pinole
Open–Assessment &
Interim Remedial Action
LUST Cleanup Site 3/8/2022
2 ARCO # 06228 2747 Pinole Valley
Rd, Pinole
Open – Eligible for
Closure
LUST Cleanup Site 4/6/2022
State Department of Toxic Substances Control
1 Appian 80 Express
Cleaners
# 60001904
1577 Tara Hills
Drive, Pinole
Active Envirostor 10/14/2022
2 Mercury Dry Cleaners
# 07720037
2714 Pinole Valley
Road, Pinole
Certified/Operation and
Maintenance
Envirostor 10/29/2022
Source: State Water Resources Control Board GeoTracker, https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/map/?global_id=SL0601331885, accessed March 15, 2022.

2.7.4 Hazardous Materials Area Plan
Contra Costa County maintains a Hazardous Materials Area Plan (HMAP). The document describes the overall hazardous materials emergency response organization within Contra Costa County. It establishes the lines of authority and coordination for hazardous materials incidents affecting Contra Costa County and identifies the roles and responsibilities of local, state, and federal government agencies necessary to minimize the impacts of a hazardous materials incident. The HMAP meets the requirements of the California Code of Regulations Title 19, Article 3 – Section 2640 et seq.
iness_name=&FEDERAL_SUPERFUND=True&STATE_RESPONSE=True&VOLUNTARY_CLEANUP=True&SCHOOL_CLEANUP=True &CORRECTIVE_ACTION=True&tiered_permit=True&evaluation=True&operating=True&post_closure=True&non_operating=Tru e&inspections=True&inspectionsother=True, Accessed November 11, 2022.

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 49
Figure 17: Hazardous Materials Sites

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 50

2.8 Emergency Planning/Response
Emergency planning and disaster response are key components in addressing the City's vulnerability to natural and human-caused hazards. A well-developed emergency planning strategy ensures that in the event of a significant hazard event, the City of Pinole is prepared to efficiently respond and maintain the safety and well-being of its residents, buildings, infrastructure, and critical facilities.

2.8.1 Emergency Operations Plan
Contra Costa County developed its EOP in 2015 to address the County's planned response to emergency/disaster situations associated with natural disasters, technological incidents, biological hazards, and human-caused hazards. The EOP, which was developed as a collaborative document, also outlines the responsibilities of federal, state, regional, and county-level government agencies in the event of an emergency situation.

In 2024, the City updated and adopted its local EOP. The goal of the City's EOP is to efficiently organize, coordinate, and carry out the City's response to major emergencies. The EOP is designed to be implemented and exercised prior to an emergency. The plan identifies four phases of emergency management: mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. The EOP identifies the responsibilities of the following departments in an emergency situation:

Fire, Police, Public Works, Finance, the City Manager's Office, the Community Development Group, Administrative Services, and the Emergency Operations Center. These departments, as directed by the EOP, are responsible for developing and maintaining standard operational procedures.

The City of Pinole’s emergency management organization operates under California’s Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) and the National Incident Management System (NIMS). The City Manager will direct the emergency management organization, serving as the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Director. The EOC Director is responsible for implementing the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) through the efforts of the City’s Emergency Operations Center (EOC). Every department and agency within the city will provide support to the operation of the City’s EOC, with support from the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, Contra Costa County Sheriff’s Office, and the West Contra Costa Unified School District. The City’s EOC is organized following the functions and principles of SEMS and NIMS.

2.8.2 Emergency Preparedness Program
The City has an emergency preparedness program, "Pinole-Ready," that was used to develop the City's municipal emergency planning and response project. Pinole-Ready is a collaborative emergency management program that includes the City's services and community. The purpose of the program is the organization and management of resources and responsibilities in the event of an emergency. This program employs an emergency management strategy focused on preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation. This

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 51
planning project aims to make the community more prepared and resilient to emergencies and hazard events.

The City does not currently have an active community emergency response team (CERT) program. The City of Pinole Strategic Plan 2020 – 2025 Implementation Action Plan, adopted in August 2020, includes directives to restore the CERT program and conduct annual tabletop exercises and community drills as a strategy.

The City relies on the Contra Costa County Community Warning System (CWS) to warn and inform residents about an emergency or disaster and the safety actions that residents should take. CWS is a joint system between the Contra Costa County Office of the Sheriff, the Health Services Department, other government agencies, industry, news media, and the nonprofit organization Community Awareness & Emergency Response. Notification methods under the CWS include sirens, voice, text, and email alert messages, Telephone Emergency Notification System, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration weather radio, and national alert systems Emergency Alert Systems and Wireless Emergency Alerts.

2.8.3 Public Safety Services
Police Services
Police protection services in Pinole are provided by the Pinole Police Department, related to public safety in the City. Services include preventing and controlling activity that is threatening life and property, aiding citizens who are in danger of physical harm, protecting constitutional rights and freedoms, facilitating traffic, and responding to and investigating crime. The Pinole Police Department shares the Public Safety Building with the Pinole Fire Department.

Fire Services
The City of Pinole has contracted with the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (Con Fire) for fire protection services in March of 2023. Through this agreement, a previously shuttered fire station (Station 74) reopened to provide fire suppression, medical services, rescue, and hazardous materials response to the Pinole Valley area. Con Fire will also operate out of Station 73 to provide these services in the Downtown area. It should be noted that Fire Station 74 is located in the Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone.

In Addition, Con Fire will also provide free services and safety devices, public outreach to schools and businesses, and training courses, including safety demonstrations, earthquake preparedness workshops, and maintenance. These services promote disaster preparedness, fire prevention, and safety in the City. A fiber-optic network has been established at Fire Station 74 to facilitate the transition to the county fire network.

The Community Services and Facilities Element was adopted in 2010 with the General Plan update and addressed the existing conditions, needs, goals, and policies related to police and fire services. This Safety Element fully integrates with the Community Services and Facilities Element.

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 52

2.8.4 Evacuation Routes
In the event of a significant emergency, clear routes are needed to ensure that emergency responders and supplies can be transported and that community members can be evacuated. Evacuation efforts depend on the severity and type of hazard incident that is occurring. In some cases, people may have a day or two to prepare, while other situations might call for an immediate evacuation. Evacuation routes include major roadways and thoroughfares intended to transport people from areas impacted by hazardous events to areas of safety. The designated evacuation routes in the City include freeways/highways, regional arterials, arterials, and collectors, as depicted in Figure 18. These are Interstate 80, San Pablo Avenue, Appian Way, Tennent Avenue, Pinole Valley Road, Tara Hills Drive, and Fitzgerald Drive. In addition, the evacuation routes map includes some of the collector streets. Designated evacuation routes are the most reliable roadway facilities for the following reasons:
• These roads are designed to accommodate higher volumes of traffic in-line with their classifications.
• Access controls are more stringent on roads of higher classification. • Intersection controls are designed to prioritize travel on roads of higher classification. • Roadway maintenance policies prioritize roads of higher classification.

In addition to identifying evacuation routes, SB 99, codified in Government Code Section 65302 (g), requires communities to identify residential developments in any hazard area identified in the Safety Element that does not have at least two emergency evacuation routes.

Figure 18 identifies these residential developments.

Evacuation Routes Study Summary
Under Assembly Bill (AB) 747, the City’s Safety Element needs to address evacuation planning for any emergency scenarios that would warrant an evacuation of populations within the affected areas. The Evacuation Routes Assessment report for the City of Pinole includes an analysis of the capacity, safety, and viability of evacuation routes under a range of emergency scenarios applicable to the local jurisdiction.

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 53
Figure 18: Evacuation Routes

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 54
Figure 19: Neighborhood Access to Evacuation Routes

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 55
The technical definition of the capacity of a road is the maximum hourly rate at which vehicles can reasonably be expected to traverse a point during a given time period under prevailing roadway, traffic, and control (free flow) conditions. As part of the evacuation route assessment, the most direct evacuation routing from the centroid of Zonehaven evacuation zones27 shown in to each of the primary evacuation gateways listed below exiting the City was identified (refer to Figure 21).

Gateway A – San Pablo Avenue (South)
• Gateway B – San Pablo Avenue (North)
• Gateway C – I-80 (South)
• Gateway D – I-80 (North)
The evacuation time from each zone centroid to each gateway as well as to the nearest gateway is provided in the Evacuation Routes Assessment. Travel time estimates range for each gateway are shown in Table 8. During evacuation conditions, manual control at the most critical intersections should be provided by designated traffic control personnel. Thirtyfive such locations are identified in the Evacuation Routes Assessment, of which 28 are within City limits.

Table 8: Travel Time Estimates Summary
Evacuation Zones
Travel Time Summary (min) Via Gateway: Closest Gateway
A
San Pablo Ave
(South)
B
San Pablo Ave
(North)
C
I-80
(South)
D
I-80 (South)
Via
Gateway
Travel Time
(minutes)
E001 2.50 6.00 6.25 7.25 A 2.50
E002 3.25 5.25 5.75 6.50 A 3.25
E003 5.25 3.00 6.00 5.25 A 3.00
E004a 3.00 6.25 4.75 5.50 B 3.00
E004b 2.75 4.75 4.25 5.00 A 2.75
E005a 4.75 5.00 3.75 4.75 A 3.75
E005b 7.00 4.75 4.25 3.50 C 3.50
E006 7.25 4.75 4.50 3.75 D 3.75
E007a 3.50 6.50 3.25 4.00 D 3.25
E007b 5.00 8.25 2.25 3.00 C 2.25
E008a 7.50 7.50 3.25 3.25 C 3.25
E008b 8.75 9.50 4.50 5.50 C 4.50
E008c 12.25 10.00 7.50 5.75 C 5.75
E009 9.75 7.50 5.00 3.25 D 3.25
E010 13.25 10.75 8.50 6.75 D 6.75
E011 15.25 12.75 10.50 8.75 D 8.75
E012 12.50 10.25 7.75 6.25 D 6.25
27 Emergency evacuation zones for the City of Pinole have been developed at the County level as part of Contra Costa County Zonehaven EVAC Evacuation Pre-Plan modeling program. These zones have been developed through close coordination with the Pinole Fire Department.

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 56
Figure 20: Zonehaven Evacuation Zones

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 57
Figure 21: Evacuation Zone Centroids & Evacuation Gateways

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 58
The two emergency scenarios were identified that would require an evacuation of populations within select evacuation zones within the City. These include a potential fire hazard scenario and a potential dam inundation hazard scenario.

Scenario-1: If a fire hazard were to occur in the foothills to the east of the City, the Evacuation Zones 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12 may potentially be affected. Residents in each of these zones should be directed to travel north on Pinole Valley Road towards I-80 (Gateways C & D) and away from the fire hazard. The specific wildfire concern expressed by the City Fire Department is the threat to the residential neighborhood at the top of Galbreth Road, identified as Centroid 8c in the Evacuation Route assessment. If Galbreth Road is available during an evacuation, the travel time to the closest evacuation Gateway at I-80 Northbound is just under 6 minutes. If Galbreth Road becomes directly threatened by wildfire is therefore unusable for evacuation, alternative vehicular access is provided via the emergency access gate providing connectivity to South Rancho Road/Rancho Road. Emergency responders must unlock the emergency access gate.

Scenario-2: A potential failure at the Maloney Reservoir, which would potentially inundate residential neighborhoods and 10 critical facilities (refer to Figure 14), including government facilities such as City Hall, Fire Station 73, and the police department, post office, and youth center. A breach at the northeast corner of the dam and breach along the north wall will take less than 3 minutes for 1 foot of water to reach these homes. These homes would reach a maximum flood wave depth ranging from 6 to 10 feet. Given the relatively short time between the dam breach and flooding effects that would impact or make evacuation routes unusable, it will be critical to develop advance warning methods that would identify a likely breach of the dam so a preemptive evacuation order could be given. One such example would be an earthquake event that causes damage to the dam but does not immediately cause a dam breach. Under some emergency scenarios, such as an earthquake that causes an immediate rupture of the dam, it may not be possible or practical to declare a vehiclebased evacuation.

Goals, Policies and Action Items

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 59
3 Goals, Policy, and Action Items
GOAL SE 1: Minimize the potential for loss of life, injury, damage to property, economic and social dislocation, and unusual public expense due to natural hazards.

Flooding and Erosion
POLICY SE 1.1: Continue to implement the Pinole Creek Watershed Vision Plan and Pinole Creek Greenway Master Plan.

Action SE 1.1.1: Continue to seek funding and work with creek restoration stakeholders to implement the Pinole Creek Watershed Vision Plan and Pinole Creek Greenway Master Plan.

Action SE 1.1.2: Ensure Pinole Creek is complemented by local development during the review of specific development proposals by including it as a natural amenity for the development.

Action SE 1.1.3: Continue to update the Flood Hazard Reduction Ordinance periodically based on new information and research to include land use controls regulations for properties that abut Pinole Creek in order to minimize potential conflicts between flood, resource protection, and recreational goals and to adhere to pertinent local, state, and federal agency requirements.

Action SE 1.1.4: Collaborate with the Contra Costa County Flood Control District and other property owners in the Pinole Creek watershed, particularly the East Bay Municipal Utility District, to establish a diversion basin that could reduce stormwater flows during severe storm conditions.

Action SE 1.1.5: Coordinate with Contra Costa County Flood Control District on flood protection and prevention within the City, per GC 65302(g)(2)(B)(v)
POLICY SE 1.2: Require appropriate control measures to control and minimize the impact of flooding and erosion.

Action SE 1.2.1: Complete and implement the Storm Drainage Master Plan.

Action SE 1.2.2: Investigate feasible infrastructure improvements to remove the Pinole Library, Senior Center, and Tiny Tots structure from the 100-year flood zone.

Action SE 1.2.3: Coordinate with Caltrans to ensure proper maintenance and infrastructure integrity at all bridges within the City.

Action SE 1.2.4: Continue to periodically update and enforce the Erosion Control Ordinance.

Goals, Policies and Action Items

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 60
Action SE 1.2.5: Require erosion prevention plans for new development such as revegetation or other acceptable measures.

Action SE 1.2.6: Periodically monitor areas surrounding Pinole Creek for erosion control.

POLICY SE 1.3: Continue to monitor studies that identify anticipated changes in sea level and create appropriate standards and improvements to minimize flood risks.

Action SE 1.3.1: Continue to coordinate with local, regional, state, and federal agencies regarding impacts and mitigation of a potential rise in sea level.

Action SE 1.3.2: Continue to update the Climate Action and Adaptation planning process on a regular basis, to govern the San Pablo Bay waterfront and any other areas that may be impacted by changes in sea level.

Action SE 1.3.3: Continue to support the actions in the Bay Conservation and Development Commission's Bay Adapt Joint Platform and cooperate in the future implementation of strategies to adapt to Bay-related impacts of climate change, in addition to other ongoing research by regional agencies.

Action SE 1.3.4: Continue to implement the Municipal Code flood protection standards for development within a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) -designated Special Flood Hazard Area and will coordinate with FEMA and other agencies in the evaluation and mitigation of future flooding hazards that may occur as a result of sea-level rise.

Action SE 1.3.5: Pursue funding for adequate protection based on best-available-science from sea-level rise and subsidence.

POLICY SE 1.4: Establish appropriate capital improvements and management programs to maintain and upgrade drainage systems as needed to minimize local flooding.

Action SE 1.4.1: Require project applicants to investigate and report on project impacts on stormwater runoff and the wastewater treatment plant and ensure that project-specific impacts are mitigated.

Action SE 1.4.2: Explore the possibility of incorporating green infrastructure requirements such as rain gardens, bio-swales, green roofs, permeable paving, rainwater harvesting, and green parking in the City Municipal Code for new developments and major renovations.

Action SE 1.4.3: Continue implementing a Clean Water Program to reduce surface water discharge through project design (e.g., reduce water runoff by minimizing impervious surfaces and using green areas for drainage) and monitor compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit program and the Clean Water Act.

Goals, Policies and Action Items

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 61
Action SE 1.4.4: Seek funding to upgrade facilities to reduce inflow and infiltration and treat runoff.

POLICY SE 1.5: Ensure that appropriate measures are in place to minimize the risk and impact of flooding due to dam inundation.

Action SE 1.5.1: Investigate infrastructure improvements (such as retaining walls or deployable flood barriers) at City Hall, Fire Station 73, and Police Department.

Action SE 1.5.2: Consider alternative locations for the Emergency Operations Center (EOC), equipment staging, and other required resources outside of the Maloney Dam Reservoir inundation zone.

Action SE 1.5.3: Coordinate with East Bay Municipal Utility District to maintain Maloney Reservoir in satisfactory condition. Promptly identify future deficiencies and collaborate where feasible toward infrastructure solutions or improvements.

Action SE 1.5.4: Participate in emergency preparedness exercises with dam owners and operators, where required.

Action SE 1.5.5: Explore developing advance warning methods that would identify a likely breach of the dam so a preemptive evacuation order could be given.

Seismic Activity and Geologic Instability
POLICY SE 1.6: Ensure that all geologic hazards are adequately addressed and mitigated through project development. Development proposed in areas of potential geological hazards should not be endangered by, nor contribute to, the hazardous conditions on the site or on adjoining properties.

Action SE 1.6.1: Make the Geological Hazard map readily available on the website either by providing links to reliable data sources such as the California Geological Survey or by updating the geologic hazard map with new information provided by geotechnical studies.

Action SE 1.6.2: Require future development and major renovations within the fault trace areas or other geologic hazard areas (e.g., liquefaction, land sliding, mud sliding, erosion, sedimentation, hydromodification, and settlement) to provide geotechnical studies determining the location of the fault trace relative to proposed improvements, the feasibility of the proposed design, level of risk associated with potential geologic hazards, and appropriate mitigations.

Action SE 1.6.3: Ensure that during project design and review, existing and new structures are designed to protect people and property from seismic hazards.

Action SE 1.6.4: Continue to implement and routinely update the California Building Code (CBC)to mitigate the risk of seismic activity.

Goals, Policies and Action Items

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 62
Action SE 1.5.5: Review the location of proposed utilities in relation to active fault traces identified during the Design Review and require utility lines crossing active fault traces to be specifically designed to withstand the earth's expected movement or to be relocated.

Action SE 1.5.6: Monitor slope conditions in areas of concern to evaluate future risk. If slope stability appears threatened or otherwise at risk of failure, document a response plan, schedule, and funding source.

Action SE 1.5.1: Monitor slope conditions closely after wildfire incidents for potential debris flow. If debris flow conditions occur, proactively stage response materials in areas at risk of debris flows.

POLICY SE 1.7: Address safety issues related to unreinforced masonry buildings in coordination with historic preservation policies and programs.

Action SE 1.7.1: Explore funding sources to create an inventory of unreinforced masonry structuresin the City that may collapse in the event of an earthquake and develop a hazard reduction program for their rehabilitation or removal.

Wildfire
POLICY SE 1.8: Incorporate fire-safe design for existing and new developments and major renovations.

Action SE 1.8.1: Continue to use the California Fire Code and California Code of Regulations and update them as necessary to mitigate the risk of wildfires.

Action SE 1.8.2: Revisit site design and maintenance standards periodically to ensure that the standards for fire protection for new development meet or exceed the statewide minimums.

Action SE 1.8.3: Require the new development proposals to submit plans showing ingress/egress, evacuation routes, emergency vehicle access, visible addressing and signage, and fuel modification/fireretardant zones.

Action SE 1.8.4: Identify existing non-conforming development and create a plan which would include seeking grant funding to update those developments to contemporary fire-safe standards, in terms of road standards and vegetative hazard, and requiring all development to meet or exceed CCR, division 1.5, chapter 7, subchapter 2, articles 1 -5 requirements (SRA Fire Safe Regulations).

POLICY SE 1.9: Ensure that the City is well equipped to reduce the risk of wildfire and its aftereffects.

Action SE 1.9.1: Evaluate ongoing fire protection and emergency medical service delivery in the community and Stations 73 and 74 to improve response time in the City.

Goals, Policies and Action Items

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 63
Action SE 1.9.2: Review, or work with the contracted fire protection agency to review, the adequate availability of fire suppression equipment, including fire engines, to support planned development in the City.

Action SE 1.9.3: Review and revise development impact fees for new development projects for their contribution towards fire protection services
Action SE 1.9.4: Ensure that the contracted fire protection agency strivesto provide an on-scene response to emergency incidents in the City within eight minutes and 30 seconds, 90 percent of the time.

Action SE 1.9.5: Develop a Fire Safety Operations Assessment that identifies and compares different approaches to the provision of emergency services and identifies needed facilities and an appropriate organizational structure to provide cost-effective fire and emergency medical services.

Action SE 1.9.6: Examine opportunities to create all-weather emergency vehicle access through open space in order to shorten response times and improve mutual aid between Pinole, Hercules, and El Sobrante.

Action SE 1.9.7: Explore opportunities to provide access to two or more evacuation routes for existing and future residential development with densities of more than 30 units per acre.

Action SE 1.9.8: Continue using City's Utility Users' Tax (UUT) per Measure C passed in 2018 to fund fire protection services.

Action SE 1.9.9: Continue to coordinate with Pacific Gas and Electric Company through the Rule 20 Program to underground utility lines to mitigate wildfire risk for the projects approved under the program.

Action SE 1.9.10: Construct an emergency access egress road extending from Galbreth Road to South Rancho Road and a fire access gate to be opened by emergency responders and explore the possibility of making this a permanent public road.

POLICY SE 1.10: Coordinate and cooperate with regional agencies on wildfire preparedness programs.

Action SE 1.10.1: Continue working with the County to develop the Countywide Zonehaven Platform that connects to the community warning system.

Action SE 1.10.2: Cooperate with the East Bay Municipal Utility District to ensure that the present and future water supply needs are met adequately and to maintain the integrity of the water supply.

Action SE 1.10.3: Continue to collaborate with the Bay Area Quality Management District to monitor air quality, spread awareness of air quality issues, and notify the public if wildfire smoke appears to be causing elevated levels of particulate pollution in the region.

Goals, Policies and Action Items

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 64
Action SE 1.10.4: Develop a plan to revegetate slopes on City-owned property as well as work with appropriate agencies and property owners soon after wildfires with desirable native species that support native habitat and have robust root systems to keep soil in place.

POLICY SE 1.11: Reduce the risk of wildfire spreading to the extent possible.

Action SE 1.11.1: Treat the City-owned roadways identified as evacuation routes as firebreak areas and maintain these roadways adequately.

Action SE 1.11.2: Encourage neighborhood- or area-based approaches to reducing wildfire hazards, acknowledging that one property's wildfire risk is dependent on the wildfire hazards presented by surrounding properties.

Action SE 1.11.3: Ensure that new development and major renovations are required to submit fuel modification plans for approval from the contracted fire protection agency.

Action SE 1.11.4: Should development be located in FHSZ’s, then they must be built to the current California Building Code and Fire Code.

Action SE 1.11.5: Reduce the risk of wildfire hazards by working with homeowner associations, business park associations, and the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District to maintain fire-retardant landscaping and buffer zones in areas of high wildfire risk and impose such requirements on new development in areas of high wildfire risk.

Climate Resiliency
POLICY SE 1.12: Increase the City's resiliency to climate change impacts.

Action SE 1.12.1: Adopt a Climate Action and Adaptation Plan, routinely monitor its effectiveness, and update it on a regular basis.

Action SE 1.12.2: Continue to implement the resiliency efforts laid out in the Sustainability Element of the General Plan.

Action SE 1.12.3: Identify public buildings, specific private buildings, and/or institutions with facilities required for multiple day habitation as public shelters during periods of extreme flooding, heat waves, or power outages and provide up-to-date information to the public about such buildings through the City's website.

Action SE 1.12.4: Develop a protocol for how the City will respond to extreme heat events, e.g., extend cooling center hours, alternative schedules for outdoor workers, delivery of water, medicine, and other critical resources to vulnerable populations, and so on.

Goals, Policies and Action Items

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 65
Action SE 1.12.5: Strive to reach out to the community during City-organized festivals or other regional events and on social media with climate-action-related education.

Action SE 1.12.6: Locate new essential public facilities, including hospitals and health care facilities, emergency shelters, emergency command centers, and emergency communications facilities outside of hazard areas as feasible, and implement construction methods to minimize impacts if located in at-risk areas.

Action SE 1.12.7: To the extent feasible, develop natural infrastructure that uses natural ecological systems or processes to reduce vulnerability to climate change-related hazards or other related climate change effects.

Action SE 1.12.8: Continue tracking the status of current state drought warnings and conservation requirements. Support EBMUD in public outreach efforts regarding the drought status.

Action SE 1.12.9: Support EBMUD in water portfolio diversification efforts, including recycled and desalinated water, to ensure drought-proof water supplies in the future.

Action SE 1.12.10: Complete the Recycled Water Feasibility Study, as identified in the Capital Improvement Plan, to phase the construction of future recycled water infrastructure.

Action SE 1.12.11: Identify critical facilities in need of reliable sources of sustained electrical power during natural hazards and climate change impacts.

Action SE 1.12.12: Evaluate infrastructure improvements at Pinole-Hercules Water Pollution Control Plant (Critical Facility #23) to mitigate against sea level rise and flood hazards. Identify funding sources as appropriate.

Action SE 1.12.13: Continue tracking ongoing sea level rise policy and science updates.

Action SE 1.12.14: Continue to monitor critical facilities in and around Pinole Creek, where groundwater emergence is more likely to occur.

