CITY COUNCIL
Anthony Tave, Mayor
Devin T. Murphy, Mayor Pro Tem
Maureen Toms, Council Member
Cameron Sasai, Council Member
Norma Martínez-Rubin, Council Member
PINOLE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING AGENDA
June 16, 2026
5:30 PM
Attend in Person: PINOLE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - 2131 PEAR STREET OR
Attend VIA ZOOM TELECONFERENCE – Details provided below How to Submit Public Comments:
In Person:
Attend meeting at the Pinole City Council Chambers, fill out a yellow public comment card and submit it to the City Clerk.
Via Zoom:
Members of the public may submit a live remote public comment via Zoom video conferencing. Download the Zoom mobile app from the Apple Appstore or Google Play. If you are using a desktop computer, you can test your connection to Zoom by clicking here. Zoom also allows you to join the meeting by phone.
From a PC, Mac, iPad, iPhone or Android:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89335000272
Webinar ID: 893 3500 0272
By phone: +1 (669) 900-6833 or +1 (253) 215-8782 or +1 (346) 248-7799 • Speakers will be asked to provide their name and city of residence, although providing this is not required for participation.
• Each speaker will be afforded up to 3 minutes to speak (subject to modification by the Mayor) • Speakers will be muted until their opportunity to provide public comment.
When the Mayor opens the comment period for the item you wish to speak on, please use the “raise hand” feature (or press *9 if connecting via telephone) which will alert staff that you have a comment to provide and press *6 to unmute. To comment with your video enabled, please let the City Clerk know you would like to turn your camera on once you are called to speak.
Written Comments:
All comments received before 3:00 pm the day of the meeting will be posted on the City’s website on the agenda page (Agenda Page Link) and provided to the City Council prior to the meeting. Written comments will not be read aloud during the meeting. Email comments to [email protected] Please indicate which item on the agenda you are commenting on in the subject line of your email.
City Council
Agenda - June 16, 2026
OTHER WAYS TO WATCH THE MEETING
LIVE ON CHANNEL 30 AND CHANNEL 1070. Meetings are broadcast again the following week on channels 30 and 1070 (previously channel 26). The Pinole Community TV program schedule is published on the City’s website at www.Pinole.gov/PCTV.
VIDEO-STREAMED LIVE ON THE CITY’S WEBSITE, www.Pinole.gov/PCTV. Meeting videos remain archived on the site for five (5) years. Pinole Community TV can also be streamed live from Roku, Apple TV, or Amazon Fire.
TEMPORARY NOTICE: Some Comcast subscribers may also be able to see PCTV Government Media programming on Channel 30 while we work through an FCC must-carry requirement.
If none of these options are available to you, or you need assistance with public comment, please contact the City Clerk, Heather Bell-Spears at (510) 724-8928 or [email protected].
Americans With Disabilities Act: In compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, if you need special assistance to participate in a City Meeting or you need a copy of the agenda, or the agenda packet in an appropriate alternative format, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (510) 724-8928. Notification at least 48 hours prior to the meeting or time when services are needed will assist the City staff in assuring that reasonable arrangements can be made to provide accessibility to the meeting or service.
Note: Staff reports are available for inspection on the City Website at www.pinole.gov. You may also contact the City Clerk via e-mail at [email protected].
Ralph M. Brown Act. Gov. Code § 54950. In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly. The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies, which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.
City Council
Agenda - June 16, 2026
1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present, and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.
3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision: (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself /herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov't Code § 87105.
4. CONVENE TO A CLOSED SESSION
Citizens may address the Council regarding a Closed Session item prior to the Council adjourning into the Closed Session, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk.
A. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS
Gov. Code § 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: Interim City Manager, Garrett Evans, City Attorney, Eric Casher, Human Resources Director, Stacy Shell, Finance Director, Markisha Guillory, and Gregory Ramirez, IEDA
Employee organization: AFSCME Local 1
B. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE APPOINTMENT
Gov. Code § 54957
Title: City Manager
5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION
6. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker. Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting. PLEASE SEE THE COVERSHEET OF THE
AGENDA FOR INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO SUBMIT PUBLIC COMMENTS
7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Mayor Report
1. Announcements
B. Mayoral & Council Appointments
C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
City Council
Agenda - June 16, 2026
E. City Manager Report / Department Staff
F. City Attorney Report
8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMUNITY EVENTS
A. Proclamations
1. Juneteenth
2. Pride
B. Presentations
1. None
9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any interested party or Council member(s) wishes to comment on an item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of the Consent Calendar.
A. Approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting on June 2, 2026.
B. Receive the May 30, 2026 – June 12, 2026, List of Warrants in the Amount of $1,419,155.52 and the June 5, 2026 Payroll in the Amount of $578,159.12.
C. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Execution of an Agreement with Contra Costa County for Coordinated Outreach, Referral, and Engagement (CORE) Homeless Outreach Services for FY 2026–27 fully funded by Housing Successor Funds Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Lilly Whalen)
D. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Professional Services Agreement with NORESCO for Development of a Permitting Compliance Program and Building Performance Standard Program, in the Amount of $63,300, Fully Funded by the California Energy Commission Grant. Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Lilly Whalen, Kapil Amin)
E. Approval Of Fiscal Year 2026/26 Capital Budget And Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Heba El-Guindy) F. Approval Of Fourth Amendment To The On-Call Consulting Services Agreement Between The City And Coastland Civil Engineering | DCCM To Add Inspection Services Associated With The Road Rehabilitation Project (Cip Project # RO2301) Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Heba El-Guindy)
G. Placement Of Liens For Delinquent Unpaid Waste Collection Charges Falling Delinquent Between September And December 2025, Considered At An Administrative Hearing On June 4, 2026. Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Roxane Stone) H. Receive This Report Containing An Update On The Request For Bids For Implementation Of Phase 1 Of Fiscal Year 2026/27 Pavement Rehabilitation Project (CIP Project #
City Council
Agenda - June 16, 2026
RO2301) Action: Receive Report (Heba El-Guindy)
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Citizens wishing to speak regarding a Public Hearing item should fill out a speaker card prior to the completion of the presentation, by first providing a speaker card to the City Clerk. An official who engaged in an ex parte communication that is the subject of a Public Hearing must disclose the communication on the record prior to the start of the Public Hearing.
A. Conduct First Reading of Ordinance Approving Renewal of the City of Pinole's Military Equipment Policy Action: Conduct a public hearing, review and approve the 2025 - 2026 Pinole Police Department Annual Military Equipment Report, and waive full reading and introduce by title only an ordinance approving and re-adopting a Military Equipment Use Policy as Stated in Chapter 2.60 “Military Equipment Policy” of the Pinole City Municipal Code in compliance with AB 481. (Justin Rogers, Melissa Klawuhn) B. FY 2025/26 Utility Users' Tax Review and FY 2026/27 Income Exemption Limits Action:
Conduct Public Hearing and Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Markisha Guillory)
11. OLD BUSINESS
A. Approve And Authorize The Mayor To Execute The Employment Agreement For Naomi Kelly To Become The City Manager Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Stacy Shell)
B. Revised Proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2026/27 Operating and Capital Budget Action: Receive Report and Provide Direction (Markisha Guillory)
12. NEW BUSINESS
A. Approve a Purchase and Sale Agreement by and Between the City of Pinole and American Postal Infrastructure (APIF) for the Sale of Property Located at 2101 Pear Street (Post Office) Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Eric Casher, Lilly Whalen)
13. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Continued from Item 6) (Public Comments) Open only to members of the public who did not speak under the first Citizens to Be Heard, Agenda Item 6 Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes for City Council items and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.
Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future meeting.
14. ADJOURNMENT to the Special City Council Meeting of June 23, 2026 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.
I hereby certify under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing Agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of Pinole City Hall, 2131 Pear Street Pinole, CA, and on the City’s website, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting date set forth on this agenda. _______________________
Heather Bell-Spears, CMC
City Council
Agenda - June 16, 2026
City Clerk
POSTED: Thursday, June 11, 2026 at 5:05 pm
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES
June 2, 2026
1. CALL TO ORDER & PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IN HONOR OF THE US MILITARY TROOPS
The City Council Meeting was held in a hybrid format (in-person and via Zoom videoconference and broadcast) from the Pinole Council Chambers, 2131 Pear Street, Pinole, California. Mayor Tave called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 5:30 p.m. and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Before we begin, we would like to acknowledge the Ohlone people, who are the traditional custodians of this land. We pay our respects to the Ohlone elders, past, present and future, who call this place, Ohlone Land, the land that Pinole sits upon, their home. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the Ohlone community for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding.
3. ROLL CALL, CITY CLERK’S REPORT & STATEMENT OF CONFLICT An official who has a conflict must, prior to consideration of the decision; (1) publicly identify in detail the financial interest that causes the conflict; (2) recuse himself/herself from discussing and voting on the matter; and (3) leave the room until after the decision has been made, Cal. Gov.
Code § 87105.
A. COUNCILMEMBERS PRESENT
Anthony Tave, Mayor
Norma Martinez-Rubin, Council Member
Cameron Sasai, Council Member*
Maureen Toms, Council Member
*Remote Attendance, 2964 E Ravenswood Drive, Gilbert, AZ 85298
COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT
Devin T. Murphy, Mayor Pro Tem
B. STAFF PRESENT
Garrett Evans, Interim City Manager
Heather Bell-Spears, City Clerk
Eric Casher, City Attorney
Stacy Shell, Human Resources Director
Charlene Davis, Human Resources Analyst
Fiona Epps, Communications Director
Heba El-Guindy, Public Works Director
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Andrea Dwyer, Community Services Director
Roxane Stone, Deputy City Clerk
City Clerk Heather Bell-Spears announced the agenda had been posted on May 29, 2026 at 2:30 p.m. with all legally required written notices. Written comments had been received in advance of the meeting, distributed to the City Council and staff, posted to the City website and made available to the public to view in the Council Chambers.
Following an inquiry, the Council reported there were no conflicts with any items on the agenda.
4. CONVENE TO A CLOSED SESSION: None
5. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION TO ANNOUNCE RESULTS OF CLOSED SESSION:
None
6. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Public Comments)
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.
Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.
Richard Cossel commented that roads were in disrepair, infrastructure was failing, the budget was not balanced, money had been wasted, certain City Council members treated the City as their own personal travel agency and a recent Civil Grand Jury Report found the City was mismanaged and gave the City an “F” rating. The Civil Grand Jury Report also found the City of Pinole had the worst financial rating of the 19 cities in Contra Costa County and the highest sales taxes in the County. Three Council members appeared to be colluding and voting in a block and voted to place Measure D on the June 2, 2026 ballot, since it would normally have a low turnout in the hopes it would pass. This same trio would not commit to not running for Mayor if Measure D passed. The City funded activities opening itself up to lawsuits based on viewpoint, sex and gender discrimination and now the City may potentially hire a new City Manager who was the wife of a former San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (PUC) official who had been convicted of wire and bank fraud and bribery. The potential new City Manager could be considered a coconspirator since she would have signed $1.3 million in fraudulent loan documents, partook in the benefits of the conspiracy and resigned her job as City Administrator for the City of San Francisco in disgrace.
Mr. Cossel read into the record the trial jury verdict for Harlan Kelly Jr., dated July 14, 2023, who was found guilty on all charges and the statement made by the judge about the defendant. He found there was a pattern for some City of Pinole officials who were not concerned about the will of the people and welfare of the City, and rather were putting their own ideological driven projects above the basic needs of citizens. He hoped to see better in the future.
Debbie Long was not surprised the Mayor Pro Tem was absent for this meeting. She commented that since the last City Council meeting, the Civil Grand Jury had issued a report about the City’s financial viability and which detailed why the City had been rated “F,” the lowest in the County.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Ms. Long would have expected that would have been an item on the meeting agenda, for no other reason than to schedule Town Hall meetings where the public was not limited to three minutes, and which would allow a real discussion in order to promote transparency. Instead, the City Council was going to proceed with the 2026/27 budget, which only allowed three minutes to discuss the entire document. She suggested the City Council should be embarrassed by the Civil Grand Jury rating and have the humility to say they had screwed up rather than continue with business as usual. She requested the Civil Grand Jury Report be brought back on a future meeting agenda in order to establish dates for at least two Town Hall meetings to discuss and fully vet the conclusions of the report.
As the City Council moved onto agenda Item 11A, Ms. Long asked that the City Council keep in mind the budget cuts intended to be made were not in the public nor staff’s best interests. Any cuts to staff should be done at the highest levels, not at the expense of the rank and file.
Irma Ruport thanked Mayor Tave, Mayor Pro Tem Murphy and Council member Sasai for giving taxpayers the opportunity to vote on Measure D. Whether the measure passed or not, was not the reason to hold back and prevent citizens from being a part of the voice and the vote, which was what democracy was about. Referring to the cost of the ballot measure, she referenced some Council member’s special interests, such as the costs for a potential Faria Museum, as an example. She also referenced the 2025/26 Civil Grand Jury Report, which she read last week and which report included six recommendations. She suggested the City had not been doing well over the past year. There had been lousy City Managers, one left for the City of Vallejo and she understood recently left that position, and the most recent City Manager only stayed for a year and looked for a job in four different states, and this information was available on Google and YouTube. She questioned why the City was making these mistakes and suggested starting over and cleaning house.
Ms. Ruport stated she was a 50-year resident and she had received a lot of flak from Council members over the years, suggesting she should leave town if she didn’t like it, and one even told her he hated her. As a resident of Pinole, she had a right to be here, the right to vote and no one had the right to scare her away. She emphasized it was time to come together. She had also been a member of the union, was a Chief Steward, and had experience in government and had experienced job loss. She noted the City had been through the ringer before and almost went through bankruptcy. She was well aware of the City’s history as a long-time resident and she had spoken to the former City Manager about needing a budget, but they never had time.
Allison Carrillo also referenced the conclusions of the Civil Grand Jury Report and highlighted the purpose of the Civil Grand Jury, which investigated local government and operations when a city struggled to manage its own affairs. She found the conclusions not surprising in that underlying information had long been publicly available. She looked forward to reading the formal responses from both the City Council and City staff to the report which found the City faced serious structural budget challenges that had built up over years of relying on one-time funding and reserve withdrawals, roadway deterioration and deferred infrastructure. Acknowledging those challenges was not a reason for despair, but a call for action. She otherwise disagreed with the findings of the Civil Grand Jury in that Measure I was a General Fund tax maintaining the City’s fiscal responsibility across a broad range of needs. It was not a special revenue tax. Filling a pothole was not treatment, but a reactive safety measure and necessary, although not a solution, with full resurfacing and rehabilitation required at a far greater cost than people anticipated.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Ms. Carrillo stated she had voted for Measure I since she found the City was dangerously relying on reserves to pay for structural deficits. She recognized that significant pavement rehabilitation would remain out of reach but getting the City’s house in order must start now. She had raised similar concerns in 2024, at the time sewer rates had been discussed, and her position had not changed. Raising fees to among the highest in the Bay Area must be matched by a genuine commitment for results, through fiscal discipline, strategic planning and clearing the bottleneck preventing staff from building and delivering real capital programs; rather than have staff time consumed by special City Council projects and deferring core work the City desperately needed at the cost to residents. Political infighting and prioritization of special interests needed to end.
City staff were capable and deserved the direction and space to do their job and deliver the infrastructure residents depended on. She highlighted the responsibilities of the City Council and City staff, and suggested Pinole was worth fighting for, the community was resilient and believed in their future, but needed leadership with long-term well-being over short-term politics.
Peter Herman also referenced the Civil Grand Jury Report and commented the financial state of the City being the last in all of Contra Costa County, with the highest sales taxes, roads that could not be repaired and the potential for bankruptcy, could not be a recent problem. He did not hold the three Council members blameless, but could not believe the tenured Council members did not see this coming. He asked where the warning was for the conclusions in the Civil Grand Jury Report, where the leadership was to address this in a thoughtful and thorough manner, and whether a comprehensive plan could be offered to forestall something like this. He questioned how this was a surprise to those who were engaged citizens since it was part of the public record, but the public did not understand all of the financial details, which was what the City Council was for. As a retired homeowner and citizen relying on the City for the preservation of his property value and well-being, he found the situation to be outrageous. He was very angry with every single member of leadership for the City of Pinole.
7. REPORTS & COMMUNICATIONS
A. Mayor Report
There was no report.
1. Announcements: None
B. Mayoral & Council Appointments: None
C. City Council Committee Reports & Communications
Council member Toms reported she attended an all-day class, training exercise and introduction to land use planning for wildfires in the State of California, which was highlighted in depth. She also attended the East Bay Wildfire Coalition of Governments meeting, with the Coalition working as a region in the East Bay to address the massive amounts of fuel in the East Bay Hills, with the discussion of how the Board of Forestry was considering drafting rules for Zone Zero, for noncombustible items next to homes. There had also been a discussion about public information that needed to be communicated to homeowners in the area related to reducing their risk for fire, and the Coalition also discussed opening up CAL FIRE Grants.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Council member Toms reported she had also spoken with the Interim City Manager and the Public Works Director about projects in the City of Pinole that could be considered to reduce wildfire risk in the Pinole Valley.
Council member Martinez-Rubin reported she responded to invitations to represent the City of Pinole or support activities in partnership with the Bay Front Chamber of Commerce or local schools including a ribbon cutting ceremony at Togo’s at 1471 Fitzgerald Drive, Suite 105; 75th anniversary of Collins Elementary School; webinar sponsored and conducted by the League of California Cities as part of Senate Bill (SB) 827, which required new Councilmembers and other electeds to participate in a very basic and fundamental overview of municipal finances and financial management; and the West Contra Costa Unified School District (WCCUSD) first annual celebration of graduates of Latino/Latinx students throughout the WCCUSD at the Richmond Auditorium.
Council member Sasai reported he attended a meeting of the West Contra Costa Transportation Commission (WCCTC), with a presentation on budget allocations for projects and had voted on a $7.1 million budget allocation towards a regional project in West County, which included $700,000 in a budget allocation for a project in the City of Pinole to improve a section of Tennent Avenue to facilitate safer movements for bicyclists and pedestrians. He thanked the Public Works Director and City staff for making the project possible.
Council member Sasai also wished everyone a restful and deserved Memorial Day, having come from a family of veterans who served the country. He reported his Great-Grandfather, Tadashi Takeuchi served in the early 20th Century and had been posthumously awarded the Purple Heart, Combat Infantry Badge and Bronze Star, after dying in combat on October 30, 1944. He recognized the sacrifices all veterans made, particularly those who paid the ultimate price.
Mayor Tave also reported there had been a ribbon cutting ceremony for Travis Credit Union in late-May and he welcomed the business to the City of Pinole.
D. Council Requests for Future Agenda Items
Council member Martinez-Rubin requested a presentation from Republic Services to review and emphasize the importance of sorting recyclables, with residents having received information a few months ago that sorting would be closely monitored as of July 1, 2026, to comply with Senate Bill (SB) 1383. She asked for a presentation to be made during the month of July.
ACTION: Motion by Council members Martinez-Rubin/Sasai for a presentation from Republic Services to review and emphasize the importance of sorting recyclables, in compliance with SB 1383, during a City Council meeting in July.
Vote: Passed 4-0-1
Ayes: Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
ACTION: Motion by Council members Martinez-Rubin/Toms for staff to prepare a proclamation to be presented to Collins Elementary School, in recognition of its 75th Anniversary.
Vote: Passed 4-0-1
Ayes: Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Tave/Council member Martinez-Rubin to agendize a presentation of the Civil Grand Jury Report and findings.
Vote: Passed 4-0-1
Ayes: Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Irma Ruport referenced the Civil Grand Jury Report and asked that it be posted on the City website as soon as possible for public review. She referenced Page 17 of the report, which read:
Consider developing methods to engage Pinole residents regarding options to address ongoing fiscal challenges, which was due by December 31, 2026. She stated she had repeatedly requested a fiscal budget and status report, and although past City Managers informed her the budget was balanced, the City had now received an “F” rating from the Civil Grand Jury. She agreed with the need that the Civil Grand Jury Report be agendized.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
E. City Manager Report / Department Staff
Interim City Manager Garrett Evans also referenced Civil Grand Jury Report No. 2604, Pinole’s Financial Future, which was a 20-page report which detailed the fiscal challenges before the City of Pinole, from previous operating deficits, one-time fund transfers, rising pension and retiree health costs, to unfunded capital improvement projects including roads and City facilities. The City Council and the community would see presentations during this meeting for the Fiscal Year (FY) 2026/27 budget and Capital Improvement Plan (CIP), with significant adjustments and reductions in both from what had been entertained in March 2026. He commended the City Council for being consistent with him since he came on board in March 2026, to see how to balance the budget for FY 2026/27 and beyond, using the “Yellow Brick Road” method and consideration of seeing some road projects now.
A $3 million request for bids would close on Monday, June 8, 2026 for the first phase of road improvements and staff anticipated another $3 million request for bids in late July for an additional number of roads to be done.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Interim City Manager Evans thanked City staff for being creative and problem solving to reduce the expenditures in the upcoming fiscal budget in a meaningful manner, with staff having been collaborative to put forth a budget that was balanced, spread the pain, with the least-worst in expenditure reductions. If the City Council concurred with the staff recommendation, there would be a $50,000 shortfall in the budget where the deficit had originally been $4.2 million. This meeting offered an excellent opportunity to address many of the items in the Civil Grand Jury Report before they were due and present them in an open forum. The response to the Civil Grand Jury Report was due by August 14, 2026.
Mayor Tave also expressed his appreciation to City staff for the effort to cover the deficit gap.
F. City Attorney Report: None
8. RECOGNITIONS / PRESENTATIONS / COMMUNITY EVENTS
A. Proclamations: None
B. Presentations: None
9. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and noncontroversial. These items will be enacted by one motion and without discussion. If, however, any interested party or Council member(s) wishes to comment on an item, they may do so before action is taken on the Consent Calendar. Following comments, if a Council member wishes to discuss an item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and taken up in order after adoption of the Consent Calendar.
A. Approve the Minutes of the Regular City Council Meeting on May 19, 2026.
B. Receive the May 16, 2026 – May 29, 2026 List of Warrants in the Amount of $941,280.34 and the May 22, 2026 Payroll in the Amount of $583,557.21.
C. Adopt a Resolution Approving a Memorandum of Understanding Between the City of Pinole and the Pinole Police Employees’ Association (PPEA) for the Period of July 1, 2025 – June 30, 2026. Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Stacy Shell)
D. Approve and Authorize the Mayor to Execute the Employment Agreement for Naomi Kelly to Become the City Manager. Action: Adopt Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Stacy Shell)
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Debbie Long referenced Item 9D, and commented much had already been said about the potential hire of Naomi Kelly as the new City Manager, and the background of her husband, Harlan Kelly, Jr. If someone did not know, they could Google their names, which would give one great pause and concern that this City Council was bringing in Ms. Kelly as the next City Manager at an elevated salary not seen in the City before, all at a time when the City was fiscally insolvent.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Ms. Long heard comments that Ms. Kelly should be given the chance since oftentimes women were judged harsher than men, but she did not believe this was the case. She suggested Ms.
Kelly should not be judged less harshly simply because she was a woman. She was concerned the City was hiring someone as a leader, with a questionable financial background and who may bring drama to the City. Because of that background, she did not see Ms. Kelly would be qualified to take on the City’s looming financial deficit and instill confidence and respect in her leadership.
She also questioned how the City’s consultant, Joe Gorton, could bring forward a candidate with Ms. Kelly’s background given her departure as a City of San Francisco Administrator. She asked why it was necessary to increase the new City Manager’s contract $50,000, close to an additional $100,000 with benefits, from what the City paid previous City Managers, again at a time when the City was decreasing the budgets of the rank and file. She was sure not one City Council member would have the guts or the tenacity to change their votes. She was not only angry, but extremely angry and mystified by the City Council’s utter stupidity and suggested they be proud as they continued to run the City into the ground.
Cathy McFarland read into the record, a portion of written comments submitted on June 1, 2026, as follows: The Council’s choice for a new City Manager is Naomi Kelly. This choice just shows and confirms the sordid, self-servicing and egotistical ways of our Mayor and the two male council members who have been on their continued journey to slowly destroy our city. Naomi Kelly was San Francisco’s City Administrator until she resigned in 1-12-2021. Her husband is Harlan Kelly who was San Francisco’s Public Utilities General Manager and who was convicted of 6 counts of federal fraud and conspiracy crimes – wire fraud, bank fraud and bribes from construction contractors. The KELLY FAMILY took a trip to Hong Kong and China in 2016 which was paid for by Walter Wong a construction contractor. According to multiple sources it was stated that during the time of the raid on their home there was “suspected cocaine” on the premises. Naomi Kelly resigned saying she wanted the city to “function without distraction.” Is this a situation we need to read in between the lines that she may have been given an ultimatum by the city to resign or was it really her personal choice? The City of Pinole wants to pay her a base annual salary of $305,000.00 which is $79,00.00 more a year (equals an additional $6,580.00 a month) than our previous City Manager was paid in 2024. What is she going to be the council’s back door plan for when measure D for an elected mayor fails? NO TO THIS CITY MANAGER APPOINTMENT.
Tonight you are not voting behind closed doors. The city and the residents will see exactly how each one of you votes! We will see who is representing and protecting our city and who is using and abusing it for their self-serving agendas.
Bill Bright., also referenced Item 9D, and commented he had reviewed the average salary of City Managers nationwide and according to Zip Recruiter the average salary was $115,000. The City of San Jose paid its City Manager $135,000 with the highest recorded salary $261,000. He was uncertain how the City could pay the proposed salary for Naomi Kelly with the City having just been given an “F” rating from the Civil Grand Jury. He questioned how the City could continue down this road and he asked that the City Council reconsider this hire.
Sheila Grist, suggested the prior speakers said about all she wanted to say. She read into the record a quote from Martin Luther King Jr. about his children that they would one day live in a nation where they would not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Allison Carrillo, welcomed the new City Manager and commented she was stepping into a City with real challenges, as documented in the Civil Grand Jury Report, which report was not a critique, but a road map identifying where the City was and points to where it needed to be. The new City Manager was stepping into an organization that had been worn down by staff turnover, exhausted by years of navigating disparate interests, political, personal and organizational and which instability had a cost which they were hearing in the challenges of the City to maintain staff and hire new staff, including salaries that must be paid to bring people in. Those challenges had shown up in deferred maintenance, infrastructure, strained services and a community which had grown skeptical of promises. Pinole had cycled through too many City Managers and Directors of Public Works in too few years, and every transition reset momentum, fractured institutional knowledge and signaled to staff and the community alike that stability was not something the City could hold on to, which must change. She hoped it would start with the new City Manager.
