Pleasanton City Council
February 6, 2024

CITY COUNCIL

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
Tuesday, February 6, 2024
7:00 PM

City Council Chamber
200 Old Bernal Avenue
Pleasanton, CA 94566

The meeting will be held in-person and via video/teleconference and will be broadcast live on Channel 29 and at https://www.tri-valleytv.org
and https://www.youtube.com/user/TheCityofPleasanton.

Public participation: It is requested that members of the public wishing to address the City Council submit a speaker card. When public comment is opened on an agenda item, individuals may speak once per agenda item.

To submit written public comment regarding an open session item on this meeting agenda visit https://forms.cityofpleasantonca.gov/f/writtenpubliccomment. Comments will be accepted by the City Clerk’s Office until 12:00 p.m. on the day of the Council meeting.

In Person at Council Chamber:
• Submit a physical speaker card to the City Clerk at the meeting. When your name is called, please provide comment at the podium.

CALL TO ORDER
• Pledge of Allegiance
• Remarks by Councilmember Balch
• Roll Call
Resolution No. 2024-002
Ordinance No. 2274

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION

AGENDA AMENDMENTS

CONSENT CALENDAR
Items listed on the consent calendar are considered routine in nature and may be enacted by one motion. If discussion is required, that particular item will be removed from the consent calendar and will be considered separately.

City Manager

1. Approve meeting minutes of December 5, 2023
Community Development

2. Actions of the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission

City Council Agenda Page 2 of 3 February 6, 2024

3. Adopt Ordinance No. 2273 approving the application for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Development Plan to establish development standards and construct tennis court fencing for 2207 Martin Avenue, as filed under case No.

PUD-148
Library and Recreation

4. Approve submittal of an Alameda County Transportation Commission grant application to the 2024 Paratransit Discretionary Grant Program for up to $536,000 in grant funding
Public Works

5. Approve fifth amendment to agreement with Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. for an increase of $57,509 for a total not-to-exceed amount of $317,059 for Water and Sewer Connection Fees Study consulting services

6. Approve third amendment to the agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc. to increase the not-to-exceed amount by $100,000 for Fiscal Year 2023/24 for tree maintenance services

7. Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign and file, on behalf of the City, a Financial Assistance Application for a Financing Agreement from the State Water Resources Control Board for the planning, design, and construction of CIP No. 24174 – Water Supply Alternative (Wells 9 and 10) Project and related authorization

8. Accept public improvements performed by Paulson Cox Construction, Inc. for the Augustin Bernal Mountain Bike Trail Project, CIP No. 20771

9. Accept public improvements performed by Golden Bay Construction, Inc. for the Val Vista Underdrain Improvements Project, CIP No. 21457

MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

10. Presentation of the Alameda County Local Area Formation Commission and update on current activities

11. Public Comment regarding items not listed on the agenda – Speakers are limited to 3 minutes.

PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS
If necessary to ensure completion of the following items, the Mayor may alter time limits.

12. Receive a presentation on the Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment and accept the final report

City Council Agenda Page 3 of 3 February 6, 2024

13. Accept the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) and other related audits for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2023

MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL

COUNCIL REPORTS
Brief reports on conferences, seminars, and meetings attended by the Council

ADJOURNMENT

Notice
Under Government Code §54957.5, any writings/documents regarding an open session item on this agenda and items received by the City Clerk’s Office by 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting provided to a majority of the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet will be available for public inspection on the City’s website https://www.cityofpleasantonca.gov/ and also at the Pleasanton Library located at 400 Old Bernal Ave., Pleasanton, CA 94566.

There is a 90-day limit for the filing of a challenge in the Superior Court to certain City administrative decisions and orders, which require a hearing by law, the receipt of evidence, and the exercise of discretion. The 90-day limit begins on the date the decision is final (Code of Civil Procedure § 1094.6). Further, if you challenge an action taken by the City Council in court, you may be limited, by California law, including but not limited to Government Code §65009, to raising only those issues you or someone else raised in the public hearing, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council prior to or at the public hearing. The City Council may be requested to reconsider a decision if the request is made prior to the next City Council meeting, regardless of whether it is a regular or special meeting.

Accessible Public Meetings
The City of Pleasanton can provide special assistance for persons with disabilities to participate in public meetings. To make a request for a disability-related modification or accommodation (e.g., an assistive listening device), please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 123 Main Street, Pleasanton, CA 94566 or (925) 931-5027 at the earliest possible time. If you need sign language assistance, please provide at least two working days’ notice prior to the meeting date.

Item #1

CITY OF PLEASANTON

CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES
December 5, 2023

CLOSED SESSION

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Brown called the meeting to order at the hour of 6:00 p.m. from the Remillard Conference Room located at 3333 Busch Road.

ROLL CALL

Present: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Nibert, Testa, Mayor Brown

Absent: None

PUBLIC COMMENT
Mayor Brown opened public comment. There being no speakers, Mayor Brown closed public comment.

ADJOURN TO CLOSED SESSION

1.PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION per Gov’t Code §54957(b):

Title: City Attorney

2.CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS per Gov’t Code §54957.6:

Agency designated representatives: Veronica Thomas (Director of Human Resources and Labor Relations), Xaviera Scoggins
Unrepresented employee: City Attorney

ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.

REGULAR MEETING

CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Brown called the meeting of the City Council to order at the hour of 7:05 p.m. from the Remillard Conference Room located at 3333 Busch Road.

Councilmember Balch provided opening remarks.

ROLL CALL

Present: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Nibert, Testa, Mayor Brown

Absent: None

REPORT ON CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney, Dan Sodergren, stated there was no reportable action.

City Council Minutes Page 2 of 8 December 5, 2023

AGENDA AMENDMENTS
Staff requested item 13 be heard before the consent calendar. The City Council agreed to the amendment.

Councilmember Balch requested to pull item 5 from the consent calendar for further discussion and continue item 10 to the next meeting.

Item 13. Business Anniversary Recognition
Lisa Adamos, Economic Development Manager introduced the item and presented the businesses recognized for their 20-, 25-, and 30-year anniversaries in the city.

CONSENT CALENDAR
City Manager

1. Adopt and waive second reading of an ordinance amending Chapter 6.28 of the Municipal Code regarding consolidation of the newsracks located in the Pleasanton downtown area *Councilmember Testa voted “no”
Recommendation: Waive the second reading and adopt Ordinance No. 2248 amending Chapter

6.28 of the Municipal Code regarding consolidation of newsracks located in the Pleasanton downtown area.

2. Adopt a resolution setting the 2024 calendar year City Council meeting schedule Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 23-1436 setting the 2024 calendar year City Council meeting schedule with 20 regular meetings.

3. Approve meeting minutes of October 3, October 9, 2023 Recommendation: Approve the meeting minutes.

Community Development

4. Actions of the Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve the report.

5.Pulled for discussion – Introduce an Ordinance to amend the Stoneridge Shopping Center Development Agreement, for a previously approved approximately 362,790-square-foot shopping center expansion, to extend the term for one year with an option to extend for an additional year subject to the completion of performance standards, and waive the first reading Recommendation:

1. Introduce and waive the first reading of Ordinance No. 2249 to amend the Stoneridge Shopping Center Development Agreement, for a previously approved approximately 362,790- square-foot shopping center expansion, to extend the term for one year with an option to extend for an additional year subject to the completion of performance standards.

City Council Minutes Page 3 of 8 December 5, 2023

2. Find the proposed Fifth Amendment to the Stoneridge Shopping Center Development Agreement to be exempt from further review the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and CEQA Guidelines section 15183

6. Approve professional services agreement with Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. to conduct a comprehensive study of the City’s Development Impact Fees, Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance, and Affordable Housing Fee, for a total cost of $203,928 and approve budget amendments in the General Fund and the Lower Income Housing Fund and authorize the City Manager to approve administrative amendments to the agreement
Recommendation:

1. Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the attached Professional Services Agreement EPS for $203,928, with a term through December 31, 2024.

2. Authorize the City Manager to amend the Agreement to update the term and scope of work/ as necessary.

3. Amend the FY 2023/24 Budget Appropriation for:
a. The General Fund by increasing the Community Development Department’s Professional Services Budget by $136,572 and decreasing the fund balance by $136,572; and b. The Lower Income Housing Fund by increasing the Professional Services Budget by $67,356 and decreasing the fund balance by $67,356.

Finance

7. Adopt a resolution finding that certain development impact fees subject to AB1600 and SB1693 are unexpended after five years and the funds are committed to particular projects Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 1437 finding that certain development impact fees subject to AB 1600 and SB 1693 are unexpended after five years and the funds are committed to particular projects.

Library and Recreation

8. Approve a 10-year agreement with Lifetime Tennis, Inc. (DBA Lifetime Activities, Inc.) For tennis operations and maintenance
Recommendation: Approve a 10-year agreement with Lifetime Tennis, Inc. (DBA Lifetime Activities, Inc.) For tennis operations and maintenance
Public Works

9. Approve the purchase of a GM5900 T4 Mower in the amount of $167,158 Recommendation: Approve the purchase of the TORO Groundsmaster 5900 (GM5900) T4 Final, full-time bi-directional 4WD in the amount of $167,158, which includes a 10 percent contingency.

10.Continued to December 19, 2023 – Approve first amendments to the as-needed maintenance and trade services agreements by increasing the total not-to-exceed amounts to $1,200,000 for Pipe and Plant Solutions Inc. and $750,000 for Presidio Systems, Inc. for Utilities-Sewer/Storm flushing and Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) services
Recommendation:

1. Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute an amendment to the as-needed

City Council Minutes Page 4 of 8 December 5, 2023
maintenance and trade services agreement with Pipe & Plant Solutions, Inc. to increase the not-to-exceed amount by $700,000 for sewer CCTV service to revise the total not-to-exceed agreement limit from $500,000 to $1,200,000 for FY 2023/24.

2. Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment to the as-needed maintenance and trade services agreement with Presidio Systems, Inc. to increase the not-to- exceed amount by $250,000 for sewer and storm cleaning services to revise the total not-to- exceed agreement limit from $500,000 to $750,000 for FY 2023/24.

11. Approve second amendment to agreement with GHD, Inc. to provide workflow consulting services for the City's Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (CMMS) by increasing the not-to- exceed amount by $140,300 for a total not-to-exceed amount of $616,622 Recommendation: Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the second amendment to the Professional Services Agreement with GHD, Inc., for the City's Computerized Maintenance Management Systems (CMMS), increasing the not-to-exceed amount by $140,300, including a 15 percent contingency for a total not-to-exceed amount of $616,622.

12. Accept public improvements performed by DPI for the Annual Water System Distribution Improvements Project, CIP No. 23183
Recommendation:

1. Accept the project as complete and authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion.

2. Authorize release of the retention in the amount of $29,029 to DPI, Inc. 30 days after the recordation of the Notice of Completion.

3. Authorize the return of the project’s balance of $178,017 to the Water Replacement Fund(Fund 421)
MOTION: It was m/s by Arkin/Balch to approve the consent calendar as recommended with modifications to item 2 to remove the meeting on April 2, 2024 and replace July 2 with a meeting on July 16, 2024, and to exclude items 5 and 10 from the consent calendar. Councilmember Testa noted her “no” vote on item 1 to carry forward from ordinance introduction. Motion passed by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Nibert, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None

Absent: None

MEETING OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

13. Business Anniversary Recognition – item heard before Consent Calendar.

14. Presentation of new City website
Sharon Petrehn, Management Analyst, gave the presentation. Councilmembers asked questions and provided comments.

15. Public Comment regarding items not listed on the agenda Mayor Brown opened public comment. The following individuals provided comments: Arne Olson.

Mayor Brown closed public comment.

City Council Minutes Page 5 of 8 December 5, 2023

PUBLIC HEARINGS AND OTHER MATTERS

16.Continued from November 7, 2023 – Introduce an ordinance to add a new Chapter 9.06 Leaf Blower Restrictions to the Municipal Code to ban gasoline-powered leaf blowers effective June 1, 2024, and waive first reading
Recommendation: Introduce and waive the first reading of Ordinance No. 2250 to add a new Chapter 9.06 Leaf Blower Restrictions to the Municipal Code to ban gasoline-powered leaf blowers effective June 1, 2024.

Diego Mora, Associate Planner, presented the item. Diego Mora, Ellen Clark, and Giacomo Damonte responded to questions from the Council.

Mayor Brown opened the public hearing. The following individuals provided comment: Jim Van Dyke, Vicki LaBarge, Sharon Piekarski, Ron Baskett, Phil Bowman, Jerry Johnston.

Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.

MOTION: It was m/s by Arkin/Testa to approve the item as recommended. Motion passed by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Nibert, Testa, Mayor Brown
Noes: Balch

Absent: None
The Mayor recessed the meeting at 9:05 p.m. and reconvened the meeting at 9:14 p.m.

17. Receive a report on revenue measure outreach and polling results Recommendation: Receive a presentation on revenue measure polling results and provide direction for staff to engage in community outreach to further explore a revenue measure.

Susan Hsieh, Finance Director, Bonnie Moss with Clifford Moss, and Curt Below with FM3, presented the item and responded to questions from the Council.

Mayor Brown opened the public hearing. The following individuals provided comment: Jason Hunter, Craig Freeman, John Engelbrekston.

Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.

Motion: It was m/s by Brown/Nibert to direct staff to move forward with engagement to further explore a revenue measure. Motion passed by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Nibert, Testa, Mayor Brown
Noes: Councilmember Balch

Absent: None
At 10:35 p.m., by majority consensus, the City Council continued item 19 to be heard at the next City Council meeting.

18. Introduce and waive first reading of an ordinance approving amendments to create a Housing Opportunity Zone District and Rezone all applicable Housing Project Sites identified in the Housing Element to this District and codifying the Objective Design Standards housing sites

City Council Minutes Page 6 of 8 December 5, 2023
compliance review process
Recommendation: Introduce and waive the first reading of Ordinance Nos. 2251 through 2272.

1. Find the proposed municipal code amendments and HOZ District rezonings consistent with the General Plan and specifically, the Housing Element.

2. Introduce and waive the first reading of Ordinance Nos. 2251-2272 approving Case Nos.

P23-0607 and P23-0608, the two draft Municipal Code text amendments, and zoning unit maps.

Eric Luchini, Senior Planner, presented the item.

The City Attorney advised that recusals would be needed from Councilmember Balch and Councilmember Testa should there be questions or discussion specific to the sites 4750 First Street or 3999 Bernal Avenue due to Councilmember Balch residing within 500 feet of housing opportunity site located at 3999 Bernal Avenue and Councilmember Testa residing within 500 feet of housing opportunity site at 4750 First Street.

The Mayor inquired whether the City Council had any questions or discussion specifically regarding either of the sites at 3999 Bernal Avenue or 4750 First Street sites. There being none, no recusals were made.

Councilmembers asked clarifying questions regarding other sites.

Mayor Brown opened the public hearing. There being no speakers, Mayor Brown closed the public hearing.

Motion: It was m/s by Balch/Nibert to approve Ordinance No. 2272 and the findings as recommended creating the Housing Opportunity Zone District and the Objective Design Standards Housing Sites Compliance Review Process. Motion passed by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Nibert, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None

Absent: None
Councilmember Testa recused from the meeting prior to being action taken regarding the site at 4750 First Street.

Motion: It was m/s by Balch/Nibert to approve the rezone of the site located at 4750 First Street (Ordinance No. 2263). Motion passed by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Nibert, Mayor Brown
Noes: None
Absent/Recuse: Councilmember Testa
Councilmember Testa returned to the meeting.

Councilmember Balch recused from the meeting prior to action being taken regarding the site at 3999 Bernal Avenue.

Motion: It was m/s by Arkin/Nibert to approve the rezone of the site located at 3999 Bernal Avenue (Ordinance No. 2266). Motion passed by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Nibert, Mayor Brown
Noes: None

City Council Minutes Page 7 of 8 December 5, 2023
Absent/Recuse: Councilmember Balch
Councilmember Balch returned to the meeting.

Amended Motion: It was m/s by Balch/Arkin approve rezone of all other remaining properties, except for Site 27 Vineyard Avenue – PUSD, (Ordinance Nos. 2251, 2252, 2253, 2254, 2255, 2256, 2257, 2258, 2259, 2260, 2261, 2262, 2265, 2267, 2268, 2269, 2270, 2271). Motion passed by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Nibert, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None

Absent: None
Amended Motion: It was m/s by Balch/Nibert to approve the rezone of site 27 Vineyard Avenue – PUSD (Ordinance No. 2264) and to encourage staff to work with the property owner to meet the City’s policy regarding park or open space. Motion passed by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Nibert, Mayor Brown
Noes: Councilmember Testa

Absent: None

19.Continued to December 19, 2023 – Receive a report on the Water System Master Plan

20.Item 5 from Consent Calendar – Introduce and waive the first reading of an Ordinance to amend and extend the Stoneridge Shopping Center Development Agreement (DA), governing a previously approved approximately 362,790-square-foot shopping center expansion, for one year, with a City Manager option to extend the DA for one additional year subject to the completion of performance standards set forth in this fifth amendment Recommendation:

1. Find the proposed Fifth Amendment to the Stoneridge Shopping Center Development Agreement to be exempt from further review the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21083.3 and CEQA Guidelines section 15183.

2. Introduce and waive first reading of Ordinance No. 2249 to amend and extend the agreement as set forth in the Fifth Amendment and direct the City Manager to execute the same
Eric Luchini, Senior Planner, presented the item.

Ellen Clark, Community Development Director, and City Manager Beaudin responded to questions from the City Council.

Mayor Brown opened public comment. The following individuals provided comment: Simon Properties representative Cecily Barclay, JCP representative Kameron Klotz, and Dean Wallace.

Mayor Brown closed public comment.

The City Council asked questions of staff.

Mayor Brown re-opened public comment. The following individual provided comment: Kameron Klotz for Councilmembers to ask clarifying questions.

Mayor Brown closed public comment.

City Council Minutes Page 8 of 8 December 5, 2023
The Council discussed options on how to proceed.

Motion: It was m/s by Arkin/Balch to amend the ordinance to extend the terms of the Development Agreement for 6 months until July 1, 2024, removing section 7 in its entirety, removing section 19.16 and all references to 19.16, and renumbering the remaining sections in the document accordingly. Motion passed by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Arkin, Balch, Nibert, Testa, Mayor Brown Noes: None

Absent: None

MATTERS INITIATED BY COUNCIL
Councilmember Balch requested reconsideration of virtual public comment for discussion at a future City Council meeting. The request failed for lack of majority consensus.

COUNCIL REPORTS
Councilmembers reported on regional and local agency meetings attended.

ADJOURNMENT
The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 12:45 a.m.

Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk

Item #2

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
February 6, 2024
Community Development
TITLE: ACTIONS OF THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR AND PLANNING

COMMISSION
P23-0899, David Mena/Mena Architects
Application for Design Review approval to add a new rollup door to the north side of the building, a new exterior door on the south side of the building, and minor changes to existing landscape to accommodate the project at the existing commercial building located at 3938 Valley Avenue.

Approved. (44 days)
P23-995, Sundarsan Krishnan & Savitha Sridharan
Application for Administrative Design Review approval to construct an approximately 488-square-foot, single-story addition in the front of the existing house and for an approximately 41-square-foot new front entry porch located at 2122 Corte Ricardo Court.

Project Information:

Existing floor area: 1,950 square feet
Total floor area with addition: 2,438 square feet
Lot size: 6,860 square feet
Existing floor area ratio: 28.43 percent
Total floor area ratio with addition: 35.54 percent
Approved. (8 days)
P23-1009, Tony Meo/Custom Residential Design
Application for Administrative Design Review approval to construct an approximately 500-square-foot single-story addition, an approximately 78-square-foot, second-story addition and a second-story balcony to the right (east) of the existing residence located at 4256 Brindisi Place.

Project Information:

Existing floor area: 3,671 square feet
Total floor area with addition: 4,249 square feet
Lot size: 26,760 square feet
Existing floor area ratio: 13.72 percent

Total floor area ratio with addition: 15.88 percent
Approved. (16 days)
P23-1002, Pat Ruvalcaba/PJR Design Associates
Application for Administrative Design Review approval to construct an approximately 11 feet 4-inch tall open pergola in the rear yard of the residence located at 5846 Corte Margarita.

Approved. (15 days)
P23-0994, Terry Townsend
Application for Administrative Design Review approval to demolish approximately 395 square feet at the rear of an existing historic residence and construct an approximately 823-square-foot first-story addition to the rear of the existing historic residence located at 1162 Division Street.

Project Information:

Existing floor area: 1,999 square feet
Total floor area with addition: 2,427 square feet
Lot size: 11,288 square feet
Existing floor area ratio: 17.71 percent
Total floor area ratio with addition: 21.50 percent
Approved. (9 days)
Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Melinda Denis
Zoning Administrator
Ellen Clark
Director of Community
Development
Gerry Beaudin
City Manager

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Item #3
February 6, 2024
Community Development
TITLE: ADOPT ORDINANCE NO. 2273 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE

CITY OF PLEASANTON APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED UNIT

DEVELOPMENT (PUD) DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND CONSTRUCT TENNIS COURT FENCING FOR 2207 MARTIN AVENUE, AS FILED UNDER CASE NO. PUD-148
The foregoing Ordinance No. 2273 was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on January 16, 2024, by the following vote:

Ayes: Councilmembers Balch, Nibert, Vice Mayor Testa
Noes: None

Absent: Mayor Brown
Recused: Councilmember Arkin

ORDINANCE NO. 2273

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON

APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD)

DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ESTABLISH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND CONSTRUCT TENNIS COURT FENCING FOR 2207 MARTIN AVENUE, AS FILED UNDER CASE NO. PUD-148
WHEREAS, on March 17, 2023, Meenu Gochhwal and Ashish Choudhary (“Applicant”) applied for PUD development plan approval under case No. PUD-148 to establish development standards for 2207 Martin Ave (“Property”); and
WHEREAS, the Property is designated Low Density Residential in the General Plan; and WHEREAS, the zoning for the Property is PUD-LDR (Planned Unit Development – Low Density Residential) District; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting of August 23, 2023, with a 5-0 vote, the Planning Commission determined the development plan is appropriate for the site, made the findings, and recommended to the Pleasanton City Council PUD-148 be approved; and WHEREAS, following the August 23, 2023 hearing, staff determined there was a need to clarify and affirm certain details of the Planning Commission’s approval; and, the applicant also submitted further information and requested changes to the conditions of approval. By staff direction, the item was redirected to the Planning Commission to review and affirm the conditions of approval as modified; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting of December 13, 2023, by a 4-1 vote, the Planning Commission determined the development plan is appropriate for the site, made the required findings, and recommended to the Pleasanton City Council PUD-148 be approved; and WHEREAS, on January 16, 2024, the Pleasanton City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on this application and considered all public testimony, agenda reports, and related materials, and the recommendations of City staff and the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, after review of the materials presented, the Pleasanton City Council determined the proposed PUD development plan was consistent with the City’s General Plan and purposes of the PUD ordinance, and by this reference adopted and reaffirmed all the conditions and findings set forth in Planning Commission resolution (Resolution No. PC-2023-18); and WHEREAS, the Pleasanton City Council determined the proposed project was adequately analyzed in the Initial Study/Negative Declaration adopted by the City Council for RZ-97-2 in conformance with the standards of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQ) and no further environmental review is required pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON DOES HERBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The City Council approves case PUD-148, the application of Meenu Gochhwal and Ashish Choudhary for PUD Development Plan approval to establish development standards and construct tennis court fencing for 2207 Martin Avenue, subject to the conditions as shown in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made part of this ordinance by this reference.

SECTION 2. A summary of this ordinance shall be published once within fifteen (15) days after its adoption in “The Valley Times,” a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Pleasanton, and the complete ordinance shall be posted for fifteen (15) days in the City Clerk’s office within fifteen 15) days after its adoption.

SECTION 3. This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after its passage and adoption.

The foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Pleasanton on January 16, 2024 by the following vote.

Ayes: Councilmembers Balch, Nibert, Vice Mayor Testa
Noes: None

Absent: Mayor Brown
Recused: Councilmember Arkin
______________________________
Karla Brown, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

EXHIBIT A

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PUD-148
2207 Martin Avenue
January 16, 2024
The applicant is hereby notified, as part of this approval, that (s)he is required to satisfy and maintain compliance with the conditions of approval below. Where approval by the Director of Community Development, Planning Division, Director of Engineering/City Engineer, City Attorney, Chief Building and Safety Official, Fire Department or other City staff is required, review shall be for compliance with all applicable conditions of approval, adopted policies and guidelines, ordinances, laws and regulations, and accepted practices related to the approval. In addition to complying with the conditions below, the applicant is required to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws that pertain to this project, whether or not specifically noted herein.

This approval is granted for a Planned Unit Development approval to establish development standards for an existing single-family residence zoned PUD (Planned Unit Development) - LDR (Low Density Residential) and construct tennis court fencing at the rear of the property at Assessor Parcel No. 946-1146-46 at 2207 Martin Avenue. Development shall be substantially as shown on the project materials listed below:
a. Project narrative and plan, Exhibit B, prepared by Meenu Gochhwal and Ashish Choudhary, owners, dated “Received” on June 17, 2023 and November 20, 2023 and kept on file in the Planning Division of the Community Development Department.

The project materials listed above are collectively the “Approved Development Plan.” THIS APPROVAL IS GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

1. APPROVAL AND REVISIONS: All development on the subject parcel shall be in substantial conformance with the “Approved Development Plan”, except as modified by the following conditions. See Condition No. 4 below.

2. LIABILITY AND INDEMNIFICATION: To the extent permitted by law, the project applicant shall hold harmless, defend (with counsel acceptable to the City), and indemnify the City, its City Council, its officers, commissions, employees and agents from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and/or the applicant to attack, set aside, or void the approval of the project or any permit authorized hereby for the project, including without limitation, reimbursing the City its attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in defense of the litigation.

The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice.

PLANNING DIVISION – 925-931-5600
Site Development and Building Design

3. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: Primary (existing single-family residence) and accessory structures uses shall be those of the R-1-40,000 (One-Family Residential) District of the Pleasanton Municipal Code. Project Specific Condition

4. TENNIS COURT: The tennis court, including tennis court fencing, shall be subject to the following development standards:
a. Allow fencing approximately 10-feet maximum in height at the front and rear (narrow) ends of the tennis court.
b. Allow fencing approximately 8-feet maximum in height on the long sides of the tennis court, extending from the 10-foot-high corner poles to the service lines. c. Vining vegetation will be planted to grow along the tennis court fencing, and tall, 5- gallon minimum vegetation, will be placed between the court and property line fencing.
d. Applicant and neighbor will share repair costs of an approximately 7-foot-high solid wood fence along the property line between 2207 Martin Avenue and 3520 Dennis Drive. If the neighbors have not shared costs to pay for the repairs within six months of the effective date of this approval, the applicant shall be relieved of this condition. e. Tennis court lighting above eight feet in height shall require Administrative Design Review.