Goals, Policies and Action Items

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 66
GOAL SE 2: Minimize the potential for loss of life, injury, damage to property, economic and social dislocation, and unusual public expense due to human-made hazards.

Crime
POLICY SE 2.1: Reduce the risk of crime through site planning, surveillance, and information.

Action SE 2.1.1: Apply Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles when planning for public and private improvements.

Action SE 2.1.2: Involve law enforcement agencies in the Design Review process of new and rehabilitated buildings in order to increase resident and occupant safety. The review may include but not be limited to lighting and landscaping.

Action SE 2.1.3: Maintain and expand a secure network of surveillance cameras in the community to discourage and help investigate criminal activity based on Pinole Police Department advice and experience.

Action SE 2.1.4: Strive to provide an on-scene response to emergency incidents in the City within 5 minutes.

Action SE 2.1.5: Work with criminal justice agencies and community groups to support programs that offer information about community policing, reporting child and adult abuse and neglect, and other crime prevention techniques.

Action SE 2.1.6: Support efforts to strengthen and expand neighborhood watch programs and encourage businesses to participate in these efforts.

Action SE 2.1.7: Work with law enforcement agencies and community groups to promote cleanup, graffiti removal, and other neighborhood beautification efforts.

Action SE 2.1.8: Work with law enforcement to guide and educate the public on active shooter scenario public responses through employer/school staff training and public education.

Action SE 2.1.9: Conduct a neighborhood safety light survey and provide adequate street lighting in areas with concern to discourage crime while preventing unnecessary light pollution or spillover.

Goals, Policies and Action Items

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 67
Health Emergencies
POLICY SE 2.2: Be prepared to provide essential services during a public health crisis.

Action SE 2.2.1: Include an operations protocol for public health crisis scenarios in the next update to the City's Emergency Operations Plan.

Action SE 2.2.2: Ensure that City employees are equipped to telecommute if needed during an emergency.

Action SE 2.2.3: Keep the essential City services, to the extent possible, operational and timely.

Action SE 2.2.4: Ensure, to the extent possible, that City employees have access to appropriate protective equipment to provide essential services.

Action SE 2.2.5: Follow the direction and guidance of appropriate public health agencies and relay the information to the community in a timely manner.

Hazardous Materials
POLICY SE 2.3: Evaluate new development on sites that may have involved hazardous materials prior to development approvals.

Action SE 2.3.1: Ensure that sites in Pinole that are contaminated with hazardous substances are cleaned through decontamination of soils, treatment, and filtration of groundwater.

Action SE 2.3.2: Use the conditional use permit and encroachment permit process to ensure pipeline safety when construction occurs. New developments should screen, protect, or underground all gas, electric, and communication lines; screen facilities (e.g., transformers) as safety and conditions require; and provide underground connections when feasible to improve public safety and the City's appearance.

POLICY SE 2.4: Ensure proper handling, storage, disposal, and cleanup of hazardous materials.

Action SE 2.4.1: Work with Contra Costa County and other regional partners to implement the County Hazardous Waste Management Plan and notify the public about locations and opportunities to properly dispose of household hazardous materials.

Action SE 2.4.2: A comprehensive investigation of hazardous materials storage tanks should be undertaken for specific sites when development is proposed. The potential hazard of any tanks or former tank sites found should then be evaluated using California Environmental Protection Agency and local regulatory guidelines, and sites shall be remediated as needed.

Action SE 2.4.3: At the time of new development, any known or discovered hazardous material should be cleaned up and any impacts mitigated as required by the governing law.

Goals, Policies and Action Items

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 68
Action SE 2.4.4: Ensure that no hazardous materials are dumped in any area of the City through code enforcement.

Action SE 2.4.5: Routinely educate the public regarding proper handling, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials and advertise household hazardous waste collection days and locations on the City website, through social media, and other platforms.

Action SE 2.4.6: Evaluate contracted fire protection agency’s and Police Department's capacity to respond to hazardous materials spills; identify any gaps in equipment or training.

POLICY SE 2.5: Support measures to responsibly manage hazardous waste to protect public health, safety, and the environment.

Action SE 2.5.1: Support legislative efforts to reduce the risk associated with hazardous waste.

Action SE 2.5.2: Enforce licensing and current laws regarding the transport of hazardous materials through the City and support state and federal safety legislation to strengthen requirements for hazardous materials transport.

Action SE 2.5.3: Continue to participate in Contra Costa County Hazardous Materials Area Plan regulatory requirements and emergency response coordination.

GOAL SE 3: Spread education and awareness related to emergency preparedness and programs.

POLICY SE 3.1: Create programs and practices that provide information and education to the residents of Pinole related to hazards, emergency preparedness, and other safety issues.

Action SE 3.1.1: Encourage the development and dissemination of information relating to fire hazards to educate and assist builders and homeowners in being engaged in wildfire mitigation activities.

Action SE 3.1.2: Ensure that the emergency preparedness web page (Pinole-Ready) is up to date and readily accessible on the City website to promote resident awareness and caution regarding hazards, including soil instability, earthquakes, flooding, and fire.

Action SE 3.1.3: Periodically update information on personal emergency preparedness (Pinole-Ready). At a minimum, this should include preparedness for events related to wildfire, earthquake, flooding, heat, and health emergencies.

Action SE 3.1.4: Strive to reach out to the community during City-organized festivals or other regional events and on social media to educate on personal emergency preparedness and other hazard-related information.

Goals, Policies and Action Items

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 69
Action SE 3.1.5: Explore restoring the CERT program within the City of Pinole and coordinate with outside agencies in conducting annual tabletop exercises and community drills.

Action SE 3.1.6: Educate City officials at the beginning of each term on emergency procedures, protocols, line of command, and expedited processes related to disaster recovery.

Action SE 3.1.7: Spread awareness about the County Warning Systems and encourage residents to sign up to receive notifications and communication during a natural or human-made disaster.

Action SE 3.1.8: Continue to publicize disaster plans such as Emergency Operations Plan and make them available on the City website and to critical facilities.

GOAL SE 4: Ensure that government agencies, residents, and businesses are prepared for an effective response and recovery in the event of emergencies or disasters.

POLICY SE 4.1: Minimize the risk to life and property through emergency preparedness.

Action SE 4.1.1: Maintain and implement the Emergency Operations Plan, including necessary training, emergency preparedness drills, evacuation plan, and community education.

Action SE 4.1.2: Explore the possibility of developing and implementing a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan either by the City or in partnership with regional entities.

Action SE 4.1.3: Consider developing and adopting a pre-disaster ordinance for post-disaster recovery and reconstruction that includes provisions for debris clearance, damage assessment, demolitions, reoccupancy and building moratorium criteria, fee waivers, and deferrals, and expedited permitting procedures for repair and reconstruction.

Action SE 4.1.4: Continue working with Contra Costa County and other concerned agencies to adopt a regional Emergency Response Plan.

Action SE 4.1.5: On their next update, ensure that the policies and action items in other general plan elements are revised to be consistent with policies and actions in Safety Element.

POLICY SE 4.2: Permit development only in those areas and with design features that mitigate potential danger to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents.

Action SE 4.2.1: Maintain detailed hazard maps for use in the development review.

Action SE 4.2.2: Strive to locate and design emergency buildings and vital utilities, communication systems, and other public facilities so that they can remain operational during and after an emergency or disaster.

Goals, Policies and Action Items

SAFETY ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 70
Action SE 4.2.3: Maintain structural and operational integrity of essential public facilities during flooding, per GC 65302(g)(2)(B)(iii).

Action SE 4.2.4: Require appropriate studies to assess identified hazards and ensure that impacts are adequately mitigated.

Action SE 4.2.5: Regulate new pipeline development through the conditional use permit process. Require new development to screen, protect, or underground all utilities and provide underground connections to improve public safety as well as the City's appearance.

Action SE 4.2.6: Ensure newly proposed or modified roadway designs (e.g., median modifications and speed humps) are reviewed by the contracted fire protection agency to ensure that they do not significantly impair the movement of emergency vehicles and equipment.

POLICY SE 4.3: Incorporate technological enhancements in new and substantially remodeled structures and facilities to support and improve emergency services.

Action SE 4.3.1: Consider developing a fiber-optic network plan that can provide visual access for emergency services providers and assist with crime prevention and the monitoring of critical public facilities (e.g., storm drain and flood protection facilities).

Action SE 4.3.2: Update the City's ordinance to incorporate necessary improvements into new and substantially remodeled structures to ensure that emergency service providers are able to transmit and receive radio communications within structures.

CITY OF PINOLE
hEALTH AND
Environmental
Justice ELEMENT

PUBLIC REVIEW DRAFT

FOR COUNCIL REVIEW

AND ADOPTION
JANUARY 20, 2026

Table of Contents

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 1
Table of Contents
1 BACKGROUND & HISTORIC OVERVIEW.......................................................................... 2

1.1 Environmental Justice, Equity and Disadvantaged Communities............................... 2

1.2 Health and Healthy Communities .................................................................................. 3

1.3 Requirements & Regulations ......................................................................................... 3

1.4 History.............................................................................................................................. 6

1.4.1 Native American Tribes ......................................................................................................6

1.4.2 Redlining ..............................................................................................................................9

1.5 Relationship to Other General Plan Elements............................................................ 10 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS.................................................................................................. 12

2.1 Identifying Impacted Communities ............................................................................. 12

2.2 Impacted Communities – Community Profile ............................................................ 13

2.3 CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Data and Results (CalEPA DAC Designation Criteria #1)......... 17

2.3.1 Pollution Indicators ..........................................................................................................23

2.3.2 Sensitive Populations .......................................................................................................26

2.3.3 Socioeconomic Factors.....................................................................................................28

2.3.4 Race/Ethnicity Profiles......................................................................................................29

2.4 2017 SB 535 Previous DAC Designation (CalEPA DAC Designation Criteria #3) ...... 31

2.5 Household Median Income by Census Tracts ............................................................ 31

2.6 Supporting Environmental Justice Data...................................................................... 33

2.6.1 Healthy Places Index.........................................................................................................33

2.6.2 Healthy Food Access .........................................................................................................35

2.6.3 Transit, Bike and Walkability Access...............................................................................36

2.6.4 Medical Care Access .........................................................................................................37

2.6.5 Polling Places Access ........................................................................................................39

2.7 Summary of Impacted Community Identification...................................................... 40 3 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................................... 41

3.1 Policy Introduction and Preparation Summary.......................................................... 41 4 GOALS, POLICY, AND ACTION ITEMS ........................................................................... 43

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 2
1 Background & Historic Overview

1.1 Environmental Justice, Equity and Disadvantaged Communities Environmental justice is a concept that aims to minimize and equalize the effects of environmental hazards and pollution among people of all races, ethnicities, or income levels.

Critical definitions used in this existing conditions report is described below.

Environmental Justice. California Government Code Section 65040.12 defines environmental justice as: “The fair treatment and meaningful participation of people of all races, cultures, incomes, and national origins, with respect to the development, adoption, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies” and establishes the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) as the coordinating agency for State environmental justice programs.

Equity. The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) defines equity as: “achieving fairness and balance in access to environmental resources (e.g., green space, safe neighborhoods, healthy homes, healthy fisheries), in bearing environmental burdens (e.g., pollution in air, water and on land), and in participating in environmental decision-making.” The EDF also establishes that some populations, including ethnic minority communities, indigenous persons, people of color, and low-income communities, have less access to resources and experience disproportional burden. Equitable policies aim to address the imbalance groups experience.

Disadvantaged Communities. California Government Code Section 65302(h) defines disadvantaged communities as: “an area identified by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) pursuant to Section 39711 of the Health and Safety Code or an area that is a low-income area that is disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative health effects, exposure, or environmental degradation”.

Senate Bill (SB) 535 established initial requirements for minimum funding levels to disadvantaged communities. This legislation delegated responsibility to CalEPA to identify these communities, stating that designation must be based on “geographic, socioeconomic, public health and environmental hazard criteria.”
As of May 2022, the final designation of disadvantaged communities was released by CalEPA.

In this designation, CalEPA formally designated four categories of geographic areas as disadvantaged communities: 1

1. Census tracts receiving the highest 25 percent of overall scores in CalEnviroScreen

4.0. 1 California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities – California Climate Investments to Benefit Disadvantaged Communities, https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/sb535, accessed October 25, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 3

2. Census tracts lacking overall scores in CalEnviroScreen 4.0 due to data gaps but receiving the highest 5 percent of CalEnviroScreen 4.0 cumulative pollution burden scores.

3. Census tracts identified in the 2017 DAC designation as disadvantaged, regardless of their scores in CalEnviroScreen 4.0.

4. Lands under the control of federally recognized Native American Tribes. For the purposes of this designation, a Tribe may establish a particular area of land that is under its control even if not represented as such on CalEPA’s Disadvantaged Communities (DAC) map and therefore should be considered a DAC by requesting a consultation with the CalEPA Deputy Secretary for Environmental Justice.

For the purposes of our research and investigation in this existing conditions report, the term “Impacted Communities” is used in place and interchangeably with the term disadvantaged communities.

1.2 Health and Healthy Communities
In addition to environmental justice principles, the health and well-being of City residents is fundamental to the quality of life and economic vitality. Protection of public health, safety and welfare is the legal basis for land use regulation, and the built environment closely relates to health and health outcomes. Research from OPR has shown that low-income communities or communities of color are more likely to disproportionately suffer from poor health. 2 Health is integrated in statute into the Environmental Justice Element regulatory requirements but is also closely correlated with all other required General Plan Elements. While a standalone Health Element is not a State statutory requirement, the City of Pinole had previously included health-specific policies within the Health and Safety Element. Policies from the Health and Safety Element specifically related to Health were reorganized and moved into the Environmental Justice Element, as part of the preparation of this Element. The purpose behind this policy reorganization is to reduce redundancy between the two General Plan Elements.

Policies were reviewed and edited where required. Recommendations from the OPR Health Communities General Plan Guidelines were included, where applicable.

1.3 Requirements & Regulations
The foundation of environmental justice comes from the Equal Protection Clause of the United State Constitution. The Fourteenth Amendment establishes that states may not “…deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) indicated in a 1992 report that racial minority and low-income populations experience higher-than-average exposures to 2 California Governor’s Office of Planning and Research, Chapter 6: Healthy Communities, https://opr.ca.gov/docs/OPR_C6_final.pdf, accessed October 31, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 4
certain air pollutants, hazardous wastes, and other environmental pollutants. Executive Order (EO) 12898 signed by President Clinton in 1994, titled Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations directs federal agencies to:
• Identify and address the disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of their actions on minority and low-income populations, to the greatest extent practicable and permitted by law.
• Develop a strategy for implementing environmental justice. • Promote nondiscrimination in federal programs that affect human health and the environment, as well as provide minority and low-income communities access to public information and public participation.

At the State level, California Senate Bill 115 was approved in 1999 and added Section 65040.12 to the Government Code. This bill defined environmental justice at the state level and made the CalEPA responsible for the state environmental justice program. The bill also required OPR to consult with state and federal agencies to coordinate environmental justice efforts.

Assembly Bill 1553 Chapter 762, was passed in 2001 and required OPR to develop guidance for general plans, including guidance on environmental justice elements. Since 2003, OPR General Plan guidelines provided considerations for the inclusion of environmental justice concerns.

Most recently, Senate Bill 1000 in 2016 established environmental justice as a mandatory element or topic that must be addressed in jurisdictions with disadvantaged communities.

The overarching Government Codes related to General Plan Environmental Justice Elements are Government Code Sections 65040.12 and 65302(h).

Government Code Section 65040.12(d) states:

The guidelines developed by the [Office of Planning and Research] pursuant to subdivision (c) shall recommend provisions for general plans to do all of the following:
(1) Propose methods for planning for the equitable distribution of new public facilities and services that increase and enhance community quality of life throughout the community, given the fiscal and legal constraints that restrict the siting of these facilities.
(2) Propose methods for providing for the location, if any, of industrial facilities and uses that, even with the best available technology, will contain or produce material that, because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant hazard to human health and safety, in a manner that seeks to avoid over-concentrating these uses in proximity to schools or residential dwellings. (3) Propose methods for providing for the location of new schools and residential dwellings in a manner that seeks to avoid locating these uses in proximity to

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 5
industrial facilities and uses that will contain or produce material that because of its quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant hazard to human health and safety.
(4) Propose methods for promoting more livable communities by expanding opportunities for transit-oriented development so that residents minimize traffic and pollution impacts from traveling for purposes of work, shopping, schools, and recreation
Government Code Section 65302(h) states:
(1) An environmental justice element, or related goals, policies, and objectives integrated in other elements, that identifies disadvantaged communities within the area covered by the general plan of the city, county, or city and county, if the city, county, or city and county has a disadvantaged community. The environmental justice element, or related environmental justice goals, policies, and objectives integrated in other elements, shall do all of the following:
(A) Identify objectives and policies to reduce the unique or compounded health risks in disadvantaged communities by means that include, but are not limited to, the reduction of pollution exposure, including the improvement of air quality, and the promotion of public facilities, food access, safe and sanitary homes, and physical activity.
(B) Identify objectives and policies to promote civic engagement in the public decision-making process.
(C) Identify objectives and policies that prioritize improvements and programs that address the needs of disadvantaged communities.
(2) A city, county, or city and county subject to this subdivision shall adopt or review the environmental justice element, or the environmental justice goals, policies, and objectives in other elements, upon the adoption or next revision of two or more elements concurrently on or after January 1, 2018.
(3) By adding this subdivision, the Legislature does not intend to require a city, county, or city and county to take any action prohibited by the United States Constitution or the California Constitution.
(4) For purposes of this subdivision, the following terms shall apply:
(A) “Disadvantaged communities” means an area identified by the California Environmental Protection Agency pursuant to Section 39711 of the Health and Safety Code or an area that is a low-income area that is disproportionately affected by environmental pollution and other hazards that can lead to negative health effects, exposure, or environmental degradation.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 6
(B) “Public facilities” includes public improvements, public services, and community amenities, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 66000. (C) “Low-income area” means an area with household incomes at or below 80 percent of the statewide median income or with household incomes at or below the threshold designated as low income by the Department of Housing and Community Development’s list of state income limits adopted pursuant to Section 50093 of the Health and Safety Code.

Health and healthy community policies are not a statutorily required component of a California General Plan. However, OPR has published General Plan Guidelines for Healthy Community Elements, including policy recommendations. This guidance was applied to the Health and Environmental Justice Element where appropriate.

1.4 History
Historical discrimination against specific communities in California has driven the environmental justice issues faced today. Most inequities in Pinole, Contra Costa County, and the Bay Area Metropolitan Region can be traced through land use decisions in the past 200 years. These injustices, detailed on the following pages, were often encouraged by either the federal or state government. Specific discriminatory land use decisions relating to Native American tribes and redlining are outlined below. While this section is not intended to be an inclusive list of all land use injustices within the City and the region, this section serves to acknowledge as part of the foundation upon which more recent injustices lie.

1.4.1 Native American Tribes
Pinole and the surrounding communities are the ancestorial homeland of the Karkin Ohlone people, (Karkin language) Lisjan Ohlone people (Chochenyo language), Muwekma Ohlone people (Chochenyo language) and Bay Miwok in a territory called Huchiun. The Muwekma Ohlone people are represented by the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area. The Confederated Villages of Lisjan represents seven Tribes that were directly enslaved at Mission San Jose and Mission Delores: Lisjan Ohlone, Karkin Ohlone, Bay Miwok, Plains Miwok, Wappo, Delta Yokut and Napian. As early as the 1700s, Native American Tribes experienced systemic oppression from Spanish colonizers who institutionalized the Mission system and intentionally disrupted both tribal culture and environmental stewardship. In the 1800s, State-sponsored policies further impacted tribes’ relationship with the land.

The Ohlone people are the primary group of Native Americans on the Northern California Coast, with a reach from present-day San Francisco through Monterey Bay.3 When the Spanish invaded in the late 1700s, the Spanish called the tribes Costanoan, meaning people of the coast. In the 1960’s and 1970’s, inspired by the Black Power and American Indian
3 University of California, Berkeley, Division of Equity & Inclusion. Ohlone Land, https://cejce.berkeley.edu/ohloneland, accessed April 12, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 7
Movements, the tribes organized and renamed as Ohlone. Ohlone tribes were connected but consisted of diverse cultures and languages and did not view themselves as a single or unified group. The members of various tribes freely interacted with each other prior to Spanish colonization. Figure 1 below illustrates language territories of Ohlone people.

Figure 1: The Ohlone Territories
Ohlone language territories as mapped by the UC Berkley Native American Student Development and Muwekma Ohlone Tribe.

Source: UC Berkeley | Division of Equity & Inclusion, “Ohlone Land: Berkeley sits in the territory of xučyun,” https://cejce.berkeley.edu/ohloneland, accessed May 19, 2022.

According to the Confederated Villages of Lisjan:
“The colonization of this land began with the reign of terror inflicted by Spanish soldiers and missionaries who sought to convert all Indigenous people into Catholic subjects of Spain and steal their land. The Missions were plantations, built by slave labor and sustained through brutal physical violence and extractive land practices. The Spanish brought deadly diseases, invasive species and Christian ideology based on human dominion of the natural world with devastating consequences for the Lisjan people and all living beings they shared the land with.

After a brief but harrowing Mexican rancho period, Lisjan survivors faced extermination policies of the United States that aimed to eliminate California Indians entirely. In a climate of virulent racial discrimination and state-sponsored vigilante killings, most Lisjan families survived by isolating themselves and concealing their identities. Cultural and spiritual

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 8
traditions were forced into dormancy or secrecy, and much knowledge perished with the passing of generations.”4
The Confederated Villages of Lisjan and Muwekma Ohlone Tribe are not recognized as official tribes by the United States federal government or the State of California.5 An assessment from anthropologist A.L. Kroeber’s in 1925 stated that Native Californians were “extinct for all practical purposes,” and federal negligence resulted in the government stripping several Ohlone tribes of their land. At this time, Muwekma Ohlone were federally recognized as the Verona Band of Alameda County (established 1906), but because of Krober’s statement the Bureau of Indian Affairs Lafayette Dorrington declared in 1927 that the “Ohlone needed no land”.
6 The Verona Band of Mission Indians was dropped from the rolls.7 Though Kroeber later recanted his erroneous statement in the 1950s, the lasting damage remains.8
Because of this “unrecognized” status, the Confederated Villages of Lisjan and Muwekma Ohlone tribes have no reservations or protected land, and receive none of the rights, benefits, compensations, or protections provided to tribes under existing U.S. laws. Tribe members cannot access educational scholarships or housing grants either at the state or federal level.

Collectively, the Ohlone tribes have submitted eight petitions since 1988 (at the cost of the tribe) for federal recognition status with no success. The federal criteria require costly genealogical investigations, and in the case of the Muwekma Ohlone tribe – decades long lawsuits and legal battles. The federal recognition process requires Native American tribes to demonstrate continuity of leadership, tribal cultural and tribe organization.9 The California Mission System dismantled this leadership and organization, making it impossible for the Ohlone and other California tribes to meet the federal recognition criteria. California has the largest number of non-federally recognized tribes in the United States, due to the reasons listed above and other discriminatory policy related decisions. 10 4 Confederated Villages of Lisjan, “Tribal History,” https://villagesoflisjan.org/home/tribal-history/, accessed May 18, 2022; Muwekma Ohlone Tribe
5 Confederated Villages of Lisjan, “Tribal History,” https://villagesoflisjan.org/home/tribal-history/, accessed May 18, 2022; Muwekma Ohlone Tribe, “Historical Overview – A Brief Historical Overview of a Previously Federally Recognized Tribe”, http://www.muwekma.org/historical-overview.html, accessed May 18, 2022. 6 Letter from Charlene Nijmeh, Chairwoman for the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the San Francisco Bay Area to Paul Fine, Chair at the University of California, Berkley,
https://chancellor.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/kroeber_muwekma_ohlone_tribe_public.pdf dated August 14, 2020, accessed May 18, 2022.
7 UC Berkley | Division of Equity & Inclusion, “Ohlone Land: Berkley sits in the territory of xučyun,” https://cejce.berkeley.edu/ohloneland, accessed May 19, 2022. 8 Jane Recker, “This Native American Tribe Wants Federal Recognition. A New DNA Analysis Could Bolster Its Case,” Smithsonian Magazine, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/native-american-federal-recognition-dna-analysis-ohlone180979916/#:~:text=According%20to%20an%20official%20tribal,recognized%20by%20the%20U.S.%20government. published April 18, 2022, accessed May 18, 2022.
9 Sogorea Te’ Land Trust, Lisjan (Ohlone) History and Territory, https://sogoreate-landtrust.org/lisjan-history-and-territory/, accessed May 19, 2022.
10 Krol, Debra Utacia, The Revelator, “Can Native American Tribes Protect Their Land If They’re Not Recognized By The Federal Government?” , published March 12, 2019, accessed May 19, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 9
The City of Pinole acknowledges the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of the land, and thanks the Ohlone community for stewardship and support. Policy recommendations in Section 3 include policies focused in support of the Ohlone tribe.

1.4.2 Redlining
As a response to a housing shortage caused by the Great Depression, the practice of “redlining” was carried out by the federal government in 1933 in an attempt to provide housing to white, middle- and lower-class families. The Homeowners Loan Corporation (HOLC) created “Residential Security” maps of major American cities, including urban areas in the neighboring Alameda County. HOLC maps assigned color-coded grades to residential neighborhoods that reflected “mortgage security”. Neighborhoods receiving green or “Best” were deemed minimal risk for banks and other mortgage lenders. Neighborhoods receiving red were considered “hazardous”; this is where the term “redlining” originated from.