The City needed a City Manager and City Council who were committed to the long game, a genuine partnership built on aligned priorities, mutual accountability and respect and the discipline to put the long-term health of the City above short-term politics. She hoped the new City Manager would use the Civil Grand Jury Report, study the staff and coordinate with the City Council and build a plan and stay to see if through, with Pinole counting on her to meet the moment, the mandate, and where they needed her to be.
Irma Ruport speaking to Item 9C, congratulated the Pinole Police Department (PPD) for the approval of the contract. She emphasized public safety officers deserved better than the contract that was given with such late notice and having been the last to be approved. She respected Police Officers, she had family in law enforcement, and she recognized law enforcement was underpaid. She hoped the City Council would do better the next time.
As to Item 9D, Ms. Ruport asked the City Council to continue the item. She reported she had a Human Resources background and suggested the City had failed with the two former City Managers, with one having left the City for the City of Vallejo and who left that community recently, and the most recent City Manager who was a job hopper had left for something else. She again asked that Item 9D be continued and reported the guidelines for the recruitment of a City Manager were available on the City website.
Ms. Ruport added she had applied for a job with the City of Pinole at one time, years ago, and had a lie detector test, clearance check and security. She asked whether the Human Resources Department followed those methods. The City had retained a recruiter for the City Manager position and she questioned whether Ms. Kelly was the best candidate. She again asked that the item be continued, the City Council go back and start over and if the City had to use an existing Director temporarily as City Manager that should be done.
Peter Murray stated he had been a member of the Interview Board for the City Manager, which also included Ms. Ruport, and he agreed with her 100 percent. He was not happy with the interview process in that he had prepared questions for the interview and was told he could not use his questions and had to use a strict sheet of questions leading to concerns he was being scripted. He reiterated his concerns with the process that had been followed for the recruitment of the new City Manager, particularly since the Interview Board had been told Ms. Kelly had been thoroughly vetted; but if that were true, he wondered how the City Council had made its decision.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Mr. Murray suggested the community deserved an answer and agreed the City Council hold off making a decision for Item 9D.
Rafael Menis speaking to Item 9C, understood the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to be approved with the Pinole Police Employees’ Association (PPEA) would cover through the end of June 2026, with a new MOU to be negotiated. He asked whether the City had a plan to negotiate the next MOU in a more rapid fashion. He also understood the total cost of revisions for the MOU was $214,000, of which $202,600 was from the General Fund per Page 51 of 268 of the agenda packet. He asked if that would be tracked as a budget adjustment to the current year’s budget or carried forward as a cost to be added on to the budget to be discussed for FY 2026/27.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Council member Toms spoke to Item 9C and understood the three percent increase for the PPEA had been budgeted for the current fiscal year budget, which was confirmed by the Interim City Manager.
Council member Martinez-Rubin referenced Item 9D and recalled part of the recruiter’s tasks included making a presentation prior to a new City Manager being on board. She asked if that could be done at the next City Council meeting to allow the public to understand and review the process. There had been a lengthy process from the beginning which the consulting firm provided, with opportunities for members of the public to speak to the recruitment process in a number of instances, but she recognized not everyone may have participated. Between now and the next meeting, she would like the recruiter invited back to provide a presentation for Item 9D.
Interim City Manager Evans was uncertain of the full contract language for the City Manager recruiting consultant, but if that was the direction of the City Council that could be done.
Council member Martinez-Rubin offered a motion, seconded by Council member Toms to defer Item 9D to the June 16, 2026 City Council meeting, and at the same meeting request the consultant, Mr. Gorton, review the City Manager recruitment process that included the opportunities for input from members of the public.
Mayor Tave asked what the presentation would look like.
Council member Martinez-Rubin suggested that was to be determined, but among the points made by the consultant, and to ensure there was an understanding and a reception if a new City Manager, regardless of who it was, the consultant had offered some type of activity that would wrap up the recruitment process. She recognized the contract with the consultant would have to be revisited.
City Attorney Eric Casher did not recall that, although the consultant may have offered that beyond the scope of the contract. He confirmed with the Human Resources Director that such a presentation was not within the scope of the contract for the consultant and an additional cost could be involved.
Council member Martinez-Rubin understood the importance for the public to understand that everything incurred a cost since it was the consulting firm’s time.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Council member Martinez-Rubin again asked that the possibility be explored and that staff come back with a response. She repeated her motion, seconded by Council member Toms to defer Item 9D to the next meeting of the City Council.
ACTION: Motion by Council members Martinez-Rubin/Toms to defer Consent Calendar Item 9D, to the June 16, 2026 City Council meeting.
Vote: Passed 3-1-1
Ayes: Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: Tave
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
ACTION: Motion by Council member Toms/Mayor Tave to approve Consent Calendar Items 9A, 9B and 9C, as shown.
Vote: Passed 4-0-1
Ayes: Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Assembly Bill 2561/Government Code Section 3502.3 (Vacancies, Recruitment and Retention Efforts) Compliance. Action: Conduct Public Hearing (Stacy Shell, Charlene Davis)
Human Resources Analyst Charlene Davis provided a PowerPoint presentation for Assembly Bill (AB) 2561, Status of Vacancies and Recruitment and Retention Efforts in Calendar Year 2025, which included an overview of AB 2561; workforce overview; vacancy information and recruitment and retention efforts.
Responding to questions from the City Council, Human Resources Director Stacy Shell and Human Resources Analyst Davis clarified the following:
• Confirmed AB 2561 was a new requirement with the first presentation provided to the City Council in 2025. (Toms)
• The vacancy rate this time last year was 13.65 percent. (Sasai) • Vacancies involved three police officers, one dispatcher, Community Safety Specialist, Associate Civil Engineer, Building Inspector, Capital Improvement Program Manager, Community Services Officer and City Manager. (Sasai)
• The vacancy rate for bargaining group AFSCME Local 512 was 14.29 percent, and included two vacant positions in the Public Works Department and one vacancy in the Community Development Department. (Sasai)
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
• Some of the positions that were hard to fill were in the 12 months or more period of the recruitment process and had been positions that were certified. As an example, the Associate Civil Engineer required a professional engineering certificate and it had been a challenge to find qualified applicants. Recruitment for this position had been open for a year or more. Recruitment for the Building Inspector was also a challenge given the City’s small size and had been a 12-month recruitment process so far. Efforts were made to recruit for a Capital Improvement Program Manager position and given challenges the environmental component was removed with a focus on the capital improvement piece.
That recruitment effort had been ongoing just over a year. Law enforcement positions were a continuous recruitment effort and open until filled. Staff could follow up with more information, if needed. (Martinez-Rubin)
• Acknowledged West County neighboring cities and throughout the greater Bay Area had experienced similar challenges recruiting for some of the positions, such as the Associate Civil Engineer, Building Inspector and Capital Improvement Program Manager positions.
Staff also reported while conditional offers had been extended to individuals in the Associate Civil Engineer and Building Inspector positions, there had been challenges related to certification requirements and since the City was competing with other agencies, candidates had a choice to either join Pinole or consider another agency. Some candidates had shared with staff why they chose not to come to Pinole and consider another agency, but not all. Given the positions were also available throughout the county and the state, qualified candidates had a choice. (Martinez-Rubin).
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
Irma Ruport asked what a 9/80 work schedule and hybrid remote option meant. She suggested the hybrid option should no longer be available since the pandemic was over, and employees should be brought back to the office. She appreciated the work of City staff, but the City needed better service. She asked why Pinole Community Television (PCTV) was under the Community Services Department on the chart and suggested it should be under the City Manager’s Office.
She referenced the vacancy information that had shown six positions currently open, and suggested all positions should be frozen with the exception of the PPD since the public would not buy-in.
Ms. Ruport commented that in 2025, the then City Manager created the position of Communications Director under the City Manager’s Office, and the then Assistant to the City Manager got the job at a higher salary not including benefits. She asked whether the position was properly vetted and open to others to apply, and if not, that should be reviewed.
Interim City Manager Evans clarified the 9/80 work schedule was nine days over the course of a 10-day work period condensing the 80 hours into that schedule. The hybrid remote option was an enticement to try and either retain or attract employees with some cities considering bonuses for certain positions, while recognizing the intent for employees to be in the office with certain positions eligible for the hybrid option. Freezing positions was something that would be worked out with the City Council, as appropriate, through the budget cycle and as part of addressing other issues identified in the Civil Grand Jury Report.
Ms. Ruport made other comments from the audience that were not captured by the microphone.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Rafael Menis understood the challenges the City had in recruiting for some positions, as previously detailed, and with AFSCME Local 512 currently at a 14.29 percent vacancy rate, with three vacant positions. If the positions were frozen, he asked about the impact on the City’s ability to implement the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) and the desire by the City Council and the community as a whole, for the goal of increased roadway development. As to the modified hybrid/remote employment, he suggested if an employee had one or two days in a 14-day cycle, allowing a remote option would be a good way to attract employees and would help the planet and commute costs. He understood some Pinole staff commuted from outside of Pinole and remote opportunities would have climate gains and would not have any additional costs, as other incentives could. Referencing the retention statistics, he commented in the unfortunate event an employee passed away, how would that be categorized, as a voluntary separation, a retirement or some other category.
Interim City Manager Evans reiterated in terms of employee freezing, staff would work with the City Council since certain positions were needed to accomplish the goals of the City Council.
Allison Carrillo a resident of Pinole and a CIP Manager for another city, commented she made it a rule she would not work for the City she lived in. When choosing a position she applied for she looked at salary, benefits, financial reports, watched city meetings to see how well people worked together, watched the community to see how people interacted, liked to see strategic goals, people who were working together trying to build trust together in all ways, looked at the budget she had for the department and the Council priorities versus those staff recommended, all of which had been addressed in the Civil Grand Jury Report. She commented that people who were engineers, CIP Managers and Directors kept on eye out and paid attention to the cities around them, and the behavior of a city, city manager, city council members and residents in general, which went a long way in making a welcome environment for new staff coming in to share their expertise and ability to lead and communicate.
Debbie Long asked whether the Human Resources Department groomed employees to have the opportunity to advance from within, rather than going out for new Department Heads. She did not want to see missed opportunities for existing employees. She suggested there be a specific policy so no one was overlooked. She also asked whether the City had an existing Assistant City Manager, whether the City had a written policy for recruiting Department Heads, since they were not covered by unions, and whether the City had an ethics clause in any contracts. If not, it should, and if it did, she wanted to know what it was. She also asked that all answers to the public’s questions be submitted publicly and possibly brought back on the next Consent Calendar for everyone to see.
Interim City Manager Evans explained cities actively tried to groom internally with a base knowledge they want to grow and develop and those opportunities were always afforded and given special consideration to employees. Also, staff could prepare a memorandum that could be posted online or addressed during the City Manager’s Report portion of the meeting agenda with answers to questions. He also clarified the City Manager had the discretion to hire through the Pinole Municipal Code (PMC).
Human Resources Director Shell clarified the City did not currently have an Assistant City Manager.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
For recruiting Department Heads, Ms. Shell stated the City generally followed personnel rules for a majority of vacancies, but they were unrepresented positions and technically excluded from the competitive process. There was the ability to make appointments outside of a competitive selection process; although during her tenure with the City of Pinole, a majority of the Department Heads had been selected through a competitive process. She added the City did have an ethics clause that could be made available.
In response to the Mayor, City Attorney Casher clarified the public hearing process with public comment received, with the public hearing opened but which should be closed before the City Council had a discussion and vote.
Council member Martinez-Rubin moved the item, seconded by Council member Toms. She looked forward to a report from staff in response to the questions from the public.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
ACTION: Motion by Council members Martinez-Rubin/Toms to adopt a resolution approving the adoption of the Vacancies and Recruitment and Retention Public Hearing Requirement in Compliance with Assembly Bill 2561.
Vote: Passed 4-0-1
Ayes: Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
B. Adopt a Resolution Ordering and Receiving the Engineer’s Report Containing the Annual Assessments for the Pinole Valley Road Landscape and Lighting Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2026/27 and Ordering a July 21st Public Hearing to Approve and Levy the Assessments. Action: Conduct Public Hearing and Adopt a Resolution per Staff Recommendation (Heba El-Guindy) Public Works Director Heba El-Guindy provided a PowerPoint presentation for Pinole Valley Road Landscape and Lighting Assessment District (LLAD) – Assessments for Fiscal Year (FY) 2026/27, which included an overview of the background; Zone A: North of I-80; Zone B: South of I-80 and the assessment summary for FY 2026/27.
The City Council was asked to conduct a public hearing concerning the Pinole Valley Road Landscape and Lighting Assessment District and consider any and all objections; order preparation of the Annual Assessment Report; receive the Assessment Report; and set a Public Hearing on July 21, 2026, for the City Council’s approval of Fiscal Year 2026/27 assessments per the Assessment Report and the levy of assessments.
Responding to questions from the City Council, Public Works Director El-Guindy clarified the following:
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
• The Assessment Summary for FY 2026/27 was again clarified. As part of a presentation on the same item in September 2025, staff had identified some concerns about calculations and the need to revamp the assessment; but there was insufficient time to conduct the appropriate community consultation process and reset the analysis based on the facilities within the Assessment District, which was something staff planned for this fiscal year. It was important to approve the assessment rates before August 10, 2026 to pass the information to the county, to levy the assessments with the property taxes, although staff planned in future months to retain a consultant and allow multiple opportunities for the community to participate in the process of redeveloping the structure of the assessment. (Martinez-Rubin)
PUBLIC HEARING OPENED
City Clerk Bell-Spears reported there were no comments from the public.
PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED
ACTION: Motion by Council members Toms/Martinez-Rubin to adopt a resolution Ordering and Receiving the Engineer’s Report Containing the Annual Assessments for the Pinole Valley Road Landscape and Lighting Assessment District, for Fiscal Year 2026/27 and Ordering a July 21st Public Hearing to Approve and Levy the Assessments.
Vote: Passed 4-0-1
Ayes: Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
11. OLD BUSINESS
A. Revised Proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2026/27 Operating and Capital Budget.
Action: Receive a Report and Provide Direction (Markisha Guillory) Interim City Manager Evans thanked the City Council and the Finance Subcommittee for their leadership and guidance to see this item get very close to a balanced budget within the anticipated adoption two weeks from now. He also thanked management staff for the very hard and difficult recommendations to reach a more balanced budget than in years past, which came down to must haves, should haves and nice to have. Must haves included public safety, roads, accessible sidewalks and emergency preparedness. Should haves and nice to haves blended together at times, such as landscaped parks, senior programs, events, employee training, consultant studies and the like.
Interim City Manager Evans advised there were items staff recommended be shifted from subsidy mode to living within their budgets, from the storm drain category, and PCTV. It was not an elimination of either, but a living within their means. In the case of storm drains at approximately $240,000 a year and for PCTV $200,000 a year.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Even after the cuts being recommended, Interim City Manager Evans stated there remained looming changes with ongoing California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS) costs and retiree medical costs, which would not go away, and would only continue to grow. It was an ongoing challenge for everyone. Finalizing the annexation discussions with the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District (CCCFPD) would also have a huge budgetary impact for the benefit of Pinole.
Interim City Manager Evans provided a PowerPoint presentation for the Revised Proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2026/27 Operating and Capital Budget, which included the General Fund Revised Proposed Budget; General Fund Revised Proposed Budget – Potential Balancing Measures; Estimated Reserve Balances and six percent budget reductions for all City Departments, including the City Council, City Clerk, City Manager, City Attorney, Finance, Human Resources, Police, and Public Works. He highlighted the Recreation Fund, Building and Planning Fund, Community Development – Planning Division, Community Development – Code Enforcement and Economic Development, Information Systems Fund, Information Systems, PCTV Fund, Long-Term Financial Forecast (LTFF) (Yellow Brick Road) – Revised Draft, Sewer Enterprise Fund and Revised Budget – All Funds.
As to the next steps, staff would receive recommendations from the City Council for incorporation into the next version of the Final Proposed Budget with the Final Proposed FY 2026/27 Operating and Capital Budget and the Five-Year CIP to be presented to the City Council for adoption on June 16, 2026.
Interim City Manager Evans recommended the City Council review the Revised Proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2026/27 Operating and Capital Budget and provide direction to staff for changes to incorporate into the next draft of the document, the Final Proposed version.
Responding to questions from the City Council, Interim City Manager Evans, Community Services Director Andrea Dwyer and Communications Director Epps clarified the following:
• The budget had been optimized to a six percent reduction and from a $4.2 million deficit to a $50,000 deficit, with that optimization coming from sacrifices from City staff, with the priority to keep services as high as possible, without a reduction in staffing and in the hopes of having a balanced budget as of July 1. (Mayor Tave) • Whether the budget had taken into account potential carryovers depended on where some projects were in the process and sometimes where the Finance Director may carry it over; although generally, they would try to stop and start over the reallocation as appropriate, but there could be certain projects that were close to completion that they may want to carryover. As an example, the travel budget for the three Council members at the dais and for the current fiscal year may not have been, and likely would not be exhausted for the fiscal year, and could be carried over. (Toms)
• For the Public Works Department and the six percent reduction scenario, the reductions in maintenance, as outlined, were clarified with staff having looked at five-year spending patterns, with certain funds within Departments carried over year after year, but maybe not spent all the time. (Martinez-Rubin)
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
• In that case, there was a subconversation between the Interim City Manager and the Public Works Manager, as to what was anticipated next year given concerns with a larger number than trend, and who was of the opinion the reductions were sufficient for what would have to be maintained next year. (Martinez-Rubin) • The General Reserve Fund was again clarified. (Martinez-Rubin) • For Community Development – Code Enforcement and Economic Development, and for the six percent reduction scenario, clarified the Pinole Perks program still existed and there were cards as part of the program still in use. Pinole Perks had been reduced for the next year given “incomplete use as is, to match that.” (Martinez-Rubin) • Acknowledged appreciation to all City staff on the proposed budget and the work of the Finance Subcommittee on the budget. (Sasai)
• General Fund Revised Proposed Budget – Potential Balancing Measures, and the recommendation for less 3 percent cost-of-living (COLA) wage increase, at $490,000 had been recommended to be applied to all City employees. (Sasai) • Recreation Fund, and the proposed reductions were again clarified. The recommendation to reduce the Senior Lunch Program of $15,000 was clarified. The program currently ran four days a week for eligible seniors and would be pulled back to three days a week. The reductions in City-sponsored events, as outlined, were also clarified, with the cost for each event identified. Staff also made an effort to weigh attendance versus costs for events to balance areas of service. As an example, for the events shown, the Tree Lighting would be reduced from a $10,000 to a $5,000 event. The City-sponsored events shown offered an opportunity for reductions at six percent, but would not fully eliminate the events, but reduce the costs for the services provided for the events. The reduction in costs was for the Community Service Department. As to the Car Show, the Community Services Department was responsible for the cost of $30,000 for the event, staffing and expenditures, with the other cost for events spread across different departments, if a line item existed. If there were reductions in savings in other City Departments, as it related to staff contributions to other City-sponsored events, acknowledged a request that be shown in the revised budget. As to the reduction for the Newsletter Guide at $20,000 for the Recreation Fund, it was clarified it would eliminate the Activity Guide and newsletter, but other print media was provided by the Communications Department. (Sasai) • For the Recreation Fund, clarified the notation of the Library Closure for half of the fiscal year at $94,000 related to renovations for the Pinole Library for the HVAC system and roof. (Sasai)
• For PCTV, and the proposed reduction in part time staff at $18,000, clarified there were approximately three part-time staff in PCTV. If the City Council were to direct staff to make the Enterprise Fund self-sufficient, they would go back and look at the scaling of the model for the Enterprise Fund. How this reduction would impact full time staff would require full time staff to adapt to a cost-neutral program and it may result in less coverage in a subcommittee or committee meetings or community events, as examples, and may result in a staff person having to use their telephones to video record a meeting. (Sasai)
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
• For PCTV, the reduction in professional services would impact plans to hire a consultant to come in and do an evaluation of the production control and master control in the Council Chambers to streamline and modernize the system; part-time staff would be reduced from a $30,000 to a $18,000 budget, which would not eliminate a part-time staff member but reduce the number of hours the part-time staff would be working for the year, which hours would vary. (Sasai)
• Recreation Fund, the reduction in the Senior Lunch Program was again clarified and while revenue was received for the program, expenditures outweighed that revenue. Clarified Fridays involved a more reduced lunch program and the volume of participation depended on the day and the month. During the summer more seniors came out and in the winter people tried to buy multiple meals since it took them through three to four days of need. (Martinez-Rubin)
• Confirmed the initial budget deficit had been significantly reduced, but again the real challenge was CalPERS retirement and retiree medical, with staff working on a draft response for the City Council to look at options to manage those costs for new hires, which was an issue affecting most cities. (Mayor Tave)
• Funds for road repair were in separate funds in accounts waiting to be spent, and would be released to get roads improved, with Requests for Proposal (RFPs) due on June 8, 2026, to be brought to the City Council for approval as quickly as possible. (Mayor Tave) • The PPD and Public Works Department six percent reduction scenarios were again clarified. When considering the $500,000 in vacancy savings for the PPD, staff had incorporated the salary vacancy and overtime costs as an impact and evaluated them together, which resulted in the $500,000 in savings. A ten percent budget reduction would impact 21 percent of the overall staff. The Police Chief had made cuts where possible and strategically, but the cuts would be getting into officers or dispatch if going above a six percent reduction, which staff hoped to avoid. (Mayor Tave) • Acknowledged concern with the proposal to reduce the Senior Lunch Program, which was an essential program for many seniors, with staff confident they would be able to find the money in other types of cuts in certain areas, but cautioned if going much beyond needing to cover more than a $100,000 deficit, they could be looking at cuts to staff. (Mayor Tave)
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafael Menis provided the following comments on the budget:
- Noted the PCTV fund cuts, as shown on Slide 22 of the PowerPoint presentation as compared to the Yellow Brick Road model, had shown significantly more cuts than had been shown on Slide 22. Asked whether it was equitable to expect one Department to face such substantial cuts, as compared to other City Departments and have those cuts separated out from the review of the rest of the process since it had been included in the six percent expenditure cuts and was its own line, and a big line.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
- For the cuts to the Building and Planning Fund and the removal of some of the items under the Housing Element, as shown, asked if the City removed all of the allocations for a Housing Element program whether that would cause problems with Housing Element compliance, or was the City allowed to cut a program if not fiscally viable. - For the cuts to the City Clerk’s Office, it would reduce overview for the various subcommittees, which was a separate thing from the broadcast of the various subcommittees, and if the City wanted PCTV to operate as an Enterprise Fund, it would not help it operate as an Enterprise Fund if eliminating all support staff and capabilities since PCTV would not be able to go out and receive additional revenue.
Tracy Walker asked the City Council to preserve the funding for PCTV, which for more than 40- years had been capturing the history, memories and stories of the community and documented City Council meetings, school events, youth sports, cultures and celebrations, veteran programs local businesses and moments that made the City of Pinole special. She recognized PCTV Coordinator Dave Snell and Cable Access Technician Erick Wilson who had dedicated years of service to PCTV and the City of Pinole, through their commitment, helping preserve the history and memories of the community for generations, and also recognized Communications Director Epps for her leadership, dedication and commitment to assist with PCTV and the community.
She stated they were more than employees; they were family.
After the loss of her father Robert Walker, Jr. and while navigating grief, work, families, responsibilities and running a small business, Ms. Epps, Messiers Snell and Wilson and the PCTV family showed up for the Walker Family, listened and encouraged and reminded Ms. Walker that life goes on and that she mattered, which compassion could not be measured on a budget spreadsheet. PCTV was also a vital resource for seniors, veterans and individuals with disabilities and residents who relied on the broadcast to stay connected to local government and community events. A 2024 community survey had shown that 92 percent of the respondents believed it was important or vitally important to preserve the core services that PCTV provided.
Ms. Walker asked the City Council to remember the people behind the numbers, the employees, volunteers, interns and crew members who had dedicated years of service to keeping the community informed, connected and engaged, with PCTV more than a television station, it was history, community and connection to one another. She asked the City Council to preserve funding for PCTV and continue to invest in a service that had faithfully served the City of Pinole and neighboring communities for more than four decades.
PCTV Coordinator Dave Snell commented he had remained neutral and respected the problems the City was facing, but having studied the six percent reductions for PCTV, if taking nearly 70 percent of PCTV budget, he asked how that would not equate to eliminating staff. He had been working for the City of Pinole for 29 years, in the same position with PCTV, which had been established by the City Council 42-years ago, and was the first of its kind technology office, funded in part by Cable Franchise Fees. Over the years as other governments began broadcasting their meetings, which were now required, other cities started their own offices, or began Information Technology (IT) offices with staff to run their meetings, and some used Public Works personnel.
For PCTV, the expected six percent cuts were moved to roughly 69 percent citing the City subsidy and enterprise account on the second page of the June 2, 2026 staff report.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
There was no explanation of how PCTV was to operate with nearly a 70 percent budget reduction.
As for the enterprise account, PCTV had not been managed in an enterprise account system for decades, with the unused funds swept back into the General Fund, including funds provided by the cable company for capital equipment.
Mr. Snell commented as an enterprise, PCTV could only charge their clients a direct cost, and he asked how they were supposed to earn enough funding to offset the Pinole subsidy or the Pinole work. Matching external sources for funding meant PCTV only worked for the paying client. On
reductions totaling $35,821, and it made no sense leaving the two full-time staff, their families and friends unable to define what was intended by the staff report.
Mr. Snell noted most of the work must go on, as required by SB 707, open meetings: meeting and teleconference requirements, requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). Following a 70 percent reduction, if PCTV staff was cut, he asked who would be left to meet those state and federal requirements. Further, if staff was reduced, it was clear it would be staff who were over 40 years old; but he left that to Human Resources and the City Attorney to advise on that matter. If a greater than six percent cut was considered for PCTV, he asked for a delay to allow a thorough review of what they were looking at and to figure out how operations could actually take place without simply throwing out a giant number.