Project Specific Condition
END

Item #4

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

February 6, 2024
Library and Recreation

TITLE: APPROVE SUBMITTAL OF AN ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION GRANT APPLICATION TO THE 2024 PARATRANSIT
DISCRETIONARY GRANT PROGRAM FOR UP TO $536,000 IN GRANT

FUNDING

SUMMARY
The Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC) recently initiated a call for proposals for its 2024 Paratransit Discretionary Grant Program (PDGP) to solicit applications for transportation programs that will improve the transportation system. The funding is available for five years, over Fiscal Years (FY) 2024/25 through 2028/29; ACTC has an estimated $12 million to allocate for projects. To meet the January 31, 2024, application deadline, staff submitted a grant application requesting $536,000 for the five-year cycle for the Pleasanton Rides Program and is requesting the City Council's approval. The funding request would supplement current Measure BB paratransit funding to add a driver to the program and purchase a second fully electric vehicle to be added to the fleet.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve submittal of an Alameda County Transportation Commission grant application for the 2024 Paratransit Discretionary Grant Program for up to $536,000 in grant funding.

BACKGROUND
In recent years, the City has reconfigured the Pleasanton Rides program, formerly the Pleasanton Paratransit Service. Reconfiguration followed recommendations from the 2019 Mobility Forward – Tri-Valley Paratransit Study. It included a service agreement with Black Tie Transportation (executed in February 2020) to provide Pleasanton Rides service to Pleasanton residents aged 70 years and older and a Memorandum of Understanding with Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (executed in January 2023) to offer Americans with Disabilities Act qualified rides to Pleasanton residents aged 18 years and older. ACTC’s Measure BB funds fund both agreements.

DISCUSSION
The funding provided by this ACTC grant would provide an additional driver for the program two days per week and fund the purchase of a second fully electric vehicle.

Adding a driver two days per week would allow the City’s Pleasanton Rides contractor to increase the one-way ride output by 1,300 per year to meet growing demand. Since moving Pleasanton Rides to a contract operator, the annual rides have increased year-over-year, with an average of 37 percent more rides each year. In the first six months of FY 2023/24, the service averaged nine new riders per month. Additional service availability would allow the contractor to continue to improve the service that keeps over 900 Pleasanton senior citizens on the move. Staff estimates the cost for adding a driver for two days of service to be $67,000 for FY

2024/25 and increasing by 3 percent each year, to $69,010 in FY 2025/26, $71,081 in FY 2026/27, $73,212 in FY 2027/28, and $75,409 in FY 2028/29. This amount covers the cost of the additional driver and the vehicle maintenance incurred on the proposed two days.

Adding a second fully electric vehicle to the Pleasanton Rides fleet would contribute to the City’s Climate Action Plan 2.0 and the Alameda Countywide Transportation Plan by advancing clean energy and contributing to a climate-resilient Alameda County. Should the grant funding be awarded, staff proposes purchasing a second electric vehicle at an estimated cost of $180,000, including contingencies, in FY 2025/26.

ACTC will review grant applications and award funding in late spring 2024 for the five-year cycle beginning with FY 2024/25 project funding. Staff requests retroactive approval from the City Council for its submittal to meet the January 31, 2024, application deadline. Staff will withdraw the application if the City Council does not approve.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Approval of this item would expand equitable access to senior transportation in Pleasanton as well as lower daily vehicle emissions, as recommended by the City’s Climate Action Plan 2.0.

OUTREACH
No outreach was conducted, as this item is an administrative matter of City business.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This action advances the ONE Pleasanton Strategic Plan goals of Building a Community where Everyone Belongs, Strategy 3 – Implement high-priority items from the Library and Recreation Department Strategic Plan; and Investing in Our Environment, Strategy 6 – Continue to implement priority items from the Climate Action Plan 2.0 to lead by example in environmental sustainability. This action also advances Library and Recreation Strategic Plan Goal D Organizational Effectiveness and Talent Management, Strategy 2 - Prioritize and implement recommendations based on findings in the paratransit study.

FISCAL IMPACT
The grant requires a 12 percent local match for the vehicle and 50 percent for operations; the grant also requires a commitment to using Measure BB reserves. If the full grant request is funded at $536,000, the City’s match would be $21,600 for the vehicle and $177,856 for operations ($199,456 in total). The City’s portion of the funding would come from the Measure BB reserve for paratransit which has a current fund balance of $337,338. City matching fund requirements would be spread over the five-year grant term and the City will continue to receive its annual Measure BB paratransit allocation.

ACTC anticipates grant awards in late spring, 2024 and should execute funding agreements within three to four months of the announcement. If the funding application is successful, staff will recommend the City Council approval the agreement and authorize any necessary budget actions, including appropriation of funds necessary for local match and amendments to revenue and expenditure budgets to account for the grant funding.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Jay Ingram, Recreation
Manager
Heidi Murphy, Director of Library and
Recreation

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

None

Item #5

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

February 6, 2024
Public Works - Operations Division

TITLE: APPROVE FIFTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT WITH RAFTELIS FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS, INC. FOR AN INCREASE OF $57,509 FOR A TOTAL NOT-TO- EXCEED AMOUNT OF $317,059 FOR WATER AND SEWER CONNECTION FEES

STUDY CONSULTING SERVICES

SUMMARY
The City Council initially awarded a professional services contract to Raftelis in 2019 and subsequently approved four amendments to the agreement, to extend the term and to augment the scope of work to include the capital and operating costs for the original PFAS project, drought rates and connection fees study. The proposed fifth amendment is to prepare a water and sewer connection fees study. This will increase the total contract by $57,509 for a new not-to-exceed total of $317,059.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the contract with Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. by an increase of $57,509, to an amount not-to-exceed $317,059, to prepare a water and sewer connection fees study.

BACKGROUND
The City awarded a contract to Raftelis Financial Consultants, Inc. (Raftelis) in September 2019 to conduct water and sewer rate studies. City staff and Raftelis were expecting to complete the rate studies in mid-2020 but delayed the study due to the pandemic, and the City's desire to have water rate models include new capital and operating costs associated with Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the City's groundwater supply, which were not expected to be known until spring 2021.

On September 1, 2020, City Council approved the first amendment to extend the contract date and increase the not to exceed amount by $30,700 to add to the scope of work to include new capital and operating costs associated with PFAS in the City's groundwater supply. On June 15, 2021, the City Council received a presentation on the Basis of Design Report (BOD) prepared by Carollo Engineers and approved finalizing the project design. On September 7, 2021, City Council approved a PFAS funding plan, after which staff and Raftelis restarted the water and sewer rate study, which incorporated $46 million for the rate-funded portion of the PFAS project. On October 15, 2021, the City Council approved the second amendment extending the contract date.

On December 21, 2021, the City Council approved a third amendment to this agreement to increase the scope to include drought rates and water and sewer connection fees, which increased the total contract by $74,000 for a total not-to-exceed amount of $213,400. On September 6, 2022, Council directed staff to pause the PFAS project and to evaluate other water supply alternatives. Accordingly, the rate study was also paused as it included funding

for the PFAS project.

On April 18, 2023, the City Council approved a fourth amendment to this agreement to increase the scope to include updating the water rate models and preparing a water rate study, which increased the total contract by $46,150 to an amount not-to-exceed $259,550.

DISCUSSION
On November 7, 2023, Council approved water and sewer rate adjustments, completing the water rate component scope of work in Raftelis’ agreement. These Council-approved rate adjustments will help the City maintain adequate funding for the operations and maintenance of the water system, partially replenish the reserves to Council-approved reserve levels, and better position the City to pursue future debt financing.

The second amendment included funds for a water and sewer connection fees study in addition to both the drought rates plus the water rate study; however, due to the extensive public outreach and the timing of the City Council's approval of the rates which necessitated an additional Council meeting, another amendment is needed to fund the connection fees study.

Raftelis’ proposal is $50,008, which, with a 15 percent contingency, is a total of $57,509.

Therefore, staff is recommending a fifth amendment to the agreement to increase the total contract by $57,509 to an amount not to exceed $317,059 to complete the water and sewer connection fees study.

The tentative timeline and proposed tasks are:

Date Action
February 6, 2024 Council consideration of proposed amendment March - May Task 1: Project management, Kick-off meeting, data collection, and QA/QC
May Task 2: Water and sewer connection fees
June - August Task 3: Draft and Final PowerPoint Presentation

Raftelis has extensive experience conducting water and sewer connection fee studies and, as noted previously, this study is already included in the agreement's scope of work. Notably, the water and sewer connection fee study will be completed over the coming six months concurrent with the schedule for the development impact fee study, for which adoption is planned in August 2024 (with two workshops with the City Council scheduled in the interim).

To complete this review and analysis, the Raftelis contract needs to be increased by $57,509 to an amount not-to-exceed $317,059 for the water and sewer connection fees study. As presented as Attachment 1, the proposed fifth amendment with Raftelis accomplishes these objectives.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
As a full-service municipality, the City provides a wide range of services and programs to meet the needs of all members of the community. Completion of the water and sewer connection fee study will provide information intended to support the fiscal sustainability of the City's enterprise funds.

OUTREACH
As the development of the water and sewer connection fees study continues to progress, updates will be provided during scheduled City Council meetings so that the public will be fully informed and have a forum to provide feedback. Additionally, the City will be convening a water advisory group to provide additional input as the study progresses.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the ONE Pleasanton strategic plan goal of Funding our Future, Strategy 3 - Evaluate and update enterprise revenue sources, including utility rates, and connection and user fees to address growth and meet current needs.

FISCAL IMPACT
The Water and Sewer Funds FY 2023/24 and FY 2024/25 proposed budgets include sufficient funds to cover the increased $57,509 in contract costs.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Tamara Baptista, Assistant Dir. of
Public Works - Operations &
Maintenance
Norm Dorais, Interim Director of
Public Works

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Fifth Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with Raftelis

Contract # 2020206
Fifth Amendment Page 1

FIFTH AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
Thi
s Fifth Amendment to Agreement ("Fifth Amendment") is entered into this ___ day of February 2024 by the City of Pleasanton ("City") and Raftelis Financial Consultants (“Consultant”).

Wh
ereas, on September 3, 2019 the City and Consultant entered into Professional Services Agreement for water and sewer rate study services, as amended by a First Amendment dated September 01, 2020 to expand the scope of services and extend the terms, a Second Amendment dated October 15, 2021 to extend the term, a Third Amendment dated December 22, 2021 to increase the compensation and extend the term, and a Fourth Amendment dated May 15, 2023 to increase the compensation and extend the term (collectively the “Agreement”);
Wh
ereas, the parties desire to amend the Agreement by increasing the compensation and expand the scope of services.

Now
, therefore, in exchange for valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

1. Section 4 of the Agreement, “Compensation” is amended to read: Total Compensation for the remaining term of this Agreement for services and reimbursement for cost shall not exceed $317,059, which includes a 15% contingency for unforeseen circumstances and related extra services as determined to be necessary by the City. Payment of such contingency funds is not guaranteed to Consultant unless the City requests in writing such extra services.

2. The Scope of Work is amended to include three additional tasks as outlined in the updated Exhibit A.1, attached hereto.

3. This Fifth Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement. Counterparts may be delivered via facsimile, electronic mail (including pdf or any electronic signature complying with U.S. federal E-Sign Act of 2000 (15 U.S. Code §7001 et seq.), California Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Cal. Civil Code §1633.1 et seq.), or other applicable law) or other transmission method, and any counterpart so delivered shall be deemed to have been duly and validly delivered and be valid and effective for all purposes.

4. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

In
witness whereof, authorized representatives of the parties have executed this Fifth Amendment to the Agreement as of the date and year first above written.

CIT
Y OF PLEASANTON CONSULTANT – Raftelis Financial
_____________________________
By: __________________________
Gerry Beaudin, City Manager Signature

Contract # 2020206
Fifth Amendment Page 2
__________________________
Print name

ATTEST: Title: __________________________

_____________________________ [If Consultant is a corporation, signatures must comply Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk with California Corporations Code §313]

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: __________________________
_____________________________ Signature
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney __________________________

Print name

Title: __________________________

445 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 1925, Los Angeles, CA 90071 www.raftelis.com
January 12, 2024

Ms. Tamara Baptista
Assistant Director of Public Works - Operations and Maintenance City of Pleasanton
P.O. Box 520
Pleasanton, CA 94566

Subject: Proposal for Water and Sewer Connection Fees

Dear Ms. Baptista:

Raftelis is pleased to submit this proposal to update the City of Pleasanton’s (City) water and sewer connection fees (as an amendment to the existing contract with the City for a Water, Recycled Water, and Sewer Rate Study).

The type of data we will request includes and is not limited to the following:
• Most recent detailed fixed asset ledgers for water and sewer showing the in-service dates, gross book value, net book value, accumulated depreciation, and annual depreciation expense for all assets (Excel). If any assets were contributed or funded with grants, please identify them. • Any water and sewer capacity analyses
• Water and sewer master plans
• Water and sewer capital plans and funding sources for the next ten years, including the additional capacity as a result of each project

Enclosed is a scope of work and schedule assuming final connection fees will be presented before the City Council on August 20, 2024. Please contact me should you have any questions or wish to adjust the scope of work.

Sincerely,

Brian C. Bass
Manager

RAFTELIS 1

Scope of Work
Note: We assumed that staff meetings are virtual.

Task 1: Project Management, Kick-Off Meeting, Data Collection and QA/QC
This task includes time for client correspondence, billing, general project scheduling, and time to prepare meeting minutes. We propose gathering the required data and starting the financial model before the kick-off meeting. Therefore, we will make the most of the kick-off meeting by coming prepared with questions. At the kick-off meeting, we will:
• Introduce our project team
• Discuss project drivers
• Establish project goals and objectives
• Finalize the work plan and schedule
• Discuss pricing objectives, including equity, affordability, and revenue stability • Discuss changes to rate structures if desired
• Discuss the data request and any additional data requirements

Before the meeting, we will prepare an agenda and provide staff with presentation materials.

Task 1 also includes time for quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) after each task. A Senior Consultant or equal staff member with at least five years of experience will review the model. Combined with the Project Manager's review, this review will minimize errors and provide alternative perspectives/approaches to the model.

MEETINGS:
• One virtual kick-off meeting and two virtual meetings with staff to research and collect data

DELIVERABLES:
• Data request list, kick-off meeting agenda, presentation materials, and meeting minutes

Task 2: Water and Sewer Connection Fees
Raftelis will calculate water and sewer system development charges (SDCs) (which also go by various names such as connection fees, impact fees, and capacity fees). Raftelis will calculate the SDCs using three different methodologies. The various approaches used to calculate SDCs have largely evolved on the basis of changing public policy, legal requirements, and the unique and special circumstances of each agency. However, three approaches are widely accepted and appropriate for water and wastewater SDCs. The first is the buy-in approach, which rests on the premise that new customers are entitled to service at the same price as existing customers. However, existing customers have already developed the facilities to serve new customers, including the costs associated with financing those services. Under this approach, new customers pay only the amount equal to the net investment already made by existing users. The second approach is the incremental cost approach, where new customers pay for additional capacity requirements, irrespective of the value of past investments made by existing customers. The last approach is a hybrid of the two methodologies mentioned above, acknowledging the relative share of existing capacity available to future users versus the share of additional capacity to be constructed in order to serve new connections.

RAFTELIS 2

Proposed fees will meet applicable regulatory requirements (Government Code 66000). Raftelis will develop a model to calculate the water and sewer connection fees. The model will be developed in Excel and can be used for future updates.

MEETINGS:
• Two City Council Workshops. These workshops will discuss the three primary methodologies used in calculating SDCs. We will help the City select a method based on its goals and objectives for recovering capacity-related capital costs.

DELIVERABLES:
• Calculated water and sewer development fees

Task 3: Draft and Final PowerPoint Presentation
Raftelis will prepare a Draft and Final PowerPoint presentation of the water and sewer connection fees. We will incorporate staff comments into the final version.

MEETINGS:
• Phone calls as needed to discuss the draft PowerPoint presentation • One meeting to present draft connection fees to the City Council in June. • One meeting to present connection fees to the City Council on August 20, 2024.

DELIVERABLES:
• Draft and final electronic copies of the PowerPoint presentation

RAFTELIS 3

Schedule
Below is a proposed schedule that assumes that Raftelis will receive all data by mid-February and be able to schedule meetings as necessary. We endeavor to have draft connection fees for mid to late May.

TASKS

1. Project Management, Kick-off
Meeting, Data Collection, and
QA/QC
  

2. Water and Sewer Connection
Fees  

3. Draft and Final PowerPoint
Presentations  
 In-person Meetings
 Web Meetings
 Deliverables

FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG
2024

RAFTELIS 4

Price Proposal
The following table shows the anticipated hours and hourly rates by staff members. Expenses include costs associated with travel (if required) and a $10 per hour technology charge covering computers, networks, telephones, postage, etc.

KK BB LR Admin Total

1. Project Management, Kick-off
Meeting, Data Collection, and QA/QC 3 4 4 4 4 16 $3,660

2. Water and Sewer Connection Fees 2 22 20 90 0 132 $33,134

3. Draft and Final PowerPoint
Presentations 2 2 16 8 20 0 44 $13,214
5 4 4 2 32 114 4 192
$320 $260 $200 $95
$13,440 $8,320 $22,800 $380 $44,940
Total Fees $44,940
Total Expenses $5,068
Total Fees & Expenses $50,008
Tasks
Web
Meetings
In-person
Meetings
KK - Kevin Kostiuk
BB - Brian Bass
LR - Lindsay Roth
Admin - Administration
Hours
Total Fees &
Expenses
Total Meetings / Hours
Hourly Billing Rate
Total Professional Fees

Item #6

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

February 6, 2024
Public Works - Operations Division

TITLE: APPROVE THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH WEST COAST ARBORISTS, INC. TO INCREASE THE NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT BY $100,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023/24 FOR TREE MAINTENANCE SERVICES

SUMMARY
The City’s urban forest is comprised of more than 26,000 trees located in parks, medians, and municipal building landscapes that require ongoing upkeep and maintenance. In October 2020, the City entered into a three-year agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc. (WCA) for tree maintenance, consulting, and as-needed services with an option to extend the agreement for two additional one-year terms. The original annual amount for FY 2023/24 was amended to increase the not-to-exceed amount by $28,014 (the local consumer price index) to a new total of $695,014. Staff now recommends an amendment to the agreement with WCA by increasing the not-to-exceed amount by $100,000 for FY 2023/24 for a total not-to-exceed amount of $795,014.

The request is to ensure adequate funds are available to complete tree pruning services as needed for upcoming street resurfacing work and to process Heritage Tree Removal Permits in a timely manner while continuing the routine tree pruning that maintains the health and safety of the urban forest. WCA provides on-call certified arborist support services for the Heritage Tree program and performs regular reviews of complex Heritage Tree Removal Permits with City staff.

RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the City Manager to amend the maintenance and as-needed agreement with West Coast Arborist, Inc. by increasing the not-to-exceed amount by $100,000 to $795,014 for FY 2023/24 (to June 30, 2024).

BACKGROUND
The City currently has a contract with WCA to perform various tree services, primarily consisting of tree pruning and tree and stump removal throughout the city in the public right-of- way, street medians, municipal building landscapes, and public parks. Regularly scheduled tree pruning reduces citizen complaints and the number of tree emergencies during storm events. WCA also prunes trees for road resurfacing projects and provides consulting services primarily for reviewing Heritage Tree Removal Permits.

In winter 2023, the City experienced several severe storm events that resulted in more than $149,000 in emergency tree work performed by WCA. As a result of the storm response tree work and associated costs, the City suspended routine tree pruning by WCA for approximately six weeks in FY 2022/23 due to a shortage of funding for the contract.

DISCUSSION
In FY 2023/24, the City is utilizing additional consulting services to administer and support the Heritage Tree program as well as to prune trees to provide clearance for upcoming street resurfacing, which often requires the pruning of private property trees that encroach into the public right-of-way. The proposed increase in the WCA contract for FY 2023/24 will provide the capacity to process Heritage Tree Removal Permits in a timely manner and prune trees for street resurfacing work while continuing the routine tree pruning that maintains the health and safety of the urban forest. Staff is requesting an additional $100,000 as needed to meet the street resurfacing and arboricultural consulting needs for the remainder of this fiscal year.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
The maintenance of the urban forest is essential in meeting the City’s Climate Action Plan 2.0 (CAP) goals in the form of carbon sequestration, oxygen production, and stormwater retention, as a healthy urban forest improves the livability of the city.

OUTREACH
No outreach was conducted, as this item is a routine matter of City business.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the Citywide ONE Pleasanton strategic plan goal of Investing in our Environment, Strategy 6 - Continue to implement priority items from the Climate Action Plan 2.0 (CAP) to lead by example in environmental sustainability.

FISCAL IMPACT
The agreement with West Coast Arborists, Inc. is funded by Parks and Median Renovation (Fund 518) and Urban Forestry (12930101). Staff is recommending $50,000 from Parks and Median Renovation (Fund 518) and $50,000 from Urban Forestry (12930101). Budget amendments will be proposed as part of the mid-year budget update that will be presented to the City Council on February 20, 2024. There are sufficient funds in these two funds to cover the costs.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Giacomo Damonte, Parks
Division Manager
Norm Dorais, Interim Director of Public
Works

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Third Amendment to the As-Needed Agreement with West Coast Arborist, Inc.

Contract #2021231
Third Amendment Page 1

THIRD AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT
This Third Amendment to Agreement ("Third Amendment") is entered into this ____ day of February 2024, by the City of Pleasanton ("City") and West Coast Arborist, Inc ("Contractor”).

Whereas, on October 1, 2020, the City and Contractor entered into a Maintenance and As Needed Services Agreement for tree care and consulting services per R.F.P. OSD 2020-301, as amended by a First Amendment dated July 1, 2023, to extend the term and increase compensation, and a Second Amendment dated August 18, 2023, to increase compensation (collectively the “Agreement"); Whereas, the parties desire to amend the Agreement to increase compensation for Fiscal Year 2023/24 due to unplanned additional work needed in response to heavy storms.

Now, therefore, in exchange for valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows:

1. Section 3 of the Agreement (“Compensation”) the annual not to exceed amount will be increased from $695,014 to $795,014 for Fiscal Year 2023/24.

2. This Third Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which together shall constitute one agreement. Counterparts may be delivered via facsimile, electronic mail (including pdf or any electronic signature complying with U.S. federal E-Sign Act of 2000 (15 U.S. Code §7001 et seq.), California Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Cal. Civil Code §1633.1 et seq.), or other applicable law) or other transmission method, and any counterpart so delivered shall be deemed to have been duly and validly delivered and be valid and effective for all purposes.

3. All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

In witness whereof, authorized representatives of the parties have executed this Third Amendment as of the date and year first above written.

CITY OF PLEASANTON CONSULTANT – West Coast Arborist

_____________________________ By: __________________________ Gerry Beaudin, City Manager Signature
__________________________
Print name
ATTEST: Title: __________________________
_____________________________ [If Contractor is a corporation, signatures must comply Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerkwith California Corporations Code §313]

Contract #2021231
Third Amendment Page 2
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: __________________________
_____________________________ Signature
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney
__________________________
Print name
Title: __________________________

Item #7

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

February 6, 2024
Public Works - Operations Division

TITLE: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO SIGN AND

FILE, ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, A FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE APPLICATION

FOR A FINANCING AGREEMENT FROM THE STATE WATER RESOURCES

CONTROL BOARD FOR THE PLANNING, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION OF CIP NO. 24174 – WATER SUPPLY ALTERNATIVE (WELLS 9 AND 10) PROJECT

AND RELATED AUTHORIZATION

SUMMARY
Through Assembly Bill AB-102, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) authorized the allocation of $1,000,000 to the City for the City Water-Well Construction for Clean Water program. To complete the allocation process, the SWRCB requires a resolution by the governing body to authorize administration of these funds via a Financial Assistance Application. The adoption of the resolution will allow the City to complete the Grant Application for these funds to be used for the selected water supply alternative project of building two new wells.

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign and file a Financial Assistance Application for a financing agreement from the SWRCB for the planning, design, and construction of CIP No. 24174 – Water Supply Alternative (Wells 9 and 10) Project and related authorization.

BACKGROUND
With the discovery in 2019 and 2020 of Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in the City's groundwater wells, the City began to engage in legislative advocacy efforts seeking support and funding to address this issue. The City’s advocacy firm, Townsend Public Affairs, facilitated several conversations with several legislators and their staff, and Mayor Brown followed up with additional discussions with both state and federal legislative representatives.

State Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan responded by submitting a funding request for Pleasanton, and was successful in securing an allocation of $1,000,000 to the City through the SWRCB's City Water-Well Construction for Clean Water program passed by the State Legislature in July 2023.

DISCUSSION
Pursuant to State Assembly Bill AB-102, the SWRCB was authorized by Section 19.562. (c) (3) of the Budget Act of 2023. The process to acquire the funds was outlined to City staff late in 2023. Applications for funding require an adoption of a resolution by the jurisdiction’s governing body to authorize administration of the funds if funding is awarded. Attachment 1 is a resolution that would allow the City to apply for the funding.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Not applicable, as this item is an administrative matter of City business.

OUTREACH
No outreach was conducted, as this item is an administrative matter of City business.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this application advances the Citywide ONE Pleasanton strategic plan goal of Investing in Our Environment, Strategy 3 – Identify funding and implement the recommendations from the Water Supply Alternative Study to resolve PFAS water quality issues.

FISCAL IMPACT
If the application is successful, the total allocation will be $1,000,000, originally scheduled to be received in 2024; however, funds are currently frozen by the Governor as the State works through a 2024 budget shortfall. When funding is received, it will be allocated to CIP No. 24174 – Water Supply Alternative (Wells 9 and 10) Project, bringing the balance to $1.5 million.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Norm Dorais, Interim
Director of Public Works
Norm Dorais, Interim Director of Public
Works

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Resolution

ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON

AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO THE STATE WATER

RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD FOR DIRECTED GRANT ASSISTANCE FOR THE WATER SUPPLY ALTERNATIVES PROJECT FOR WELLS 9 AND 10, AND DESIGNATING THE CITY MANAGER AS THE CITY’S AUTHORIZED

REPRESENTATIVE
WHEREAS, the City of Pleasanton (the “City”) desires and intends to finance expenditures related to the planning, design, and construction Water Supply Alternative (Wells 9 and 10) Project (the “Project”).

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1.Approves this authorizing resolution to complete a Financial Assistance Application for the Project as required by the State Water Resources Control Board.

SECTION 2.Designates Gerry Beaudin, City Manager, (the “Authorized Representative”) or designee, is hereby authorized and directed to sign and file, for and on behalf of the City, a Financial Assistance application for a financing agreement from the State Water Resources Control Board for the Project.

SECTION 3.The Authorized Representative, or designee, is designated to provide for the assurances, certifications, and commitments required for the financial assistance application, including executing a financial assistance agreement from the State Water Resources Control Board and any amendments or changes thereto.

SECTION 4.The Authorized Representative, or designee, is designated to represent the City in carrying out the City’s responsibilities under the financing agreement, including certifying disbursement requests on behalf of the City and compliance with applicable state and federal laws.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Pleasanton at a regular meeting held on February 6, 2024.

I, Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk of the City of Pleasanton, California, certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on the 6th day of February 2024, by the following vote:

Ayes:

Noes:

Absent:

Abstain:
_____________________________
Jocelyn Kwong, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________
Daniel G. Sodergren, City Attorney

Item #8

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

February 6, 2024
Public Works - Engineering Division

TITLE: ACCEPT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PERFORMED BY PAULSON COX CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR THE AUGUSTIN BERNAL MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAIL PROJECT, CIP NO. 20771

SUMMARY
The Augustin Bernal Mountain Bike Trail Project consisted of a 0.7-mile downhill-only mountain bike trail from the upper portion of Augustin Bernal Community Park down to the staging area/parking lot, along with environmental mitigation measures. Construction of the project, which occurred from May to November 2023, is now complete to the satisfaction of the Interim Director of Public Works, and staff recommends the City Council accept the project as complete.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Accept the project as complete and authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion.

2. Authorize release of the retention in the amount of $10,931 to Paulson Cox Construction, Inc. 30 days after the recordation of the Notice of Completion.

3. Authorize the return of the project’s balance of $120,866 to General Trail Improvements and Development, CIP No. 01737 (Fund 222).

BACKGROUND
The Augustin Bernal Mountain bike trail is a one-way, 0.7-mile downhill-only winding “technical” mountain bike trail with banked turns and grade changes extending from the top of Augustin Bernal Park, across a segment of the Golden Eagle Homeowners Association (GEHOA) property and down to the park staging area.

The trail was selected as one of the top trail priorities during the 2019 Trails Master Plan update process to provide mountain bikers with a challenging and fun alternative downhill route to help avoid conflicts between hikers and mountain bikers at Augustin Bernal Park.

Shortly following the approval of the Trails Master Plan, the project was funded as part of the 2019/20 CIP program. The environmental review and design process started in late 2020, with both the environmental documentation and trail design performed by Dudek, and was completed in mid-2022. The City and GEHOA finalized their public trail easement agreement in November 2022, which allowed the trail to cross over the section of GEHOA property between the top of the trail and the parking lot. The Notice of Determination for the project was filed on March 23, 2023, to meet California Environmental Quality Act requirements.

On February 7, 2023, the City Council awarded the construction contract for the Augustin

Bernal Mountain Bike Trail Project, CIP No. 20771, to Paulson Cox Construction, Inc. for $265,617. Council also authorized the Director of Engineering to approve and execute change orders up to the not-to-exceed amount of $53,000; authorized the City Manager to approve Amendment No. 4 to the professional services agreement with Dudek in the amount of $76,319; and approved the transfer of $359,026 from the General Trail Improvements and Development, CIP No. 01737 (Fund 222 – Park Development Impact Fees) to fund construction.

DISCUSSION
Construction of the trail project began on May 15, 2023; the trail was substantially completed on June 21, 2023, and the associated environmental mitigation work was completed in November 2023. Dudek provided a biologist specializing in herpetology (the scientific study of amphibians and reptiles) to be on-site during any clearing or grading work during construction.

A final balancing change order for the project removed $53,500 in trail decommissioning work as the design team determined that fencing at the beginning of decommissioned trails was a sufficient deterrent without fencing at the end of the decommissioned trails. Additionally, the project’s biologist determined that leaving logs and boulders in place, rather than using them to block decommissioned trails, better supported herpetological habitat and that the fencing, “sensitive habitat” signage, and “ripping” the trails (penetrating the compacted soil through mechanical means to break up and loosen the soil) was sufficient mitigation.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
The mountain bike trail was constructed to provide residents with another recreational opportunity and help to alleviate conflicts between hikers, bikers, and equestrians. The downhill-and-mountain-bike-only trail is the first trail of its kind in Pleasanton’s trail system and was designed to address potential erosion issues, improving the trail's sustainability. It is intended to be challenging and enjoyable enough to limit other destructive, unlawful trail construction in the park, limiting environmental damage.

OUTREACH
Signage was posted at the trailhead and in the Augustin Bernal Park parking lot, notifying trail users of the construction project and trail closure. The trail’s construction was posted on the City’s website and shared with the community via social media. Additionally, the Golden Eagle Homeowner’s Association was notified of the trail construction project, and notifications were sent to all property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the project. Staff also met with one of the adjacent property owners to walk the trail to discuss and address their concerns regarding the project.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the ONE Pleasanton strategic plan goal of Investing in Our Environment, Strategy 1 – Implement the four-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to complete design and construction of budgeted capital projects and Strategy 7 – Continue to invest in parks, bicycle, and pedestrian infrastructure, and public art to improve traffic safety, promote climate resilience, and increase equitable access to cultural and recreational opportunities.

FISCAL IMPACT
The construction cost was $218,617, including the original construction contract award of

$265,217, one change order for $6,900, and a balancing change order for a deduction of $53,500. Design services provided by Dudek under a professional services agreement totaled $142,603, including $45,810 for the initial environmental design services, and an additional $96,793 for trail design services, additional environmental and trail design services beyond that previously scoped, and construction support services. A portion of Dudek’s agreement was utilized for Santos Ranch stormwater repairs billed to that project, leaving $24,080 in the agreement. The total available funding for this project was $489,026. The project expenditures, including environmental review, design, construction, and other miscellaneous expenses, totaled $368,160, leaving a balance of $120,866. Staff recommends returning the remaining balance to General Trail Improvements and Development, CIP No. 01737 (Fund 222), as outlined in Attachment 1.

The trail adds 0.7 miles to the roughly 50 miles of City-maintained trails. The maintenance cost of the additional trail is expected to primarily be offset by an “adopt-a-trail” program that staff is developing to maintain this mountain bike trail. However, staff time will be required to create and manage the program, coordinate with volunteers, and provide maintenance assistance as necessary.

All the work and project close-out documentation has been completed to the satisfaction of the Interim Director of Public Works. Staff recommends the City Council accept the project as complete.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Matthew Gruber, Landscape
Architect
Norm Dorais, Interim Director of Public
Works

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Financial Expenditure Summary

ATTACHMENT 1
Project Funding to Date Amount Totals
2019-20 CIP Allocation (Park Development Impact Fee - Fund 222) $130,000 Transfer from CIP No. 01737 CCAR#8 02/07/23 (Park Dev Impact Fee - Fund 222) 359,026

TOTAL PROJECT FUNDING
Project Expenditures to Date
Advertising $875
Dudek - Environmental Design Services 45,810
Dudek - Environmental Design Services (Amendment No. 1-4) 96,793 Paulson Cox Construction, Inc. - Construction Contract 265,217 Paulson Cox Construction, Inc. - Contract Change Order No. 1 & BCO (46,600.00) Miscellaneous Expenses 6,064

TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES
Funding Balance/ (Shortfall)
Current Balance - Return to General Trail Improvements and Development, CIP No. 01737 (Fund 222) $120,866 $489,026
$368,160

MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAIL AT AUGUSTINE BERNAL PARK
CIP NO. 20771
02/06/24

Item #9

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

February 6, 2024
Public Works - Engineering Division

TITLE: ACCEPT PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PERFORMED BY GOLDEN BAY CONSTRUCTION, INC. FOR THE VAL VISTA UNDERDRAIN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT, CIP NO. 21457

SUMMARY
This project diverted recycled irrigation water collected in the soccer field underdrain system to the sanitary sewer to meet the State Water Board’s requirement that recycled irrigation water cannot be discharged into the storm drainage system. The work included the installation of 2,100 feet of new sanitary sewer lines, manhole structures, and two packaged pump stations.

The project also rehabilitated four existing storm drain outfalls and sections of 18- to 48-inch diameter corrugated metal storm drainpipe. The project was competitively bid on and awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, Golden Bay Construction, Inc., by the City Council on January 17, 2023. Construction of the project is complete to the satisfaction of the Interim Director of Public Works, and staff recommends the City Council accept the project as complete.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Accept the project as complete and authorize the City Clerk to file a Notice of Completion.

2. Authorize the release of the retention in the amount of $79,348 to Golden Bay Construction, Inc., 30 days after the recordation of the Notice of Completion.

3. Authorize the return of the project’s balance of $222,227 to the Storm Replacement/Renovation Fund (Fund 441).

BACKGROUND
In 2013, the City converted the irrigation system in Val Vista Park to use recycled water. This was the City’s first use of recycled water and was relatively easy to accomplish due to Val Vista Park’s close proximity to the Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) treatment plant that produces the recycled water. Under the State Water Board’s General Order, the recycled water used for irrigation cannot flow into the storm drain system. Procedures were established to collect and pump recycled water into the sanitary sewer system by plugging the storm drain outfalls. The process was labor intensive and routinely caused the hockey rink and skate park to close, and the outfall piping started to corrode severely. In 2018, a study was performed to determine alternatives to storing and manually pumping the recycled irrigation water to the sanitary sewer system.

On July 14, 2021, City staff authorized a task authorization in the amount of $74,480 under an on-call agreement with Pakpour Consulting Group to create biddable construction documents for the preferred alternative identified in the 2018 study. During the design, it was determined

that a pre-packaged pump station would increase the system's reliability and reduce the staff time necessary to operate and maintain the modified underdrain system. Also, after cleaning and reinspecting the park’s storm drain outfalls, two additional outfalls were identified as needing repairs. On February 1, 2022, the City Council authorized a task authorization amendment for an additional $36,915 to complete the design and prepare biddable construction documents, increasing the total task amount from $74,480 to $111,395.

On January 17, 2023, the City Council awarded the subject project to Golden Bay Construction, Inc. for $1,561,960 and authorized staff to approve and execute project change order(s) for a not-to-exceed project contingency amount of $235,000 (approximately 15 percent), for unforeseen yet necessary related work.

DISCUSSION
The designed system diverts recycled irrigation water collected in the underdrain system to the sanitary sewer for treatment at the DSRSD plant as required by the State Water Board. The system design includes valves that will allow the underdrain system to discharge to the storm drain system during the wet weather season when the irrigation system is disabled. This valving will avoid the expense of unnecessarily sending stormwater to the DSRSD plant for treatment.

The work included the installation of 1,500 linear feet of new eight-inch gravity flow recycled water pipe by open trench and horizontal directional drill operations, 14 new manhole structures, two recycled water package pump stations with electrical and controls systems, and 600 linear feet of new two-and-a-half-inch PVC recycled water force mains by open trench.

The project also rehabilitated four concrete storm drain outfalls, including 570 linear feet of existing 18- to 48-inch-diameter corrugated metal storm drainpipe using a cured-in-place pipe liner.

During construction, there was minimal impact on the Val Vista Community Park’s daily field usage. The park was open to the public during construction and the 2023 sports tournament season.

DSRSD assessed a one-time capacity charge in the amount of $17,367 for diverting the park’s soccer field underdrain recycled water to the sanitary sewer system. The fee was required for the generation of additional flow and treatment of BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand) and SS (Suspended Solids). Annual sewer fees, currently in the amount of $525, will be added to the sewer billing account of Val Vista Park’s concession building for generating extra wastewater flow into the sanitary sewer networks. The annual rates, which include local Pleasanton sewer and regional DSRSD fees, are based on the assumed flow of 220 gallons per day or the equivalent of one dwelling unit.

The City's on-call vendor performed miscellaneous park drainage improvements, including the placement of cobblestone around inlets to prevent larger pieces of bark and mulch from entering the drainage system and the installation of a chain-link fence to enclose the pump control panels securely.

The project greatly reduced the efforts required to store and pump the recycled water as the old manual operation was very labor-intensive and required continuous monitoring.

There will be additional routine annual operation and maintenance costs for the upkeep of the newly installed system. Staff will need to open or close four isolation gate valves at Val Vista Park, depending on the weather and irrigation needs. If debris and sediment build up in the newly installed pipeline, flushing operations will be required to clean the pipeline.

Consultant Services
Pakpour Consulting Group, the project’s design consultant, prepared the plans and specifications, provided construction support services to review shop drawings, responded to requests for information, and provided periodic inspections and design clarifications.

Under an existing on-call materials testing agreement with the City, Geocon Consultants provided testing services. These services included required specialty testing of the materials for the backfill and compaction of the trench backfill associated with the pipeline installation.

Change Orders
During the project's construction, several unforeseen conditions were encountered, requiring four change orders for a total of $25,010, including a balancing change order. The additional work under these change orders is described below:

Change Order No. 1 relocated a streetlight conduit to avoid conflict with a manhole installation.

The existing streetlight conduit was 24 inches below the top of the curb and ran through the center of the proposed manhole. The manhole location could not be adjusted, as it intercepted an existing storm drain for recycled water. The total cost for this change was $6,711.

Change Order No. 2 relocated an existing 4-inch Schedule 40 PVC potable water line to avoid conflict with a manhole installation and modified five force main cleanouts, which are part of pressurized sewer pipes that convey wastewater, on the paved area to allow better access for the ball valve, a flow control device, operation. The total cost for this change was $11,773.

Change Order No. 3 provided a lump sum credit to the City in the amount of $1,226 for supplying material testing services during the corrective work to address a sag that occurred during the installed horizontal directional drilling line at the southern field. The City’s on-call contractor that performed the material testing for the project was utilized to perform compaction testing for the restoration of the open trench segments.

Change Order No. 4 was a balancing change order. This change order was issued to revise the contract amount based on the adjusted quantities measured in the field to complete the work. The total cost for this change was $7,752.

All the work and project close-out documentation has been completed to the satisfaction of the Interim Director of Public Works. Staff recommends that the City Council accept the project as complete.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
Approval of this action advances the Citywide Climate Action Plan 2.0 (CAP) - Natural Systems by avoiding the discharge of recycled water into the creek thereby enhancing the ecosystem’s health.

OUTREACH
Prior to the start of construction, notification of the impact on the park’s daily usage was given to the public and sports user groups.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the ONE Pleasanton strategic goal of Investing in Our Environment - Strategy 1 – Implement the four-year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) to complete design and construction of budgeted capital projects, and Strategy 6 – Continue to implement priority items from the Climate Action Plan 2.0 (CAP) to lead by example in environmental sustainability.

FISCAL IMPACT
Total available funding for this project was $2,014,543. The expenditures total $1,792,316, leaving a balance of $222,227 (see Attachment 1). Staff recommends the project’s balance be returned to the Storm Replacement/Renovation Fund (Fund 441).

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

SM Saklaen, Associate Civil
Engineer
Norm Dorais, Interim Director of Public
Works

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Funding and Estimated Expenditures Summary

ATTACHMENT 1
Project Funding to Date Amount Totals
2020-21 CIP Allocation (Storm Replacement - Fund 441) $100,000 2021-22 CIP Allocation (Miscellanous CIP GF - Fund 201) 1,500,000 Transfer from CIP No. 22484 - CCAR#5 01/17/23 (Storm Repl - Fund 441) 414,543

TOTAL PROJECT FUNDING TO DATE
Project Expenditures to Date
Alameda County Clerk Fee $50
Bid Advertising and Reproductions 1,043
Persidio System (CCTV) 2,000
Miscellaneous Park Drainage Improvements 10,892
DSRSD Capacity Fees 17,367
Geocon Consultants (Material Testing) 6,699
Pakpour Consulting Group (Design and Construction Support) 167,295 Golden Bay Construction, Inc. - Construction Contract 1,561,961 Golden Bay Construction, Inc. - Change Orders No. 1- 4 25,010 Project Expenditures to Date
Funding Balance/ (Shortfall)
Current Balance - Return back to Storm Replacement/Renovation (Fund 441) 222,227$ $2,014,543
$1,792,316

VAL VISTA UNDERDRAIN IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
CIP NO. 21457
02/06/24

Item #12

CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT

February 6, 2024
Library and Recreation

TITLE: RECEIVE A PRESENTATION ON THE EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN

SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND ACCEPT THE FINAL REPORT

SUMMARY
The City Council identified updating and implementing the 2011 Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment as a City Council Priority in the adopted Fiscal Year 2021/22 City Council Work Plan, and included the priority in the ONE Pleasanton Strategic Plan under the goal, “Building a Community Where Everyone Belongs.” In 2022-2023 a regional team of city staff, including Pleasanton, working in collaboration with the cities of Dublin and Livermore, conducted the 2024 Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment. The overarching goal of the report is to assess Tri-Valley human service gap areas and establish implementable and collaborative outcomes while working in conjunction with the Tri-Valley Cities, local nonprofits, and Alameda County. The final report includes findings and recommendations related to human service needs in Eastern Alameda County, with planned implementation in FY 2025/26 and FY 2027/28.

RECOMMENDATION
Receive a presentation on the Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment and accept the final report.

BACKGROUND
In 2003, a regional team of city staff completed the Tri-Valley Human Services Needs Assessment to identify service gaps and provide a tool for nonprofit service providers to use when seeking grants and additional financial support. In early 2011, following the release of 2010 census data, staff conducted a broad-based assessment of human service needs in the Tri-Valley that expanded upon the 2003 assessment to reflect changes in the population and demographics of the region since the early 2000s.

Following the release of the 2020 census data, Pleasanton staff began planning an update to the 2011 assessment in collaboration with the cities of Dublin and Livermore. In February 2022, staff solicited a Request for Proposals seeking qualified consultants to lead the project.

Staff from each city served on a selection committee that included a review of submittals and in-person interviews. The selection committee selected the firm JSI Research & Training Institute, Inc. (JSI) as the most qualified, citing JSI’s approach to community outreach and desire to collaborate with stakeholders, as well as JSI’s desire to develop an actionable narrative, supported by data, of Tri-Valley human service needs.

The City of Pleasanton served as the project lead/fiscal agent and entered into a professional services agreement with JSI. The City Council approved the agreement and Memorandum of Understanding in June 2022, which formalized the project and funding obligations among the three cities.

Over 19 months, starting in August 2022, staff and the consultant engaged in an extensive process to complete the 2024 Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment (EACHSNA). This process included establishing project committees, attending community events, holding focus groups, reviewing regional studies, and hosting two joint Human Services Commission meetings in two different cities. In April 2023, the City Council was given an overview of the work to date. In February 2024, staff is presenting the final report, included as Attachment 1, to each city's respective City Council for acceptance.

DISCUSSION
The 2024 EACHSNA includes comprehensive research and analysis to describe current and anticipated human service needs over the next 5–10 years and recommendations for addressing these needs. The three cities are committed to collaborating with each other, local service providers, and Alameda County to implement these recommendations over the next decade to enhance the provision of human services in the Tri-Valley.

Findings
The Tri-Valley is economically stable; however, there are pockets within each of the three cities with high concentrations of individuals living below the federal poverty level. While there are significant numbers of social service providers in each of the three cities, some services require recipients to travel outside the region, which has implications for transportation and accessibility and creates barriers to accessing services for some recipients.

Identifying existing community strengths helps ensure that the report's recommendations build upon and leverage assets, capabilities, and resources already within the community. These strengths include community cohesion, diversity, quality of health care and mental health services, nonprofit organizations and other support service providers, recreation, and high- quality schools.

The report also identifies challenges/opportunity areas at both the community and organizational levels. These opportunity areas include housing challenges, difficulty accessing health care and mental health services, a general lack of awareness of available services and a need for service navigation, a need for outpatient and residential substance-use treatment services, and a desire for more linguistically and culturally responsive providers. Community members also expressed concerns about safety and needing more transportation services.

There is also a significant need for youth services. This includes high-quality, affordable childcare and early childhood education for young children. For older children, parents and youth alike expressed a desire for accessible extracurricular activities, including after-school and enrichment programs, affordable summer programs, and recreational activities, including sports. Older youth identified concerns around academic pressures and responsibilities, mental health and physical safety, substance use, including a need for prevention programs and treatment services, and a lack of access to school restrooms.

Service provider organizations expressed frustration at the general perception that needs are lower in the Tri-Valley. They identified several funding challenges, including a need for grants that cover infrastructure, operating costs, and marketing and a high burden for grant applications and reporting requirements. Organizations also identified a need to increase awareness of services among each other, to avoid service duplication and to leverage

resources optimally. They also expressed a need to improve recruitment and retention to support a racially, culturally, and linguistically diverse workforce.

Recommendations
The final report divides recommendations into two categories: (1) approach recommendations, which address community or organizational needs (i.e., how the work is done), and (2) actionable recommendations, which are more specific, targeted strategies to meet discrete community and organizational needs (i.e., what work is done).

Approach recommendations include:
• Implementing North Star questions to serve as a constant reference point for decision- making, helping to steer the direction of the work and maintain coherence across programs and initiatives
• Creating more structured and formal community engagement mechanisms to carry this work forward
• Anticipating systemic challenges and building responsive organizational relationships to address social determinants of health

Actionable recommendations include:
• Building a regional service network to support nonprofit collaboration and the alignment and coordination of services
• Expanding youth services and supports as a long-term investment in reducing future human service needs
• Examining funding mechanisms and processes to reduce the administrative burden and create increased and sustained funding opportunities from each of the three cities as well as from Alameda County and other funding sources
• Building a pipeline for a diverse workforce that meets the needs of Tri-Valley residents • Considering multi-sector service and infrastructure solutions to provide a safety net for those experiencing multiple concurrent needs (e.g., housing, mental health, and/or substance use).

There is strong commitment from Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton to collaborate and take a regional approach to meeting identified human service needs. To ensure accountability, staff will select recommendations and develop associated implementation plans to track, evaluate, and communicate progress toward agreed-upon goals.

Proposed next steps:
• Present the EACHSNA Final Report to Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton City Councils separately for acceptance
• Engage core nonprofits in discussing report findings, and developing short-term, mid- term, and long-term report outcomes
• Return to a joint Human Services Commission meeting to refine recommendations • Return to City Councils to seek project approvals if needed • Develop an annual Human Services reporting schedule for City Councils

• Develop a schedule for joint Human Services Commission meetings.

EQUITY AND SUSTAINABILITY
The outcomes of this final report focus efforts on Tri-Valley communities that consist of priority populations, including: faith-based leaders; female heads of household; first responders; indigenous communities; unhoused individuals; individuals with disabilities; the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) community; Livermore agricultural workers; non- English speakers; seniors/older adults; those who work, but do not live in the Tri-Valley (defined as people who cannot afford to live in the Tri-Valley due to the high cost of living, which often includes essential workers, such as teachers or first responders); and youth between the ages of 14 and 25.

OUTREACH
Community outreach for this project included the formation of two project committees, two joint Human Services Commission meetings, and six City Council meetings (two in each city). The project team held 11 focus groups, attended three Tri-Valley community events, and conducted multiple interviews. Overall the team engaged with more than 330 community members and service provider organization staff.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
Approval of this action advances the approved ONE Pleasanton strategic goal of Building a Community Where Everyone Belongs Strategy No. 12 - Implement the results of the Human Services Needs Assessment. Additionally, approval of this action advances the Library and Recreation Department Strategic Plan Goal A. 1. f. Programs, Plans, and Services – Implement Council-approved plans, Human Services Needs Assessment.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with final acceptance of this report. The total cost of the project has a not-to-exceed amount of $234,467, which includes a base scope of services fee of $203,885 plus a 15 percent contingency. The total cost is shared equally among the cities of Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton. Pleasanton’s one-third portion shall not exceed $78,155 ($67,962 plus contingency). Funding for this project is included in the FY 2023/24 adopted operating budget in account 00150200-430107.

Prepared by: Submitted by: Approved by:

Jay Ingram, Recreation
Manager
Heidi Murphy, Director of Library and
Recreation

Gerry Beaudin, City
Manager

Attachments:

1. Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment - Executive Summary

2. Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment – 2024 Final Report

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENT: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY || Page 1 Eastern Alameda County Human Services
Needs Assessment: Executive Summary

INTRODUCTION
The cities of Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton, collectively known as the Tri-Valley, have collaborated to provide Human Services for many years. The Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment (EACHSNA) follows the 10-year census and evaluates the strengths, needs, and recommendations for the human service delivery network for the region and the individual cities. In 2022 the three cities hired JSI to lead this process. This report represents those findings, including recommendations and associated implementation steps.

METHODS
The project team established guiding theoretical values and frameworks to center equity and honor those with lived experience. An emphasis was placed on identifying causes of pervasive inequities, centering the voices of those most impacted, and ensuring recommendations were sustainable and effective. This work was conducted alongside advisory bodies including community members, nonprofit organizations, and city and county representatives.

Quantitative data were analyzed from sources including the Census, local organizations, and county agencies. These findings depict the demographics of the Tri-Valley and select social determinants (e.g., poverty, housing instability). Qualitative data were collected through focus groups, interviews, community events and through organizations. Findings were supported through existing community-based and regional reports.

FINDINGS
The Tri-Valley is economically stable, however there are concentrated pockets within each of the three cities with high concentrations of individuals living below the federal poverty level.

Further, while there are significant numbers of social service providers in each of the three cities, notably some services require recipients to travel outside of the region, which has implications for transportation and accessibility.

Community strengths were identified to ensure that recommendations could build upon and leverage assets, capabilities, and resources. Identified strengths included: community cohesion; diversity; quality of health care and mental health services; nonprofit organizations and other support service providers; recreation; and high quality schools.

Challenges/opportunity areas were identified at both the community and organizational levels.

Community members experienced housing challenges and difficulty accessing health care and ATTACHMENT 1

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENT: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY || Page 2 mental health services.* There is also a general lack of awareness of available services and need for service navigation, as well as an expressed desire for more linguistically and culturally responsive providers. A need for outpatient and residential substance use treatment services was identified. Community members also expressed concerns around safety, and a need for more transportation services.

There is also significant need for youth services. For young children this includes high quality, affordable childcare and early childhood education. For older children, parents and youth alike expressed a desire for accessible extracurricular activities including after school and enrichment programs, and affordable summer programs and recreational activities, including sports. Older youth identified concerns around academic pressures and responsibilities, mental health and physical safety, substance use including a need for prevention programs and treatment services, and a lack of access to school bathrooms.

Organizations identified a need to increase awareness of services among each other, to avoid service duplication and to optimally leverage resources. They expressed a need to be able to recruit and retain members of their workforce, particularly those who are racially, culturally, and linguistically diverse. They expressed frustration at the general perception that needs are lower in the Tri-Valley. Finally, they identified several funding challenges including a need for grants that cover infrastructure, operating costs, and marketing, as well as a high burden for grant applications and reporting requirements.

RECOMMENDATIONS
These are divided into approach recommendations which address community or organizational need (i.e., how the work is done), and actionable recommendations which are more specific, targeted strategies to meet discrete community and organizational needs (i.e., what work is done).

Approach recommendations include: 1) implementing North Star questions to serve as a constant reference point for decision-making, helping to steer the direction of the work and maintain coherence across programs and initiatives; 2) creating more structured and formal community engagement mechanisms to carry this work forward; and 3) anticipating systemic challenges and building responsive organizational relationships to address social determinants of health.

Actionable recommendations include: 1) building a regional service network to support nonprofit collaboration and the alignment and coordination of services; 2) expanding youth services and supports as a long-term investment in reducing future human service needs; 3) examining funding mechanisms and processes to reduce the administrative burden and create increased and sustained funding opportunities from each of the three cities as well as from Alameda County and other funding sources; 4) building a pipeline for a diverse workforce, that * Distinct elements of health care and mental health services were identified as a strength or a challenge. For more information, please refer to the full report.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENT: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY || Page 3 meets the needs of the residents of the Tri-Valley; and 5) considering multi-sector service and infrastructure solutions to provide a safety net for those experiencing multiple concurrent needs (e.g., housing, mental health, and/or substance use).