Neighborhoods that were redlined were often lower-income, multi-family units.

Communities often consisted of immigrants, communities of color, or communities of religious groups other than Christianity.

This practice directed both public and private capital to native-born white families and their communities, and away from Black and immigrant families and their communities.

Individuals living in redlined communities were denied the right to credit, mortgages, or loans because HOLC maps erroneously declared these communities as high risk. This practice effectively segregated cities and led to disinvestment in areas populated by communities of color, immigrant, and low-income populations. Redlining also has contributed to generational wealth inequities, as homeownership in America is a primary driver of household wealth. Families that were prevented by federal policy from securing a federally backed mortgage to purchase a house were also prevented from accumulating equity that would eventually be passed down to children and grandchildren. To further compound the inequity, individuals in redlined areas were subject to predatory lending practices from private banks that further exacerbated disparities. Although the practice of redlining was outlawed by the Fair Housing Act of 1968, the effect of this policy remains.

A 2018 report prepared by Zillow Research confirms that home values in the majority of redlined neighborhoods are lower than areas ranked green or “Best”. The median home value in neighborhoods across the country labeled “Best” has risen 230.1 percent to $640,238 over the past 22 years. Comparatively, the median value in redlined areas has only climbed 203.1 percent, to $276,199. Discriminatory policy from 80 years ago continues to impact present day real estate and land use.11
Contra Costa County and Pinole was not mapped by HOLC, likely due to the rural nature compared to urban areas in neighboring of San Francisco and Alameda County (where HOLC maps were prepared). While HOLC maps were not prepared for Pinole, it is reasonable to 11 Zillow Research, Home Values Remain Low in Vast Majority of Formerly Redlined Neighborhoods, https://www.zillow.com/research/home-values-redlined-areas-19674/, published April 25, 2018, accessed March 22, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 10
assume that deed restrictions documented in the neighboring Alameda County were also present in Contra Costa County. Because of the prevalence of exclusionary zoning prior to the 1960s within the urban East Bay areas, it is possible that these practices occurred within the City of Pinole.

Figure 2: Alameda County HOLC Redlining Maps
HOLC mapped neighborhoods with lower-income, multi-family units, housing immigrants or communities of color in “redline”
Source: Robert K. Nelson and Edward L. Ayers, accessed May 24, 2022, https://dsl.richmond.edu/panorama/redlining/#loc=5/39.1/-

94.58&text=downloads.

1.5 Relationship with Other General Plan Elements
Environmental Justice policies are consistent with the goals and policies of the City’s broader General Plan, with a focus on promoting well-being of residents from the Impacted Community. The Environmental Justice Element addresses policy issues that are the focus of other elements in the General Plan. For example:
• The Housing Element identifies goals for the City to increase quality affordable housing stock.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 11
• The Land Use Element identifies the type and location of future land uses within the City, including residential, commercial, and open space. • The Circulation Element identifies the multi-modal transportation goals, along with strategies to reduce detrimental environmental impacts associated with transportation.

Where goals or policies appear to be in conflict with the General Plan with respect to the Impacted Communities, policies in the Environmental Justice Element shall prevail.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 12
2 Existing Conditions

2.1 Identifying Impacted Communities
Using the May 2022 CalEPA definition to identify Impacted Communities, census tracts in Pinole were evaluated against categories identified by CalEPA. Findings are reported below:

Table 1: Disadvantaged Community Designation Criteria Applicability to Pinole DAC Designation Criteria Applicability to Pinole

1. Census tracts receiving the highest 25
percent of overall scores in CalEnviroScreen

4.0. Applicable. One census tract in Pinole has a
CalEnviroScreen score of 75 or higher:
• Census Tract 3922.02;
CalEnviroScreen Composite Score 85

2. Census tracts lacking overall scores in
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 due to data gaps but
receiving the highest 5 percent of
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 cumulative pollution
burden scores.

Not applicable. Census tracts in Pinole are
not reported by CalEnviroScreen with data
gaps.

3. Census tracts identified in the SB 535
2017 DAC designation as disadvantaged,
regardless of their scores in
CalEnviroScreen 4.0.

Applicable. Two census tracts in Pinole
were identified as SB 535 Disadvantaged
Communities:
• Census Tract 3922.02; and,
• Census Tract 3640.02.

4. Lands under the control of federally
recognized Tribes.

Not applicable. No federally recognized
Tribes control land within the City of Pinole.

One census tract within the City of Pinole meets Criteria 1 and 3 (Census Tract 3922.02) and one census tract within the City meets Criteria 3 (Census Tract 3640.02). As recommended by OPR guidelines, CalEnviroScreen 4.0 data is utilized below to investigate unique pollution burdens or socioeconomic factors affecting Census Tract 3922.02 and Census Tract 3640.02.

A community profile for both census tracts is included in Section 2.2.

CalEnviroScreen 4.0 is a geospatial mapping tool with socioeconomic, environmental, and health data, developed by the Office of Environmental Health Hazards Assessment (OEHHA).

This tool provides statewide data in percentile scores to compare communities disproportionately impacted by, or vulnerable to, environmental pollution and contaminants. CalEnviroScreen 4.0 is the latest data reporting at the time of this writing and uses 21 indicators covering pollution sources and drivers of vulnerability by census tract, to measure overall cumulative burdens affecting California communities. Cumulative impacts

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 13
refer to exposures, public health or environmental effects from the combined emissions and discharges, in a geographic area, including environmental pollution from all sources, whether single or multi-media, routinely, accidentally, or otherwise released. Impacts will consider sensitive populations and socioeconomic factors, where applicable and to the extent data are available.

2.2 Impacted Communities – Community Profile
Both identified Impacted Communities are located along the City’s western boundary, with significant portions of each census tract located outside of the City of Pinole. The overview below provides general land use and existing conditions details to contextualize findings from CalEnviroScreen and other US Census data.

Where possible, Impacted Communities data is refined by census blocks to clearly establish residents and households within the City as part of the larger census tracts. Data limitations are noted in the following sections. Additional resources to support the community profile include the City of Pinole General Plan and Google Earth 2022 aerial imagery.

Census Tract 3922.02
Census Tract 3922.02 is approximately 0.6-square miles in size with a reported total population of 4,889 individuals.12 This census tract is primarily residential, with a small commercial cluster. Census Tract 3922.02 includes two small portions within the City of Pinole; the remainder of the tract is unincorporated Contra Costa County, including the communities of Bayview and Montalvin Manor. The segments of Census Tract 3922.02 are both distinct along the northernmost border of the City. A detailed view is shown in Figure 3, below.
12 US Census Bureau, 2020 Census Demographic Data Map Viewer – Population Density, https://mtgisportal.geo.census.gov/arcgis/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=2566121a73de463995ed2b2fd7ff6eb7, accessed October 25, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 14
Figure 3: Census Tract 3922.02 Detail
Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0, US Census 2020 Address Count Listing Files Viewer Census Block 3922.02.2000 is primarily bound by San Pablo Avenue to the south and Walter Avenue to the east. This block is characterized primarily by commercial and industrial uses.

US Census 2020 data report a total of two housing units and zero group quarters within this census block group.

A data gap was encountered with the northern portion of Census Tract 3922.02, as reported CalEnviroScreen 4.0 data boundaries do not match reported census block boundaries.

Census Block 3007 is located within the entirety of the Census Tract; Census Block 3002 includes land outside of the CalEnviroScreen 4.0 mapped boundary. Thus, the number of residential units and residents cannot be determined through US Census Data. This data gap is illustrated in Figure 4, below.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 15
Figure 4: Census Tract 3922.02 Data Gap Detail [CalEnviroScreen 4.0 mapping on left, US Census Block mapping on right]
Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0, US Census 2020 Address Count Listing Files Viewer Because CalEPA has established CalEnviroScreen 4.0 data as regulatory authority in determining Impacted Communities, this Environmental Justice Element is required to prioritize mapping and findings from this data resource. Using aerial imagery from Google Earth 2022, it is estimated that 62 residential units are located within the Census Tract 3922.02 portion highlighted above.

Table 2: Census Tract 3922.02 Data Summary
Census Tract 3922.02 Pinole Jurisdiction within
Census Tract 3922.02
Population 4,889 Unknown
Housing Units 1,508 62*
Source: US Census Bureau, 2020 Census Demographic Data Map Viewer – Population Density, https://mtgisportal.geo.census.gov/arcgis/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=2566121a73de463995ed2b2fd7ff6eb7, accessed October 25, 2022
*Estimate generated with Google Earth 2022 aerial imagery.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 16
The Impacted Community within Pinole is estimated to be approximately 62 housing units, which is approximately 1 percent of residential units within the City.13 Based on 2020 US Census data and estimates based on recent aerial imagery, approximately 4 percent of housing units within Census Tract 3922.02 are located within the City of Pinole. It can reasonably be extrapolated a similar population estimate would apply as well. As the portion of Census Tract 3922.02 within Pinole accounts for a small percentage of the total land area, data reflected by CalEnviroScreen 4.0 is largely reporting for land outside of the City jurisdiction or control.

Census Tract 3640.02
Census Tract 3640.02 is approximately 0.8-mile in size, with a reported total population of 5,868 individuals.14 This census tract is primarily residential, with small clusters of institutional (educational) and commercial uses. The majority of the census tract is located within unincorporated Contra Costa County, including the community of Tara Hills. Several small segments of Census Tract 3640.02 are located within the City of Pinole, centrally located on the western boundary. The segments of Census Tract 3640.02 include the following Census Block Groups: 1000, 1001, 3000, 3001, 3005, and 3014. A detailed view is shown of Figure 5, and population data for the Pinole portion of Census Tract 3640.02 is shown in Table 3.

Table 3: Census Tract 3640.02 Data Summary
Census Tract 3640.02 Pinole Jurisdiction within
Census Tract 3640.02
Population 5,868 477
Housing Units 1,937 143
Source: US Census Bureau, 2020 Census Demographic Data Map Viewer – Population Density, https://mtgisportal.geo.census.gov/arcgis/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=2566121a73de463995ed2b2fd7ff6eb7, accessed October 25, 2022
US Census Bureau, Decennial Census Table H10 – Total Population in Occupied Housing Units, https://data.census.gov/, accessed October 25, 2022.
13 US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2016 – 2020) Table B25032 – Tenure by Units in Structure , https://data.census.gov/, accessed October 25, 2022.
14 US Census Bureau, 2020 Census Demographic Data Map Viewer – Population Density, https://mtgisportal.geo.census.gov/arcgis/apps/MapSeries/index.html?appid=2566121a73de463995ed2b2fd7ff6eb7, accessed October 25, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 17
Figure 5: Census Tract 3640.02 Detail
Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0, US Census 2020 Address Count Listing Files Viewer Approximately 8 percent of the Census Tract 3640.02 population resides within Pinole. Of the total housing units, approximately 7.3 percent are located within the City. Thus, the majority of individuals and households within Census Tract 3640.02 are located outside of the City. As the portion within Pinole accounts for a small percentage of the total population and households, data reflected by CalEnviroScreen 4.0 is largely reporting for land outside of the City.

2.3 CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Data and Results (CalEPA DAC Designation Criteria #1)
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 illustrates data at the census tract level. The City of Pinole jurisdiction includes a total of eight census tracts. Of the eight census tracts, six include portions of residencies and properties that are located within adjacent jurisdictions (primarily unincorporated Contra Costa County). Both Impacted Communities, Census Tracts 3640.02 and 3922.02 were previously identified to include significant portions of land outside the City jurisdiction. Because these census tracts include portions of land in adjacent jurisdictions, the data reports maybe distorted or skewed for the portion within the City of Pinole. Figure 6 depicts the census tracts that make up the City of Pinole.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 18
The CalEnviroScreen 4.0 model is based on
pollution burden and population
characteristics, which contribute to
cumulative impacts. Pollution burden is made
up of two components – exposures and
environmental effects. Population
characteristics are made up of sensitive
populations and socioeconomic factors. Each
of these components (i.e., exposures,
environmental effects, sensitive populations
and socioeconomic factors) are determined
by 21 statewide indicators. Pollution burden
indicators include representative data from
specific pollution types (ozone, PM 2.5, diesel,
lead) and general pollution types (traffic,
groundwater threats, impaired water, and
drinking water contaminants). Population characteristics indicators include socioeconomic risk factors such as educational attainment, linguistic isolation, and poverty rates. Pollution burden and population characteristics are then combined to calculate the overall CalEnviroScreen score.

Scoring for the CalEnviroScreen 4.0 model uses percentiles for each of the indicators in a given geographic area. The percentile represents a relative score for the indicators as compared to the State of California. Thus, the results for each indicator range from 0-100 and represent the percentile ranking. A percentile of 100 means that a particular indicator for that area is among the highest within California, a ranking of 0 would be the lowest. A percent ranking of 50 is the average score for any indicator in California. Generally, lower scores indicate low environmental impacts or desirable socioeconomic conditions and high scores indicate poor environmental conditions, high pollution, and poor socioeconomic conditions. Further details regarding the components included in each risk factor score are further discussed in the following sections.

While the analysis below focuses on the two Impacted Communities (Census Tracts 3640.02 and 3922.02), data is presented for all census tracts located within the City. Analysis and findings are discussed where relevant. Table 4: Overall CalEnviroScreen Percentiles lists the overall CalEnviroScreen 4.0 percentile scores by census tract within the City of Pinole, below.

CalEnviroScreen 4.0 composite scores, pollution burden percentiles and population characteristic percentiles are illustrated through Figure 6 to Figure 9.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 19
Figure 6: City of Pinole Census Tracts

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 20
Figure 7: City of Pinole CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Composite Score

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 21
Figure 8: City of Pinole CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Pollution Burden Percentile

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 22
Figure 9: City of Pinole CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Population Characteristics Percentile

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 23
Table 4: Overall CalEnviroScreen Percentiles
Census Tract CalEnviroScreen
Composite Percentile
Pollution Burden Percentile Population Characteristics
Percentile
Impacted Communities - Census Tracts Meeting One or More CalEPA DAC Criteria 3640.02* 65 52 68
3922.02* 85 75 83
Other Census Tracts
3591.02 42 25 53
3591.03 46 49 42
3592.02* 20 20 23
3601.01* 38 45 34
3601.02* 6 0 30
3630* 48 41 50
* Census tract includes residencies and properties outside of the City of Pinole jurisdiction Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Indicator Maps,
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/ed5953d89038431dbf4f22ab9abfe40d/?data_id=dataSource_25-17c3d89e7e2-layer-1%3A4441, accessed March 21, 2022.

Impacted Communities (Census Tracts 3640.02 and 3922.02) As shown in Table 4, Census Tract 3922.02 is the only tract with a CalEnviroScreen 4.0 percentile score above 75, meeting CalEPA DAC Designation Criteria #1. With a composite score of 85, Census Tract 3922.02 is within the top 15 percent of environmentally burdened census tracts compared to the rest of California. As previously noted, a significant portion of this census tract is located outside the City of Pinole.

Census Tract 3640.02 has the second highest CalEnviroScreen 4.0 percentile score at 65, indicating this census tract is within the top 45 percent of impacted census tracts across California. This score does not meet the CalEPA DAC Designation Criteria #1 but is significantly higher than other census tracts in Pinole. Similar to Census Tract 3922.02, a significant portion of Census Tract 3640.02 is located outside the City of Pinole.

Other Census Tracts
The majority of census tracts within Pinole are characterized by CalEnviroScreen composite, pollution, and population characteristics scores below 50, indicating advantageous environmental outcomes. The remainder of Census Tracts in Pinole have Composite Scores between 6 – 48.

2.3.1 Pollution Indicators
CalEnviroScreen relies on specific pollution metrics to determine environmental burden, as exposure or environmental degradation is a primary concern regarding environmental justice. Communities that are disproportionately affected by environmental pollution are known to result in negative health effects, further discussed in Section 2.3.1. CalEnviroScreen

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 24

4.0 uses 13 pollution indicators to generate an overall pollution burden percentile. Table 5, Pollution Overview, includes both the overall pollution burden percentile and percentile scores for each pollution indicator by census tract.

Table 5: Pollution Overview
Census Tract Impacted
Communities
Other Census Tracts
3922.02* 3640.02* 3591.02 3591.03 3592.02* 3601.01* 3601.02* 3630* Pollution
Burden
Percentile
75 52 25 49 20 45 0 41
Ozone 8 6 8 8 8 6 6 6
PM 2.5 37 37 35 35 30 34 32 36
Diesel PM 60 70 59 82 29 65 8 73
Pesticides 60 0 0 0 6 0 0 0
Toxic Release 27 60 58 58 59 60 60 62
Traffic 9 85 18 96 54 89 7 88
Drinking Water
Contaminants
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Lead in Housing 65 47 44 46 32 25 17 55
Cleanups 98 58 58 79 52 65 0 41
Groundwater
Threats
70 45 22 0 22 55 7 47
Hazardous Waste 89 80 53 63 36 52 17 70
Impaired Water 87 77 83 83 83 87 24 24
Solid Waste 98 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
* Census tract includes land and households outside of the City of Pinole jurisdiction Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Indicator Maps,
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/ed5953d89038431dbf4f22ab9abfe40d/?data_id=dataSource_25-17c3d89e7e2-layer-1%3A4441, accessed March 21, 2022.

Impacted Communities (Census Tracts 3640.02 and 3922.02) Census Tract 3922.02 shows several percentile scores above 75, including cleanups (meaning sites undergoing formal cleanup actions by governmental authorities or property owners), groundwater threats, hazardous waste, impaired water, and solid waste. It is assumed that high pollution overview scores are related to historical and current land uses associated with heavy industry, solid waste/recycling facilities, military and distribution/shipping uses.

Specifically, this tract contains an Amazon distribution center and the UPS North Bay shipping location that likely contributes to higher than average percentile scores. It is noted these uses occur outside of the City of Pinole, but pollution likely carries over and affects populations within the City.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 25
No specific heavy industry or historical clean-up sites in these Census Tracts are located within the City of Pinole. Uses within the Pinole portion of Census Tract 3922.02 include residential (both single-family and multi-family), commercial, light industrial, and transportation uses. Current transportation uses are also assumed to be significant burdens on the community, including the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) and Union Pacific rail lines.

Other Census Tracts
Several pollution burden indicators indicate above average burdens within the City, notably the diesel particulate matter (PM), traffic, hazardous waste, and impaired water indicators.

As several pollution burdens included on Table 5 are interrelated, there are some correlations between pollution burden indicators discussed below.

Census tracts that have notably high diesel PM scores include Census Tracts 3591.03, 3601.01, and 3630. These census tracts also have the highest traffic pollution indicator scores within the City. Diesel PM occurs throughout the environment from both on-road/off-road mobile sources and some stationary sources. Major sources of diesel PM include trucks, buses, cars, ships, and locomotive engines. Cars on the I-80, including traffic conditions, is a likely factor in higher than average diesel PM and traffic pollution burden. Further, the BNSF and Union Pacific rail lines traverse the city east to west and likely impact diesel PM burden.

Hazardous waste pollution indicator scores are above average for multiple census tracts, including Census Tracts 3630, 3640.02 and 3591.03. The portions of Census Tracts 3640.02 and 3630 within the City generally include commercial and some light industrial uses, which are known to generate hazardous materials waste at higher rates/quantities when compared to residential uses. Hazardous waste indicator scores tend to vary across census tracts, ranging from 17 to 89 across the City. The toxic release indicator remains generally consistent across all census tracts, with scores between 58 – 62. Neither of these indicators appear to be correlated with solid waste, which show scores of zero across all census tracts with the exception of Census Tract 3922.02 (Impacted Community), as discussed above.

Impaired water bodies is a pollution indicator with consistently high scores across the majority of the City’s census tracts; five census tracts within the City have scores higher than 80 and one tract has a score of 77. These census tracts are either located along the San Pablo Bay shoreline or along Pinole Creek. Pinole Creek is a known impaired water body, listed by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Board on the 303(d) list due to the pollutant diazinon sourced from urban runoff/storm sewers.15 Diazinon is an insecticide, used in agriculture to control insects and other pests. Residential and private use of diazinon was banned in 2004, as it was found to easily dissolve in water and contaminate groundwater. 15 Regional Water Quality Control Board – San Francisco Bay Region, Final California 2010 Integrated Report (303(d) List/305(b) Report) – Supporting Information,
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/2010state_ir_reports/00704.shtml#7175, accessed August 16, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 26
Diazinon is known to be highly toxic to birds, bees, and other insects, and moderately toxic to fish and amphibians.16 This impaired water listing and known pollutant in Pinole Creek are likely correlated to pollution indicator scores in the top 20% of the state. It should be noted that drinking water contamination scores in Pinole are low across all census tracts, while groundwater threats vary across census tracts. Pesticide risk also remains low, as six of the eight census tracts list a score of zero and two of eight have a score below 10 (33922.02 at score of 9 and 3592.02 at score of 6).

2.3.2 Sensitive Populations
CalEnviroScreen includes data regarding sensitive populations that may be correlated with increased environmental and pollution burdens discussed above. Listed sensitive population data indicators include asthma, low birth weight and cardiovascular disease – health conditions known to be exacerbated by pollution exposure. Table 6, Sensitive Populations, identifies the sensitive populations scores for each indicator by census tract.

Table 6: Sensitive Populations
Census Tract Impacted
Communities
Other Census Tracts
3922.02* 3640.02* 3591.02 3591.03 3592.02* 3601.01* 3601.02* 3630* Population
Characteristics
Score
83 68 53 42 23 34 30 50
Asthma 93 89 61 56 51 57 53 67
Low Birth Weight 86 77 71 66 17 35 45 77
Cardiovascular
Disease
79 68 45 40 34 39 34 51
* Census tract includes land and households outside of the City of Pinole jurisdiction Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Indicator Maps,
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/ed5953d89038431dbf4f22ab9abfe40d/?data_id=dataSource_25-17c3d89e7e2-layer-1%3A4441, accessed March 21, 2022.

Impacted Communities (Census Tracts 3640.02 and 3922.02) Census Tract 3922.02 (Impacted Community) has the highest scores amongst all census tracts for asthma, low birth weight and cardiovascular disease. Census Tract 3640.02 (Impacted Community) also shows relatively high scores for asthma and low birth weight.

The incidence of asthma in Census Tract 3922.02 is scored 93, indicating a burden within the top 10 percent of census tracts within California. Census Tract 3640.02 shows a slightly lower score of 89 for asthma. Asthma is known to be correlated with pollution and environmental factors, particularly in early childhood before the immune system is fully mature. 16 National Pesticide Information Center, Diazinon – General Fact Sheet, http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/Diazgen.html, accessed August 16, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 27
Environmental factors such as pollution exposure may also play a role in adult-onset asthma.

It is noted that asthma can also be caused by factors not related to pollution, such as genetics, allergies, or respiratory infections in early childhood.17 Higher than average rates of asthma could be correlated with the pollution burdens in Census Tract 3922.02, as discussed in Section 2.3.1, Pollution Indicators.

Similarly, low birthweight incidents could also be correlated with high pollution burden percentiles outlined in Section 2.3.1. Low birthweight is defined as when a baby is born weighing less than five pounds, eight ounces and is usually caused either by preterm birth or fetal growth restriction. Known risks to low birthweight includes environmental factors such as exposure to air pollution or lead, and social vulnerability factors such as chronic health conditions, domestic violence, infections, smoking, drinking alcohol or using street drugs. 18 The incidence of low birthweight for Census Tract 3922.02 scored 86, indicating a burden within the top 15 percent of census tracts within California. Census Tract 3640.02 has a lower score of 77 for low birth weight.

Census Tract 3922.02 has a percentile score or 79 for cardiovascular disease indicating an above average incidence of heart-related health problems. While cardiovascular disease can be related to social vulnerability and lack of healthy food or exercise opportunity, it is documented by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that long-term exposure to particulate matter and nitrogen oxides can prematurely age blood vessels, thus contributing to heart disease.19
Both current and historical land uses are likely contributing factors for high pollution indicators, and thus the high concentration of sensitive populations. While the majority of Census Tract 3922.02 is located outside of the City, a small residential neighborhood within Pinole is included where pollution burden is shown by the data to be disproportionate.

Further, significant portions of the City (including residential areas in Census Tract 3591.02) share a boundary with Census Tract 3922.02. Pollution sources from outside of the City within Census Tract 3922.02 could contribute to negative health outcomes in other parts of Pinole, as discussed below.

Other Census Tracts
Generally, indicators for asthma, low birthweight and cardiovascular disease are average or above average. Asthma rates in particular range from 61 – 89 in the remaining census tracts 17 American Lung Association, What Causes Asthma?, https://www.lung.org/lung-health-diseases/lung-diseaselookup/asthma/asthma-symptoms-causes-risk-factors/what-causes-asthma, published October 23, 2022, accessed August 17, 2022.
18 March of Dimes, Low Birthweight, https://www.marchofdimes.org/complications/low-birthweight.aspx published June 2021, accessed August 17, 2022.
19 United States Environmental Protection Agency, Linking Air Pollution and Heart Disease, https://www.epa.gov/sciencematters/linking-air-pollution-and-heart-disease, published March 30, 2022, accessed August 16, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 28
within the City, even for census tracts with low diesel PM and traffic scores. For example, Census Tract 3601.02 shows a Diesel PM score of 8 and Traffic score of 7, but an asthma score of 53. As previously discussed, asthma occurrences could be related to factors outside of pollution burden, such as genetics or allergies. Asthma occurrences could also be correlated with indoor pollution types not tracked or documented by CalEnviroScreen 4.0.