Debbie Long explained her comments would be general since three minutes did not allow for detailed questions for something as important as the budget trying to recover from a $4 million deficit, and the topic of a Civil Grand Jury Report, which again should be heard in a Town Hall meeting. She found the City had got into this position by hiring too many Department Heads, with the title of Director. Since 2020, the City had doubled that title and with the doubling of that title came substantial salary increases. From 2020 to 2024, with the elevated titles, the City had increased the salaries for its Directors 71 percent, with total compensation increased by 83 percent, not taking into account years 2025 or 2026, which she was sure would conservatively account for another 20 percent increase to that number. She asked that everyone keep in mind, that those employees were unrepresented and not part of the union, where negotiation was not needed.
Ms. Long also commented the budget had made assumptions, including the county giving the City credit for fire protection from properties served in the county and there was a line item about the CCCFPD and annexation of which she was unclear. It had also been shown there would be no COLAs, and she was uncertain whether that had been negotiated with the unions. She asked if the budget included the higher contract costs for the new City Manager and noted the budget also called for severely reducing and in effect closing PCTV, which she suggested would be a huge mistake. PCTV kept citizens informed and ensured the City’s history was documented.
Before any cuts were made in the rank and file, she suggested a cut or two should be made in the Director positions which may take care of the deficit.
Ms. Long emphasized that Mr. Snell had given his professional career to the City of Pinole and was now close to retirement. She questioned whether the City intended to lay him off, the only staff person to be laid off, who was close to retirement and likely over 50 years of age.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Ms. Long again asked for a Town Hall meeting, asked how much of Mr. Snell’s expenses for PCTV had been attributed to other Department Heads, and how much the City Manager, Communications, Finance and Human Resources Directors had been included in those expenses, since those people rarely touched PCTV any more than the City Council. She added that years ago the City Council fired a beloved City Manager, which had resulted in a huge recall and which the current City Council should think about.
Irma Ruport commented the City had been through this road before, including the recession where half of the staff was gone and the City was going bankrupt. This scenario could be repeated in the next year and everyone needed to be serious. She had been a resident of Pinole when that reduction in staff occurred, she had worked for the federal government in the past and had experienced job reduction, and while it hurt, entities had to live within their means. She noted that 80 percent of City staff was new and came on board in the last three to four years, and the City was full at the top level. The City needed to look to the Department Heads who were overly staffed, including the City Clerk, Finance, Community Development and Human Resources Departments.
Ms. Ruport also agreed with the comments offered by Mr. Snell about PCTV. Mr. Snell was PCTV, that person who created and kept PCTV alive. She questioned why the City would transfer him to the City Manager’s Office away from Recreation and then place the IT group with the City Manager at over a million dollars. They also had a Communications Director position open in the past year, with that person given a substantial raise and title, and that needed to be revisited, including revisiting some of the positions opened by prior City Managers. She reiterated the prior City Manager approved some of the positions, and while she had asked the former City Manager why she was doing it, she was told because she could. She asked the City Council to save PCTV and the Senior Center and consider the formation of a Citizen Oversight Committee that would meet once a month. She also agreed the City needed a Town Hall discussion on the budget since three minutes was not enough time to discuss the entire budget. She reiterated she was a long-time resident and this was not the first time the City had gone through a similar situation.
She wanted to see the City Council do something now and get some of the staffers out who did not want to do their job.
Anthony Vossbrink thanked the previous speakers who took the time to appear before the City Council and partake in the public comments, with the most interesting comments that could be and should be heard on a regular basis, such as the need for Town Hall meetings and other open forum opportunities to provide more transparency and open communication with the public. He echoed the comments made 100 percent. He also questioned some of the numbers provided, generally speaking in the different City Departments, and rather than cut and cut and have takeaways, he would like the community asked what ideas they may have to put forth and show the public some respect by entertaining their comments and/or agenda requests, rather than the Mayor being dismissive almost on an ongoing basis.
Mr. Vossbrink referenced the proposed reduction to the Senior Lunch Program, from four to three days. He pointed out in the past the program had been offered five days a week but had later been reduced to four days, and during COVID may have been reduced further, but seniors should not be forced to give up their lunch program. He questioned how much money would really be saved by reducing the program one day, and noted over the past several months, the Senior Lunch Program had already been reduced by the Community Services Director.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
There was also no mention of the fact that a staff person worked three to four days a week at the Senior Center. Mr. Vossbrink further commented the person who operated the Pinole Car Show put in a lot of his own time for the event.
Phoebe Polk expressed concern with the possible reductions to PCTV, as outlined in the PowerPoint presentation, since PCTV provided information to the public about City Council activities and other outreach. While the Interim City Manager had suggested PCTV could be replaced with some type of phone-based technology, and while that may be the case, it could be transitioned in overtime and not be part of one giant cut to the entire budget for PCTV. She found the proposed reductions to PCTV to be too much with the actual cuts totaling $480,000, two thirds of the PCTV budget which would basically shutter PCTV. It would also clearly come from the salaries of the staff for PCTV and the City would basically be firing all PCTV staff.
Ms. Polk commented that while the Mayor stated he was doing everything possible to preserve jobs, that was not being accomplished by eliminating PCTV. She suggested $100,000 could be saved and rather than pay $309,000 to the new City Manager, the City could pay $170,000 to a new City Manager and look for someone local who could do the job. There were 18,000 people in the City of Pinole, and there should be one person that could do the job of City Manager. She commented her grandmother moved to Pinole 60-years ago, recently passed away, and lived in the City for 50-years. She moved to Pinole since her grandmother told her how great the City was, the Senior Lunch Programs were where she would meet her friends and hang out in the Senior Center and be part of the senior community. Other family had come from out of town to attend the Car Show, which was a big draw for West County, and she asked whether the City had considered local dealerships to sponsor the Car Show to make the $30,000 expense more manageable.
Peter Murray commented this matter had become personal to a lot of people. He had been through several recessions with the City of Pinole and the topic of PCTV was always on the chopping block and the first thing that came up, although the community became concerned and there was a lot of discussion in the community about transparency. He commented the one thing the City had was a public access channel, where information got out to the public. If the City Council were to pursue that path, he cautioned it to be prepared. He recognized hard decisions had to be made but stated the City always found a way.
Referencing the budget for the Pinole Library, Mr. Murray asked the City Council to ask the County Library Commission whether the costs were spread out across the board in that while everyone called it the Pinole Library it was also West County’s library. He would like the City to ask the County Library Commission if the City was getting a fair break on the library. He also understood the City found $1 million as part of the contract with the CCCFPD, but asked whether the City had spoken with the CCCFPD about what Pinole had given to the CCCFPD, and the ability to cover Carriage Hills and area out to the City of Martinez. He understood the CCCFPD got two free fire stations out of that deal, which may not have been equitably applied.
Mayor Tave declared a recess at 8:25 p.m. The City Council meeting reconvened at 8:33 p.m. with Council members Martinez-Rubin, Toms and Mayor Tave present in-person and Council member Sasai present remotely.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Kurt Pless, a pro advocate for PCTV and Mr. Snell explained he knew Mr. Snell for almost 15- years and he was excellent at what he did. He reported Ms. Long had provided the City Council with three pages of what Messiers Snell and Wilson went through each week, and who used to do all of the tasks with the help of 13 people, but were now down to two people. Based on his knowledge, both men did a great job.
Mr. Pless explained he had volunteered for PCTV and his son used to work for Mr. Snell and later attended U.S.C. and was able to attend the university thanks to Mr. Snell and his crew. He suggested three pages of their duties did not cover the job provided by Messiers Snell and Wilson.
He thanked Mr. Snell for all he had done and he begged the City Council to keep Messiers Snell and Wilson and PCTV. He pointed out this meeting would not take place if Messiers Snell and Wilson were not present and nothing was being done to keep them. Mr. Snell had gone above and beyond the call of duty for the City of Pinole, with nearly 30-years of dedication, and he again commended both for their work that benefitted the City.
Mari (no last name given) supported PCTV as a resident of Pinole for about 15-years and coach for several children within the community, most recently as a commentor and announcer working with PCTV, announcing one of the Pinole Valley High School (PVHS) football programs. He supported PCTV and if it were cut stated it would be a travesty to the community. PCTV was the voice of and to the people and in a time where there was so much noise out in the community and around the world, the City needed a way to amplify the voices and keep proper programming for Pinole residents. Eliminating PCTV would silence voices and should not be done. The City Council was asked to think about this decision and keep PCTV.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Council member Martinez-Rubin asked about the differences between the reductions for PCTV in the PowerPoint presentation and the $480,000 total reduction that had been quoted along with the assertion from the public that PCTV would be going away, which was not what they were talking about. She asked for clarification from staff on what programs would be affected by the proposed reductions to PCTV.
Interim City Manager Evans recognized PCTV was unique as compared to other cities in the County, a positive gem in the City and the proposed cuts had not been taken lightly; however, PCTV was something listed in the Civil Grand Jury Report as the elephant in the room, and as noted on Page 13 of the Civil Grand Jury Report had been listed in Finding 3 requesting a response from the City. The reason for the two different numbers was the City was originally considering the six percent reduction, which was why the smaller numbers were shown, but when looking at how much was going into the $480,000, it was either an A or B, and if PCTV were to act as a true Enterprise Fund, the expenditures should match the revenues or close to it, at $480,000. It was acknowledged that changed the model quite a bit and the focus would be on City Council and Planning Commission meetings, and that would be a change to PCTV as it existed today.
Communications Director Epps clarified the impacts if $480,000 was cut from the PCTV budget.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
It would include scaling back a lot of operations and result in the inability to operate a public access center, which provided the Public, Educational, and Governmental (PEG) programming, government meetings, inclusive access to the PEG media that helped viewers stay informed, free and low-cost video production services and related training. Audio Visual (AV) equipment available to the public would not be available, station and field equipment usage would have to be evaluated, administrative budgeting and oversight for station operations to run the two cable channels would be impacted, historical archiving, video management for the City including both community and City files as far back as the 1950s would not be able to be managed and would require an alternative or discontinuation, inability to provide audio and visual support to the City of Pinole Departments with those services to go back to staff to do their own meetings for public meetings and events, workshops, mayoral conferences and Public Address (PA) system requests for certain events and ribbon cuttings, which all required specialized knowledge and training.
There would also be impacts to AV operations, hybrid meetings, staff would have to be trained to do those things at a scaled down level, and they would not have the same City Council meeting production the City had been used to over the past few years. In addition, there would be an inability to support the residents’ organizations and local businesses in sharing their stories.
Further, discontinuation of sponsored advertising for local businesses, event coverage, local news features, ribbon cuttings, public access programming, discontinuation of the Beat of Pinole series, sports broadcasts would also be impossible. Lastly, external contracts for services would have to be discontinued and end training and hands on media experiences for media and communications fellows in the areas of video production and journalism, and the channel programming for PCTV would change.
Council member Martinez-Rubin asked staff to clarify the ADA requirements Mr. Snell referenced for PCTV and any other requirements. While she understood things would have to be pared back or scaled down, she asked whether there were some requirements that were essential to be in place for PCTV. She asked whether the City would meet its public access broadcasting channel requirements with the budget reductions being proposed.
Interim City Manager Evans recognized PCTV was a platinum version as compared to other cities, and offered an excellent level of service. He noted other cities did what was required under $100,000 a year. It was a balance of nice to haves and must haves. He suggested possibly an emergency meeting with the Finance Subcommittee could be considered before the June 16, 2026 City Council meeting or the City could consider working down the reductions in phases, but he referenced the challenges of the Civil Grand Jury Report where there was no good choice.
Council member Martinez-Rubin acknowledged the comments from the public that this was not the first time PCTV had faced difficulties and encountered the need to reduce services. That had become more real and acute and the City must pay attention to the Civil Grand Jury Report when considering reductions to ensure there would not be a greater gap between expenses and revenue. It was disappointing that ways to reduce some of the City subsidies had to be considered given the efforts that had been made over the years to increase visibility to City Hall and accessibility to information, which staff had produced and delivered and the community had become used to, and it would be difficult to step back.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Council member Martinez-Rubin also referenced the County Animal Services contract and asked whether there were any possibilities for modifications and whether the City was getting what it was paying for in terms of the contract.
Interim City Manager Evans commented the same questions was being asked by other cities and the contract was a common challenge for the Public Managers Association (PMA) to control those costs.
Interim City Manager Evans stated the contract had gone through multiple rounds of evaluation at the PMA level and was a very expensive and necessary endeavor. Two years ago, the PMA offered a difference in the formula of the contract, which effort was ongoing and was being considered since certain communities had a higher call volume versus others, so a per capita cost was not equitable. He did not see a new contract would be in place for this coming fiscal year and that cost was part of the Community Services Department budget.
In response to Council member Toms, Interim City Manager Evans again clarified the proposed budget cuts for PCTV, which would be for the next fiscal year and again clarified the General Fund Revised Proposed Budget – Potential Balancing Measures, with a PCTV reduction to match revenue at $480,000.
Council member Toms referenced the service levels in other communities that broadcast their meetings and noted for many other committees where she served, they used Zoom with the Owl camera up front and broadcast through social media. She added the budget for PCTV had shown external charges at $29,651, she assumed was for coverage of meetings in other communities, and she asked if that covered costs.
Interim City Manager Evans advised it covered the costs.
Council member Toms found that was not necessarily a loss of Pinole services but if they were to reduce the staff the revenue would go away.
Council member Sasai referenced the reduction for the Recreation Fund for the Senior Lunch Program at $15,000 and suggested it was non-negotiable for him to make this reduction. He suggested that now was not the time to cut meal programs for seniors and older adults and for a demographic that was impacted by a lot of different cuts in services. The nation was going through an affordability crisis with cuts to Medical and food access, a direct result of House Resolution 1 (H.R.1), which would go into effect soon. He suggested that item should not be cut, for the reasons stated and it would be unconscionable to make that cut at this time.
Council member Sasai also referenced the proposed cuts to PCTV and asked why a full budget was not attached to the agenda packet and why the $480,000 in total cuts was not elaborated in the staff report.
Interim City Manager Evans clarified the presentation was not done in time for the agenda packet, and that was his fault.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Council member Sasai recognized PCTV had been an easy target for cuts. Before he was elected to the City Council, PCTV was not just a benefit and amenity to Pinole but a necessity, and unless residents were aware of what was going on in the City, it was not doing a service to the community and reduced democracy. He understood the need for a balanced budget and the need to avoid staff cuts at all costs. He was also aware of the potential impacts if $480,000 was reduced from the PCTV budget. He asked staff to elaborate what a $480,000 budget reduction to PCTV meant in actual cuts to staff, particularly to full time employees.
Interim City Manager Evans commented without having the salary schedule, it would be dramatic matching what was seen in levels in other cities that did not have full time staff for this work.
Council member Sasai recognized the public wanted to know the impacts to staff, and not understanding whether or not that was a complete elimination of the full-time positions, or a dramatic reduction to part time positions, he personally was of the opinion that PCTV had been understaffed for a long time. He was familiar with PCTV staff who had experienced cuts in the past. He could not support the $480,000 budget reduction to a level that would dramatically reduce PCTV and impact existing staff who had done a wonderful job. He was disappointed they may have to go back to the drawing board and figure this out. He was aware most cities did not have the same level of excellent production, which was one of the great parts of Pinole. During his four years on the City Council, he had never run into a constituent who wanted to cut or have fewer services from PCTV.
Interim City Manager Evans commented that if $480,000 went back into the budget, plus the $15,000 for the Senior Lunch Program, to balance that out cuts would have to be considered to three full-time employees somewhere.
Council member Martinez-Rubin offered an idea for the line item, Stipends for High School Students Internships, which had been a proposal from a couple of years ago. For the current year, there was an allocation of $8,700, which was half of the cost of the Senior Lunch Program.
She suggested those funds be used for the Senior Lunch Program.
Council member Toms commented that as much as it pained her to reduce the senior meals, during the three days meals were provided there was a possibility that people could get additional meals to take home. She had a side conversation with staff about other meal programs in other areas.
Mayor Tave stated that CalFresh was being reduced and due to H.R.1, there would be further reductions in available resources which would hit every community hard. The problem was usually legislation like this would not have an impact for another six months, and they were trying to curb that over time. He preferred to consider other items at this time and had some options to offer for PCTV. He supported the Senior Lunch Program going back to four days a week at $15,000 in preparation for a food need and which had been a critical service during COVID.
Mayor Tave offered a motion, seconded by Council member Sasai to keep the Senior Lunch Program in the budget with staff to find the $15,000 to make that happen.
ACTION: Motion by Mayor Tave/Council member Sasai to keep the Senior Lunch Program in the budget with staff to find the $15,000 to make that happen.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Vote: Passed 4-0-1
Ayes: Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
Clarifying the existing intern program, City Clerk Bell-Spears reported there were currently zero paid interns for the City Council, but in the past there had been two interns for a period of time.
Council member Sasai stated he believed in the success and impact of the intern program as a great addition, but given the deficit, the priority had to be staff. He was not just looking at the City Council interns but those for PCTV and in different City Departments. He understood the Housing Element Interns were paid and he would like to dive deeper into seeing what the impacts may be if the paid internship programs were eliminated.
Mayor Tave found a reduction in interns was in order, but he asked to retain at least one intern for the City Council so that the program maintained some level of opportunity for students.
Council member Martinez-Rubin understood that required a Council member to be available to function as the intern’s guide, and asked whether it was realistic to anticipate any Council member would be available to function that way and have a high school student be their intern since it had not been the case this year nor in the year prior, which was why she proposed to consider the program be suspended until such time as there was a need again and availability of Council members to do as intended, to guide the high school students.
Mayor Tave understood they were considering the removal of the program from the books and reintroducing the program when there was a discussion amongst the City Council to do so.
ACTION: Motion by Council members Martinez-Rubin/Toms that the Stipend for High School Students that was currently for this fiscal year in the City Council budget, be eliminated in Fiscal Year 2026/27.
Vote: Passed 3-1-1
Ayes: Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Toms
Noes: Sasai
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
Mayor Tave asked staff to clarify how PCTV could act as an Enterprise Fund. He asked whether an Enterprise Fund could fund itself, with all revenue generated by PCTV to go back to PCTV, with charges to the City to go back and different customers to come back to the program, generating around $200,000. He asked how the City would fund the Sewer Enterprise Fund, as an example, so that it could become self-sustainable.
Interim City Manager Evans explained ideally they would have reserve funds in a reserve program, around 30 percent in reserves to cover shortfalls.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Mayor Tave understood the City would need $180,000 for the next fiscal year to augment PCTV, and with the $200,000 in revenue and an additional $180,000 in reserves, it would get them to January 2027. He asked if that was enough for a program like PCTV to run on its own. He understood the Civil Grand Jury Report had identified PCTV as being subsidized year after year, which was not working, and he imagined grants and the freedom to start working as an enterprise with outreach. He asked if there was a strong business plan that could be developed for PCTV to allow it to continue.
Interim City Manager Evans explained the model currently was $200,000 and they were asking them to increase it three to four-fold, and the question was whether there were customers out there that PCTV could serve. A stretch would be doubling, tripling or quadrupling, which was a huge task in six months, and what would happen if the funding targets were not reached.
Mayor Tave commented the City had not operated PCTV as an enterprise for the past ten years or so and the City had been supplementing PCTV to the tune of around $4.8 million based on a straight-line match, and he acknowledged anyone on a Grand Jury would look at that cost. He asked how an organization could provide that level of service and generate that revenue, or whether the City should double its prices for PCTV.
Council member Martinez-Rubin noted that was provided customers wanted to pay. PCTV had attempted to find additional locations to record and perhaps those efforts should be revisited, since she could not recall how successful those efforts had been.
Mayor Tave commented to date he had never seen an actual revenue generating plan, and while it had been mentioned at the City Council level including grants and a member of the public suggested reaching out to local car dealerships for consideration of sponsorships of some events, and other businesses that may help support the program, he wanted to understand what steps had been taken to support PCTV.
Council member Martinez-Rubin reiterated there had been attempts, and whether or not that was feasible at this point was unknown since much of the expenses incurred by a city were affected by the economics of things and the higher cost of things, and if they were trying to be responsive to the Civil Grand Jury Report, part of the response would include mentioning that and the expectation of the public. She was uncertain whether a business model was applicable because if PCTV was a business it would not be active at all.
Mayor Tave asked whether there was a business plan for PCTV, to which Interim City Manager Evans understood there was no business model for PCTV.
Mayor Tave suggested they could take $200,000 being generated in revenue and go to a bank and provide a business model with the revenue anticipated and grow that business. Unsure that was the way they wanted to go, to date, he questioned the plan, if any, for PCTV. If there was no plan, the City could no longer afford it.
Council member Martinez-Rubin did not want to leave it up in the air, the City could not go to a bank and there were certain ways a City could accept revenues.
Interim City Manager Evans commented a bank would want to tie it back to the General Fund.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
The City Council continued to discuss the status of PCTV at length and it was recognized that the City would not be able to come up with a business plan in a few weeks.
Council member Toms commented if the City had to consider the worst-case scenario and eliminate the General Fund subsidy for PCTV, she was unclear what would be left of the program and what that would look like. She understood the City would not get the revenue for existing services with the budget cuts and was uncertain the internal department transfers would survive.
Council member Toms recognized this was a big issue that needed to be addressed, but wanted to know what PCTV would look like if a worst-case scenario was considered.
Mayor Tave agreed it was fair to understand that and he understood that the City Council meeting of June 16, 2026 was the turnaround to discuss this item, but it was a slippery slope once one thing was cut in that revenues were impacted, and the City may not have enough revenue to continue the program. The Civil Grand Jury suggested not using one-time funds to supplement ongoing costs, but it seemed like what they were pushing themselves into was to generate some type of revenue by taking from something else, which was not a good idea either.
Mayor Tave referenced the Vehicle Impact Fees (VIFs) and asked if they were tied to just roads, when they could be used and were they tied to the General Fund.
Public Works Director El-Guindy explained the VIFs could be used starting in July 2026. To date $1.2 million had been generated in VIFs, which were specific to roads, with the fees generated from the impacts from garbage trucks on the roads. As to whether Measure S funds were available, she could provide clarification as part of the presentation for Item 11B.
Mayor Tave asked the Interim City Manager if he saw a scenario where that could happen and was informed it was a long shot because there were certain Measure S types of activities for roads and other things that belonged to roads and the CIP needed it.
Council member Sasai wondered about the $480,000 PCTV number and the mention by the Interim City Manager if that was added to the shortfall, what that meant for the number of FTEs in the City and the potential dire impacts if the PCTV reductions were not made. The City Council needed to look into decreasing the $480,000 total to a point where it would not impact staff in PCTV. He suggested they could not take on that task at this hour, but recommended the Finance Subcommittee call a meeting between now and the next City Council meeting to investigate that issue and figure out with the Interim City Manager, Finance Director and City Treasurer how to reduce the $480,000 number without impacting the staff at PCTV.
Mayor Tave commented the hard part for him was there needed to be time for staff to digest the $480,000 number, and there was a short window to do that. Also, the Interim City Manager made it clear that number equated to cuts to three FTEs somewhere, and if not to PCTV, it could be the PPD, or Public Works and the City could not make the $480,000 disappear but they could try to spread it out and discuss possible scenarios. This was a very real issue, and very real deficiency in the budget and the question was whether PCTV could be supported. The Civil Grand Jury Report stated the City could not support PCTV and the scenario before the City Council showed it could not be supported. The question to the Interim City Manager and staff was whether there was some ability to reduce the $480,000 total for PCTV and could it be supplemented with onetime funds, but again that was not recommended by the Civil Grand Jury.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Mayor Tave recognized PCTV was one of the oldest public facing services in the City and the City Council had to consider whether there were any opportunities, but at this time it did not look like that was the case.
Council member Toms suggested a period of transition for three to six months for PCTV was worth considering. She clarified if the City Council did not consider reductions there would be a deficit of $557,000, equating to about three FTEs, but if considering cuts to PCTV, it would result in either two or one and a half FTE, and the Council needed all of that information in front of them.
Mayor Tave suggested enough runway to have a discussion. He also recognized there was $94,000 in savings from the library but that was one-time monies.
Interim City Manager Evans suggested another thought was to cut the reductions in half for PCTV and go into two years, and in the next year, the subsidy would be no more than $240,000 and they still would have the different contracts, and PCTV would have a year to figure it out and staff would have to find options for the City Council for that consideration. If the Finance Subcommittee could meet in the interim that would be great, but if not, the City Council must discuss this topic during the June 16, 2026 meeting and the City had to have an approved budget by June 30, 2026.
He pointed out the budget could be changed as many times as desired starting July 1, 2026. He suggested there was a way to lay out the plan, and staff could start in earnest to see how to reach the $240,000, possibly closer to $300,000 in cuts. There were a couple he had in mind, but would have to speak with a couple of City Departments.
Council member Toms referenced Council member Sasai’s recommendation for another Finance Subcommittee meeting and suggested a couple of dates be held out in the event a decision was unable to be made during the June 16, 2026 City Council meeting. She recommended the date of June 23, 2026 be reserved for a Special City Council meeting. She added in the next two weeks before the next City Council meeting, there may be a better understanding of what the carryover may look like and having one-time funds for an ongoing budget was not the way to go, but may ease the hurt if that number was known.
Council member Martinez-Rubin noted that additional meetings to adopt the budget had been held in the past, and would provide some time. She supported the option for another meeting on June 23, 2026. She offered a motion to that effect.
Council member Toms offered a motion to reserve the date of June 23, 2026 for a subsequent City Council meeting if the City Council was unable to get everything done on June 16, 2026.
ACTION: Motion by Council members Toms/Martinez-Rubin to reserve the date of June 23, 2026 for a subsequent City Council meeting if the City Council was unable to approve the budget on June 16, 2026.
Vote: Passed 4-0-1
Ayes: Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai, Toms
Noes: None
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
B. Revised Proposed FY 2026/27 Capital Budget and Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan. Action: Receive Report and Provide Direction (Heba El-Guindy) Public Works Director El-Guindy provided a PowerPoint presentation for the Revised Capital Improvement Plan for FY 2026/27 – FY 2030/31 and the Annual & Priority FY 2026/27 Capital Projects, which focused on changes made to the presentation since it had been presented to the City Council on May 19, 2026.