There is deep commitment from Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton to collaborate and take a regional approach to meeting identified needs from this process. To ensure accountability, recommendations will be selected and associated implementation plans will be developed to track, evaluate, and communicate progress toward agreed upon goals and approaches.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY
Human Services
Needs Assessment
January, 2024
ATTACHMENT 2

CONTENTSEASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENT Table of Contents
I. HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT 2
II. TERM DEFINITION 3
III. STORY 5
IV . BACKGROUND 6
V . GUIDING THEORETICAL VALUES AND FRAMEWORKS 7
Community Engagement, Power Sharing, and Capacity Building 7 Additional Applied Frameworks 8
The Life-Course Perspective 8
Structural Considerations 9
Upstream and Downstream 9
Social and Structural Determinants of Health 10
Root Causes 10
Report Considerations 11
VI. METHODS 12
Foundational Steps: Gathering Input and Establishing Advisory Groups 12 Landscape Scan 12
Joint Commission and City Council Meetings 12
Needs Assessment Website 13
Advisory Groups Development 13
Community Liaison 13
Eastern Alameda Power and Action Committee 14
Steering Committee 15
Priority Populations 15
Engaging Different Language Groups 16
Quantitative Analysis and Qualitative Data Collection 17 Quantitative Data 17
Census Data 17
Regional Reports 18
Qualitative Data 18
Demographics 19
Representation and Implicit Bias 19
Nonprofit Focus Groups 20
Community Focus Groups 20
Recruitment 20
Structure 20
Capacity Building through Facilitation 21
Individual Interviews 21
Tabling Events and Intercept Interviews 22
VII. FINDINGS 22
Demographic Trends in the Tri-Valley 23
Population 23
Age 24
Race and Ethnicity 27
Economic Stability 32
Existing Services 36
Strengths 43

Table of Contents
Community Cohesion 43
Diversity 43
Health Care and Mental Health Services 44
Nonprofits and Supportive Services 44
Nonprofit Services 44
First Responders 46
Recreation 46
Schools and Educational Excellence 46
Community-Level Challenges and Opportunity Areas 48
Housing 48
Health Care 53
Mental Health 56
Service Provision, Awareness, and Navigation 58
Generalized Service Provision 58
Service Awareness 58
Service Navigation 58
Racial/Linguistic/Cultural Responsiveness 59
Racial and Cultural Responsiveness 59
Linguistic Responsiveness 60
Substance Use 61
Safety 62
Transportation 64
Youth 66
Childcare 66
Accessible Extracurricular Activities 67
After School and Enrichment Programs 67
Summer Programs 67
Sports 67
Academic and Other Pressure/Responsibilities 68
Youth Safety 68
Physical Safety 68
Psychological Safety 69
Youth Mental Health 69
Substance Use 70
Bathrooms as a Human Right 70
Substance Use Support and Treatment 70
Organizational-Level Challenges and Opportunity Areas 71 Service Awareness and Duplication 71
Workforce 71
Recruitment and Retention 71
Racially, Culturally, and Linguistically Responsive Workforce 72 Perception of Need and Funding 73
Perception of Need 73
Funding 73
Emergency Preparation: Supplies and Infrastructure 73
VIII. RECOMMENDATIONS 74
Approach Recommendations 74
Approach Recommendation 1: Implement North Star Questions 74

CONTENTSEASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

Approach Recommendation 2: Community Engagement 75
Approach Recommendation 3: Anticipate Systemic Challenges and Build Organizational Relationships 75 Identify Systemic Challenges 75
Relationship Building 76
Youth 76
Social Determinants of Health 76
Actionable Recommendations 77
Actionable Recommendation 1: Create a Regional Service Network 77 Actionable Recommendation 2: Youth Services and Supports 78 Youth-Centered Services 78
In-School Health and Wellness Center 78
Community-Based Youth and Family Events 79
Actionable Recommendation 3: Tri-Valley Nonprofit Funding 79 Actionable Recommendation 4: Build Pipelines for a Diverse Workforce 80 Actionable Recommendation 5: Consider Multi-Sector Service and Infrastructure Solutions 80 Housing 80
Projection of Housing Units Needed 81
Promising Practices by City 81
Substance Use 82
Mental Health 82
Infrastructure Needs 82
IX. IMPLEMENTATION PROCESSES AND PLAN 83
Implementation Processes 83
Sample Implementation Plans 84
X. APPENDICES 87
Appendix 1. Social Services Inventory 87
Appendix 2. Peer Review Report 88
Appendix 3. Comprehensive Quantitative Data 91
Appendix 4. Previous Community Health Needs Assessments 92 Appendix 5. EAPAC Recruitment Materials 93
“What is a Needs Assessment?” 93
EAPAC Recruitment Flyer 94
EAPAC Interest Form 95
Appendix 6. Interview Guides and Focus Group Materials 96 Nonprofit Focus Group Guide 96
First Responders Interview Guide 97
Community Focus Group Guide 98
Intercept Interview Guide 99
Focus Group Interest Form 100
Demographics Data Collection Form 101
Appendix 7. Programs and Funded Services following the 2011 Needs Assessment 102 XI. REFERENCES 103
Table of Contents

CONTENTSEASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 1
Acknowledgements
This report was prepared by John Snow, Inc. (JSI), a mission-driven national and international public health research and consulting organization dedicated to advancing the health of individuals and communities. The development of this report was made possible by the Cities of Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton and through the ongoing communication and support from Shaun Chilkotowsky, City of Dublin; Josh Thurman, City of Livermore; and Jay Ingram, City of Pleasanton.

The Project Team expresses its deepest gratitude to the community members, individuals from nonprofit organizations, first responders, faith-based organizations, and many service providers whose voices and experiences are captured in this report. We acknowledge that it is impossible to fully express the complexity of what it means to live, attend school or work, and play in the Tri-Valley, particularly for those in need of or delivering human services, but hope you see some of your humanity and strengths, as well as your challenges, here.

We acknowledge and thank the advisory groups that served in varying capacities. Profound appreciation goes to the Eastern Alameda Power and Action Committee members for their advocacy and engagement throughout this project: Maria Gomez, Francesca Rosinski, Jasmin Schroder, Trenton Thomsen, and Emily Wilson. We also thank the two members who did not wish to be named.

In addition, we thank the Steering Committee members for their ongoing input, consideration, support, and brainstorming: Anissa Basoco-Villerreal – Assistant Agency Director of Alameda County Social Services; Christine Beitsch-Bahmani – Chief Executive Officer City Serve of the Tri-Valley; John Bost – Executive Director, Open Heart Kitchen, Evette Brandon – Quality Improvement and Accreditation Director, Alameda County; Becky Hopkins – Assistant to the City Manager, City of Pleasanton; Carolina Guzman – Quality Improvement Manager, Alameda County Department of Public Health; Alcian Lindo – Program Manager, Chabot-Las Positas Career Center; Liz Perez-Howe – Chief Executive Officer, Axis Community Health; Jennifer Pierce – Deputy Director, Alameda Community Development Agency Housing & Community Development Department, and Kimi Watkins-Tartt – Director, Alameda County Public Health Department.

This work was conducted and written by the following individuals, referred throughout as Project team Members: Deanna Lewis, Corina Pinto, Bex Reno, Anupam Sharma, Alison Soloman, Nadia Syed, and Hannah Young. Julie Ray edited the report.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 2
I. HOW TO USE OF THIS DOCUMENT
This report is designed to be read from start to finish, or it allows the reader to directly access separate sec- tions. Below, you will find the select highlights along with its corresponding page numbers for easy reference.

How were data collected?
Learn more about what data were
used and how the data were collected.
• Quantitative data….........................17
• Qualitative data…...........................18
Who participated?
Explore the many ways that community
representatives, non-profits, and others
were engaged.
• Advisory group development….......13
• Priority populations…......................15
• Demographics…...............................19
What were recommendations
for the Tri-Valley?
Discover the recommendations identified
through this process including how to
advance change, and what to address.
• Approach recommendations….........74
• Actionable recommendations….......77
What values or frameworks
guided this work?
Hear about the approach to equity and
the theories that guided this work.
• Guiding theoretical values and
frameworks…...................................7
What were
Tri-Valley strenghts?
Read about some of the Tri-Valley assets,
capabilities, and resources.
• Strengths…........................................43
What will come of this work?
Review the proposed next steps including
how recommendations will be prioritized
and implemented.
• Implementation processes…............83
• Sample implementation plans….......84
What challenges
were identified?
Examine some opportunities for
improvement identified by community
members and non-profit organizations.
• Community level challenges…........48
• Organizational level challenges…...71

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 3
II. TERM DEFINITION
We’ve defined key terms used throughout this report to ensure its process and findings are accessible and clear.

Capacity Building The process of developing and strengthening the skills, instincts, abilities, processes, and resources that organizations, communities, and individuals need to survive, adapt, and thrive.1 City Council
The City Council, composed of the Mayor and four City Council members, this city governing body has all the regulatory and corporate powers of a municipal corporation provided under California State Law. In general, the Council supervises the operations of the City government by establishing policies and programs and appropriating funds for each service function. 2 Community Liaison
An individual who served on both the Steering Committee and Eastern Alameda Power and Action Committee, connecting the JSI Project Team, city staff, and community members. They provided historical and current context on best practices for engagement with the Tri-Valley community.

Eastern Alameda
Power and Action
Committee
An advisory committee composed of community members, service providers, and service recipients. This committee is involved with focus group and interview recruitment, preparation, facilitation, and supports data analysis.

Federal
Poverty Level
A measure used to gauge access to aid programs (e.g., government assistance programs). It is based on household income and size. In California, the FPL for a family of four in 2023 was set at $30,000.

Health Equity
Work to identify, dismantle, and reimagine systems of power ingrained with racism, discrimination, neglect, disrespect and dehumanization. This work contributes to the evolution of society in offering all people opportunities, security, power, resources and information to live their happiest and healthiest lives.
3 Human Services
Commission and
Joint Commission
Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton each have their own Human Services Commission to advise the city council on community human service needs and identify ways to meet these needs. The Commission focuses on communities that are socially or economically disadvantaged.

The Joint Commission refers to a workshop or meeting attended by Human Service Commissioners from all three cities.

Human Services
Services provided by the cities, nonprofits, and other agencies that support communities and individuals with basic needs like food and shelter and other services such as health care and employment.

Lived Experience
Knowledge based on personal perspective, identities, and history beyond professional or educational experience. People’s lived experience is directly affected by social, health, public health, or other issues and by the strategies that aim to address those issues. Lived experience gives people insights that can inform and improve systems, research, policies, practices, and programs.
4 Macro-Level
Factors
Factors that affect the health of an individual on a structural level and entire communities, counties, states, and countries. Advocating for policy changes to create more affordable housing is an example of trying to change a macro-level factor that affects an individual’s ability to find housing.

Medi-Cal California’s Medicaid health care program, which pays for a variety of medical services for children and adults with limited income and resources.
5 EA

STERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 4
Needs Assessment
North S
tar
P
ower Sharing
Quantitative Data
Qualitative Data
R
ecommendations:

Approach and
Actionable
Social and

Structural
Determinants
of Health
Steering Committee
S
trengths-Based
approach
T
ri-Valley
T
riangulation
Upstream and
Downstream
Factors
A process and resulting resource used to understand the qualities of a given community including its strengths and opportunities for growth. Needs Assessments often use both quantitative and qualitative data to gain a representative depiction of a community.

A constant reference point for decision-making, helping to steer the direction of the work and maintain cohesion across programs and initiatives.

Distribution of power in which different representative groups share decision making and other responsibilities.

Can be counted, measured, or given a numerical value. In this needs assessment, the quantitative data include demographic information such as race, ethnicity, age, income, employment, marriage status, etc. Quantitative data can be collected through surveys, census, local organizations and county agencies, and other sources.

Typically collected through focus groups, interviews, and conversations. These data are not numerical. Qualitative data collection methods allow community members to share their experiences and deep insights that are more difficult to capture quantitatively/numerically.

Recommendations in this report are categorized into ‘Approach’ and ' Actionable.’
Approach recommendations encompass broad or overarching factors that should be integrated into any approach to meet a human service need, regardless of the specific strategy employed.

Actionable recommendations are more precise, focused on a singular or multiple social determinant of health simultaneously.

The non-medical factors that influence health outcomes, including the conditions in which people are
born, grow, work, live, and age, and the wider set of forces and systems shaping the conditions of daily life. They include economic policies and systems, development agendas, social norms, social policies and political systems.6
An advisory group formed for the Eastern Alameda County Human Services Needs Assessment with representatives from the three cities, Alameda County, local nonprofi ts, and JSI Project Team
members. This committee provided oversight and support to the project and assisted with the distribution of findings.

Focuses on identifying and building upon a community or individual’s strengths. It is a shift from focusing on the issues in a community only.

Another term for the three cities in Eastern Alameda County: Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton.

The cities are geographically adjacent to each other, totaling 65.95 square miles and a collective population of 234,282.

The use of multiple methods (e.g., interviews and focus groups) or data sources in qualitative research to develop a deep understanding of a theme or event. Triangulation is important in ensuring information is accurate.

Upstream factors: Structural or contributing conditions that affect a person’s health or wellbeing.

For example, when individuals speak of the need for affordable housing, they often acknowledge other forces such as inflation and the need for a living wage.

Downstream factors: The result of upstream factors affecting health. These are often measured as individual-level factors that shape a person’s health outcomes, or the health outcomes themselves.

For example, an individual’s ability to access fresh fruits and vegetables aff ects their risk of
developing diabetes.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 5
This report begins with a story in recognition that
data—no matter how close to community members’
lived experiences—is insufficient in truly conveying
the challenges and complexities that any individual or
family experiences. This story is not of any one person or family, but rather a compilation of stories that were heard. These are stories that weave various realities
found throughout the Tri-Valley community into a
much broader picture. This story is presented to
ground our findings, allowing the reader to see how
human services (and the lack of them) can shape not
only individual outcomes, but the life course of future generations and an entire region.

The G family is a multigenerational family in which
Mia, the matriarch, lives with her son Luis, his wife,
Laura, and their children Alexa and James. They love
the beauty of the mountain landscape and year-long
warm weather of the place they call home; however,
each member of the family experiences barriers
challenging their ability to live happy, healthy, and
peaceful lives.

Let’s begin with Mia. Mia is 72 years old and was
diagnosed with type 2 diabetes a few years ago. As
her condition progresses, she struggles with her
mental health. Mia is covered under Medicare but
has a hard time finding a mental health provider
(e.g., a therapist or social worker) who not only
speaks her language but also understands how
challenging it is for her to talk about her mental
health. It is also difficult for Mia to keep track of
her various appointments and she is unable to
drive the distance to the nearest hospital to see her
specialists. Sometimes, Mia prefers not to go to any
of her appointments because constant travel and
management make her anxious.

Mia’s son Luis works two low-wage jobs, neither of
which provide health insurance, and he makes just
enough not to qualify for Medi-Cal. English is not
Luis’s first language, which makes navigating the
health insurance system very challenging. Luis tries
his hardest to make sure he does not get injured on
the job and lives in fear of receiving a large medical
bill.

Luis’s wife Laura also works a low-wage job. She is
desperate to connect with women her age but is
ashamed about how poorly she speaks English. Laura
has thought about taking English classes but her work
schedule makes it difficult to attend classes regularly.

Alexa and James are in fifth and tenth grade,
respectively. Alexa was born in the United States;
James was five years old when their parents and
grandmother arrived in the country. Alexa enjoys
school but wishes she could take art classes. Her
parents support her creative interests, but are unable
to pay for classes.

James has been struggling with several things,
particularly mental health. James, who uses they/
them pronouns, works very hard at school. James
feels they owe it to their parents to get into a great
school and bring the family out of poverty. They
would like to talk to someone who understands the
pressures of being the oldest child. Sometimes James
has intense panic attacks but feels their parents
would not understand how they feel and does not
want to add more stress to their lives.

The story of the G family is not unusual. In this
assessment, seeds of these stories—of isolation,
challenges navigating human services, stigma
toward mental health, transportation and linguistic
challenges, and more—emerged through the many
conversations with community members. The
assessment you are about to read analyzes the
strengths and challenges in the Tri-Valley and includes recommendations to respectively build upon and
mitigate them. This is all in service of the overarching goal of improving residents’ health and wellness.

III. STORY

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 6
IV. BACKGROUND
The cities of Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton,
collectively known as the Tri-Valley (figure 1), have
provided Human Services collectively for many
years. The cities value innovation, collaboration,
and problem solving to maintain and improve
the quality of life for all residents. Each city has a
unique perspective on how to meet the needs of its
residents. While each city respects the individuality
of each community, it also sees value in focusing
on collaboration for common efforts and regional
solutions. The Eastern Alameda County Human
Services Needs Assessment (EACHSNA) is one such
collaboration, created to evaluate the strengths and
needs of the human service delivery network for the
region and the individual cities.

In 2011, the Tri-Valley conducted a needs assessment
focused on the cities’ most vulnerable populations:
low-income families, individuals, children, seniors,
and people with disabilities.
7 This Tri-Valley needs
Shaded areas
are city limits
Tri-Valley
Dublin, CA
Pleasanton, CA
Livermore, CA
Figure 1. Tri-Valley Map
assessment process follows the 10-year census, as
will the regional needs assessment.

The 2011 assessment found a significant and
increasing disparity between the growing demand
for human services and a stagnating, and at times,
declining supply of services in Eastern Alameda
County. Many of the findings in the report
mirror those reflected here related to mental/
behavioral health, housing, health care, workforce,
transportation, and changing demographics.

However, one finding in the 2011 needs assessment
that did not surface here was a need for increased
food and nutrition programs. This reflects the success
of the region in mitigating food insecurity through
funding and other initiatives, one of the many efforts
undertaken to increase access to resources and
services. A list of additional programs and initiatives that emerged in response to findings from the 2011
needs assessment is available in Appendix 7.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 7
The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated the need for
more resources so, in 2022, the three cities hired JSI
to lead the EACHSNA process. JSI is a public health
research and consulting organization with an office in
Berkeley, California. It has over 40 years of experience providing technical services to federal, state, and local agencies to improve the health of individuals and
communities, with a focus on vulnerable populations.

JSI was tasked with conducting the EACHSNA by
leveraging existing documents including the prior
needs assessment; incorporating a diversity, equity,
and inclusion framework to ensure an equitable and
inclusive process and outcomes; and developing
a final report including recommendations and
associated implementation steps.

Figure 2. Timeline of the Tri-Valley Needs Assessments
2003
Tri-Valley commissioned its first human services
needs assessment collecting critical local data
for programmatic, policy, and resource allocation
decision making.
2011
The three cities commissioned a follow up report
to assess the changing needs, demonstrate
current and future human service needs and
service delivery gaps, and recommend ways to
meet residents’ human service needs.
2021
The three cities resolved to conduct a needs
assessment every 10 years to stay abreast of the
changing needs within their individual cities and
the region as a whole.
2022
JSI was hired to complete the 2022 needs
assessment.

V. GUIDING THEORETICAL VALUES AND FRAMEW ORKS
Community Engagement,
Power Sharing, and Capacity Building
Our process grounded the work in equity and ensured
a sound and inclusive assessment process. It started
with the use of an equity framework as a roadmap
for the assessment to help ensure a collaborative,
engaged, and intentional process that built
community capacity and relationships. The following
outlines each framework principle and how it was
applied in the Needs Assessment.

Centering lived experience: In recognition of the fact
that community members and service providers are
the experts of their lives, the JSI Project Team worked thoughtfully and deliberately to center the voices
of community members within the Tri-Valley who
were eligible for, have sought out, or have received
human services. Throughout the project, the JSI
Project Team aimed to lessen participants’ burden
while maximizing opportunities for participation. It
focused on identifying and engaging people who are
often labeled “difficult to reach,”
i particularly those
identified as priority populations in the project’s
initial scoping activities.

Equitable data practices: There is a long history of
extractive data collection practices in the United
States, with little to no sharing of power, capacity
building within communities, or follow-up in how
data were used. Thus, equity was a focus of every
step of data collection and analysis. Community
members were trained and supported to collect data
as focus group and interview facilitators; provided
trainings on topics including qualitative analysis;
and shaped the identification and prioritization of
strengths, challenges, and recommendations.

Strengths-based approach: The central purpose of
a human service needs assessment is to identify
challenges (i.e., community and organizational
i Note: This term is problematic because it obscures the historic lack of inclusion efforts and barriers to participation, including a lack of trust.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 8
challenges) and possible solutions, but it is also
important to identify and celebrate individual and
community assets, capabilities, resources, and
strengths. All too often when the focus is directed on
individuals or neighborhoods with high human service
needs, the emphasis is on issues or deficits. This is
not only disempowering; it also fails to recognize
the many ways that communities can be a source of
strength and resilience. Thus throughout the data
collection and in this report, we celebrate and honor
the strengths of the Tri-Valley.

Community capacity building: Similar to the
recognized need for equitable data practices, one
of the guiding values for this needs assessment was
on the importance of engaging in power-sharing
activities to support community members’ capacity to
develop, implement, and sustain local initiatives. For
this project, this included training with community
member participants of the Eastern Alameda Power
and Action Committee (EAPAC) with a focus on
capacity building and mentorship on methods of
data collection, and an explicit focus on how power
might be shared to ensure community members
felt included in the needs assessment process and
beyond. To that end, we made efforts to ensure the
findings were broadly accessible to the community by
building a public-facing website and creating a section in this report to define terms used throughout.

Additional Applied Frameworks
As the work unfolded, the community described
challenges as cross-generational, interconnected, and
stemming from broader, overarching factors. This is
important to capture because it not only describes
what people are experiencing, but also how they
experience and think about their conditions. The
following section represents the effort to capture this through existing frameworks that help us think about
the challenges and how to shape effective solutions.

The Life-Course Perspective
The life-course perspective provides a lens to identify interventions that have the potential to crease change
across generations. The life-course perspective calls
us to focus on: 1) distinct life stages (e.g., adolescence or older adults); 2) the trajectories of lives based
on a number of factors and conditions (e.g., social
and structural determinants of health); and 3) the
relationship between individual and collective life
courses, or as Martin Luther King Jr. put it, “the
inescapable network of mutuality.” This refers to the
idea that the fate of all individuals are linked. Put
another way, the health and wellness of the Tri-Valley
is inextricably connected to those individuals who are
the least resourced within the communities.

The G family is a perfect example of why it is
important to consider a life-course perspective.

The barriers facing the 72-year-old Mia effect
the entire family. If Mia’s diabetes gets out
of control due to challenges of managing her
appointments, her son Luis and daughter-in-
law Laura may have to take time off of work
to care for her. If the family begins to struggle
financially and have a challenging time putting
food on the table, Alexa’s and James’ hindered
development and mental health will diminish
their ability to learn in school.

In the context of this EACHSNA update, the use of the
life-course perspective draws attention to the need
for services that are focused on distinct age groups,
while also considering the importance of ensuring
people’s needs are met across time. For example,
it is important to focus on specific challenges and
interventions for teenagers now and to think about
how their needs are expected to evolve as they enter
young adulthood). It also draws attention to the need
to design and deliver services that are both universal
or widely available for everyone, and targeted, in
that they should respond to the needs of distinct
priority populations. For example, there is a need for
universal mental health services, but those services
must also be tailored to the needs of adolescents,
non-English speakers, and people who lack mental
health insurance. The life-course perspective also calls us to consider the emotional, physical, psychological,
and social needs that evolve within specific historical and cultural contexts. For example, the application
of a life-course perspective calls us to understand
how youth might be uniquely and disproportionately
affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify
services and a responsive delivery mechanism to
meet those needs.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 9
The G family is a perfect example of why it is
important to consider a life-course perspective.

The barriers facing the 72-year-old Mia effect
the entire family. If Mia’s diabetes gets out
of control due to challenges of managing her
appointments, her son Luis and daughter-in-
law Laura may have to take time off of work
to care for her. If the family begins to struggle
financially and have a challenging time putting
food on the table, Alexa’s and James’ hindered
development and mental health will diminish
their ability to learn in school.

Figure 3. Model of the Life-Course Framework. Source: State of Hawaii Department of Health Structural Considerations

UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM
A needs assessment provides a snapshot or even
a retrospective look at the challenges faced by
a community or its sub-groups. However, it is
important to note that what a needs assessment
typically captures represents what are often called
‘downstream’ factors. These are often mentioned
at the individual-level, simply because a needs
assessment asks individuals about their experiences.

For example, when asked about challenges, a
community member might mention a health concern
such as high blood pressure. From a downstream
lens, a responsive intervention might be to make sure
that person has access to health services.

However, looking midstream and upstream might
point to different interventions. In the example
of high blood pressure, a midstream contributor
might be the stress the person is under from being
unemployed. A midstream intervention might
connect the individual to career services. Finally,
looking even further upstream might indicate a
broader decline in available jobs within a region. This would indicate a need to think about and examine
ways to attract industry to a region and/or provide
career training opportunities.

Human services are directly charged with mitigating
the downstream consequences flowing from these
macro level or structural factors. However, there
is a parallel need to work upstream to prevent
these needs from arising in the first place. Thus,
when focusing on downstream conditions, there
should always be a broader conversation about
midstream and upstream contributors and possible
interventions. This ensures any intervention can
have the greatest effect. One human service provider
eloquently expressed this desire to focus upstream:
“If we’re talking about dreams here… we really
need to go upstream and start working with
people before they get into crisis and need to be
connected to care. We need to preempt [crises]
when people are younger, when babies are being
born. ...Getting them access to education, stable
housing and food would make a huge difference so
they don’t end up in crisis.”

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 10

SOCIAL AND STRUCTURAL

DETERMINANTS OF HEALTH
These mid- and upstream factors are often called
social or structural determinants of health. These
non-medical factors influence health outcomes and
are the conditions in which people are born, grow,
work, live, and age, and the wider set of forces
and systems shaping the conditions of daily life.

As described above, community members often
mentioned these in the same breath as the challenge
they were experiencing. Similarly, while nonprofit
Figure 4. Upstream and Downstream Approach to Health
Source: Jon Warner
Figure 5. Root Causes of Inequities
organizations identified some of the workforce
challenges to attracting and retaining diverse
service providers, they also noted the high cost of
housing and funding limitations (e.g., funders not
supporting operational costs) that were barriers to
providing a living wage. One faith-based organization
representative said that:
“We feel that problem [living wage] acutely as a
church because we have to pay…we can’t compete
with Google, and Facebook. We’re a nonprofit,
a church. And so we need employees who work
here and who live here. It doesn’t do much good
to have a pastor who lives in Tracy or Modesto or
Stockton. So in some ways, the nonprofit world and
the church world face the same challenges that
the schools do in getting teachers here, or police
officers or firefighters to live here.”

ROOT CAUSES
Troughout this needs assessment, participants
identified several social or structural determinants
that helped to create the current conditions that the
region is experiencing. These are best understood
Source: Health Resources in Action (HRiA)
COPD
Cancer
Behavior
Problems
Depression Hypertension
Diabetes
Heart
Disease Obesity
Injury
Social
Connections
Smoking
Substance
Use Stress
Lack of
exercise
Diet
Falls
Built Environment
Education
Violence and Trauma
Employment
Housing
Social Environments
Heterosexism
Classism
Racism
Poverty
Ableism
Sexism
Structural &
Institutional
Barriers
Distribution of
resources
Ageism
Religious
Prejudice
Xenophobia

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 11
as root causes. In this needs assessment, these
included housing and land use policies, racism and
discrimination, the cost of living and inflation, policy, various structures and institutions, and funding
streams.