Several census tracts within Pinole scored within the 70th percentile for low birthweight incidents, including 3591.02, 3630, and 3640.02. While Census Tracts 3630 and 3640.02 also show high scores in the Diesel PM, Traffic, and Hazardous Waste categories, Census Tract 3591.02 generally scores average or below average in these categories. Similar to asthma occurrences, low birthweight can also be correlated with risk factors outside of pollution burden.

Cardiovascular disease scores are generally below average, with the exception of Census Tract 3640.02. This tract shows the second highest pollution burden percentile score at 52, with high scores in diesel PM, traffic, and hazardous waste categories. This census tract is located adjacent to Census Tract 3922.02 (Impacted Community), and negative health impacts could be attributed to proximity of industrial and other polluting historical land uses.

Further, Census Tract 3640.02 is located largely outside of the City of Pinole.

2.3.3 Socioeconomic Factors
According to OEHHA, there is a growing body of literature that provides evidence of the heightened vulnerability of people of color and lower socioeconomic status to environmental pollutants. Socioeconomic factors analyzed by CalEnviroScreen include education, linguistic isolation, poverty, unemployment, and housing burden. Table 7, Socioeconomic Factors, identifies the socioeconomic factors scores for each indicator by census tract.

Table 7: Socioeconomic Factors
Census Tract Impacted
Communities
Other Census Tracts
3922.02* 3640.02* 3591.02 3591.03 3592.02* 3601.01* 3601.02* 3630* Population
Characteristics
Score
83 68 53 42 23 34 30 50
Education 63 58 59 30 40 44 34 38
Linguistic
Isolation
64 52 38 41 10 31 N/A 29
Poverty 36 49 27 25 28 30 7 48
Unemployment 54 9 47 63 53 13 74 54
Housing Burden 73 54 55 14 20 52 1 7
* Census tract includes land and households outside of the City of Pinole jurisdiction Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Indicator Maps,
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/ed5953d89038431dbf4f22ab9abfe40d/?data_id=dataSource_25-17c3d89e7e2-layer-1%3A4441, accessed March 21, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 29
Impacted Communities (Census Tracts 3640.02 and 3922.02) Census Tract 3922.02 includes the highest scores out of the eight census tracts for education levels (indicating lower levels of educational attainment), linguistic isolation (indicating high occurrences of linguistic isolation) and housing burden (indicating rent or mortgage levels over 30 percent of a household income). Despite socioeconomic indicators scored between 36 to 73, scores from sensitive population indicators (including 90th percentile asthma occurrences and 80th percentile low birthweight occurrences) result in a high population characteristic score at 83. This generally indicates high levels of social vulnerability, although instances of poverty remain below average and unemployment are average.

Other Census Tracts
Socioeconomic percentile scores for census tracts within Pinole are all below average or average, indicating advantageous socioeconomic outcome. Census Tract 3601.02 reports an unusually high unemployment score at 74, while other census tracts report scores either below average or average. The unemployment indicator represents the percentage of the population over the age of 16 and under the age of 65 that is unemployed and eligible for the labor force. Census Tract 3601.02 does not include any other significant vulnerability factors, with very low scores for housing burden (1) and poverty (7). Educational attainment appears to be high, with a below average percentile score of 34. No data for linguistic isolation is reported for this census tract. Despite the high unemployment score, the population characteristics composite score is 30 – generally indicating low social vulnerability compared to other census tracts in California. Additionally, it is noted this census tract includes a small portion within Pinole, the remainder of the census tract includes areas in El Sobrante to the south of Pinole.

The remainder of the population characteristic composite scores range from 23 to 68, generally below average or slightly above average. Majority of other scores reported are generally consistent across the remaining seven census tracts.

2.3.4 Race/Ethnicity Profiles
CalEnviroScreen 4.0 does not include indicators to document of race or ethnicity distribution, but CalEnviroScreen does include a race/ethnicity profile to supplement the indicator scores listed above. Understanding the distribution of CalEnviroScreen cumulative impact scores in association with race and ethnicity distribution are critical to understanding issues at the intersection of environmental justice and equity. The race/ethnicity profiles compiled by CalEnviroScreen 4.0 are included below in Table 8, Racial/Ethnic Populations.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 30
Table 8: Racial/Ethnic Populations
Census Tract
Impacted
Communities
Other Census Tracts
3922.02* 3640.02* 3591.02 3591.03 3592.02* 3601.01* 3601.02* 3630* African
American

16.9% 14.3% 15.7% 9.9% 7.8% 8.1% 9.6% 19.7%
Asian American 18.8% 18.8% 26.2% 37.1% 21.9% 18.1% 25.8% 18.6% Hispanic 43.9% 41.9% 28.3% 12.5% 20.8% 19.6% 20.4% 25.3% Other 3.8% 4.5% 5.7% 8.9% 7.8% 11.6% 2.8% 4.7%
White 16.4% 20.4% 24% 31.6% 41.5% 42.6% 41.1% 31.7%
* Census tract includes land and households outside of the City of Pinole jurisdiction Source: CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Indicator Maps,
https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/ed5953d89038431dbf4f22ab9abfe40d/?data_id=dataSource_25-17c3d89e7e2-layer-1%3A4441, accessed March 21, 2022.

Impacted Communities (Census Tracts 3640.02 and 3922.02) Census Tract 3922.02 and Census Tract 3620.02 (Impacted Communities) have the highest percentage of Hispanic populations, at 43.9 percent and 41.9 percent, respectively. In addition, Census Tract 3922.02 has the second highest percentage of Black residents at 16.9 percent. Asian American citizens are generally represented at similar rates as other census tracts. Census Tracts 3922.02 and 3620.02 have the lowest percentage of white residents at

16.4 percent and 20.4 percent, respectively. Generally, Census Tract 3922.02 has the most diverse race and ethnicity breakdown compared to the rest of the census tracts. As discussed in previous sections, this Census Tract experiences pollution burden in the 75th percentile, with several pollution indicators such as solid waste, cleanup sites, hazardous waste, and impaired waters reported back in the 80th percentile or higher. Further, this census tract reports a 93rd percentile score for incidents of asthma, with low birthweight scores at 86 and cardiovascular disease at 79. While other population characteristics are below average or average, the housing burden score at 73 is the highest of all eight census tracts analyzed.

The intersection of race/ethnicity and significant pollution burden in this census tract is a critical environmental justice concern. This environmental justice element is limited in ability to address the full extent of this complex issue. It is noted that the majority of this census tract is located outside of the City of Pinole, and the census tract only includes approximately 50 residential uses. Further race or ethnicity data breakdowns by census block or census block group do not yield significantly improved or detailed information, as the size of the residential area accounts for a very small footprint at both the census block and census block group level. Thus, it is unclear if the racial/ethnic makeup of the portion of the census tract in Pinole is similar in nature to Census Tract 3922.02 as a whole.

Policies within this document are only applicable to the City of Pinole, including the portion of Census Tract 3922.02 within the City; the remainder of Census Tract 3922.02 is outside of the City’s jurisdiction and control. The majority of current and historical industrial uses occurred in neighboring jurisdictions, where the City does not control land use decisionPage 245 of 516

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 31
making. Given the unique circumstances of this census tracts, policies focus on partnerships with neighboring jurisdictions and Contra Costa County, where feasible, to address this environmental justice concern.

Other Census Tracts
Racial/ethnic populations distributed in the six other census tracts are generally uniform, with some exceptions. Generally, white populations represent the largest population group, followed by Hispanic, Asian American, African American and then Other. However, Asian Americans represent the largest population group in Census Tract 3591.03 at 37.1 percent.

Also, Hispanic populations represent the largest group in Census Tract 3591.02.

Concentrations of racial/ethnic populations in these census tracts do not correlate with disproportionate environmental or socioeconomic disadvantages.

2.4 2017 SB 535 Previous DAC Designation (CalEPA DAC Designation Criteria #3)
In addition to CalEnviroScreen 4.0 composite scores receiving the highest 25 percent of overall scores in CalEnviroScreen 4.0 (CalEPA DAC Designation Criteria #1), census tracts previously identified in the 2017 DAC designation (regardless of current CalEnviroScreen 4.0 scores) are considered to be disadvantaged or Impacted Communities. The 2017 CalEPA designation recognized census tracts in the top 25 percent as identified by CalEnviroScreen

3.0.20 According to OEHHA, there are 307 tracts in California that were designated as Impacted Communities in 2017 that meet this specific DAC criteria. 21 Two census tracts within Pinole meet this criterion, as discussed in Section 2.1, above. Census Tract 3640.02 and 3922.02 both were identified in 2017 as Impacted Communities, and thus they meet CalEPA DAC Designation Criteria #3. Therefore, both census tracts are formally designated as Impacted Communities in this Environmental Justice Element.

2.5 Household Median Income by Census Tracts
In addition, CalEnviroScreen 4.0 data, OPR also recommends evaluating California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) list of state income limits to identify communities at or below the statewide median income ($87,100 for a family of 4 during 2020). Income is a critical metric for analyzing Impacted Communities and identifying areas that may experience environmental justice issues related to income. Income data from the American Community Survey (US Census Bureau) at the census tract level is included 20 California Environmental Protection Agency, Final Designation of Disadvantaged Communities Pursuant to Senate Bill 535, https://calepa.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2022/05/Updated-Disadvantaged-Communities-Designation-DAC-May2022-Eng.a.hp_-1.pdf, published May 2022, accessed October 26, 2022. 21 California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities – California Climate Investments to Benefit Disadvantaged Communities, https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/sb535, accessed October 26, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 32
below in Table 9, Median Household Income. Figure 10 depicts the census blocks within the City where the median household income is below the Statewide median household income level, $87,100.

Table 9: Median Household Income
Census
Tract
Impacted
Communities
Other Census Tracts
3922.02* 3640.02* 3591.02 3591.03 3592.02* 3601.01* 3601.02* 3630* Median
Income
$89,567 $94,313 $94,902 $97,689 $113,821 $82,457 $128,781 $86,830 * Census tract includes land and households outside of the City of Pinole jurisdiction Source: American Community Survey 2020 5-Year Profiles, DP03 – ACS – Selected Economic Characteristics.

Two Census Tracts within Pinole have reported median household incomes below the statewide median income level: Census Tract 3601.01 ($82,457) and Census Tract 3630 ($86,830). When compared to CalEnviroScreen 4.0 data, direct correlations between below median household income levels and environmental justice are unclear. For example, Census Tract 3601.01 and 3603 both report below average pollution burden percentile scores, indicating generally positive outcomes. Both tracts have above average scores in traffic and diesel PM indicators, and Census Tract 3601.01 has an impaired water score of

87. The pollution burden percentile score for Census Tract 3601.01 is listed at 45; Census Tract 3630 is listed at 41. The median pollution burden percentile score for this census tracts is 43; while Census Tract 3630 and 3601.01 indicate below median income levels, pollution burden is reported back to be on par with median percentile scores.

Similarly, Census Tract 3601.01 and 3630 report population characteristic scores categorized as average or below average, generally indicating positive outcomes. Census Tract 3601.01 reports slightly higher than average housing burden with a score of 52; however, the percentile score for population characteristics is 34. Census Tract 3630 reports slightly higher than average unemployment burden with a score of 54, and the percentile score for population characteristics is exactly average at 50.

Comparatively, both Impacted Communities show income levels higher than the state average. Census Tract 3922.02 has the highest pollution burden percentile score at 75 and the highest population characteristics score at 83. This census tracts report a median household income slightly above the statewide median average at $89,567. The second-most burdened census tract within the City, Census Tract 3640.01, has a pollution burden percentile score at 68 and pollution burden percentile score at 52. This census tract reports median household income at $94,313, significantly above the statewide median of $87,100.

Thus, factors other than household income may be driving inequity in pollution burden and population characteristics. This is compounded by Census Tract 3601.02 reporting the highest median household income at $128,781 per household, while simultaneously reporting the highest unemployment score within the City at 74. It is noted that the census tracts discussed above are not located entirely within the City of Pinole, where factors

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 33
outside of the City’s control are included within the ACS data. Further, factors other than median household income can affect accessibility and capacity when evaluated at the family level.

Figure 10: Pinole Median Household Income Data

2.6 Supporting Environmental Justice Data
In addition to the OPR recommended analysis of CalEnviroScreen 4.0 and ACS median household income data, supporting environmental justice data is included in the section below to provide a comprehensive review of the City of Pinole.

2.6.1 Healthy Places Index
The California Healthy Places Index (HPI) is a data tool from the Public Health Alliance of Southern California to advance health equity. The Public Health Alliance of Southern California is an active coalition of ten local public health jurisdictions and supports emerging best practices for advancing a healthier California. The HPI was a tool to explore community conditions that impact life expectancy and combines 25 community characteristics (such as

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 34
access to healthcare, housing, education) into a single, indexed score.22 The healthier a community, the higher the HPI score. Table 10, Healthy Places Index, identifies HPI percentile scores by census tract within Pinole.

Table 10: Healthy Places Index
Census Tract HPI Percentile
Impacted Communities Census Tracts Meeting One or More CalEPA Criteria 3640.02* 53.5
3922.02* 44.4
Other Census Tracts
3591.02 80.5
3591.03 66.5
3592.02* 81.9
3601.01* 84.2
3601.02* 91.0
3630* 70.2
* Census tract includes land and households outside of the City of Pinole jurisdiction Source: Healthy Places Index, https://map.healthyplacesindex.org/?redirect=false, accessed April 13, 2022.

Generally, census tracts within the City are listed with above average HPI scores, indicating advantageous health outcomes in these neighborhoods. Several tracts list scores of 80 or above, including Census Tract 3591.02, 3592.02, 3601.01 and 3601.2.

Both Impacted Communities reflect the lowest HPI scores, with Census Tract at 44.4 and 3640.02 at 53.5. HPI reports policy action areas to improve this score in economic, education, neighborhood, housing, and healthcare access categories. Specific burdens on unemployment, high school graduation rates, park access, retail density and low income homeowner/renter cost burden are noted by the Public Health Alliance of Southern California. This data generally matches reports from CalEnviroScreen 4.0 and is consistent with findings discussed under Section 2.3.

The HPI data viewer also provides scores for the City and County level. The City of Pinole has an HPI percentile score of 83.6, indicating the City has healthier community conditions than

83.6 percent of other California cities. At the county level, Contra Costa County has an HPI percentile score of 91.2, indicating the County has healthier community conditions than 91.2 percent of other California counties. The high City and County scores are generally comparable to the surrounding area, with the exception of the known Impacted Communities as discussed above.
22 Healthy Places Index, About the HPI, https://www.healthyplacesindex.org/about-hpi, accessed October 31, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 35

2.6.2 Healthy Food Access
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) the Food Access Research Atlas is a data tool to present food access indicators and identify “food deserts”. A food desert is defined as a census tract with limited access to health and affordable food. USDA research has shown areas with higher levels of poverty are more likely to be food deserts, but other factors such as vehicle availability and use of public transportation can contribute to food desert conditions. It is important to note that food deserts can be found in dense urban areas, rural areas, and all types of urbanized communities in between.23 The Food Access Research Atlas identifies both low income and low access census tracts, to identify and evaluate food deserts. Low-income census tracts are defined as:
• Poverty rate at 20 percent or greater; or,
• Median family income is less than or equal to 80 percent of the state-wide median family income; or,
• The tract is within a metropolitan area and has a median family income less than or equal to 80 percent of the metropolitan area’s median family income.

Low income tracts are then compared against low access tracts. USDA defines low access to food stores by the number (at least 500) and share (at least 33 percent) of people at different distances from the nearest supermarket, supercenter, or large grocery store, as well as the number of housing units without access to a vehicle and are more than 0.5 mile from a store.

Thus, USDA maps three measures in urban areas for low food store access:
• Low Income (LI) and Low Access (LA) at 1-mile [a significant number of residents is more than 1 mile from the nearest food store].
• LI and LA at 0.5-mile [a significant number of residents is 0.5-mile from the nearest food store].
• LI and LA using vehicle access [more than 100 housing units do not have a vehicle and are more than 0.5-mile from the nearest food store].

It is generally understood that the further people have to travel, challenges to healthy food access occur. Further, USDA cites vehicle availability as an important measure of how readily a household can access a food store. It is also noted that not all people in a census tract categorized as low access are low-income or without a vehicle. 24 23 United States Department of Agriculture, Characteristics, and Influential Factors of Food Deserts, https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/45014/30940_err140.pdf, published August 2012 and accessed May 23, 2022.
24 United States Department of Agriculture – Economic Research Service, Introduction to the Food Access Research Atlas, https://gisportal.ers.usda.gov/portal/apps/experiencebuilder/experience/?id=a53ebd7396cd4ac3a3ed09137676fd40&page=p age_0, accessed August 22, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 36
Census Tract 3922.02 (Impacted Community) is listed as a LI and LA community at 1-mile, where a significant number of residents is more than one mile to the nearest food store.

USDA notes that this tract does not have a high number of households without vehicles that are located more than one-half mile from a supermarket. Census Tract 3922.02 is known to have both environmental and socioeconomic burdens compared to neighboring census tracts, as identified by CalEnviroScreen 4.0 data. While CalEnviroScreen does not discuss food access or food deserts, the data conveyed by the USDA data is generally consistent with other socioeconomic burdens previously discussed and documented.

Figure 11: USDA Low-Income and Low-Access Food Atlas
Source: United States Department of Agriculture, Food Access Research Atlas, https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/food-accessresearch-atlas/go-to-the-atlas/, accessed April 13, 2022.

Census Tracts 3640.02 (Impacted Community), 3591.03, 3630 and are listed as LI and LA communities at 0.5-mile, where a significant number of residents is more than 0.5-mile to the nearest food store. While these census tracts indicate shorter distances to food stores when compared to Census Tract 3922.02, 0.5-mile distances or more can create access challenges for vulnerable populations. In addition, Census Tract 3640.02 is documented by USDA as a census tract with a high number of households (135 of 1,798, or 7.5 percent) without vehicles, more than one-half a mile from a supermarket. Reliance on public transportation or alternative transportation methods (such as walking or bicycling) can pose significant challenges to accessing healthy foods.

2.6.3 Transit, Bike and Walkability Access
Transportation access is closely linked to environmental justice and health concerns, as lowincome populations may rely on public transportation or active transportation methods such

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 37
as walking and bicycling. In urban and suburban communities, public transportation or walking/biking can pose safety risks in areas designed primarily for cars. Public transportation can run slowly or irregularly, increasing the amount of time required to travel the same distance when compared to a private vehicle. Further, access can be prohibited by lack of infrastructure such as sidewalks, bike lanes, or transit stop facilities (e.g., benches, adequate lighting, and shade structure). Further, certain populations such as children or senior citizens may not be able to drive but would benefit from safe access without reliance on someone with a private vehicle.

Walk Score is an evaluation tool to measure general walkability and bike access for a community. This tool assigns composite scores based on how accessible a community is for those without cars. The Walk Score for the City of Pinole is 42, indicating that Pinole is a cardependent city and more errands require a car. The most walkable neighborhoods in Pinole are listed as Old Town (Census Tract 3591.03, Walk Score 61), Nob Hill (Census Tract 3591.02, Walk Score 58) and East Bluff (Census Tract 3591.03, Walk Score 54). The Bike Score for Pinole is listed as 28, indicating that Pinole is somewhat bikeable but with minimal bike-specific infrastructure.25
Reasons for the relatively low pedestrian and bicycle access include lack of roadway crossing aids, narrow roads, lack of bicycle lanes, lack of signage and topography. Future projects are aimed at enhancing connectivity in the City, including the multi-use San Francisco Bay project and planned trails development to extend the Pinole Creek Trail to Pinole Valley Park.

Public transportation in the City includes bus services provided by the Western Contra Costa Transit Authority (WestCAT) and the Alameda Contra Costa Transit Authority (AC Transit).

Within Pinole, WestCAT operates primarily along the City’s main transportation corridors including San Pablo Avenue, I-80, Appian Way, and Pinole Valley Road. Services are provided Monday through Friday with limited service on Saturdays and Sundays. AC Transit services in the City are limited to routes along Fitzgerald Drive and Appian Way, which connect the Richmond Parkway Transit Center with the Richmond transit center.

2.6.4 Medical Care Access
Medical care access is fundamentally linked to environmental justice, as a key component to fighting health disparities in the community. While Pinole is a mid-sized City within the urbanized San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward Metropolitan Area, specific types of medical care can be challenging to access and require travel outside of the City. The City of Pinole previously had a small hospital and emergency room facilities (Doctor’s Medical Center) located at 2151 Appian Way; this hospital declared bankruptcy and closed in 2006.26 The 25 WalkScore, Living in Pinole, https://www.walkscore.com/CA/Pinole, accessed August 22, 2022. 26 San Francisco Business Times, Doctors Medical Center closes Pinole campus, https://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/stories/2006/09/11/daily29.html, published September 14, 2006, accessed August 25, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 38
physical structure was demolished; no similar hospital, emergency room, or urgent care facilities have opened in the City since closing Doctor’s Medical Center.

The largest medical center in City of Pinole is the Kaiser Permanente Pinole Medical Office, located along Pinole Valley Road north of Interstate-80. Kaiser Permanente is a membershipbased integrated managed case consortium, that only accepts Kaiser Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) insurance plans or assigned Medicare/Medicaid/Medi-Cal plans. Thus, not all citizens in Pinole can access medical care at this specific facility. Kaiser Permanente Pinole is not an emergency care facility or urgent care facility. The following services are offered at this location: adult medicine, family medicine, injection clinic, laboratory, pediatrics, pharmacy, radiology/diagnostic imaging, rehabilitation services and women’s health services.

There is one urgent care facility located in Pinole, LifeLong Immediate Urgent Care at 806 San Pablo Avenue. Office hours listed on the facility website are limited, 1:00 PM – 4:00 PM Monday through Thursday, and closed Friday – Sunday. 27 Outside of the City, there are three urgent care facilities in Richmond, one in Vallejo and four in Concord.

The closet emergency care facilities near Pinole include:
• Emergency Room – Kaiser Permanente Richmond Medical Center (approximately 8 miles from the City)
• Emergency Room – Sutter Solano Medical Center (approximately 14 miles from the City)
• Emergency Room – Contra Costa County Martinez Health Center (approximately 14 miles from the City)
• Emergency Room – Kaiser Permanente Vallejo Medical Center (approximately 14 miles from the City)
• Emergency Room -- Alta Bates Campus Emergency Department (approximately 15 miles from the City)
• Emergency Room – Kaiser Permanente Oakland Medical Center (approximately 16 miles from the City)
It is noted that Kaiser Permanente can provide emergency medical care to non-members in the above mentioned emergency room facilities.

Urban hospital closures are known to impact vulnerable populations and uninsured communities most greatly. Studies have observed and concluded that increased journey distance to the hospital Is associated with increased risk of mortality.28 Further, the negative 27 LifeLong Medical Care, Immediate/Urgent Care – Pinole, https://lifelongmedical.org/locations/lifelong-immediate-urgentcare-pinole/, accessed August 25, 2022. 28 Nichol, et al. The relationship between distance to hospital and patient mortality in emergencies: an observational study, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17711952/, published September 24, 2007, accessed August 25, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 39
consequences of hospital closure extend beyond timely access to medical care, but also often affect long-term employment prospects and population growth of a community. 29

2.6.5 Polling Places Access
Voting is the most basic act of citizenship, participation in the electoral process by voting.

The right to participate in local, state, and federal elections is the primary way to participate in the public decision making process. California has become increasingly inclusive, providing multiple options to vote, including vote-by-mail, secure ballot drop-off boxes, early in-person voting, and conventional election day voting. During the 2020 and 2022 elections, all active registered voters automatically received a vote-by-mail ballot with pre-paid postage, to provide additional voting options amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.

For the 2022 primary in June and 2022 election in November, one official ballot drop box is located within the City jurisdiction at City Hall, 2131 Pear Street.30 This drop box is located outdoors and is available for ballot drop-off 24/7. Residents in Pinole may drop off their ballot at any ballot drop box within the County. Ballot drop boxes are secured to prevent tampering or unauthorized retrieval of envelopes. Each ballot box is inspected daily for damage or evidence of tampering. 31
At the time of this writing, polling locations have not been confirmed for the November 2022 election. For the June 2022 primary election, three polling locations were available within the City, listed below: 32
• Shannon Elementary, 685 Marlesta Road
• Pinole Valley Community Church, 2885 Pinole Valley Road • Pinole Senior Center, 2500 Charles Avenue
In addition, Pinole provides elections information and voter registration information on the City website, linked here:
https://www.ci.pinole.ca.us/city_government/city_council/elections_information 29 Health Care Drive, Negative effects of rural hospital closings go beyond health, study finds, https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/negative-effects-of-rural-hospital-closings-go-beyond-health-study-finds/620700/, published March 21, 2022, accessed August 25, 2022.
30 Contra Costa County Elections, Official Ballot Drop Boxes, https://www.cocovote.us/official-ballot-drop-boxes/, accessed August 25, 2022.
31 Contra Costa County Elections, Official Ballot Drop Boxes – Common Questions, https://www.cocovote.us/official-ballot-dropboxes/, accessed August 25, 2022. 32 League of Women Voters – Smart Voter, List of Polling Locations in Contra Costa County – June 7, 2022, http://www.smartvoter.org/2022/06/07/ca/cc/polllist.html, accessed August 25, 2022.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 40

2.7 Summary of Impacted Community Identification
After a review of CalEnviroScreen 4.0 data, previous 2017 DAC identification, and other environmental justice related data sources, it is concluded that Census Tracts 3922.02 and 3640.02 are both Impacted Communities in the City of Pinole. While additional environmental justice data resources were reviewed, findings and results were not significant enough to identify other City Census Tracts as Impacted Communities. Policies identified in Section 3 will include specific focus on the Impacted Communities, where noted.