The proposed five-year CIP contained 49 projects under five categories (Facilities, Parks, Sanitary Sewer, Stormwater, and Roads) and 7 infrastructure assessments and the FY 2026/27 Annual and Priority Projects including 9 Facilities, 5 Parks, 9 Sanitary Sewer, 3 Stormwater, and 16 Roads, in addition to 4 Infrastructure Assessments.
It was also clarified how the priority settings for the CIP projects had been based whether state or regional mandated targets and associated reporting and standard requirements, priority needs in review of existing deficiencies and potential impacts, funding sources and grant funding deadlines, project schedules and ongoing progress.
Public Works Director El-Guindy walked through the projects for facilities, parks, sanitary sewer, stormwater, and roads, highlighted any changes proposed to the projects since last presented to the City Council on May 19, 2026; priority rankings, and the seven infrastructure assessments.
She clarified for the facilities category, the Pinole Shores Corporation Yard project (FA2602) that was fully funded by Measure S for $400,000 had been postponed to the following fiscal year.
She also highlighted the review and approval process for the CIP and the Five-Year CIP Budget Summary.
Responding to questions from the City Council, Public Works Director El-Guindy clarified the following:
• Acknowledged appreciation for the priority rankings and funding source information for the CIP projects. Confirmed the Infrastructure and Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee had been provided information for all projects, including all of the consultants and contractors on board. (Martinez-Rubin)
PUBLIC COMMENTS OPENED
Rafael Menis asked when the VIFs would actually have numbers associated with the line item in FY 2026/27 though FY 2030-31, Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan as shown on Page 199 of 268 of the agenda packet, and for the City of Pinole, Capital Improvement Plan FY 2026-27 through FY 2030-31 Funding Summary as shown on Page 202 of 268 of the agenda packet, and whether that information would be provided in time for the June 8, 2026 Planning Commission meeting or the June 16, 2026 City Council meeting.
Interim City Manager Evans stated the information should be included in the June 16, 2026 version of the documents for the City Council meeting.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Public Works Director El-Guindy also clarified the $3.7 million for the pavement rehabilitation project, between the two projects would be in time for the second request for bids, in late July early August, with the $1.2 million added to that, which would increase the scope of the project.
PUBLIC COMMENTS CLOSED
Council member Sasai referenced Facilities & Real Estate Master Plan (IN2301), which was not something the City Council had requested, but he understood in speaking with staff there was some type of inventory of City properties.
Council member Sasai offered a motion to move the project to the unfunded category. He noted the document stated it was unfunded, but it was still in the CIP, which staff should clarify.
Public Works Director El-Guindy clarified Facilities & Real Estate Master Plan (IN2301) was an infrastructure project that had been planned for fiscal year 2027/28 for $200,000 out of Measure S funds. The project was not planned for fiscal year 2026/27, with the thought for the City Council to consider its priority in a future year, unless the Council wanted to change that.
Council member Sasai understood the project was not funded for this fiscal year. He was of the opinion there was an inventory of properties in Pinole, and $200,000 was a lot of money that could be a sales price for a City-owned property. The project was not something that originated from the City Council and was a staff recommendation. He suggested those funds could be used somewhere else to better benefit the residents of Pinole.
Council member Sasai offered a new motion, seconded by Mayor Tave, to eliminate Facilities & Real Estate Master Plan (IN2301) completely from the CIP.
Council member Martinez-Rubin commented if the City was not going to do anything with the funds and since those funds had not yet been allocated, it would not affect this year’s budget and made no sense to reduce it altogether given that environments and conditions changed. The need may still be there and she would leave the project as is since it would not affect the City at this point.
Council member Sasai asked staff whether they foresaw any sort of outside or grant funding to fully fund a Master Plan such as that being proposed as part of IN2301.
Public Works Director El-Guindy reported there were planning types of grant funds staff could look into. She had not looked at the $200,000 number to assess given the existing information whether that much was needed or not, with that number on the books for a number of years. She could look into that as well and see what would be reasonable.
Council member Sasai commented that it took staff capacity to research the grants and apply for grants, and it may not happen in the first round, but could in subsequent rounds. He noted there was an inventory of properties already and the City did not need a Facilities & Real Estate Master Plan to tell them about properties already owned by the City. He suggested the project should not be kicked down the road for a future City Council and loom over their heads since it was not a priority for this City Council.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Interim City Manager Evans explained that Measure S funds were General Fund monies, and if potentially allocated that was taking away resources from something else, particularly given that there was no certainty that it would be needed in two years. Staff could create a general detail of properties and their annual maintenance without needing to spend $200,000.
ACTION: Motion by Council member Sasai/Mayor Tave to eliminate the Facilities & Real Estate Master Plan (IN2301) completely from the CIP.
Vote: Passed 3-1-1
Ayes: Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Sasai
Noes: Toms
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
Council member Sasai referenced Plum Street Parking Lot Improvements (FA2302), which had been the only project on the CIP that was marked as a low priority and had been discussed in the past. He offered a motion, seconded by Mayor Tave to move the project to the unfunded category.
Public Works Director El-Guindy clarified Plum Street Parking Lot Improvements (FA2302) had been scheduled for fiscal year 2027/28 for $220,000 out of Growth Impact Fees.
Council member Toms noted the City had an Infrastructure and Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee, the project was not planned for this fiscal year, and it would be helpful to forward any concerns to the Subcommittee to vet the project and consider changes to projects that were on the books for fiscal year 2027/28. She would like the Subcommittee to take a deeper look at that project.
Council member Sasai commented the Infrastructure and Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee was free to look at the projects on the unfunded list and in future years move it back to the funded category. He understood the road rehabilitation projects would take multiple years and would be done in phases, and suggested the City should not be losing focus in terms of capital projects.
They had to get to the root of what Pinole residents wanted and ensure roads were paved. He restated his motion to move the project to unfunded with the Infrastructure and Transportation Ad Hoc Subcommittee to take a look at unfunded projects and make a recommendation.
In response to Council member Martinez-Rubin, Public Works Director El-Guindy clarified Plum Street Parking Lot Improvements (FA2302), was intended to make the site more secure with appropriate fencing and the like.
ACTION: Motion by Council member Sasai/Mayor Tave to move Plum Street Parking Lot Improvements (FA2302) to the unfunded category.
Vote: Failed 2-2-1
Ayes: Tave, Sasai
Noes: Martinez-Rubin, Toms
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Council member Sasai explained he intended to bring FA2302 back for further discussion at the end of the budget cycle. Referencing Upgrade to City Pools, (FA2502), this was another project that had not been scored as a high priority, and he offered a motion to defer the project one fiscal year allowing staff capacity to prioritize roads.
Public Works Director El-Guindy clarified Upgrade to City Pools, (FA2502), was planned for fiscal year 2026/27 at $200,000 from Growth Impact Fees, mainly for the lining of the pools, with quite a bit of equipment having already been replaced. She added the shed needed to be upgraded and benches and the locker room needed to be replaced.
Mayor Tave seconded the motion but clarified if the pool lining needed to be replaced that meant there was a leak and he asked for clarification.
Public Works Director El-Guindy confirmed there was damage, with the $200,000 mostly for repairs to damaged areas.
ACTION: Motion by Council member Sasai/Mayor Tave to defer Upgrade to City Pools (FA2502), to the next fiscal year allowing staff capacity to prioritize roads.
Vote: Failed 1-3-1
Ayes: Sasai
Noes: Tave, Martinez-Rubin, Toms
Abstain: None
Absent: Murphy
Council member Sasai explained he intended to also bring FA2502 back for further discussion at the end of the budget cycle.
Council member Sasai referenced Skate Park Rehabilitation (PA2202), which was fully funded for this year with Growth Impact Fees, and was not something most residents brought up as opposed to roads as a priority. Since the project would take away capacity for other projects of concern for Pinole residents, he offered a motion to defer the project to fiscal year 2027/28.
There was no second to the motion.
Council member Sasai stated he would also bring this item back for further discussion when the CIP came back since the City had to focus on roads this fiscal year.
Council member Toms noted there was currently damage to the Skate Park, which had uneven pavement and which was dangerous for children, and if it continued it would have to be closed and cordoned off and was, in her opinion, a high priority.
Council member Sasai noted the priority score for Skate Park Rehabilitation (PA2022) was Medium whereas there were other projects with a higher priority that were either in progress or phased.
Public Works Director El-Guindy noted the recommendations including the project to be removed from the CIP.
Pinole City Council Regular Meeting
Minutes – June 2, 2026
Public Works Director El-Guindy clarified the unfunded projects that had been included in the packet were not forgotten, they were applying for grants for implementation, they were not part of the CIP, but some of them, such as the signals project, would fall under the umbrella of the Signal Upgrades and for the Local Road Safety Plan. Staff was pursuing grants for multiple recommended improvements as part of the unfunded projects.
12. NEW BUSINESS: None
13. CITIZENS TO BE HEARD (Continued from Item 6) (Public Comments) Only open to members of the public who did not speak under the first Citizens to be Heard, Agenda Item 6.
Citizens may speak under any item not listed on the Agenda. The time limit is 3 minutes and is subject to modification by the Mayor. Individuals may not share or offer time to another speaker.
Pursuant to provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is listed on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. The City Council may direct staff to investigate and/or schedule certain matters for consideration at a future Council meeting.
Rafael Menis reported there was a third airborne disease besides Influenza A and COVID-19, RSV, and while he was no longer symptomatic, he was wearing a mask on the side of caution as a result. He also took the opportunity to read into the record the text of the Civil Grand Jury Report, Findings 1 through 16.
14. ADJOURN to the Regular City Council Meeting of June 16, 2026 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.
At 10:24 p.m., Mayor Tave adjourned to a Regular City Council Meeting of June 16, 2026 in Remembrance of Amber Swartz.
Submitted by:
_________________________________
Heather Bell-Spears CMC
City Clerk
Approved by City Council:
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.C.
DATE: JUNE 16, 2026
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Lilly Whalen, Community Development Director, 510-724-9832, [email protected]
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN
AGREEMENT WITH CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FOR COORDINATED
OUTREACH, REFERRAL, AND ENGAGEMENT (CORE) HOMELESS
OUTREACH SERVICES FOR FY 2026–27 FULLY FUNDED BY HOUSING
SUCCESSOR FUNDS
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with the County of Contra Costa in an amount not to exceed Fifty-One Thousand, Five Hundred Thirty-Seven Dollars ($51,537), utilizing Housing Successor Funds, to provide Coordinated Outreach, Referral, and Engagement (CORE) services in the City of Pinole for FY 2026-27
BACKGROUND
The Coordinated Outreach, Referral, and Engagement (CORE) program, operated by Contra Costa Health, Housing, and Homeless Services, provides mobile, trauma-informed outreach, housing navigation, and case management services to individuals experiencing homelessness.
In FY 2025/26, the City of Pinole joined a regional partnership with the cities of El Cerrito, San Pablo, and Hercules to jointly fund a CORE outreach team serving West Contra Costa County.
This structure ensured Pinole a reliable share of dedicated outreach hours that would not be cost-effective to secure independently. In the absence of dedicated City outreach staff, participation in the regional CORE team has provided Pinole with consistent, non-enforcement-based engagement with unhoused individuals and strengthened coordination with the Police Department, local businesses, and County service systems. Throughout the fiscal year, the partnership supported a coordinated regional approach to identifying and engaging unhoused individuals, connecting them to shelter and services, and responding to community concerns.
For FY 2026/27, Contra Costa County notified participating jurisdictions that the City of Hercules will no longer be part of the shared-services model. To sustain the level of service provided across the region, the County will assume Hercules’ former share of CORE team hours. As a result, Pinole will continue to receive the same amount of CORE coverage as in FY 2025/26, with no reduction in outreach time despite the change in partner cities.
On April 7, 2026, the City Council received a mid-year update from CORE staff summarizing client contacts, service navigation outcomes, business engagement activities, and case
management progress.1
Following the presentation, the Council expressed continued support for the CORE program and interest in the County’s Housing Security Fund, which provides flexible financial assistance to help tenants retain housing. The fund may be used for unpaid rent or other barriers to housing stability such as overdue bills, license renewals, and certain medical costs. This discussion aligned with work already underway by the City’s Housing Fellow, who is developing a comprehensive set of recommendations for the strategic use of limited Housing Successor Funds across three project areas. As part of this planned effort, staff will return in late summer or early fall with a holistic funding strategy, which will include analysis and recommendations related to a potential set-aside contribution to the Housing Security Fund.
Funding for the CORE agreement continues to be eligible under the City’s Housing Successor Fund pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 34176.1. Assembly Bill 1782 (Chapter 85, Statutes of 2024), effective January 1, 2025, increased the allowable annual expenditure on homelessness-prevention and rapid-rehousing services from $250,000 to $500,000, plus cost-of-living adjustments. CORE services fall clearly within the allowable uses, making the Housing Successor Fund an appropriate funding source for the FY 2026/27 agreement.
1 https://pinoleca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/982/files/attachment/1610
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The proposed agreement for FY 2026/27 will maintain the City of Pinole’s participation in the regional CORE outreach program at the same level of service provided in FY 2025/26. The total cost to the City for FY 2026/27 is $51,537, reflecting annual program adjustments but no change in the number of hours or type of services Pinole will receive. Although the City of Hercules will no longer participate in the shared-services model, Contra Costa County will assume Hercules’ former share of CORE team hours, ensuring uninterrupted and consistent outreach coverage for Pinole.
Under the agreement, a two-person CORE team will continue to provide field-based engagement with individuals experiencing homelessness, including housing assessments, connections to shelter and behavioral health services, referrals through the County’s Coordinated Entry system, and ongoing case management support. The team will also maintain its coordination with the Pinole Police Department by responding to non-enforcement-based service calls and offering proactive outreach and support to local businesses.
The County will continue to provide monthly Service Impact Reports, including client contact data, case management summaries, Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) metrics, and GIS-based mapping of outreach activity. These reports help City staff assess program effectiveness, identify trends, and refine service coordination as needed. As demonstrated through the April 7, 2026 mid-year update, CORE services remain a valuable component of the City’s homelessness-prevention strategy, providing measurable outcomes and a consistent presence in the community.
The FY 2026/27 CORE agreement will be funded entirely through the City’s Housing Successor Fund. This aligns with the broader, ongoing effort led by the City’s Housing Fellow
to develop a comprehensive strategy for allocating limited Housing Successor Funds across multiple project areas. That work will return to the City Council in late summer or early fall with a holistic recommendation, including analysis of a potential set-aside contribution to the County’s Housing Security Fund. The proposed CORE expenditure fits within the statutory framework established by Health and Safety Code Section 34176.1 and remains well below the annual $500,000 limit for eligible homelessness-prevention and rapid-rehousing activities.
FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of the FY 2026/27 CORE agreement is $51,537, payable in four quarterly installments. The full amount will be funded from the City’s Housing Successor Fund, which is an eligible source for homelessness-prevention and rapid-rehousing services under California Health and Safety Code Section 34176.1, meaning that there is no impact to the City's General Fund. Assembly Bill 1782 (Chapter 85, Statutes of 2024), effective January 1, 2025, increased the annual expenditure cap for these activities from $250,000 to $500,000, plus cost-of-living adjustments. The proposed expenditure is well within this limit and does not constrain the City’s ability to support other eligible Housing Successor Fund initiatives.
This cost is consistent with prior-year expenditures for CORE participation, with increases reflecting standard annual program adjustments rather than changes in service levels. The expenditure will also be incorporated into the broader Housing Successor Fund strategy currently under development by the City’s Housing Fellow, which will return to the Council in late summer or early fall with recommendations on long-term allocations, including consideration of a potential set-aside contribution to the County’s Housing Security Fund.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. Draft Agreement
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA FOR CORE OUTREACH SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026–27 WHEREAS, the CORE (Coordinated Outreach, Referral and Engagement) program, operated by Contra Costa County’s Health, Housing and Homeless Services Division, provides mobile, trauma-informed outreach and housing navigation services to individuals experiencing homelessness; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pinole does not employ dedicated outreach staff, and participation in a regional CORE team provides consistent, non-enforcement-based engagement with unhoused individuals while strengthening coordination with the Pinole Police Department, local businesses, and County service systems; and WHEREAS, in FY 2025/26, the City of Pinole participated in a regional partnership with the cities of El Cerrito, San Pablo, and Hercules to jointly fund CORE services in West Contra Costa County; and
WHEREAS, for FY 2026/27, the County has informed participating jurisdictions that the City of Hercules will no longer participate in the shared‑services model, and to maintain continuity of service, Contra Costa County will assume Hercules’ former share of CORE team hours, ensuring no reduction in the level of service provided to Pinole; and WHEREAS, under the terms of the FY 2026/27 agreement, Pinole will receive an annual minimum of 346.67 hours of dedicated outreach service, with activities including direct street engagement, housing assessments, service coordination, and outreach to the business community; and
WHEREAS, the City’s cost for FY 2026/27 is $51,537, payable in quarterly installments, as set forth in the agreement; and
WHEREAS, the expenditure is eligible under California Health and Safety Code Section 34176.1(a)(2) for homelessness‑prevention and rapid‑rehousing activities, and Assembly Bill 1782 (Chapter 85, Statutes of 2024), effective January 1, 2025, increased the allowable annual expenditure cap for such activities from $250,000 to $500,000, plus cost‑of‑living adjustments; and
WHEREAS, the CORE outreach services agreement is a component of the City’s broader homelessness-prevention strategy and will be incorporated into the forthcoming comprehensive Housing Successor Fund planning effort led by the City’s Housing Fellow.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute the agreement with Contra Costa County for the provision of CORE outreach services for Fiscal Year 2026–27, in an amount not
to exceed $51,537, in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pinole held on the 16th day of June, 2026 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
I, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 16th day of June, 2026
____________________________________
Heather Bell-Spears, CMC
City Clerk
1 AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF PINOLE
AND CONTRA COSTA COUNTY FOR ITS CONTRA COSTA
HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT – COMMUNITY RESPONSE DIVISION THIS AGREEMENT, effective the July 1, 2026, (“Effective Date”), is by and between CITY of Pinole (hereinafter "CITY"), a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California and located in the County of Contra Costa, State of California, and Contra Costa County for its Health Services Department – Community Response Division (hereinafter referred to as “CONTRACTOR”).
THE PARTIES ENTER INTO THIS AGREEMENT based upon the following facts, understandings, and intentions:
CITY desires to contract with CONTRACTOR and CONTRACTOR has agreed to contract with CITY to provide homeless outreach services in CITY of Pinole, as further described herein, upon the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION of the mutual covenants and promises of the parties herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. TERM
The term of this Agreement (“Term”) begins on the effective date of this AGREEMENT and expires on June 30, 2027. The continuation of the Term into each next fiscal year will be contingent upon CITY’s lawful encumbrance or appropriation of new funds for the Agreement.
2. SCOPE OF SERVICES
A. CONTRACTOR shall provide County-contracted staff to provide Coordinated Outreach Referral and Engagement (CORE) program services (defined in section 2.B below) to individuals living in a state of homelessness within the boundaries of CITY. The primary mission of the CORE program is to engage and stabilize homeless individuals living outside through consistent outreach to facilitate and/or deliver health and basic needs services to, and find permanent housing, for such individuals.
2 CONTRACTOR shall employ and utilize its CORE Team (as defined below) to (i) serve as an entry point into the County of Contra Costa’s coordinated entry system for unsheltered persons and (ii) work to locate, engage, stabilize and house chronically homeless individuals and families.
CONTRACTOR will assure CITY receives an annual minimum of 346.67 hours of service from the CORE Team assigned to perform CONTRACTOR’s obligations under this AGREEMENT (after observance of holidays). The CORE Team will consist of two (2) individuals who will provide services to CITY over the course of the AGREEMENT for at least
6.67 hours per week.
The days and hours of the CORE Team to provide said services are to be determined by CITY’s City Manager or their designee. The days and hours will be flexible based on the needs of CITY in collaboration with City of San Pablo and City of El Cerrito, and their respective Police Departments. The CORE Team will be scheduled to provide said program services between the hours of 12:00 PM to 8:00 PM, Tuesday through Saturday of each week during the term of this AGREEMENT, based on the needs of CITY. A member of the CORE Team will check in at the beginning of each shift with CITY’s Police Department on-duty Watch Commander or Homeless Outreach Officer for assignment. CITY shall provide CONTRACTOR the name and contact information of CITY coordinator. Specifically, the CORE Team shall comply with the following:
1) At least 1 (one) CORE Team shall be assigned by CONTRACTOR to perform CONTRACTOR’s obligations to CITY under this
AGREEMENT. CORE Teams shall be comprised of at least two (2) persons qualified to provide the services described herein.
CONTRACTOR warrants and represents that each of the individuals it employs and/or retains to provide the services CONTRACTOR is required to perform hereunder shall (i) possesses the requisite experience and training to competently perform said services (this is
3 not an on-the-job training program for CONTRACTOR’s employees), (ii) shall possess the requisite license(s), degrees, and/or approvals necessary to competently perform said services, and (iii), to the extent said individuals shall have supervisory or disciplinary authority over any minor as part of the services to be performed hereunder, said individuals shall undergo a criminal background check pursuant to Cal. Pub. Resources Code sec. 5164 and pass that check before they are retained by CONTRACTOR to perform services under this AGREEMENT. The background check shall include a Live Scan in which fingerprints are submitted to the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for a criminal record check. 2) Prior to the commencement of the term of this AGREEMENT, CONTRACTOR shall provide a written list of the names and contact information of all persons whom CONTRACTOR intends to employ to perform CONTRACTOR’s obligations under this AGREEMENT.
At least five (5) calendar days before CONTRACTOR removes or adds any person from or to this list, it shall provide written notice of same to CITY coordinator along with the name(s) and contact information of the person(s) removed and/or added.
B. Without limiting the foregoing provisions, CONTRACTOR will perform the following program services:
1) Identify and initiate contacts with homeless individuals living on the streets, assess their housing and service needs, and facilitate connections to shelter, benefits, behavioral health and primary healthcare services.
2) Respond to calls for outreach and engagement from CITY’s employees. At the commencement of the term of this AGREEMENT, CONTRACTOR shall provide to CITY a list of the names of persons (and their contact information) who will be assigned to respond to such calls.
3) Conduct a standardized intake and needs assessment assuring all
4 homeless individuals contacted are entered into the Homeless Management Information System used by CONTRACTOR.
4) Conduct VI-SPDAT (Vulnerability Index-Service Prioritization Assistance Tool), a housing assessment tool, assuring that homeless individuals who are provided services hereunder are entered into the Coordinated Entry system for prioritizing their needs for longer term housing.
5) Partner with assigned CITY officer(s) during CORE Team work shifts throughout the week as needed and as determined by CITY coordinator.
6) Connect homeless individuals, also designated as “homeless clients”, via phone or in person with other points in the homeless service continuum including, but not limited to, interim housing, substance abuse treatment and mental health counseling, and benefits, etc. 7) Perform special assignments to include, but not be limited to, homeless counts, Homeless Connect and presentations. The number and nature of said assignments shall be determined by CITY coordinator who shall timely inform CONTRACTOR of
CONTRACTOR’s obligation to perform them.
8) Conduct patrols of strategic areas within CITY’s limit, including commercial areas, on foot and via vehicle as designated by CITY coordinator.
9) Provide support to businesses where unhoused individuals may need services.
10) Observe and report threats to the health and/or safety of homeless individuals (or threats by homeless individuals to the health or safety of others) encountered in the field and determine the need to summon uniformed police, fire or other emergency personnel. 11) Maintain direct communications with CITY’s Police Department to
5 report illegal activity.
12) CORE Team supervisors and outreach workers will participate in monthly meetings with CITY’s Police and City Management Departments, as well as with public and private partners as deemed appropriate by CITY coordinator.
13) CORE Team management will provide Service Impact Reports to CITY at intervals determined and required by CITY. The reports will assist CITY in evaluating outcomes of this AGREEMENT. The monthly report shall, in detail, describe the services rendered by CONTRACTOR during the previous thirty (30) days as well as the names of the persons rendering the service.
14) CONTRACTOR’S uniform will read “CORE Pinole” to increase visibility of services. CORE Outreach Specialists shall wear highly visible and easily recognizable CORE vests when engaged in fieldwork and during contacts.
3. PAYMENT
A. Commencing July 1, 2026, CITY shall pay CONTRACTOR on a quarterly basis in arrears after services have been rendered and documented in quarterly invoices provided by CONTRACTOR, provided however that the total compensation to CONTRACTOR under this Agreement not to exceed Fifty-One Thousand, Five Hundred ThirtySeven Dollars ($51,537) during Fiscal Year 2026-27 under this Agreement, as detailed in Exhibit A, FY26/27 Budget.
B. CONTRACTOR shall invoice CITY on a quarterly basis during the term of this AGREEMENT. Each invoice shall describe the date(s) the services were provided as well as the time(s) spent rendering the services. The quarterly invoice shall, in detail, describe the services rendered by CONTRACTOR during the billing period as well as the names of the persons rendering the service. In the event a payment is not received by CONTRACTOR within ten (10) days after the billing period identified in Section 3(A),
6 CONTRACTOR shall notify CITY and CITY shall have until the end of the same month to make such a payment or as many days as may be otherwise agreed upon by the parties to make payment to CONTRACTOR.
4. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR
A. CONTRACTOR is and shall be deemed an independent contractor and shall have exclusive responsibility for and control over details and means of providing its services under this AGREEMENT, subject to the provisions herein. CONTRACTOR agrees that its services shall be performed with due diligence, competently and in accordance with generally accepted industry practices and as generally directed by CITY.
As an independent contractor, CONTRACTOR and its employees shall not be eligible for any payment, benefits or remuneration of any nature, which CITY may otherwise provide to its own employees. The amount specified in Section 3(A) shall be the only payment CITY pays to CONTRACTOR for the latter’s performance under this AGREEMENT.
All persons, if any, hired by CONTRACTOR shall be employees, volunteers, or subcontractors of CONTRACTOR and shall not be construed as employees or agents of CITY in any respect.
B. CONTRACTOR shall perform and coordinate all its activities in a timely manner so that the assigned activities will be completed according to any reasonable deadlines imposed by CITY.
5. AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVES
CITY’s authorized representatives to administer the terms of this AGREEMENT shall be the City Manager or designee. CONTRACTOR’S representative to administer the terms of this AGREEMENT shall be Jenny Robbins. Notwithstanding any other terms of this AGREEMENT, either party may at any time change the designation of representatives upon written notice provided to the other party without this AGREEMENT having to be amended or modified.