The integration of this framework was particularly
important in the development of recommendations.

There is an immediate need to provide human
services for those suffering in the Tri-Valley. However, there is an equally pressing need to work systemically
to remove the root causes of that suffering. This
need informed the Approach Recommendations
to consider a series of North Star questions to
guide the selection and implementation of any
strategy to support the health and wellbeing of Tri-
Valley residents. It also called for community- and
organizational-level challenges and opportunities to
answer ‘What are the upstream conditions that have
created this need that we might address through
strategies that have a community impact?’
Report Considerations
A needs assessment is a powerful tool, representing
the elevated needs of community members,
nonprofit organizations, and direct service providers.

Triangulation with census and other published data
sources gives a representation of the human service
needs and resources in the Tri-Valley. However,
while we made significant efforts to engage a broad
subsection of people from each of the three cities
across a variety of identity characteristics, it is
believed that complete representation is not possible.

Further, although efforts were made to project
future needs, especially in the grounding of the life-
course perspective, time will age these findings as
the cities and region evolve after these results and
recommendations are published.

This is not to suggest that these findings are
inherently invalid, but rather a call for the varied
audiences to use this report as a starting point for
conversation and reflection. The perspectives of
those who do not see their experiences and priorities
represented here are just as valid as those who do. If
you disagree with the findings or recommendations
here, or identify needs that have not been elevated,

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENT
consider this an invitation to advocate for change by
raising your individual or collective voice in service of continuing to advance collaborative change.

Additionally, as indicated in the discussion of Root
Causes and Social and Structural Determinants of
Health, many of the needs identified herein represent
downstream consequences of structural conditions
outside the control of those meeting human service
needs. This document can also serve as evidence of
the need for continued upstream efforts to reduce
the need for human services more broadly. We
encourage the use of this document as a mobilizing
force to those continuing to advance systemic change.

Let’s go back to the G family. Laura does
not speak English very well and feels shame
when trying to begin a conversation with her
neighbor who only speaks English. This shame
was magnified one day when she was walking
with her daughter Alexa on a beautiful spring
day.

Laura and Alexa were having a conversation in
Spanish when a person walking behind them
said: “Speak English, this is America.”
As limited as Laura’s English is, she knew what
this person meant. Not only did this make
Laura even more insecure, but Alexa began to
doubt whether she should speak a language
other than English in public. Recently, she
missed a few medical appointments because
the worried about her ability to communicate
with her providers.

PAGE 12
VI. METHODS
Leveraging the guiding theoretical frameworks and
values, the EACHSNA update used quantitative and
qualitative methods to meet the needs assessment
objectives. The process also involved substantial
intentionality and involvement of the voice of Tri-
Valley community members throughout. The overall
approach included four phases: 1 landscape scan;
2 advisory group development; 3 qualitative and
quantitative data collection; and 4) analysis of
findings.

Foundational Steps: Gathering Input
and Establishing Advisory Groups
Landscape Scan
JSI started the project with an initial landscape
scan guided by interviews, engaging individuals at a
community event, and creation of a social services
inventory. The goals of the landscape scan included:

1. Establishing a preliminary understanding of the
context in which human services are provided in
the Tri-Valley and the people and organizations
giving and receiving them.

2. Creating a social services inventory of human
services in the Tri-Valley.

3. Identifying individuals for the project’s advisory
groups – Steering Committee, Community Liaison
and EAPAC.

4. Establishing connections with organizations
to facilitate recruitment for focus groups and
interviews.

Individual’s names, events, and organiz
ations were
initially provided by the core city staff and the
Human Services Joint Commission. Interviewees
also connected the JSI Project Team with additional
Tri-Valley organizations and individuals who they
thought should be involved in the project (i.e.,
snowball sampling). The JSI Project Team interviewed
individuals from different human service sectors and
who serve a diverse range of communities within the
Tri-Valley.

During the landscape scan, the team interviewed
13 executives, staff members, and volunteers from
nonprofits, county agencies, and schools. These
conversations consisted of questions focused on:
• The identification of the most pressing issues in
the community.
•
•
•
Whether the individual was part of the previous
needs assessment work or the implementation of
emergent recommendations.

The identification of priority populations and
organizational or individual contacts through
whom they might be engaged.

Whether they had any reports or other data that
could help inform this needs assessment.

Notes were tak
en during the interview and coded
independently by two JSI Project Team members
to identify significant themes. These initial findings
were presented to the Steering Committee and at
the Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton City Council
meetings. They were also used to develop subsequent
interview and focus group guides, particularly for the
nonprofit focus groups.

The JSI Project Team also attended La Familia’s Dia
de los Muertos Community Event. At this event, JSI
talked with community members and residents in
English and Spanish about what they loved and what
they would change about their community.

After collecting this preliminary information and
gaining input from the Joint Commission and at
City Council meetings, JSI recruited members and
developed the EAPAC and the Steering Committee.

These committees informed data collection efforts,
identified priority populations, and helped reach
individuals and organizations.

Joint Commission and City Council Meetings
At the beginning of the project, the JSI Project Team
met with each Human Services Commission and City
Council to present the needs assessment approach,
gather feedback, and refine priority populations from
city leadership. The table below includes the dates of
each of these meetings.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 13
Table 1. Meetings Attended by the JSI Project Team

EVENT DATE
Joint Human Services Commission
Meeting, Pleasanton
November 2,
2022
Dublin City Council Meeting April 4, 2023
Pleasanton City Council Meeting April 18, 2023
Livermore City Council Meeting June 12, 2023
Needs Assessment Website

ROLE RESPONSIBILITY COMPOSITION
Community
Liaison
Serve on both the Steering Committee and
EAPAC, connect the JSI Project Team, city staff,
and community members. Provide historical and
current context on best practices for community
engagement in the Tri-Valley.

One individual who has experience
in direct service work, a Tri-Valley
community member, understanding of
human services landscape in Tri-Valley
EAPAC Support community connections and qualitative
data process, co-facilitate focus groups, and
provide feedback on interview tools and
preliminary data analysis and overall process.

Community members, human service
providers, recipients of Tri-Valley services
Compensated role for community
members
Steering
Committee
Provide oversight of the project, support the
assessment process, review work plan and status
of project activities, support logistics and project
requirements, coordinate events, and preview
deliverables.

Tri-Valley city representatives, County
staff, nonprofit leadership, and select JSI
Project Team members
In alignment with the equity framework principle of
equitable data practices, process information was
made available through the website www.
mytrivalley.org throughout the Needs Assessment
The site included an explanation of what a needs
assessment is; the methodologies used in the
EACHSNA; opportunities to get involved through the
advisory or focus groups; reports on current
findings
and demographics trends; and upcoming events. All
three cities determined that the site would only be
active through the duration of the Needs Assessment
project, and any relevant data would be carried
forward into this report.

Advisory Groups Development
The JSI Project Team developed three advisory roles/
groups (see below to ensure the application of the
equity framework and guide project implementation.

The individuals who comprise these groups are
community leaders—both those with organizational
standing and those with lived experience.

Table 2. Project Advisory Roles
JSI created and presented a graphic at the Joint
Commission and City Council meetings (see Figure
6) to facilitate communication about the purpose of
each of these advisory bodies and how they would
intersect. Some JSI Project Team members were on
the Steering Committee only; others were a bridge
between the EAPAC and the Steering Committee.

The Community Liaison also served in a bridge role,
attending both EAPAC and Steering Committee
meetings. After in-depth deliberation about whether
or not to hold ongoing joint EAPAC and Advisory
Committee meetings, the decision was made to
hold the majority meetings separately given the
distinct scopes of work and responsibilities for each
group, and in recognition of the potential power
dynamics between them. The two groups were
brought together twice during the data analysis and
recommendation development phases to provide
input on and add nuance to the findings.

COMMUNITY LIAISON
The community liaison was an essential member
of the advisory groups for the Needs Assessment.

As consultants with no experience living, working,
or seeking services in the Tri-Valley, the JSI Project
Team acknowledged the potential for gaps in the
assessment. The Community Liaison had knowledge
and context to illuminate the distinct features of
and experiences within the Tri-Valley. The role also
served on both the Steering Committee and the
EAPAC. Given that the groups would not meet with
each other until the end of the project, the liaison

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 14
Figure 6. Advisory Groups for the EACHSNA
supported bidirectional communication between the
two groups, the JSI Project Team, and the Steering
Committee.

Catherine Arthur (Cat), RN, PHN, MSN, a Livermore
Valley Joint Unified School District School Nurse was
selected as the community liaison for the project. She
was initially recommended by city staff during the
landscape scan. Cat was interviewed by two members
of the JSI Project Team and selected based on her
experience as a parent/community liaison in the
school (e.g., demonstration of inclusive approach and
valuing diverse voices) and her higher-level interest/
knowledge and connection to families/community
members. In addition to working in Livermore
schools, she lives in Livermore. During the landscape
scan, Cat and others interviewed said the majority of
the Tri-Valley’s pockets of poverty are concentrated
in Livermore. Given this, it was important to have
a community liaison who understood the needs of
Livermore residents in particular.

EASTERN ALAMEDA POWER
AND

ACTION COMMITTEE
Befor
e beginning active recruitment of EAPAC
members, the JSI Project Team created a 2-page
document titled “What is a Needs Assessment?” that
described the purpose of a needs assessment, what
the EACHSNA aimed to accomplish, and its

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENT
importance and potential implications. It also
outlined the process for conducting the needs
assessment, including an explanation of quantitative
and qualitative data, the equity framework, and an
overview of the advisory groups involved. It offered
ways for community members to get involved,
including serving on the EAPAC and participation
in focus groups or interviews, and an invitation to
reach out via email. The JSI Project Team also created
an EAPAC Recruitment Flyer, which outlined the
purpose of the EAPAC, the roles and responsibilities
of members, opportunities for their professional
development, and compensation information. Both of
these materials were published in English and Spanish
and sent to community members via email, posted on
the project website, and distributed in person by the
Community Liaison.

Next, the JSI project team created an EAPAC Interest
Form, which was accessible via a QR code on the
EAPAC flier. The interest form was created using
Google Forms, published in English and Spanish,
and offered the option to complete the form on
behalf of oneself or someone else. This form
centralized contact information for interested
community members and provided information on
potential EAPAC members’ lived experiences (e.g.,
types of human services received); demographic
characteristics (to ensure representation of priority
Eastern Alameda
Power and Action
Committee
Steering
Committee
Tri-Valley
Community
Member
Community
Liason
Tri-Valley
Government
Staff
Tri-Valley
Nonprofit
Staff
JSI
Staff

PAGE 15
populations); connection to the Tri-Valley community;
and interest in serving on the EAPAC. Questions were
designed to be open-ended, optional, and require
minimal time to complete. The Community Liaison
was integral to ensuring that the language on the
form was accessible and inclusive, and that the form
was not a barrier to participation.

Twenty-seven responses were received and all
interested candidates were contacted via phone and/
or email to set up a 15–20-minute phone screen.

The JSI Project Team and Community Liaison
developed a set of questions to ask EAPAC candidates
during the phone screen:
• Would you be able to meet for 1.5 hours in the
evening once every other month?
• Are there groups of people you would not be able
to work with?
• What groups are you most comfortable working
with?
• What communities do you feel that you are most
connected with?
• We will be discussing a variety of social and health
topics throughout this process, such as adolescent
health and LGBTQIA+ advocacy. Are there any
topics you would not feel comfortable engaging
with?
• Specific follow-up questions about their
applications.

JSI Project Team members and the Community
Liaison conducted phone screens, during which notes
were taken in a shared spreadsheet and reviewed
after. Based on the initial phone screen, if there was
any uncertainty about a candidate, a second team
member conducted an additional phone conversation.

Using documentation from these calls, the JSI Project
Team and Community Liaison recommended EAPAC
members, selected to represent all three cities, with
experience accessing and/or directly providing human
services in the Tri-Valley, diverse backgrounds (e.g.,
race, ethnicity, cultural, linguistic), and representing one or more priority populations. Candidates who
were employed by a city or county government
agency and served on the Tri-Valley Human Services
Joint Commission were ineligible due to potential
conflicts of interest. The list of recommended EAPAC
members was brought to core city staff for discussion
and approval. Ten people were invited to join the
EAPAC. The other 16 candidates were thanked
for their interest and informed they had not been
selected. They were also invited to participate in a
future focus group or interview, if interested.

STEERING COMMITTEE
Steering Committee candidate selection was
informed by the landscape scan interviews and
through recommendations from the three city staff
members. The selection process ensured there
was representation from the three cities, a mix
of nonprofit, community, and Alameda County
representation, racial and ethnic diversity, and that
organizational type spanned the various categories
of human services guided by the Kaiser Family
Foundation Framework (i.e., economic stability,
neighborhood and physical environment, education,
food, community and social context, and health care
system).
8 As a result, individuals from the following
organizations were selected: Las Positas Career
Center, Livermore USD, Alameda County Social
Services, Alameda County Department of Public
Health, Axis Community Health, Alameda County
Community Health Improvement Plan, Alameda
County Housing and Community Development
Agency, Asian Pacific Islander American Public Affairs
Tri-Valley Chapter, CityServe of the Tri-Valley, Open
Heart Kitchen, and the cities of Dublin, Livermore,
and Pleasanton.

Priority Populations
From the data gathered through the landscape
scan interviews, quantitative demographic data,
City Council meetings, Human Service Commission
meetings, and advisory groups, 12 groups were
identified as priority populations for the Needs
Assessment (table 3).

Although this Needs Assessment is meant to capture
the breadth of lived experiences among residents
of the Tri-Valley, particular emphasis was placed on
the communities that were anticipated to be most
in need of human services, may have had a distinct
lived experience based on one or more identity
characteristics, and most likely to be affected by the
resulting recommendations.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 16
POPULATIONii DESCRIPTION
Faith-based leaders Individuals or groups that are part of faith-based organizations which can include but are not limited to churches, mosques, and temples.

Female heads of
households
Female members of family units who are the primary source of income in the household.

First responders Police officers, firefighters, emergency medical technicians, nurses, etc.

Indigenous communities Member of an indigenous community or tribal nation.

Individuals who are
unhoused
Individuals who have experienced being unhoused currently or in the past.

Individuals with
disabilities
Individuals who identify as a person with disabilities, including physical, intellectual, and/or developmental.

Lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender, and queer
(LGBTQ) community
Individuals or groups that identify as part of the LGBTQ community.

Livermore agricultural
workers
Agricultural workers including those who worked in winery fields, typically immigrants or refugees.

Non-English speakers Includes individuals who do not speak English or feel comfortable participating in a focus group or interview in English. Languages most commonly spoken in the Tri-Valley include Spanish, Pashto, Farsi, Mandarin, Cantonese, and Dari.

Seniors/older adults Individuals ages 65 years and older.

Those who work, but do
not live in the Tri-Valley
People who cannot afford to live in the Tri-Valley due to the high cost of living.

This often includes essential workers, such as teachers or first responders.

Youth Individuals between the ages of 14 and 25.

Table 3. Priority populations for the EACHSNA
ii Presented in alphabetical order
Within these priority population categories is an
acknowledgment of the complexity of identity, and
an honoring of the heterogeneity, or differences
in experiences, within any one category. It is also
recognized that identity is intersectional; that is,
individuals within these prioritized groups may
identify with more than one category. Those tasked
with completing this needs assessment sought to
understand and articulate the complexity of individual
lived experiences. We acknowledge that it is reductive
to presume that an individual has a particular lived
experience based on a singular or even intersectional
identity categorization. However, given the systemic
and sociopolitical factors, these individuals
may distinctly experience social and structural
determinants of health. Deeply understanding
individuals’ lived experiences and the extent to which
certain identity characteristics affected them was
therefore a key consideration in the method
selection.

ENGAGING D IFFERENT LANGUAGE GROUPS
The Steering Committee and city staff prioritized
Spanish, Pashto, Farsi, Mandarin, Cantonese, and Dari
for the EACHSNA because of the large population
of individuals in the Tri-Valley who speak them.

However, as data collection progressed, a number
of barriers to engaging speakers of these languages,
particularly Pashto, Farsi, and Dari. While recruitment materials wer
e translated into these languages, there
was insufficient infrastructure to reach community
leaders and build trust within this project’s timeframe and scope. Moving forward, deliberate strategies
must be identified and implemented to build
relationships and engage community members
meaningfully beyond the data collection period. This
could include inviting non-English or multilingual
speakers onto the project team, publishing project
materials (e.g., the project website) in all relevant
languages, and going directly t
o communities to
disseminate the findings. Trust, instrumental to

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 17
involving people who don’t speak English equitably,
must be built between and during community
engagement activities.

Quantitative Analysis and
Qualitative Data Collection
Informed by the aforementioned Foundational Steps,
the JSI Project T
eam conducted quantitative analyses,
collected primary qualitative data, and triangulated
findings using existing community-based and
regional reports
. Early in the project, preliminary
quantitative findings were produced and made public
through the EACHSNA website. This informed the
identification of priority populations, shaped the co-
design of data collection instruments in concert with
the
EAPAC, and informed and involved community
members in the Needs Assessment process.

Next, the JSI Project Team used several qualitative
methodologies to engage residents of the three cities
including tabling at community events, conducting
interviews and focus groups, and administering
intercept interviews, which involves informally
engaging available individuals in a brief conversation
about needs assessment topics. It is important to
note that the only primary data collection activity
was qualitative. It is said that quantitative data
(e.g., surveys) allow researcher to go an inch deep
and a mile wide, while qualitative data (e.g., focus
groups, interviews) go a mile deep and an inch
wide. A qualitative methodological approach was
selected to gain a more nuanced and contextualized
understanding of the lived experience of community
members (especially priority populations)
and
nonprofit organizations.

In qualitative data collection, the focus is not on
generalizability per se, meaning the goal is not to
achieve a numeric indicator that is meant to be
statistically representative of an entire community.

Rather, the metric of quality for qualitative data is
the extent to which saturation is achieved. Saturation
means that across data collection activities, no new
substantive information is arising. To achieve this,
an iterative data collection approach was taken.

This allowed periodic modification of data collection
methodologies to ensure a diverse sample was
engaged. To achieve saturation, methods were
expanded to include individual service provider and
intercept interviews.

The resulting community-level challenges and
opportunity areas and organization-level challenges
and opportunity areas were identified then cross-
checked with other regional reports to determine the
extent to which existing data supported or added
nuance to the emergent themes. Further, findings
were presented to the EAPAC and Steering
Committee in a series of joint meetings, where
both groups offered rich context to emergent
ideas and themes. Findings were also reported to
nonprofit organizations, resulting in discussion about
the prioritization of recommendations and their
feasibility. Feedback from these activities resulted
in the refinement of the theme and/or resulting
recommendation.

Quantitative Data

CENSUS DATA
The JSI Project Team drew on large amounts of
secondary data to guide and contextualize this
project. In particular, the team relied on data
published by the US Census Bureau, which are
comprehensive, systematic, standardized, and
available at granular geographic levels (the lowest and most commonly used level of geography in this report
is the census block group). These data offer insights
into age, gender, race, income level, educational
attainment, and more, providing a robust quantitative
foundation for understanding the demographic and
socioeconomic profile of the Tri-Valley and the needs
of the communities. In addition to US Census Bureau
data, data from the Environmental Protection Agency,
the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the
US Department of Housing and Urban Development,
and the US Department of Agriculture were analyzed.

A comprehensive list of all quantitative data and
census block groups can be requested from the
contact in Appendix 3.

To standardize geographic analysis, a unique
geography called “Tri-Valley” was created and used
across most of the tables, charts, and maps that
appear in this report. This geography is a set of the
most densely populated census block groups within
the larger geographic region known as the Livermore-
Pleasanton Census County Division (CCD). Both the

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 18
CCD and the Tri-Valley are visualized in Figure 1: the
CCD is the large polygon with the thick black outline
and the Tri-Valley, which sits entirely within the CCD, is outlined in red.

REGIONAL REPORTS
Additionally, this report references data found
in similar reports based on the Tri-Valley region.

Data found and used from these reports (Table 4)
supplement the primary data detailed in this needs
assessment.

Qualitative Data
Several qualitative data collection strategies were
used to obtain a sample that captured the depth and
breadth of experiences with providing and receiving
services in the Tri-Valley.

After the exploratory landscape scan and formation
of the steering committee and EAPAC, the qualitative

NAME DESCRIPTION
TVAPC 2023 Data Profile:

Just Getting by in the Tri-
Valley
A data profile detailing the demographic and population changes of Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton. It highlights issues and barriers faced by low- income households and the intersectionality of such barriers. 2019 Tri-Valley
Paratransit Study
A study exploring how effective the organization, management, and delivery of paratransit services are in the Tri-Valley area.

Stanford 2022 Community
Health Needs Assessment
Conducted by Stanford Health Care, ValleyCare to assess the health of the community in their service area, which primarily consists of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon.

John Muir Health 2022
Community Health Needs
Assessment
Explores the conditions affecting community health within the service area of John Muir Health. The service area consists largely of Contra Costa and Northern Alameda Counties, and Livermore. Data from this report about the Tri-Valley is limited to the Livermore region.

Kaiser Permanente Walnut
Creek Medical Center 2022
Community Health Needs
Assessment
A community health profile of the Kaiser Permanente Walnut Creek Medical Center’s service area, which includes Walnut Creek, Contra Costa, Antioch, and Livermore. Data for this report about the Tri-Valley is limited to the Livermore region.

Alameda County
Community Health Needs
Assessment
This Alameda County Health Care Services Agency and Public Health Department report looks at the conditions and factors influencing the health of county residents.
2022 Tri-Valley Homeless
Count and Survey
Comprehensive Report
A report documenting the Point In Time (PIT) Count including a detailed assessment of the cities of Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton. 2021-2022 2-1-1 Contact
Activity
A summary report on contact activity and client demographics for people using 2-1-1 in 2021–2022.

Table 4. Supplemental Reports
phase of the needs assessment included one-on-
one and small group interviews, focus groups with
nonprofits and community members, intercept
interviews, and interactive tabling sessions at various events throughout the Tri-Valley. In addition to
the number of individuals involved, the JSI Project
Team and the individual members of the EAPAC did
extensive outreach to priority populations through
flier distribution, posting on community forums
(Nextdoor, Facebook, etc), word of mouth, email,
and phone calls. In recruitment for focus groups
and interviews, participants were asked to answer
optional demographic questions including, age,
gender, city they live or work in, ethnicity and race,
education, marital s
tatus, languages spoken, and
household income. This allowed individuals to
identify with multiple groups and helped ensure
priority populations were engaged.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 19

QUALITATIVE DATA COLLECTION EFFORT
PEOPLE

INVOLVED
9 community focus groups
(adults + youth)
81 2 nonprofit focus groups
• executive staff
• direct service staff
19 Community tabling
• Dublin St. Patrick’s Day Festival
• La Familia Dia de los Muertos event
• Tri-Valley NonProfit Alliance Poverty
webinar
110+
Interviews with community members 29
Interviews with nonprofit leaders
and faith-based organizations
26 Interviews with first responders 3
Intercept interviews
• Axis Health Center
• Livermore Senior Center
• La Salud Health Fair: Salud y Sol End
of Summer Health Fiesta
70 TOTAL 338
Table 5. Data Collection Activity and Sample

DEMOGRAPHICS
For the majority of the primary data collection efforts, demographic data were not collected in recognition
of: 1) the discomfort of many individuals when
asked personal information, potentially resulting
in lower levels of engagement; and 2) the desire to
lessen the burden of participation, particularly for
those engaged through tabling events and intercept
interviews.

The exception to this was focus groups, in which
individuals had the option of providing demographic
information. Of the 81 individuals who participated
in focus groups, 63 elected to provide demographic
information. This information is summarized below.

These data points should be interpreted with caution
and with the reminder that they do not reflect
the demographics of people engaged in individual
interviews, intercept surveys, or tabling events.

Participants were asked how to describe themselves
(capturing racial and ethnic demographics), and the
response category allowed for multiple selections
to capture individuals who self-identified as
multiracial. The largest proportion of participants
self-identified as white (41.9%), followed by East
Asian (20.9%) which includes Chinese, Filipino, and
Japanese ancestry
. Hispanic, Latino, and Spanish
origin represented 9.7% of respondents. The other
participants included South Asian (e.g., Indian,
Pakistani, Bangladeshi) at 8.1%; and Black or African
American, including Jamaican, Haitian, Nigerian, and
Ethiopian at 8.1%. 6.5% of respondents selected
multiple racial or ethnic categories while 4.8% of
respondents indicated that they preferred not to
answer this question.

The majority of participants (40.3%) had less than a
high school diploma, while 8.1% had a high school
diploma or an associate’s degree (3.2%). 22.6% had a
bachelor’s degree, and 17.8% had a master’s degree
or higher. Annual household income ranged from
$35,000 to more than $200,000, with the majority
(40.3%) indicating that they preferred not to answer.

Languages spoken by focus group participants
included English, Hindi, Spanish, Mandarin, and
Cantonese.

REPRESENTATION AND IMPLICIT BIAS
Throughout this project, the JSI Project T
eam
collaborated closely with city staff, the Steering
Committee, EAPAC, and other partners to inform the
approach to data collection, analysis, and
recommendations. Key considerations, including
representation across the three cities, as well as
distinctions within and between cities, were revisited.

As mentioned, when discussing priority populations
and the data collection design, the focus was on
understanding the c
omplexity of lived experiences for
individuals most in need of human services, balanced
against the need to ensure broad representation.

Throughout this process and in close collaboration
with
the EAPAC, the JSI Project Team often questioned
its own implicit biases and the potential biases of
those involved. In addition to this ongoing internal
work, the findings were triangulated with census data
and regional reports to determine the extent to which
lived experiences were reflected in existing data.

Additionally, a recurring question arose of whether
there were substantive differences between cities or
whether findings and the resulting recommendations
were experienced regionally. Initially, distinct efforts were made to collect within-city data, as significant

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 20
differences within each were anticipated. As data
collection and analysis progressed, however, it was
found that issues were largely cross-cutting. For
example, participants from all three cities identified
concerns about housing, health and mental health
services, substance use, transportation, and more.

Additionally, youth from each city identified similar
and overlapping themes. Further, participants
proposed more regional recommendations.

Nonetheless, there are some distinctions between the
three cities, and many human services are funded or
implemented within cities. Thus, the primary findings
are organized by cross-cutting themes driven by the
data. To add context and nuances, these findings are
supplemented with city-specific data from census
data and other published reports, where possible.

NONPROFIT FOCUS GROUPS
Focus groups with nonprofits were conducted to
more fully explore the emerging themes from the
landscape scan interviews. Steering Committee and
JSI Project Team members circulate a Google form
to indicate interest in and availability in the focus
groups. A total of 43 respondents, including nonprofit
and city government organizations members,
completed the form.

Because nonprofit executives and leaders have
insights that are qualitatively different from those
who work in more client-facing roles, the two
sessions were separated into direct service staff
and executives. This accounted for power dynamics
and created an environment of peers in each case.

Both focus groups were conducted over Zoom and
recorded so that the JSI Project Team could code and
analyze generated transcripts. Three JSI Project Team
members were in attendance. Two co-facilitated and
the third took notes to ensure the recordings were
captured and provide technical assistance necessary
to support participation.