Figure 12 illustrates the City of Pinole Impacted Communities, below.

Figure 12: City of Pinole Impacted Communities Summary

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 41
3 Policy Recommendations

3.1 Policy Introduction and Preparation Summary
Based on the Impacted Community findings discussed above, recommended policies are presented and organized in the sections below. Government Code 65302(h)(1)(A) to (C) statutorily requires Environmental Justice Elements to address the following topical areas:
• Identify objectives and policies to reduce exposure to pollution including improving air quality in disadvantaged communities.
• Identify objectives and policies to promote public facilities in disadvantaged communities.
• Identify objectives and policies to promote food access in disadvantaged communities.
• Identify objectives and policies to promote safe and sanitary homes in disadvantaged communities.
• Identify objectives and policies to promote physical activity in disadvantaged communities.
• Identify objectives and policies to reduce and unique or compounded health risks in disadvantaged communities not otherwise addressed above. • Identify objectives and policies to promote civic engagement in the public decisionmaking process in disadvantaged communities. • Identify objectives and policies that prioritize improvements and programs that address the needs of disadvantaged communities.

To meet these regulatory requirements, policies are organized and grouped by topical area as follows:
• Equity in Access: healthy food, public facilities, public transit, key employment centers, government services, medical/health services, quality schools, and childcare. • Equity in Environment: air quality, water quality, health risks associated with climate change and climate vulnerability, safe and sanitary housing. • Equity in Civic Engagement Opportunities: access to civic engagement opportunities, access to voting/polling places
• Equity in Generations: preserving the right of future generations to live, work, and enjoy Pinole.

At the direction of City staff, policies from the Health and Safety Element specifically related to Health topical areas were reorganized and moved into the Environmental Justice Element.

The purpose behind this policy reorganization is to reduce redundancy between the two General Plan Elements. Many topical areas previously covered in the Health and Safety

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 42
Element are closely related to topical areas addressed in the Environmental Justice Element.

Thus, the previous Health and Safety Element will now be known as the Safety Element. The Environmental Justice Element covers health topical areas integrated into each section.

Where policies were previously included in the Health and Safety Element, notations are bracketed in blue highlight. The original goal, policy or action title is included. This formatting is for organizational purposes only; the Final Environmental Justice Element will remove these identifiers and present all-inclusive policies.

Goals, policies, and actions below are intended to address circumstances in both the Impacted Communities and the greater City of Pinole. Where applicable, focused policies relating to localized environmental justice issues in the Impacted Communities are specifically identified. For other topical areas with greater reach beyond the Impacted Communities, policies will be applicable to the entirety of the City.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 43
4 Goals, Policy, and Action Items
GOAL EJ 1: Promote and support equity in access to key quality of life factors, including access to healthy food, public facilities, public transit, key employment centers, government services, medical/health services, quality schools and childcare.

Equity in Access
POLICY EJ 1.1: Ensure adequate and equitable access to healthy food to promote healthy lifestyles and prevent obesity.

Action EJ 1.1.1: Encourage and support efforts by schools to help shape curriculum and improve access to information related to nutrition and exercise.

Action EJ 1.1.2: Encourage schools to set up community gardens by identifying land adjacent to schools that can be used as a garden or by making City staff available to assist the school in starting a garden.

Action EJ 1.1.3: Explore using zoning regulations to help create a healthier environment for children by limiting or restricting the number of fast-food outlets near schools.

Action EJ 1.1.4: Promote local farmers’ markets as an affordable and healthy option for fresh food. Explore opportunities that allow farmers market vendors to accept CalFresh, WIC, and Market Match.

Action EJ 1.1.5: Promote educational opportunities and programs that provide residents with the knowledge, skills, and resources, to make healthy food decisions.

Action EJ 1.1.6: Evaluate healthy eating equity as part of the land use decision-making process, to avoid concentrations of fast-food establishments/convenience stores creating healthy food deserts in both the Impacted Communities and remainder of the City.

Action EJ 1.1.7:Promote statewide efforts to expand the usage of food assistance benefits (e.g., CalFresh, WIC, and Market Match) to increase the purchasing power of the community and decrease food insecurity.

POLICY EJ 1.2: Ensure adequate and equitable access to recreational opportunities, including access to parks, open space, natural spaces, and trails, to promote healthy lifestyles and prevent obesity.

Action EJ 1.2.1: Collaborate with school districts and other private facilities to form joint use of facility agreements for the use of pools, sports, and recreation facilities.

Action EJ 1.2.2 : Encourage educational facilities to locate in areas that will encourage walking and physical activity to promote student health.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 44
Action EJ 1.2.3: Ensure the goals, policies and actions in the Natural Resources and Open Spaces Element have been implemented in a manner that promotes equitable access to quality recreational opportunities within parks in Pinole. Integrate universal design principles when designing public spaces.

POLICY EJ 1.3: Encourage equitable access through active transportation and public transit to key employment centers, commercial corridors, government services and civic uses.

Action EJ 1.3.1: Encourage compact, transit-oriented development within one-quarter to onehalf mile of transit stations and transit stops along key corridors.

Action EJ 1.3.2: Continue to collaborate with transportation/transit agencies and organizations to improve transit service, ensure equitable access, and encourage increased ridership.

Action EJ 1.3.3: Continue implementation of the Three Corridors Specific Plan for commercial corridors along San Pablo Avenue, Pinole Valley Road, and Appian Way, establishing mixeduse development, land use designations, and design guidelines that encourage walkable communities, improved bicycle facilities, and improved public transit facilities.

Action EJ 1.3.4: Improve conditions for walking and bicycling around schools by installing crosswalks, colored pavement, curb bulb outs, and other improvements to ensure pedestrian and bicyclist safety.

Action EJ 1.3.5: Promote and advertise WestCAT Dial-A-Ride transportation service for senior citizens to enhance accessibility for citizens aged 65 or older.

Action EJ 1.3.6: Include street design features that facilitate biking and walking trips in both newly developed and established neighborhoods.

Action EJ 1.3.7: Require all new development be designed to enable easy and safe pedestrian and bicycle access and circulation.

Action EJ 1.3.8: Identify and remove gaps and barriers in the walking and biking network, construction new facilities where necessary. Focus connectivity improvements within the Impacted Communities.

POLICY EJ 1.4: Encourage and enhance access for children to schools and recreational opportunities.

Action EJ 1.4.1: Coordinate with West Contra Costa County Unified School District and other public agencies to provide adequate transportation access to Pinole public schools.

Action EJ 1.4.2: Ensure that future schools and childcare facilities are sited in residential or mixed-use zones that avoid incompatible land uses and environmental health concerns associated with commercial, agricultural, or industrial uses.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 45
Action EJ 1.4.3: Continue offering low-cost enrichment classes, sports, and childcare opportunities at the Pinole Youth Center and Tiny Tots. Consider partnering with private entities for supplementary low-cost recreational or childcare opportunities.

Action EJ 1.4.4: Encourage partnerships between West Contra Costa County School District and the Pinole Recreation Department to expand accessible and affordable programming and recreational opportunities at the Pinole Youth Center and Tiny Tots.

Action EJ 1.4.5: Participate in the Safe Walk to School Program and Injury Prevention and Physical Activity Promotion, prioritizing barrier removal to active transportation between residential areas and schools. Focus on enhancing safe pedestrian, bicycle, and transit connections in both the Impacted Communities and remainder of City.

POLICY EJ 1.5: Ensure a full range of equitable public health services to support varied health and wellness needs in the community, including children, senior citizens, disabled individuals, other vulnerable populations.

Action EJ 1.5.1: Encourage local health care providers to locate health care services and facilities and provide adequate staffing to ensure equitable accessibility to such facilities.

Action EJ 1.5.2: Identify health services that are not readily available in the community and seek to improve access to these services.

Action EJ 1.5.3: Consult with medical service providers to consider the establishment of urgent care facilities or other emergency medical service facilities.

Action EJ 1.5.4: Consider collaboration with neighboring jurisdictions in an effort to establish regional urgent care facilities/emergency medical service facilities in mutually beneficial locations.

Action EJ 1.5.5: Consider a low-cost or free non-emergency medical transportation service to enhance accessibility to medical care without relying on ambulance or other emergency transportation.

Action EJ 1.5.6: Encourage the development of a medical center, emergency room, urgent care, or other similar uses within the City of Pinole.

Action EJ 1.5.7: Publicize low-cost or free health services and resources, including low-cost or free insurance programs. Consider cultural competency when selecting the method, approach, and language used in publication materials.

Action EJ 1.5.8: Encourage new medical and health uses to locate near existing transit stations to enhance accessibility.

Action EJ 1.5.9: Promote and connect at risk individuals with the Contra Costa County H3 (Health, Housing and Homeless) Services.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 46
POLICY EJ 1.6: Support and encourage educational programs and practices that improve public health, with particular focus on improving outcomes for sensitive populations.

Action EJ 1.6.1: Integrate healthy life choices into City recreation programs for all age groups.

Action EJ 1.6.2: Participate in programs, events, and ongoing outreach efforts that disseminate information about maintenance of physical and mental health and illness prevention.

Action EJ 1.6.3: Continue to encourage physical activity and provide a broad range of recreational activities in the community.

Action EJ 1.6.4: Work cooperatively with the medical community to develop and support programs promoting healthy lifestyles, including improved diets, exercise, smoking cessation, and diabetes prevention/treatment.

Action EJ 1.6.5: Investigate the high instances of asthma, low birth weight, and cardiovascular disease within the Impacted Community as reported by CalEnviroScreen. Identify instances occurring both within and outside of the City, and potential land use, policy, or infrastructure solutions.

Action EJ 1.6.6: Investigate higher than average instances of asthma across the City. Identify potential land use, policy, or infrastructure solutions accordingly.

GOAL EJ 2: Support land use patterns and densities that reduce pollution, with particular focus to reducing pollution burden in and around Impacted Communities.

Equity in Environment
POLICY EJ 2.1: Improve land use planning to minimize water quality pollution, including compliance with state and federal water quality standards.

Action EJ 2.1.1: Create partnerships of community groups, businesses, and agencies to develop strategies to reduce water pollution.

Action EJ 2.1.2 : Enforce the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit regulations.

Action EJ 2.1.3: Prohibit development in areas that are particularly susceptible to erosion and sediment loss, that cannot be mitigated through standard engineering procedures.

Action EJ 2.1.4: Implement the Stormwater Management Plan.

Action EJ 2.1.5:Where appropriate, maximize infiltration of rainwater into soil. Ensure that impervious surfaces created in new development and redevelopment is designed to optimize infiltration. Minimize or eliminate direct connections between impervious surfaces and storm drains.

Action EJ 2.1.6: Support regional, state, and federal clean water programs.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 47
Action EJ 2.1.7: Proactively support the San Francisco Bay Regional Quality Control Board in clean-up efforts on Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) cases within the City of Pinole and adjacent to the City boundary. Prioritize support on clean-up efforts at LUST cases affecting the Impacted Community (including those sites outside of the City), such as the former Chevron facility sites, Wiegmann Rose Inter Co, and Koppers, Inc.

Action EJ 2.1.8: Work with the Office of Environmental Health and Hazards Assessment and the state Department of Toxic Substances to better understand potential impacts and exposures from water quality pollution identified in the most current version of CalEnviroScreen 4.0.

POLICY EJ 2.2: Reduce the transport of runoff and surface pollutants off-site and reduce pollutant loading in the wastewater system.

Action EJ 2.2.1: Provide regular maintenance and monitoring of stormwater collection and treatment facilities to ensure effective operation.

Action EJ 2.2.2: Regularly inspect commercial, industrial, and public facilities to ensure proper connections to the sanitary system and avoid illicit discharge.

Action EJ 2.2.3: Apply best management practices to sanitary sewer system discharges.

Action EJ 2.2.4: Establish protocol for reducing the use of pesticides in spaces maintained by the City.

Action EJ 2.2.5 : Wherever possible, use low impact design (LID), requiring on-site stormwater pre-treatment.

POLICY EJ 2.3: Preserve natural water bodies, riparian areas, and drainage systems in a natural condition wherever possible.

Action EJ 2.3.1: Limit disturbance of natural water bodies and drainage systems to only those activities related to public recreation and circulation or to activities designed to enhance environmental conditions.

Action EJ 2.3.2: Participate in local and regional restoration projects to improve water quality in the local watersheds.

Action EJ 2.3.3: Continue implementing the Pinole Creek Watershed Vision Plan and design standards, including setbacks and mitigation requirements, to preserve and restore natural water bodies, riparian areas, and drainage systems.

Action EJ 2.3.4: Explore restoration projects on Pinole Creek to enhance water quality and habitat, while reducing disproportionate trash and pollution burden on neighboring properties.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 48
POLICY EJ 2.4: Improve land use planning to minimize air quality pollution, noise, and odors, by promoting strategic land use patterns for businesses, reducing the number and length of motor vehicles, encouraging alternative uses of transportation, and reducing pollution associated with vehicular traffic.

Action EJ 2.4.1: Support the location of ancillary employee services, including childcare, restaurants, banking facilities, and convenience markets, at major employment centers for the purposes of reducing mid-day vehicle trips.

Action EJ 2.4.2 : Change zoning and land use policies to limit land use conflicts between residential areas and sources of diesel pollution.

Action EJ 2.4.3 : The City shall update the Zoning Code to identify the location of existing odor sources within Pinole.

Action EJ 2.4.4 : Create a model for large employers in the City to reduce single-occupant vehicle trips, support the use of alternative fuels, and encourage alternative modes of transportation. Such programs could include:
• Creating rideshare/carpooling incentives for employees who commute together. • Replacing City-owned vehicles with alternative fuel vehicles. • Ensuring that necessary infrastructure is in place (e.g., showers, bike racks, electric charging stations, shared automobile leasing stations) and available to employees and visitors who rely on such facilities to support alternative modes of transportation.

Action EJ 2.4.5 : Perform additional outdoor air modeling to ensure regional and local air standards are met or exceeded, with particular focus on air quality in and around the Impacted Communities.

Action EJ 2.4.6: Enforce mandated truck and bus routes to protect air quality and limit pollution near sensitive receptors or residential uses.

Action EJ 2.4.7: Wherever possible, use low impact design (LID), green barriers, and sound barriers to reduce sound impacts and greenhouse gas emissions. In particular, all new development in close proximity to Interstate 80 and Pinole Creek should include a landscaped buffer between development areas to improve air quality.

Action EJ 2.4.8 : Support efforts by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) to improve air quality in Impacted Communities both within and adjoining the City. Monitor local air quality and identify main pollution sources.

Action EJ 2.4.9: When new development would be a source of pollution or when odors are proposed near residences or other sensitive receptors, either adequate buffer distances shall be provided (based on recommendations and requirements of the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines) or filters or other equipment/solutions shall be provided to reduce the potential exposure to acceptable levels. Potential mitigation associated with this policy requirement will be coordinated with any required permit conditions from BAAQMD.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 49
Action EJ 2.4.10: When new residential developments or land uses with sensitive receptors are proposed near existing sources of pollution or odors, either adequate buffer distances shall be provided (based on recommendations and requirements of the BAAQMD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines) or filters or other equipment/solutions shall be provided to the source to reduce the potential exposure to acceptable levels.

Action EJ 2.4.11: Encourage smoke-free workplaces and communities to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke.

Action EJ 2.4.12: Work with the California Department of Transportation to enhance physical barriers between sensitive receptors and Interstate 80 freeway, such as sound walls and landscaped barriers, to reduce disproportionate diesel and traffic pollution on properties in close proximity. Focus enhancements within the Community of Focus.

Action EJ 2.4.13: Work with the Office of Environmental Health and Hazards Assessment and the state Department of Toxic Substances to better understand potential impacts and exposures from air quality pollution identified in the most current version of CalEnviroScreen

4.0. POLICY EJ 2.5: Participate in local and regional planning efforts to reduce or mitigate health risks associated with climate change and climate vulnerability.

Action EJ 2.5.1: Develop a Climate Action Plan that includes incentive programs, fee mitigation programs, adaptation and resiliency programs, and City-funded programs that minimize health risks associated with climate change and prioritize environmental justice.

Action EJ 2.5.2 : Develop a Local Hazard Mitigation Plan that investigates natural and manmade hazards and disasters, including impacts specifically on vulnerable or sensitive populations.

Action EJ 2.5.3: Participate in regional San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission shoreline adaptation and sea level rise mitigation strategies, to reduce the impact of negative coastal impacts associated with climate change.

Action EJ 2.5.4 : Incorporate climate change and climate variability into planning, health and emergency preparedness plans and guidance to increase preparedness for natural hazards exacerbated by climate change, especially among vulnerable populations (both within Impacted Communities and the remainder of the City).

Action EJ 2.5.5: Develop emergency preparedness support for vulnerable populations as part of the Emergency Operations Plan, including focus within the Impacted Communities.

POLICY EJ 2.6: Ensure equitable access to safe and sanitary housing by maintaining a diverse housing stock and supportive programs.

Action EJ 2.6.1: Promote and further fair housing policies and programs identified in the City Housing Element.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 50
Action EJ 2.6.2: Develop outreach programs or supportive programs to enhance property and residential maintenance, weatherization, and rehabilitation. Include helpful code enforcement information where appropriate. Focus outreach on the Impacted Communities.

Action EJ 2.6.3:Utilize and promote federal, state, local, and private funding programs offering low interest loans or grants for housing rehabilitation and maintenance. Promote rehabilitation assistance opportunities within the Impacted Communities.

Action EJ 2.6.4: Support housing development that meets the needs of diverse populations and households.

Action EJ 2.6.5: Promote fair housing resources and services within the Impacted Communities, to assist in the enforcement of fair housing laws.

Goal EJ 3: Promote meaningful and inclusive participation in the public decisionmaking process of all community members, particularly those belonging to marginalized groups, and ensure that residents are informed of and are provided opportunities to actively participate in decisions that affect their environment, communities, and quality of life.

Equity in Civic Engagement
POLICY EJ 3.1: Promote equitable civic engagement and participation opportunities through the availability and accessibility of information, education, and resources.

Action EJ 3.1.1: Coordinate outreach efforts between City Departments and other public agencies to reduce redundancies between different communication channels.

Action EJ 3.1.2: Evaluate creation of an environmental justice ordinance and ensure community outreach to incorporate environmental justice principles into new project development review.

Action EJ 3.1.3: Consider including childcare opportunities at key outreach events affecting entire neighborhoods and the City as a whole, allowing parents and caregivers to fully participate.

Action EJ 3.1.4: Provide accessible information in the languages used by the affected community, including written and verbal translation/interpretation assistance.

Action EJ 3.1.5: Utilize multiple methods to communicate participation opportunities and feedback on public decisions. Consider cultural competency when selecting the method, approach, and language used in publication materials.

Action EJ 3.1.6: Consider the digital divide when identifying methods to communicate civic engagement and participation opportunities and avoid relying on digital channels for all communication with the public.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 51
Action EJ 3.1.7:Host in-person meetings or workshops at times, dates, and locations that are convenient for affected community members to attend. Consider varying the time, date, and locations for meeting series to encourage participation from broad groups. Consider ADA accommodations, technology access and food options when planning and hosting community outreach.

Action EJ 3.1.8: Prioritize transparency and equity in all City decision making.

Action EJ 3.1.9: Partner with community-based organizations with established relationships and trust to conduct outreach for relevant City initiatives.

Action EJ 3.1.10: Form a resident advisory committee that meets on a regular basis to monitor the implementation of EJ Element.

Action EJ 3.1.11: Identify and invite residents from the Impacted Communities or other isolated areas in the City of Pinole to serve on City boards, commissions, and task force members as openings occur.

Action EJ 3.1.12: Enhance relationships and build trust with residents and property owners within the Impacted Communities but working with community-based organizations or other specialized outreach/engagement.

POLICY EJ 3.2: Promote equitable access to local, state, and federal election polling places and ballot boxes.

Action EJ 3.2.1: Support local outreach efforts hosted by Contra Costa County Elections Division, including information on how to register to vote, how to vote, and voters rights.

Action EJ 3.2.2: Advertise and share official Contra Costa County ballot box locations within the City to promote accessibility.

Action EJ 3.2.3: Collaborate with transportation/transit agencies and organizations to provide free or discounted public transportation options to polling places on election dates, specifically in low income communities.

GOAL EJ 4: Promote land use and policy decisions that make Pinole a desirable place to live for people of all ages, races, genders, and income levels, while preserving the right for future generations to live, work and enjoy Pinole.

Equity in Generations
POLICY EJ 4.1: Strengthen existing relationships with the Ohlone people.

Action EJ 4.1.1:Support the Ohlone people in their efforts to secure both state and federal recognition status.

Action EJ 4.1.2: Continue to acknowledge the Ohlone people and their land at the beginning of City meetings and gatherings.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 52
Action EJ 4.1.3: Continue to maintain positive and meaningful relationships with the Ohlone people, including early consultation on related land use decisions.

POLICY EJ 4.2: Promote equitable outcomes for all citizens in Pinole by enhancing diversity and anti-racism education and programming.

Action EJ 4.2.1: Encourage relevant and age-appropriate diversity and anti-racism education and programming in Pinole public schools.

Action EJ 4.2.2:Develop diversity and anti-racism education to compliment programming in enrichment classes at Pinole Youth Center and Tiny Tots.

Action EJ 4.2.3:Support anti-racism and diversity training for all City employees, including Police and Fire Services.

POLICY EJ 4.3: Support land use, policy, and programming decisions to attract young adults and young families to Pinole, while continuing to serve existing residents.

Action EJ 4.3.1: Continue to develop a diverse and affordable housing stock, allowing residents to select housing that best suits unique needs and lifestyles.

Action EJ 4.3.2: Encourage West Contra Costa County Unified School District and Contra Costa Community College District to maximize local employment opportunities through relevant education, degrees, and programming opportunities.

Action EJ 4.3.3: Improve equitable access to homeownership in Pinole through supporting first-time homebuyers’ programs, including first mortgage programs and down payment assistance programs. Acknowledge that home equity is one of the strongest ways for families to build intergenerational wealth and promote such programs to groups who were excluded from homeownership.

POLICY EJ 4.4: Prioritize improvements and programs that address the needs of the Impacted Communities.

Action EJ 4.4.1: Review City policies and procedures to ensure the spending of general funds for recreation, air quality, and other environmental improvements, community programming and public infrastructure are appropriately prioritized for the Impacted Communities.

Action EJ 4.4.2: Seek grants and partnerships with public, private, and philanthropic entities that promote implementation of policies in the Environmental Justice Element and promote social and economic development activities within the Impacted Communities.

Action EJ 4.4.3: Ensure that future improvements in the City that have an impact on the Impacted Community will be mitigated to a less than significant impact and will not disproportionally produce negative impacts, such as increase in pollution exposure, net loss of affordable housing, or displacement of residents.

HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
CITY OF PINOLE 53

PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 25-09
WITH EXHIBIT A: SAFETY ELEMENT
AND EXHIBIT B: ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT

RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PINOLE

RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THE APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 25-01 FOR ADOPTION OF THE SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE

ELEMENTS TO THE CITY OF PINOLE GENERAL PLAN AND APPROVAL OF THE CEQA EXEMPTION PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15061(b)(3) WHEREAS, California Government Code Sections 65580-65589.8 require amendment of the City’s current General Plan Housing Element to address the assigned housing needs of current and future City residents; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pinole’s share of regional housing need is established by the Association of Bay Area Governments (“ABAG”) and this period’s related Regional Housing Needs Allocation (“RHNA”) was adopted by ABAG in December 2021; and WHEREAS, on March 22, 2022, the City Council received an introduction to the Land Use Planning for Pinole process, which included the Housing Element Update as well as updates to the existing Health and Safety Element and preparation of a new Environmental Justice Element; and
WHEREAS, from March 2022 through July 2022 and from August 2025 through September 2025 the City conducted public outreach, which included creating a website, posting a survey, and two virtual community workshops, and one in-person public meeting and advertisements of engagement opportunities and information through social media, email, notifications in the City’s bi-weekly reports, mailed postcards, flyers, community TV advertisements; and
WHEREAS, on July 13, 2022, the City Council and Planning Commission held a special joint meeting to receive a comprehensive status update of the project; and WHEREAS, on September 12, 2025, the public review draft of the Safety and Environmental Justice Elements was released for public review and comment, with a digital copy available through the City’s webpage, which links to the dedicated General Plan Update, and a hard copy available at City Hall; and
WHEREAS, on September 22, 2025, the Planning Commission reviewed the public review draft Housing Element and provided feedback and recommendations to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the City prepared the Safety and Environmental Justice Elements in conformance with State and local planning law and practices, considering local conditions and context, including economic, environmental, and fiscal factors; and WHEREAS, the Safety and Environmental Justice Elements update qualifies for an exemption in the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), as the project does not provide entitlements to land use development projects,
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of

Pinole hereby recommends that the City Council approve General Plan Amendment 22-01 to adopt the 2023-2031 Housing Element, attached as Exhibit A, to repeal and replace the existing Housing Element of the General Plan, and approve the CEQA Exemption for the Housing Element Update, :

1. The above information within this resolution is true and correct; and

2. The Safety and Environmental Justice Element Update qualifies for a California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Exemption under CEQA Guidelines section 15061(b)(3); and

3. The amendments to the City’s General Plan Housing Element are consistent with applicable provisions of State law.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Planning Commission of the City of Pinole on this 22nd day of September 2025, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

__________________________________
Gabriel Sandoval, Chair 2025-2026

ATTEST:
________________________________
David Hanham, Planning Manager

EXHIBIT A

SAFETY ELEMENT

EXHIBIT B

ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT

1 September 22, 2025
1 2
3 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING
4 PINOLE PLANNING COMMISSION
5 6 September 22, 2025
7 8 THIS MEETING WAS HELD IN A HYBRID FORMAT
9 BOTH IN-PERSON AND ZOOM TELECONFERENCE
10 11
12 A. CALL TO ORDER: 7:00 p.m.
13 14 B. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
15 16 C. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the 17 Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to 18 the Ohlone elders, past, present and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land 19 that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming 20 together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their 21 stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue 22 our relationship of mutual respect and understanding. 23 24 D. ROLL CALL
25 26 Commissioners Present: Bender, Lam-Julian, Martinez, Uch, Vice-Chairperson Menis, 27 Chairperson Sandoval
28 29 Commissioner Excused: Huey
30 31 Staff Present: David Hanham, Planning Manager
32 Justin Shiu, Senior Planner
33 34 E. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD
35 36 There were no comments from the public.
37 38 F. MEETING MINUTES
39 40 1. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for September 8, 2025 41 42 Commissioner Bender requested the following amendments to the September 8, 2025 43 Planning Commission meeting minutes:
44 45 Page 14 of 165 of the agenda packet, Lines 41 through 43:
46 47 Commissioner Bender reported the Brandt Court historic house that was to be relocated from 48 the City of Hercules to property in Pinole had disappeared and the property had been for sale 49 for some time.
50

2 September 22, 2025
1 Page 8 of 165 of the agenda packet, Lines 42 through 49:
2 3 Exhibit A, Design and Development, No. 27, acknowledged agreement with the statement 4 in principle, although a developer looking at the site would entertain providing a parking 5 structure, such as ground floor parking for a residential multifamily building, with the 6 benefits of that approach being reduced surface parking and allowing for more housing 7 development and more public/private amenity spaces, all with the knowledge that the 8 status of retail would be unknown. (Bender)
9 10 MOTION with a Roll Call vote to approve the Planning Commission Meeting Minutes for 11 September 8, 2025, as amended by Commissioner Bender. 12 13 MOTION: Sandoval SECONDED: Martinez APPROVED: 6-0-1 14 ABSENT: Huey
15 16 G. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
17 18 1. Adoption of a Resolution to Recommend the Safety and Environmental 19 Justice Elements Updates to the General Plan
20 21 Planning Manager David Hanham presented the staff report dated September 22, 2025, 22 and introduced Consultant Noelle Anderson, Project Manager, Community Planning 23 Resilience Lead, Michael Baker International (MBI), who provided an extensive 24 PowerPoint presentation on the Updates to the Safety and Environmental Justice 25 Elements of the General Plan.
26 27 Mr. Hanhan asked the Planning Commission to adopt Resolution 25-09 recommending 28 approval to the City Council of the Updates to the Safety and Environmental Justice 29 Elements of the City of Pinole General Plan.
30 31 Responding to questions from the Planning Commission on Exhibit A, Safety Element, Mr. 32 Hanham and Ms. Anderson clarified the following:
33 34 • Hazardous material pipelines had not been included in the Safety Element but had 35 been addressed in the Contra Costa County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation 36 Plan (HMP). Clarified in the context of Safety Elements, data about the exact 37 location of pipelines was not available making it challenging to derive policy 38 objectives from them in addition to the fact they were owned by third-party entities 39 making it further challenging to include policy directives. They had been included 40 by reference with a link to the HMP. (Bender)
41 42 • Page 79 of 165 of the agenda packet, clarified a statement in the first paragraph 43 under Fire Services, that references Station 74 “will be reopened” because at the 44 time of the preparation of the Safety Element updates, the Contra Costa County 45 Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) had not yet reopened Station 74. 46 Acknowledged Station 74 was now open and the statement could be so amended. 47 (Uch)
48 49
50

3 September 22, 2025
1 • Page 79 of 165 of the agenda packet, acknowledged a typographical error in the 2 first full paragraph which should be amended to read: Pinole currently doesn't 3 have a community emergency response team (CERT) program, but the City of 4 Pinole Strategic Plan 2020 – 2025 Implementation Action Plan, adopted in August 5 2020, has called out to exploring restoring the CERT program and conducting 6 annual tabletop exercises and community drills as one of its strategies to satisfy 7 the goal of safe and resilient Pinole. (Uch)
8 9 • Clarified the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT), was a regional 10 organization that operated on a community basis, with the Federal Emergency 11 Management Agency (FEMA) and other public safety agencies offering directives 12 on training as to how one could be certified. CERT empowered local residents to 13 take charge of their neighborhoods and provide first aid and/or preliminary 14 emergency response in the absence of a formal public safety agency in the event 15 of a major disaster. (Uch)
16 17 • Clarified the City would have to rely on Contra Costa County, the State of 18 California, and the federal government to create a CERT since the City had not 19 implemented a CERT plan. There were policies and programs in the Safety 20 Element to help Pinole become more fire safety and fire smart. Noted building 21 codes were ever changing making the City more fire safe and smart. Clarified the 22 Safety Element did not specifically reference Firewise or other programs in which 23 the City may participate to become certified or be designated as a community that 24 was actively working to reduce fire risk. The Safety Element included policies 25 related to wildfire preparedness under Wildfire, Policy SE 1.8, as shown on Page 26 90 of 165 of the agenda packet, with the majority of the policies written prior to the 27 changes in the Wildfire Severity Hazard Maps. Policy SE 1.10, as shown on Page 28 91 of 165 of the agenda packet, would coordinate and cooperate with regional 29 agencies on wildfire preparedness and programs with action measures included, 30 which were also outlined. (Martinez)
31 32 • Page 81 of 165 of the agenda packet, Figure 18: Evacuation Routes, clarified the 33 connection between Galbreth and Rancho Roads was currently locked but could 34 be unlocked in the event of an emergency. This route had not been included or 35 identified in Figure 18 with only major thoroughfares considered. While there were 36 a couple of access points that could be used in the valley between the cities of 37 Hercules and Pinole, they also had not been included given the unknown status of 38 the condition of the routes in an emergency since the routes may not be able to 39 accommodate a large volume of vehicles, or there could be possible third-party 40 property ownership. In the event of an emergency, all first responder agencies 41 would be involved and an Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) would be put in 42 place.
43 44 From a policy perspective, the Safety Element identified only the major evacuation 45 routes along Pinole Valley Road and I-80, with the smaller connections not 46 included, not only because everyone may not know where they were located, but 47 since the Fire Department determined which routes to be used as part of an EOP. 48 Acknowledged a recommendation that the routes of Galbreth Road and the area 49 north of the City of Hercules should be included in the identified evacuation routes. 50 (Martinez)

4 September 22, 2025
1 • The PowerPoint presentation was the same presentation provided to the public 2 during the most recent public workshop, with the exception of the last few pages 3 outlining responses from the surveys. (Lam-Julian)
4 5 • Page 76 of 165 of the agenda packet, Table 7, Hazardous Materials Sites, clarified 6 the database was a snapshot in time as reported by GeoTracker and the California 7 Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and was not meant to be an 8 exhaustive or inclusive list of every past, current or future release within the City. 9 As cited, on March 15, 2022 when the data had been pulled, it was intended to 10 provide some context on the typical hazardous materials users in the City and also 11 meant to acknowledge the types, not the specific locations of hazardous materials 12 use. Clarified as an example that not every dry cleaner was identified as an issue 13 in either of the databases and it was possible there were dry cleaners in Pinole 14 that had not been flagged. (Lam-Julian)
15 16 • Acknowledged the area of Tara Hills was looking for volunteers to participate in 17 CERT. Acknowledged a recommendation to amend Policy SE 3.1, as shown on 18 Page 96 of 165 of the agenda packet. Rather than start or create a CERT program 19 from scratch, recommended partnering with local CERT programs and highlighting 20 that for the community as an ongoing conversation. Staff clarified the intent of 21 Policy SE 3.1 was that it be broad and not identify a specific program or name and 22 not reference the creation of something from scratch, and rather highlight existing 23 CERT programs as a good idea. Language had been included about participating 24 in Contra Costa County programming and resource sharing, with community 25 sharing and educational awareness programs to be included under that umbrella. 26 (Lam-Julian)
27 28 • Page 45 of 165 of the agenda packet, Figure 6: Landslide Areas and Page 87 of 29 165 of the agenda packet, Policy SE 1.2, which reads: Require appropriate control 30 measures to control and minimize the impact of flooding and erosion, with staff 31 clarifying these policies were not intended to prohibit development but prohibit 32 development where it was objectively unsafe to do so, with a multitude of mitigation 33 actions that could be integrated into design and development at the project 34 proposal phase to make it safe to develop in any hazard zone, with the exception 35 of flooding, and which the policy language was trying to outline. (Vice-Chairperson 36 Menis)
37 38 • Page 63 of 165 of the agenda packet, clarified the last sentence of the full 39 paragraph on this page, which reads: The CAAP is fully integrated into Safety 40 Element, and which meant the CAAP would be incorporated by reference in the 41 Safety Element, similar to the HMP. (Vice-Chairperson Menis) 42 43 • Page 79 of 165 of the agenda packet, and the last sentence of the first paragraph 44 under Fire Services, which reads: It should be noted that Fire Station 74 is located 45 in the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, and acknowledged this was no longer 46 accurate. There were other instances in the document that referenced the Very 47 High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, although CAL FIRE recently redesignated most 48 of Pinole into the Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone. (Vice-Chairperson Menis) 49

5 September 22, 2025
1 • Clarified the policies and action measures, as stated, would remain, with the 2 narrative and background to be revised to indicate that Fire Station 74 was now 3 open and operational and identify some areas of the City that had been moved 4 from the Very High to Moderate Fire Hazard Severity Zone. (Vice- Chairperson 5 Menis)
6 7 • Clarified some of the data sources in the document were linked to 2022 data and 8 the consultant explained that due to the timing of the document preparation and 9 contract scope of services, the original scope of work had not anticipated the pause 10 for the HMP, and the data was unable to be revised from 2022 without additional 11 scope and fee. (Vice-Chairperson Menis)
12 13 • Page 88 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action SE 1.3.5, which reads: Pursue 14 funding for adequate protection from sea-level rise and subsidence, and 15 acknowledged a request for the term “adequate” to be defined. The consultant 16 suggested the term be defined at a later date by specific infrastructure projects 17 directed by the Public Works Department. Clarified the term used was intended to 18 be broad and not provide specific direction since sea-level rise was the most 19 expensive to structurally engineer and plan for. This term had been left 20 intentionally broad. While sea-level rise had not affected Pinole too much, it may 21 in the future and had been included in some operational plans, particularly for the 22 Hercules-Pinole Wastewater Treatment Plant, which was near the Bay. Clarified 23 the City had prepared no studies as yet on the impacts of sea-level rise. (Vice24 Chairperson Menis) 25 26 • Page 61 of 165 of the agenda packet, Table 3, California Coastal Commission Sea 27 Level Rise Projections, was clarified as it related to Action SE 1.3.5, and it was 28 noted the City of Pinole was seeing impacts from sea-level rise at the 66-inch level, 29 as compared to the lower estimations in Table 3. Tables provided from the Coastal 30 Commission had not included the definition of the term “adequate” since it could 31 mean different things for different infrastructures. Based on current projections, 32 sea-level rise would not be seen until reaching the 66-inch level. (Vice-Chairperson 33 Menis)
34 35 • Page 91 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action SE 1.9.10, which reads: Construct 36 an emergency access road extending Galbreth Road to South Rancho Road and 37 a fire access gate to be opened by emergency responders and explore the 38 possibility of making this a permanent public road. Clarified staff could check on 39 the status of this action measure and it may be possible to modify the action 40 measure to reflect the status of construction of the remainder of the access road. 41 (Vice-Chairperson Menis)
42 43 • Page 92 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action SE 1.11.14, which reads: When 44 feasible, require all development to be located outside of the Very High Fire Hazard 45 Severity Zone (VHFHSZ). Should development be located in VHFHSZs, then they 46 must maintain certain defensible space through specific fuel modification (brush 47 clearing) requirements as outlined in Government Code Sections 51175-51189 48 and required to be built to the current California Building Code and Fire Code. 49

6 September 22, 2025
1 Clarified this action measure could be eliminated or the language modified to 2 reflect the “Moderate” Fire Hazard Severity Zone and removal of the reference to 3 the Government Code section. (Vice-Chairperson Menis and Commissioner 4 Martinez)
5 6 • Page 94 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action SE 2.1.3, which reads: Maintain and 7 expand, where feasible, the network of surveillance cameras in the community to 8 discourage and help investigate criminal activity based on Pinole Police 9 Department advice and experience. The consultant clarified Crime Subsection 10 Policy SE 2.1, which reads: Reduce the risk of crime through site planning, 11 surveillance, and information was not statutorily required, per the Safety Element. 12 Existing policies had been retained in working with the Pinole Police Department 13 but it was not primarily the focus of the scope of work. The Safety Element’s 14 primary goal was to address natural hazards, not human costs. Staff 15 recommended Action SE 2.1.3 could be revised to read: Maintain, expand, secure 16 where feasible, the network of surveillance cameras in the community to 17 discourage and help investigate criminal activity based on Pinole Police 18 Department advice and experience. (Vice-Chairperson Menis) 19 20 • Page 97 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action SE 3.1.5, which reads: Explore 21 restoring the CERT program and conducting annual tabletop exercises and 22 community drills. Clarified CERT was a nationwide program with a pre-set 23 curriculum which inherently relied on the basis of the nationwide curriculum that 24 was already produced and recommended, including tabletop exercises and other 25 drills practiced as part of the certification process. Clarified there were some cities 26 that facilitated partnerships through their CERT programs and it was not unusual 27 for multiple cities to host a program where participants could come from the 28 jurisdictions as part of the partnership. Keeping the policy as is allowed for 29 maximum flexibility. (Vice-Chairperson Menis)
30 31 • Page 82 of 165 of the agenda packet, Figure 19: Neighborhood Access to 32 Evacuation Routes, acknowledged concerns with limited evacuation routes from 33 the Pinole Valley. Clarified any route possible would be used depending on the 34 nature of the incident, with the primary routes having been identified. Clarified the 35 City’s evacuation zones, as reflected on Table 8: Travel Times Estimates 36 Summary, and as shown on Page 83 of 165 of the agenda packet. (Chairperson 37 Sandoval)
38 39 • Page 86 of 165 of the agenda packet, acknowledged a request to revise Scenario40 1, as written, to update the information related to the status of improvements for 41 the connection on Galbreth Road. (Vice-Chairperson Menis) 42 43 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED (Safety Element)
44 45 There were no comments from the public.
46 47 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
48 49

7 September 22, 2025
1 Vice-Chairperson Menis referenced Page 63 of 165 of the agenda packet, and asked that 2 the last sentence of the full paragraph under 2.5.6 Climate Action and Adaptation Plan, be 3 revised to read: The CAAP is fully integrated into the Safety Element. He also referenced 4 Page 79 of 165 of the agenda packet, and asked that the first full paragraph on the page 5 be revised to read: Pinole currently doesn't have a community emergency response team 6 (CERT) program, but the City of Pinole Strategic Plan 2020 – 2025 Implementation Action 7 Plan, adopted in August 2020, has called out exploring the restoration of the CERT 8 program and conducting annual tabletop exercises and community drills as one of its 9 strategies to satisfy the goal of safe and resilient Pinole. Also, on the same page, he 10 asked for a revision to the second sentence of the first full paragraph under Fire Services, 11 to reflect that Fire Station 74 will not be reopened, but “has opened.” 12 13 Commissioner Bender referenced Page 56 of 165 of the agenda packet, and the second 14 sentence of the second paragraph under Section 2.4.2, Dam Inundation, which reads:
15 Maloney Reservoir is a recreational, artificially impounded body of water located near the 16 intersection of Appian Way and Mann Drive. He stated, as discussed during the Planning 17 Commission Ad Hoc Committee meeting, Maloney Reservoir was not recreational, but a 18 covered facility with locked gates and did not show up as a recreational opportunity or 19 facility in the East Bay Regional Parks District (EBRPD) website. He also found it ironic 20 that the Hayward Fault reminded everyone this morning due to a recent earthquake what 21 this was all about.
22 23 Chairperson Sandoval referenced Page 92 of 165 of the agenda packet, and Action SE 24 1.11.4. He asked that the intent of the language remain given CAL FIRE and the 25 CCCFPD could change how the City was categorized. He was open to an amendment to 26 reflect that the City could encourage fire mitigation or defensive space for parcels or areas 27 that were at a higher fire risk in the valley. If a wildfire were to come through that part of 28 the City, a number of the parcels between the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) should have 29 strict fuel breaks and mitigation.
30 31 Chairperson Sandoval also referenced Page 94 of 165 of the agenda packet, and Action 32 SE 2.1.3, and suggested the language change staff had recommended for a secure 33 network would be acceptable.
34 35 Vice-Chairperson Menis suggested further revision to Action SE 2.1.3, as shown on Page 36 94 of 165 of the agenda packet, to read: Maintain and expand, and secure, where feasible, 37 the network of surveillance cameras in the community to discourage and help investigate 38 criminal activity based on Pinole Police Department advice and experience. 39 40 Chairperson Sandoval found the revision too wordy and recommended a further revision 41 to Action SE 2.1.3, as follows:
42 43 Maintain and expand, where feasible, the secure network of surveillance cameras 44 in the community to discourage and help investigate criminal activity based on 45 Pinole Police Department advice and experience.
46 47 Commissioner Martinez commented he had worked with a number of agencies throughout 48 the years and he was appreciative of the concern with the language. He recommended 49 additional revision to Action SE 2.1.3, for consideration, as follows:

8 September 22, 2025
1 Maintain and expand, and secure, the network of surveillance cameras in the 2 community to discourage and help investigate criminal activity based on Pinole 3 Police Department advice and experience ensuring the appropriate security 4 protocols are administered.
5 6 Chairperson Sandoval agreed with the revision.
7 8 Vice-Chairperson Menis found that adding the language about security protocols would be 9 helpful. He expressed concern with the revision in that if the Planning Commission was 10 saying “secure network” it was implying several things, that a network existed and implying 11 the network was secure to some standard, which standard was not stated. There was a 12 difference in saying something was secure and making something more secure, one was a 13 state of being and the other an action. He suggested if the Commission was looking for 14 action, it was appropriate to maintain the action focus of security, particularly if under a crime 15 element, and he offered more scenarios to explain his position. He found that the revision 16 did not provide the suggested security, as his suggested wording would have done. 17 18 Chairperson Sandoval suggested the secure network was implied in the language since the 19 Commission expected the City would have a secure network. 20 21 Vice-Chairperson Menis again disagreed in that if the Commission was just speaking of City 22 controlled cameras he may have agreed, but the language in Action SE 2.1.3 was broader. 23 24 The Commission debated the language in Action SE 2.1.3, and Ms. Anderson explained the 25 City’s security cameras were implemented by the Pinole Police Department, monitored by 26 the Police Department, with policies and protocols already in place that were likely applicable 27 to such an action and did not usually derive directives for action based on the City’s Safety 28 Element. As previously mentioned, this crime section was completely optional, and not 29 statutorily a required component of the Safety Element. The focus of the Safety Element 30 was to address natural hazards and not human caused hazards where crime would be 31 included. She understood the nuance of wanting to be as correct as possible, but cautioned 32 being too specific in this policy and stepping on the toes of other directives that the 33 Commission may not be aware of since the security of these systems did not derive their 34 security directives from the Safety Element.
35 36 Vice-Chairperson Menis noted that part of the goals, policies and actions in the Safety 37 Element were to be aspirational, and offered some examples from the stated policies and 38 actions. As such, he suggested the Commission should not just discuss “maintaining and 39 expanding the network” but also discuss “securing” the network. 40 41 Chairperson Sandoval agreed with the security, but security should be used as a descriptor 42 of the network.
43 44 Vice-Chairperson Menis noted part of the reason security was to be added onto the list of 45 tasks was that in his opinion, the network, as it existed, was not most likely secure. 46 47 Mr. Hanham suggested since the action measure was causing some issues, if language 48 could be added a vote from the Commission could determine which language being 49 proposed would be acceptable. He recommended a straw vote, or a vote be considered for 50 the language revision to Action SE 2.1.3.

9 September 22, 2025
1 MOTION with a Roll Call vote to amend Action SE 2.1.3, to read:
2 3 Maintain and expand, a secure network of surveillance cameras in the community 4 to discourage and help investigate criminal activity based on Pinole Police 5 Department advice and experience.
6 7 MOTION: Sandoval SECONDED: Bender APPROVED: 5-1-1
8 NOES: Menis
9 ABSENT: Huey
10 11 MOTION with a Roll Call vote to amend Action SE 2.1.3, to read:
12 13 Maintain, expand, and secure the network of surveillance cameras in the 14 community to discourage and help investigate criminal activity based on Pinole 15 Police Department advice and experience while ensuring security protocols are 16 administered.
17 18 MOTION: Menis SECONDED: Martinez FAILED: 2-4-1
19 NOES: Uch, Lam-Julian, Bender, Sandoval
20 ABSENT: Huey
21 22 Commissioner Lam-Julian referenced Page 94 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action SE 2.1.8, 23 which reads: Work with law enforcement to guide and educate the public on active shooter 24 scenario public responses through employer/school staff training and public education. 25 She asked whether the City had any jurisdiction over school staff in public education or 26 whether the recommendation was to work with the West Contra Costa Unified School 27 District (WCCUSD). The last she checked, and pursuant to the parent handbook, the 28 WCCUSD did not have Resource Officers on-site but had assigned liaisons from the 29 Pinole Police Department to different campuses. She asked for clarification. 30 31 Mr. Hanham clarified that Action SE 2.1.8 was intended for the City to work with the 32 WCCUSD and work with law enforcement to guide and educate the public on active 33 shooter scenarios. The City was not dictating to the WCCUSD, which had protocols in 34 place and the intent was that the City and the WCCUSD would work together. 35 36 Vice-Chairperson Menis referenced Page 92 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action SE 1.11.4, 37 and clarified with Mr. Hanham this action measure would be deleted entirely unless the 38 Planning Commission wanted to keep some portion of the action measure. 39 40 Chairperson Sandoval was open to retaining some modified version of Action SE 1.11.4. 41 42 Mr. Hanham recommended Action SE 1.11.4 could be revised to read:
43 44 Should development be located in Moderate, High, Fire Hazard Severity Zone, 45 then they must maintain certain defensible space through specific fuel modification 46 (brush clearing) and required to be built to the current California Building Code and 47 Fire Code.
48 49 The Planning Commission agreed with the staff recommended revision to Action SE 1.11.4. 50

10 September 22, 2025
1 Vice-Chairperson Menis referenced Page 97 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action SE 3.1.5 2 and recommended it be revised to read:
3 4 Explore restoring the CERT program and conducting annual tabletop exercises 5 and community drills and partner with other jurisdictions in the County on the CERT 6 program.
7 8 Mr. Hanham recommended Action SE 3.1.5 be further amended to read:
9 10 To explore restoring the CERT program within the City of Pinole and coordinate 11 with other outside agencies and conducting annual tabletop exercises and 12 community drills.
13 14 The Planning Commission agreed with the staff recommended revision to Action SE 3.1.5. 15 16 Vice-Chairperson Menis referenced Page 91 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action SE 1.9.10, 17 and confirmed staff would modify this action measure to identify the current state of the 18 construction of an emergency access road extending Galbreth Road to South Rancho Road 19 before the Safety Element was presented to the City Council. 20 21 The Planning Commission moved onto Exhibit B, updates to the Environmental Justice 22 Element, and Mr. Hanham and Ms. Anderson responded to questions from the Planning 23 Commission, as follows:
24 25 • Page 136 of 165 of the agenda packet, acknowledged a recommendation that the 26 Walk Score for downtown Pinole be identified. (Uch)
27 28 • Page 128 of 165 of the agenda packet, and the third sentence of the first paragraph 29 under Other Census Tracts, which reads: The unemployment indicator represents 30 the percentage of the population over the age of 16 that is unemployed and eligible 31 for the labor force, and clarified the upper age limitation was 65-years. (Vice32 Chairperson Menis) 33 34 • Clarified most of Census Tract 3601.02 was located in the City of Richmond. (Lam35 Julian) 36 37 • Page 135 of 165 of the agenda packet, Figure 11: USDA Low-Income and Low38 Access Food Atlas, had been based on 2013 data and before Safeway closed. MBI 39 could look into updating the data, particularly after Safeway closed, although the 40 frequency of the data being updated was unknown. (Vice-Chairperson Menis) 41 42 • Page 144 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action EJ 1.5.6, which reads: Encourage the 43 development of a medical center, emergency room, urgent care, or other hospital 44 uses in the previous Doctors Hospital building. Staff recommended eliminating the 45 language reading: in the previous Doctors Hospital building. (Vice-Chairperson 46 Menis)
47 48