7 6. AMENDMENT
This AGREEMENT may not be modified or amended except through written agreement between the parties.
7. OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE OF DOCUMENTS
A. CONTRACTOR’s records and documents pertaining to actual monthly activities within CITY shall be given to CITY by the end of each month, if requested. Such documents will be redacted by CONTRACTOR removing personally identifiable information which is restricted under HIPAA guidelines before they are provided to CITY. CONTRACTOR is entitled to keep copies of these same items for its internal use and for reporting to governmental agencies (e.g. HUD and County of Contra Costa) on services rendered to homeless individuals.
B. CONTRACTOR shall retain said records and documents for the three-year period immediately following the termination of this AGREEMENT, and upon reasonable notice from CITY, shall make said records and documents available at a mutually agreeable location in Contra Costa County to CITY for inspection and copying.
8. STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE
CONTRACTOR represents to CITY that CONTRACTOR’S services shall be performed in an expeditious and timely manner and with the degree of skill and care that is required by current, good, sound procedures and practices applicable to the profession which provides the services CONTRACTOR is agreeing to perform hereunder. CONTRACTOR further agrees that the services shall be in conformance with this AGREEMENT.
9. MUTUAL INDEMNIFICATION
A. CITY shall defend, save and hold harmless and indemnify CONTRACTOR, and its officers, agents and employees from all liabilities and claims for damages for death, sickness or injury to persons or property, including without limitation, all consequential damages, from any cause whatsoever
8 arising from or connected with the operations or the services of CITY hereunder, to the extent resulting from the conduct, negligent or otherwise, of CITY, its agents or employees.
B. CONTRACTOR shall defend, save and hold harmless and indemnify CITY and its officers, agents and employees from all liabilities and claims for damages for death, sickness or injury to persons or property, including without limitation, all consequential damages, from any cause whatsoever arising from or connected with the operations or the services of CONTRACTOR, to the extent resulting from the conduct, negligent or otherwise, of CONTRACTOR, or its employees.
10. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
CONTRACTOR shall, at its own expense, procure and maintain in full force at all times during the term of this AGREEMENT the following insurance:
A. Commercial General Liability Coverage. CONTRACTOR shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with limits of no less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) limit per occurrence and two million dollars ($2,000,000) aggregate limit for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage.
B. Automobile Liability Coverage. CONTRACTOR shall maintain automobile liability insurance covering all vehicles used in the performance of this AGREEMENT providing one million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage.
C. Compliance with State Workers' Compensation Requirements.
CONTRACTOR covenants that it will ensure itself against liability for Worker’s Compensation pursuant to the provisions of California Labor Code §3700, et seq. CONTRACTOR shall, at all times, upon demand of CITY Council and properly authorized agents, furnish proof that Workers' Compensation Insurance is being maintained by it in force and effect in accordance with the California Labor Code.
9 D. Other Insurance Provisions. The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain the following provisions:
1) CITY, its officers, agents, employees, and volunteers are to be covered as additional insured on an endorsement at least as broad as an ISO CG 20 10 (or as an Additional Covered Party as noted on Contractor’s insurance certificate) with respect to: Liability arising out of activities and operations performed by or on behalf of CONTRACTOR pursuant to this AGREEMENT and premises owned, occupied, or used by CONTRACTOR. The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the scope or protection afforded to CITY, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers.
2) CONTRACTOR's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance with respect to CITY, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance, risk pooling arrangement, or self-insurance maintained by CITY, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be in excess of CONTRACTOR's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 3) Any failure to comply with the reporting provisions of the policy shall not affect the coverage provided to CITY, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers.
4) The insurance CONTRACTOR is required to obtain hereunder shall provide coverage for CONTRACTOR’s liabilities under this AGREEMENT, including but not limited to
CONTRACTOR’s obligations under Section 9.
5) The aforementioned policies shall be issued by an insurance carrier having a rating of Best A:VII or better which is satisfactory to CITY Attorney and CITY’s Pooling Authority and evidence of said insurance shall be delivered to CITY at the time of the execution of this AGREEMENT or as provided below. In lieu of actual delivery of such policies, a Certificate issued by the insurance carrier showing such policy to be in force for the period covered by the AGREEMENT may
10 be delivered to CITY. Except for worker's compensation and professional liability insurance, the policies mentioned in this subsection shall name CITY as an additional insured and provide for thirty (30) days’ notice of cancellation to CITY. Said policies shall not be canceled earlier than, nor the amount of coverage reduced earlier than, thirty (30) days after CITY receives notices from the insured of the intent of cancellation or reduction.
11. TERMINATION
A. CITY or CONTRACTOR may terminate this AGREEMENT for any reason upon sixty (60) days’ written notice to the other party.
B. CITY and/or CONTRACTOR may terminate the AGREEMENT upon ten (10) days’ written notice if the other party (the “breaching party”) breaches this AGREEMENT and the breach is not cured within ten (10) days after the non-breaching party has delivered written notice to the breaching party notifying the breaching party of the nature of the breach and the steps that must be taken and completed within said ten (10) day period to cure the breach. Upon passage of the said ten (10) day period without the breaching party curing the breach, the AGREEMENT shall be deemed terminated.
C. In the event of termination based upon sixty (60) days’ notice as set forth in subsection 11(A), CITY will pay CONTRACTOR for services performed through the effective date of the termination.
D. Any records or documents prepared for CITY prior to the effective date of any termination of this AGREEMENT shall be promptly delivered to CITY by CONTRACTOR, subject to Section 7 above.
E. The parties acknowledge that City of San Pablo and City of El Cerrito have a similar contract in place with CONTRACTOR. Taken together, these agreements enable CITY to contract for at least 6.67 hours of services per week from CONTRACTOR and allow City of San Pablo, City of El Cerrito, and Contra Costa Health Services to cumulatively
11 contract for at least 33.33 hours of service from CONTRACTOR, thereby splitting the cost of a full-time CORE Team. Should City of San Pablo, or City of El Cerrito terminate their agreement with CONTRACTOR, or, should City of San Pablo or City of El Cerrito notify CONTRACTOR of a breach of its agreement, or should CONTRACTOR notify City of San Pablo or City of El Cerrito of a breach of its agreement, CONTRACTOR must simultaneously deliver a copy of any default or termination notice delivered or received by CONTRACTOR and notify CITY in writing within ten (10) days after the breach or termination of the contract between CONTRACTOR and City of San Pablo or City of El Cerrito.
12. COMPLIANCE WITH CIVIL RIGHTS
During the performance of this AGREEMENT, CONTRACTOR
agrees as follows:
A. Equal Employment Opportunity. In performing under this AGREEMENT, CONTRACTOR shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, sex, or national origin. Such actions shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, promotion, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rate of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training including apprenticeship.
B. Nondiscrimination Civil Rights Act of 1964. CONTRACTOR will comply with all federal regulations relative to nondiscrimination in federally assisted programs.
C. Solicitations for Subcontractors including Procurement of Materials and Equipment. In all solicitation, either by competitive bidding or negotiations, made by CONTRACTOR for work to be performed under a subcontract including procurement of materials or leases of equipment, each potential subcontractor, supplier or lessor shall be notified by CONTRACTOR of CONTRACTOR’s obligation under this
12 AGREEMENT and the regulations relative to nondiscrimination on the grounds of race, religion, color, sex, or national origin.
13. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS
CONTRACTOR shall comply with all applicable published Federal, State of California, and local laws, rules, and regulations, and shall obtain all applicable licenses and permits for the conduct of its business and the performance of the services described herein.
14. CHOICE OF LAWS
This AGREEMENT shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California, excluding any choice of law rules which may direct the application of the laws of another jurisdiction.
15. NON-WAIVER
The waiver by either party of any breach of any term, covenant, or condition contained in the AGREEMENT, or any default in their performance of any obligations under the AGREEMENT shall not be deemed to be a waiver of any other breach or default of the same or any other term, covenant, condition, or obligation, nor shall any waiver of any incident of breach of default constitute a continuing waiver of same.
16. ENFORCEABILITY
In the event that any of the provisions or portions or application of any of the provisions of the AGREEMENT are held to be illegal or invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, CITY and CONTRACTOR shall negotiate an equitable adjustment in the provisions of the AGREEMENT with a view toward affecting the intended purpose of the AGREEMENT. The illegality or invalidity of any of the provisions or portions or application of any of the provisions of the AGREEMENT shall not affect the legality or enforceability of the remaining provisions or portions or application of any remaining provisions of the AGREEMENT.
17. INTEGRATION
13 This written AGREEMENT contains the entire AGREEMENT and all understandings between the parties as to the subject matter of this AGREEMENT. It merges and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous agreements, commitments, representation, writings, and discussions between CONTRACTOR and CITY, whether oral or written.
18. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS
CITY and CONTRACTOR respectively, bind themselves, their successors, assigns, and legal representatives. CONTRACTOR shall not assign or transfer any interest in the AGREEMENT without CITY's prior written consent, which consent shall be at CITY's sole discretion. Any attempted assignment or transfer in breach of this provision shall be void.
19. NOTICES
All notices required hereunder shall be in writing and mailed postage prepaid by Certified or Registered mail, return receipt requested, or by personal delivery to the addresses as shown below, or such other places as CITY or CONTRACTOR may, from time to time, respectively, designate in a written notice given to the other. Notice shall be deemed received three (3) days after the date of the mailing thereof or upon personal delivery.
To CITY: City Manager
2131 Pear St
Pinole, CA 94564
Phone: 510-724-9000
To CONTRACTOR: Jenny Robbins, Director
Contra Costa County Health Services Department
Community Response Division
2600 Stanwell Drive, Suite 100
Concord, CA 94520
Phone: 925-608-6700
20. AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT
The persons whose signatures appear below warrant and represent that they have been duly authorized by their respective party to execute this AGREEMENT on behalf of that party. They further warrant and represent that
14 the party which they represent has taken the requisite action to approve this AGREEMENT and authorize its execution by the undersigned. The persons whose signatures appear below warrant and represent that this AGREEMENT is a lawful agreement that is binding upon the party which the undersigned represents, enforceable against said party in accordance with its terms and conditions.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this AGREEMENT in three (3) or more copies as of the date and year first written above.
By: By:
Name: Jenny Robbins, LCSW Name: Garrett Evans
Title: Director Title: Interim City Manager
Community Response Division City of Pinole
Attest:
Heather Bell-Spears, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Eric S. Casher, City Attorney
Attachment:
Exhibit A – FY 26/27 Budget
15 Exhibit A
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.D.
DATE: JUNE 16, 2026
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Lilly Whalen, Community Development Director, 510-724-9832, [email protected]
Kapil Amin, Sustainability Project Manager, N/A, [email protected] SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO
EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH NORESCO
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A PERMITTING COMPLIANCE PROGRAM AND
BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARD PROGRAM, IN THE AMOUNT OF $63,300, FULLY FUNDED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION GRANT.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached resolution (Attachment A) authorizing the City Manager to enter into a professional services agreement not to exceed $63,300 with NORESCO for the Development of a Permitting Compliance Program and Building Performance Standard Program (Attachment B), funded entirely by the City’s grant award from the California Energy Commission (CEC).
BACKGROUND
In January 2025, the City executed a $700,000 grant agreement with the California Energy Commission under the Local Government Building Decarbonization Challenge. The grant supports multiple initiatives in the City’s Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) aimed at reducing building-related greenhouse gas emissions.
Two key CAAP actions are directly addressed through this proposed contract with NORESCO:
1. CAAP Action BE-2j — Permitting Compliance Program. This action calls for establishing a more consistent, efficient, and user-friendly permitting environment to improve compliance with energy and electrification requirements. The envisioned program includes:
• Routine training for building staff
• Clear, web-based compliance checklists and permit guidance • Online permitting enhancements
• Fee structures that encourage compliance, including zero-cost permits for heat pump installations
• Tools that reduce permit evasion and streamline customer experience
2. CAAP Action BE-3d — Building Performance Standard (BPS). This action directs the City to create long-term performance requirements for commercial and industrial buildings larger than 20,000 square feet. The BPS is planned in four stages:
1. Technical assistance and data analysis
2. Mandatory energy-use reporting
3. Retro-commissioning to correct inefficiencies and evaluate electrification opportunities
4. Implementation of a GHG performance requirement for covered buildings These programs build upon substantial progress already underway in Pinole, including:
• Launch of eTRAKiT online permitting1
• Instant permitting via Symbium for energy-efficiency projects2 • Pinole Energy Enhancement Rebate (PEER) Program3
• Limited no-cost building permit fees for heat pump projects4 • The All-Electric Building Virtual Concierge5
• Development of reach codes and a water heater loaner program Together, these initiatives strengthen building electrification, support residents and businesses, and reduce administrative burden on staff.
1 www.pinole.gov/online-permitting-licensing-center
2 www.pinole.gov/instant-permitting-for-residential-energy-projects 3 www.contracosta.ca.gov/9978/Pinole-Energy-Enhancement-Rebate-Program 4 www.pinole.gov/permit-rebates-for-gas-to-heat-pump-installations 5 www.pinole.gov/concierge
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
In March 2026, the City released a Request for Proposals (RFP) (Attachment C) seeking experienced firms to help develop both the permitting compliance program and the building performance standard program. The City received three proposals, which were evaluated by a review committee based on qualifications, approach, and technical experience. After review, the committee assigned the proposal from NORESCO (Attachment B) the highest score for several reasons:
• Extensive experience developing similar programs: NORESCO has worked on permitting modernization, building decarbonization, and building performance standards across California and nationally.
• Deep knowledge of state energy codes and compliance tools: They are familiar with Energy Code Ace, statewide reach codes, electrification policies, Title 24, and best-practice permitting improvements.
• Strong background in building performance standards: NORESCO helped design and implement BPS programs in cities such as Chula Vista and Boulder. • Ability to integrate Pinole’s existing work: The firm demonstrated understanding of the City’s existing online permitting tools, rebates, instant permits, and grant-funded incentives, and will ensure these efforts are combined into a cohesive compliance and performance framework.
The scope of work under the contract includes:
• Comprehensive assessment of current permitting and inspection processes
• Interviews with contractors and staff to identify barriers • Development of streamlined permitting workflows and support tools • Integration of reach code requirements
• Review of existing research, pilot programs, and statewide technical resources • Creation of a full Building Performance Standard, including: building inventory and classification, selection of performance metrics, target setting, compliance pathways and penalties, cost analysis and supportive incentive mapping, stakeholder and building-owner engagement
• Final recommendations and Council-ready program materials: This work will lay the foundation for long-term compliance improvements, support decarbonization goals, and help ensure Pinole meets grant-funded deliverables on schedule.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no General Fund impact. The total contract cost of $63,300 is fully covered by the CEC grant, and no matching funds are required.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. NORESCO Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program final updated 5.15 2026
C. Request for Proposals
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO EXECUTE A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH NORESCO,
LLC FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A PERMITTING COMPLIANCE PROGRAM AND BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARD PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $63,300, FULLY FUNDED BY
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION GRANT FUNDS
WHEREAS, in January 2025, the City executed a grant agreement with the California Energy Commission (CEC) through the Local Government Building Decarbonization Challenge; and
WHEREAS, the scope of work in the grant agreement directs the development of a permitting compliance program and building performance standard program in alignment with the City’s Climate Action and Adaptation Plan; and WHEREAS, in March 2026, the City released a Request for Proposals seeking qualified firms to perform this work; and
WHEREAS, the City received three proposals responding to the RFP; and WHEREAS, a City selection review team evaluated and ranked the proposal submitted by NORESCO, LLC the highest; and
WHEREAS, the total cost for the proposed work is $63,300 and is fully funded by the City’s California Energy Commission grant award; and
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Pinole finds the foregoing recitals to be true and correct and incorporates them herein by reference.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with NORESCO, LLC for development of a permitting compliance program and building performance standard program, in the amount of $63,300, in substantially the form attached as Exhibit A.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pinole held on the 16th day of June, 2026 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:
I, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was regularly introduced, passed, and adopted on the 16th day of June, 2026
____________________________________
Heather Bell-Spears, CMC
City Clerk
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
EXHIBIT A:
CONSULTING SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PINOLE AND
NORESCO, LLC
THIS AGREEMENT for consulting services is made by and between the City of Pinole (“City”) and NORESCO, LLC (“Consultant”) (together sometimes referred to as the “Parties”) as of June _____, 2026 (the “Effective Date”) in Pinole, California.
Section 1. SERVICES. Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to City the services described in the Scope of Work attached as Exhibit A at the time and place and in the manner specified therein. In the event of a conflict in or inconsistency between the terms of this Agreement and Exhibit A, the Agreement shall prevail.
1.1 Term of Services. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and shall end on April 30, 2027, and Consultant shall complete the work described in Exhibit A by that date, unless the term of the Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended, as provided for in Section 8. The time provided to Consultant to complete the services required by this Agreement shall not affect the City’s right to terminate the Agreement, as provided for in Section 8.
1.2 Standard of Performance. Consultant shall perform all services required pursuant to this Agreement in the manner and according to the standards observed by a competent practitioner of the profession in which Consultant is engaged in the geographical area in which Consultant practices its profession.
Consultant shall prepare all work products required by this Agreement in a professional manner and shall conform to the standards of quality normally observed by a person practicing in Consultant's profession.
1.3 Assignment of Personnel. Consultant shall assign only competent personnel to perform services pursuant to this Agreement. In the event that City, in its sole discretion, at any time during the term of this Agreement, desires the reassignment of any such persons, Consultant shall, immediately upon receiving notice from City of such desire of City, reassign such person or persons.
1.4 Time. Consultant shall devote such time to the performance of services pursuant to this Agreement as may be reasonably necessary to meet the standard of performance provided in Section 1.1 above and to satisfy Consultant’s obligations hereunder.
Section 2. COMPENSATION. City hereby agrees to pay Consultant an amount not to exceed Sixty-Three Thousand Three Hundred Dollars ($63,300), for all work set forth in Exhibit A and all reimbursable expenses incurred in performing the work. In the event of a conflict between this
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
Agreement and Consultant’s proposal regarding the amount of compensation, the Agreement shall prevail. City shall pay Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement at the time and in the manner set forth herein. The payments specified below shall be the only payments from City to Consultant for services rendered pursuant to this Agreement.
Consultant shall submit all invoices to City in the manner specified herein. Except as specifically authorized by City, Consultant shall not bill City for duplicate services performed by more than one person.
Consultant and City acknowledge and agree that compensation paid by City to Consultant under this Agreement is based upon Consultant’s estimated costs of providing the services required hereunder, including salaries and benefits of employees and subcontractors of Consultant. Consequently, the parties further agree that compensation hereunder is intended to include the costs of contributions to any pensions and/or annuities to which Consultant and its employees, agents, and subcontractors may be eligible. City therefore has no responsibility for such contributions beyond compensation required under this Agreement.
2.1 Invoices. Consultant shall submit invoices, not more often than once a month during the term of this Agreement, based on the cost for services performed and reimbursable costs incurred prior to the invoice date. Invoices shall contain the following information:
▪ Serial identifications of progress bills; i.e., Progress Bill No. 1 for the first invoice, etc.;
▪ The beginning and ending dates of the billing period; ▪ A Task Summary containing the original contract amount, the amount of prior billings, the total due this period, the balance available under the Agreement, and the percentage of completion;
▪ At City’s option, for each work item in each task, a copy of the applicable time entries or time sheets shall be submitted showing the name of the person doing the work, the hours spent by each person, a brief description of the work, and each reimbursable expense; ▪ The total number of hours of work performed under the Agreement by Consultant and each employee, agent, and subcontractor of Consultant performing services hereunder, as well as a separate notice when the total number of hours of work by Consultant and any individual employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant reaches or exceeds 800 hours, which shall include an estimate of the time necessary to complete the work described in Exhibit A;
▪ The Consultant’s signature.
2.2 Monthly Payment. City shall make monthly payments, based on invoices received, for services satisfactorily performed, and for authorized reimbursable costs incurred. City shall have 30 days from the receipt of an invoice that complies with all of the requirements above to pay Consultant.
2.3 Final Payment. City shall pay the last 10% of the total sum due pursuant to this Agreement within sixty (60) days after completion of the services and submittal
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
to City of a final invoice, if all services required have been satisfactorily performed.
2.4 Total Payment. City shall pay for the services to be rendered by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. City shall not pay any additional sum for any expense or cost whatsoever
incurred by Consultant in rendering services pursuant to this Agreement. City shall make no payment for any extra, further, or additional service pursuant to this Agreement.
In no event shall Consultant submit any invoice for an amount in excess of the maximum amount of compensation provided above either for a task or for the entire Agreement, unless the Agreement is modified prior to the submission of such an invoice by a properly executed change order or amendment.
2.5 Hourly Fees. Fees for work performed by Consultant on an hourly basis shall not exceed the amounts shown on the following fee schedule attached hereto as Exhibit B.
2.6 Reimbursable Expenses. There are no reimbursable expenses.
2.7 Payment of Taxes. Consultant is solely responsible for the payment of employment taxes incurred under this Agreement and any similar federal or state taxes.
2.8 Payment upon Termination. In the event that the City or Consultant terminates this Agreement pursuant to Section 8, the City shall compensate the Consultant for all outstanding costs and reimbursable expenses incurred for work satisfactorily completed as of the date of written notice of termination.
Consultant shall maintain adequate logs and timesheets in order to verify costs incurred to that date.
2.9 Authorization to Perform Services. The Consultant is not authorized to perform any services or incur any costs whatsoever under the terms of this Agreement until receipt of authorization from the Contract Administrator.
Section 3. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT. Except as set forth herein, Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, provide all facilities and equipment that may be necessary to perform the services required by this Agreement. City shall make available to Consultant only the facilities and equipment listed in Exhibit C, and only under the terms and conditions set forth therein.
Section 4. INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS. Before beginning any services under this Agreement, Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall procure the types and amounts of insurance specified herein and maintain that insurance throughout the term of this Agreement. The
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
cost of such insurance shall be included in the Consultant’s bid or proposal. Consultant shall be fully responsible for the acts and omissions of its subcontractors or other agents.
4.1 Workers’ Compensation. Consultant shall, at its sole cost and expense, maintain Statutory Workers’ Compensation Insurance and Employer’s Liability Insurance for any and all persons employed directly or indirectly by Consultant in the amount required by applicable law. The requirement to maintain Statutory Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance may be waived by the City upon written verification that Consultant is a sole proprietor and does not have any employees and will not have any employees during the term of this Agreement.
4.2 Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance
4.2.1 General requirements. Consultant, Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain commercial general and automobile liability insurance for the term of this Agreement in an amount not less than TWO MILLION DOLLARS ($2,000,000) per occurrence and FOUR MILLION DOLLARS ($4,000,000) aggregate, combined single limit coverage for risks associated with the work contemplated by this Agreement.
4.2.2 Minimum scope of coverage. Commercial general coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Commercial General Liability occurrence form CG 0001 (most recent edition) covering comprehensive General Liability on an “occurrence” basis. Automobile coverage shall be at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Automobile Liability form CA 0001 (most recent edition) covering any auto (Code 1), or if Consultant has no owned autos, hired (code 8) and non-owned autos (Code 9). No endorsement shall be attached limiting the coverage.
4.2.3 Additional requirements. Each of the following shall be included in the insurance coverage or added as a certified endorsement to the policy:
a. The Commercial General and Automobile Liability Insurance shall cover on an occurrence basis.
b. City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds for liability arising out of work or operations on behalf of the Consultant, including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations; or automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by the Consultant.
Coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Consultant’s insurance at least as broad as CG 20 10 11 85, or both CG 20 10 10 01 and CG 20 37 10 01.
c. For any claims related to this Agreement or the work hereunder, the Consultant’s insurance covered shall be primary insurance as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City,
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
its officers, officials, employees, agents or volunteers shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and non-contributing. d. The policy shall cover inter-insured suits and include a “separation of Insureds” or “severability” clause which treats each insured separately.
e. Consultant agrees to give at least 30 days prior written notice to City before coverage is canceled or modified as to scope or amount.
4.3 Professional Liability Insurance.
4.3.1 General requirements. Consultant, at its own cost and expense, shall maintain for the period covered by this Agreement professional liability insurance for licensed professionals performing work pursuant to this Agreement in an amount not less than ONE MILLION DOLLARS ($1,000,000) per occurrence or claim covering the Consultant’s errors and omissions.
4.3.2 Claims-made limitations. The following provisions shall apply if the professional liability coverage is written on a claims-made form:
a. The retroactive date of the policy must be shown and must be before the date of the Agreement.
b. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the Agreement or the work.
c. If coverage is canceled or not renewed and it is not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a retroactive date that precedes the date of this Agreement, Consultant must provide extended reporting coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of work under this Agreement.
d. A copy of the claim reporting requirements must be submitted to the City prior to the commencement of any work under this Agreement.
4.4 All Policies Requirements.
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
4.4.1 Submittal Requirements. Consultant shall submit the following to City prior to beginning services:
a. Certificate of Liability Insurance in the amounts specified in this Agreement; and
b. Additional Insured Endorsement as required for the General Commercial and Automobile Liability Polices.
4.4.2 Acceptability of insurers. All insurance required by this section is to be placed with insurers with a Bests' rating of no less than A:VII.
4.4.3 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Insurance obtained by the Consultant shall have a self-insured retention or deductible of no more than ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($100,000).
4.4.4 Wasting Policies. No policy required herein shall include a “wasting” policy limit (i.e. limit that is eroded by the cost of defense).
4.4.5 Waiver of Subrogation. Consultant hereby agrees to waive subrogation which any insurer or contractor may require from Consultant by virtue of the payment of any loss. Consultant agrees to obtain any endorsements that may be necessary to effect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.
4.4.6 Subcontractors. Consultant shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverages for
subcontractors shall be subject to all of the requirements stated herein, and Consultant shall ensure that City, its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers are covered as additional insured on all coverages.
4.4.7 Excess Insurance. If Consultant maintains higher insurance limits than the minimums specified herein, City shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant.
4.5 Remedies. In addition to any other remedies City may have if Consultant fails to provide or maintain any insurance policies or policy endorsements to the extent and within the time herein required, City may, at its sole option: 1) obtain such insurance and deduct and retain the amount of the premiums for such insurance from any sums due under the Agreement; 2) order Consultant to stop work under this Agreement and withhold any payment that becomes due to Consultant hereunder until Consultant demonstrates compliance with the requirements hereof; and/or 3) terminate this Agreement.