The JSI Project Team drafted a different facilitation
guide for each nonprofit focus group. Input and
feedback were solicited from Steering Committee
members so that questions were relevant and
aligned with the objectives of the focus groups.

These objectives included learning more about
the experiences of nonprofit staff in Tri-Valley,
including organizational needs and partnerships
and understanding the human services strengths,
challenges, and opportunities, and recommendations
to improve them.

The first nonprofit focus group was held with 11
direct service staff on March 16, 2023. The nonprofit
focus group for executives was conducted on March
22, 2023 with 17 individuals. Unlike the direct service staff group, this session included both Steering
Committee members and other nonprofit executive
staff. Findings from these focus groups informed
organizational-level challenges and opportunity areas
and the development of recommendations.

COMMUNITY FOCUS GROUPS
Just as the St
eering Committee was involved in the
co-design of nonprofit focus groups, EAPAC members
were integral to the design and implementation
of community focus groups. Members spent a
considerable amount of time inside and outside
scheduled meetings providing feedback on interview
guides and recruitment materials and spreading the
word on social media and in-person.

Recruitment. EAPAC and JSI Project Team members
created several physical and electronic copies of
fliers that could be circulated on social media and
in-person. Fliers included basic information about
the Needs Assessment and a QR code that linked to
a separate community member focus group interest
form. In addition to inquiring about city of residence/ occupation, preferred modality (e.g., online or in
person), and available dates, a set of preliminary
demographics questions was included. While all
participants who completed the form were invited
to participate in their top-choice focus group, the
demographic questions allowed the JSI Project Team
members to assess who had been made aware of and
expressed interest in participating in focus groups
so that recruitment and outreach efforts could be
altered if needed. The form also included a question
on what services, if any, a participant had or was
currently receiving.

Structure. While the nonprofit focus groups were
separated along direct service provision/executive
leadership roles to control for power, a different set
of circumstances influenced the structuring of focus
groups with community members. For one, there had
been strong interest from the Joint Human Service
Commission and Steering Committee members to

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 21
extract themes and findings that were city-specific
so that the Human Services Commissions of Dublin,
Livermore, and Pleasanton could use the data to more
accurately implement any resultant interventions.

Conducting separate focus groups specific to Dublin,
Livermore, and Pleasanton, then, was a natural
organizing practice to produce city-specific results.
(As noted above, as data collection and analysis
progressed, this evolved to have a more regional-
focus). To maximize accessibility and convenience,
adult focus groups for all three cities were offered
over Zoom and in-person at the Dublin and Livermore
public libraries. Each focus group was led by two
to three co-facilitators and a notetaker/recorder.

In-person sessions were recorded using physical
recording devices.

The final consideration that influenced the structure
of community focus groups was the separation
of youth (under 20) from adults. The idea for this
division came from EAPAC members, particularly
the youth in high school, who felt strongly that the
challenges and experiences of young people in the
Tri-Valley were fundamentally different from those
of older community members. As such, a set of three
youth-specific focus groups, two in-person and one
virtual, was conducted.

Capacity Building through Facilitation. All focus
groups for adults and youth were co-designed and co-
facilitated by the JSI Project Team and selected EAPAC
members. Though this was not originally written into
the project design, after several EAPAC members
expressed interest, the JSI Project Team led a
capacity-building workshop to share best practices in
data collection and focus group facilitation. A subset
of EAPAC members had experience with community
engagement and facilitation and shared their
expertise in this training. This was an opportunity
for the JSI Project Team to meet its commitment to
capacity building.

EAPAC members ensured that questions were written
with accessible language, follow-up probes were
phrased so that they could be naturally introduced
into conversation, and the length of the guide was
manageable. While selected individuals from the JSI
Project Team attended and supported facilitation,
the priority was on building the capacity of EAPAC
facilitators to use the focus group guides and lead the conversations.

It is difficult to overstate EAPAC members’
involvement as co-facilitators effect on the quality of community member focus group data. Their presence
allowed participants to share insights and details that they may not have had JSI Project Team members
been the only facilitators. Their familiarity with the
Tri-Valley community was also crucial to establishing
trust between participants, as EAPAC facilitators
generally understood context-specific details like
places and organizations that participants directly
or indirectly referenced. Most importantly, EAPAC
facilitators were close, empathetic listeners who
offered emotional support to participants who shared
intimate, vulnerable stories and anecdotes. Often,
participants offered advice, resources, and support
to one another, going as far as to give the names of
coordinators and organizations.

Youth focus groups also benefited greatly from youth
EAPAC members as co-facilitators. They brought
the same empathy and critical listening skills to an
environment that allowed young participants to
discuss challenges and experiences that, as predicted,
were qualitatively different from those of adults.

INDIVIDUAL INTERVIEWS
In addition to focus groups, several individual
interviews were conducted with other community
members and leaders and selected categories
of service providers. Leaders of faith-based
organizations were individually interviewed during
the qualitative data collection phase, since their
organizations were well-known for providing social
services related to food and shelter in the community.

Additionally, individual interviews were conducted
with first responders, who are often called to respond
to individuals in crisis and have first-hand knowledge
about the types of emergency services needed.

Finally, upon initial review of the linguistic
representativeness of focus group participants,
the Steering Committee felt that it was important
to conduct additional outreach to communities
that primarily spoke a language other than English.

After close collaboration with the EAPAC and select
Steering Committee members, it was decided that

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 22
engaging individuals from these communities with
the remaining time and lack of existing infrastructure
could risk tokenizing their experiences and create
further mistrust. As an alternative, an effort was
made to better understand the lived experiences of
non-English speaking communities through interviews
with the nonprofit providers that serve them. It is an
imperfect approach, as discussed, but determined to
have the lowest risk of harm. This experience
illuminated the need to establish relationships
with non-English speaking residents of the Tri-Valley,
which subsequently informed an Approach
Recommendation.

TABLING E VENTS AND INTERCEPT IN

TERVIEWS
Another follow-up from the initial review of focus
group themes with the Steering Committee was the
need to more thoroughly engage Spanish speakers
and older adults. In an effort to bring the Needs
Assessment process closer to these communities, a
series of intercept interviews was conducted at the
main Axis Health Center in Pleasanton, the Livermore
Senior Center, and the La Salud family health fair in
Livermore. Intercept interviews were conducted by
approaching patients and residents, offering a brief
explanation of the Needs Assessment, and asking
three short questions.

Finally, the JSI Project Team conducted a series of
tabling events at popular community functions such
as the Dublin St. Patrick’s Day festival and the Día
de Los Muertos event hosted by La Familia. The JSI
Project Team also attended a webinar hosted by
the Tri-Valley NonProfit Alliance titled “Race, Power
and Poverty: Understanding How These Factors
Impact Socio-Economic Status in the Tri-Valley.”
The purpose of attending these events was to build
an understanding of the Tri-Valley and the various
communities within it. These events were also an
opportunity to inform the community of the Needs
Assessment and opportunities to participate.

VII. FINDINGS
STRENGTHSiv
Community cohesion
Diversity
Health care and mental health services
Nonprofits and support services
Recreation
Schools and educational excellence
This section presents results from the quantitative
secondary data analysis and primary qualita
tive data
collection activities. [For more information on how
data were collected and analyzed, see the Methods
section.] Table 6 outlines the strengths and the
community and organizational level challenges and
opportunity areas. The findings are complete with
hyperlinks for convenient navigation to detailed
subsections of the report.

Table 6. Strengths, Challenges, and Opportunities
iv Organized alphabetically.
v Organized by challenges mentioned most frequently, followed by youth-specific findings. vi Organized by challenges mentioned most frequently.

COMMUNITY LEVEL CHALLENGES/
OPPORTUNITY AREASv
Housing
Health care
Mental health
Service provision, awareness, and navigation
Linguistic/cultural responsiveness
Substance use
Safety
Transportation
Youth

ORGANIZATIONAL LEVEL CHALLENGES/
OPPORTUNITY AREASvi
Service awareness and duplication
Workforce
Perception of need and funding
Emergency preparation
Racial/linguistic/cultural responsiveness

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 23
vii Approximately 3,000 people who live in Dublin are in adult correctional facilities (e.g., FCI Dublin), but are not represented by the statistics in this report, including the 2021 population estimate. Additionally, some students in the Livermore school district do not live in Alameda County. They are not represented by the statistics in this report.

Figure 7. People per Square Mile
Geographies shown are
census block groups
a total population of just under 80,000. Dublin is the
smallest, most densely populated, and fastest
growing municipality, with a total population of ap-
proximately 70,000.
vii
Since the 2010 census, Dublin’s population has in-
creased by 50%, a rate that far outpaced the other
two municipalities in the Tri-Valley (see Table 7).

Sources: US Census Bureau 2020, 2021
People per square mile
Tri-Valley
Livermore Pleasanton CCD,
Alameda County, CA
Several of the themes outlined in the findings include
quotes from the qualitative data collection processes.

These quotes are not the sole source of qualitative
data from which a given theme arises but are rather
meant to offer articulations of a given strength
or challenge in a community member’s or service
provider’s own words. It is also important to note
that these findings represent people’s perceptions of
services needed, which may at times differ from the
existence of available services. Discrepancies between
the perception and existence of services may reflect
areas in need of promotion and awareness-raising
efforts.

Demographic Trends in the Tri-Valley
Population
As of 2021, approximately 238,000 people resided in
the Tri-Valley (see Figure 7 and Table 7). Livermore is the largest municipality in the Tri-Valley, with a total population of just over 88,000. Pleasanton is home to
TOTAL

POPULATION
(2021)
TOTAL

POPULATION
(2010)

PERCENT
CHANGE
(2010–2021)
Dublin 69,818 46,407 50
Livermore 88,403 81,666 8
Pleasanton 79,558 70,197 13
Tri-Valley 237,779 198,270 20
Table 7. Total Population and Percent Change
Sources: US Census Bureau; US Census Bureau ACS 5-year
Note: Percent change calculated as the difference between the total in 2021 and the total in 2010 divided by the total in 2010.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 24
Figure 8. Historic and Projected Population Growth
Sources: US Census Bureau, US Census Bureau ACS 5-year
Livermore, CA Pleasanton, CA Dublin, CA
Total Population
younger than the state and the county. Pleasanton
is the oldest municipality in the region, where the
median age is 41 years, 4 years older than California’s median age (37 years). People over age 65 account
for just under 15% of Pleasanton’s population, and
people over age 85 account for just under 2%.

As seen in Table 8, the total number of children in
Dublin is projected to increase over the next 5 to 7
years, while the number of children in Livermore and
Pleasanton is projected to increase only slightly and
level off. By contrast, over this same time period, the number of seniors is projected to steadily increase
in Livermore and Pleasanton, but level off and only
slightly increase in Dublin over the same period
(Figure 11). The current median age mix across the
Tri-Valley is well illustrated by Figure 12, which shows where the youngest census block groups (dark green)
and oldest census block groups (dark purple) are
located. Again, Dublin stands out as being significantly younger than the other two municipalities.

The total population in all three municipalities is
projected to continue to climb over the next 5 to 7
years, with Dublin’s growth outpacing the other two.

By 2030, given these projected growth rates, it is like- ly that Dublin’s total population will be roughly the
same as Pleasanton’s (Figure 8).

Age
The median age in the Tri-Valley region (40.5 years)
is 3.5 years older than in California overall (37 years) and nearly 3 years older than in Alameda County
(38 years). All three municipalities in the Tri-Valley
have approximately the same number of children
(between 18,000 and 20,000) as of 2021 (Table 8).

Dublin is the youngest municipality in the region,
where children make up more than one-quarter of
the population (27%), a fact that is reflected by the
geographic distribution of children in Map 2. It is the only municipality whose median age (36.5 years) is

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 25

MEDIAN AGE

IN YEARS

POPULATION
UNDER AGE 5

POPULATION
UNDER AGE 18

POPULATION
AGE 18–64

POPULATION
AGE 65

AND OVER

POPULATION
AGE 85

AND OVER
Dublin 36.5 7.6%
(5,296)

26.6%
(18,564)
64%
(44,664)

9.4 (6,590)

0.7 (473)
Livermore 40.4 6.9
(6,111)

22.6 (19,963)

63.9 (56,463)

13.5 (11,977)

1.9 (1,718)
Pleasanton 41.1 4.8
(3,785)

24.0 (19,096)

61.1 (48,629)

14.9 (11,833)

1.9 (1,486)
Tri-Valley 40.5 6.4 24.2 62.8 13.0 1.6
Alameda
County
38 5.6 20.6 65.4 14.0 1.8
California 37 6% 22.8 62.8 14.4 1.8
Table 8. Population by Age and Location
Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Note: Percentages reflect the area’s total population. Parenthetical numbers count individuals in each category.

Figure 9. Population Under Age 18 (Children)
Geographies shown are
census block groups
Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Population Under Age 18 (Children)

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 26
Figure 10. Historic and Projected Trends in Number of Children Sources: US Census Burea, US Census Bureau ACS 5-year
Children are people under age 18
Livermore, CA Pleasanton, CA Dublin, CA
Number of Children
Figure 11. Historic and Projected Trends in Number of Seniors Sources: US Census Burea, US Census Bureau ACS 5-year
Seniors are people age 65 and older
Livermore, CA Pleasanton, CA Dublin, CA
Number of Seniors

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 27
Figure 12. Median Population Age
Geographies shown are
census block groups
Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Race and Ethnicity
Since 2000, the white non-Hispanic population of
the Tri-Valley region has declined both proportionally
and by count (Table 9). Even with this decline, the
region remains substantially whiter (43% white) than
Alameda County (30% white) and the state (36%
white) (Table 9). Dublin is the least white municipality in the region, where non-Hispanic whites account for
29% of the population. Livermore is the municipality
in the Tri-Valley with the highest percentage of those
who identify as white (Figure 13), accounting for 55%
of the total population. Whites account for 44% of the
total population in Pleasanton.

Over the coming 5 to 7 years, the white non-Hispanic
population is predicted to continue to decline in
Pleasanton. It is expected to remain relatively stable
in Dublin and Livermore. Proportionally, the white
non-Hispanic population is projected to continue
to decrease in all municipalities as non-white
populations are projected to continue to increase
proportionally (Figure 14).

At 2% of the total population, the proportion of Black
non-Hispanic individuals living in the Tri-Valley is
substantially lower than in Alameda County (10%) and
the state (5%). As illustrated in Figure 15, Dublin is
home to the largest Black population in the region

WHITE NON-HISPANIC

POPULATION

BLACK NON-HISPANIC

POPULATION

ASIAN NON-HISPANIC

POPULATION

HISPANIC

POPULATION
Dublin 28.8 (20,078) 3.6 (2,517) 52.3 (36,526) 9.6 (6,688) Livermore 55 (48,578) 1.7 (1,528) 14.7 (12,975) 22.8 (20,176) Pleasanton 43.5 (34,606) 1.8 (1,397) 38.9 (30,972) 10.8 (8,605) Tri-Valley 43.4 2.3 33.5 15.2
Alameda County 29.9 9.9 31.4 22.4
California 35.8 5.4 14.7 39.5
Table 9. Race and Ethnicity by Location
Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Note: Percentages reflect the area’s total population. Parenthetical numbers count individuals in each category.

Median Age (Years)

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 28
Figure 13. Percent of Population Who Are White Non-Hispanic Percent of Population that
is White non-Hispanic
Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Geographies shown are
census block groups
Figure 14. Historic and Projected Trends in Number of People Who Are White Non-Hispanic Sources: US Census Bureau; US Census Bureau ACS 5-year
Livermore, CA Pleasanton, CA Dublin, CA
Number of White non-Hispanic People

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 29
Percent of Population
that is Black non-Hispanic
Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Geographies shown are
census block groups
Figure 15. Percent of Population Who Is Black Non-Hispanic Figure 16. Historic and Projected Trends in Number of People Who Are Black Non-Hispanic Sources: US Census Bureau; US Census Bureau ACS 5-year
Livermore, CA Pleasanton, CA Dublin, CA
Number of Black non-Hispanic People

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 30
Figure 17. Percent of Population Who Are Asian Non-Hispanic Percent of Population
that is Asian non-Hispanic
Geographies shown are
census block groups
Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Figure 18. Historic and Projected Trends in Number of People Who Are Asian Non-Hispanic Sources: US Census Bureau; US Census Bureau ACS 5-year
Livermore, CA Pleasanton, CA Dublin, CA
Number of Asian non-Hispanic People

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 31
proportionally and by count (4%; 2,517 – see Table 9)
though the number and proportion of Black
individuals in Dublin declined sharply in the last 10
years (Figure 16). The Black population is projected
to rise in Livermore and Pleasanton over the next 5
to 7 years, though Dublin is still projected to have the largest Black population in the Tri-Valley (Figure 16).

Proportionally, the population residing in the Tri-
Valley region is significantly more Asian than the
California population overall (Table 9). Asians who

INDIAN CHINESE FILIPINO KOREAN
OTHER

ASIAN VIETNAMESE JAPANESE PAKISTANI TAIWANESE
Dublin 25.6
(17,857)

13.7 (9,592)

4.8 (3,380)

2.6 (1,793)

2.2 (1,518)

1.7 (1,186)

0.6 (428)

0.6 (423)

0.4 (269)
Livermore 5.2
(4,583)

2.5 (2,180)

3.0 (2,647)

0.7 (627)

0.6 (553)

1.3 (1,120)

0.4 (391)

0.2 (148)

0.1 (94)
Pleasanton 19.0
(1,508)

10.9 (8,667)

1.7 (1,331)

3.0 (2,347)

1.4 (1,140)

0.8 (644)

0.7 (578)

0.6 (515)

0.6 (510)
Tri-Valley 15.8 8.6 3.1 2.0 1.4 1.2 0.6 0.5 0.4
Alameda
County

8.5 10.4 5.3 1.2 1.5 2.0 0.7 0.4 0.5
California 2.1 3.9 3.3 1.2 0.7 1.7 0.7 0.2 0.2
Table 10. Percent and Number of Non-Hispanic Asian Nationalities and Ethnic Groups by Location Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017–2021
Note: Percentages reflect the area’s total population. Parenthetical numbers are individuals in each category. are non-Hispanic account for 15% of the state’s total
population, but they make up 34% of the population
in the Tri-Valley (Table 9). A majority of people
(52%; 36,526) who live in Dublin identify as Asians
who are non-Hispanic. Pleasanton is also home to
a large number of Asians who are non-Hispanic
(30,972), who account for 39% of its total population
(Table 9). The concentration of Asians in these two
municipalities is made evident by Figure 17. As
seen in Figure 18, the number of Asians who are
non-Hispanic grew dramatically between 2010 and
Figure 19. Percent of Population Who Are Hispanic
Percent of Population
that is Hispanic
Geographies shown are
census block groups
Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 32
Figure 20. Historic and Projected Trends in Number of People Who Are Hispanic Sources: US Census Bureau; US Census Bureau ACS 5-year
Livermore, CA Pleasanton, CA Dublin, CA
Number of Hispanic People
2020. In fact, the proportion of Asians who are non-
Hispanic in the Tri-Valley region doubled between
2010 and 2020. Asians accounted for 34% of the total
population in 2020, compared to 17% of the total
population in 2010. At the regional (Tri-Valley) level, the proportion of all other racial groups declined
during this period.

The category of Asians who are non-Hispanic captures
many different nationalities and ethnic groups (Table
10). Approximately 26% of the over 142,000 Indian
Americans who live in Alameda County reside in the
Tri-Valley. Over half of these individuals (17,857) live in Dublin, where they account for more than 25% of
the municipality’s total population.

The Tri-Valley’s population is 15% Hispanic, a
substantially lower proportion than in the state
(40%) and Alameda County (22%) (Table 9). As seen
in Figure 19, the largest Hispanic population in the
Tri-Valley (by both proportion and count) is located
in Livermore, where Hispanics account for 23% of the
total population (an increase from 2010, when they
represented 21% of Livermore’s total population).

Although the total number of Hispanics living in the
Tri-Valley has increased since 2010, proportionally the group has slightly decreased (15% in 2021 compared
to 16% in 2010). Its proportional share is predicted to increase in the next 5 to 7 years (Figure 20).

Taken together, these data demonstrate that the
overall population increase in the Tri-Valley in the last decade was mostly driven by: 1) a dramatic increase
in the number of Asian (non-Hispanic) individuals
living in the region, particularly in Dublin and
Pleasanton; and 2) a slight increase in the number of
Hispanic individuals living in the region, particularly in Livermore and Dublin. In the coming years, the
Tri-Valley is projected to continue to grow, become
less white, more Asian and Hispanic, and—except for
Dublin—older.

Economic Stability
By many measures, as seen in Table 11, the Tri-Valley
has a relatively high level of economic stability, partic- ularly as compared to the state and county. Table 12
references the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), a measure
used to determine eligibility for various government
programs and benefits. For example, to be eligible
for Medi-Cal adults must be at up to 138% FPL, while
Medi-Cal for children is up to 266% FPL.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 33

UNEMPLOYMENT
RATE (%)
MEDIAN

HOUSEHOLD INCOME
Dublin 3.7 $171,168
Livermore 3.3 $139,904
Pleasanton 4.0 $167,932
Tri-Valley 3.6 $150,427
Alameda
County

5.0 $112,017
California 6.5 $84,097
Table 11. Unemployment Rate and
Median Household Income by Location
Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Note: Percentages in column 1 reflect the total civilian labor force age 16 and over that is unemployed in each area. Percentages in columns 3 and 4 reflect the area’s total population for whom poverty status is determined. Parenthetical numbers are counts of individuals in each category.

BELOW 100%

FEDERAL POVERTY
LEVEL
BELOW 200%

FEDERAL POVERTY
LEVEL
Dublin 3.7 (2,501) 7.6 (5,234)
Livermore 4.0 (3,502) 11.5 (10,134)
Pleasanton 4.8 (3,834) 8.7 (6,895)
Tri-Valley 4.2 9.6
Alameda
County

8.9 19.4
California 12.3 28.5
Table 12. Federal Poverty Level by Location
Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017–2021
Note: Percentages in columns 1 and 2 reflect the area’s total population for whom poverty status is determined. Parenthetical numbers are individuals in each category.
% FPL 0% 100% 150% 200%

HOUSEHOLD SIZE
1 $0 $14,580 $21,870 $29,160
2 $0 $19,720 $29,580 $39,440
3 $0 $24,860 $37,290 $49,720
4 $0 $30,000 $45,000 $60,000
5 $0 $35,140 $52,710 $70,280
6 $0 $40,280 $60,420 $80,560
7 $0 $45,420 $68,130 $90,840
8 $0 $50,560 $75,840 $101,120
add’l,
add $0 $5,140 $7,710 $10,280
Table 13. Income Cutoffs for
Federal Poverty Level by Household Size
Source: Covered California,
https://www.coveredca.com/pdfs/FPL-chart.pdf
When comparing 100% and 200% FPL, the key
difference lies in the income threshold: 100% FPL
is the baseline measure and means that a person’s
or a family’s income is at the threshold defined as
poverty for their household size; 200% FPL indicates
an income level that is twice the baseline. The
income cutoffs for households of different sizes are
enumerated in Table 13.

The poverty level in the Tri-Valley is half that of the county (4.2% compared to 8.9% of the population)
and just one-third that of the state (12.3%). The
region also has a relatively low unemployment rate:

3.6% in the Tri-Valley compared to 5% in Alameda
County and 6.5% in California overall (Table 12).

Figure 21 shows more recent unemployment statistics
reported by the California Employment Development
Department. The spike in unemployment in all three
municipalities in 2020 is directly attributable to the
COVID-19 pandemic. Unemployment rates in the
region have not returned to their pre-pandemic
levels, but even so they remain significantly lower
than unemployment at the county and state levels.

As seen in Figure 22, the median household income
is more than $160,000 in almost half of the census
block groups in the Tri-Valley, nearly double the state median household income (Table 11). The gap in
median household income between the Tri-Valley and
the state is projected to increase over the next 5 to 7 years (Figure 23).

Median household income can be somewhat
misleading, however. Using different measures
and disaggregating the data illustrates that some
regions and populations of the Tri-Valley are more
economically disadvantaged than others. The FPL
accounts for cost of living, so it is a more robust
measure of poverty than median household income.

Figure 24 shows the proportion of the population in
each census block group that is below the FPL.

Table 14 shows the racial breakdown of people living
in poverty in each municipality as of 2021. One would
expect the poverty rate for each group to roughly
align with its proportion of the total population. For
example, if white people account for 25% of the
population in a place, one might expect that 25%
of the impoverished population in that same place
would be white. If the rate is substantially higher or

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 34
Figure 22. Median Household Income
Median Household Incomes
Geographies shown are
census block groups
Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Figure 21. Unemployment Rates by Year
Source: TVAPC Data Profile, 20231,5
Dublin Livermore PleasantonCalifornia EDD, 2023

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 35
Figure 23. Historic and Projected Trends in Median Household Income Sources: US Census Bureau; US Census Bureau ACS 5-year
Livermore, CA Pleasanton, CA Dublin, CA
Median Household Income in Dollars
Alameda County, CA California
Figure 24. Percent of People Below Federal Poverty Level Percent of People
Below Poverty Level
Geographies shown are
census block groups
Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 36
for the past 30 years, hovering right around 4%
(Figure 25). The highest proportion of people living
in poverty was reported in Livermore in 2010, when
the rate reached 6%. This is still much lower than the
average and absolute rates in Alameda County and
California over the same period of time.

Existing Services
The JSI Project Team compiled a social services
inventory for the Tri-Valley in the early stages of the needs assessment process. During the project period,
the
Tri-Valley Human Services Pocket Guide was
updated. It lists available services but not service type by location. Such a spatial analysis is important given Figure 25. Historic and Projected Trends in Population Below Poverty Level Sources: US Census Bureau; US Census Bureau ACS 5-year
Livermore, CA Pleasanton, CA Dublin, CA
Percent of Population Below FPL
Alameda County, CA California

ALL PEOPLE

BELOW FPL

WHITE PEOPLE

BELOW FPL

BLACK PEOPLE

BELOW FPL

ASIAN PEOPLE

BELOW FPL

HISPANIC PEOPLE

BELOW FPL
Dublin 2,501 583 187 1,247 400
Livermore 3,502 1,967 161 324 1,300
Pleasanton 3,834 1,348 135 1,352 889
Table 14. Federal Poverty Level by Race, Ethnicity, and Location Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017–2021
lower, it illustrates a disparity. In all three Tri-Valley municipalities, the number of Black and Hispanic
people below the poverty level is higher than would
be expected, given their representation in each place
at a population level. The disparity is greatest among
the Black population in Livermore and the Hispanic
population in Pleasanton. By contrast, the number
of white and Asian people below the FPL is less than
would be expected across the Tri-Valley. The one
exception is in Livermore, where the number of white
people below it aligns with their representation at a
population level.

The proportion of people living below the poverty
level in the Tri-Valley has remained relatively stable

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 37
the size and scale of the three cities. Clustered service types in one area may mean that residents of another
city and/or without convenient access to public
transit may not have access to services. Additionally,
this demonstrates that some key services reside
outside the Tri-Valley
.

Services were placed into the six broad categories of
the Kaiser Family Foundation’s social determinants of
health framework (Figure 26).8
Organizations with complete addresses (e.g., not P .O.
boxes) included in the social services inventory were
geoc
oded using latitude and longitude coordinates.