11 September 22, 2025
1 • Page 145 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action EJ 2.1.3, which reads: Prohibit 2 development in areas that are particularly susceptible to erosion and sediment 3 loss. Clarified the intent of this action was not to link to landslides, with the 4 landslide map in the Safety Element specific to deep seeded landslides, where the 5 underlying bedrock was causing structural instability with the landslide risk, 6 whereas this policy was intended to give the City the ability to integrate mitigation 7 measures in a proposed development in an area where there was known erosion 8 risk causing a water quality pollution issue. (Vice-Chairperson Menis) 9 10 • Acknowledged reference to Figure 6: Landslide Areas, as contained in the Safety 11 Element (Page 45 of 165 of the agenda packet) and request to account for and 12 reference Figure 6 into Action EJ 2.1.3, although staff noted there could be erosion 13 loss and not necessarily a landslide and offered examples within a development 14 area. Clarified areas susceptible to erosion due to sediment loss were identified 15 in a site-specific investigation, not a regional map, and again clarified the intent of 16 Figure 6 in the Safety Element. Suggested Action EJ 2.1.3 could be modified to 17 read: Prohibit development in areas that are particularly susceptible to erosion 18 and sediment loss that can’t be mitigated through standard engineering practices. 19 (Vice-Chairperson Menis).
20 21 • Page 146 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action EJ 2.2.4, which reads: Establish 22 protocol for reducing the use of pesticides and other public spaces maintained by 23 the City. Clarified this was an action item to ensure the City complied with this 24 action measure. The Public Works Department used non-hazardous pesticides 25 for places maintained by the City and with the establishment of a protocol to be 26 done through the Public Works Department. Staff recommended this action 27 measure could be amended to read: Establish protocol for reducing the use of 28 pesticides within public spaces maintained by the City. (Vice-Chairperson Menis) 29 30 • Page 150 of 165 of the agenda packet, Policy EJ 4.1, which reads: Strengthen 31 existing relationships with the Ohlone people and following action measures Action 32 EJ 4.1.1., EJ 4.1.2 and EJ 4.1.3, as shown on Pages 150 and 151 of 165 of the 33 agenda packet. Staff clarified the Ohlone would have 90-days to respond to the 34 Environmental and Justice Element Updates. Normally, when the City conducted 35 projects they were required by Assembly Bills (AB) 52 and 18, to notify the tribes of 36 different development projects. The Ohlone may provide comments on these 37 documents and the Ohlone had provided comments on projects in the past which 38 staff highlighted. The City was already following the action measure shown and the 39 City needed to maintain what it was already doing. Whether the City could reach out 40 to the Ohlone for suggestions on actions to these policies, the Ohlone would have 41 the opportunity to provide comment on the Environmental Justice Element prior to 42 the document going to the City Council for consideration. (Vice-Chairperson Menis) 43 44 • Page 151 of 165 of the agenda packet, acknowledged a typographical error in Action 45 EJ 4.4.3, with this action measure to now read: Action EJ 4.4.3: Ensure that future 46 improvements in the Impacted Community will not produce negative impacts on 47 existing residents, such as increase in pollution exposure, net loss of affordable 48 housing, or displacement of residents. (Vice-Chairperson Menis) 49

12 September 22, 2025
1 • Clarified these policies only applied within the City of Pinole and not actions outside 2 the City that would impact the Impacted Community. The net loss of affordable 3 housing was already a component of the Housing Element along with the 4 displacement of residents, with policies in place to address the net loss of 5 affordable housing and replacement that needed to be constructed. The net 6 increase in pollution exposure would be in what the City had control over. Clarified 7 the statutory requirement was to include a policy that ensured any additional 8 disproportionate pollution burden would not be placed on the Impacted 9 Community. Whether a distribution center was located near the City, as a possible 10 scenario, the City would be notified of such development and the City would 11 provide feedback on the need to mitigate the Impacted Community. (Vice12 Chairperson Menis) 13 14 • In terms of a proposed warehouse on San Pablo Avenue, staff clarified most of the 15 area was to the west with most of the distribution and truck traffic not near the 16 Impacted Community in terms of wind flows off of the Bay. In that case and for 17 that project, an air quality analysis had been prepared which included conditions 18 of project approval. In most cases, for projects proposed in and around the 19 impacted communities, the City would provide mitigations with environmental 20 review to be required to ensure the project did not create a significant impact. Staff 21 also clarified the City would not displace affordable housing. Areas that allowed 22 warehouses in Pinole did not allow housing. (Vice-Chairperson Menis). 23 24 • Page 113 of 165 of the agenda packet, Figure 3: Census Tract 3922.02 Detail, 25 clarified Block Group 2000, as shown in Figure 3, was probably more towards the 26 Del Monte Shopping Center and about a mile to the west from Pinole Shores, with 27 the cement plant a bit closer; the only two industrial projects in the City at this time. 28 Confirmed the Pinole Shores project included air quality mitigation measures. (Vice29 Chairperson Menis) 30 31 • Page 151 of 165 of the agenda packet, acknowledged Action EJ 4.4.3, could be 32 revised to read: Ensure that future improvements in the Impacted Community will 33 not produce negative impacts unless mitigated, on existing residents, such as 34 increase in pollution exposure, net loss of affordable housing, or displacement of 35 residents. (Vice-Chairperson Menis)
36 37 • Page 142 of 165 of the agenda packet, Policy EJ 1.2, which reads: Ensure adequate 38 and equitable access to recreational opportunities, including access to parks, open 39 space, natural spaces, and trails, to promote healthy lifestyles and prevent obesity, 40 and clarified the Senior Center owned by the City was run by a third-party. 41 Acknowledged a recommendation to include a statement that the Senior Center was 42 run by a third party. Clarified there were broader polices included in the document 43 that talked about promoting equitable access to recreational opportunities that could 44 be expanded to include comparable activities for all ages, but senior center funding 45 may be the component for age restrictions and it was noted the City provided youth 46 activities. Staff would have to look into what could be done in terms of staffing for 47 recreational activities and there was discussion about programming and whether a 48 program paid for itself, with staff to defer to the Administrative Services Director on 49 how the City’s recreational programs were run. (Lam-Julian)

13 September 22, 2025
1 • Page 142 of 165 of the agenda packet, acknowledged a recommendation to modify 2 Action EJ 1.2.1 to read: Collaborate with school districts and other entities to form 3 joint use of facility agreements for the use of pools, sports, and recreation facilities, 4 or add an action statement to have recreational opportunities available for all ages 5 including the 18-64 range. (Vice-Chairperson Menis)
6 7 • Clarified all of the City’s recreational programs offered come from a funding source, 8 and given the City’s limited budget acknowledged concern with putting forth 9 requirements. Clarified programs for those 65 years and older may involve funds 10 from the State, a regional funder or national funding grant system, and if the City had 11 other means to offer other services those services would have been provided, with 12 the City’s limited funding and staffing acknowledged. Acknowledged the preference 13 that Action EJ 1.2.1 remain as written. (Martinez).
14 15 • Acknowledged the suggestion one of the advantages of targeting the 18-64 age 16 group was that it could potentially be done in an equitable way without needing much 17 or any subsidy that was not feasible for those on fixed incomes like seniors or Tiny 18 Tots from disadvantaged populations. Recognized this was not a suggestion for the 19 City to subsidize the programs, but as part of the aspirational and environmental 20 justice goals, provide adequate and equitable opportunities, which included access 21 to all age groups. Staff was of the opinion the action measures being discussed 22 offered a broader range of access to the community whether 18-64 or 65 years or 23 older and the policies were not limiting age groups. Clarified the reason the 24 Environmental Justice Element had provided so much focus on those 65 years and 25 older and children, was because those were categories the CalEnviro Screen 4.0 26 Tracker specifically identified as socially vulnerable. It was not intended to ignore the 27 18-64 age group and the recreational opportunities provided to them, but responded 28 to the social vulnerability definitions set forth by the State as related to those age 29 groups, and it was widely acknowledged by the State that there were funding 30 resources for those recreational programs for those age groups, and where most 31 recreational programs were funded through the City.
32 33 MBI had not been scoped to provide an in-depth analysis to study the gaps in the 34 City’s current recreation services offerings and rather focused on the services 35 currently being offered and wanted to enhance the ability of the City to make those 36 offerings as equitable and as feasible within the frameworks provided. (Vice37 Chairperson Menis) 38 39 • Acknowledged the suggestion as a matter of equity that the City should at least 40 address all groups, not just those highlighted by the CalEnviro Screen. (Vice41 Chairperson Menis) 42 43 PUBLIC HEARING OPENED (Environmental Justice Element) 44 45 There were no comments from the public.
46 47 PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
48 49

14 September 22, 2025
1 Commissioner Lam-Julian clarified that MBI’s scope of services had not included an in2 depth analysis whether the City was, in fact, optimizing all of its City-owned facilities, 3 whether the facilities were rented or included a managerial company that oversaw the 4 facility, which was something she would like to see analyzed in the future. She would like 5 to know whether the City was optimizing its current resources with the knowledge the City 6 used a managerial company to oversee the Senior Center. She was curious as to whether 7 that was the best option moving forward and whether the City was, in fact, following Policy 8 EJ 1.2, which reads: Ensure adequate and equitable access to recreational opportunities, 9 including access to parks, open space, natural spaces, and trails, to promote healthy 10 lifestyles and prevent obesity.
11 12 Commissioner Lam-Julian commented the community members she had spoken to had 13 limited time and resources and she found the City had not explored all options or addressed 14 the gap in the community. While she realized the focus on the CalEnviro Screen, it had not 15 taken into account children and younger seniors.
16 17 Vice-Chairperson Menis referenced Page 114 of 165 of the agenda packet, and 18 recommended the following revision to the paragraph on this page as follows:
19 20 Because CalEPA has established CalEnviroScreen 4.0 data as regulatory 21 authority in determining Impacted Communities, this Environmental Justice 22 Element is required to prioritize mapping and findings from this data resource. 23 Using aerial imagery from Google Earth 2022, it is estimated that 62 residential 24 units are located within the Census Tract 3922.02 portion highlighted above. 25 26 Vice-Chairperson Menis referenced Page 144 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action EJ 1.5.1, 27 and recommended the following revision:
28 29 Encourage local health care providers to locate health care services and facilities 30 and provide adequate staffing to ensure equitable accessibility to such facilities. 31 32 The Planning Commission accepted the change to Action EJ 1.5.1. 33 34 Vice-Chairperson Menis referenced Page 145 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action EJ 2.1.3, 35 and recommended the following revision:
36 37 Prohibit development in areas that are particularly susceptible to erosion and 38 sediment loss unless mitigated.
39 40 Vice-Chairperson Menis referenced Page 151 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action EJ 4.4.3, 41 and recommended the following revision:
42 43 Ensure that future improvements in the City that would have an impact on the 44 Impacted Community are mitigated to a less than significant level unless mitigated 45 on existing residents, such as increase in pollution exposure, net loss of affordable 46 housing, or displacement of residents.
47 48 Mr. Hanham explained that staff may further wordsmith Action EJ 4.4.3 to ensure 49 consistency with the language in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 50

15 September 22, 2025
1 Commissioner Bender referenced Page 105 of 165 of the agenda packet, and requested 2 the first sentence of the second paragraph under 1.4.1 Native American Tribes be revised 3 to read:
4 5 The Ohlone people are the primary group of Native Americans on the Northern 6 California Coast, with a reach from present-day San Francisco through Monterey 7 Bay.3
8 9 Commissioner Bender referenced Pages 136 and 137 of 165 of the agenda packet, the last 10 sentence of the last paragraph under 2.6.4 Medical Care Access, to be revised to read:
11 12 The physical structure was demolished; no similar hospital, emergency room, or 13 urgent care facilities have opened in the City since closing Doctor’s Medical Center. 14 15 Commissioner Bender referenced Page 130 of 165 of the agenda packet, and the second 16 sentence of the paragraph under Other Census Tracts, which reads: Generally, white 17 populations represent the followed by Hispanic, Asian American, African American and 18 then Other. He asked and staff confirmed the reference to white populations would be 19 clarified.
20 21 Chairperson Sandoval referenced Page 144 of 165 of the agenda packet, Action EJ 1.5.6, 22 and recommended it be revised to read:
23 24 Encourage the development of a medical center, emergency room, urgent care, or 25 other hospital uses in the community.
26 27 Vice-Chairperson Menis referenced Page 135 of 165 of the agenda packet, Figure 11: USDA 28 Low-Income and Low-Access Food Atlas, and confirmed with staff the figure would be 29 modified, as previously discussed.
30 31 MOTION with a Roll Call vote to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 25-09 with Exhibit 32 A: Safety Element and Exhibit B: Environmental Justice Element, a Resolution of the 33 Planning Commission of the City of Pinole Recommending to the City Council Approval of 34 General Plan Amendment 25-01 for Adoption of the Safety and Environmental Justice 35 Elements to the City of Pinole General Plan and Approval of the CEQA Exemption Pursuant 36 to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3), as amended by the Planning Commission. 37 38 MOTION: Sandoval SECONDED: Menis APPROVED: 6-0-1
39 ABSENT: Huey
40 41 Chairperson Sandoval identified the 10-day appeal process of a decision of the Planning 42 Commission in writing to the City Clerk.
43 44 Commissioner Martinez left the meeting prior to the discussion of Item H. 45 46 H. OLD BUSINESS:
47 48 1. Discussion of Redevelopment of Appian 80 Shopping Center – Compiled 49 Ideas Resolution – Second Revision

16 September 22, 2025
1 Mr. Hanham provided the staff report dated September 22, 2025. The Planning 2 Commission was asked to adopt the draft resolution contained in Exhibit A, to the staff 3 report.
4 5 The Planning Commission walked through the Second Revision of the Compiled Ideas 6 Resolution page-by-page, as contained in Exhibit A to the staff report, with the following 7 comments and/or revisions as follows:
8 9 • Mixed Use Development, 1, no changes.
10 11 • Mixed Use Development 2, noted some spacing issues with the formatting as 12 compared to Mixed Use Development 2 and 3.
13 14 • Mixed Use Development 3, no changes.
15 16 • Design and Development 4, 5, 6 and 7, no changes. 17 18 • Design and Development 8, recommended the last sentence be restructured or 19 hyphenated to flow better, and staff noted the margins could be expanded to better 20 space the text.
21 22 • Design and Development 9 and 10, no changes.
23 24 • Access and Transportation 11 and 12, no changes. 25 26 • Markets and Commercial Opportunities, 13, revised to read: Development should 27 consider the need for an affordable grocery option. Markets should consider the 28 price point and needs of the community in the area, in particular seniors and 29 persons on fixed-incomes.
30 31 • Markets and Commercial Opportunities, 14, 16 and 17, no changes. 32 33 • Markets and Commercial Opportunities, 15, expand Footnote 5, to read: Examples 34 may include Yard House and Whole Foods and prepared foods being a sales tax 35 benefit.
36 37 • Community Enhancement and Partnerships, 18, 19, 20, no changes. 38 39 • Other Topics for City Council, 21, revised to read: Planning Commission further 40 suggests City Council give consideration to a nexus study in developing a Citywide 41 commercial land vacancy fee.
42 43 PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
44 45 Anthony Vossbrink, asked that landscaping requirements be included in the ideas for 46 consideration. He cited the blight along the back perimeter of the shopping center property 47 and a large ravine in the back, which collected debris from I-80 and other properties. 48 There was also a grove of tall dead pine trees that were a fire hazard. 49

17 September 22, 2025
1 Mr. Vossbrink asked who would draw the property lines for the property in terms of whether 2 the County, Caltrans or the City was responsible for maintenance. He also asked whether 3 there had been any discussion of color coordination for the buildings to ensure the existing 4 tenants were all on board and required to coordinate with similar paint colors for the 5 exterior of the shopping center.
6 7 PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
8 9 In response to the public comment, Mr. Hanham explained once the new property owner 10 decided what they want to do with the project, they would have to submit design review to 11 the City. As to the debris in the ravine, that property was Caltrans property and Caltrans was 12 responsible for maintenance but code enforcement could be asked to inspect the area. The 13 City had an area fenced off due to issues with trucks and it may be possible to fence the back 14 side as well. The City could work with the property owner on that issue working with code 15 enforcement.
16 17 Commissioner Bender hoped the area would become something more than a strip mall but 18 he recognized there was no project at this time.
19 20 Commissioner Lam-Julian also recognized there were no plans currently for the property but 21 hoped something would come through since the community deserved it. 22 23 Vice-Chairperson Menis suggested there was room for aesthetics and recommended a new 24 point could be added under Design and Development to read: Development should strive to 25 have a unified color scheme.
26 27 Commissioner Bender disagreed with adding the statement since there was as yet no 28 proposal and only concepts were being discussed as to what the Planning Commission 29 wanted to see planning-wise, which was different from what the buildings would look like. 30 There was no guarantee the property owner would pay attention to the proposed ideas 31 resolution, which expressed the aspirations and hopes of what the Planning Commission 32 hoped the property could be from a macro picture, and he suggested leaving it at that. He 33 recognized the Planning Commission had spent a great deal of time on the document that 34 had evolved to become more succinct. He wanted to keep the document short, sweet and 35 aspirational.
36 37 Chairperson Sandoval thanked staff and the Planning Commission for all the work on the 38 document which involved three separate meetings. He hoped the developer was listening 39 and would consider something new and beautiful the City deserved or if the current developer 40 chose not to and decided to sell, he looked forward to another developer considering the 41 aspirational ideas the Planning Commission had offered. 42 43 MOTION to adopt Resolution 25-08 with Exhibit A, Development Ideas and Concepts, a 44 Resolution of the Planning Commission of the City of Pinole, County of Contra Costa, State 45 of California, Expressing Desirable Ideas and Concepts for Consideration for Future 46 Redevelopment of the Appian 80 Shopping Center Recommended to the City Council of the 47 City of Pinole, as amended by the Planning Commission. 48 49 MOTION: Sandoval SECONDED: Bender APPROVED: 5-0-2 50 ABSENT: Huey, Martinez

18 September 22, 2025
1 I. NEW BUSINESS: None
2 3 J. CITY PLANNER’S/COMMISSIONER’S REPORT
4 5 Mr. Hanham reported he would be attending the American Planning Association (APA) 6 Conference in Monterey in the next week. He and Senior Planner Justin Shiu offered the 7 following updates:
8 9 • Staff was waiting for the Fire Department to provide comments on the Pinole Shores 10 II project.
11 12 • Appian Village was moving forward fairly quickly on the first three buildings and staff 13 was working to have the Lighting and Landscaping Assessment District (LLAD) for 14 the property completed and conditions of approval completed prior to issuance of 15 Certificates of Occupancy (COOs).
16 17 • Pinole Vista was entitled through October 2026, with a one-year extension. 18 19 • Staff was working on a couple of Lot Line Adjustment (LLA) applications. 20 21 • A public workshop was being considered for the month of October for the Parklet 22 Program and outdoor dining, date to be determined to be held in the Council 23 Chambers. It was hoped the regulations would be brought to the Planning 24 Commission prior to the end of the year and the City Council in January. 25 26 • Staff continued to work on the Objective Development Design Standards (ODDS), 27 with changes currently being made based on recommendations from the Planning 28 Commission Ad Hoc Committee. Staff hoped to have the ODDS presented to the 29 Planning Commission in the next 60 days.
30 31 • Staff with assistance from interns was working on a Planning Division webpage to 32 collect information on Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). 33 34 • The Planning Department was hosting the third workshop in a series of workshops 35 for the Pinole Accessible Living Program (PAL) to be held at the Senior Center. 36 37 Commissioner Lam-Julian asked that staff remind the Appian Village developer to be good 38 neighbors since several community members had reached out to express concern trucks 39 were driving reckless and she had witnessed a cement truck driving the wrong way during 40 drop-off to enter the lot. Given the proximity of schools with the area already congested, it 41 was getting hostile between community members and the workers for the project. 42 43 Mr. Hanham advised a gentle reminder could be provided. 44 45 Vice-Chairperson Menis reported during a recent Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Committee 46 (TAPS) meeting a public commenter had provided comments along similar lines, that there 47 were issues around drop-off time and lanes being closed off. There had been an inquiry 48 whether there had been any conditions imposed on the project to constrain the hours of 49 operation to avoid overlay with the pickup and drop-off times for the schools.

19 September 22, 2025
1 Mr. Hanham understood there were a thread of emails between the Public Works Specialist 2 and the principal of the middle school about drop-offs and when the developer, DeNova 3 Homes, could access the roadway. It was clear the developer had to be reminded to be 4 mindful about drop-off and pickup times. He suggested once the striping was completed on 5 the roadway that may solve some of the problems. He added once the developer started 6 with the curb and gutter work there could be some lane closures. He would relay the 7 concerns to the Public Works Department. He added, when asked, that the road should not 8 be closed by the developer unless there was approval from the City, and the only time the 9 City approved the closure of the road was for slurry seal work. 10 11 Vice-Chairperson Menis asked whether the City had an explicit condition of approval on the 12 project to state that the work could only be done between certain hours, and Mr. Hanham 13 confirmed there were conditions related to construction and again if any road closures were 14 needed approval from the Public Works Department was required. He recalled that work 15 could only occur on weekends.
16 17 Vice-Chairperson Menis reported that when he tried to find information on the City website 18 about conditions of approval for undeveloped projects he could find no information for the 19 subject project. He asked whether a hyperlink could be provided for the project which could 20 be helpful, and Mr. Hanham confirmed that could be done. 21 22 PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
23 24 Anthony Vossbrink, referenced the overpass on Appian Way which crossed over I-80 and 25 asked whether the City or the public had any say over the type of structure Caltrans was 26 working on given concerns it could become an eyesore similar to other Caltrans structures 27 in other communities. When the issue was raised at a recent TAPS meeting, staff was 28 unclear as to what kind of concrete safety wall would be installed and the details about the 29 structure were unclear. He wanted more information on the structure including the status of 30 the pedestrian path. He added there was a lot of AT&T work on the lines and poles up and 31 down Pinole Valley Road and asked whether the work was related to promises made by 32 AT&T and/or PG&E that old poles and lines up and down Pinole Valley Road would be 33 underground. He also reported there remained a problem at the corner of Granada Court 34 and Shea Drive where double poles had been strapped together in violation of the Americans 35 with Disabilities Act (ADA) for the pathway, which had been there for several years, was an 36 eyesore and a possible safety hazard leaving the City liable. 37 38 Mr. Vossbrink further asked about the status of the vacant lot next to the storage center at 39 the corner of Ramona Street and Pinole Valley Road, across from the high school. The 40 landlord sign had been removed and he asked whether it would be replaced. He also asked 41 how property lines were defined and reported on the number of dead trees that lined the 42 sides of City streets, in particular there was a large tree in the middle of Galbreth Road that 43 was a fire hazard and should be remediated. There were also dead trees along I-80 and the 44 Adobe Road Trail behind the dog park and caretaker’s house. 45 46 PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
47 48 Mr. Hanham responded to the public comment and explained he would have to check with 49 the Public Works Department on the status of the AT&T work. 50

20 September 22, 2025
1 Mr. Hanham clarified the I-80 overpass work, was the purview of Caltrans and was a safety 2 project. He also confirmed the City had interest in the vacant lot at Ramona Street and 3 Pinole Valley Road, but most of the uses proposed required a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) 4 or were unpermitted uses. As to the status of ownership of the trees on public sidewalks and 5 along the trails, he would have to check with Joe Bingaman, Public Works Manager. 6 7 In response to the Chair, Mr. Hanham advised the vacant lot near the high school was zoned 8 Commercial Mixed-Use (CMU).
9 10 K. COMMUNICATIONS
11 12 Vice-Chairperson Menis reported on the ex-parté communications to his email list about the 13 topics on the meeting agenda and various other items. He announced the following 14 community events: Senior Food Distribution at the Senior Center on September 23, 2025 15 from 10:00 to 11:00 a.m. for seniors in the City of Pinole only, with evidence of residence and 16 age required; Street Eats from 5:00 to 8:00 p.m. on September 26, October 10 and 24, 2025 17 at the Community Corner in downtown Pinole; Coffee with the City Manager on September 18 26, 2025 from 8:30 to 9:30 a.m.; and a rally at the intersection of Tennent Avenue and San 19 Pablo Avenue on Saturday, September 27, 2025. He also reported the County had a 20 community survey available through the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) 21 website as part of phase two of an update to the Countywide Transportation Plan (CTP). 22 23 L. NEXT MEETING
24 25 1. Planning Commission Regular Meeting on October 27, 2025 at 7:00 p.m. 26 27 M. ADJOURNMENT: 10:48 p.m.
28 29 Transcribed by: Reviewed and Edited by:
30 31 Sherri D. Lewis City Staff
32 Transcriber

CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 12.A.

DATE: JANUARY 20, 2026
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Markisha Guillory, Finance Director, 510-724-9823, [email protected] SUBJECT: ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL REPORT (ACFR) FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2025

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council receive and accept the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) for the fiscal year (FY) ended June 30, 2025.

BACKGROUND
At the close of each fiscal year, the City engages an external auditor to audit its financial statements. The purpose of a financial audit, which is conducted as a best practice in both the public and private sectors, is to provide users of financial statements with reasonable assurance that they can rely on the statements to make informed decisions. Financial statements are the tool that management uses to give an accounting of the stewardship of the financial resources for which it is responsible.