Section 5. INDEMNIFICATION AND C ONSULTANT’S R ESPONSIBILITIES.
5.1 General Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold City, its officials, officers, employees,
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
volunteers and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of or incident to any alleged negligent acts, omissions or willful misconduct of Contractor, its officials, officers, employees, agents, subcontractors and subcontractors arising out of or in connection with the performance of the Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all consequential damages, attorneys’ fees and other related costs and expenses. Contractor shall defend, at Contractor's own cost, expense and risk, any and all such aforesaid suits, actions or other legal proceedings of every kind that may be brought or instituted against City, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers. Contractor shall pay and satisfy any judgment, award or decree that may be rendered against City or its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers, in any such suit, action or other legal proceeding. Contractor shall reimburse City and its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents and/or volunteers, for any and all legal expenses and costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by each of them in connection therewith or in enforcing the indemnity herein provided.
Contractor's obligation to indemnify shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by City or its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers. Notwithstanding the foregoing, to the extent Contractor's Services are subject to Civil Code Section 2782.8, the above indemnity shall be limited, to the extent required by Civil Code Section 2782.8, to claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the Contractor. This Section 5.1 shall survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement.
5.2 PERS Indemnification. In the event that Consultant or any employee, agent, or subcontractor of Consultant providing services under this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction or the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) to be eligible for enrollment in PERS as an employee of City, Consultant shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City for the payment of any employee and/or employer contributions for PERS benefits on behalf of Consultant or its employees, agents, or subcontractors, as well as for the payment of any penalties and interest on such contributions, which would otherwise be the responsibility of City.
Section 6. STATUS OF CONSULTANT.
6.1 Independent Contractor. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Consultant shall be an independent contractor and shall not be an employee of City. City shall have the right to control Consultant only insofar as the results of Consultant's services rendered pursuant to this Agreement and assignment of personnel pursuant to Subparagraph 1.3; however, otherwise City shall not have the right to control the means by which Consultant accomplishes services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other City, state, or federal policy, rule, regulation, law, or ordinance to the contrary, Consultant and any of its employees, agents, and subcontractors providing services under this
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
Agreement shall not qualify for or become entitled to, and hereby agree to waive any and all claims to, any compensation, benefit, or any incident of employment by City, including but not limited to eligibility to enroll in the California Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) as an employee of City and entitlement to any contribution to be paid by City for employer contributions and/or employee contributions for PERS benefits.
6.2 Consultant No Agent. Except as City may specify in writing, Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent. Consultant shall have no authority, express or implied, pursuant to this Agreement to bind City to any obligation whatsoever.
Section 7. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.
7.1 Governing Law. The laws of the State of California shall govern this Agreement.
7.2 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with all laws applicable to the performance of the work hereunder.
7.3 Other Governmental Regulations. To the extent that this Agreement may be funded by fiscal assistance from another governmental entity, Consultant and any subcontractors shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations to which City is bound by the terms of such fiscal assistance program.
7.4 Licenses and Permits. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and its employees, agents, and any subcontractors have all licenses, permits, qualifications, and approvals of whatsoever nature that are legally required to practice their respective professions. Consultant represents and warrants to City that Consultant and its employees, agents, any subcontractors shall, at their sole cost and expense, keep in effect at all times during the term of this Agreement any licenses, permits, and approvals that are legally required to practice their respective professions. In addition to the foregoing, Consultant and any subcontractors shall obtain and maintain during the term of this Agreement valid Business Licenses from City.
7.5 Pinole Business License. Consultant shall obtain a City of Pinole business license according to the terms of Title 5 of the City of Pinole Municipal Code and deliver to City proof of such business license prior to beginning work under this Agreement. Work under this Agreement cannot begin until the City receives proof that Consultant has obtained a City of Pinole business license.
7.6 Nondiscrimination and Equal Opportunity. Consultant shall not discriminate, harass, or allow harassment, on the basis of a person’s race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, age, physical or mental handicap or disability,
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
medical condition, marital status, sex, or sexual orientation, and denial of family care leave, against any employee, applicant for employment, subcontractor, bidder for a subcontract, or participant in, recipient of, or applicant for any services or programs provided by Consultant under this Agreement. he Consultant and subcontractors shall comply with the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code Section 12900(a-f) et seq.) and the applicable regulations promulgated thereunder (California Code of Regulation, Title 2, Section 7285.0 et seq.) The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment and Housing Commission implementing Government Code of Regulations, are incorporated into this Agreement by reference and made a part hereof as if set forth in full. Consultant shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, policies, rules, and requirements related to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination in employment, contracting, and the provision of any services that are the subject of this Agreement, including but not limited to the satisfaction of any positive obligations required of Consultant thereby.
The Consultant shall comply with regulations relative to Title VI (nondiscrimination in federally-assisted programs of the Department of Transportation – Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 21 - Effectuation of Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act). Title VI provides that the recipients of federal assistance will implement and maintain a policy of nondiscrimination in which no person in the state of California shall, on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, age, disability, be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of or subject to discrimination under any program or activity by the recipients of federal assistance or their assignees and successors in interest. Consultant shall include the provisions of this Subsection in any subcontract approved by the Contract Administrator or this Agreement.
7.7 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise. This Agreement may be subject to 49 CFR, Part 26 entitled “Participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises in Department of Transportation Financial Assistance Programs.” Disadvantage Business Enterprise (DBE) participation shall be in accordance with the AUTHORITIES DBE policies and the CONSULTANT agrees to comply with Federal-Aid Agreement procedures in accordance with State of California Department of Transportation.
7.8 Administrative Requirements. Consultant must comply with federal procedures in accordance with 49 CFR, Part 18, Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments.
Section 8. TERMINATION AND MODIFICATION.
8.1 Termination. City may cancel this Agreement at any time and without cause upon written notification to Consultant. In the event of termination, Consultant shall be entitled to compensation for services performed to the effective date of termination; City, however, may condition payment of such compensation upon Consultant delivering to City any or all documents, photographs, computer
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
software, video and audio tapes, and other materials provided to Consultant or prepared by or for Consultant or the City in connection with this Agreement.
8.2 Extension. City may, in its sole and exclusive discretion, extend the end date of this Agreement beyond that provided for in Subsection 1.1. Any such extension shall be specified in writing by the City. Consultant understands and agrees that if City issues such an extension, City shall have no obligation to provide Consultant with compensation beyond the maximum amount provided for in this Agreement. Similarly, unless authorized by the City, City shall have no obligation to reimburse Consultant for any otherwise reimbursable expenses incurred during the extension period.
8.3 Amendments. The parties may amend this Agreement only by a writing signed by all the parties.
8.4 Assignment and Subcontracting. City and Consultant recognize and agree that this Agreement contemplates personal performance by Consultant and is based upon a determination of Consultant’s unique professional competence, experience, and specialized professional knowledge. Moreover, a substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was and is the personal reputation and competence of Consultant. Consultant may not assign this Agreement or any interest therein without the prior written approval of the City.
Consultant shall not subcontract any portion of the performance contemplated and provided for herein, other than to the subcontractors noted in the proposal, without prior written approval of the City.
8.5 Survival. All obligations arising prior to the termination of this Agreement and all provisions of this Agreement allocating liability between City and Consultant shall survive the termination of this Agreement.
8.6 Options upon Breach by Consultant. If Consultant materially breaches any of the terms of this Agreement, City’s remedies shall included, but not be limited to, the following:
8.6.1 Immediately terminate the Agreement;
8.6.2 Retain the plans, specifications, drawings, reports, design documents, and any other work product prepared by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement;
8.6.3 Retain a different consultant to complete the work described in Exhibit A not finished by Consultant; or
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
8.6.4 Charge Consultant the difference between the cost to complete the work described in Exhibit A that is unfinished at the time of breach and the amount that City would have paid Consultant pursuant to Section 2 if Consultant had completed the work.
Section 9. KEEPING AND STATUS OF RECORDS.
9.1 Rec ords Created as Part of Consultant’s Performan ce. All reports, data, maps, models, charts, studies, surveys, photographs, memoranda, plans, studies, specifications, records, files, or any other documents or materials, in electronic or any other form, that Consultant prepares or obtains pursuant to this Agreement and that relate to the matters covered hereunder shall be the property of the City. Consultant hereby agrees to deliver those documents to the City upon termination of the Agreement. It is understood and agreed that the documents and other materials, including but not limited to those described above, prepared pursuant to this Agreement are prepared specifically for the City and are not necessarily suitable for any future or other use. City and Consultant agree that, until final approval by City, all data, plans, specifications, reports and other documents are confidential and will not be released to third parties without prior written consent of both parties.
9.2 Consultant’s Books and Rec ords. Consultant shall maintain any and all ledgers, books of account, invoices, vouchers, canceled checks, and other records or documents evidencing or relating to charges for services or expenditures and disbursements charged to the City under this Agreement for a minimum of three (3) years, or for any longer period required by law, from the date of final payment to the Consultant to this Agreement.
9.3 Inspection and Audit of Records. Any records or documents that Section 9.2 of this Agreement requires Consultant to maintain shall be made available for inspection, audit, and/or copying at any time during regular business hours, upon oral or written request of the City. Under California Government Code Section 8546.7, if the amount of public funds expended under this Agreement exceeds TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($10,000.00), the Agreement shall be subject to the examination and audit of the State Auditor, at the request of City or as part of any audit of the City, for a period of three (3) years after final payment under the Agreement.
For the purpose of determining compliance with Public Contract Code 10115, et seq. and Title 21, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 21, Section 2500 et seq., when applicable and other matters connected with the performance of the contract pursuant to Government Code Section 8546.7; Consultant, subconsultants, and City shall maintain and make available for inspection all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of the contract, including but not limited to, the costs of administering the contract. All parties shall make such materials available at
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
their respective offices at all reasonable times during the contract period and for three years from the date of final payment under the contract. The state, State Auditor, AUTHORITY, FHWA, or any duly authorized representative of the Federal Government shall have access to any books, records, and documents of Consultant and it’s certified public accountants (CPA) work papers that are pertinent to the contract and indirect cost rates (ICR) for audit, examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and copies thereof shall be furnished if requested.
Consultant and subconsultant agreements, including cost proposals and Indirect Cost Rates (ICR), may be subject to audits or reviews such as, but not limited to, an agreement audit, an incurred cost audit, an ICR Audit, or a CPA ICR audit work paper review. If selected for audit or review, the agreement, cost proposal and ICR and related work papers, if applicable, will be reviewed to verify compliance with 48 CFR Part 31 and other related laws and regulations. In the instances of a CPA ICR audit work paper review it is Consultant’s responsibility to ensure federal or local government officials are allowed full access to the CPA’s work papers including making copies as necessary. The agreement, cost proposal, and ICR shall be adjusted by Consultant and approved by the City Contract Administrator to conform to the audit or review recommendations.
Consultant agrees that individual terms of costs identified in the audit report shall be incorporated into the agreement by this reference if directed by City at its sole discretion. Refusal by Consultant to incorporate audit or review recommendations, or to ensure that the federal or local governments have access to CPA work papers, will be considered a breach of Agreement terms and cause for termination of the Agreement and disallowance of prior reimbursed costs.
9.4 Audit Review Procedures. Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this contract that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by the City’s designated official. Not later than thirty (30) days after issuance of the final audit report, Consultant may request a review by City of unresolved audit issues. The request for review will be submitted in writing. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by City will excuse Consultant from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this contract. Consultant and subconsultant contracts, including cost proposals and ICR, are subject to audits or reviews such as, but not limited to, a contract audit, an incurred cost audit, an ICR Audit, or a CPA ICR audit work paper review. If selected for audit or review, the contract, cost proposal and ICR and related work papers, if applicable, will be reviewed to verify compliance with 48 CFR, Part 31 and other related laws and regulations. In the instances of a CPA ICR audit work paper review it is Consultant’s responsibility to ensure federal, state, or local government officials are allowed full access to the CPA’s work papers including making copies as necessary. The contract, cost proposal, and ICR shall be adjusted by Consultant and approved by City’s contract manager to conform to the audit or review recommendations.
Consultant agrees that individual terms of costs identified in the audit report shall be incorporated into the contract by this reference if directed by City, at its sole discretion. Refusal by Consultant to incorporate audit or review recommendations, or to ensure that the federal, state or local governments have access to CPA work papers, will be considered a breach of contract terms
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
and cause for termination of the contract and disallowance of prior reimbursed costs.
Section 10 STATE AND FEDERAL PREVAILING WAGE.
10.1 State Prevailing Wages. Where applicable, the Consultant shall comply with all Federal, State, and local laws, ordinances, regulations, and permits applicable to the work. This includes compliance with prevailing wage rates and their payment in accordance with California Labor Code Sections 1773 through 1775.
10.2 Federal Prevailing Wages. The Davis-Bacon Act requires that all contractors and subcontractors performing on federal contracts (and contractors or subcontractors performing on federally assisted contracts under the related Acts) in excess of $2,000 pay their laborers and mechanics not less than the prevailing wage rates and fringe benefits listed in the contract’s Davis-Bacon wage determination for corresponding classes of laborers and mechanics employed on similar projects in the area. Davis-Bacon labor standards clauses must be included in covered contracts and subcontracts.
Apprentices may be employed at less than predetermined rates if they are in an apprenticeship program registered with the Department of Labor or with a state apprenticeship agency recognized by the Department. Trainees may be employed at less than predetermined rates if they are in a training program certified by the Department.
Contractors and subcontractors on prime contracts in excess of $100,000 are required, pursuant to the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act, to pay employees one and one-half times their basic rates of pay for all hours over 40 worked on covered contract work in a workweek. Covered contractors and subcontractors are also required to pay employees weekly and to submit weekly certified payroll records to the contracting agency.
Section 11 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.
11.1 Attorneys’ Fees. If a party to this Agreement brings any action, including an action for declaratory relief, to enforce or interpret the provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees in addition to any other relief to which that party may be entitled. The court may set such fees in the same action or in a separate action brought for that purpose.
11.2 Venue. In the event that either party brings any action against the other under this Agreement, the parties agree that trial of such action shall be vested exclusively in the state courts of California in the County of Contra Costa or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
11.3 Severability. If a court of competent jurisdiction finds or rules that any
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
provision of this Agreement is invalid, void, or unenforceable, the provisions of this Agreement not so adjudged shall remain in full force and effect. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.
11.4 No Implied Waiver of Breach. The waiver of any breach of a specific provision of this Agreement does not constitute a waiver of any other breach of that term or any other term of this Agreement.
11.5 Successors and Assigns. The provisions of this Agreement shall inure to the benefit of and shall apply to and bind the successors and assigns of the parties.
11.6 Use of Recycled Products. Consultant shall endeavor to prepare and submit all reports, written studies and other printed material on recycled paper to the extent it is available at equal or less cost than virgin paper.
11.7 Conflict of Interest. Consultant may serve other clients, but none whose activities within the corporate limits of City or whose business, regardless of location, would place Consultant in a “conflict of interest,” as that term is defined in the Political Reform Act, codified at California Government Code Section 81000 et seq.
Consultant shall not employ any City official in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. No officer or employee of City shall have any financial interest in this Agreement that would violate California Government Code Sections 1090 et seq.
Consultant hereby warrants that it is not now, nor has it been in the previous twelve (12) months, an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City. If Consultant was an employee, agent, appointee, or official of the City in the previous twelve months, Consultant warrants that it did not participate in any manner in the forming of this Agreement. Consultant understands that, if this Agreement is made in violation of Government Code §1090 et.seq., the entire Agreement is void and Consultant will not be entitled to any compensation for services performed pursuant to this Agreement, including reimbursement of expenses, and Consultant will be required to reimburse the City for any sums paid to the Consultant. Consultant understands that, in addition to the foregoing, it may be subject to criminal prosecution for a violation of Government Code § 1090 and, if applicable, will be disqualified from holding public office in the State of California.
Consultant will comply with all conflict of interest laws and regulations including, without limitation, City’s Conflict of Interest Code (on file in the City Clerk’s Office). It is incumbent upon the Consultant or Consultant’s firm to notify the City pursuant to section 10.10 Notices of any staff changes relating to this Agreement.
a. In accomplishing the scope of services of this Agreement, all officers, employees and/or agents of Consultant(s), unless as indicated in Subsection
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
b., will be performing a very limited and closely supervised function, and, therefore, are unlikely to have a conflict of interest arise. No disclosures are required for any officers, employees, and/or agents of Consultant, except as indicated in Subsection b.
Initialed by City Attorney’s
Office
b. In accomplishing the scope of services of this Agreement, Consultant(s) will be performing a specialized or general service for the City, and there is substantial likelihood that the Consultant’s work product will be presented, either written or orally, for the purpose of influencing a governmental decision. As a result, the following Consultant(s) shall be subject to the Disclosure Category “1-5” of the City’s Conflict of Interest Code:
11.8 Rebates, Kickbacks, or Other Unlawful Consideration. The Consultant warrants that this Agreement was not obtained or secured through rebates, kickbacks or other unlawful consideration either promised or paid to any City employee. For breach or violation of this warranty, City shall have the right, in its discretion, to terminate this Agreement without liability, to pay only for the value of the work actually performed, or to deduct from this Agreement price or otherwise recover the full amount of such rebate, kickback or other unlawful consideration.
11.9 Debarment and Suspension Certification. Consultant will comply with Title 2 CFR, Part 180, “OMB Guidelines to Agencies on Government wide Debarment and Suspension nonprocurement)”, which certifies that he/she or any person associated therewith in the capacity of owner, partner, director, officer, or manager, is not currently under suspension, debarment, voluntary exclusion, or determination of ineligibility by any federal agency; has not been suspended, debarred, voluntarily excluded, or determined ineligible by any federal agency within the past three (3) years; does not have a proposed debarment pending; and has not been indicted, convicted, or had a civil judgment rendered against it by a court of competent jurisdiction in any matter involving fraud or official misconduct within the past three (3) years. Any exceptions to this certification must be disclosed to City.
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
11.10 Solicitation. Consultant agrees not to solicit business at any meeting, focus group, or interview related to this Agreement, either orally or through any written materials.
11.11 Contract Administration. This Agreement shall be administered by the Community Development Director, who shall act as the City’s representative. All correspondence shall be directed to the Community Development Director or through his or her designee.
11.12 Notices. Any written notice to Consultant shall be sent to:
Michael Goodrum
Technical Director, NORESCO, LLC
2151 Michaelson Drive, Suite 231
Irvine CA 92612
Any written notice to City shall be sent to:
City Manager, City of Pinole
2131 Pear Street
Pinole CA 94565
11.13 Professional Seal. Where applicable in the determination of the City, the first page of a technical report, first page of design specifications, and each page of construction drawings shall be stamped/sealed and signed by the licensed professional responsible for the report/design preparation.
11.14 Integration; Incorporation. This Agreement, including all the exhibits attached hereto, represents the entire and integrated agreement between City and Consultant and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations, or agreements, either written or oral. All exhibits attached hereto are incorporated by reference herein.
11.15 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement.
The Parties have executed this Agreement as of the Effective Date.
CITY OF PINOLE CONSULTANT
Garrett Evans, Interim City Manager Michael Goodrum, Technical Director Consultant’s City of Pinole Business
License #:_
Attest:
Heather Bell-Spears, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Eric S. Casher, City Attorney
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES
.
The Consultant’s scope of services will include the scope of work listed on pages 14-17 of the Consultant’s proposal of April 6, 2026 and any modifications or additions agreed to by the Parties in writing and signed by the parties pursuant to Section 8.3.
Consulting Services Agreement between City of Pinole and NORESCO, LLC. [DATE] [PAGE NUMBER]
EXHIBIT B
COMPENSATION SCHEDULE AND HOURLY
FEES
The fees charged by Consultant for work performed on an hourly basis shall not exceed the hourly rates shown in the fee proposal contained on page 23 of the Consultant’s proposal of April 6, 2026 (Exhibit D)
[DATE]
EXHIBIT C
CITY-FURNISHED FACILITIES
City shall furnish physical facilities such as desks, filing cabinets, and conference space, as may be reasonably necessary for Consultant’s use while consulting with City employees and reviewing records and the information in possession of the City. The location, quantity, and time of furnishing those facilities shall be in the sole discretion of City. In no event shall City be obligated to furnish any facility that may involve incurring any direct expense, including but not limited to computer, long-distance telephone or other communication charges, vehicles, and reproduction facilities.
[DATE]
EXHIBIT D
NORESCO PROPOSAL
April 6, 2026
CITY OF PINOLE
Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and Building Performance Standard Program
P
Point of Contact:
Michael Goodrum, P.E., CEM, LEED AP ND, CDP
Project Director
303.459.7401 | [email protected] | www.noresco.com
This page intentionally left blank.
A. COVER LETTER
2151 Michelson Drive. Suite 231 | Irvine, CA 92612
www.noresco.com
April 6, 2026
City of Pinole
Community Development Dept.
2131 Pear Street
Pinole, CA 94564
RE: Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program Dear Selection Committee,
The City of Pinole (City) is taking meaningful, coordinated steps to advance community-wide building decarbonization and streamline permitting—efforts that will directly support the Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) goals of carbon neutrality by 2045. NORESCO is pleased to submit our proposal to support the City in developing both a comprehensive Permitting Compliance Program and a Building Performance Standard (BPS) Program. Our team brings deep technical, policy, and implementation expertise to deliver programs that are clear, workable, and grounded in real-world building practices, while fully leveraging the robust foundational work the City has already completed.
NORESCO is a national leader in building energy codes, permitting modernization, and building performance standards.
We have helped design and administer some of the earliest and most influential BPS programs in the country, including the City of Chula Vista’s Building Energy Saving Ordinance—California’s first operating BPS. This team has also worked on Boulder’s Building Performance Ordinance, another monumental program for communities in Colorado. This experience directly aligns with Pinole’s needs to develop targeted metrics, establish compliance pathways, integrate benchmarking data, and set performance targets for buildings under 50,000 square feet.
Our work on these programs informs an approach that is technically rigorous, transparent, and supportive of both building owners and municipal staff throughout implementation.
We are equally experienced in permitting process modernization. Across California—including San Diego County, San Diego, Chula Vista, Menlo Park, and Palo Alto—we have supported decarbonization policies that intersect with building departments, reach codes, permitting triggers, and electrification measures. Pinole has already built an impressive foundation, including eTRAKiT online permitting, instant permits via Symbium, the Pinole Energy Enhancement Rebate Program, limited no-cost permit fees, and the forthcoming all electric building virtual concierge. NORESCO will thoughtfully integrate these existing programs into a cohesive compliance framework.
We also understand the City’s directive to leverage existing research and statewide resources—including the San Mateo County Heat Pump Water Heater Streamlining Report, the SPUR Greenlighting Clean Heat Brief, the MCE/Cadmus permitting study, and Energy Code Ace technical assistance. NORESCO will incorporate these tools into a streamlined, user-centered program that reduces administrative burden, encourages voluntary compliance, and makes electrification upgrades more accessible for homeowners and contractors.
A. COVER LETTER
2151 Michelson Drive. Suite 231 | Irvine, CA 92612
www.noresco.com
For the BPS program, our role will include identifying and classifying covered buildings, selecting appropriate performance metrics, setting targets using CEC benchmarking data, developing equitable compliance pathways, conducting cost analyses, and facilitating robust engagement with building owners, tenants, and staff.
Our participation in the California BPS Peer Learning Collaborative further ensures that Pinole’s program aligns with emerging statewide norms, funding opportunities, and best practices.
We accept the terms of the City’s Consulting Services Agreement and confirm that our proposal will remain valid for ninety (90) days. Michael Goodrum will serve as the primary point of contact for our firm, working in coordination with John Balfe, the designated Project Manager.
We value the opportunity to partner with the City of Pinole on this important next phase of its climate and permitting modernization work. We look forward to supporting the City in delivering programs that are technically sound, equitable, and achievable for the community.
Best regards,
Michael Goodrum
Point of Contact & Technical Director
NORESCO, LLC
303.801.7800 | [email protected]
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 3 B. BRIEF COMPANY PROFILE
B. BRIEF COMPANY PROFILE
COMPANY INFORMATION
RFP Requirement Response
Company Name NORESCO, LLC
Employee Count & Staffing Capacity
NORESCO is fully equipped to support the City with the flexibility, depth, and responsiveness required for this on-call engagement. Our Sustainability Sector includes more than 460 qualified professionals available, as needed, to meet project demands.
We have identified a core team of five personnel, selected for their direct and relevant expertise and ability to ensure the successful delivery of the City’s BPS objectives. They all have project experience in benchmarking, performance metrics, performance standards, and compliance pathways.
More details about their experience can be found in Section C.
Headquarters Office 1 Research Drive, Suite 400C
Westborough, MA 01581
Local Offices
2151 Michelson Drive. Suite 231
Irvine, CA 92612
500 Capitol Mall – Suite 2350
Sacramento, CA 95814
Number of Years in Business 42 years
Company Organizational Structure
NORESCO is a wholly-owned, indirect subsidiary of Carrier Global Corporation, we are committed to advancing and transforming the built environment. Carrier Global Corporation, a Fortune 500 company listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE: CARR), is a leading provider to the HVAC distribution and building systems industries worldwide.
Disciplines
We offer a comprehensive suite of energy efficiency and sustainability consulting services for new and existing buildings. Particular to this proposal are:
• Building Performance Development and Implementation
• Building Stock Analysis
• Facility Conditions Assessments
• California State Energy Code Experts
4 | NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program B. BRIEF COMPANY PROFILE
Founded in 1984, NORESCO is one of the nation’s leading energy services and sustainability consulting firms, with
more than four decades of experience
helping public agencies modernize
buildings, electrify infrastructure, and
implement effective climate strategies.
As a leading sustainable design
engineering firm, we improve the
energy-efficient design and maintenance
of individual buildings while also
supporting government and utility
clients in developing broader energy
efficiency and decarbonization policies.
Our integrated experience across
policy development, technical analysis,
and hands-on project delivery directly
supports the City of Pinole’s goals
to streamline permitting processes,
improve compliance, and establish longterm building decarbonization programs.