This information was uploaded into a geographic
information system and data were visualized to
assess the spatial distribution of resources across
the Tri-Valley. Trends—particularly gaps—were
assessed given socioeconomic variation. The maps
below provide a number of different views on the
type and location of services that were included in
the social services inventory. All service locations
included on the maps were color coded to align with
the aforementioned KFF categories. As seen in Figure
27, some organizations included in this list are not
located within the Tri-Valley. They were included
because they serve all of Alameda County and were
listed by key informants.

Figures 28, 29, and 30 are zoomed-in views of each
of the three municipalities in the Tri-Valley to better show the spatial distribution of services in each. Color variation indicates which KFF category aligned with
the service location.

Figure 26. Kaiser Family Foundation Social Determinants of Health Framework

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 38
Figure 27. Service Types by Location
Tri-Valley
Alabama County, CA
Type of Service
Community & Social Context
Economic Stability
Education
Food
Health Care System
Neighborhood and Physical
Environment
Other
Type of Service
Community & Social Context
Economic Stability
Education
Food
Health Care System
Neighborhood and Physical
Environment
Other
Dublin, CA
Shaded area is city limits
Figure 28. Service Types in and Around Dublin

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 39
Type of Service
Community & Social Context
Economic Stability
Education
Food
Health Care System
Neighborhood and Physical
Environment
Other
Pleasanton, CA
Shaded area is city limits
Figure 29. Service Types in and Around Pleasanton
Type of Service
Community & Social Context
Economic Stability
Education
Food
Health Care System
Neighborhood and Physical
Environment
Other
Livermore, CA
Shaded area is city limits
Figure 30. Service Types in and Around Livermore

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 40
To compare service location with the relative need for
those services in any given area, the poverty rate (at
the census block group level) was added underneath
the point location layer illustrating disaggregated
service categories. [Note: While the FPL is a good
proxy measure for socioeconomic burden, it may not
fully capture the burden experienced in Livermore as
compared to the other two municipalities.]
First, as seen in Figure 31, most health care system
resources included in the social services inventory
are in Dublin, despite Dublin residents experiencing
lower levels of burden across most measures. Figure
32 shows a concentration of community and social
context service locations in Livermore, with about an
equal number of locations in Dublin and Pleasanton.

Percent of Population
Below Poverty Level
Health Care
System Services
Figure 31. Health Care Services by Percent of People Below Poverty Level Percent of Population
Below Poverty Level
Community and
Social Services
Figure 32. Community and Social Services by Percent of People Below Poverty Level

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 41
Percent of Population
Below Poverty Level
Food
Figure 33. Food Services by Percent of People Below Poverty Level Figure 33, which highlights service locations in
the food category, indicates that Pleasanton is
home to fewer food resources than the other two
municipalities in the Tri-Valley. Figure 34 indicates
that there are fewer organizations, in general, that
directly focus on economic stability as compared
to many of the other service categories. As seen
in Figure 35, one organization offering education
services is in the most economically disadvantaged
census block group in Dublin. However, most
service locations in the education category are near
downtown Pleasanton. The majority of organizations
providing services in the neighborhood and physical
environment categories are in Livermore (Figure
36). Notably, only one such organization is located in
Dublin.

Percent of Population
Below Poverty Level
Economic Stability
Figure 34. Economic Stability Services by Percent of People Below Poverty Level

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 42
Percent of Population
Below Poverty Level
Education
Figure 35. Education Services by Percent of People Below Poverty Level Percent of Population
Below Poverty Level
Neighborhood and
Physical Environment
Figure 36. Neighborhood and Physical Environment Services by Percent of People Below Poverty Level

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 43
Strengths
The strengths of the Tri-Valley area are not just seen, but deeply felt. Community members expressed what
makes their community great and provided context
for why they are invested in its improvement through
this needs assessment. Key Tri-Valley strengths are
community cohesion, diversity, nonprofit and law
enforcement services, education, health care and
mental health services, and recreation.

Community Cohesion
The Tri-Valley was described as warm and welcoming.

Residents said that people in the community were
helpful, empathetic, compassionate, and look out for
one another. One resident mentioned the importance
of giving back:
“… I have not gone hungry in my life. But I know
that I’ve been very fortunate. There’s a lot of peo-
ple who have made that possible for me, that I
don’t take that for granted. .... And I have an obli -
gation to help others to see what I can do to kind of
pass on and lift up folks that didn’t get those same
opportunities.”
People also seem to try to get to know each other and
noted that their neighbors lend a helping hand when
needed. One recalled a time when she was struggling
and how the community came together to help her.
“… I’m a single mom. And I don’t have a lot of in -
come. And one time when I lost my job, there were
parents from the PTA that donated grocery gift
cards for me. And one of the teachers bought coats
when my son and I didn’t have proper outerwear.

He rides his bike to school … and he was late to
school. The teacher said ‘Why are you late?’ And
my son explained to him, ‘my bike broke down, it’s
not working properly and I’m always trying to fix
it and it won’t.’ And so the teacher took it upon
himself to ask other teachers in the lunchroom to
donate. And they got him a new bike, so he was
able to get back and forth to school.”
Additionally, given that the health and social service
systems can be hard to navigate, communities coordi-
nate events where residents can get basic necessities.

Image 1. Something I Love About My Community Sign
“We really are a community, everybody kind of
does watch out for one another. … Again, some-
thing kind of very small, but I think it does go a
long way. And I think being a Livermore resident,
that’s a huge piece of what keeps us here is our
neighborhood and the people in it.”
Diversity
Another common thread that residents noted was the
rich diversity in the Tri-Valley. Participants celebrated the cultural, ethnic, and socioeconomic differences
among residents. They also valued the ability to build
relationships and get to know others from different
backgrounds.
“I think that diversity is a strength in our commu-
nity…we’ve got diversity especially as it relates to
Asian and white individuals. We lack diversity as it
relates to African Americans and to some extent,
the Hispanic population. But there’s a lot of ethnic
diversity. And I think that gives us strength”

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 44
As a result of the changing demographics, new
nonprofits have sprung up, and existing nonprofit
leaders and organizations have worked to provide
culturally sensitive services that contribute to creating a community where everyone feels welcomed. One
service provider said:
“I think there’s a lot of diversity. And I think
that’s why I like working at [organization name].

There’s people from all walks of life, all different
socioeconomic levels, and a lot of different cultures.

And I think I’ve learned a lot from my patients
about different religions, different cultures, you
know, different value systems. And I think diversity
is always good. It gives you a nice perspective of
the world and it makes me grow as a person just
to learn about different people’s different ways of
life.”
Health Care and Mental Health Services
Access to high-quality health care providers and
mental health services was another strength
identified. Tri-Valley’s location offers community
members great health care options. One participant
noted, “clearly, we’ve got a lot of health care
options between Kaiser and Valley Care and UCSF
[University of California San Francisco]…” Additionally, community members said that most people had
access to high-quality, affordable health care coverage through Medi-Cal.

Community members also praised the wrap-around
services provided by Axis Community Health. One
focus group participant described these services:
“I’m a marriage and family therapist so we work
with emotional needs, but at Axis, we’re a wrap-
around team. So if they need like resources for
housing or food or they’re having transportation
issues… we have care coordinators that we work
with. We also consult with the doctors on the
medical side… we try to meet the needs of all the
patients, whatever needs they may have.”
Furthermore, in response to the need for high-quality
accessible mental health services, the Tri-Valley
partnered with outside organizations. One participant
said:
“I definitely think we have seen a great success
in partnering with outside resources. I think for a
long time, law enforcement specifically has tried
to keep everything close to the chest… We didn’t
hire mental health clinicians to work for the city of
Pleasanton. We subcontracted out to a company
that already was doing that and providing surface
services in other parts of Alameda County. So they
already had the staff and the training and the
experience to work effectively.”
Finally, the Tri-Valley has implemented changes in
how law enforcement is involved in mental health.

One first responder interviewee described the
alternative response unit which aimed to:
“...reduce the number of involuntary psychiatric
holds in the community and to be able to provide
resources to the community. [The community] was
pretty vocal about wanting to remove the police
from non-criminal calls relating to mental health
issues, and homelessness and things like that. And
so from there, we [law enforcement] put together
an alternate response unit…One of the missions of
the unit is to provide a non-uniform response to
people suffering from mental illness or who are in
crisis.”
Nonprofits and Supportive Services

NONPROFIT SERVICES
Strategic partnerships. The comprehensive services
of nonprofit organizations, enhanced by the strategic
partnerships with other organizations including
faith-based entities, was mentioned as a significant
strength of the Tri-Valley. Community members
described services as helpful and appreciated the
partnerships.

Nonprofit leaders also expressed their support for
collaboration among nonprofits. They demonstrated
the importance of working together to leverage
services to serve the community more effectively and
stressed how important it is to be able to share ideas
and work together to serve the community. Many
expressed appreciation for the Tri-Valley NonProfit
Alliance.
“I think one of the strengths in the Tri-Valley is
that we have the Tri-Valley NonProfit Alliance...

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 45
which does a great job in providing support to
nonprofits, trainings with their speaker series, and
now even meeting places or space. So I think that
that organization is a real strength for all of us in
the valley.”
Nonprofit participants also discussed several
collaborations including those between food banks
and faith-based organizations to mitigate food
insecurity in the Tri-Valley:
“People trust the organizations… CityServe mainly
is the one that’s most accessible to members in
the community… There’s also the Axis Community
Health clinic here that is accessible, and it’s easy
for the patients because [there are] different
locations…There’s also Open Heart Kitchen. And
they are able to obtain hot meals as well. And
there’s also the churches in the grand station like
St. Vincent DePaul, and other community services
that provide …showers and…laundry as well.”
Food security and services. As illustrated above,
participants spoke at length about the number of
nonprofit and faith-based resources that are working
to ensure Tri-Valley community members have
adequate food. This is critical because in a 2022
John Muir Health Needs Assessment key informants
indicated that food insecurity was increasing in
the Tri-Valley area, particularly among the Asian
community in Pleasanton.
9 Table 15 shows that at a
municipal level, a large proportion of the population
is considered to have low access to healthy food
within half-a-mile, considered the upper limit of
“walkable.” The 1-mile distance (also in Table 15)
shows that in the Tri-Valley, there are a significant
number of people who have very low access to
healthy food. Additionally, the high rates of vehicle
access throughout the Tri-Valley (Table 24) suggest
that almost all people living there are able to access
healthy food at a one-mile distance. Figure 37 depicts
the location of households receiving food assistance
(SNAP/EBT) in the Tri-Valley. Census block groups in
downtown Livermore stand out as having particularly
high proportions and counts of households receiving
food assistance as compared to most other areas in
the community.

Percent of Households
Receiving SNAP/EBT
Figure 37. Percent of Households Receiving SNAP/EBT
Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 46

PERCENT OF PEOPLE WITH

LOW ACCESS TO HEALTHY
FOOD (1/2 MILE TO < 1 MILE)

PERCENT OF PEOPLE WITH

VERY LOW ACCESS TO
HEALTHY FOOD (≥ 1 MILE)

PERCENT OF HOUSEHOLDS

RECEIVING FOOD STAMPS
Dublin 54.1 12.1 2.7
Livermore 65.6 21.0 3.3
Pleasanton 57.5 18.3 2.4
Tri-Valley 60.1 17.5 2.9
Alameda
County

43.8 8.9 6.9
California 51.0 18.5 9.5
Table 15. Food Access and Percent of Food Stamp Recipients by Location Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017–2021; USDA ERS 2019 Note: Columns 1 and 2 are proportions of the total population in each area.

Column 3 represents proportions of the total number of households in each area.

FIRST RESPONDERS
Participants said that law enforcement was well
trained to handle mental health services and provided
exceptional emergency response capabilities.

When asked about a community strength, one
resident responded, “I was thinking about our
police department and just their partnerships with
like Horizons Counseling Center and all that they do
to support our community.” When someone said,
“Pleasanton has a very responsive and understanding
police force,” another participant concurred.

Recreation
In nearly every conversation, community members
mentioned parks and outdoor areas as a strength,
describing them as inclusive, accessible for people
with disabilities, well maintained, environmentally
friendly, and an overall great resource. They
appreciated the bike paths, hiking trails, places for
recreational sports, and how spacious they were.
“What I like about Dublin is that I lived here for
12 years, it’s very laid out with the parks, they’re
all environmentally friendly. It’s all accessible for
everyone – doesn’t matter what your disability is
like – it’s accessible…”
Schools and Educational Excellence
Many residents mentioned the quality of schools
in the Tri-Valley. Students and parents agreed that
the schools were well-equipped to prepare students
for college. “I knew this is where I wanted to raise
my children because the schools are excellent.”
Other residents said that families felt supported and
respected when they were in need. One mentioned
that school personnel were sensitive to the stigma
associated with seeking help:
“… if it weren’t for my social worker at [my child’s]
school, I would have struggled a lot more than I
did… And I want to say it was in elementary when I
found out that there were resources here available
to me. And they waited until after school so I could
come and pick up laundry detergent, or toilet
paper, or whatever I needed. Because they didn’t
want my son to feel like he was an outcast with the
other kids. That’s really important...”
Table 16 captures the educational attainment across
the Tri-Valley. Every municipality in the region was
above both state (22%) and county (29%) levels of
postsecondary educational attainment (bachelor’s
degree). Figure 38 shows geographic variation in
educational attainment at a census block group
level. Educational attainment is highest in Dublin
and Pleasanton, though educational attainment
throughout the Tri-Valley is higher than state and
county levels in most places.

Although rates of educational attainment are
generally high throughout the Tri-Valley,
disaggregating by racial groups highlights some
disparities. As seen in Figure 39, the high school

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 47
LESS
THAN 9TH
GRADE
9TH– 12TH
GRADE
HIGH
SCHOOL
DEGREE
SOME

COLLEGE
ASSOCIATE’S
DEGREE
BACHELOR’S
DEGREE

GRADUATE
DEGREE

POPULATION
OVER AGE 25
(DENOMINATOR)
Dublin 2.3 2.2 10.2 11.9 5.8 37.9 29.7 47,792
Livermore 2.7 3.2 16.1 22.0 9.4 29.5 17.0 62,933
Pleasanton 1.6 1.8 9.9 13.3 7.1 35.7 30.6 55,414
Tri-Valley 2.2 2.5 12.3 16.4 7.7 33.8 25.0 162,624
Alameda
County

5.7 5.3 16.7 16.3 6.4 28.3 21.3 1,193,863
California 8.7 7.1 20.4 20.5 8.0 21.9 13.4 26,797,070
Table 16. Education Levels, by Percent
Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017–2021
Note: Percentages reflect each geography’s population that is over age 25.

Percent of Population with a
Bachelor’s Degree or Higher
Figure 38. Percent of Population with a Bachelor’s Degree or Higher Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Geographies shown are
census block groups
graduation rate for white students in the Tri-Valley
is 10 percentage points higher than it is for Black
students. Similarly, disaggregated data on chronic
absenteeism also point to racial disparities, with
the highest rates reported among Black students in
Dublin and Pleasanton, and among American Indian
or Alaska Native students in Livermore (Table 17).

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 48
Tri-Valley High School Graduation and
UC/CSU Requirements Rates - 2021-22
African
American Asian Filipino Hispanic or
Latino White Two or
More Races
High School Graduation Rate Graduates Meeting UC/CSU Requirements California Department or Education, DataQuest, 2022
Figure 39. High School Graduation at UC/CSU Requirement Rates Community-Level Challenges and
Opportunity Areas
Housing
Housing is a significant challenge, particularly as the roots of the current housing crisis lie in overarching
structural factors beyond the scope of those working
to meet health and human service needs. Housing is
an intractable challenge not just in the Tri-Valley, but in the entire Bay Area and beyond. It is unsurprising
that housing was a significant problem in the 2011
needs assessment
7 and other hospital-based and
county-wide needs assessments.10,11 Additionally,
it was the top concern among individuals calling
the 2-1-1 helpline, with requests for housing being
over three times higher than any other need and
representing the highest unmet need among callers.
12 In this EACHSNA, housing challenges were most
frequently tied to such factors as the need for a living wage, especially for those working in the service
industry and essential workers (e.g., custodians,
teachers, fire fighters), and the high cost of living in the Tri-Valley and rising inflation in the United States.

From the landscape scan the theme of housing also
came up as an issue that correlated with employment
issues, substance use, and mental health. This
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%

DUBLIN LIVERMORE PLEASANTON
African American 31.90% 36.00% 31.70%
American Indian or Alaska Native 13.60% 42.40% 16.70%
Asian 8.00% 13.20% 8.00%
Filipino 7.80% 15.60% 9.80%
Hispanic or Latino 22.60% 30.20% 21.90%
Pacific Islander 28.30% 29.40% 20.60%
White 14.30% 18.20% 13.60%
Two or More Races 13.80% 18.40% 15.30%
Not Reported 25.00% -- 12.00%
Table 17. Chronic Absenteeism Rates by Student Race/Ethnicity California Department or Education, DataQuest, 2023
overarching
structural factors

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 49
was corroborated by the 2022 Tri-Valley PIT Count
which found that 72% of unhoused individuals had
psychiatric or emotional conditions; 70% had post-
traumatic stress disorder; and 45% reported drug or
alcohol abuse.
13 The rate of home ownership in the Tri-Valley (68%)
is considerably higher than in Alameda County
(54%) and in California (56%) (Table 18). Relatedly,
rentership is considerably lower in the region as
compared to Alameda County and California. Table
17 disaggregates the rate of housing cost burden
between homeowners and renters, and shows that
rates for both are generally better than at the county
and state levels in almost all three municipalities. The exception is in Livermore, where a larger proportion
of renters (50%) are housing-cost burdened than at
the county level (47%). At every level of geographic
analysis, renters are more likely than homeowners
to be housing-cost burdened (Table 18). As seen in
Figure 40, this trend has held true over time. Since
2016, the housing cost burden rate has been highest
among renters in Livermore, followed by those in
Pleasanton.

The Livermore Housing Elements also indicated
this, showing that a very low-income household
in Livermore can afford $1,199 to $1,850 in rent
per month, depending on the household size.

However, with average rents starting at $2,206
for a one-bedroom unit, these households cannot
afford average market-rate rentals without facing
cost burden issues.
18 The housing cost burden rate
appears to be trending upward for Pleasanton
renters, downward for Dublin renters, and stable for
Livermore renters. Throughout this time period, rates

OWN RENT

HOUSING COST

BURDENED OWNERS

HOUSING COST

BURDENED RENTERS
Dublin 64.4 35.6 25.4 36.4
Livermore 72.3 27.7 27.7 49.9
Pleasanton 67.5 32.5 22.9 46.4
Tri-Valley 67.9 32.1 25.7 44.4
Alameda County 53.9 46.1 28.1 46.5
California 55.5 44.5 30.7 51.5
Table 18. Rentership, Home Ownership, and Cost Burden by Location Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017–2021
Note: Percentages for columns labeled “Own” and “Rent” reflect the given area’s total population.

Percentages for columns labeled “Cost Burdened Home Owners” and “Cost Burdened Renters” reflect the category in the particular area. of housing cost burden among homeowners in the
three municipalities were much lower than among
renters, and—aside from a slight uptick between 2019
and 2020 among Livermore and Dublin owners—rates
have been steadily trending down (Figure 40). The
Stanford Valley Care Needs Assessment has some
additional context on housing cost burden.
11 Both
quantitatively and qualitatively, the report found that housing and other costs of living in the Tri-Valley are extremely high; the median home rental cost is more
than 40% higher than the median state home rental
cost.

Figure 40. Housing Cost Burden Rates
by City for Renters and Owners
Housing Cost Burden Rates for
Various Groups in the Tri-Valley
2016-2020
Source: US HUD CHAS database

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 50
A number of significant housing challenges arose,
many which relate to the lack of affordable housing
stock, especially for people who are low-income.

Housing is best summed up as a need for more:
more affordable housing units and vouchers,
rental assistance programs, emergency housing
options, and programs to increase the accessibility
of homeownership, especially for young families.

One interviewee said “There’s not enough housing,
especially low-income, affordable housing. And so
all our young adults are moving away, because they
can’t find housing, and sometimes their families
are following them, and that’s a real blow to the
community.” Some focus group participants in
Pleasanton expressed frustration at the lack of low-
income housing, asking why Pleasanton was allowing
developers to take credits instead of building low-
income or affordable housing.
viii
Housing was frequently mentioned alongside the
recognition of the high (and rising) cost of living in
the Tri-Valley and an acknowledgement that salaries
have not risen as quickly as the cost of living, which
has resulted in a high housing burden (i.e., over 50%
of income going toward housing expenditures). High
housing costs were also mentioned by nonprofits,
as high rents inherently stretch their budgets and
result in their inability to sustain rental subsidies or provide emergency housing funds in the long-term.

Increasingly, nonprofit organizations have supported
those who are unhoused or financially challenged to
move to more affordable regions.

Housing concerns were particularly salient for many
participants as, at the time of data collection, the
COVID-19 eviction moratorium was concluding. Many
service providers also noted that the pandemic had
exacerbated housing problems, with many residents
falling behind on rent due. Community members
expressed frustration with this, as well as fear as
to how they might be directly affected and what
might be done to mitigate housing instability. Some
discussed the possibility of building more affordable
housing, while acknowledging the challenges of
NIMBYism.
ix
Housing concerns not only affect those directly
affected, but also those who serve them in other
capacities. Services are stretched thin, and those
working directly with clients expressed a distinct
sense of frustration about their inability to meet
community needs, which has a long-term negative
impact on the workforce. One nonprofit staff
member said:
“I think it’s always been the case that there’s never
been enough resources to meet the need. I think
we are all seeing unparalleled demand, particularly
for housing and shelter the last few years. Folks in
extremely stressful, challenging, horrible situations,
with just not nearly enough available resources or
resources that even exist to connect them to, and
then for all of us working in these organizations on
the frontlines…taking these calls and not being able
to successfully say, ‘Oh, yes, there is an emergency
shelter bed we can put you into.’ I just think it’s
really exacerbated, and then it causes mental
health challenges for our staff.”
In addition to housing as an overarching community
concern, many raised concerns about the distinct
ways that certain groups or sub-populations are
disproportionately affected. This included people who
are currently unhoused, young families, people with
disabilities, and older adults.

There is recognition that being without shelter
inherently destabilizes an individual across a number
of areas (e.g., mental health, food security). There
was acknowledgement of a need for more steps to
provide intervention before an individual is unhoused
to prevent structural, physical, and mental precarity.

According to the 2022 Tri-Valley PIT Count, unhoused
individuals are predominantly in Livermore.
13 As
seen in Figure 41, there was a dramatic increase in
the number of unhoused individuals in Pleasanton
between 2017 and 2019. The number of unhoused
individuals captured by the PIT counts has been
relatively stable in the other two municipalities since 2017.
viii This reflects the perception of those focus group participants; the City of Pleasanton Inclusionary Housing Ordinance provides options for compliance including on-site construction of affordable units, payment of an in-lieu fee, and other alternatives.
ix From the acronym ‘not in my backyard,’ which refers to generalized support for affordable housing, as long as it’s elsewhere in a community.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 51
For those with disabilities or receiving Supplemental
Security Income (SSI) or Social Security Disability
Insurance Program (SSDI), finding affordable housing
is near-impossible. One interviewee said:
“I don’t think we have enough funds to get folks
housed. It’s been crazy, The Tri-Valley is a really
expensive area. Some of the minimum housing
income requirements are not accessible to
patients who are receiving SSI or SSDI. These folks
are receiving about $1,300 a month. And the
minimum income requirement and these housing
applications, they go from like 20/30k to 60k a
year. And these patients are only making $11,000–
$12,000 because of SSI. And that’s not enough,
you know? Unfortunately, affordable housing… I
know we try our best, but it’s insufficient.”
Community members cited concerns about the long
waitlists for affordable housing and the increasing
need for housing stock. With the growing population
of older adults in the Tri-Valley, the need for housing was particularly pressing. Nonprofits indicated that
they are encountering a rising number of seniors who
are unstably housed. Older adults are particularly
precarious because they are likely to have higher
medical bills, and housing instability likely exacerbates health conditions. One person described the cycle
that many older adults experience:
“I’m seeing more low-income seniors than I have
seen in the past. We have an office that serves
seniors specifically, and I’m just seeing more low-
CENSUS POPULATION: TREND
21 243 18
8 264 70
7229 242
PleasantonLivermoreDublin
2017
2019
2022
Figure 41. Number of Individuals Who Are Unhoused by City income seniors and more seniors who have rented
somewhere for 15 years. Now that landlord is
moving and they’re selling their house, and now
they have to find affordable rent, and they’re not
on a list, they’re not…you know, they don’t have
access to that, because they haven’t needed it.

We’ve seen more seniors become homeless with
not being able to find somewhere affordable in
time. And that’s for those vulnerable seniors that
already have health issues and then to have to live
in a car or on the street, that’s just going to make
their health decline more.”
Others noted that high housing costs and housing
precarity does not just effect those who are low-
income; it is beginning to have a ripple effect across
the region:
“I think that in order to stop the increase of
homelessness, and it’s not just for people who are
low-income or [have] mental health issues…you
are now seeing middle class, even upper-middle
class (if there is even an upper-middle class) on
the verge of losing their housing, because of jobs
that do not pay enough to continue to stay housed
with the high rent.”
Some cited this as a result of the tech industry. They
noted that at one time the region was positioned to
be a contender for Silicon Valley, which increased
housing prices. However, more recently, nonprofits
indicated that they are seeing increasing housing
instability among those who have historically been
Source: Tri-Valley 2022 Homeless PIT Count Report

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 52
more affluent and not previously needed services,
such as people who have been laid off in the tech
industry.

It is important to note that though housing
affordability is a problem across the region, there
are differences between the three cities, and racial
and ethnic sub-populations are disproportionately
affected. As discussed above and shown in Figure
42, a substantial proportion of the population across
the Tri-Valley is considered housing-cost burdened,
meaning that households spend 30% or more of their
income on housing costs (either mortgage or rent).

Downtown areas are particularly affected by housing
costs. Additionally, as discussed above and shown in
Table 18 and Figure 40, renters are more likely than
homeowners to be housing-cost burdened. As seen in
Table 19, in the Tri-Valley—as in Alameda County and
most other places in the United States—nonwhite
individuals are far more likely to rent than to own
their homes.
14 As a result, there are racial disparities
when it comes to housing cost burden in the Tri-
Valley. One exception is for the Asian sub-population,
among whom rates of home ownership are much
higher (and renter rates lower) as compared to the
county and the state (Table 19).

Percent of Households
that Spend 30% or More of
Income on Housing Costs
Figure 42. Housing Burden by Location
Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Geographies shown are
census block groups

WHITE BLACK ASIAN HISPANIC

OWN RENT OWN RENT OWN RENT OWN RENT
Dublin 57.3 42.7 29.6 70.4 73.0 27.0 53.4 46.6
Livermore 75.1 24.9 53.8 46.2 81.5 18.5 47.5 52.5
Pleasanton 69.0 31.0 11.1 88.9 72.5 27.5 42.6 57.4
Tri-Valley 64.5 35.5 40.0 60.0 73.6 26.4 54.9 45.1
Alameda County 59.6 40.4 32.1 67.9 62.8 37.2 39.5 60.5
California 60.0 40.0 35.6 64.4 60.4 39.6 45.4 54.6
Table 19. Home Ownership and Renter Rates by Race and Ethnicity Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017–2021

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 53
Health Care
Concerns related to health care including service
availability and accessibility, the cost of services,
perceptions of quality of services, and cultural
responsiveness were raised frequently. Within health
care, a number of barriers specific to specialty,
mental health, reproductive health, dental, and
youth mental health services arose. Accessibility was
a frequent concern, with participants highlighting
barriers including geographic distance to services
and transportation and related to insurance status
or type.