At the conclusion of year-end financial audit, the City publishes the ACFR, which contains the City of Pinole’s basic financial statements, auditor’s report, and important supplemental information regarding that fiscal year. The ACFR is intended to present the reader with a comprehensive view of the City’s financial position and operational activities.

The City’s Finance Department is responsible for preparing the ACFR and assumes responsibility for its accuracy, completeness, and fairness. The Pun Group, the City’s auditors, audited the basic financial statements included in the ACFR to provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free of material misstatement and are fairly presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The Pun Group issued an unmodified opinion on the City’s financial statements; this is the highest possible rating. This means that the financial statements are presented, in all material respects, in accordance with applicable financial reporting guidelines.

Consistent with sound fiscal management practices and prudent public policy, City staff is presenting the ACFR to the City Council. The ACFR can be found on the City’s website at:
https://www.pinole.gov/financial-reports/.

REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The ACFR (Attachment A) is organized into five sections:

• An introduction, which includes the Transmittal Letter and the Independent Auditor’s Report;
• Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A);
• Basic Financial Statements and Notes;
• Supplemental Information; and
• Statistical Information.

The MD&A section (pages 5-18) of the ACFR presents an overview and analysis of the City’s financial activities for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025. Staff encourages readers to consider the information presented in this section in conjunction with additional information provided in the Transmittal Letter (pages v-viii), the City’s basic financial statements (pages 19-44), and the notes to the financial statements (pages 45-90). Additionally, the ACFR is supplemented by other auditors’ reports on the matters of internal controls, compliance, and governance (Attachments B-F).

Financial Highlights
The following is a summary of financial highlights from the MD&A section of the ACFR for the year ended June 30, 2025.
• The City's assets and deferred outflows of resources exceeded its liabilities and deferred inflows of resources at the close of FY 2024/25 by $35.7 million (net position).

Of this amount, $29.3 million is restricted for specific purposes (restricted net position), $42.1 million is the net investment in capital assets and $35.7 million represents a deficit in unrestricted net position.
• The City’s net position decreased by $3.2 million, an 8.4% decrease at the close of FY 2024/25 as compared to FY 2023/24. The decrease is primarily the net result of the decrease in cash and investments with fiscal agents in governmental activities and the increase in accounts payable in business activities. Overall, governmental activities’ net position decreased by $5.4 million while business-type activities increased by $2.2 million.
• The General Fund balance at the close of FY 2024/25 was $28.5 million, which has various levels of restrictions. The General Fund as presented in the financial statements is composed of the main General Fund, Measure S 2006 Fund, Measure S 2014 Fund, General Reserve Fund, Equipment Reserve Fund, and Section 115 Trust Fund. Of the $28.5 million fund balance, $5.6 million is unassigned. The unassigned fund balance represents the portion that is not restricted, committed, or assigned for specific

purposes.

This ACFR meets all the requirements to achieve the highest standard in government accounting and financial reporting for an ACFR, the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting issued by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA). The City has received this certificate annually for the last twentyseven consecutive fiscal years and expects to receive this certificate for the FY 2024/25 ACFR.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025 B. Communication at Conclusion Letter for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025 C. Report on Agreed-Upon Procedures Applied to Schedule of Measure S 2006 Revenues and Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025 D. Report on Agreed-Upon Procedures Applied to Schedule of Measure S 2014 Revenues and Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025 E. Report on Agreed-Upon Procedures Applied to Schedule of Measure I 2024 Revenues and Expenditures for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025 F. Report on Agreed-Upon Procedures Applied to Appropriations Limit Schedule for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025

Annual
Comprehensive
Financial Report
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025

CITY OF PINOLE

City of Pinole
Pinole, California
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2025
Prepared by the
Finance Department

City of Pinole
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
Table of Contents
i
Page
INTRODUCTORY SECTION (Unaudited)
Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................................ i Letter of Transmittal ................................................................................................................................................... v Principal Officers ...................................................................................................................................................... ix Organization Chart ..................................................................................................................................................... x GFOA Certificate of Achievement ............................................................................................................................ xi

FINANCIAL SECTION
Independent Auditor’s Report ................................................................................................................................ 1 Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited) ........................................................................................... 5 Basic Financial Statements:

Government-Wide Financial Statements:

Statement of Net Position ............................................................................................................................ 22 Statement of Activities ................................................................................................................................ 24 Fund Financial Statements:

Governmental Funds Financial Statements:

Balance Sheet ........................................................................................................................................ 31 Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet
to the Government-Wide Statement of Net Position ...................................................................... 32 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances ............................................... 33 Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances to the Government-Wide Statement of Activities ................................................................................................................... 34 Proprietary Funds Financial Statements:

Statement of Net Position ..................................................................................................................... 37 Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position .......................................................... 38 Statement of Cash Flows ...................................................................................................................... 39 Fiduciary Funds Financial Statements:

Statement of Fiduciary Net Position ..................................................................................................... 43 Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position .................................................................................. 44 Notes to the Basic Financial Statements ........................................................................................................ 51

City of Pinole
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
Table of Contents (Continued)
ii
Page
FINANCIAL SECTION (Continued)
Required Supplementary Information (Unaudited):

Budgetary Information ....................................................................................................................................... 93 Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Change in Fund Balance Budget and Actual Schedules:

General Fund ............................................................................................................................................... 95 Housing Programs Special Revenue Fund .................................................................................................. 96 Building and Planning Special Revenue Fund ............................................................................................ 97 Schedule of the City’s Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability and Related Ratios:

Cost Sharing Multiple Employer Miscellaneous Plan ................................................................................. 98 Schedules of Contributions – Pension:

Cost Sharing Multiple Employer Miscellaneous Plan ............................................................................... 100 Schedule of the City’s Proportionate Share of the Net Pension Liability and Related Ratios:

Cost Sharing Multiple Employer Safety Plan ........................................................................................... 102 Schedules of Contributions – Pension:

Cost Sharing Multiple Employer Safety Plan ........................................................................................... 104 Schedule of Changes in Net Other Postemployment Benefits Liability and Related Ratios ........................... 106 Supplementary Information:

Non-Major Governmental Funds:

Combining Balance Sheet ......................................................................................................................... 113 Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances ................................................................................................................................. 117 Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance – Budget and Actual:

Public Works Capital Projects ................................................................................................................... 121 Growth Impact Special Revenue Fund ...................................................................................................... 122 Gas Tax Special Revenue Fund ................................................................................................................. 123 Parkland Dedication Special Revenue Fund ............................................................................................. 124 Measure C Special Revenue Fund ............................................................................................................. 125 Storm Water Special Revenue Fund ......................................................................................................... 126 Refuse Management Special Revenue Fund ............................................................................................. 127 Adjudicated Asset Seizure Special Revenue Fund .................................................................................... 128 Police Special Revenue Fund .................................................................................................................... 129 Cable TV Special Revenue Fund .............................................................................................................. 130 Recreation Special Revenue Fund ............................................................................................................. 131 Rate Stabilization Fund ............................................................................................................................. 132 Development Services Special Revenue Fund .......................................................................................... 133 Solid Waste Special Revenue Fund ........................................................................................................... 134 CASP Certification & Training Special Revenue Fund ............................................................................ 135 Fiduciary Funds:

Combining Statement of Fiduciary Net Position ....................................................................................... 138 Combining Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position .................................................................... 140

City of Pinole
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
For the Year Ended June 30, 2025
Table of Contents (Continued)
iii
Page
STATISTICAL SECTION (Unaudited)
Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................... 145 Financial Trends:

Net Position by Component – Last Ten Fiscal Years ...................................................................................... 146 Changes in Net Position – Last Ten Fiscal Years ............................................................................................ 148 General Fund Tax Revenue by Source – Last Ten Fiscal Years...................................................................... 151 Fund Balances Governmental Funds – Last Ten Fiscal Years ........................................................................ 152 Changes in Fund Balances Governmental Funds – Last Ten Fiscal Years ...................................................... 154 Revenue Capacity:

Assessed and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property – Last Ten Fiscal Years ..................................... 157 Direct and Overlapping Governments – Last Ten Fiscal Years ...................................................................... 158 Principal Property Taxpayers – Current and Nine Years Prior ........................................................................ 159 Property Tax Levies and Collections – Last Ten Fiscal Years ........................................................................ 161 Taxable Sales by Category – Last Ten Fiscal Years ........................................................................................ 162 Direct and Overlapping Sales Tax Rates – Last Ten Fiscal Years .................................................................. 164 Top 25 Sales Tax Producers ............................................................................................................................ 165 Debt Capacity:

Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type – Last Ten Fiscal Years ......................................................................... 166 Ratios of Net General Bonded Debt Outstanding – Last Ten Fiscal Years ..................................................... 167 Direct and Overlapping Governmental Activities Debt ................................................................................... 168 Computation of Legal Debt Margin – Last Ten Fiscal Years .......................................................................... 169 Revenue Bond Coverage – Last Ten Fiscal Years ........................................................................................... 170 Demographic and Economic Information:

Demographic Statistics – Last Ten Fiscal Years ............................................................................................. 171 Principal Employers – Current and Nine Years Ago ....................................................................................... 173

Operating Information:

Operating Indicators by Function/Program – Last Ten Fiscal Years ............................................................... 174 Full-Time Equivalent City Government Employees by Function/Program – Last Ten Fiscal Years .............. 177 Capital Asset Statistics by Function/Program – Last Ten Fiscal Years ........................................................... 178 Other Report:

Independent Auditor’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards ........................................... 181

iv
This page intentionally left blank.

v
December 19, 2025
Members of the City Council
Residents of the City of Pinole
We are pleased to present the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) of the City of Pinole, California (City) for the fiscal year (FY) ended June 30, 2025.

Introduction
The City issues a complete set of financial statements each year that conform to accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) and are audited by an independent, certified public accounting firm.

To meet this requirement, the City creates the ACFR, which contains the required audited financial statements as well as other useful supplemental information.

The City, not the auditor, is responsible for the content of the ACFR. City management assumes full responsibility for the completeness and reliability of all the information presented in the ACFR.

To protect the government’s assets from loss, theft, or misuse and to compile sufficient reliable information for the preparation of the City’s financial statements in conformity with GAAP, the City has established a comprehensive internal control framework. The City’s framework of internal controls has been designed to provide reasonable, rather than absolute, assurance that the financial statements will be free from material misstatement, because it would be inefficient if the cost of internal controls outweighed their benefits. As management, we assert that, to the best of our knowledge and belief, this financial report is complete and reliable in all material respects.

The Pun Group, an independent, certified public accounting firm, has audited the City of Pinole’s financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025. The objective of the audit was to provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements of the City are free of material misstatement. The audit involved examining on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements; assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management; and evaluating overall financial management presentation. The Pun Group concluded, based upon the audit, that there was a reasonable basis for rendering an unmodified opinion that the City of Pinole’s financial statements for the year ended June 30, 2025 are fairly presented in conformity with GAAP. Their independent auditor’s report is the first component presented in the Financial section of the ACFR.

Public agencies that receive federal funding above a certain monetary threshold are required to undergo an annual “Single Audit” that incorporates the audit of financial statements mentioned above as well as an auditors’ assessment of the City’s internal controls and compliance with legal requirements, particularly internal controls and compliance regarding administration of federal awards. The Single Audit Report is published as a separate document from the ACFR. A Single Audit Report is not required for the City for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025 because the City’s expenditures of federal funds did not exceed the $750,000 threshold for the year.

GAAP requires that the ACFR include a narrative introduction, overview, and analysis of the City’s financial condition, provided by management in the form of the Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A), to accompany the basic financial statements. This letter of transmittal is designed to complement the MD&A and should be read in conjunction with it. The City’s MD&A can be found immediately following the independent auditors report in the Financial section of the ACFR.

CITY OF PINOLE
2131 Pear Street Phone: (510) 724-9000
Pinole, CA 94564 www.Pinole.Gov

vi
Profile of the Government
The City is primarily a residential community located in West Contra Costa County on the shores of San Pablo Bay, approximately 30 miles northeast of San Franciso and 20 miles north of Oakland. Highway Interstate 80, which traverses Pinole, connects the San Francisco/Oakland metropolitan area. State Route 4 links Pinole to the neighboring cities of Martinez, Concord, and Pleasant Hill. Pinole is a general law city that was incorporated on June 25, 1903.

There are approximately five square miles of land within Pinole’s boundary. It has a population of approximately 18,261 as of January 2025.

The City operates under the Council-Manager form of operation, with five Council Members elected citywide on a non-partisan basis. Council Members are elected to four-year staggered terms with three Council Members alternating election with two Council Members at two-year intervals. Each year, the Council appoints one of its members to serve as Mayor. The Council appoints the City Manager, City Attorney, and City Clerk. Policymaking and legislative authorities are vested in the City Council, which, among other things, passes ordinances, adopts the budget, and appoints committees. The City Manager is responsible for carrying out the policies and ordinances of the City Council, for overseeing the day-to-day operations of the City, and for appointing the department directors.

Pinole is a full-service city, with 114 full-time equivalent authorized personnel in FY 2024/25. The City provides public safety (police), public works (maintenance of streets, infrastructure, and facilities), community development (land use and building regulation), community services including recreation programs and parks, wastewater utilities, administration, and fiscal services. Effective March 1, 2023, the Fire Department transitioned from the City of Pinole to the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District, which provides fire and emergency medical services to Pinole residents under a contract services agreement. Sewer treatment and collection services are provided by the City’s Wastewater Treatment Plant.

The financial statements included in the ACFR cover the City (the primary government) and its component units if applicable. Component units are legally separate entities for which the primary government is financially accountable.

Blended component units, although legally separate entities, are, in substance, part of the City’s operations, and data from these units are combined with data from the City. The City’s component unit, the City of Pinole Joint Powers Financing Authority, is a separate government entity whose purpose is to assist with the financing or refinancing of public capital facilities within the City and is all blended. Discrete component units are reported in a separate column in the basic financial statements to emphasize their separateness from the City. The Successor Agency to the Pinole Redevelopment Agency is not a component unit of the City but is accounted for in a Private Purpose Trust Fund in the Fiduciary Funds segment of the financial report. The former Redevelopment Agency was considered a component unit of the City.

The City Council must adopt an initial budget for the upcoming fiscal year no later than June 30, with the fiscal year commencing on July 1. The annual budget serves as the City of Pinole’s primary financial planning and control tool.

The budget is prepared by both fund and department. Department heads may transfer resources within a fund in the department’s budget, provided such transfers remain within adopted appropriations limits. Any amendments to the budget at the fund level require approval by the City Council.

Local Economy
The region in which Pinole is located has a varied manufacturing, industrial, and commercial economic base. The long-term trend of the City’s economy is a stable local tax base and generates tax revenue primarily from property tax, sales tax, utility users’ tax, and intergovernmental tax. The City’s principal businesses are engaged in merchandising and retail sales.

Pinole’s population has remained stable and had a population of 18,261 in 2025, 0.45% down from 18,344 in 2024.

The median household income was $159,800 in 2025, 2.6% up from $155,700 in 2024. The local unemployment rate in 2025 was 3.0%, down from 3.3% in 2024. Although unemployment rates have risen nationwide, Pinole has continued to experience rates consistently lower than those at the county and state levels. The total workforce in Pinole for 2025 was 9,600 employees compared to 4,544 employees nine years ago in 2016. This includes employees of the City of Pinole, major retailers, a medical center, and the school district.

vii
To maintain service levels in the City’s core municipal operations, Pinole voters approved Measure I—an additional local half-cent sales—during the November 2024 municipal election. This measure increased the City’s sales tax rate to 10.25% on taxable purchases and is projected to generate approximately $2,600,000 in additional revenue for the General Fund. The proceeds will support essential services, including public safety, road maintenance, and community services.

The City has continued to experience stable property tax values. At the end of the second quarter (June 2025), the median price of a detached single-family home in Pinole was $710,000, the same as the median price of $710,000 for June 2024. The county median home price was $850,000 and the statewide median home price was $899,560.

The City advanced several major housing, environmental, and economic development initiatives. The City secured $650,000 in Prohousing Incentive Program funds to support the Low/Moderate Affordable Housing Asset Fund and joined the Contra Costa County Brownfields Alliance, jointly applying for an EPA Brownfields Grant to assist future redevelopment. Significant progress occurred in affordable housing production, with Certificates of Occupancy issued for both Vista Woods (179 senior units) and Valor Village (33 veteran units). The City also processed permits for the first phase of the 154-unit Appian Village condominium project.

In alignment with Major Initiative 5 of the Economic Development Strategy, staff supported downtown activation efforts by sponsoring business-led Art Walk and Street Eats events at Community Corner.

Long-Term Financial Planning and Major Initiatives
The City’s long-term strategies are guided by the City of Pinole Strategic Plan 2020-2025, which establishes priorities for fiscal sustainability, community services, infrastructure investment, and economic development. As a part of its financial planning efforts, the City maintains a 20-year financial forecast that is updated annually to reflect changes in revenues, expenditures, and other economic factors. This forecast serves as a tool for identifying potential future opportunities and challenges. By proactively analyzing these trends, the City is able to align resources with community priorities and address issues through the annual budget process and capital improvement planning.

The City maintains a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), which is a multi-year planning tool that identifies and prioritizes capital needs over the upcoming five-year horizon. The CIP aligns capital projects with appropriate funding sources, schedules, and implementation strategies. The plan serves as a working blueprint for building and sustaining publicly funded physical infrastructure. In coordination with the CIP, the City has also developed master plans that address high-priority areas, such as roads, transportation, and stormwater.

In the coming fiscal year, the City will continue to support major development and reinvestment activities throughout Pinole. Staff will perform inspections and process permits for Appian Village and continue working with the developer of the former Kmart site to either implement the approved Pinole Vista entitlements or re-envision the site for new economic activity. The City will also advance permitting for the proposed 120,000-square-foot Pinole Shores II industrial project and collaborate with the new owner of Pinole Square/Appian 80 to expedite revitalization efforts, including through potential Brownfields assistance. Additionally, the City plans to advance the potential disposition of two key City-owned downtown sites to catalyze reinvestment and further the Economic Development Strategy’s goal of sustained downtown activation.

Relevant Financial Policies
The City of Pinole has adopted a comprehensive set of financial policies which are reviewed annually. Of note are the Structurally Balanced Budget Policy, Reserve Policy, and Investment Policy.

The annual budget serves as the foundation of the City’s financial planning and control. Development of the budget is guided by the Structurally Balanced Budget Policy, which states that the City will aspire to create a proposed General Fund operating budget that is structurally balanced whereby current expenditures will be funded by current year revenue. The budget is legally adopted through passage of a Council resolution no later than June 30. A budget review, which includes recommended additions or changes, is presented to the City Council on a quarterly basis. Any changes as a result of these reviews are legally adopted through Council resolution.

viii
The Council exercises budgetary control at the functional department level. Formal budgetary integration is employed as a management control device during the fiscal year for the General Fund, Special Revenue Funds, Capital Project Funds, Enterprise Funds, and Internal Services Funds. The budgeted funds are adopted on a basis consistent with GAAP in the United States. Expenditures may not legally exceed budgeted appropriations at the fund level.

Management does not have the authority to amend the budget without approval of the City Council.

In accordance with its Reserve Policy, the City maintains cash reserves to meet certain anticipated future obligations as well as to ensure that the City maintains adequate financial resources to continue to provide basic municipal services in the event of a significant unanticipated revenue decrease or expenditure increase. The reserves are held in a separate fund referred to as the General Reserve. The General Reserve maintains an amount equivalent to 25% (three months of coverage) of the City’s annual General Fund ongoing operating expenditures per the Reserve Policy.

Public funds held by the City treasury are invested in accordance with the City’s Investment Policy, which conforms to California Government Code Section 53601. The objectives of the City’s Investment Policy are to invest up to 100% of temporarily idle funds while maintaining safety, liquidity, and yield. The permitted investments include U.S. treasury notes, bonds, or bills; instruments issued by a U.S. federal agency or a U.S. government sponsored enterprise; negotiable certificates of deposit (with certain restrictions); medium term corporate notes with a rating category of “AA” or better; commercial paper of “prime quality”; bankers acceptances; repurchase agreements not to exceed 30 days; money market mutual funds; and the State of California Local Agency Investment Fund.

Awards
The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA) awarded the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the City of Pinole for its ACFR for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024. This was the twenty-seventh consecutive year that the City has received the prestigious award.

In order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, a government must publish an easy to read and efficiently organized comprehensive annual financial report. This report must satisfy both generally accepted accounting principles and applicable legal requirements. A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year. We believe that our current annual comprehensive financial report continues to meet the Certificate of Achievement Program's requirements, and we are submitting it to the GFOA to determine its continued eligibility for a certificate.

Acknowledgements
The preparation of the ACFR was made possible through the dedicated work of the Finance Department staff and with the cooperation of all City departments. Special thanks and acknowledgement are due to Maria Mata, Senior Accountant and Anthony Colden, Accounting Specialist for their commitment and effectiveness in the maintenance of the City’s financial records.

I wish to acknowledge and thank the City Council for its leadership and commitment to ensuring the long-term fiscal health of the City.

Respectfully submitted,
Markisha Guillory
Finance Director

ix

ELECTED OFFICIALS

Cameron Sasai Anthony Tave Maureen Toms
Mayor Mayor Pro Tempore Council Member
Devin Murphy Norma Martínez-Rubin Roy Swearingen
Council Member Council Member City Treasurer

DEPARTMENT HEADS
City Manager Kelcey Young
City Attorney (Contract) Eric Casher
City Clerk Heather Bell
Community Development Director Lilly Whalen
Community Services Director Andrea Dwyer
Finance Director Markisha Guillory
Human Resources Director Stacy Shell
Police Chief Melissa Klawuhn
Public Works Director Heba El-Guindy

Residents of Pinole
City Council City Treasurer
City Manager City Clerk City Attorney
Community
Development
Community
Services Finance Human Resources Police Public Works
-Planning-Building-Code Enforcement-Affordable Housing-EconomicDevelopment-RedevelopmentSuccessor Agency -Parks and Recreation:
-Administration-Tiny Tots-Youth Center-Senior Center-Swim Center-Tennis Court-Memorial Hall -Special Events-Library and AnimalServicesCommunity Healthand Food -AccountingOperations:
-Accounts Payable-Accounts Receivable-Payroll Processing-Audits and Financial Reporting-Budget Management-Long-Range FinancialPlanning-Purchasing-TreasuryManagement-Debt and BondAdministration-Business LicenseAdministration -Human ResourcesAdministration andRisk Management-Labor Relations-Employee Relations-Recruitment andSelection-BenefitsAdministration-OrganizationalTraining andDevelopment-Classification andCompensation -Police Operations-Police SupportServices-Police Dispatch WestBay CommunicationsCenter -Administration andEngineering-Road Maintenance-Facility Maintenance-Park Maintenance-Storm Water-Waste Reduction-Water PollutionControl Plant-Sewer Collection-Landscape andLighting AssessmentDistrict-Real Estate andProperty Management-Fleet Management Office of the City
Manager
-Administration and Programs-Information TechnologLJ
ĞƉĂƌƚŵĞŶƚͲWŝŶŽůĞŽŵŵƵŶŝƚLJdĞůĞǀŝƐŝŽŶ;WdsͿ
Note: The Contra Costa County Fire Protection District provides fire safety services to Pinole residents.

Ͳ
ůĞĐƚŝŽŶƐͲŝƚLJŽƵŶĐŝů^ƵƉƉŽƌƚͲZĞĐŽƌĚƐDĂŶĂŐĞŵĞŶƚͲWƵďůŝĐZĞĐŽƌĚƐZĞƋƵĞƐƚƐͲ&WWŽŵƉůŝĂŶĐĞΘdƌĂŶƐƉĂƌĞŶĐLJͲŽĂƌĚƐΘŽŵŵŝƐƐŝŽŶƐ^ƵƉƉŽƌƚͲůĂŝŵƐΘ>ĞŐĂůEŽƚŝĐĞWƌŽĐĞƐƐŝŶŐ x Page 309 of 516
Government Finance Officers Association
Certificate of
Achievement
for Excellence
in Financial
Reporting
Presented to
City of Pinole
California
For its Annual Comprehensive
Financial Report
For the Fiscal Year Ended
June 30, 2024
Executive Director/CEO
xi

xii
This page intentionally left blank.

6 Hutton Centre Drive, Suite 1200
Santa Ana, California 92707
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT
To the Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
of the City of Pinole
Pinole, California
Report on the Audit of the Financial Statements
Opinions
We have audited financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City of Pinole, California (the “City”), as of and for the year ended June 30, 2025, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents.

In our opinion, the accompanying financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective financial position of the governmental activities, business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City, as of June 30, 2025, and the respective changes in financial position and, where applicable, cash flows thereof for the year then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinions
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAS”) and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States (“Government Auditing Standards”). Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements section of our report. We are required to be independent of the City, and to meet our other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with the relevant ethical requirements relating to our audit. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinions.

Change in Accounting Principle
As discussed in Note 1 to the financial statements, the City adopted new accounting guidance, GASB Statement No. 101, Compensated Absences during the year ended June 30, 2025. The adoption of this standard resulted in the restatement of the City’s net position as of June 30, 2024. Our opinion is not modified with respect to this matter.

Responsibilities of Management for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and for the design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.