The City’s development of a Permitting
Compliance Program and Building
Performance Standard (BPS)
Program requires clear, practical, and
implementable program design. These
programs must be efficient for City
staff to administer and straightforward
for building owners to understand and
comply with. NORESCO’s experience
aligns directly with these needs,
including streamlining permitting
processes, integrating reach code
triggers, defining clear compliance
pathways, and developing tools that
reduce administrative burden while
supporting long-term climate goals.
Our team specializes in building energy
policies such as benchmarking, energy
reporting, and building performance
standards, with a strong emphasis
on implementation. We are actively
supporting California jurisdictions in
the design and launch of BPS programs,
including development of performance
metrics, reporting frameworks, equitable
compliance pathways, cost analyses,
and stakeholder engagement strategies.
Through our leadership in the
CalBPS Peer Learning Collaborative,
we work alongside state agencies,
utilities, and peer jurisdictions to align
methodologies for target setting, data
normalization, equity considerations,
enforcement strategies, and the use of
state-supported tools. This ensures that
Pinole’s programs reflect current, widely
accepted approaches across California’s
evolving BPS landscape.
Within California, NORESCO supports
active benchmarking and compliance
programs, including Chula Vista’s
Building Energy Saving Ordinance—
California’s first operational BPS—as
well as ongoing efforts in the City and
County of San Diego. This experience
directly supports Pinole’s need to
leverage existing benchmarking data,
evaluate performance metrics, and
establish rational, achievable targets by
building type, grounded in real-world
program administration.
NORESCO also brings over a decade
of experience delivering Title 24
compliance training and education in
the San Diego region through work
with San Diego Gas & Electric and
local jurisdictions. In collaboration
with Energy Code Ace, we provide
targeted outreach on compliance
improvement strategies, electrification,
and EV infrastructure through a range
FIRM HIGHLIGHTS
$5+ Billion
in guaranteed
energy savings
since founding
460+
employees
nationwide
25 million
metric Tons of
CO2 Emissions
reduction
42 years
of industry
experience
32,288 kW+
of solar photovoltaic
arrays and renewable
sources installed
120 Million+
MMbtu of energy
saved
FIRM HISTORY AND
QUALIFICATIONS
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 5 B. BRIEF COMPANY PROFILE
TEAM HIGHLIGHT: Our Team’s Intimate Knowledge in Energy Codes and Standards in California
NORESCO has decades of leadership in developing and implementing building energy efficiency standards and carbon reduction initiatives in California. Many members of our proposed team have played integral roles in these efforts, with a primary focus on the Title 24 Standards, as well as national contributions to ASHRAE 90.1 and 62.1 User Manual updates. Specific relevant experience includes:
• NORESCO has advanced the nation’s most efficient energy code—California’s Title 24—through the 2001, 2005, 2008, 2013, 2016, 2019, 2022, and 2025 code cycles. Currently, NORESCO is supporting 2028 updates. • The California Energy Commission relied on NORESCO to develop a strategic plan in 2018 focused on Zero Net Energy goals.
• NORESCO developed the ASHRAE 90.1 User’s Manual (1989, 1999, 2001, 2004, 2007, 2010, 2016, 2019), 62.1 User’s Manual (2004, 2007, 2010, 2013, 2016, 2019), 62.2 User’s Manual (2010), and 90.2 User’s Manual (1993). Many core team members are a part of the large team of experts at NORESCO that authored key elements in ASHRAE’s recently published Decarbonization Guide for Existing Buildings. The manual provides detailed instruction as well as tables and graphs for existing building renovations. of formats, including instructor-led
trainings, webinars, self-paced modules,
and digital resources. These efforts are
tailored to meet the needs of diverse
audiences, including staff, contractors,
and building stakeholders.
In addition, we draw on experience from
jurisdictions with mature BPS programs,
including Denver, Washington State,
Massachusetts, and New York. These
programs have addressed complex
challenges such as equitable target
setting, building-type differentiation,
flexible compliance pathways,
enforcement mechanisms, and longterm program durability. We translate these lessons into California-specific,
actionable solutions to support Pinole
in developing a defensible, user-friendly,
and scalable program.
Finally, as a national Energy Services
Company (ESCO), NORESCO
brings deep, hands-on experience
implementing energy upgrades
in existing buildings. This practical
perspective ensures that both the
Permitting Compliance and BPS programs
are grounded in real-world conditions,
including installation timelines, financing
constraints, tenant considerations,
construction sequencing, and operational
impacts. These insights enable the
City to design programs that improve
compliance, accelerate electrification, and
reduce emissions without introducing
unnecessary barriers for homeowners,
contractors, or building owners.
We implement,
not just advise
We connect policy
and technical
analysis with realworld execution
We leverage
what you’ve
already built
We design for usability
& deliver within real
municipal constraints
P P P P
6 | NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program H. RELEVANT PROJECTS/SERVICES WITH REFERENCES
Statewide, CA
NORESCO PARTNERS WITH CALIFORNIA ENERGY
COMMISSION TO DEVELOP NEW ENERGY EFFICIENCY
STANDARDS IN SUPPORT OF STATE’S DECARB GOALS
NORESCO has collaborated with the Buildings Standards Office at the California Energy Commission to advance the nation’s most efficient energy code, Title 24, Part 6, through the 2001, 2005, 2008, 2013, 2016, 2019, 2022, 2025, and 2028 code cycles.
NORESCO technical staff provided complete support services to the California Energy Commission to update the nonresidential building energy efficiency standards and provide support to the residential updates. Updates included measure analysis, measure report preparation, energy savings analysis, life-cycle analysis, drafting of proposed changes to the Standards, working through the Energy Commission rulemaking and Standards adoption process, proposed changes to the Alternative Calculation Method manuals, and updating of the compliance manuals.
NORESCO is currently working on the 2025 and 2028 code cycles, which will enable the CEC to drive continued progress toward the goals in California’s Integrated Energy Policy Report (IEPR). The 2021 IEPR recommends the acceleration of building decarbonization and the installation of 6 million heat pumps by 2030. California’s building energy code will play a key role in achieving these objectives, and the NORESCO team will support the CEC in developing energy accounting methodologies, including development of prototype building models, weather files, metrics and life-cycle cost methodology. The team will review national model codes, assess new measures and code structure ideas, and support the research and development of new code requirements. Tools, training, and other resources developed by NORESCO can be found at www.energycodeace.com.
With the ongoing support of NORESCO, the CEC continues to pioneer worldleading strategies for buildings, while enabling energy bill savings and other benefits to building owners and occupants.
CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION — TITLE 24
NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDING SCIENCE TECHNICAL SUPPORT
Timeline
2001 - Present
NORESCO Services
Energy Code Development
Energy Modeling
Cost Effectiveness Analysis
GHG Reduction Analysis
Owner/Client
California Energy Commission
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 7 H. RELEVANT PROJECTS/SERVICES WITH REFERENCES
Chula Vista, CA
CITY OF CHULA VISTA — BUILDING PERFORMANCE
STANDARD
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FIRST BUILDING PERFORMANCE
STANDARD TO LAUNCH IN CALIFORNIA THROUGH WORK
WITH THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
We are assisting Chula Vista with administrating their Building Energy Savings Ordinance through outreach, education, and resources. This has included evaluating and developing website content, co-producing informative videos of benchmarking benefits and how to use EnergyStar Portfolio Manager, developing an outreach plan including letters and postcards to owners, planning in-person events for building owners to help with reporting and making decisions once benchmarking is established.
NORESCO worked closely with City staff to audit and analyze existing building data while continuously supporting them to update and refine their owner database.
This data was used to inform marketing and outreach efforts as we connected with stakeholders. Through program branding, website updates, and additional outreach, our team is providing key information on meeting the benchmarking standards, which tools to use, and practical energy efficiency measures to increase building performance.
We co-produced several short promotional videos showing the benefits of benchmarking and the success local businesses have had in lowering utility bills, reducing energy use, and upgrading systems to comply with the ordinance as well a detailed tutorial walking through the reporting process.
Size
XX SF
Timeline
2019 – Present
Owner/Client
City of Chula Vista
NORESCO Services
Technical Support
Quality Control and Analysis
Standard Compliance and Support
Strategic Communications/Outreach
Graphic Design Support
8 | NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program H. RELEVANT PROJECTS/SERVICES WITH REFERENCES
For the City, this means your BPS program would be informed by current, real-world experience from peer jurisdictions, grounded in DOE-vetted best practices, and supported by a third-party technical advisor that is already helping cities navigate the policy, data, stakeholder, and compliance challenges of launching and operating a successful Building Performance Standard. !
Statewide, CA
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY — CALIFORNIA BUILDING
PERFORMANCE STANDARD COHORT
ACCELERATING BPS DEVELOPMENT BY LEVERAGING PEER
COMMUNITIES AND NATIONAL BEST PRACTICES
NORESCO is part of a nationwide network of cohorts supporting development and implementation of benchmarking and BPS. Through DOE’s RECI Round 1 award, NORESCO collaborates with cohorts in seven states, allowing us to bring proven policy frameworks, implementation strategies, and lessons learned from jurisdictions at every stage of BPS adoption to our municipal clients.
Within this national effort, NORESCO partnered with USGBC-California to create and lead the CalBPS Peer Learning Collaborative— a statewide working group of cities, counties, and state agencies actively developing or implementing BPS policies. Participants range from jurisdictions establishing benchmarking ordinances to those enforcing full performance standards, including coordination with the California Energy Commission as the state advances its own BPS. NORESCO structures and facilitates this collaborative, curates technical content, brings in national subject matter experts, and provides tools, templates, and implementation guidance. John Balfe, the Senior Project Manager proposed for the City of Pinole, has been instrumental to the success of this program and will apply these proven approaches to ensure the effective implementation of your Permitting Compliance Program and Building Performance Standard.
Timeline
2024 - Present
Owner/Client
U.S. Department of Energy /
ClearlyEnergy
NORESCO Services
Building Performance Standard
Development, Adoption, and
Implementation
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 9 C. ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING
C. ORGANIZATION AND
STAFFING
PROJECT HIGHLIGHT: Turning energy benchmarking into a
foundation for building decarbonization in San Diego
We are working with the City of San Diego to support updates to their Energy Benchmarking Ordinance to advance building decarbonization efforts in alignment with the City’s Climate Action Plan. Our team is providing technical and policy support to modernize benchmarking requirements, ensure accurate and timely energy reporting, and inform future decarbonization strategies. Our team is advising the City on policy approaches that encourage energy efficiency, electrification, and reduced reliance on fossil fuels, while ensuring that energy consumption data is properly obtained, interpreted, and reported to support informed decisionmaking.
We are leading stakeholder engagement to raise awareness of benchmarking and decarbonization requirements, educate building owners, and gather feedback to inform policy. We also maintain the City’s benchmarking resources to ensure guidance is accurate, accessible, and actionable for improving building performance and reducing emissions.
TEAM ORGANIZATION & QUALIFICATIONS
JOHN BALFE
Project Manager
MICHAEL GOODRUM
P.E., CEM, LEED AP ND, CDP
Technical Director and
Subject Matter Expert
RACHEL TRUTTMANN
FITWEL AMBASSADOR
Engineer/Analyst – Reach
Codes
ZAHRA ZOLFAGHARI
LEED GREEN ASSOCIATE
Engineer/Analyst – BPS
KRISTEN SALINAS
P.E. (CA), LEED AP BD+C, WELL AP, ENV SP
Code Compliance Subject Matter Expert
CITY OF PINOLE
JOHN ARENT
P.E. (CA)
Building Energy and Commissioning
Subject Matter Expert
10 | NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program C. ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING
MICHAEL GOODRUM, P.E., CEM, LEED AP ND, CDP
Technical Director and Subject Matter Expert
SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE
With two decades of years of experience in energy efficiency, existing buildings, and decarbonization policy, Michael brings well‑established leadership to the development and implementation of BPS and benchmarking programs. This work is grounded in more than 15 years of hands‑on assessments of municipal, institutional, and commercial facilities, providing a practical understanding of building operations and achievable savings. A key strength for this project is his familiarity with the State of California’s planned BPS. Michael was invited to participate in the State’s BPS workshops, providing early access to draft recommendations and ongoing coordination with the California Energy Commission— insights that will help ensure local alignment with statewide requirements.
Recent efforts also include statewide BPS development support for the U.S. Department of Energy and the Colorado Energy Office, as well as leadership on multiple California initiatives such as the DOE-funded California BPS Cohort, benchmarking and ordinance support for the City of San Diego, decarbonization analysis for the City of Los Angeles, and compliance tool development for Southern California Edison and SDG&E. This combination of technical and policy experience ensures delivery of practical, data‑driven, and implementable programs for jurisdictions, staff, and building owners.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
20 years
TIME ALLOCATED TO
PROJECT:
10%
JOHN BALFE
Project Manager
SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE
John brings experience implementing proven best practices in energy programs focused on decarbonization and building efficiency. He has been key in leading the development and implementation of BPS programs throughout the country, providing hands‑on support to more than 150 communities to meet energy and decarbonization goals. Recent efforts include project management of statewide BPS programs for the U.S. Department of Energy in California and with the Colorado Energy Office.
A significant portion of John’s work is directly connected to California jurisdictions. In leading the DOE‑funded California BPS Cohort, he manages peer exchange and supports local governments statewide in the development, adoption, and implementation of benchmarking and BPS programs. Also leads benchmarking ordinance support for the City of San Diego, he organizes outreach and engagement activities to increase compliance and oversees the City’s transition to the BEAM reporting platform—experience closely aligned with Pinole’s goals for streamlined compliance and clear reporting requirements.
Additional experience includes workforce development and technical training support for NREL’s Buildings UP Program and decarbonization project management for NYSERDA’s Downtown Revitalization Initiative, demonstrating expertise in stakeholder engagement, technical assistance, and scalable program delivery.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
10 years
TIME ALLOCATED TO
PROJECT:
20%
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 11 C. ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING
KRISTEN SALINAS, P.E. (CA), LEED AP BD+C, WELL AP, ENV SP Code Compliance Subject Matter Expert
SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE
Kristen brings experience in sustainable design, building performance, and decarbonization, with expertise spanning both new construction and existing‑building work. With a civil engineering background, she integrates sustainability measures—including BPS compliance strategies, embodied carbon analysis, and certification pathways—into practical, buildable solutions. Her Green Building and Sustainable Design certificate further enhances her understanding of low‑carbon materials, water systems, and resilient site planning.
Based in California, her work is strongly rooted in the State’s energy policy and building‑performance landscape, including extensive support for the California Energy Commission and major California utilities. Through the Statewide Codes and Standards Program, she develops Title 24, Part 6–related guidance, training, and compliance resources that help jurisdictions and project teams interpret and apply energy‑code requirements. She also supports BPS‑related efforts by evaluating building performance and helping cities and utilities integrate decarbonization recommendations into planning and operations. Kristen’s engineering expertise, deep familiarity with California codes, and hands‑on experience supporting performance‑based policies will be integral in helping our team set these programs up for success in Pinole.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
20 years
TIME ALLOCATED TO
PROJECT:
10%
JOHN ARENT, P.E. (CA)
Building Energy and Commissioning Subject Matter Expert
SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE
John is a California‑based engineer with experience specializing in California building energy codes, decarbonization policy, and technical standards development. He has supported the California Energy Commission across more than six Title 24 code cycles, contributing to Standards Updates, nonresidential technical analysis, Alternative Calculation Methods, software development for CBECC‑Com, and statewide measure evaluation. His work includes measure identification, cost‑effectiveness analysis, prototype model development, and creation of technical documentation that directly informs California’s energy policy and regulatory updates.
He provided long‑standing technical support to California’s investor‑owned utilities, including Southern California Edison and Pacific Gas & Electric. His efforts include CASE proposal development, energy modeling and prototype building research, compliance enhancement strategies, comparative technical analysis, and development of implementation resources for Title 24 and Title 20. With deep experience across California codes, compliance pathways, energy modeling tools, and stakeholder support, John brings highly relevant expertise to the Pinole project, particularly in Title 24 interpretation, emissions‑reduction strategies, and development of practical compliance and implementation guidance for local jurisdictions.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
30 years
TIME ALLOCATED TO
PROJECT:
10%
12 | NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program C. ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING
RACHEL TRUTTMANN, FITWEL AMBASSADOR
Engineer/Analyst – Reach Codes
SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE
Rachel brings experience supporting sustainability, energy code compliance, and decarbonization initiatives, with a strong focus on California jurisdictions. Her work centers on education, training, outreach, and program material development for Title 24, Part 6 and Title 20, positioning her well to support Pinole’s permitting compliance and building performance standard programs, which require clear, user‑friendly communication and consistent guidance for both applicants and staff.
Rachel has provided sustainability and compliance support for several major California utilities, including Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric, and San Diego Gas & Electric. This work includes developing training materials, supporting jurisdictional education efforts, conducting outreach to trade organizations, and helping local governments improve compliance with state energy codes. Her municipal experience includes supporting reach code, benchmarking, and BPS‑related efforts for the Cities of Chula Vista, Encinitas, and San Diego, including implementation support for the City of San Diego’s Building Energy Benchmarking Ordinance.
ZAHRA ZOLFAGHARI, LEED GREEN ASSOCIATE
Engineer/Analyst – BPS
SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE
Zahra is a Building Performance Analyst with experience in building science, energy modeling, carbon analysis, and performance optimization. Her work supports the development of BPS by translating technical modeling and carbon data into insights that inform policy design, compliance pathways, and retrofit strategies. She has contributed to analyses that help jurisdictions understand baseline building performance, identify improvement opportunities, and evaluate cost‑effective decarbonization measures.
Much of her recent experience is directly connected to California’s building stock and energy-code framework. For Southern California Edison, she performed large-scale modeling and data analysis to develop prototype buildings representing California’s single-family, multifamily, and nonresidential sectors, providing foundational data for future BPS and code updates. Her work supporting PG&E and other California utilities includes assisting with Title 24, Part 6 and Title 20 compliance workflows and developing program materials that improve understanding of code requirements. Prior roles include significant contributions to building-performance and decarbonization tool development, such as leading research and product teams to deliver automated energy‑modeling tools and conducting calibrated modeling and retrofit optimization analysis for a utility‑led commercial decarbonization pilot. These experiences strengthen her ability to support BPS programs with rigorous analytics, scenario evaluation, and technology‑driven assessment capabilities.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
5 years
TIME ALLOCATED TO
PROJECT:
30%
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE:
5 years
TIME ALLOCATED TO
PROJECT:
30%
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 13 D. DESCRIPTION AND APPROACH
D. DESCRIPTION AND
APPROACH
PROPOSED
METHODOLOGY
• Efficiency, leveraging completed
City work, relationships, knowledge
of tools and resources
• We are already embedded in
Energy Code ACE and are a
founding firm of the CalBPS PLC so
we are deeply familiar with these
• We’ve helped many other CA
jurisdictions with reach code
development and compliance, and
have been a part of benchmarking
and BPS support for many
(particularly Chula Vista)
• Leverage past experience for other
CA jurisdictions with available
tools/templates to reduce effort/
cost and give most value to Pinole
• Develop guides and resources
for City staff as foundation for
continued administration of
programs
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
APPROACH
Project Workplan
NORESCO will schedule and hold a
project kickoff meeting with the City
of Pinole within 10 business days of
executing the contract. Prior to the
kickoff, we will provide City of Pinole a
detailed Project Workplan based on this
proposal that shows key deliverables
and estimated months for completion
of each. Reviewing and agreeing on
the Project Workplan with City staff
during the kickoff will streamline
schedule, align interdependent activities
between tasks, and outline plans for
the stakeholder engagement activities.
We will provide meeting minutes to
all attendees within one week of the
project kickoff meeting.
Regular Meetings and Status
Reports
Led by John Balfe, NORESCO will
coordinate via email, shared documents
and repositories, and via virtual
meetings. John and the team are
available for bi-weekly meetings with
City staff, as well as on a case-by-case
basis when more urgent meetings are
needed. The team will be available for
any regularly scheduled calls via Zoom,
Microsoft Teams or whatever platform
is preferred.
We will provide meeting agendas
in advance and keep a record of all
meetings, presentations, attendees,
PROJECT HIGHLIGHT: Development of BPS
recommendations meet the State’s GHG reduction
targets
NORESCO worked with the Colorado Energy Office to facilitate stakeholder engagement with utility and industry stakeholders, as well as and local government representatives to help in our development of BPS recommendations to meet the State’s
GHG reduction targets of 7% by 2026 and 20% by 2030,
from a 2021 baseline. This guidance document helps building owners and building industry professionals understand the State’s new building performance standards. It conveys the specific requirements, and explains how building owners can demonstrate compliance. The BPS Technical Resource Guide also suggests strategies to reduce energy use and carbon emissions in buildings.
This Guide delivers on the goals of the Colorado Greenhouse Gas Pollution Reduction Roadmap. View the guide here.
14 | NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program D. DESCRIPTION AND APPROACH
Washington Commercial Building Energy Code Roadmap | Portland, OR The final roadmap identifies building strategies that are specific to the selected building types, targets plug loads, and provides measures that would need to be implemented over multiple code cycles. It provides actionable measures that could be incorporated into the code over the next several code cycles.
invoices, monthly and final reports to
make contract administration easy.
NORESCO can house records and
developed materials on a shared drive/
site, such as SharePoint, to allow for
easy access for both the NORESCO and
City staff.
We will provide monthly status reports
together with invoices that summarize
activities from the previous period and
next steps for coming deliverables in the
Project Workplan.
Communication Strategy
Led by John Balfe, NORESCO will
coordinate via email, shared documents
and repositories, and via virtual
meetings. The team will be available for
any regularly scheduled calls via Zoom,
Microsoft Teams or whatever platform
is preferred.
For our deliverables, NORESCO employs
a User-Centered Design approach that
focuses on the audience of deliverables
to tailor them effectively. We have
team members who have experience
in building energy audits and retrofits
for many different types of commercial
buildings. This experience gives us
perspective for reaching stakeholders
like building owners and design
professionals that are the audiences for
Reach Codes and BPS programs.
QA/QC Procedures
NORESCO maintains a QC process
based on peer review. The QC process
is an opportunity to improve the
quality of our deliverables and leverage
the expertise we have on our team.
Reviewers provide insightful evaluation
that is rooted in real world experience
and hands on familiarity.
TASK BY TASK WORK
PLAN
TASK 1: PERFORM A
COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT OF
THE CURRENT PERMITTING AND
INSPECTING PROCESS
We will kick off the project with
an assessment and review of the
City’s permitting processes, tools
and resources. We have experience
helping jurisdictions streamline their
permitting and compliance process,
in California and in other states.
Before recommending solutions, we
strongly believe in starting with a
needs assessment, which includes
this task as well as Tasks 2-6. The
needs assessment will include a 1
hour interview with the Community
Development Director to understand
the process and resources, as well as
current programs related to permit
compliance (Task 4). We will conduct
a 1-hour group interview with Building
staff to gain more detail on steps
of the process and understand the
tools used. Deliverables will include
a simple assessment plan and 2-5
page report of existing conditions, as
desired.
TASK 2: CONDUCT INTERVIEWS
WITH 10 CONTRACTORS OF
VARYING PERMIT TYPES
Based on our experience streamlining
permit process and review of the
MCE/Cadmus study, NORESCO will
compile questions for contractor
interviews to gather feedback on
the current City process. We will
share these questions with City
staff for review and approval prior to
conducting any contractor interviews.
NORESCO will use the City’s list of
local contractors to solicit interviews
with a variety of contractors and
permit expeditors , who were not
previously included in the MCE/
Cadmus study. Careful consideration
will be taken when making selections
for interview candidates to validate
the findings. To minimize time
impacts for interviewees and
increase accessibility, we plan to hold
virtual interviews. We will classify
respondents by permit type and
conduct a series of up to eight 1-hour
group interviews with the contractors
in each permit type.
Our team will record interviews and
leverage AI tools, such as Microsoft
Copilot, to summarize interviews and
isolate key themes and potential areas
for improvement. We will document
the results and key themes in a 2-5
page report to City staff. The report
will identify the key themes and top
actions for addressing these items
within the process.
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 15 D. DESCRIPTION AND APPROACH
TASK 3: FAMILIARIZE WITH
PROPOSED ENERGY REACH CODE
POLICIES
NORESCO’s code compliance SME’s will
hold two to three meetings, totaling
no more than 5 hours, with the City’s
Sustainability Project Manager to
understand which reach code policies
are currently under consideration for the
City, as well as existing programs that
may support reach code compliance
(Task 4). As one of the reach code
technical assistance providers for
the Statewide Reach Codes Program,
we are familiar with the policies in
consideration by the City. We will
document the outcome in a 1-2 page
summary that outlines the planned
reach codes and where they present
opportunities to align with permit
process streamlining.
TASK 4: REVIEW ALL UNDERWAY
AND EXISTING PROGRAMS OFFERED
BY THE CITY PERTINENT TO
PERMITTING COMPLIANCE
Leveraging other interviews with City
staff in Tasks 1 and 3, together with
review of programs in Table 2 of the RFP
and associated City program websites,
NORESCO will develop understanding
of the City’s existing programs that
can support code compliance. We
will work with the Sustainability
Project Manager to contact and meet
with other City staff that are leading
specific programs to gain deeper detail.
These meetings will enable our code
compliance SMEs to envision means
to integrate these programs for a
cohesive code compliance program.
We will summarize these programs in
a 2-5 page report, including identifying
methods/means for integration.
TASK 5: REVIEW ALL EXISTING
WORK AND RESEARCH IN TABLE 1
PROVIDED IN THE BACKGROUND
SECTION
As a technical consultant for the Energy
Code ACE team and the Statewide
Reach Codes Program, NORESCO is
familiar with several of the resources in
Table 1 of the RFP. This gives us a head
start on researching and reviewing these
resources to summarize for City staff.
Where we are not intimately familiar
with a resource in Table 1, our team
will research and review to garner best
practices and lessons learned that can
benefit the City of Pinole. Beyond Table
1, we will also bring in knowledge and
best practices from other programs
and jurisdictions that we actively
support for reach codes and code
compliance.
We will distill these best practices
and key initiatives for the City staff in
a 2-5 page technical memorandum.
The memo will specifically call out
resources the City can take advantage
of, and programs that we recommend
the City incorporate as part of a
cohesive code compliance program.