The need to travel for services, particularly specialty, and referrals, which often took individuals outside
the Tri-Valley (e.g., San Francisco or “over the hill”
(i.e., Oakland)), was mentioned frequently and had
transportation infrastructure implications. Traveling
for medical care takes a significant amount of time
and affects work. One participant said
“I went through the same thing (navigating health
care services) for so many services for so many
years. We had to go up to Antioch so that my child
could get her insulin pump and get taught on how
to do it. It’s like well…okay…I gotta take like half-a- day off to go up there with her.”
Kaiser was also frequently mentioned in regard to
geographic distance, with participants saying that
they had to travel to Walnut Creek or Oakland for
hospital services.

Many insurance concerns came from people who
were un- or under-insured because they did not
qualify for Medi-Cal, but participants also spoke
of private insurance challenges, including that
individuals with private insurance were unable to
access substance use treatment or mental health
services. One participant described a Kaiser-specific
experience:
“We kind of find this weird little gray area, where
people, you know, if you have Kaiser and you have
a child who needs mental health [services], you
know, maybe acute mental health help, it can take
two months to get that appointment. And so we’ve
had to find various partners like Axis Community
Health and the Bridge program.”
The vast majority of the people who live in the Tri-
Valley were insured (97%) (Table 20). Just over one
in five (20%) had public health insurance (Table 20).
x
Livermore is home to the highest proportion and
number of uninsured individuals in the region and the
highest proportion and number of individuals in the
region on public health insurance. A more granular
geographic analysis at the census block group level
shows that, in addition to Livermore, there are a few
areas in Pleasanton with uninsured rates that exceed
the county (4%) and state (7%) level (see Figure 43
and Table 20). At the census tract level (the most
detailed geography for which such data are available),
it becomes clear that many of the places where
people are uninsured also report high rates of public
insurance, reflecting the socioeconomic status of the
people living in those places, particularly downtown
Livermore and southeast Pleasanton (see Figure 44).

PERCENT OF THE

POPULATION THAT

IS UNINSURED

NUMBER OF

PEOPLE WHO

ARE UNINSURED

PERCENT OF THE

POPULATION WITH PUBLIC

HEALTH INSURANCE

NUMBER OF PEOPLE

WITH PUBLIC HEALTH

INSURANCE
Dublin 2.2 1,518 15.5 10,620
Livermore 3.1 2,720 23.3 20,576
Pleasanton 2.3 1,809 19.7 15,619
Tri-Valley 2.6 5,952 20.1 46,474
Alameda County 4.3 71,358 30.4 506,491
California 7.2 2,800,277 38 14,781,015
Table 20. Insurance Status by Location
Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017–2021
x The Census Bureau classification of public insurance includes Medicare, Medicaid, and VA Health Care (provided through the Department of Veterans Affairs); and the Children’s Health Insurance Program.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 54
Percent of Population
that is Uninsured
Figure 43. Percent of the Population Who Are Uninsured
Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Geographies shown are
census block groups
Percent of Population with
Public Health Insurance
Figure 44. Percent of the Population with Public Health Insurance Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Geographies shown are
census block groups

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 55
Insurance status affects the availability of
transportation to medical appointments, particularly
for those on Medicare. One provider said:
“Patients who need medical care and have
a managed care plan, such as Alliance or
Anthem Blue Cross, they are able to obtain
transportation through their insurance for
medical appointments, pharmacy visits, dental
visits, and therapy visits. But mainly our patients
who have Medicare, it’s difficult for them to
have a transportation resource unless they use
paratransit or Wheels.”
While community health clinics were cited
frequently as a regional strength, people noted
long appointment wait times and an insufficient
number of health clinics overall. This often resulted
in emergency room use for routine health care
(including prescription refills), as one community
member described. “Yes we have access, but it takes
us two months in order to get a doctor. So basically,
we have to go to the emergency room if we want to
get seen right now.”
Data show that the dentist ratio for municipalities in
the Tri-Valley is in line with or better than the ratios for Alameda County and California. For the four
types of providers in Table 21, Livermore notably
lags behind the other two municipalities. The ratios
for obstetricians or gynecologists and primary care
providers are particularly concerning, and likely
indicate that people in Livermore seeking prenatal,
gynecological, and primary care face barriers to
access (Table 21).

Although community members acknowledged that
the Tri-Valley built a dental clinic (following the
identified gap in the 2011 needs assessment
7), and

PRIMARY CARE

PHYSICIAN

PRIMARY CARE

NURSE PRACTITIONER DENTIST OBGYN
Dublin 1,624 4,107 970 3,947
Livermore 2,600 8,840 1,263 11,098
Pleasanton 698 2,040 804 1,611
Alameda County 997 2,394 1,172 3,009
California 1,038 2,324 1,297 3,976
Table 21. Provider to Patient Ratio
Source: NNPES NPI 2022
expanded services overall at Axis Community Health,
they noted long wait times for dental care. One
individual indicated that their children waited 1.5
years to receive dental care. The Kaiser Permanente
Walnut Creek Health Center reported that children
in need of dental services using general anesthesia
must travel outside the Tri-Valley area, leading to the geographic and transportation barriers mentioned
earlier in this section.
10 Others described the
insufficiency of dental coverage through Medicare
and Covered California and the difficulty of finding
dentists who accept the plan:
“Access to a dentist is a very difficult thing. A few
dentists don’t want to accept any ‘other than
premier’ dental plans. And so, you know, you are
in a queue, and there are fewer dentists that do
accept those lower benefits for dental types of
work. Is that unfair? It’s an equity issue, I’ll say
that.”
As with other regional opportunity areas, participants
noted how the health care system was differentially
experienced by sub-groups or -populations. The need
for health care services for children was mentioned
frequently, with participants noting that kids had
to travel to Oakland’s Children’s Hospital for acute
and non-acute exams. Seniors were also highlighted
as a group with distinct health care and supportive
health care navigation service needs. Finally, for non- English speakers and those who speak it as a second
language, the need for translation services in health
care settings was mentioned frequently and further
explored in the linguistic and cultural responsiveness
opportunity area. The Stanford 2022 Community
Health Needs Assessment also identified Latinx,
undocumented people, veterans, and unhoused
populations as groups who struggle to access care
due to a lack of providers and available
appointments.11

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 56

DEPRESSION

PREVALENCE

POOR MENTAL

HEALTH PREVALENCE
Dublin 16.8 13.3
Livermore 19.6 14.8
Pleasanton 17.3 12.6
Tri-Valley 17.8 13.4
Alameda
County

15.9 13.5
California 17.5 15.9
Mental Health
Mental health was also a significant concern and
opportunity area for the Tri-Valley across various
stakeholders including community members, non-
profit employees, and first responders. Additionally,
triangulation with other needs assessments validates
the
finding that mental and behavioral health service
is a significant need.11 Within mental health, challeng- es related to accessibility (similar to those
categorized under health care), including distance to
services, service availability and costs, and insurance; factors exacerbating conditions; populations with
distinct needs; and workforce arose.

Table 22. Adult Mental Health Indicators
Source: CDC BRFSS PLACES, 2021
As seen in Table 22, rates of depression and poor
mental health in the Tri-Valley are highest in
Livermore. Just under one-in-every five Livermore
adults is diagnosed with depression. Depression
rates are higher than in Alameda County for every
municipality in the Tri-Valley, though only Livermore’s rate (20%) exceeds the state’s (18%). Rates of poor
mental health across the region are more in line with
the county rate, though Livermore also stands out
with nearly 15% of its adult population reporting that
their mental health is poor. Further, the suicide rate in Livermore (9.8 per 100,000) is higher than in Alameda
County (7.7), with the rate being highest among the
white population.
9 In the Alameda County needs
assessment, Livermore identified behavioral health as
a key priority.
14 A number of factors hinder access to mental health
services. Community members cited the limited
number of mental health providers and services in
the region, and relatedly, long wait lists to receive
care. One individual said that “it can take up to
two months to get an appointment.” These issues
were interwoven with transportation challenges,
particularly when referrals sent those seeking mental
health services to parts of the county outside the Tri- Valley. The long wait lists and provider shortage in the Tri-Valley echoed the Livermore focus group findings
from the Alameda County Needs Assessment.14
Insurance impedes access to mental health care
through service coverage (or lack thereof), the result- ing effect on service costs, availability of providers
who take a particular type of insurance, and need for
individuals to be able to navigate the complex system.

Participants noted difficulty navigating insurance,
which often resulted in decreased access to care. This
was a problem for public and private insurance (par-
ticularly Kaiser), demonstrating that mental health
service access is a barrier regardless of an individual’s socioeconomic status. One participant expressed the
relationship between insurance type and the need for
service navigation:
“Another issue or challenge is that a lot of the coun-
ty
resources that are available require you to have
MediCal insurance. The Tri-Valley in and of itself
is socioeconomically more affluent, and we have a
population of people who are experiencing mental
health challenges. They can’t get help in the inter-
im because they have a level of insurance, but they
can’t navigate that insurance to get mental health
resources. Because they have privatized insurance,
they’re not eligible for programs.”
This issue was also captured by one participant’s
experience trying to ensure her children had mental
health services and her challenges navigating insur-
ance and transportation.
“I am a widow and when my husband died, we
went on medical and Social Security. At the time,
my kids were under 18 so they were on Medicare.

We chose Kaiser, and Kaiser doesn’t do regular
counseling so basically I paid out of pocket for
grief counseling for three years for both my kids.

Then when the kids both developed anxiety and
depression we needed to get regular psychology
and psychiatry appointments. So first we were
shunted up to [name redacted] in Oakland. That’s
a long way to go to get a psychiatry or psychology
appointment. And we were supposed to be going
every week. And now that my kids are both over

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 57
18, we’ve been shunted back to [name redacted]
for the psychologist that my younger child is still
seeing on a regular basis.”
In addition to service availability, participants noted a number of factors increasing the need for mental
health services. COVID-19 was most frequently cited,
with participants expressing concern about the
extent to which mental health challenges will have
lasting consequences. Key informants for the John
Muir report described mental health status in the
Tri-Valley as critical due to the fear, anxiety, stress, job loss, isolation, and lack of trust that resulted from the pandemic.9 Similar consequences were raised in
relation to youth and the extent to which mental
health issues might be compounded by social media.

Throughout the landscape scan interviews, parents
reflected on ongoing behavioral health challenges
among children and adolescents, expressing feelings
of overwhelm.

The landscape scan interviews also brought forth
themes about mental health stigma. It was noted
that societal stigma makes accessing mental health
services a challenge for many. While telehealth
emerged as a potential solution during the pandemic,
respondents noted that it does not cater to
everyone’s needs or digital capabilities.

The unhoused, individuals with severe mental illness,
immigrant and refugee populations, and older adults
were also mentioned as having distinct needs for
mental health services. A relationship was often
drawn between people with severe mental illness
and who are unhoused, with much discussion on how
the factors exacerbated each other. One nonprofit
employee spoke of the long-term mental and
emotional effects of housing instability, noting the
connection between being in a near-constant state
of crisis and a person’s immediate mental health,
functionality, and decision-making capacity. Mental
health crises are o
ften exacerbated by insufficient
emergency mental health centers and services.
“Trying to find emergency psychiatry services, or
trying to find a psychiatrist of any kind is hard…
trying to do it on an emergency basis because you
have a loved one who you’re afraid of, who could
be a harm to themselves or others... it’s practically
impossible.”
Participants noted that when concerned community
members and even parents need help when a person
is experiencing a mental health emergency, they
often must rely on police and jails instead of inpatient emergency mental health care.
“The severely mentally ill, that whole population
that’s out there, you know, so many of those folks
end up getting housed in the jails in other places
because they get arrested because there’s not
enough capacity to serve those folks. So that that’s
another issue that I would say can be challenging,
is residential (services) for folks.”
In addition to the connection between mental health
and unstable housing, participants discussed a need
for comprehensive emergency and/or in-patient
services for those using substances. This topic is
further explored under substance use.

Additional mental health and related services
challenges were noted for some immigrant and
refugee populations, such as the need for linguistic
and culturally responsive services. Many come from
countries where they experienced war and other
trauma and may have left loved ones who are still
experiencing suffering and hardships. The unique
challenges of bi-cultural children of refugees and
immigrants and generalized difficulties with a new
culture also call for mental health services to help
people adjust.

COVID-19 was frequently cited as having a profound
effect on older adults’ mental health, including by
exacerbating loneliness and isolation for those who
lived alone. Many older adults did not access mental
health services, perhaps due to a shift to virtual
appointments, which call for the ability to navigate
online platforms. This, combined with physical
isolation due to mobility challenges that many
older people have, may have increased anxiety and
depression. One service provider noted:
“I think that our biggest hurdle is getting the
seniors to understand that while they need to be
cautious of what is out in the world, they also need
to not live in that fear and kind of move forward
and engage back in those interactions because

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 58
they’re not doing so… 78% of the seniors who
we serve live alone. If you think about that, that
means that a minimum of 10 hours of their waking
time is spent alone.”
As mentioned, workforce challenges are closely tied
to the need for additional mental health providers.

This is related to structural factors including cost
of living and the need to pay essential workers
(i.e., those working in community mental health) a
living wage. Further, more linguistically, racially, and culturally responsive service providers are needed, as
detailed below.

Service Provision, Awareness, and Navigation

GENERALIZED SERVICE PROVISION
In
terviewees and focus group participants spoke
at length about the need for a range of support
services. Community members wanted a place
where individuals could go to receive non-emergency
support. One provider described this as a need for
‘generalized community assistance’: “There’s a part of
our population that needs help, like even how to get
your social security card, how to get a birth certificate, how to apply for driver’s license, just the general
things that we don’t have one place to direct people
to and support them with.”
Other participants identified a need for generalized
support for individuals who struggle with reading
or wri
ting. This is essential not only for helping
community members understand and navigate health
and human services, but also for assisting with daily
living tasks. For example, one participant mentioned
that some people find it challenging to read and
understand directions for taking medication.

SERVICE AWARENESS
The Tri-Valley offer
s a substantial number of services
to address various social determinants of health.

However, community members noted a lack of
awareness of these services and how to access
them. One individual said “I know personally with
me it’s kind of hard for me to comprehend… how
to even begin the process of trying to find any type
of information. You know, unless someone’s really
pointing me in the direction I wouldn’t even know
where to begin.” When asked for recommendations
on how to improve human services in the Tri-
Valley, another individual noted simply, “make
sure community members know what services are
available.”
One participant spoke of researching community
resources in preparation for the focus group:
“I looked at a Tri-Valley website and there’s a lot
of resources that I didn’t know about. There’s like
a dozen that they show, like the churches that
provide food, some provide showers, some will do
their laundry for them. So I just looked in Livermore,
because that’s my town. I think that is also getting
that word out there for people, that they have
some resources. Some of it may be communication,
because how do you reach them?”
A service provider also reflected this challenge, tying the lack of service awareness to a need for increased
advertising funds for nonprofits:
“There’s not enough designated funds for people
to know the services that are provided…I was just
having a conversation with a man an hour ago,
who asked if the nonprofits tried to stay secret and
small. And I was trying to explain to him capacity
and priorities and all of that. So I would say funds
for making people aware of the services (are
needed).”
Community members and nonprofit organization
respondents acknowledged that cities, churches,
and other entities made efforts to raise awareness of
available services. However, they also said that there
was widespread lack of awareness among people who
needed them.

SERVICE NAVIGATION
The need for service and insurance navigation came up
frequently within the topic of health care and mental
health care. It also appeared as a general barrier to
accessing human services, in particular for individuals with disabilities, the unhoused, immigrants and
refugees, older adults, and non-English speakers and
those for whom it is a second language. Persons in
these last two groups have a distinct need for service
navigation support from providers who are racially,
culturally, and linguistically responsive. This also has implications for the nonprofit workforce.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 59
One community member described trying to
navigate health care services after moving
from another county:
“There’s a year-long wait for dental at Axis
Community Health and they’re like, “oh, no, you
have to call Alameda County and you have to
disenroll from that. And then you have to re-enroll…
and I’m like, ‘How long does that take?’ And they’re
like, ‘oh, it’s between 30 and 90 days’… I trust
absolutely nobody. I can’t get a hold of Alameda
County Alliance. Because all the things I’m told, it
just spiraled out of control. It’s like, can somebody
please just tell me something that’s simple to do?
I don’t have the money to pay for all of this stuff.

But I would if I could, just to avoid it, because it’s
so heartbreaking.”
A provider also mentioned the knowledge and skills
needed to navigate human services and how difficult
it can be for community members:
“Being able to get to health care is one issue. The
other issue is just having the resources to know
where to go, how to look for it, and to the ability
to get it…to call their insurance or a primary
health care physician, and they will direct them
to whatever resources they need. Without that
kind of access, a lot of people really struggle and
don’t know where to go. And we still have people
who have insurance but struggle to know where
to start—how to begin to get health care, mental
health care.”
Individuals with disabilities also have unique service
navigation needs. One service provider noted
frequent calls about housing, programs, and other
resources for people with disabilities. The provider
was overwhelmed by the number of requests and
limited capacity to serve as a resource navigator. The
provider said that the 2-1-1 line and the Regional
Center of the East Bay do as much as they are able
but are overwhelmed, too. Just under half (174 of
352) of the 2-1-1 callers indicated having a disability. 12 Unhoused individuals also have specific needs for
service awareness, navigation, and centralized
services (e.g., assistance with document access and
retention and housing application support). One
focus group participant highlighted the many complex
contributing factors to becoming unhoused, and
identified the near-impossible task for those in crisis to recognize and access the right services:
“There’s a number of different solutions…are you
getting ready to be kicked out of your apartment
or evicted? Are you losing your job? Did your car
just break down, and your car is the key to getting
your kids to school and getting you to work so that
you can pay the rent? I think there are services
that address crisis mode… and (a need for) getting
people connected with those services and making
them aware of the services.”
Focus groups participants in a John Muir health
report said that services for unhoused veterans were
insufficient or even non-existent in the Tri-Valley,
forcing people in need to travel outside the area.
9 Participants identified immigrants and refugees as
sub-populations that could benefit from efforts to
increase awareness of services and strategies to
provide service linkages.
“A lot of them know about their refugee status and
they know that they can get free medical, food
stamps, low-income housing. Some of them know
about it, some of them don’t. I think that could be
something that they could be more aware of. But then
again, there’s a long waiting list for those as well.”
Participants also said that older adults need
navigation support services. This is made more
complex by their need to navigate insurance types for
health care and medication coverage. The John Muir
report also indicated that transitioning to telehealth
care is a significant challenge for older adults.9
Racial/Linguistic/Cultural Responsiveness

RACIAL AND CULTURAL RESPONSIVENESS
Participants from the community and nonprofits
expressed a desire to have more individuals
from various communities and cultures in paid
service provider provisions. This was particularly
acknowledged in light of the changing demographics
within cities and across the region. Individuals
acknowledged that having service providers who are
from the communities being served enhances client
comfort and trust in the care.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 60
Providers acknowledged that racial and cultural
responsiveness calls for knowledge of diverse
populations, as well as in-depth consideration of how
to deliver congruent services. They also connected
this to a broader positive impact on clients:
“We’re thinking about culturally appropriate food
as well. I think we sometimes get so unjustly fixated
on making sure that the most basic needs are met
that sometimes we don’t get to those next levels
that are equally important to folks to make sure
the sort of tentacles of colonialism—how much
someone can eat, the types of food they can eat—
are going to go unaddressed and sort of be able
to try to get to that next level, while also making
sure that those basic food security needs are met.

It also goes a long way toward mental health and
emotional health. Folks don’t feel like they are ‘less
than’ because of the food choices they feel forced
to make, so that we can invigorate the conversation
with some dignity in terms of the types of food that
we make available.”

LINGUISTIC RESPONSIVENESS
Table 23 shows the language spoken at home
among people over the age of 5. Notably, only half
the population in Dublin spoke English at home. A
majority of those who did not speak English at home
spoke Asian languages (27%).
xi Many people living in
Pleasanton also did not speak English at home (41%).

As in Dublin, a majority (21%) of these people spoke
Asian languages. Individuals who spoke Spanish at
xi Asian and Pacific Island languages categorized by the ACS include Chinese; Korean; Japanese; Vietnamese; Hmong; Khmer; Lao; Thai; Tagalog or Filipino; the Dravidian languages of India such as Telugu, Tamil, and Malayalam; and other languages of Asia and the Pacific, including Philippine, Polynesian, and Micronesian.

ENGLISH SPANISH
OTHER
INDO-

EUROPEAN
ASIAN-

PACIFIC

ISLANDER OTHER

POPULATION
OVER AGE 5
(DENOMINATOR)
Dublin 50.0 5.1 16.1 27.1 1.7 64,522
Livermore 75.3 11.4 5.0 7.5 0.8 82,292
Pleasanton 58.6 5.7 14.1 20.9 0.8 75,776
Tri-Valley 62.4 7.8 11.2 17.5 1.1 217,605
Alameda County 54.0 16.0 8.4 19.8 1.8 1,579,078
California 56.1 28.3 4.6 9.9 1.1 37,105,018
Table 23. Language Spoken at Home, by Percent
Source: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017–2021
Note: Percentages are proportions of the given geography’s population that is over age 5. home represented a notably smaller proportion of
the total population in the Tri-Valley (8% of all people over age 5) as compared to Alameda County (16%)
and California (28%). Livermore was the municipality
with the largest percentage and number of people
speaking Spanish at home in the Tri-Valley (11%;
9,381 people).

Figure 45 depicts the location of language-isolated
households in the Tri-Valley. These households are
defined as those in which no one 14 years old and
over speaks English only or speaks a language other
than English at home and speaks English less than
very well. There are areas across the Tri-Valley where
more than 14% of households are language-isolated,
including in downtown Livermore and Pleasanton,
and between Dublin and Pleasanton. These data
highlight the diversity within Dublin, Livermore, and
Pleasanton and the need for providers who reflect
community demographics.

Language represents a distinct barrier for services
among non-English speakers and those who speak
it as a second language. This was a challenge to
completing paperwork for services:
“Specifically what we’re talking about with
language… I think what it comes down to is the
fact that some of the papers that families have to
fill out aren’t translated in their language, or it’s
harder to access certain paperwork to be able to
explain the processes to families.”

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 61
There are also implications for families trying to call to receive services:
“Spanish-speaking families call… they’re being
directed in English as to what numbers to press and
they can’t really keep up with it. And they get to a
point where they don’t get an answer. So they stop
and it just adds all these layers as to why accessing
resources is so difficult for these families... All the steps that they have to take…it adds so many more
layers than an English-speaking person would
have.”
Language barriers affect people’s ability to seek
support from police and other first responders,
which also affects people’s safety. When asked
about barriers within the community, one individual
said “...a lot of the Tri-Valley agencies, including
law enforcement, do not have bilingual officers and
detectives and staff.”
While Spanish-speaking populations were frequently
highlighted as needing translation and interpretation
services, there was also a need for translation and
interpretation in languages such as Farsi, Dari,
Percent of Households that
are Language Isolated
Figure 45. Language Isolation
Sources: US Census Bureau ACS 5-year 2017-2021
Geographies shown are
census block groups
Cantonese, Mandarin, Hmong, and Cantonese. One
service provider said:
“Regarding language, there’s no Hmong
interpreter. Specifically, we’ve been dealing with a
lot of issues regarding Hmong language and that’s
come up…where do we send them? Also, their
dialect isn’t written – it can’t be written down, so
they need someone to translate.”
Substance Use
Community members, service providers, first
responders, and nonprofit participants in all three
cities mentioned the challenge of substance use. The
Alameda County Needs Assessment noted that binge
drinking is higher in Livermore compared to state-
wide rates.14
A significant concern focused on early onset of
substance use among youth. One participant
observed, “we’re seeing it more and more in the
middle schools. Fifth grade even.” Additional
information about youth substance use and
interventions can be found in the Youth section.

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS

PAGE 62
Community members were concerned about
substance use among adults, too, noting the safety
concern when people openly use substances in public
spaces, particularly public transportation. One said
“The only way we can have safe community events or
have safe public transportation, or really just care
about the safety of members of the community in
general is if…there’s no open substances.”
Participants spoke to the complexity of factors
contributing to substance use, and the difficulty
in addressing substance use when people aren’t
ready for treatment. One provider discussed their
experience working with this population:
“They have substance use disorders and mental
health (conditions). And you do want to connect
them…I do connect them to rehab programs
through the Alameda County ACCESS line. But
it’s all depending on their change readiness,
sometimes they’re not open to wanting to stop
use. Sometimes it’s… something’s triggering them.

It could be family housing, it’s something that they
use to cope. A lot of our patients…started using
substances at a very young age, or they’re currently
using right now, or they were also in remission but
they relapsed due to the pandemic.”
There is a general consensus about a lack of available
services in the Tri-Valley, including those that are
education and prevention focused. “We don’t have
enough services in general. We certainly don’t have
enough substance abuse or substance use education
support services.” There is also a lack of local
treatment services for individuals using or addicted
to substances. When asked about service gaps within
the Tri-Valley one service provider responded:
“I would say residential or non-residential
(services) for substance use and abuse…that’s kind
of a challenge finding those kinds of resources.

We were looking the other day and it seemed like
we had to look elsewhere in the county for that,
depending on what the client’s resources were. So
that seemed like a bit of a challenge.”
Participants also highlighted the specific need for
harm reduction programs and services:
“It’s something that we don’t really talk about
here in the Tri-Valley as much, but a lot of our
population have substance use disorder, and it’s
primarily methamphetamine. We don’t have any
harm reduction programs like the city has and
there’s no needle exchange program.”
Substance use is a cross-cutting issue, with several
participants acknowledging the connections with
being unhoused and mental health conditions,
with substance use often serving as a form of self-
medication for undiagnosed or untreated mental
health disorders.
“What we’ve noticed
is that a lot of people we
come across in the street have substance abuse
issues. You know, there’s a variety of issues, but
ultimately, everything leads back to mental illness.

And if they’re not getting that help…it’s going to be
very hard for them to resolve any other issue they
have. Because ultimately, that’s what it comes
down to.”
Findings from this Needs Assessment about the
often overlapping needs of substance use, mental
health (including lack of services), and housing, and
connections between safety and substance use are
reinforced by findings from the Alameda County
Needs Assessment.14
Safety
Concerns were raised about the extent to which
community members felt safe. This encapsulated
psychological safety, with a connection to and
implications for mental health, and physical safety,
with concerns about crime and violence. Overall,
there was a perception that both violent and non-
violent crime had increased in the Tri-Valley. One
individual said:
“Crime is a conc
ern. Quality of living is deteriorating
with the crimes that are becoming more and more
intense. You know more and more of this kind of
crime is happening in our everyday life. We don’t
feel safe.”
This cross-cutting theme, as one participant indicated, was spread across the region:

EASTERN ALAMEDA COUNTY HUMAN SERVICES NEEDS ASSESSMENTSS