TASK 6: ENHANCE PROPOSED
SOLUTIONS VIA CONSULTATION
WITH ENERGY CODE ACE
As noted above, NORESCO is a
consultant on the Energy Code
Ace team with a history of 15+
years working to advance tools and
resources with the IOUs on the Energy
Code Ace platform. We currently
develop content and resources for
Energy Code Ace, as well as meet with
local jurisdictions to educate them on
which tools and resources can best
support their policies and programs.
We will leverage our experience and
position as a member of the Energy
Code Ace team to do the same for
the City of Pinole. From our deep
experience, we will compile a 1-2 page
summary report that identifies the
Energy Code Ace tools and resources
that will benefit the City ‘s permitting
compliance program.
TASK 7: COMPILE DRAFT
PROGRAMMATIC FEATURES
(INFORMED BY TASKS 1–6)
As we work through the discovery and
needs assessment phases included
in Tasks 1-6 to improve the City’s
reach codes and code compliance
initiatives, we will catalog these into
a table of recommendations. We will
use the table to develop an actionable
streamlined permitting process with
additional tools and resources. We
will document the recommended
features in a 5-10 page report for
City staff. Once staff have reviewed,
we will hold a short meeting to review
the recommendations and collaborate
with City staff on those features to be
implemented.
TASK 8: IMPLEMENT APPROVED
SOLUTIONS AND FEATURES INTO
FINAL PROGRAM
Implementing the solutions agreed
upon in Task 7, will be a collaborative
effort between City staff and NORESCO.
NORESCO will spend 32 hours to
assemble outlines, short print and digital
resources, and recommended language
for updates to processes. Due to budget
constraints, we will be prudent with
recommendations and will prioritize
low cost and low effort solutions for
immediate implementation, and a
second level of recommendations for
future City implementation or extended
programmatic improvements. A final
report will be provided to outline
implemented solutions and a playbook
for future changes, when feasible.
TASK 9: DETERMINE HOW TABLE 3
RESOURCES WILL BE LEVERAGED
FOR THE BPS PROGRAM
NORESCO supports several
jurisdictions, both within and outside
of California, with development and
implementation of BPS programs
and we are familiar with most of the
resources in Table 3 of the RFP. We
were also a founding partner with
USGBC-CA of the CalBPS Peer Learning
Collaborative (PLC) and helped develop
many of the resources currently
available. This gives us a head start
on researching and reviewing these
resources to summarize for City staff.
Where we are not already familiar
with a resource in Table 3, our team
will research and review to garner best
practices and lessons learned that can
benefit the City of Pinole. Beyond Table
3, we will also bring in knowledge and
best practices from other BPS programs
and jurisdictions that we actively
support.
We will distill these best practices and
available resources for the City staff in a
2-5 page technical memorandum. The
memo will specifically call out tools and
resources the City can take advantage
16 | NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program D. DESCRIPTION AND APPROACH
of, and best practices as they develop a
BPS.
TASK 10: IDENTIFY AND CLASSIFY
ALL COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
BUILDINGS OVER 20,000 SQ FT
NORESCO will use County Assessor
data to identify and classify
Commercial/Industrial buildings over
20,000 ft2 in the City. NORESCO
requests that City staff connect our
team with the appropriate personnel at
the County Assessor office to provide
the necessary data. Our team will
spend up to 22 hours for the building
stock analysis of the City of Pinole’s
commercial/industrial buildings. We
will ultimately develop a matrix of the
covered buildings recommended for a
BPS program.
TASK 11: SELECT THE BEST BUILDING
PERFORMANCE METRIC FOR
COVERED BUILDINGS
Leveraging our knowledge and
experience with other jurisdictions’
BPS and available resources from
the DOE and EPA, we will evaluate
and recommend a metric for covered
building performance. We will also
take into account potential interaction
with neighboring jurisdictions and
State initiatives. Aligning metrics and
targets with other jurisdictions in the
region provides consistency for building
owners that may improve compliance.
NORESCO will devote up to 10 hours
for evaluating performance metrics
and develop a 1-2 page technical
memorandum that summarizes
the analysis and supports the
recommendation for the selected
metric.
TASK 12: SET TARGETS FOR COVERED
BUILDINGS
NORESCO will allocate 14 hours to work
with City staff to determine appropriate
targets for the covered buildings in the
BPS. The absence of building energy
use data for the commercial/industrial
buildings to inform target setting has
a significant impact on this process.
Currently, 16 buildings report energy
use data to the State’s benchmarking
program, which is less than half of
the buildings over 20,000 ft2 that
would likely form the covered building
list. As a result of the limited data for
Pinole’s building energy use, the targets
chosen will require flexibility for future
adjustment within the BPS policy.
NORESCO will identify targets based
on national averages, statewide data,
and targets for other jurisdictions in
the Bay Area. We will provide Pinole
with a methodology for adjusting these
targets based on the covered buildings’
reported energy use after at least two
years of program implementation.
We will develop a 2-5 page technical
memorandum for City staff that
documents the proposed targets,
summarizes the process used to
develop them, and recommends steps
for tailoring them with actual building
data in the future if needed.
TASK 13: ESTABLISH COMPLIANCE
PATHWAYS, TIMELINES, DATA
REPORTING STANDARDS, AND
PENALTIES
Using other jurisdiction examples,
and resources from our work with the
CalBPS PLC, we will flesh out the other
key policy aspects of a BPS program.
We will recommend timelines for
achieving performance targets, which
may include interim targets/milestones,
to align with City climate goals. These
timelines must be realistic for building
owners to comply if the BPS program is
to be successful. We will also develop
alternate compliance paths, whether for
adjusting targets or timelines, or both,
that encourage compliance and pave a
path for success for building owners.
Data verification is another critical
aspect for a BPS program to ensure that
reported performance is accurate. This
is important not only for compliance,
but because it will form the basis
for any penalties assessed for noncompliance.
NORESCO is familiar with data
verification programs/processes across
several jurisdictions and have also acted
as data verifier for individual building
owners, so we understand both sides of
the coin.
Finally, we will evaluate BPS penalties
based on other jurisdictions known
penalties and whether they have been
assessed. This will include penalty
amounts, frequency and how penalties
are used, whether directly to the city or
into an available fund for BPS program
support.
We allocate 20 hours to the analysis
and evaluation of these other program
factors that are part of a BPS. This
will include compiling a 2-5 page
technical memorandum outlining the
recommended timelines, alternative
compliance pathways, data verification
processes and penalties with supporting
information and examples from other
jurisdictions.
TASK 14: PERFORM COST ANALYSIS
FOR COMPLIANCE PATHWAYS AND
IDENTIFY SUPPORTIVE PROGRAMS
NORESCO will spend up to 16 hours
researching programs to support
building owners for BPS compliance.
Our focus will be on programs providing
direct financial support for building
owners to complete retrofits and
upgrades for building systems. We will
also explore other financial support,
such as tax credits, that provide indirect
support for building owners.
We will also catalog financing
mechanisms, such as green banks, PACE
and even performance contracting as
potential options for building owners.
We will compile basic installation
cost information for common retrofits
and compare the installation costs
to available direct funding support to
highlight potential gaps in first costs for
building owners.
NORESCO will summarize the findings
of our research in a 2-5 page technical
memorandum for City staff.
TASK 15: BUILDING OWNERS AND
INTEREST HOLDER ENGAGEMENT
Our team will develop a stakeholder
outreach and engagement plan for
City staff. We have developed similar
plans for other jurisdictions to guide
their outreach efforts. Given the limited
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 17 D. DESCRIPTION AND APPROACH
budget in this project, NORESCO
recommends that we deliver a robust
outreach and engagement plan to City
staff for execution. City staff will record
(video or audio) engagement sessions
and NORESCO’s team will use closed AI
tools to analyze the results and identify
key feedback themes. We will map
these feedback themes to the proposed
BPS program components and make
revisions in response to the feedback.
Using this approach, NORESCO
allocates 8 hours to developing a robust
outreach plan and 12 hours to analyzing
results and revising policy and program
recommendations. We will provide
City staff a summary report of the
stakeholder feedback with the mapping
to various BPS program components.
As an added scope, NORESCO will
provide up to 56 hours of additional
support to the City for stakeholder
engagement. This may take the form
of stakeholder outreach sessions,
interviews, surveys or other means of
engagement. NORESCO will work with
the City to determine the most effective
outreach methods so that the additional
hours can be used most effectively.
TASK 16: STAFF AND CITY COUNCIL
ENGAGEMENT
NORESCO will aggregate our BPS
program recommendations into a draft
report and accompanying presentation
for the Pinole City Council and other
staff. We will also provide a list of
key City staff to engage with and
suggested talking points to engage
these staff and Council members.
The draft report will be 5-10 pages
and summarize the key program
aspects, along with descriptions of
the analysis methodologies used. We
will provide the draft report and slides
to the Sustainability Project Manager
for review and schedule a meeting
to discuss feedback. A final report
and slide deck will be delivered to the
Sustainability Project Manager that
incorporates the feedback and changes
discussed in the review meeting.
NORESCO will virtually attend the City
Council adoption hearing and support
the Sustainability Project Manager with
presenting the proposed BPS program.
TASK 17: IMPLEMENT THE BPS
POLICY AND PROGRAM
Implementing the BPS policy and
program that is approved by City
Council, will be a collaborative effort
between City staff and NORESCO.
Similar to the approach for Reach
Codes implementation, NORESCO will
assemble outlines, short print and digital
resources, and recommended language
for educating building owners for
compliance. We will leverage available
resources for implementation and
prioritize critical activities for immediate
implementation. 40 hours are allocated
to support the initial BPS program
implementation. We will support the
City in their continued administration
of the BPS program by developing a list
of activities by year for City staff along
with an estimate of City staff labor
requirements.
A final 5-10 page report will be provided to
outline the implemented BPS program and
a playbook for future administration and
potential changes.
As an added scope, NORESCO will provide
up to 44 hours for BPS implementation
support for City staff. We will collaborate
with City staff to determine the most
impactful support for their needs for
an effective use of these added hours.
Possible options for support include
tutorial videos for building owners, fact
sheets, compliance flyers or postcards,
or review of supporting software for City
staff.
NORESCO was selected to literally write the book
on decarbonizing existing buildings, ASHRAE
recently published earlier this year
NORESCO developed the new ASHRAE Guide for Building Decarbonization Retrofits for Commercial and Multifamily Buildings. NORESCO authored this guide based on our extensive building energy retrofit experience to help ASHRAE in their goal to transform building energy retrofits toward the focused goal of decarbonization.
This page intentionally left blank.
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 19 E. PROJECT SCHEDULE
E. PROJECT SCHEDULE
The figure below illustrates the tasks and deliverables within the work plan described in this proposal. With a single, coordinated team handling all tasks, we will work efficiently through cross sharing information in real time. We will also leverage our experience and familiarity with many of the existing tools and resources from our roles in Energy Code ACE and the CalBPS Peer Learning Collaborative. This approach streamlines tasks and the development of deliverables to meet the project schedule. The project timeline is based upon having a contract agreement in place May 6, 2026. If the RFP selection and contract negotiation processes take additional time beyond what is projected in the RFP, the timeline for project deliverables may be adjusted accordingly.
The NORESCO team will review this timeline for key tasks with City of Pinole staff during the project kickoff meeting to agree on and document any needed adjustments to schedule for the project deliverables.
This page intentionally left blank.
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 21 F. SUBCONSULTANTS
F. SUBCONSULTANTS
At this time, NORESCO will not utilize any
subcontractors or external consultants for
this project. All work will be performed
in-house by NORESCO’s staff. Our project
team includes a full range of expertise
necessary to successfully deliver the scope
of services requested by the City.
City and County of Denver Electrification Plan | Denver, CO As part of the City and County of Denver’s (Denver) effort to reduce greenhouse emissions city-wide by 80% by 2050, NORESCO developed an interim technical report that provided information for The Energize Denver Renewable Heating and Cooling Plan: Existing Building and Home Electrification. NORESCO technical staff simulated typical energy systems using models that represented the 17,000 non-residential buildings and 135,000 single family homes within the City’s geography. From the models, we developed building and system typologies and compared existing mechanical systems to alternate, all-electric technologies.
This page intentionally left blank.
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 23 G. COST PROPOSAL
G. COST PROPOSAL
NORESCO developed a budget for each major task in this proposal as shown below. We have included
within tasks allocations for regular
meetings and monthly progress
updates to the Sustainability Project
Manager. John Balfe will lead the
regular meetings and will bring in
team members as needed for specific
topics. This approach helps keep tasks
coordinated and progress effective while
allowing most team members to focus
their time on the tasks themselves.
To provide extended functionality for the
City of Pinole, we developed budgets for
additional scopes/services described
in the project approach. These services
for Tasks 15 and 17 are requested
additional scopes by the City to support
City staff with implementation of the
BPS program.
Our budget estimate does not include
travel expenses for in-person meetings
or stake-holder interviews.
* Invoicing will include rates based on actual direct, indirect and fringe costs per Federal Cost Principles.
FEE BREAKDOWN
Task Item
Costs within $48.3k Budget Costs Over $48.3k Budget Total Costs Estimated
Hours
Average
Hourly Rate
Cost Within
$48.3k
Budget
Estimated
Hours
Average
Hourly Rate
Cost
Exceeding
$48.3k
Budget
Fee
Task 1 12 $ 169.58 $ 2,03 0 $ - $ - $ 2,035
Task 2 32 $ 159.94 $ 5,118 0 $ - $ - $ 5,118
Task 3 5 $ 146.40 $ 732 0 $ - $ - $ 732
Task 4 10 $ 146.40 $ 1,464 0 $ - $ - $ 1,464
Task 5 10 $ 153.60 $ 1,536 0 $ - $ - $ 1,536
Task 6 3 $ 146.33 $ 439 0 $ - $ - $ 439
Task 7 16 $ 150.94 $ 2,415 0 $ - $ - $ 2,415
Task 8 32 $ 148.66 $ 4,757 0 $ - $ - $ 4,757
Task 9 10 $ 196.00 $ 1,960 0 $ - $ - $ 1,960
Task 10 22 $ 160.91 $ 3,540 0 $ - $ - $ 3,540
Task 11 10 $ 175.60 $ 1,756 0 $ - $ - $ 1,756
Task 12 14 $ 170.36 $ 2,385 0 $ - $ - $ 2,385
Task 13 20 $ 168.90 $ 3,378 0 $ - $ - $ 3,378
Task 14 16 $ 169.81 $ 2,717 0 $ - $ - $ 2,717
Task 15 20 $ 172.10 $ 3,442 56 $ 151.36 $ 8,476 $ 11,918 Task 16 16 $ 199.31 $ 3,189 0 $ - $ - $ 3,189
Task 17 40 $ 185.80 $ 7,432 44 $ 148.86 $ 6,529 $ 13,961 TOTAL 288 $ 167.69 $ 48,295 100 $ 150.26 $ 15,005 $ 63,300
24 | NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program G. COST PROPOSAL
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 25 H. RELEVANT PROJECTS/SERVICES WITH REFERENCES
H. RELEVANT PROJECTS/
SERVICES WITH REFERENCES
Our clients are our strongest advocates. Many of the
organizations we serve have partnered
with us for years, relying on our team
to help them achieve their energy
efficiency and sustainability goals
across multiple projects. We view
every engagement as the start, or
continuation, of a long-term relationship
built on trust, collaboration, and results.
While we are proud of our past
experience, what truly defines us is
our ability to deliver sustainable design
solutions tailored to each client’s
needs, no matter the project’s size,
scope, location, or schedule. We invite
you to speak directly with our clients,
ask them candid questions about our
responsiveness, budget management,
and ability to navigate project challenges.
Their experiences best reflect the level
of partnership and commitment you can
expect from our team.
City of Chula Vista — Building Performance Standard | Chula Vista, CA NORESCO supported the implementation of the first Building Performance Standard to launch in California through work with the City of Chula Vista.
CALIFORNIA ENERGY
COMMISSION
Gabriel D. Taylor
Senior Engineer, Decarbonization &
Load Flexibility
California Energy Commission
715 P Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
[email protected]
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Coleen Wisniewski
Environmental Sustainability
Manager
City of Chula Vista
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
[email protected]
619.409.5828
COLORADO ENERGY OFFICE
Ben Goldstein
Senior Program Manager - Commercial
Building Decarbonization
Colorado Energy Office
1600 Broadway Suite 1960
Denver, CO 80202
[email protected]
720.355.0109
This page intentionally left blank.
NORESCO | Response to Assist in the Development of the Permitting Compliance Program and BPS Program | 27 I. REQUIRED STATEMENTS/DOCUMENTS
I. REQUIRED STATEMENTS/
DOCUMENTS
a) Disclose any actual, apparent, direct or indirect, or potential conflicts of interest that may exist with respect to the consultant, management, or employees relative to the services to be provided under the Agreement. This
includes any real or perceived conflict associated with this project, the Scope of Services, or any prior or current work for the City of Pinole. If a Consultant has no conflicts of interest, an affirmative statement confirming the absence of conflicts must be included.
NORESCO affirms that there are no actual, apparent, direct, indirect, or potential conflicts of interest with respect to the Consultant, its management, or any employees in relation to the services to be provided under the Agreement. This includes confirmation that there are no real or perceived conflicts associated with this project, the Scope of Services, or any prior or current work for the City of Pinole.
b) A statement acknowledging compliance with the Levine Act. Consultants are required to disclose on the record any contribution of more than $250 made to a City Council and within the twelve-month period preceding any subsequent procurement based on and within the twelve-month
period preceding any subsequent procurement based on
this RFP. This applies to the proposing firm, any team
member, agents of the firm or team members, and major
shareholders of any closely held corporation participating on the team. If you have made a contribution that needs to be disclosed you must provide written notice of the
date, amount and receipt of the contribution(s) to the City Manager.
NORESCO acknowledges and affirms compliance with the
Levine Act and further affirms that there are no contributions to disclose.
c) Ability and agreement to fulfill the indemnification and insurance requirements contained in the standard
contract.
We have reviewed the indemnification and insurance
requirements set forth in the standard contract and confirm our ability and agreement to fully comply with these
provisions. We maintain all required insurance coverages and limits as specified and will provide certificates of insurance and any additional documentation upon request. d) A statement that nothing contained in the submitted
proposal is proprietary. Proposals must not include
copyrighted, confidential, or trade secret material.
NORESCO affirms that nothing contained in the submitted proposal is proprietary. The proposal does not include any copyrighted, confidential, or trade secret material.
e) Acknowledgement that the Consultant understands
that all documents submitted to the City in connection
with the proposal are subject to the California Public
Records Act and may be disclosed without notice to the
Consultant. This includes all materials submitted during evaluation, negotiation, and contract execution.
NORESCO acknowledges that documents submitted to
the City in connection with this proposal are subject to the California Public Records Act and may be disclosed by the City without notice to NORESCO.
f) A description of any and all proposed exceptions,
alterations, modifications or requested amendments
to the Scope of Services or other requirements of this
RFP, including the Standard Contract (Attachment A).
If no exceptions are proposed, a statement indicating
“Consultant takes no exceptions” must be included.
NORESCO has carefully reviewed the terms and conditions outlined in the RFP and does not have any material
concerns with using them as the basis for a forthcoming agreement. However, if awarded, we would appreciate
the opportunity to discuss a few minor edits to ensure
the Agreement reflects the nature of the work, including removal of references to State/Federal Prevailing Wage
requirements and Professional Seal obligations.
Point of Contact:
Michael Goodrum, P.E., CEM, LEED AP ND, CDP
Project Director
303.459.7401 | [email protected] | www.noresco.com
City
CITY OF PINOLE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
2131 PEAR STREET
PINOLE, CA 94564
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
Permitting Compliance Program and Building
Performance Standard Program
for the City of Pinole
Issue Date: March 16, 2026
RFP Response Deadline: April 6, 2026
Anticipated Contract Award Date: May 5, 2026
Anticipated Start Date of Contract: May 6, 2026
PAGE 2 PERMITTING COMPLIANCE PROGRAM AND BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARD
PROGRAM
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
PERMITTING COMPLIANCE PROGRAM AND BUILDING PERFORMANCE
STANDARD PROGRAM
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this Request for Proposal (RFP) is to invite proposals from qualified firms to assist the City of Pinole with development of both a permitting compliance program and building performance standard program. A permitting compliance program will streamline and simplify the permitting process, reduce administrative burden, decrease permitting evasion, and increase convenience for both permit applicants and building staff. A building performance standard program will establish a standard for energy use per square foot in commercial and industrial buildings over 20,000 square feet. The ultimate purpose of this programs is to achieve the Pinole Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP) goals set for community building decarbonization as well as make progress towards achieving carbon neutrality by 2045.
CITY PROFILE
Pinole is a bayfront community of about 19,000 residents in Contra Costa County, incorporated on June 25, 1903. The City has a land area of more than five square miles and is bordered by Hercules to the North, San Pablo and Richmond to the South, and the unincorporated areas of Tara Hills and El Sobrante to the southeast and southwest of the City.
The City of Pinole is a “full-service” city, meaning that the City provides all of the traditional municipal services (police, land use management, public works, and parks and recreation) to its residents. The City of Pinole also provides residents with some non-traditional municipal services, such as wastewater treatment, community television programming and childcare. The City operates on the City Council-City Manager system of local government with five elected Council members serving four-year terms with a rotating mayor. City Hall hours of operation are 8:00 am to 4:30 pm, Monday through Thursday. City Hall is closed to the public on Fridays.
BACKGROUND
The City of Pinole is advancing community-wide building decarbonization through multiple, coordinated strategies. In 2024, the City launched the Pinole Energy Enhancement Rebate program (PEER) to help offset project cost of various energy-efficiency measures for single-family and multi-family property owners. The City is also developing an all-electric building virtual concierge—a one-stop platform designed to streamline adoption of electrification measures.
PAGE 3 PERMITTING COMPLIANCE PROGRAM AND BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARD
PROGRAM
In tandem, the City is also pursuing reach codes to establish stronger standards that support long-term decarbonization goals. The City also modernized its permitting systems by launching eTRAKiT for online permitting as well as Symbium for instant approval of solar and, just recently, a suite of energy-efficiency permits, significantly improving efficiency and accessibility.
Additionally, the City has allocated funds to issue no-cost permit fees for heat pump water heaters and heat pump HVACs. In tandem, the City is developing a water heater loaner program for homes to make any necessary upgrades to accommodate permanent heat pump water heaters.
The City of Pinole adopted its inaugural CAAP1 in August 2024 to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045, aligning with State goals and reducing the City’s contribution to global emissions. Building energy consumption from fossil fuels makes up approximately 32% of the Pinole community greenhouse gas emissions with building electrification identified as a key strategy.
Central measures in the CAAP’s Building Energy section include • BE-1 Electrify 100% of new construction in the City in 2024 • BE-2 Electrify existing residential buildings to reduce natural gas consumption by 26% by 2030 and 100% by 2045
• BE-3 Electrify existing commercial and mixed-use (i.e., combined commercial and residential) buildings to reduce natural gas consumption 18% by 2030 and 100% by 2045 Actions under these measures to make progress towards these goals include • BE-2j Enforce ordinance compliance through a comprehensive permitting compliance program may include, but it is not limited to:
o Providing dedicated time for routine staff training to incorporate into existing building inspections
o Imposing fees for noncompliance to offset staff costs and encouraging voluntary compliance
o Establishing easy-to-understand web-based compliance checklists and permit applications
o Facilitating online permitting
o Providing zero-cost permit fees for heat pump installations 1 City of Pinole Final Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
PAGE 4 PERMITTING COMPLIANCE PROGRAM AND BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARD
PROGRAM
• BE-3d Develop a building performance standard program to meet a specific level of energy use per square foot for all commercial and industrial buildings over 20,000 square feet.
Implementation and compliance support, including resources and tools which will be implemented through four stages:
1. Pre-development phase – Stage 1 – Staff to receive technical assistance from the Building Technologies Office in the Federal Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE).
Per the EERE, technical assistance may take the form of:
▪ Building stock analyses, including analysis of energy and emission impacts associated with building performance standard adoption
▪ Performance target-setting and trajectories
▪ Measure and technology prioritization and packaging
▪ Cost-effectiveness analyses
2. Data collection phase – Stage 2 – All commercial and industrial building owners with floor area over 20,000 square feet report electricity and natural gas data through energy star portfolio manager
3. Retro commissioning phase – Stage 3 – All covered building owners complete a retro commissioning process to identify and correct system inefficiencies while identifying opportunities for electrification and downsizing of oversized equipment.
4. GHG Performance Standard – Stage 4 – Implement a building performance standard that requires buildings to meet a specific GHG performance level The City was awarded Federal grant funds through the California Energy Commission Local Government Building Decarbonization Challenge to support preparation of these programs. The resulting fixed-fee contract and scope of services will be subject to all grant terms and conditions.
The following tables are being provided to help inform more accurate cost proposals as well as avoid duplicative work in order to ensure efficient spending of public funds. This completed and in progress work must be leveraged where feasible in completion of scope of work.
Table 1: Current and upcoming resources for permitting compliance program development Resource Status Description
San Mateo County
Comprehensive Report on Heat
Complete (please see
attachments)
The report documents the
findings and analysis of inPage 139 of 359
PAGE 5 PERMITTING COMPLIANCE PROGRAM AND BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARD
PROGRAM
Pump Water Heater Permitting
Streamlining
depth research into current
permitting and inspection
processes for heat pump
water heater retrofit
projects across the 21
jurisdictions in San Mateo
County
Marin Clean Energy/Cadmus
Permitting simplification
findings
Underway Marin Clean Energy enlisted
the support of Cadmus to
conduct a study on
streamlining the building
permitting process.
Cadmus interviewed
multiple jurisdictions,
including Pinole, to learn
about challenges and
opportunities from staff.
Interviews with applicants
to learn about their
experience and areas for
improvement at these
jurisdictions were also
conducted.
SPUR Greenlighting Clean Heat
Brief
Complete (please see report
in attachments)
A roadmap for streamlining
and standardizing clean
heating installations, and
hastening building
electrification efforts
Marin County Permit Holiday
feasibility study
Complete (please see report
in attachments)
A July 2025 study details the
feasibility of implementing a
permit feel sale or holiday
by weighing the potential
benefits, costs, and
implementation
considerations.
TECH Public Reporting Permitting
Pilot
Complete ( please see this
link)
This TECH Clean California
report identifies permitting
timelines and challenges for
heat pump water heater
issuance and proposes